Displaying multiple occurrences of a tag in a list or table

[Bobw147]

First of all I would like to say thanks for such a brilliant plug-in. It has been extremely useful to me so far. Today, however, I came across a use-case that it doesn't appear to handle so I guess this is more of a feature request than a bug report.

I would like to be able to have multiple instances of the data associated with a given tag in the same file parsed and displayed so that each has it's own row in a list or table.

My ideal use-case.

I have a file that contains that a number of sections and in each section I have a tag followed by data that I want to display in, say, a table. Ideally there should be a row in the table for each entry of that tag despite the fact that they are in the same file

For example, let's assume I have

Section 1

#task name:: this task name due-date:: 2021-08-15

Section 2

#task name:: another task name due-date:: 2022-02-10

I would like each of these to have it's own row in the table even thought they are from the same file. What I will get at the moment is a single row containing the data for the entry in Section 2

In fact even if I remove the #task definition from Section 2, what I will see displayed in the table is still the data associated with Section 2! I assume that this is because the parser is triggered by the first occurrence of #task, parses the rest of Section 1 collecting the name and due-date properties but then continues to parse the remainder of the page, comes across the field variables in Section 2 and overwrites those previously obtained. It makes sense that this happens because the parser does not know when to stop processing.

I know I could move the task into different files but I have a situation where it would be useful to keep the items together in the same file.

Perhaps I have missed something. Your thoughts would be welcome.

[blacksmithgu]

I'm actually working on this as the next major feature, where markdown sections can have their own metadata and you can select per-section, rather than per-file, which I think should be exactly your use case.

[Bobw147]

Not only a brilliant programmer (having been in the industry for 30+ years, I recognise one when I see one!) but with precognitive/clairvoyant abilities as well. I look forward to it. Is it too dangerous to hold my breath just yet?

[NomarCub]

Was this feature implemented @blacksmithgu? Can this be closed?

[AB1908]

Section based indexing works now but this specific use case would need DVJS. Obsidian's metadataCache doesn't index metadata that way so we'd have to parse the file.