I am no expert but I tend to agree that styling seems a bit daunting for a beginner and medium level css-skill user. Off the cuff, how about including a list of standard elements that *need* to styled in the *stripped-down* version of tiddlywiki? So that a new user does not forget to style an element just because he is not currently using it. This at present can be done by seeing the [[StyleSheetColors]] but a list of stylable elements, with just a line or two of explanation, wherever required, would help a beginner and an amateur like me.
On Oct 16, 9:11 pm, "Tobias - http://tbGTD.tiddlyspot.com"; <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi jk and FND, > > I agree with jk about certain aspects of "design convolutedness". > Right now I am working on a "flavour" for which I stripped all > preconfigured design rules. I replaced the shadow-Stylesheets in the > file ...well knowing that I need to take care of that when upgrading. > Yet, I started completely from scratch (even using css-browser-reset > from yui). In terms of finding my own ways, that was a relief, I tell > you. > > I think a good workaround that meets jk's needs (and mine too) were to > present at least two standard downloads for TiddlyWiki, the backwards- > compat' one and a basic design stripped of every single css > declaration from the core that is not essential (even indentation for > lists!), containing core css definitions to nullify any default > browser styles, presented as a "basic TiddlyWiki" ...so that those who > think they know better how to style it may do so without having to > consider any default unnessessary gradients, margins, paddings, fonts, > colors and what not... and that is not overriding, but rather starting > from (quite a different) scratch, which I would prefer big time (for > some use-cases). > > Consider this: those basic downloads just differ in their pre-applied > shadow-StyleSheets... shouldn't that be rather simple to achieve? > Or... how about a "never upgrade" flag for certain shadow tiddlers? > > Tobias. > > On 16 Okt., 10:06, FND <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > it's nice how tiddlywiki provides several measures of hackability, but > > > when it comes down to it styling it is very difficult > > > We're aware of these issues. Unfortunately, significant changes are > > often constrained by backwards-compatibility concerns, as a large number > > of themes, plugins and individual customizations rely on the current DOM > > structure and styling. > > > > I've been trying to design it from the inside-out to be more usable > > > We'd love to hear any suggestions you might have. > > > > will I one day be able to rapidly construct a tiddlywiki using a > > > pre-existing, modularized library of rich javascript functions? is > > > tiddlywiki backporting some of its features to jQuery itself, rewriting > > > some of its original features using jQuery, or both? > > > We're definitely aiming to both take advantage of jQuery where sensible > > and extracting functionality into generic jQuery plugins: > > http://jquery.tiddlywiki.org > > Any contributions in that area would be most welcome (best discussed on > > the developers' list). > > > -- F. > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TiddlyWiki" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/tiddlywiki?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
