I can add to that list with my criteria: v) New host must be reliable and maintained (I don't want any downtime!) vi) Access to revisions vii) Running latest version of TiddlyWiki at all times - important for the "this is a tiddlywiki thing". If we are going to run something which is an old version of TiddlyWiki, to me it defeats the point of moving from MediaWiki viii) An api / url for each individual tiddler so that the community can make mash ups, run their own media wiki instance etc.. I don't want a closed system where it's hard to get stuff out of. ix) Pages should be downloadable so they can run offline - I might want to download some documentation on a certain subject to use on the train for example.
Jon On Feb 1, 8:18 am, Martin Budden <[email protected]> wrote: > Following on from the comments: > "All in all, I think the best route would be to leave the choice of > future platform to someone with an unbiased point of view." > "I'll be perfectly happy to accept the decision of the community, if I > feel that it has been made through an open, transparent process." > > I'll make some effort to start that off: > > To make an unbiased and transparent decision we need to set down the > criteria for the decision and then evaluate the alternatives against > those criteria. I suggest the following criteria (and feel free to add > to this list): > > i) New host must support TiddlyWiki formatting and macros (which one > of the main reasons to move away from MediaWiki) > ii) New host must be multi-user (which is why we cannot just use a > TiddlyWiki) > iii) New host must be based on an established and supported platform > (long-time users of TiddlyWiki may remember that the documentation, > prior to mediawiki, was on ZiddlyWiki, a Zope-based server side > TiddlyWiki. We moved away from this because the Zope server we used > shut down and ZiddlyWiki stopped being supported by its author). > iv) New host must be reasonably fast and responsive. > > Martin > > On Jan 29, 12:07 pm, Poul <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > On 29 Jan., 01:36, Poul <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > All in all, I think the best route would be to leave the choice of > > > future platform to someone with an unbiased point of view. > > > Let me qualify that last remark, at the risk of offending someone by > > unintentional (really) implication: > > I'll be perfectly happy to accept the decision of the community, if I > > feel that it has been made through an open, transparent process. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TiddlyWiki" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/tiddlywiki?hl=en.
