How about "Tidwiki" - "tid" from tidbit (a small morsel). Very similiar to Tiddlywiki (a name I don't have any problem with, incidentally), just shorter, and single Tidwikis could still be Tiddlers. "Xememex" does not appeal; obscure and hard to remember.
On Tuesday, December 29, 2020 at 12:34:47 PM UTC+11 [email protected] wrote: > The uniqueness of "xememex" is nice for making sure I find the sample code > for just the new project. That is the only real concern I would have about > renaming: Making sure search engine results can be refined easily. > > Although I personally agree that the project title word is just a random > string of letters that I can copy-paste as a prefix for my search query, I > personally dislike the repetition of letters in xememex. Although > xemex.com com is already taken by a watch company, perhaps we could take > advantage of some other TDL like xemex.dev on which browsers now require > HTTPS communication. > > I agree wirh Stobot that 'Wiki' isn't a buzzword today and doesn't sound > that professional. Knowledgebase abbreviated as KB is ubiquitous. Perhaps a > rebrand focus could be Xememex Quine KB. This sums up where to go, why it > is unique, and why you would want to use it. (Thanks to Matt for the > suggestion.) > > Saying 'cards' is in the project name would be focusing on the > implementation details instead of the user's overall problem. Cards can > solve the problem, but that is just a necessay evil. An easy to update and > re-link KB is their end goal. Perhaps some project concept abbreviations > could be XM code in a QKB file? > > I do like the unit identity of "card" because it is unlikely to actually > be in the content of anyone's actual documents or code. It is easy to find > all such references, and isn't a sub-part of other common English words. It > is very short to type, which is probably my biggest gripe about the > 'currentTiddler' variable. It is used so often, I would really appreciate > 'curCard' for the next iteration. > > I have been going through the documentation to learn how to create a > working example of each individual option in TW. Just scratching the > surface I keep running into 'depreciated' examples. A new fork for Xememex > is definitely what I would desire. TWC is still being used today on old and > current browsers. TW5 will continue to be used 15 years from now. Applying > all the lessons learned to a separate project should make a clean break and > require the minimum of today's latest browsers' functionality. Older > browsers - if they must be used - will still work with the other projects. > > A focus on support for internationalization right out of the gate would > also help. Just recently, Jeremy said trying to support field names with > non-ASCII Unicode characters would be very complex under-the-hood. Making a > clean re-design will help others to write cards and metadata in their own > language much easier. > > The hardest part of rebranding - as Mozilla well knows - is keeping the > current project being able to support the latest fads instead of truly > halting development for two years. I don't have any suggestions other than > deciding the new project will only focus on implementing the existing > TW5.1.23 features, and any new features will have to be brought in during a > second round of updates after the base project is released. > > I only have two pleadings for improvements: > > 1) Please include some kind of string literal escape codes so we can use [ > ], " ', etc. characters within filters without worrying about whether the > query can succeeed. It would be like the !--html comment-- tag where all > data inside is treated as non-code. Most people won't use these operation > characters in card, tag or field names. Power users should have some method > that consistently allows for them. > > 2) Please try to make at least one practical example of every single > keyword. I am constantly trying to figure out how to use keywords mentioned > on TW.com but don't actually have any concrete implementation to see why it > would be useful. Counter examples would also be nice. > > On Monday, December 28, 2020 at 7:51:01 AM UTC-8 Stobot wrote: > >> I know Jeremy's trying to not make this all name related - but not being >> a developer, don't think I can contribute to that part of the conversation. >> I agree that it would seem logical to use a new name with a new significant >> version, though I also agree that development has been so healthy lately >> that I worry about that momentum starting because of a looming re-design on >> the core. >> >> With that, on naming... :) >> >> - I agree and have experienced that the "Tiddly" / "Tiddler" naming >> is a barrier for me to sell others on the software - doesn't seem serious >> - I agree that "Wiki" in general undervalues what TiddlyWiki is these >> days. I agree with others who consider TW more of a "platform". For >> example >> I use it as a competitor to Microsoft PowerApps. >> - I really like "card" - that's what I use when explaining TiddlyWiki >> already and is totally self-explanatory given how it appears on screen. >> Plays well with the various metaphors of virtual card boxes. >> - I like "memex" after reading a bit about it. I agree that one >> concern is that it's not obvious how to pronounce it... >> - Related - Even if I knew how to pronounce it, I could tell them >> the name and they may not know the spelling even close enough to even >> find >> with google - which could be problematic >> - Maybe something else memex related but something that's more >> intuitive to spell / pronounce? MemexCards, MemexDeck, MyMemex, >> MemexPlatform, MemexPro, TheMemex >> >> >> >> On Monday, December 28, 2020 at 9:58:40 AM UTC-5 Mark S. wrote: >> >>> On Monday, December 28, 2020 at 4:02:18 AM UTC-8 wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> As you mention in a later reply, the real challenge is replacing the >>>> word tiddler. I remember trying this in Classic and it wasn't easy then >>>> and >>>> is probably even harder now with all the widget attributes etc. Which >>>> makes >>>> me wonder if this would really be the best use of our time and resources? >>>> >>>> >>> xemes >>> >> -- 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/93aae994-3107-4606-8860-5322a06f5005n%40googlegroups.com.
