Ciao Jeremy I push this just a little bit more. I hope it will get a bit clearer where I am coming from.
By "universal" I was meaning consistent behaviour by TW on saving & appearance across browsers, screen sizes & devices. Not so much the "universal" as in the common fall-back behaviour in browsers. What I am getting may be clearer if I lay out a concrete scenario... (1) To create several hundred TWs of novels. (2) With a consistent interface that renders well over multiple device types. (3) That has a consistent, standard, way of saving. I have this in mind doing this next year. I have held off till now because (2) was not satisfied. Its getting closer, thanks to Riz. (3) Remains an issue. Whilst I understand there are things I don't grasp about browser limits, I'm still finding it hard to grasp this ... ... why on earth its SO difficult to get a browser to stop saving (downloading) TW as TW, TW(1), TW(2) etc, rather than being nudged to overwrite TW as TW. Best wishes Josiah On Tuesday, 15 November 2016 22:16:33 UTC+1, Jeremy Ruston wrote: > > Hi Josiah > > You are using "universal" in a way I am not quite. > > > I’m using it to mean a technique that works with all browser > configurations. > > I focusing mainly on first experience. Someone who does NOT understand, or > stumbles at the relation between the HTML5 universalish save and what > happens next. > > > Do you mean that you are concerned with users who do not understand the > mechanism by which saving happens? > > I don’t think that changes anything. Those users are best served by the > user experience of something like TiddlyFox, not by the HTML5 fallback > saver. Because, as established, the fallback saver has a poor user > experience for users who don’t understand what’s going on. > > So my point is in the spot of "sadly it doesn't exist." I'm thinking about > the best approximations to what does exist and wondering it can be > implemented wider. Something like that. > > > For instance a TiddlyFox for every browser. Not wanting to create work so > much as noting TiddlyWiki's reach & uptake is, I believe, currently > hampered by how browsers work. > > > None of the other browsers allow JavaScript extensions direct and full > access to the filesystem. Some browsers (like Chrome) provide access to a > sandboxed filesystem (I believe that is how TiddlyChrome works), but they > don’t generally allow access to arbitrary files. > > Anyhow, if your concern is primarily beginners then I suspect that very > often the entire concept of working with an offline file is alien for them. > I think that most of the time, those users are best served with an online > TiddlyWiki configuration. That’s the configuration that minimises the new > things that users need to learn in order to use TiddlyWiki, because it > behaves like any other online service. > > Fundamentally, to use TiddlyWiki locally, users must become their own > sysadmin. They have sole responsibility for managing and protecting their > data. That responsibility requires a level of understanding and awareness. > That’s a small price for those of us that value the ability to work > offline, but erects a fundamental barrier for beginners who don’t have the > inclination to learn. > > Best wishes > > Jeremy > > > Best wishes > Josiah > > > On Tuesday, 15 November 2016 20:02:40 UTC+1, Jeremy Ruston wrote: >> >> Hi Josiah >> >> On FILE SAVING my point is that the save is not re-entrant under normal >> conditions. That is my understanding. You can save but you then have to >> open the thing in a new >> >> instance? Have I understood correctly? >> >> >> That's exactly what I meant about the confusing user experience, and >> potential for human error. >> >> Part of what I am getting at, I think, is naive users when coming across >> TW can get befuddled when its not re-entrant. I myself have frequently got >> confused using it in Opera. Save. Open. Which tab is which? You get the >> idea? >> >> >> Yes, I think you're saying that the default fallback saver is confusing >> for users. That's true, but it's the best we've got. >> >> PouchDB we discussed, yes. I just think its a neat example that works >> pretty damn well. I agree its not really a universal portable solution. >> >> >> It works OK for demos and temporary caching before syncing to a server. >> But it wouldn't be suitable for, say, writing a novel: would you really >> want weeks of work locked up in a browser where it can be arbitrarily >> deleted at will by the browser? Local storage is designed for caching, and >> present implementations are not robust for other usages. >> >> I think my broad question is still valid. Of course I'm very much focused >> on people like me who like TiddlyWiki but find the saving aspect of it odd. >> I'm sure I'm not alone. Really I want it as always re-entrant software >> behaves. >> >> >> What is the question are you asking? >> >> We've established that we have a near-universal saving technique with >> usability issues, and more specialised techniques that don't have the >> usability issues. I am sure we'd all love a universal technique that >> doesn't have the usability issues, but sadly it doesn't exist. >> >> Best wishes >> >> Jeremy. >> >> >> Best wishes >> Josiah >> >> On Tuesday, 15 November 2016 18:21:48 UTC+1, Jeremy Ruston wrote: >>> >>> Hi Josiah >>> >>> There is already a near-universal solution to saving changes within the >>> browser: the built-in HTML5-compatible “download saver”. It works on >>> practically all desktop browsers, and many mobile browsers. However, the >>> user experience is poor, and there is scope for human error. >>> >>> Apart from the universal, fallback saver, we’ve got more specialised >>> savers that work in specific environments. For example, the saver for >>> TiddlySpot, or TiddlyFox, or the one that works with Windows HTA files. >>> >>> So, I’m not sure what you’re asking. I don’t think that the HTML5 >>> standard contains any overlooked mechanisms that can allow TiddlyWiki saves >>> changes. I am not aware of any non-standardised browser features that help >>> us, either. >>> >>> Finally, you mention PouchDB. Again, as we’ve discussed before, there’s >>> nothing magical going on there. Data is saved to one of several HTML5 local >>> storage mechanisms. TiddlyWiki5 could use those mechanisms to save changes, >>> but it’s scarcely a replacement for the standard saving mechanism because >>> ones data remains locked up within the browser, and can’t easily be >>> transported elsewhere. >>> >>> Best wishes >>> >>> Jeremy >>> >>> >>> On 15 Nov 2016, at 16:45, Josiah <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> Ciao >>> >>> TiddlyWiki can be opened in any browser on any device running any >>> platform that supports JavaScript. >>> >>> However it can't currently be saved in a consistent way across them. >>> >>> And on mobile devices its look is often messy. >>> >>> *I'm wondering if there is a UNIVERSAL solution to this?* >>> >>> Like combining Riz's mobile theme (that looks excellent on all devices >>> I've looked at it---AND for normal screens too ... Looks good as the >>> default) .... >>> >>> ... with Daniello's saving mechanism (using pouchDB) that functions >>> well over several platforms? >>> >>> In any case I guess I'm making a point that for the broader user-base >>> the more Universal and consistent the behaviour of the starting TiddlyWiki >>> you download is the better. >>> >>> Best wishes >>> Josiah >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> 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 post to this group, send email to [email protected]. >>> Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/tiddlywiki. >>> To view this discussion on the web visit >>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywiki/7c1f1786-bda7-4fd3-af70-d1361994448f%40googlegroups.com >>> >>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywiki/7c1f1786-bda7-4fd3-af70-d1361994448f%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> >>> . >>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >>> >>> >>> >> -- >> 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 post to this group, send email to [email protected]. >> Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/tiddlywiki. >> To view this discussion on the web visit >> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywiki/3a7d3f4c-c8a1-428a-b969-b458257b66e5%40googlegroups.com >> >> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywiki/3a7d3f4c-c8a1-428a-b969-b458257b66e5%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> >> . >> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >> >> > -- > 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] <javascript:>. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected] > <javascript:>. > Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/tiddlywiki. > To view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywiki/665c8443-dc3e-4c7e-a49e-5452788b2a3d%40googlegroups.com > > <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywiki/665c8443-dc3e-4c7e-a49e-5452788b2a3d%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> > . > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > > > -- 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 post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/tiddlywiki. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywiki/aadc4894-edb9-45f0-81c4-cc7c3e525651%40googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
