Hi Josiah, Mat > Excellent for bulk work. Could it allow direct editing of all field content?
Yes, it could; in the hangout we looked at Jed’s variant which has click-to-edit for all fields. > Odd as it may sound, as I look at the Tagger (i.e. a list of Tiddlers that > expand to full content on click) THAT itself could BE the content page for a > TW. I can think of TWs where something like that IS the visibleTW. Yes, it’s not far away from a story river showing all tiddlers, with all but one being folded. > Design wise maybe the tagger & edit options on the right could go at the > bottom so the tiddler content is full width? I think it’s advantageous to not have to scroll down in order to reach the editing controls. > 1 - The importance & brilliance of CSS. Riz's work really shows that CSS is a > major developmental path for TW. I was very impressed with both his elegant > design sense and how, in some ways, his inventiveness with CSS actually > enhances user function significantly. I hope when any wrinkles are ironed out > Riz would be willing to give one or two of his themes for inclusion in the > standard release .... I'm thinking particularly of: I think there’s another important point: Riz is showing how easy it is to adapt existing CSS themes to work with TiddlyWiki. There’s a wealth of great designs out there, and it’s good to be reminded that TiddlyWiki can make use of any design you see on the web. > (a) -- A "universal" theme that is proven to work well on all screen sizes, > including smart phones, in all browsers … I’d caution for careful language here. The existing default theme works the same in all browsers. The only issue we have is small screen sizes. A replacement theme would be nice to have, but fixing things to work at all screen sizes doesn’t (necessarily) need a new theme, it just needs to fix the handful of problems that we still have at small screen sizes. > (b) -- Possibly change the default theme in TW release to one of his very > elegant, modern designs? Yes, but there’s a pretty high bar for replacing the default theme in terms of backwards compatibility. > 2 -- SAVING problems consequent on browser developments, especially FF. Back in 2004, we had workable saving mechanisms for all the major desktop browsers. Then, Chrome launched with much higher levels of protection, and no ability to perform seamless saving from a file: URI in the browser. All that’s happened since then is that the other browsers have caught up with Chrome. Firefox has lagged behind, sticking with an architecture that gives extensions an unadvisedly high level of privilege. Now it’s finally catching up. There’s no avoiding the fact that the ability to work in the browser as a standalone HTML file is going away. > This is something I've commented on before. I DO think its problematic for > newbies coming to TW to then have to figure out how to save the thing. It can > get messy. Your comments about having a possible Amazon mediated cloud saving > system were interesting, There’s nothing new here. It’s always been the case that the difficulties with saving only occur when running as a standalone HTML file. Once you run TiddlyWiki on a server, all those user experience problems disappear, and TiddlyWiki becomes as easy to use as any web application. > as was the re-conceptualisation of Tiddly Desktop. I think MY point is very > much in the area of "universal" user experience ... where the less a newbie > has to do handling variations the better. I’m still missing your point, I think! To me, it’s a really simple trade-off. The ability to work offline with TiddlyWiki requires expertise and understanding because of the complexities of the environment. I think you’re hoping that things will somehow magically get easier, but I’m afraid they won’t. > Also from a development point of view: the less you have to cater for > variations the better. > At the back of my mind is whether there could be a consistent "universal" way > to handle this--such that, whichever browser you are in, TW saving always > works the same?? This is the part I may not be getting. We’ve got a very well-explored problem that can be stated as “There is no way to give users of standalone TiddlyWiki a universal, seamless experience when saving changes”. You’re stating how good it would be if that assertion were not true, but there’s no evidence to support that hope. Best wishes Jeremy > > Best wishes > Josiah > > On Thursday, 24 November 2016 09:59:12 UTC+1, Jeremy Ruston wrote: > I hope you will be able to join me for TiddlyWiki Hangout #101 on Saturday > 26th November 2016 at 2pm GMT/UTC. You are welcome to take part as a guest or > you can view the proceedings live or at a later date from the archive. > > http://hangout-101.tiddlyspot.com/ <http://hangout-101.tiddlyspot.com/> > > Please let me know if there's anything you'd particularly like to see > discussed. > > Best wishes > > > -- > Jeremy Ruston > mailto:[email protected] <javascript:> -- 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/83B4E273-CD66-4E9D-B079-58AC319615CC%40gmail.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
