[tw] Re: Math without plug-in
For mathematics notation, I use MathSVGPlugin by Paulo Soares. http://www.math.ist.utl.pt/~psoares/MathSVG.html I have used this plugin for several years on many versions of TW and Firefox. Cheers Andrew Mc On Friday, October 5, 2012 11:04:49 AM UTC+13, Marc wrote: Apologies if this is a bit off-topic, but readers of this thread are obviously concerned about math notation in TW, so I'll put the question: What are you using today to get math notation in your TWs? I've tried searching generally, but haven't really found a satisfactory solution. I'm agnostic regarding plugin vs. core code, and I liked Peter Jipsen's ASCIIMathML solution, with ASCII math in backticks and LaTeX math in dollar signs, but I want something that works with the 2.x versions of TW. I'm thinking only of local, personal notes, not concerned about web publishing, and if it only works with modern versions of Firefox, I'm okay with that. On Sunday, January 29, 2012 9:19:03 AM UTC+1, hpon wrote: Hi, I love TW, and I would love it even more if math notation was natively incorporated in empty.html. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups TiddlyWiki group. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/tiddlywiki/-/1ngVGf4IP0sJ. To post to this group, send email to tiddlywiki@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to tiddlywiki+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/tiddlywiki?hl=en.
[tw] Re: Math without plug-in
Apologies if this is a bit off-topic, but readers of this thread are obviously concerned about math notation in TW, so I'll put the question: What are you using today to get math notation in your TWs? I've tried searching generally, but haven't really found a satisfactory solution. I'm agnostic regarding plugin vs. core code, and I liked Peter Jipsen's ASCIIMathML solution, with ASCII math in backticks and LaTeX math in dollar signs, but I want something that works with the 2.x versions of TW. I'm thinking only of local, personal notes, not concerned about web publishing, and if it only works with modern versions of Firefox, I'm okay with that. On Sunday, January 29, 2012 9:19:03 AM UTC+1, hpon wrote: Hi, I love TW, and I would love it even more if math notation was natively incorporated in empty.html. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups TiddlyWiki group. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/tiddlywiki/-/bEh5lPjf06gJ. To post to this group, send email to tiddlywiki@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to tiddlywiki+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/tiddlywiki?hl=en.
[tw] Re: Math without plug-in
Hi, I use the jsMath plugin quite satisfactory (see http://mcard.tiddlyspot.com/, http://ehcuds.tiddlyspot.com/ or http://udsth0910.tiddlyspot.com/). It does not cover LaTex completly (I miss the possibility of using xy-diagrams- for this I upload jpeg images of diagrams previously compiled), but it does quite the job. On Friday, October 5, 2012 12:04:49 AM UTC+2, Marc wrote: Apologies if this is a bit off-topic, but readers of this thread are obviously concerned about math notation in TW, so I'll put the question: What are you using today to get math notation in your TWs? I've tried searching generally, but haven't really found a satisfactory solution. I'm agnostic regarding plugin vs. core code, and I liked Peter Jipsen's ASCIIMathML solution, with ASCII math in backticks and LaTeX math in dollar signs, but I want something that works with the 2.x versions of TW. I'm thinking only of local, personal notes, not concerned about web publishing, and if it only works with modern versions of Firefox, I'm okay with that. On Sunday, January 29, 2012 9:19:03 AM UTC+1, hpon wrote: Hi, I love TW, and I would love it even more if math notation was natively incorporated in empty.html. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups TiddlyWiki group. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/tiddlywiki/-/hTB_WCGKg4QJ. To post to this group, send email to tiddlywiki@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to tiddlywiki+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/tiddlywiki?hl=en.
Re: [tw] Re: Math without plug-in
I understand the possible problems (even just corrupting data is a possible one), but have no idea of criteria to be used. The criteria will evolve no doubt. The point is that the core plugin library shouldn't just become a dumping ground of every plugin plugins from over the years, it will need to be properly curated, so that end users trust it. Well, let's imagine that I have a TW5 with 9 tiddlers. How many html files would be baked from the wiki? If we're baking a complete static, JavaScript-free site, there would be 9 HTML files generated, all linking to each other. Could a visitor navigate the baked content like me in my TW (just have the same interface without an option to edit), or he'll see html files that contain certain tiddlers (defined during baking) and which are linked in a way, specially defined during baking? How a prettylink will behave, if the linked tiddler is not among baked ones? In the browser it would look like using single page mode plugin; as the user clicks on tiddler links the browser will be navigating between separate HTML files. If the linked tiddler isn't in the baked ones, the user would see a 404 error. The idea of baking a site would generally be to bake the whole thing so that it can be placed on a static web server. The motivation, of course, is that static web servers never crash. Besides baking to individual HTML files, it will also be possible to bake a read-only TiddlyWiki file. Such a thing could also be placed on a static web server, but would require the user to have JavaScript enabled to browse it. Then the user would get the classic, rich TW experience. These two approaches can be combined. I could keep my tiddlers on a private instance of TiddlyWiki5 running on my computer, and then periodically publish a subset of them to, say, Amazon S3, as both a bunch of individual static HTML files and a big TiddlyWiki HTML file containing all the published tiddlers. JavaScript redirects could be used to direct users with JavaScript from the static HTML pages to the same place within the TiddlyWiki file. Best wishes Jeremy Hans, thanks for your answers, I'll read them carefully and try the things out a bit later. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups TiddlyWiki group. To post to this group, send email to tiddlywiki@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to tiddlywiki+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/tiddlywiki?hl=en. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups TiddlyWiki group. To post to this group, send email to tiddlywiki@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to tiddlywiki+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/tiddlywiki?hl=en.
[tw] Re: Math without plug-in
Hello Jeremy, What do you mean by coded safely and reliably? (ok, perhaps this is not a question to discuss without an example..) Well, a poorly written plugin might fail if it encounters unexpected data, or might leak private information in HTTP headers, or might not work reliably in mobile browsers, or might rely on implementation details in the core that are subject to change. I understand the possible problems (even just corrupting data is a possible one), but have no idea of criteria to be used. Another thing which is unclear for me in this aspect is the following.. the most direct quesion is this: will it be possible to open any set of tiddlers in a tab of a browser, or instead there should be some pages, each containing some tiddlers and for each tiddler its container-page should be opened in a new tab? I'm afraid I don't understand the question, can you put it differently? Well, let's imagine that I have a TW5 with 9 tiddlers. How many html files would be baked from the wiki? Could a visitor navigate the baked content like me in my TW (just have the same interface without an option to edit), or he'll see html files that contain certain tiddlers (defined during baking) and which are linked in a way, specially defined during baking? How a prettylink will behave, if the linked tiddler is not among baked ones? Hans, thanks for your answers, I'll read them carefully and try the things out a bit later. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups TiddlyWiki group. To post to this group, send email to tiddlywiki@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to tiddlywiki+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/tiddlywiki?hl=en.
Re: [tw] Re: Math without plug-in
What do you mean by coded safely and reliably? (ok, perhaps this is not a question to discuss without an example..) Well, a poorly written plugin might fail if it encounters unexpected data, or might leak private information in HTTP headers, or might not work reliably in mobile browsers, or might rely on implementation details in the core that are subject to change. Do you mean that the server would be needed once -- to generate those html files so that one can publish them in a DropBox, -- or rather during the process of browsing? What's the role of the server? Here the server is being used to bake html files that can be used independently. Another thing which is unclear for me in this aspect is the following.. the most direct quesion is this: will it be possible to open any set of tiddlers in a tab of a browser, or instead there should be some pages, each containing some tiddlers and for each tiddler its container-page should be opened in a new tab? I'm afraid I don't understand the question, can you put it differently? Best wishes Jeremy Hans, what I did was create a central plugin repository TW file without any other data, yes, that's what I'm also thinkning about and set that up so that it kept all its plugins updated in as automated a way as possible. sure, it's not an issue, even if new plugins are added Using a tag for each real data TW file, I pulled the updated into each one, using Eric's importer based on that tag. I reckon such an approach would be relatively easy to support and automate, if not in core, then perhaps by a plugin manager plugin. this is rather unclear for me. Why did you need some tag if the central repository contains only things to load anyway? What importer did you use? (and is it possible to set the thing so that certain TWs wouldn't import, for instance, formulae-generating plugin?) If you provide more details, it would be very much appreciated. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups TiddlyWiki group. To post to this group, send email to tiddlywiki@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to tiddlywiki+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/tiddlywiki?hl=en. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups TiddlyWiki group. To post to this group, send email to tiddlywiki@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to tiddlywiki+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/tiddlywiki?hl=en.
Re: [tw] Re: Math without plug-in
Not speaking for Jeremy of course, but I would expect all the core functionality to be enabled *not* requiring *any* server in the sense of a process with a separate IP address. If a server process is made part of core, then I would hope that it could be run on the same machine, so that TW will fully function on a standalone, disconnected PC. Absolutely you can run the server on the same machine; node.js makes that very easy. The TW5 node app can generate standalone HTML files, or HTML files that refer back to the server for content. I think I need to try to draw an illustration of the various TW5 deployment options... Best wishes Jeremy Using a tag for each real data TW file, I pulled the updated into each one, using Eric's importer based on that tag. I reckon such an approach would be relatively easy to support and automate, if not in core, then perhaps by a plugin manager plugin. this is rather unclear for me. Why did you need some tag if the central repository contains only things to load anyway? I had a designated tag for each template - for example I used one variation on Executive for journaling, another to organize books, they had a lot of plugins in common but not all. From each TW I pulled any changed plugins that were tagged in the plugin repository TW with that TW's tag. Some tags only applied to one TW instance, others to a whole set of TWs that were identical from a design-functional POV - in every way except content tiddlers. What importer did you use? http://www.tiddlytools.com/#ImportTiddlersPluginInfo (and is it possible to set the thing so that certain TWs wouldn't import, for instance, formulae-generating plugin?) Just set up your repo's tags so that you can include/exclude them when importing - you can even use boolean expressions via http://www.tiddlytools.com/#MatchTagsPluginInfo If you provide more details, it would be very much appreciated. https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/tiddlywiki/1ioADnOrQQ4/discussion -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups TiddlyWiki group. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/tiddlywiki/-/Az_Yv1yZxE0J. To post to this group, send email to tiddlywiki@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to tiddlywiki+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/tiddlywiki?hl=en. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups TiddlyWiki group. To post to this group, send email to tiddlywiki@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to tiddlywiki+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/tiddlywiki?hl=en.
Re: [tw] Re: Math without plug-in
One thing that I hope to make easy in TW5 is to be able to publish your TiddlyWiki as a folder full of static HTML files that you can then whack onto a webserver, giving a very resilient, lightweight way of publishing stuff. That would be excellent. I imagine the core functionality would give pretty simplistic (and hopefully user-friendly) defaults, but ideally there would be standardized methods for plugins to extend for things like grouping multiple tiddlers per page, creating navigation menus, tag views. I personally use hierarchical tagging for all these things within my TWs, differentiating between meta tags, say one branch for navigation (sometimes more than one), another for identifying tiddler types (glossary entries, fulltext vs summary etc.) and then of course normal topic tags exposed to the user (published to the web site). You will indeed be able to do all of that. In TW5 everything is a macro; in classic TiddlyWiki there was a lot of special case handling for things like the main story column and tiddler links, both of which are now implemented as ordinary macros. I'm hoping to be able to support externalised tiddlers that live in files outside the main HTML file, allowing things like plugins to be easily shared between wikis. Hopefully for data/meta tiddlers as well? Yes, the idea is that external tiddlers of any type should work. criteria for inclusion ... around quality. Excellent, especially the documentation and maintenance aspects - Eric's set a pretty high bar there 8-) Precisely. Best wishes Jeremy -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups TiddlyWiki group. To post to this group, send email to tiddlywiki@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to tiddlywiki+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/tiddlywiki?hl=en.
[tw] Re: Math without plug-in
Wow, the expectations on TW5 are huge, these are shiny perspectives. At what state is the development now? I'm thinking that the plugin library would have some very simple criteria for inclusion: - Useful to more than one person - Has adequate documentation - Has proper unit tests - Is coded safely and reliably - Not duplicating the functionality of an existing plugin - The authors commitment to ongoing maintenance What do you mean by coded safely and reliably? (ok, perhaps this is not a question to discuss without an example..) One thing that I hope to make easy in TW5 is to be able to publish your TiddlyWiki as a folder full of static HTML files that you can then whack onto a webserver, giving a very resilient, lightweight way of publishing stuff. Do you mean that the server would be needed once -- to generate those html files so that one can publish them in a DropBox, -- or rather during the process of browsing? What's the role of the server? Another thing which is unclear for me in this aspect is the following.. the most direct quesion is this: will it be possible to open any set of tiddlers in a tab of a browser, or instead there should be some pages, each containing some tiddlers and for each tiddler its container-page should be opened in a new tab? Hans, what I did was create a central plugin repository TW file without any other data, yes, that's what I'm also thinkning about and set that up so that it kept all its plugins updated in as automated a way as possible. sure, it's not an issue, even if new plugins are added Using a tag for each real data TW file, I pulled the updated into each one, using Eric's importer based on that tag. I reckon such an approach would be relatively easy to support and automate, if not in core, then perhaps by a plugin manager plugin. this is rather unclear for me. Why did you need some tag if the central repository contains only things to load anyway? What importer did you use? (and is it possible to set the thing so that certain TWs wouldn't import, for instance, formulae-generating plugin?) If you provide more details, it would be very much appreciated. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups TiddlyWiki group. To post to this group, send email to tiddlywiki@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to tiddlywiki+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/tiddlywiki?hl=en.
[tw] Re: Math without plug-in
On Sunday, February 5, 2012 4:46:19 AM UTC+7, Yakov wrote: Do you mean that the server would be needed once -- to generate those html files so that one can publish them in a DropBox, -- or rather during the process of browsing? What's the role of the server? Not speaking for Jeremy of course, but I would expect all the core functionality to be enabled *not* requiring *any* server in the sense of a process with a separate IP address. If a server process is made part of core, then I would hope that it could be run on the same machine, so that TW will fully function on a standalone, disconnected PC. Using a tag for each real data TW file, I pulled the updated into each one, using Eric's importer based on that tag. I reckon such an approach would be relatively easy to support and automate, if not in core, then perhaps by a plugin manager plugin. this is rather unclear for me. Why did you need some tag if the central repository contains only things to load anyway? I had a designated tag for each template - for example I used one variation on Executive for journaling, another to organize books, they had a lot of plugins in common but not all. From each TW I pulled any changed plugins that were tagged in the plugin repository TW with that TW's tag. Some tags only applied to one TW instance, others to a whole set of TWs that were identical from a design-functional POV - in every way except content tiddlers. What importer did you use? http://www.tiddlytools.com/#ImportTiddlersPluginInfo (and is it possible to set the thing so that certain TWs wouldn't import, for instance, formulae-generating plugin?) Just set up your repo's tags so that you can include/exclude them when importing - you can even use boolean expressions via http://www.tiddlytools.com/#MatchTagsPluginInfo If you provide more details, it would be very much appreciated. https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/tiddlywiki/1ioADnOrQQ4/discussion -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups TiddlyWiki group. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/tiddlywiki/-/Az_Yv1yZxE0J. To post to this group, send email to tiddlywiki@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to tiddlywiki+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/tiddlywiki?hl=en.
[tw] Re: Math without plug-in
Somewhat related but more for maintaining a master hierarchy repository TWs for meta and content rather than system (plugin and theming) tiddlers: https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/tiddlywiki/z1Q-_3az7bY/discussion I see you (Yakov) also participated in that, but thought I'd add the link for others interested and future googlers. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups TiddlyWiki group. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/tiddlywiki/-/Ln8SDO_ESg4J. To post to this group, send email to tiddlywiki@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to tiddlywiki+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/tiddlywiki?hl=en.
[tw] Re: Math without plug-in
In what sense is the core too big? hpon, for me, like for Daniel, too big means TW as a web page will load too slow from web. Jeremy, I think that core plugins idea would be good when functions like import and update work solidly. Also, updating core plugin for each TW will still require some time and routine actions. It seems for me that a system which allows download a plugin and share it between TWs would be more convenient to use. Optionally, it could allow to import all the plugins inside a TW quickly (for sending it to another person via mail etc). Another argument for this is a following: let's imagine that I don't know about RearrangeTiddlersPlugin [1], but want to be able to rearrange tiddlers in my TWs. Of'course it wouldn't be included into the core just because I find it usefull; on the other hand, when I find it, I'll want to incorporate it into each my TW. So, here again sharing is better than preloaded plugins. *** There's another issue about core support of mathematics. The thing is, a tiddler which contains formula markup is not a unit of information which can be distributed in TiddlyWiki world by itself, because it's representation will be broken in a TW without the plugin. The same is true for each plugin which introduces any new formatter or macro. My current idea this is that TiddlyWiki can have some mechanism which would track used formatters and macro handlers and put the names of used plugins into some field of the tiddler and another mechanism which would notify the user if such tiddler is displayed, but the plugin is not installed. But this is only the first step: it wouldn't have much sense if it's not easy to find the plugin (ideally TW should just ask to download it and then download, but this is quite not easy to achieve). [1] http://www.TiddlyTools.com/#RearrangeTiddlersPlugin -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups TiddlyWiki group. To post to this group, send email to tiddlywiki@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to tiddlywiki+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/tiddlywiki?hl=en.
[tw] Re: Math without plug-in
On Friday, February 3, 2012 11:51:02 PM UTC+7, Yakov wrote: too big means TW as a web page will load too slow from web +1 updating core plugin for each TW will still require some time and routine actions. It seems for me that a system which allows download a plugin and share it between TWs would be more convenient to use. when I find it, I'll want to incorporate it into each my TW. So, here again sharing is better than preloaded plugins. easy to find the plugin (ideally TW should just ask to download it and then download, but this is quite not easy to achieve). When I has a lot of differently-configured TW's that still shared a lot of for-me-core plugins, what I did was create a central plugin repository TW file without any other data, and set that up so that it kept all its plugins updated in as automated a way as possible. Using a tag for each real data TW file, I pulled the updated into each one, using Eric's importer based on that tag. I reckon such an approach would be relatively easy to support and automate, if not in core, then perhaps by a plugin manager plugin. There's another issue about core support of mathematics. The thing is, a tiddler which contains formula markup is not a unit of information which can be distributed in TiddlyWiki world by itself, because it's representation will be broken in a TW without the plugin. This may be true for other topic/function domains requiring specialized markup syntaxes, but regarding maths, the AMS tex extensions (these days usually via latex) are such a widely accepted defacto standard as to be IMO a no-brainer. The choices come from what mechanism is used to render that standard markup to pixels - again, for a great example of flexibility in this arena see http://johnmacfarlane.net/pandoc/README.html#math -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups TiddlyWiki group. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/tiddlywiki/-/jjUxPQmsE2oJ. To post to this group, send email to tiddlywiki@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to tiddlywiki+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/tiddlywiki?hl=en.
Re: [tw] Re: Math without plug-in
for me, like for Daniel, too big means TW as a web page will load too slow from web. One thing that I hope to make easy in TW5 is to be able to publish your TiddlyWiki as a folder full of static HTML files that you can then whack onto a webserver, giving a very resilient, lightweight way of publishing stuff. I think that core plugins idea would be good when functions like import and update work solidly. Also, updating core plugin for each TW will still require some time and routine actions. It seems for me that a system which allows download a plugin and share it between TWs would be more convenient to use. Optionally, it could allow to import all the plugins inside a TW quickly (for sending it to another person via mail etc). I'm hoping to be able to support externalised tiddlers that live in files outside the main HTML file, allowing things like plugins to be easily shared between wikis. Another argument for this is a following: let's imagine that I don't know about RearrangeTiddlersPlugin [1], but want to be able to rearrange tiddlers in my TWs. Of'course it wouldn't be included into the core just because I find it usefull; on the other hand, when I find it, I'll want to incorporate it into each my TW. So, here again sharing is better than preloaded plugins. I'm thinking that the plugin library would have some very simple criteria for inclusion: - Useful to more than one person - Has adequate documentation - Has proper unit tests - Is coded safely and reliably - Not duplicating the functionality of an existing plugin - The authors commitment to ongoing maintenance In other words, the most important criteria should be around quality. There's another issue about core support of mathematics. The thing is, a tiddler which contains formula markup is not a unit of information which can be distributed in TiddlyWiki world by itself, because it's representation will be broken in a TW without the plugin. The same is true for each plugin which introduces any new formatter or macro. My current idea this is that TiddlyWiki can have some mechanism which would track used formatters and macro handlers and put the names of used plugins into some field of the tiddler and another mechanism which would notify the user if such tiddler is displayed, but the plugin is not installed. But this is only the first step: it wouldn't have much sense if it's not easy to find the plugin (ideally TW should just ask to download it and then download, but this is quite not easy to achieve). As you suggest, I'm hoping to be able to automatically detect missing plugins/themes/translations, and offer to automatically download them from tiddlywiki.com. Best wishes Jeremy [1] http://www.TiddlyTools.com/#RearrangeTiddlersPlugin -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups TiddlyWiki group. To post to this group, send email to tiddlywiki@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to tiddlywiki+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/tiddlywiki?hl=en. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups TiddlyWiki group. To post to this group, send email to tiddlywiki@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to tiddlywiki+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/tiddlywiki?hl=en.
Re: [tw] Re: Math without plug-in
On Saturday, February 4, 2012 12:32:28 AM UTC+7, Jeremy Ruston wrote: One thing that I hope to make easy in TW5 is to be able to publish your TiddlyWiki as a folder full of static HTML files that you can then whack onto a webserver, giving a very resilient, lightweight way of publishing stuff. That would be excellent. I imagine the core functionality would give pretty simplistic (and hopefully user-friendly) defaults, but ideally there would be standardized methods for plugins to extend for things like grouping multiple tiddlers per page, creating navigation menus, tag views. I personally use hierarchical tagging for all these things within my TWs, differentiating between meta tags, say one branch for navigation (sometimes more than one), another for identifying tiddler types (glossary entries, fulltext vs summary etc.) and then of course normal topic tags exposed to the user (published to the web site). I'm hoping to be able to support externalised tiddlers that live in files outside the main HTML file, allowing things like plugins to be easily shared between wikis. Hopefully for data/meta tiddlers as well? criteria for inclusion ... around quality. Excellent, especially the documentation and maintenance aspects - Eric's set a pretty high bar there 8-) -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups TiddlyWiki group. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/tiddlywiki/-/qOpQ0H6qH0sJ. To post to this group, send email to tiddlywiki@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to tiddlywiki+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/tiddlywiki?hl=en.
[tw] Re: Math without plug-in
I think that mathematical notation should be regarded as an elimentary feature, since the purpose of TW (in my view) is to present and manage information in an effective way. That purpose cannot be generally fullfilled without a proper support for math notation. Plus, society as we know it would collaps if people don't communicate and reson in mathematical terms. I strongly beg to differ. For one, I hardly ever need mathematical notations to present and manage information in an effective way. Structure or design does not directly arise from math. Instead math is abstracted from structural and design considerations to facilitate coming up with reusable patterns. But those don't always need an expression in one mathematical notation or another. To express myself TiddlyWiki style I don't need mathematical notations in quite the same way as I need markup elements and javascript. In fact, I never needed it at all. TiddlyWiki sure seems a popular tool for scientific note taking, but direct core support for math notations, latex, some dedicated wiki syntax or another, etc... is far beyond what I personally consider to be at the core of TiddlyWiki. I consider math notation support to be a problem for the TiddlyWiki core just as much as I consider its not quiet so candy presentation layer to be a fair bit over-engineered in terms of css and layout ...considering the standard TiddlyWiki ...which begs for beautification. From my point of view, wikifiers or even the core theme should plugins ...and I sure would think quite some people would rather quickly replace those with whatever flavour they prefer, rather than having to put that on top of or work around the TiddlyWiki defaults by ever so long style definitions / wikification hacks. Sure that makes things less compatible, but why would it be a tenet that apart from basic tiddlers representation requires a false sense of compatibility in TiddlyWiki land? In other words, from my point of view, the core should be stripped to its essential strengths, which neither lie in presentation, nor in markup considerations. To me, its strengths has always been the tiddler all its aspects, combined with the most expressive scripting language enabling people to aggregate atomic bits in different ways via macros and plugins. The rest has been mostly noise that I felt the occasional need to do away with... and math support would be just another noisy and partial piece of a core puzzle that does not add quite as much to core strengths in just the same way jquery, node.js or data.js do or would. tb -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups TiddlyWiki group. To post to this group, send email to tiddlywiki@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to tiddlywiki+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/tiddlywiki?hl=en.
Re: [tw] Re: Math without plug-in
On Jan 30, 2012, at 8:48 AM, Jeremy Ruston wrote: In terms of plugin distribution, I've come to believe that the present scattered nature of TiddlyWiki makes things needlessly hard for users. They have to find tiddlywiki.com, download the product, and then by reading the groups they have to figure out the sites that they need to visit to get the basic plugins that everyone relies on. So, for TW5, I'm interested in developing the idea of core plugins written by the community that become part of the standard distribution of tiddlywiki. You're not the first person to say such and such a plugin is so incredibly useful that it should be in the core. The community tends to interpret it as a suggestion that the plugin or feature becomes part of the core code, because we don't have any other unit of distribution. And then it becomes a consideration of bytes vs. benefits, and the generality of the feature. I think we can avoid all of that by introducing the idea of the tiddlywiki distribution being made up of the core code plus a bunch of plugins evolved by the community. That, together with the manual that was recently suggested would be fantastic. The amazingly flexible-adaptable TW would remain amazingly flexible-adaptable. The amazingly creative TW developer community could continue to find ways to exploit the amazing flexibility-adapatability. And it would all be MUCH more accessible to ordinary users. -- Eric Weir Uncertainty is an uncomfortable position, but certainty is an absurd one. - Voltaire -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups TiddlyWiki group. To post to this group, send email to tiddlywiki@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to tiddlywiki+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/tiddlywiki?hl=en.
[tw] Re: Math without plug-in
PMario, Thanks for your reply. In what sense is the core too big? I think that mathematical notation should be regarded as an elimentary feature, since the purpose of TW (in my view) is to present and manage information in an effective way. That purpose cannot be generally fullfilled without a proper support for math notation. Plus, society as we know it would collaps if people don't communicate and reson in mathematical terms. I cannot see why intrensic math support would be a problem for any user. Perhaps you could expand a little on why embracing math notation functionality would be harmful. /hpon On 29 Jan, 20:07, PMario pmari...@gmail.com wrote: Hi hpon, I personally think, that the core (empty TiddlyWiki) is allready big enough. Some say, it is too big and stick with a version prior to jQuery. And as you say. There are some possibilities (plugins) out there, that handle the situation quite well. So what ever is included into the core, will be wrong for someone. Imo such functions should be plugins. If it is tricky to get them working, plugins may need more or better documentation. -m -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups TiddlyWiki group. To post to this group, send email to tiddlywiki@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to tiddlywiki+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/tiddlywiki?hl=en.
Re: [tw] Re: Math without plug-in
I agree with PMario. although the current implementations are difficult to get working (believe me I've tried), if you look at the size of the source of empty.html, or heck, even look at the size. about 350kb. which could be represented as a couple hundred pages of text. this is exceptional for a web page, which usually is modular and calls upon other resources when displaying the page. so definitely better plugins, better documentation, but dear god, please don't increase the size of TW and risk making it unstable lol On Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 4:13 AM, hpon peter.norli...@gmail.com wrote: PMario, Thanks for your reply. In what sense is the core too big? I think that mathematical notation should be regarded as an elimentary feature, since the purpose of TW (in my view) is to present and manage information in an effective way. That purpose cannot be generally fullfilled without a proper support for math notation. Plus, society as we know it would collaps if people don't communicate and reson in mathematical terms. I cannot see why intrensic math support would be a problem for any user. Perhaps you could expand a little on why embracing math notation functionality would be harmful. /hpon On 29 Jan, 20:07, PMario pmari...@gmail.com wrote: Hi hpon, I personally think, that the core (empty TiddlyWiki) is allready big enough. Some say, it is too big and stick with a version prior to jQuery. And as you say. There are some possibilities (plugins) out there, that handle the situation quite well. So what ever is included into the core, will be wrong for someone. Imo such functions should be plugins. If it is tricky to get them working, plugins may need more or better documentation. -m -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups TiddlyWiki group. To post to this group, send email to tiddlywiki@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to tiddlywiki+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/tiddlywiki?hl=en. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups TiddlyWiki group. To post to this group, send email to tiddlywiki@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to tiddlywiki+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/tiddlywiki?hl=en.
Re: [tw] Re: Math without plug-in
I'm trying to design TiddlyWiki5 so that it works well with MathJax and other off-the-shelf text processing components. I'm interested in the general idea of supporting domain specific notations. So I'd be happy if TW5 could be used by choreographers (who have their own notational systems), but I recognise that mathematics is absolutely the most important notation to support. In terms of plugin distribution, I've come to believe that the present scattered nature of TiddlyWiki makes things needlessly hard for users. They have to find tiddlywiki.com, download the product, and then by reading the groups they have to figure out the sites that they need to visit to get the basic plugins that everyone relies on. So, for TW5, I'm interested in developing the idea of core plugins written by the community that become part of the standard distribution of tiddlywiki. You're not the first person to say such and such a plugin is so incredibly useful that it should be in the core. The community tends to interpret it as a suggestion that the plugin or feature becomes part of the core code, because we don't have any other unit of distribution. And then it becomes a consideration of bytes vs. benefits, and the generality of the feature. I think we can avoid all of that by introducing the idea of the tiddlywiki distribution being made up of the core code plus a bunch of plugins evolved by the community. Cheers Jeremy On Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 10:24 AM, Daniel Fallon danielf...@gmail.com wrote: I agree with PMario. although the current implementations are difficult to get working (believe me I've tried), if you look at the size of the source of empty.html, or heck, even look at the size. about 350kb. which could be represented as a couple hundred pages of text. this is exceptional for a web page, which usually is modular and calls upon other resources when displaying the page. so definitely better plugins, better documentation, but dear god, please don't increase the size of TW and risk making it unstable lol On Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 4:13 AM, hpon peter.norli...@gmail.com wrote: PMario, Thanks for your reply. In what sense is the core too big? I think that mathematical notation should be regarded as an elimentary feature, since the purpose of TW (in my view) is to present and manage information in an effective way. That purpose cannot be generally fullfilled without a proper support for math notation. Plus, society as we know it would collaps if people don't communicate and reson in mathematical terms. I cannot see why intrensic math support would be a problem for any user. Perhaps you could expand a little on why embracing math notation functionality would be harmful. /hpon On 29 Jan, 20:07, PMario pmari...@gmail.com wrote: Hi hpon, I personally think, that the core (empty TiddlyWiki) is allready big enough. Some say, it is too big and stick with a version prior to jQuery. And as you say. There are some possibilities (plugins) out there, that handle the situation quite well. So what ever is included into the core, will be wrong for someone. Imo such functions should be plugins. If it is tricky to get them working, plugins may need more or better documentation. -m -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups TiddlyWiki group. To post to this group, send email to tiddlywiki@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to tiddlywiki+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/tiddlywiki?hl=en. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups TiddlyWiki group. To post to this group, send email to tiddlywiki@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to tiddlywiki+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/tiddlywiki?hl=en. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups TiddlyWiki group. To post to this group, send email to tiddlywiki@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to tiddlywiki+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/tiddlywiki?hl=en.
Re: [tw] Re: Math without plug-in
On Monday, January 30, 2012 8:48:18 PM UTC+7, Jeremy Ruston wrote: In terms of plugin distribution, I've come to believe that the present scattered nature of TiddlyWiki makes things needlessly hard for users. They have to find tiddlywiki.com, download the product, and then by reading the groups they have to figure out the sites that they need to visit to get the basic plugins that everyone relies on. So, for TW5, I'm interested in developing the idea of core plugins written by the community that become part of the standard distribution of tiddlywiki. Hear hear! Note that just having an official list of approved-by the core developer plugins, easily installable at first run would probably be sufficient. Or perhaps a directory of available vs enabled plugins as part of the download package. But keeping the file itself as small as possible for load time consideration is important, and as I've never had to represent maths I wouldn't want the overhead in my TWs, no matter how important a feature is, the tradeoff should rather be against common/frequency. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups TiddlyWiki group. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/tiddlywiki/-/ONu9L0vDvikJ. To post to this group, send email to tiddlywiki@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to tiddlywiki+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/tiddlywiki?hl=en.
Re: [tw] Re: Math without plug-in
TW5 comes in two packages: a conventional node.js application and the familiar single HTML file. The former is generated by the latter. Many users will choose to just pull down the HTML file from tiddlywiki.com; power users may want to install the node.js app (which is incredibly easy these days) to be able to do things from the command line, or to run a personal web server. The idea would be that all the community plugins would be included in the node.js application. The default recipe for building tiddlywiki.com might augment the existing empty.html with other templates, eg, bundling plugins for power users, or a special distribution that includes maths, or a special distribution that only supports WikiCreole for interoperability. So, there would be a very clear boundary around the TiddlyWiki core stuff (it's everything in the GitHub repo), and the core could get reasonably large without impacting the size of empty.html. Best wishes Jeremy On Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 4:40 PM, HansBKK hans...@gmail.com wrote: On Monday, January 30, 2012 8:48:18 PM UTC+7, Jeremy Ruston wrote: In terms of plugin distribution, I've come to believe that the present scattered nature of TiddlyWiki makes things needlessly hard for users. They have to find tiddlywiki.com, download the product, and then by reading the groups they have to figure out the sites that they need to visit to get the basic plugins that everyone relies on. So, for TW5, I'm interested in developing the idea of core plugins written by the community that become part of the standard distribution of tiddlywiki. Hear hear! Note that just having an official list of approved-by the core developer plugins, easily installable at first run would probably be sufficient. Or perhaps a directory of available vs enabled plugins as part of the download package. But keeping the file itself as small as possible for load time consideration is important, and as I've never had to represent maths I wouldn't want the overhead in my TWs, no matter how important a feature is, the tradeoff should rather be against common/frequency. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups TiddlyWiki group. To post to this group, send email to tiddlywiki@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to tiddlywiki+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/tiddlywiki?hl=en.
[tw] Re: Math without plug-in
On Jan 30, 11:13 am, hpon peter.norli...@gmail.com wrote: In what sense is the core too big? It simply is file size. I think that mathematical notation should be regarded as an elimentary feature, since the purpose of TW (in my view) is to present and manage information in an effective way. That purpose cannot be generally fullfilled without a proper support for math notation. Plus, society as we know it would collaps if people don't communicate and reson in mathematical terms. Your are right. This conversation wouldn't be possible without mathematics. I cannot see why intrensic math support would be a problem for any user. ... hmm, If I don't need it, why should I carry it around ;) ... Perhaps you could expand a little on why embracing math notation functionality would be harmful. It would not be harmful at all. It's not the notation, it's the implementation. Let's say one is using jsMath for a long time allready. One would want to have it included into the core. Others may prefer MathJax. I personally would like to see mathquill [1] included For me the plugin solution wins. Everyone gets what s/he wants. There has been a post lately about LaTeX support [2]. May be the links I posted, contain some hints, to get the plugins working. -m [1] https://github.com/laughinghan/mathquill [2] http://groups.google.com/group/tiddlywiki/browse_thread/thread/61d33032dd0f21d2/15692cbab495b37d -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups TiddlyWiki group. To post to this group, send email to tiddlywiki@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to tiddlywiki+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/tiddlywiki?hl=en.
[tw] Re: Math without plug-in
Hi hpon, I personally think, that the core (empty TiddlyWiki) is allready big enough. Some say, it is too big and stick with a version prior to jQuery. And as you say. There are some possibilities (plugins) out there, that handle the situation quite well. So what ever is included into the core, will be wrong for someone. Imo such functions should be plugins. If it is tricky to get them working, plugins may need more or better documentation. -m -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups TiddlyWiki group. To post to this group, send email to tiddlywiki@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to tiddlywiki+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/tiddlywiki?hl=en.
