Tag Based Snippets

[BeyondLimitation]

I'm the type of person that really likes to see a label pointing out what a specific piece of information is. Even if I can just read the information and know what it is, I still like formatting to be fairly normalized throughout. Which is one of the things that's annoying me a little bit so far about Realm Works, because I can't find a decent way to do this the way I'd like to.

I'll use the new individual topic as an example. By default, it has some tag-based snippets like gender and race. Let's say I wanted to add a snippet that offers a description. I'd like it to have a label that looks like the gender & race snippets (to make it look uniform under player preview). To get that, I have to make it a tag-based snippet and fill in the annotation with the description, just not picking a tag at the time. However, this leaves this HUGE gap between the label and the text under the preview. My other option is to just do a text-based snippet, and write something like "Description: The person looks like this." However, the formatting looks way different from other snippets when that's done. The only way I really see how to get what I want is by deleting the default snippets and just retyping them in under a text based one.

So, my main question is whether or not there is a way to achieve the formatting that I'd like without having to delete the default snippets that come up?

Second, I'll say that if there is not a way to achieve this by default, how about add a new type of snippet. It's basically just the text one, but split into two sections. The first is a label that has the same formatting by default as the tag based ones, but can have anything typed inside. The second lines up right after the label and can also have anything put inside.

 

[Dakadin]

Are you able to accomplish what you want by using the Manage tab and selecting Tags? It give the option to add your own tags and tag domains that way.

 

[BeyondLimitation]

Technically, yes I could accomplish this by making a new tag, however I don't really need to save the information beyond use in the single topic at hand. Tags seem to work best when they can pop up from time to time again, like reoccurring races or equipment types. However, I'm thinking more along the lines of something that would be a sentence that would ONLY apply to the specific topic at hand, like say the physical description of a character or the exact location within a room that an object is located (like within a concealed compartment within a specific statue).

The exact scenario where I ran into this concern was while designing a new category designed to handle spells from the D20 system. Certain things like schools/subschools, components, saving throw, and so on can be repeated over and over, so tags work great for them. However, when it comes to target, area, and effect...it varies wildly from spell to spell. Tags just don't work for these since I probably will never need the entry again. I could type these in as text snippets, but they won't be labeled unless I specifically write "Area: 2 mile radius" or "Target: Willing living creature touched". And if I do that, the formatting will be extremely different from the tag based snippets beforehand.

One option that just dawned on me is that I can theoretically make each one of these entries their own section, using the section header as the label I'm looking for. However, it'll still seem a little strange as my tag-based snippets would technically be labeled twice (once as the section head and once at the beginning of the snippet itself).

 

[Silveras]

Earlier versions had the labels for text fields.. but that requires each text field to be a unique field/snippet with a specific purpose and name. They're largely the same, functionally, other than the label... and so the un-labeled "Any Text" snippet appeared.

I am sure LoneWolf would like more feedback on whether having distinct fields with labels is better than not, and how much better it is if you feel it is better.

I find value in being able to add as many "Any Text" fields to use any way I need to, but I also see the value in having some specifically-labeled and purposed fields.

 

[Zaphod Beebledoc]

BeyondLimitation.

Are you thinking of the labels like the Gender or Race ones?

 

[BeyondLimitation]

Exactly Zaphod. I decided to show screenshots of what my concern is to explain it better. In my TestRealm that I'm using to learn features, I created a new Chuck Norris character. Now, let's say I wanted to add some new info to him. It's labeled as Stuff and the information that would go in it is Blah Blah Blah. Picture 1 is if I used a Tag-Based Snippet to achieve the label effect I want, but putting the info in the annotation spot results in an indention. Picture 2 is if I just do a text snippet and label it myself. It looks more uniform but the formatting still makes it look strange. Both of these are on the player preview screen

I can achieve the effect that I'd like by putting "Blah blah blah" in as a tag, but let's say that information is unique to only my Chuck Norris character. So saving it as a tag seems kinda like a waste since those really seem to be for reoccurring information, like various races that are present in your game.

From what I gathered from Silveras' post, there used to be something very similar to this in an early version, but got removed for some reason.

 

[Zaphod Beebledoc]

I've just had a quick play with the text editing controls and you can change part of a snippet.

So, "Stuff" can be a different colour, size and font to "Blah blah blah!"

 

[Zaphod Beebledoc]

Just had a thought!

You could create a tag domain called Misc and put things in there. It would give you the formatting you require.

Maybe they will allow the saving and reusing of formatting via macro. Would be nice!

 

[Pitchwife]

THREAD NECROMANCY!

I'm with BeyondLimitation on this one. Having *some* snippets give headings, while others do not, just doesn't look great. It also means that some information lacks context. A brief glance shows that the Area (in acres) of The Docks is "16", and the Population is "2000". Also, "Commercial". Also, "Low". "Commercial" what, you ask? "Low" what? Excellent questions. If only you knew what the Snippet Type was...

 

[Knightblde]

I agree. If my data has no label, I don't know what my data is. Adding a million text fields is great, but we should be able to label those fields with a simple label box. I like the idea of showing or hiding the label on command, but labels would be greatly appreciated.

 

[Knightblde]

I got the chance to play with this a lot more today. It seems that when I click on a category heading (Individual in this case) it shows up EXACTLY how I WANT to see it when I am looking at individuals. But when I click on a topic (an Individual) much of the information that I want to see is gone. The section descriptions disappear (only available on mouse over) as does the name of all the snippets.

Is there anyway to make the actual Topic show up like they do when you click on the Category for that Topic?

*I think I am using all the right terms, please let me know if they are incorrect.

 

[Knightblde]

Ok, looking at this even more I think I understand the intended use a little better now.

Sections are basically groups for labels.
Sub-Sections are the labels for like snippets.

I was working on a Goals section under Individuals. I made a section called Goals and added three text snippets under it. I called them Immediate, Short-Term and Long-Term. What I wanted was the ability to label each of them the same way I named them.

I many not actually want that. When I started using it, I wanted to add two immediate goals to an Individual. I wanted them to be different snippets so they could be revealed at different times. But then I don't want two labels for the snippets so it makes sense to use the section/sub-section as the label.

The con to this method that the formatting makes it difficult to see where the sections and sub-sections are. When a section has multiple snippets it is visually pleasing and obvious when you are moving into a new section.

Moving from section to a sub-section is nothing special. The font is slightly smaller and the numbering is a little different. Neither of these offer enough visual separation in my opinion.

Another con is the large amount of real estate it takes to show the snippets. What once took 4 lines with headings now takes 7. I don't really see a way around this with the ability to reveal items as explained above.

 

[Knightblde]

I have decided that the ability to show labels is the winning choice. If I don't want them then fair enough. But when I do, I do.

In the image you can see the clear transition from Section 1 to Section 2. The problem is you don't know what the data in Section 2 is. When you start using sub-sections it gets a little trickier. Section 5 to 5.1, 5.2, 5.3 are not as obvious or appealing, IMHO.

In section 2 I have 5 data points. These points take up less space than the 3 data points in Section 5 because of the labels for the sub-sections. Labels on the left, on or off at my choice is the clear winner for me.

Also, you will notice that Section 5 has a blank Snippet. That Snippet is not in my design and I have to erase it from each topic I create. I only wished to use Section 5 as a separator, not as a place to store data.

 

[Destrin]

I started a new thread on this because my searching skills are lame, but I agree wholeheatedly with this. If I define a snippet as part of the structure, I want the label to ALWAYS be shown, whether it's tag based or free text entry or whatever. I can make it look close with manual entry and formatting but I really shouldn't have to.

 

[Joe]

Using the tag snippet as a workaround is definitely NOT recommended. This will be trouble in the future, so don't start making your content depending on this.

The current solution is to use the Rich Text capabilities of text snippets for format a label however you like. If you want something similar to the other labels in RW, using a dark gray color and size 8 tahoma font gets you 90% of the way there. It doesn't quite line up properly though, so it's not perfect.

That's not to say we can't or won't support "officially" labeled text snippets in the future, we just don't right now.

 

[Destrin]

That's not to say we can't or won't support "officially" labeled text snippets in the future, we just don't right now.

What irks me about this in particular is that the interface is very inconsistent as tagged snippets and free text snippets are treated fundamentally differently. Here are the definitions of 'Character Role' and 'Career' under the 'Individual' category:



And here is how they display on the actual topic (career is the last item - with the ... showing):


This is just inconsistent UI behaviour. In both cases there is a snippet name defined, for tag entries it shows the name, for free text entries it doesn't, that inconsistency makes no sense and is pushing the user away from customisation towards a template style of use.

 

[Fox Lee]

This is related to my gripes with section structure, so if I may necromance for a moment - what about two different types of text snippet? I know it sounds a bit like going back to single-line and multi-line text snippets (actually I rather liked those), but bear with me.

I get why labels displaying on all snippets is not so great - if you're adding a bunch of text blocks to a single section (say, in order to reveal to players one paragraph at a time) then you don't need labels, so the current model is good. However, lots of people have posted examples here where a text snippet is in a summary-type section, where individual snippets describe different things. In that case, showing the label just like tags is really, really what you want.

So then, what if there were just two types of text snippet? Say "free text" works exactly as the current text snippet does, but there's also "named text" or "labelled text" or something that presents with its title as a label, just like tags do. Call me crazy, but I really feel like this would be a relatively easy way to address both cases.

 

[Knightblde]

I think we would make out better if we could just show/hide the label.

If there are two different types of snippets I am sure that at some point I will use one and then realize I need the other. To change it, I would have a lot of work ahead of me to "fix" my structure.

Using the work around of typing in my own label on each snippet is a total cop-out. This does not preserve structure as I would have to type it in for each topic. The entire point of using a topic is to have a pre-defined structure to work with.

 

[Fox Lee]

I think we would make out better if we could just show/hide the label.

Ultimately yes, but since it's been implied that this may be difficult to implement, I thought having two snippet types might provide an easy alternative.

If there are two different types of snippets I am sure that at some point I will use one and then realize I need the other. To change it, I would have a lot of work ahead of me to "fix" my structure.

Isn't it a comparable amount of work, to go through the structure and add "show label" to all the relevant fields? To me it seems like six of one, half a dozen of the other.

If it would help differentiate them, maybe the labelled text could have a more distinctly different name, or appear distinct from a free text snippet in the management view. I've never had a problem accidentally using one type of snippet instead of another, except for accidentally choosing multi-domain tags instead of singles on occasion - I can't see it being much more likely than that.

Using the work around of typing in my own label on each snippet is a total cop-out. This does not preserve structure as I would have to type it in for each topic. The entire point of using a topic is to have a pre-defined structure to work with.

Very much agreed. I have a few hundred topics in "Individuals" alone, so there's absolutely zero chance I'm going back to add a bolded "Label:" to multiple fields in each of them. And even if I only had five topics to change, it's just not good design.