Tony, Building on
1) "odd intellectual" ... perhaps people who are interested in learning things for themselves are attracted to TW. Standard intellectuals, academics within institutions perhaps use a standard kit: Word integrated with a reference manager. They are focused on producing texts in a particular format grounded in a literature typically requiring a connection to an institution to get hold of. 2) "artists (with a tech bent)" ... and / or perhaps techies with an artistic bent. The blending of tool making with text making is where it gets interesting for me. I'm explicitly STEAM not STEM [1] in Cuckoo and Caddisfly mode, Brian Eno's thoughts [2] on the ecology of indie music in the UK inspire my thinking. TiddlyWiki's ecology is free from institutional and corporate influence and constraints, it's an indie scene, low fi, DIY, punk, grunge acid house not corporate rock or classical music. There's something of the avant-garde in the TiddlyVerse, it's always under development, we can all see the pre-release and the discussions around the tool. Everything is in the open, there is no immediately apparent financial reward from becoming an expert at TW. Intrinsic motivation [3] seem to be a main motivation for many users. TiddlyWiki, a Non-linear personal toolmaker, the intertwingling of text and tool within a community of non-linear notemakers Alex [1] https://theconversation.com/explainer-whats-the-difference-between-stem-and-steam-95713#:~:text=STEM%20represents%20science%2C%20technology%2C%20engineering,arts%2C%20design%20and%20new%20media.&text=The%20main%20difference%20between%20STEM,explicitly%20focuses%20on%20scientific%20concepts. [2] https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p033smwp [3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motivation#Intrinsic_motivation On Monday, 22 June 2020 02:20:08 UTC+1, TW Tones wrote: > > Alex, > > Once again you are responding from the demographic we share, the "odd > intellectual" :) ? > > Non-linear thinking (and texts - is it best to treat them both as the same >> thing?) can be seen "fork" in a garden path. >> > > I think the fact tiddlywiki supports non-linear records and concepts > ignores that fact it is also very good at any type of structure such as > list/hierarchical, networks etc..., or no structure at all. This is the > deficit model of description, the market is not good at "non-linear" so we > define tiddlywiki as "non-linear" although it goes far beyond that. I > wonder if tiddlywiki's catch phrase attracts more artists (with a tech > bent) than techies as a result? > > >> In TiddlyWiki we have "missing links" and "orphans" but we don't have a >> way of tracking hierarchies of tags. We can have a tiddler supported by >> multiple tags and some of those tags might be intended to mark position in >> a hierarchy. Jumping from a tiddler to a tag and then to another tag is a >> more difficult navigation than following the same number of links. Going up >> and down the ladder of abstraction only makes sense when there are small >> visible steps. I was thinking of situations, mechanisms and behaviors to >> make hyper-textual leaps up the ladders of abstraction and then along a few >> forked paths. And the other way, trying to trace a way down to solid ground >> from a far out thought. >> > > We can do what we want in Tiddlywiki, I thus cant agree with this > paragraph, ask and we can provide, if not already. > > > >> I am most grateful for the TiddlyVerse for sparking my imagination. Like >> many folk round the world I've not been getting out much recently... >> perhaps I've completely lost it! >> > > Me too Alex, and for me it's value includes also sparking your (and > others) imaginations. > > Regards > Tony > -- 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/61fee635-14e3-4f6a-b0bc-ae5784b512bao%40googlegroups.com.
