I guess this is what happens when you keep a project going this long... <blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Ah it was called <a href="https://twitter.com/TiddlyWiki?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw";>@TiddlyWiki</a> , and it's still around. (cool!) Before mobile though it was just an HTML file with js that did FS operations to rewrite itself. I think? Was that even possible?</p>— beering (@endearingbrew) <a href="https://twitter.com/endearingbrew/status/1346648942134476800?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw";>January 6, 2021</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js"; charset="utf-8"></script>
As if wikis were some antique relic from the past. Well, I guess they kinda are, in internet years. So I guess this would be a point for rebranding away from mentioning 'wiki' at all? *shrug* On Tuesday, January 5, 2021 at 8:07:46 PM UTC-5 TW Tones wrote: > Jeremy et al.. > > If we were to use Xememex please tell me how to say it?, Which syllables > are emphasised?. As in my prior post the issue is ease of use and speaking. > If when introducing tiddlywiki (by another name) do you really want to be > forced to spell it?. With a surname like mine, "Muscio" trust me I always > have to spell it and few can workout how to say it just from reading it, in > fact many jumble the letters to Music-o. This is actually helpful for a > surname because of various reasons, like immediate detection of people who > do not know me well on the phone, but it is not good as a transmissible > meme. > > My notes are about the approach not a name suggestion. > > On Quines > > *A quine is a computer program which takes no input and produces a copy of > its own source code as its only output. The standard terms for these > programs in the computability theory and computer science literature are > self-replicating programs, self-reproducing programs, and self-copying > programs. * > > Actually this definition found with a google search, is more about > "trivial quines". It is wrong for tiddlywiki, because it can accept input > and although it writes itself back (With new data and functions) it can > also generate many different outputs. > > I like the Quine idea and I value its relationship to TW but it is > ultimately only a partial description. Perhaps *advanced Quine*? (AQ) it > even has a TLD https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.aq not that we could > register. > > I do favor the tiddler and/or a record, I have no quibble with tiddler, as > it is "self defined" and can become many different things such as a record > or card. My only Quibble is with "TiddlyWiki" when talking to others, I now > say "TiddlyWiki platform" to new people. But for quite similar reasons I > would not be happy with Xememex although like models of cars the > introduction of X makes it sound like a recent model. I would once again be > inclined to say " Xememex platform". Perhaps "meme platform" is more > direct?. > > Regards > Tones > On Tuesday, 5 January 2021 at 20:53:02 UTC+11 jeremy...@gmail.com wrote: > >> Hi Ed >> >> 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? >> >> >> That would be to be decided. In 2010/1 we targeted the browsers that were >> in common use at the time, and presumably we’d do the same again. Nowadays, >> most browsers automatically update and so perhaps there might be less >> incentive to be as conservative as we have been. >> >> From a developer perspective, HTML and CSS have actually changed >> relatively little over the last 10 years, it’s in the area of JavaScript >> that things have radically improved: async/await, modules, classes, etc. >> Making these features available in the core will make the developers more >> productive, and make it easier for developers with contemporary JavaScript >> experience to join the project. >> >> Best wishes >> >> Jeremy >> >> >> >> On Monday, December 28, 2020 at 7:52:20 AM UTC-5 jeremy...@gmail.com >> 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 tiddlywiki+...@googlegroups.com. >>> >>> 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 tiddlywiki+...@googlegroups.com. >> >> To view this discussion on the web visit >> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywiki/80869834-bb6c-44cd-9b74-96fcc7267286n%40googlegroups.com >> >> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywiki/80869834-bb6c-44cd-9b74-96fcc7267286n%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 tiddlywiki+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywiki/a0b04182-27c5-4483-ab3f-ba80c5552e0bn%40googlegroups.com.
