> TiddlyWiki is meant to be non-linear. Putting a TOC in the empty version
goes against the principles used in dreaming up TiddlyWiki.
@David Gifford: Now I understand why there is no ToC in the blank version.
The user is thus forced to think in non-linear notes and to use the search
bar, such as https: //www.wikipedia.org. This is good on the one hand
because it is new a way of thinking for the user, but if he does not likes
this way, he will immediately stop knowing Tiddly.
> Perhaps there should be a new user edition
> My take would be that the documentation (most of your list) should stay
on tiddlywiki.com, rather than a parallel scaled down version that has to
be maintained separately.
@TonyM: I have to agree with @David Gifford: the documentation must be
written in one place (at Tiddly's website), in the "quickstart" version
only the appropriate links should be placed.
> In addition to better documentation, we should have a) an array of
editions for various use cases and b) a library of one-function-only nearly
empty tws that have one thing
I like the library of one-function-only solution, plugins are also
available in this way. In the quickstart, perhaps these links could be
placed instead of links to the descriptions, because users primarily want
to use the program, not learn it.If they miss a function, they can search
for a working solution from this list. Still thinking about this: this list
could be a central place because if we put new elements into it, they will
not appear in previously downloaded versions (even an idea: transclude this
list, so it would look like a general tiddler).
> But if a few key players could commit themselves to devote 2-3 hours a
month (or whatever) to evaluating and cleaning up documentation on
tiddlywiki.com, that would go a long way.
+1, I think it would be a good thing, but not on tiddlywiki.com (see below).
> When you can spend an afternoon making documentation, and then have it
ignored for more than a year ... well, I give up. I currently have 10 PR's
outstanding. It is too frustrating.
@Mark S: Unfortunately, I know this feeling. I saw the same problem with
Vim: the main developer is not always open to the user's involvement so
users started working on an alternative project, NeoVim. One solution might
be to further develop the official documentation in another location and
add new descriptions to it, so it would not have to wait for Jeremy to
approve it. The official documentation could include a link to this
"community documentation".
Summing up my thoughts:
* The blank version should contain a list of one-function-only versions
* Create a copy of the central documentation (tiddlywiki.com), which we
control ("community documentation")
* "Community documentation" could include different techniques and best
practices (the reference pages would not be included, those can still be
accessed at tiddlywiki.com)
--
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/2e5da438-e2b3-484e-b8cf-fc33cc5256ec%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
