Charlie, Tones, TiddlyTweeter first off, I hold you personally responsible for firing up my dormant synapses. Thanks for that, you have provided renewed impetus for me to continue pondering these issues, which I essentially ceased to do in any meaningful way since I left my research position at CSIRO (the Federal Government's research body in Australia). A dormant area of my brain has reawakened :-) This will also require me to unbox my library so suitable books can be re-queried (all my books are in storage as we have been living most of the time in South Korea for the past decade. Corona has left us 'stranded' in Sydney).
I will respond to the recent postings but, like Tones, need to think things through a bit more rather than provide a rambling nonsense of ideas and thoughts. One thought though. Maybe it is time to take discussion outside of this group. Not that I want to disenfranchise anybody but the discussion has wider ramifications/application than Tiddlywiki. It also can be applied to Mediawiki and even Bill Atkinson's original Hypercard and its offshoots. Also, this discussion can then take advantage to TW's linking facility, etc. Just a thought. Ciao for now. bobj On Wednesday, 2 December 2020 at 14:19:52 UTC+11 Bob Jansen wrote: > TiddlyTweeter wrote: > "Very good case example (http://cultconv.com/ [footnote---on mobile its > too minuscule!])." > > yes, I know of the sizing issue on mobile devices. Not sure how to handle > that other than a redesign which I am loathe to do given usage stats > (~8,000 per month over last calendar year). The basic design is for > multiple synchronous channels of information, in this case four > (video/audio, transcript, table of contents and images with captions). > Altogether too much for a small screen. Plus on iPhone, the video takes > over the whole screen anyway. > > bobj > > On Tuesday, 1 December 2020 at 03:50:57 UTC+11 TiddlyTweeter wrote: > >> Ciao bobj >> >> Very good case example (http://cultconv.com/ [footnote---on mobile its >> too minuscule!]). >> >> BTW, I really took to your last point ... >> >> Throughout all of my research career, the issue that continually crops up >>> is context. I think this is the crucial component to keep things >>> understandable. Yet no agreed understanding of context exists yet we all >>> use it ... >>> >> >> Right. In terms of information design issues there is no algorithm for >> accurately deriving either "scope of meaning" or "scope of inference >> (context implying)". Though it is pretty clear on net that within "fields >> of interest" context is ALWAYS playing an implicit role in successful sites. >> >> I thought the site you gave access to excellent. *Very honed to purpose*. >> It is an unusual (uplifting) thing seeing such a "schematization" work so >> well. >> I think that is the point. You have to "sniff/tease" out context and back >> generate (derive) schema from that first-felt understanding that isn't >> otherwise derivable. >> >> Best wishes >> TT >> >> > -- 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/47869f59-f255-4b9a-81b3-8dc47ac612c6n%40googlegroups.com.
