Scary is a different question, Mario. Maybe it needs to be scary, maybe not. Personally I believe in trusting users to act well with good information. However:
"This is embarassing" is not scary. It's annoying. If the problem is as serious as you say, then the error message needs to warn people of the true problem. "You are standing on the edge of a cliff" might get people's attention. (I would still opt for information rather than emotion, though). And if the error only ever bubbled up from somewhere deep in TW, and was serious enough to threaten data loss, then the message should ask people to notify TW support and, presumably, provide the error message, which I guess constitutes some kind of trace. But the error message doesn't do that. It's not constructive. It's not useful. It's just red. The purpose of the message and the message itself are not coherent, that's the problem. Now, my issues may be idiosyncratic, I admit. I do my coding in the browser. I don't want to be forced into learning yet another tool, installing yet another piece of software on my PC, and once again being tied to my PC for software development. TW should support some sort of meaningful and practical coding experience in the browser. I think the product has become too driven by coders and not enough by users. I understand most of the issues (roughly) behind the re-architecting, which is why I'm putting myself through the pain of upgrading, but reducing the portability of the code by making it so unpleasant to develop in the browser is a mistake. I don't believe offhand that this is a question of architecture; I think this is a question of people who like Node forgetting that there are a lot of people who don't need it, know it, or want it. For me, I see the RSOD 100 times a day when I'm writing code; that's how bad a coder I am. I don't care how bad I am, because I'm good enough to get done what I want to do, mainly. The problems I have to post about 99% turn out to be TW issues, not JS issues. TW is such a useful tool, despite this pain, that I will keep on using it. I'm going to try to start working on documentation of it, as a payback. At the end of all that though, the RSOD is not well thought through. I take your point that there may be some sort of thinking behind it - but it's still not good quality thinking as it stands. Now I have just finished editing bootstrap CSS & JS to alleviate my problems. I've changed the error message to something less idiotic, I've muted the colours, and I've put the button on top. Much to my surprise, that all worked OK, 1st time (taht's a real tribute to the designers, BTW). That will reduce my pain. It doesn't deal with the deeper issues, but I don't really expect to persuade anybody to do that. I'm interested to keep discussing it, though, if people want to. Thanks for your response. On Tuesday, 7 March 2017 19:11:25 UTC+11, PMario wrote: > > > Hi Andrew, > > In normal cases TW fails silently. So if there are wikitext problems, the > "offending" text is ignored, or if possible there is some info. eg: > messages about list filter problems. > > If RSOD pops up, there is a real js problem, which may cause data loss, if > you could cancel and go on. So the only way to get rid of that message is, > to refresh the browser window. > > So imo if this message would be less scary, we would have much more > trouble with users loosing data, because they would click it away and go on > with a probably broken system. The next save may cause much bigger problems. > > How do you create your code? Within TW or a node js dev setup? > > just some thoughts. > > mario > -- 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/18d62586-c26f-41c9-ae67-c94aaded855b%40googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
