Folks, Jed and Mark, I agree with your apparently conflicting positions here, here is something I have realised recently.
TiddlyWiki is mostly designed to act on its own elements, tags, tiddlers, fields etc... and it does this in the way any "High Level" programming language does, it treats them as sets. We simply state the set of items we want to process and tell it what to do with every item in the set. It also supports responding to empty sets, or single member sets. Years ago when I was a programmer I remember using a high level report generator, it was very similar. This approach has fantastic simplification and productivity benefits. I also understand where Mark is coming from. Much of how we understand the world is procedural, and while sets are part of it we are more familiar with steps, recipes, procedural language(s). There is a wealth of solutions in the JavaScript world to help solve real world problems. This is where Mark is right on that without the ability to include sophisticate logical manipulation or non set based procedural code we are loosing some functions, and cant leverage a lot of open source code. I may add that evans formula plugin goes a long way to fixing this while blending with TiddlyWikis approach. I started a collaborative document anyone can edit in yammer at https://www.yammer.com/tiddlywiki/#/files/140794632 It aims to Document set and procedural code structures and how to use them in tiddlywiki. You know the primitives Sequence, iteration, selection decision, recursion etc... Not withstanding the above, Last night, I realised the HTML tags <object> and <Embed> work without alteration in a Tiddler, and also realise tiddlywiki simply renders this as a html page. Now I could have a massive HTML only site with PHP and Java Script and a given html page will include what it needs to work including php and Javascript. I do not see why we could not do this inside a tiddler. The Scripts are external, the engine is external ie the PHP server are not inside the tiddler, but as far as the user is concerned they look like they are in the tiddlyWiki. Just as an iframe does. Then all we need is the ability to feed these html pages info found in tiddlywiki, and let these pages return results we can store/act on in tiddlywiki, people with more skills that me could create java and php "modules" you add to these external html pages to permit these interactions. And some support plugins/widgets in tiddlywiki. In these external solutions we should be able to use all the java-script code we want. Now, I expect rightly that Jeremy would say here he does not want to break the single file mode of Tiddlywiki, however even Jeremy would not consider a hyperlink or iframe as breaking the single file model, I think he would understand an hope he responds here, that accessing external resources is part of tiddlywiki, and they do not live in the single file. In fact in the upcoming release he has done something that will help with using of other tiddlywikis external resources, a single tiddler. Please tell me if this is more than a thought bubble? Regards Tony On Friday, July 6, 2018 at 4:09:15 AM UTC+10, Jed Carty wrote: > > There is a huge usability gain, you don't need to know any javascript to > make something new and useful with tiddlywiki. I made most of my earlier > plugins that I still use before I knew any javascript. > If it were just a neat javascript page that you used javascript to make > things in than I never would have played with it. > The reusability and simplicity of widgets is amazing, wikitext abstracts > out a lot of the overhead to give only the parts that are specifically > useful. Yes there are things that are missing but that isn't a downside of > the approach, that just means we aren't done making everything yet. > Also there are huge gains in security, I would never put Bob online if it > had inline javascript like tiddlywiki classic. > > Yes, you can do less with vanilla tiddlywiki than you can with javascript, > but you can do more with assembler than you can with javascript, but I am > not going to write a web server in assembly despite the potential > performance gains. > -- 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/a1d91514-da03-4a26-a451-e7d77c99a8e0%40googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
