I think modernization of TW should be the priority and it’s better to make use of the current momentum among developers and contributors for that. New project will naturally help in getting more reach for the software. Rebranding can be done at the time of launch of new software. For the time being use Xememex as code name of the modernization project and give alpha / beta software under xememex brand name at regular intervals for feedback in google group. As we use the new name frequently, we will obviously get to know whether the new name will have appeal among masses. Even a poll can be conducted among the user for feedback about the new name during the development period.
I will share some of my understandings about TW( though not related to this thread). Actually TW in its current state is very powerful if one understand the core features correctly and if we know where / how to use it in daily use. I am not saying I know every core features. I am still learning. The problem is that most of the new users won’t try to go through the documentation properly to understand TW. Then they will see some YouTube videos on TW, which in my opinion just show the basics alone. So they will conclude TW won’t suit them. UI might be turn off for some. But in my case, I find TW interface to be the best for maximizing my output. But I have used some plug ins to customize the UI of my TW. I like my customized TW more than any of the new crowd pulling note taking apps. But it took some effort from my part to reach that state. Everyone may not be willing to spend much time to customize their wiki. Recently I had posted in one discourse forum called “Productivists” regarding TW https://www.theproductivists.club/t/tiddlywiki-for-note-taking/121. The reply I got was surprising. They acknowledged the power of TW, but don't use TW for their note taking. May be a there should be an official community website or blog built upon TW itself with a group of moderators for it. Plug in creators should submit their plug ins to be shown in this site with demonstration of real life examples regarding its usage. Also there should be real life examples of core features also. There should be an option for users to do experimental installation of plug ins which they wish to use as in Tones Playground <https://anthonymuscio.github.io/playground.html>. This should be shown in the welcome page of main website TW so that new users can see it easily. Modernization along with such steps will definitely will increase the appeal of TW to masses. Wishing for the best for TW! On Tuesday, December 29, 2020 at 12:08:51 PM UTC+5:30 mwik...@gmail.com wrote: > On Monday, December 28, 2020 at 8:52:20 AM UTC-4 jeremy...@gmail.com > wrote: > >> That is indeed one of the critical questions. >> >> Over the years we've had consistent feedback on the name "TiddlyWiki" >> that ranges between: >> >> * I don't care about the name, it's just a meaningless string of letters >> * I think the name is fine, it's distinctive, and has few false positives >> when Googling >> * I think the name diminishes TiddlyWiki >> * I think the name is a thinly veiled obscenity >> > > I have struggled over the years trying to convince people of the serious > benefit that can be had from "this thing I use with a silly name" and > undoubtedly, at times, the name has been a bit of a hindrance in winning > people over. However, in the end, I have concluded that it doesn't really > matter. I don't think that a TiddlyWiki is a meaningless string of letters > but the vast majority of end-users aren't going to care what the > programming language/platform is called ... they just want to use the > output to do their particular tasks. So I have switched to selling people > on the output of the tool since they are more than likely not going to look > too deeply under the curtain to the inner sausage-factory that is a > TiddlyWiki widget. Now I normally just refer to the "Relevant Output Tool" > made from the "Wiki tool that I like to use" or a "Wiki system that uses > open web standards" and hope that they find the end result useful. If they > don't, it wouldn't matter if it had a sexy name. > > Javascript itself is a goofy and confusing name ... which went thorough > some renaming of its own (Mocha -> Livescript -> Javascript) to get to a > goofy and confusing name? There are no shortage of goofily named things > that are successful: Git, Rust, Yahoo, Google, Amazon. But they become less > goofy when people see the value and utility of them. > > So while I used to be in the > "change-the-name-so-I-find-it-less-embarrasing-to-say-to-my-boss" camp, I > am now in the > "make-it-indispensible-so-it-doesn't-matter-to-the-end-user-what-it-is-called" > > camp. Efforts are best directed at making it easy and powerful to use and > allowing the particular terminology or branding to fade completely into the > background for those who don't care about how things are made. Just like > most people don't care that their houses are composed of Studs, Weeping > Tiles, Footings, Slips, Bargeboards, Kite Winders, Quoin, Scuncheons, > Escutcheons, Scuttles ... they just want them to work and keep them from > the elements. > > /Mike > > -- 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 tiddlywiki+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywiki/b74ce0cc-7237-4c87-841e-2253c0701455n%40googlegroups.com.
