I apologize for that horrid mess of code. Wish there was a way to edit. Oh, it's email. Even though I'm entering this from a web page.
Reason # 1,475 why I hate Google Groups :( /rant On Wednesday, January 6, 2021 at 5:38:31 AM UTC-5 Glenn Dixon wrote: > 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 [email protected] 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 [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/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 [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywiki/b97ceffc-4ec2-41bd-9f0b-397667715d3fn%40googlegroups.com.
