Thanks for the comments Hans. I've already announced elsewhere that I am now working on TiddlyWiki again. I've been working on the build tools, which might sound non-essential, but actually is key: the difficulties with developing and publishing TiddlyWiki have slowed things down in the past. Once that's done, I plan to address the browser compatibility issues.
I'll continue to talk about progress in [twdev], and will announce any big milestones in [tw]. Best wishes Jeremy -- http://jermolene.com http://tiddlywiki.com http://osmosoft.com On 9 Dec 2011, at 02:01, "[email protected]" <[email protected]> wrote: > The recent comments about the public perception of TW being outdated > are of course inaccurate. For those of us already cognizant of the > value it provides, we're more than happy to employ kludgey workarounds > like portable Firefox to get that value. > > However for those of us trying to get other, perhaps less technical > people to adopt our TW-based solutions, it is true that the lack of > support for modern browsers reflects poorly on the project, and > affects the client's perception of our recommendation and therefore > ourselves. > > All FOSS projects with plugins/modules/extensions suffer from the > unreliability of the add-on developers, and only a subset continue to > be kept current and viable over the long term. However it is IMO > **critical** to a project's overall success that the **core** be well > maintained, so at least the basic functionality offered by the > software is available to users with "normal default" platform > requirements. > > It's true that Chrome and FF's rapid update cycle, coupled with the > fact (I assume?) that JavaScript isn't as well "standardized" as say > HTML/CSS have created a game-changingly different reality for > browser-based application platforms, but the fact is that we all must > adapt ourselves to Reality as it presents itself to us. > > In the world of FOSS, every developer has their own itch to scratch > and we mere users without the skills to contribute to the project's > development don't have the right to complain about what is so freely > given to us. But of course that doesn't stop us from acting as if we > were paying customers, and that is also part of the reality of FOSS. > So please forgive me for speaking my opinion forthrightly, and > understand my strong feelings are the result of my fervent admiration > for Tiddlywiki; I am truly grateful for the inspiration it has offered > me so far. > > Bottom line: TW's ability to interact with external programs, remote > storage, synchronization, version control, all these things are > important I'm sure to many of TWs users (=customers). However, if > development time and attention are devoted to such accessory > functionality at the expense of the core being kept compatible with > modern browsers, I personally fear for the mainstream viability of the > project as a whole. > > -- > 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. > -- 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.
