Hi Walt, It is mostly plain text, but for Markdown formatting ( which I could live > without) and links- formatted like [Google](https:// Google.com) -which > would need conversion to [[wikilinks form|https://google.com]]. >
Right so importing something like this is definitely doable. You could then either use the markdown plugin and just use these tiddlers as markdown, or try to convert to TW markup. Where things get problematic is if your content is using features or syntax specific to them. A markdown to TW converter currently does not exist but should not be that much work. I've dabbled in both areas previously, so time permitting might be able to help out if you go down this road. > To this end, it would be interesting to understand what features or >> workflow in Dynalist (or Logseq) make it better for note taking (vs >> TiddlyWiki) in your experience. >> > > Essentially it’s about speed and portability, traversing/ elaborating/ > reorganizing outlines as fast as fingers can type, and context switching > from local desktop to mobile phone in the field ( i.e. cloud) many times > per day without a hitch. If this is possible in TW, I’d love to know how… > But i think it’s a case of architectures that are optimized for different > things, don’t you think? > It actually isn't my intention to push TiddlyWiki here. I find it interesting from a UX perspective when someone has a strong preference for one tool over another. I always feel its best to choose the tool best suited for a particular task. Also, tools should always complement one's natural way of thinking and working rather than the other way. I often find that conversations around note taking don't take into account individual cognitive differences. Context switching and mobile usage is indeed in my opinion something TW doesn't have a good workflow for. The single file model doesn't help either when it comes to concerns about overwriting one version with one with older content. For the use case you describe I would consider this to be the biggest barrier. Setting up something like TiddlyWiki on node.js on Azure would help, especially with the upcoming server sent events feature in 5.2.0. However, that only takes care of the syncing and the UI issues will remain. > Still more challenging to my mind is the diff between an outlining editor and the text editing window in a tiddler; that is fundamentally constrained by web standards -is it not? Not really. After all dynalist also is implemented as a web app. Streams goes some ways towards creating a similar workflow in TiddlyWiki even though it was never intended as an outliner. I think a key difference is that in dynalist you feel like you are editing a document, versus in TW or Streams you have an edit window for one portion of the document. Part of the reason for that is how rich TW markup (think widgets and transclusions) can be and how different rendered text can be from the markup. This drives the need for separation between viewing and editing for all but the most limited use cases. However, for a keyboard driven workflow the difference in practice in Streams is not that significant in my experience. 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/14462118-dc8e-4214-8368-5ad19bbd5cb5n%40googlegroups.com.
