mat, > @TonyM, you're lifting the issue to a general critique of how many > newcomers approach TW. While I partly agree, you're hijacking Edgaras > thread here. None of your bullets are about what is being discussed here > other than in some meta sense. >
Can I clarify, is this your thread? Or has Edgaras chopped the head of it, by deleting the lead post? With all due respect I believe my answer is on target for the title of the thread, and I felt this an appropriate time to raise the "general critique of how many newcomers approach TW." because quite a few things are stated that tiddlywiki can't do, which in fact can be done. It is dangerous to "Redesign" something to meet goals that have already being achieved. As you know as a key contributor, the amount of activity has gone up, and a number of the new users including Edgaras have some great ideas that we love to hear. But when they are complex requests requesting changes, it can be hard to respond without a great deal of effort, especially when a good percentage of "possible change requests", need not be so, because we can already do it, if not exactly, certainly similar methods exist. I do see some wonderful digressions, innovations and new methods being discussed, but I am also seeing a large quantity of "I wish tiddlywiki could" when "tiddlyWiki can already". *Everyone is so inspired by the possibilities of tiddlywiki which is wonderful, but their is a high potential for a lot of unnecessary effort on all our parts.* I simply want to point this out! especially in Topics with such broad subject matter. Regards Tony > > @Edgaras - some specific opinions: > > - The + at top right corner, i.e "create new tiddler", is a too > frequently used to be so subtle and off center. > - Consider that on wide monitors, things that are stuck to the sides > can get very distant. > - What are the do/redo arrows for? > - For smoother acceptance, I'd suggest not changing stuff that are not > part of your direct proposal. For example, I imagine that using another > edit icon isn't really a feature you really care for. And while the white > background is perhaps pretty, it washes out the tiddler. I understand > that's a matter of opinion but, then, I don't think it is the background > coloring that "makes TW difficult" which I believe is your general target > objective. > - For meta info area: Custom fields are way more used than Content > type. > - There are a few system fields <https://tiddlywiki.com/#TiddlerFields> > e.g *color, _canonical_uri, list, class* that IMO would benefit from > more exposure (still in the meta info area) to raise awareness of them > (because they're useful). Not sure exactly how it should be manifested, so > I'm just saying. > - I want to immediately see if a tiddler is being edited or not. I > guess part of your mockup is about hiding this but something needs to make > the distinction immediately obvious. I suggest making the Done button (i.e > the checkmark) be in red color while editing anything. This is subtle, yet > distinct and is equivalent behaviour to the whole wiki Save button. > > A thing to consider is that TW is almost exclusively for personal use. > "Practical" is more important than "Pretty". While most of us probably > prefer minimalism, it is still critical with immediate access to e.g the > sidebar lists etc. I think a good rule of thumb is "The more used, the more > prominent it needs to be" > > Thank you for working with this, Edgaras! Your thoughts come at a good > time also, considering Jeremys ideas for big changes > <https://github.com/Jermolene/TiddlyWiki5/issues/4473> that, BTW, may, or > may not, be backward compatible. > > <:-) > -- 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 [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywiki/10fe1836-9883-451c-83e0-f60223c054df%40googlegroups.com.
