Re: [tw] Re: Voicing Futures ...

[David Szego]

On Friday, 24 March 2017 11:24:54 UTC-4, Jeremy Ruston wrote:

>
> Substitute “JavaScript” for “Java” and that’s a pretty good description of 
> TiddlyWiki running today under Node.js :)
>

Understood, but to avoid the pain / inability to have every user install 
Node everywhere they want TW, couldn't an embedded Java server do the same 
thing, and remain self-contained? 

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"TiddlyWiki" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to tiddlywiki+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to tiddlywiki@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/tiddlywiki.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywiki/c0b25b7f-8b0f-479c-b1f6-5ff8bb5f6695%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [tw] Re: Voicing Futures ...

[Jeremy Ruston]

Hi David

> Naieve but stupidly simple potential solution...
> 
> What if one of the Core Tiddlers was a Java web server running on localhost, 
> which the rest of the Core sync'd to?
> 
> Wouldn't that local Java web server have access to write files?

Substitute “JavaScript” for “Java” and that’s a pretty good description of 
TiddlyWiki running today under Node.js :)

Best wishes

Jeremy.

> 
> -- 
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
> "TiddlyWiki" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an 
> email to tiddlywiki+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com 
> .
> To post to this group, send email to tiddlywiki@googlegroups.com 
> .
> Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/tiddlywiki 
> .
> To view this discussion on the web visit 
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywiki/df24729e-88de-4e14-b018-d35499b7eb9c%40googlegroups.com
>  
> .
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout 
> .

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"TiddlyWiki" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to tiddlywiki+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to tiddlywiki@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/tiddlywiki.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywiki/2BE2CF51-B589-4B60-BE30-C36DB636D12A%40gmail.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [tw] Re: Voicing Futures ...

[PMario]

On Wednesday, March 15, 2017 at 10:31:16 AM UTC+1, Mat wrote:
>
> Guys, guys, please keep it constructive. It is super easy to misunderstand 
> - and to misphrase - in this text discussion format. The real efforts are 
> towards the betterment of TW, which is difficult enough per se ;-)
>

Well said. 
 

> How about *bookmarklets*? Could there be a bookmarklet save button that 
> both has access rights to the page and to the local computer?
>

The same javascript restrictions as for pages, apply to bookmarks. 

-m

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"TiddlyWiki" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to tiddlywiki+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to tiddlywiki@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/tiddlywiki.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywiki/171f531c-66d2-4d7f-a02d-b71c218d1fe5%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [tw] Re: Voicing Futures ...

[Mat]

Guys, guys, please keep it constructive. It is super easy to misunderstand 
- and to misphrase - in this text discussion format. The real efforts are 
towards the betterment of TW, which is difficult enough per se ;-)

Hopefully this idea/question can put focus back:

How about *bookmarklets*? Could there be a bookmarklet save button that 
both has access rights to the page and to the local computer?

Thank you!

<:-)

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"TiddlyWiki" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to tiddlywiki+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to tiddlywiki@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/tiddlywiki.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywiki/40626532-ba70-4b67-91e8-5001b19694e5%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [tw] Re: Voicing Futures ...

[Ákos Szederjei]

Dear Eric!

Who said YOU are not being able to resolve it, or YOU do not want too, because 
other feature are deemed more important? Really...
The world is not revolving around you. This list is about TW and not about 
your capabilities. What you do or want I could care less. It is not that you 
will resolve the issue of the plug in on your own. If you are the sole 
developer of this issue I profoundly apologise.

Talking about making stuff up? You claimed that the 4 step solution of yours 
is the same as if the plug in is used. Really? I just closed a Tiddly in old 
FF and it auto saved. The same, sure, and my microwaves make video 
recordings...

Fortunately, I am not really dependent on the offline functionality for my 
wiki. 
Your argumentation (or the lack of it) convinced me to switch now to another 
wiki and not wait for a solution for TW' saving problem. 

Good luck with your endeavour! 

Ákos





On Mittwoch, 15. März 2017 00:56:53 CET Eric Shulman wrote:
> On Tuesday, March 14, 2017 at 3:35:46 PM UTC-7, Ákos Szederjei wrote:
> > I understand the technical difficulties, and it is ok not being able to
> > resolve
> 
> it, or even not wanting too, because other feature are deemed more
> 
> > important.
> 
> It's ok to disagree with what I wrote... but...
> 
> I never said ANYTHING about "not wanting to" or "deemed more important"
> 
> DO NOT PUT WORDS IN MY MOUTH!!!
> 
> Just because you don't agree with my explanation does not mean you get to
> MAKE STUFF UP about what I said.
> 
> YOU ARE NOT DONALD TRUMP!

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"TiddlyWiki" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to tiddlywiki+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to tiddlywiki@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/tiddlywiki.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywiki/2546852.q7A4t5DQJh%40michael-pc.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [tw] Re: Voicing Futures ...

[Eric Shulman]

On Tuesday, March 14, 2017 at 3:35:46 PM UTC-7, Ákos Szederjei wrote:

> I understand the technical difficulties, and it is ok not being able to 
> resolve 
>
it, or even not wanting too, because other feature are deemed more 
> important. 


It's ok to disagree with what I wrote... but...

I never said ANYTHING about "not wanting to" or "deemed more important"

DO NOT PUT WORDS IN MY MOUTH!!!

Just because you don't agree with my explanation does not mean you get to 
MAKE STUFF UP about what I said.

YOU ARE NOT DONALD TRUMP!





-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"TiddlyWiki" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to tiddlywiki+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to tiddlywiki@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/tiddlywiki.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywiki/a2b7b64f-c5c3-4e5e-8625-5d31ed8e1a75%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [tw] Re: Voicing Futures ...

[Ákos Szederjei]

TiddlyFox, like TW Desktop, saved the TW file whenever a Tiddler was closed. So 
no dialog vs. 4 step. Any dialog causes more complexity.

Why have word processors / text editors auto safe feature? Because they are 
convenient and speed up work. 

You can always safe with File / Save As in the browser. 4 Steps too. 

Both Linux and Windows have backup tools which are quite good. They take 30 
seconds to setup and done. 

I understand the technical difficulties, and it is ok not being able to resolve 
it, or even not wanting too, because other feature are deemed more important. 
But please, do not tell me that without TiddlyFox my workflow is comparably 
easy. It is not obviously not.

Ákos

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"TiddlyWiki" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to tiddlywiki+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to tiddlywiki@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/tiddlywiki.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywiki/1826037.DB0yiZzVH6%40michael-pc.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [tw] Re: Voicing Futures ...

[@TiddlyTweeter]

Ciao Mark S., Ákos & Jon

*BACKUP.* Because of the importance of work I now do in TW, complementing 
the excellent TiddlyFox auto-save, I run a resident ("redundant") backup 
program that detects file changes in my TWs every 30 minutes. I simply 
cannot afford to lose work. Basically BACKUP can be handled and is, I 
think, quite manageable with the many tools around. *But you can't backup 
what you haven't saved.*

*RE-ENTRANT SAVING*. In the discussion with Jeremy there is a lot. 
Especially in his second comment. Opening that up, what it implies in 
detail, is I think very interesting. 
 One aspect of it is, centrally, whether in the future, RE-ENTRANT 
SAVING will still be possible (i.e. via some gadget in the browser) or not. 
I think that matters. I understand that the way browsers are going is 
making it harder than ever. That was a large part of where I was coming 
from. I STILL think that a TW that can save over itself as an standalone is 
not something to give up on entirely quite yet.
 And, perhaps naively, I believe its still quite important to wider 
uptake of TW.

Best wishes
Josiah

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"TiddlyWiki" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to tiddlywiki+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to tiddlywiki@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/tiddlywiki.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywiki/8a3186e9-74d0-46fd-8ae8-4a7b8b06dfc8%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [tw] Re: Voicing Futures ...

[Jon]

Hi Akos,

I'm really not qualified to comment. All I'd say is that the impression I 
have from Jeremy's and other's responses to this question is that the 
reasons the save issue hasn't been solved is due to technical difficulties 
rather than not appreciating how important having an easy saving mechanism 
is, especially for new users etc.
I'm sure someone else will be able to clarify the position.

Regards
Jon

On Monday, 13 March 2017 12:24:30 UTC, Ákos Szederjei wrote:
>
> Jon, I do not think I (we) lack the appreciation for the complexities of 
> the 
> problem. As a user, we bow to the Almighty Powers of The Developers, but I 
> think you underestimate how important an easy save feature is, as we have 
> it 
> now. 
>
> The problem as we see it, is very relevant to the use and spread of TW. In 
> my 
> opinion, to have an easy save option is not a "nice to have feature" or a 
> question of  (in)convenience. I use TW on Linux without it, and I lost lot 
> of 
> work because  I closed browser / tab accidentally or because I simply 
> forgot 
> to save. TW is capabilities are way to complex to not to have an "auto" 
> save 
> feature. 
>
> I also disagree with the assumption that the save option is a server side 
> feature. I understand the notion why it is easier to have that on a server 
> side based wiki. I am not saying we need to have the same functionality as 
> a 
> server side wiki. There are many solutions, besides plug ins, which were 
> listed before by the members of this list. Currently we do not have a 
> platform 
> independent solution for the problem. 
>
> Maybe I am overestimating the problem, that would be valid answer I 
> accept, 
> yet disagree with. 
>
> I rest my case. :) 
>
> Ákos 
>
>
>
>
> On Montag, 13. März 2017 07:38:14 CET Jon wrote: 
> > Josiah, 
> > 
> > You seem to be pushing for something which you see as inconvenient 
> without 
> > appreciating the underlying complexities involved, which as a "naive" 
> user 
> > myself, I can only guess at. 
> > I just think that if there was a quick fix to this issue, Jeremy would 
> have 
> > already introduced it. 
> > 
> > Regards 
> > Jon 
> > 
> > On Sunday, 12 March 2017 14:01:50 UTC, @TiddlyTweeter wrote: 
> > > *Here is a discussion I and Jeremy Ruston started, privately, on 
> Twitter. 
> > > We realised that it could just as well be public in case anyone else 
> wants 
> > > to read / comment ... * 
> > > 
> > > *Josiah, 1... * 
> > > Are we all doomed to have to give up on simple download file-saving? 
> > > 
> > > Do you know if the excellent TiddlyFox 2 will still work after the 
> ominous 
> > > Firefox 57? 
> > > 
> > > WHY do Mozilla take so LONG approving add-ons? 
> > > 
> > > WHY do you keep TiddlyFox on Mozilla add-ons marked as "Experimental"? 
> > > 
> > > Best wishes 
> > > Josiah 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > *Jeremy, 1...* 
> > > By “simple download file saving” do you mean the default fall back 
> HTML 5 
> > > saver? I’ve no idea about Firefox 57. I’ve no idea why Mozilla do what 
> > > they 
> > > do. I mark it experimental to save it going through Mozilla’s more 
> > > rigorous 
> > > full review. 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > *Josiah, 2...* 
> > > Ciao Jeremy. I guess where I am coming from is as a "naive" user 
> (well, 
> > > I'm pretending to be one & try stay in that skin a bit). 
> > > 
> > > I'm trying to get my head round the stumbling blocks to better uptake 
> of 
> > > TW. 
> > > 
> > > No. On "saving" I mean what TiddlyFox does brilliantly, simply. 
> Overwrite. 
> > > The fallback behaviour of save(1) save(2) is not viable, IMO, for most 
> > > folk. 
> > > 
> > > On Mozilla ... on everything I read they are internally confident in 
> what 
> > > they are doing ... just about everything else is like witnessing 
> shooting 
> > > into the foot. It all gets too convoluted. 
> > > 
> > > I now understand why you keep it "experimental". From a naive user 
> point 
> > > of view its a slight put-off. I'm not sure but does the latest v1 
> still 
> > > work in FF 52. 57 is when they say they will go wholly WebExtensions: 
> > > Firefox 57 - Compatability Milestone 
> > > <
> https://blog.mozilla.org/addons/2017/02/16/the-road-to-firefox-57-compati 
> > > bility-milestones/> 
> > > 
> > > *Jeremy, 2...* 
> > > Here’s the thing: all the difficulties in getting started with 
> TiddlyWiki 
> > > stem from the single file architecture. It’s fiddly and unfamiliar to 
> most 
> > > people. The simple fix is to move it to an online service, when all 
> those 
> > > problems melt away. Simple. If on the other hand, anyone wants the 
> > > considerable advantages of working offline without a server, well, 
> then 
> > > TiddlyWiki is the only thing on the planet that can help them, and it 
> > > comes 
> > > with a learning curve. That’s life. 
> > > 
> > > *Jeremy, 3...* 
> > > My sense is that you are pushing to find a way for the standalone HTML 
> > > file experience to match the ease of use of an online service. I 

Re: [tw] Re: Voicing Futures ...

[Ákos Szederjei]

Jon, I do not think I (we) lack the appreciation for the complexities of the 
problem. As a user, we bow to the Almighty Powers of The Developers, but I 
think you underestimate how important an easy save feature is, as we have it 
now.

The problem as we see it, is very relevant to the use and spread of TW. In my 
opinion, to have an easy save option is not a "nice to have feature" or a 
question of  (in)convenience. I use TW on Linux without it, and I lost lot of 
work because  I closed browser / tab accidentally or because I simply forgot 
to save. TW is capabilities are way to complex to not to have an "auto" save 
feature.

I also disagree with the assumption that the save option is a server side 
feature. I understand the notion why it is easier to have that on a server 
side based wiki. I am not saying we need to have the same functionality as a 
server side wiki. There are many solutions, besides plug ins, which were 
listed before by the members of this list. Currently we do not have a platform 
independent solution for the problem. 

Maybe I am overestimating the problem, that would be valid answer I accept, 
yet disagree with.

I rest my case. :)

Ákos




On Montag, 13. März 2017 07:38:14 CET Jon wrote:
> Josiah,
> 
> You seem to be pushing for something which you see as inconvenient without
> appreciating the underlying complexities involved, which as a "naive" user
> myself, I can only guess at.
> I just think that if there was a quick fix to this issue, Jeremy would have
> already introduced it.
> 
> Regards
> Jon
> 
> On Sunday, 12 March 2017 14:01:50 UTC, @TiddlyTweeter wrote:
> > *Here is a discussion I and Jeremy Ruston started, privately, on Twitter.
> > We realised that it could just as well be public in case anyone else wants
> > to read / comment ... *
> > 
> > *Josiah, 1... *
> > Are we all doomed to have to give up on simple download file-saving?
> > 
> > Do you know if the excellent TiddlyFox 2 will still work after the ominous
> > Firefox 57?
> > 
> > WHY do Mozilla take so LONG approving add-ons?
> > 
> > WHY do you keep TiddlyFox on Mozilla add-ons marked as "Experimental"?
> > 
> > Best wishes
> > Josiah
> > 
> > 
> > *Jeremy, 1...*
> > By “simple download file saving” do you mean the default fall back HTML 5
> > saver? I’ve no idea about Firefox 57. I’ve no idea why Mozilla do what
> > they
> > do. I mark it experimental to save it going through Mozilla’s more
> > rigorous
> > full review.
> > 
> > 
> > *Josiah, 2...*
> > Ciao Jeremy. I guess where I am coming from is as a "naive" user (well,
> > I'm pretending to be one & try stay in that skin a bit).
> > 
> > I'm trying to get my head round the stumbling blocks to better uptake of
> > TW.
> > 
> > No. On "saving" I mean what TiddlyFox does brilliantly, simply. Overwrite.
> > The fallback behaviour of save(1) save(2) is not viable, IMO, for most
> > folk.
> > 
> > On Mozilla ... on everything I read they are internally confident in what
> > they are doing ... just about everything else is like witnessing shooting
> > into the foot. It all gets too convoluted.
> > 
> > I now understand why you keep it "experimental". From a naive user point
> > of view its a slight put-off. I'm not sure but does the latest v1 still
> > work in FF 52. 57 is when they say they will go wholly WebExtensions:
> > Firefox 57 - Compatability Milestone
> >  > bility-milestones/>
> > 
> > *Jeremy, 2...*
> > Here’s the thing: all the difficulties in getting started with TiddlyWiki
> > stem from the single file architecture. It’s fiddly and unfamiliar to most
> > people. The simple fix is to move it to an online service, when all those
> > problems melt away. Simple. If on the other hand, anyone wants the
> > considerable advantages of working offline without a server, well, then
> > TiddlyWiki is the only thing on the planet that can help them, and it
> > comes
> > with a learning curve. That’s life.
> > 
> > *Jeremy, 3...*
> > My sense is that you are pushing to find a way for the standalone HTML
> > file experience to match the ease of use of an online service. I don’t
> > think that’s possible.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"TiddlyWiki" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to tiddlywiki+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to tiddlywiki@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/tiddlywiki.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywiki/2605025.DkSANurHcW%40michael-pc.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.