I haven't read everything yet, but to a possible name change, I was thinking of a name like BitWiki or something, if it hasn't been taken already. A Bit = Tiddly
On Monday, January 4, 2021 at 2:23:45 PM UTC-7 Ed Heil wrote: > Hi Jeremy, > > Re-reading this message (and studiously avoiding making any suggestions > for new names) the idea of "targeting more modern JavaScript engines" makes > me wonder about the question of "how modern a browser do you need to have > to have a working Tiddlywiki?" > > With regards to minimum browsers for TW5, according to the web site it's > "Safari version 6" (from 2012!) IE version 10 (also from 2012!) and "all > recent" Chrome, Firefox, and Firefox for Android, whatever that means, but > presumably going back comparably far. So right now TW5 is usable in > browsers that go about 8 years back, which is nice. And TWC support > obviously goes back way further than that. > > How big a change in "you need this recent a browser" would you think was > acceptable in a "Xememex" project? > > On Monday, December 28, 2020 at 7:52:20 AM UTC-5 [email protected] > wrote: > >> As appealing as this sounds, I just don't think that as a small community >> we have the resources to support both, unless the intention would be for >> TiddlyWiki 5 to only receive bug fix updates. >> >> >> I think that would be the default, yes, unless somebody wanted to pick up >> the development more purposefully. >> >> 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? >> >> >> 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 >> >> That last category is undoubtedly a minority, but it's a very >> consistently and forcefully expressed opinion when it does come up. I used >> to think that view said more about the people holding it than anything >> else. But the trouble is that I'm too close to the thing: the name >> "TiddlyWiki" is my little piece of wordplay, and I'm attached to it. I >> think maybe that might hold for many of us who have invested time and >> effort in the project. So I have to pay attention to feedback that comes >> from a different perspective, because I'm never going to be able to assume >> that perspective myself. >> >> The other consideration in all of this is my desire to modernise the >> design of TW5 and establish a new baseline for backwards compatibility. >> After 10 years, it's becoming increasingly limiting to live with some of >> the early design decisions of TW5 (a lot of which are pretty arcane - for >> example, "tiddlerfield" modules). I believe we would make faster and more >> decisive progress if we lost some of that baggage. >> >> The idea of modernising the core relates to the naming change because >> another bit of feedback that I received back in 2011-13 was that it was a >> mistake to reuse the name TiddlyWiki for the new project. Many people felt >> that it was unnecessarily confusing to have two distinct products with the >> same name, and struggled with my perspective that TWC and TW5 were >> different versions of the same thing. >> >> So, what I learned from all of the above is that names for communal >> things are tricky. People have strong opinions because they feel they have >> a stake. The thing that is particularly tricky is trying to change what an >> existing name means if the previous meaning is entrenched in the community. >> >> In other words, I think TiddlyWiki 5 is ripe for such a thorough internal >> overhaul that changing the names might not be as much of a practical >> consideration as it would be if we had to maintain backwards compatibility. >> >> Best wishes >> >> Jeremy. >> >> >> >> Cheers, >> Saq >> >> -- >> 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/46fa1057-6405-463e-8ec2-b67532599227n%40googlegroups.com >> >> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywiki/46fa1057-6405-463e-8ec2-b67532599227n%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> >> . >> >> -- 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/8ae119d3-065f-4d98-ab3e-0d482f7017c7n%40googlegroups.com.
