I apologize for my misunderstanding, but I am afraid that my poor language skills will prevent me from understanding exactly what you are saying.
BTC, *People have different needs and thoughts before they put together plugins and the wiki will change with time and experience. Thoughts about how it could be even better and what might be lacking to get the results they wished for. Explaining all that and other material they might have been inspired from. Then the Tutorial how it was put together.* For example, if there is a plugin that makes it easy to display tag intersections, we should start by showing the reader how to use tags and why it’s important to find tag intersections? So instead of categorizing plugins by function, do we group them by usage? I think that's a good idea. If we take the TiddlyWiki documentation as an example, the count filter operator and CountWidget could be grouped together because we use it for something similar even though their implementation is different. *Inspiration is always good - but I have a feeling that there is also some kind of fashion making special NAMES interesting at the same time. Not necessarily because they will turn out to be evergreens in note taking.* If I understand correctly, should we start from the common principles (link-based navigation) and mention the main names by the way that these principles can be found in the literature with such a name? So instead of starting to explain Zettelkasten specifically, will we explain the link-based note taking method and in the end mention that this principle is implemented by Zettelkasten, among others? *I am not sure that even the most perfect of note taking app in theori would suite everyone.* This is what I like best about TiddlyWiki, because if my habit changes in the meantime, I don’t have to look for another solution (e.g. Dynalist, Roam Research, Notion) because I can most likely get the job I want on TiddlyWiki, so the software can be tailored to my needs. TiddlyTweeter, *Especially the different outcomes of commitment to specific linking strategies (rather than product names). I think that would be invaluable. Not just for TW, but the net in general. There is a lot of talk ... Roam or whatnot, as if it was new. It IS NOT. Its been gone over many times already. What we really need to help users is improve understanding of what the RESULTS look like in different approaches.* If I understand correctly, could we show what is the meaning of outline and give example methods for this + could we mention Streams plugin as an implementation? The problem is that I don’t see much difference between link-based methods: basically, the goal of each is to keep the relevant notes densely linked. These principles can be described, but I cannot imagine a comparative description. Perhaps the individual parts could be compared, e.g. "Spoken Names vs. Unique IDs". I haven’t read the terms you’ve mentioned before after that, so if I get to know them too, maybe I’ll understand what you’re saying better. -- 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/dc64c2a7-a1aa-444e-b813-2d889e729363n%40googlegroups.com.
