Ciao Arlen Could you add an "Issues" tab? Just to be able express thoughts on scope.
I'd have interest in contributing to real beginner issues. IF it were a FAQ like ... Q: How do I save my TiddlyWiki? or Q: How do I find my last 5 Tiddlers? or Q: Why do some Tiddlers start "$:"? WHY? Because I could concentrate on one topic. Best wishes Josiah On Friday, 20 September 2019 16:33:39 UTC+2, Arlen Beiler wrote: > > Josiah, > > Do you want to use the wiki on > https://github.com/Arlen22/TiddlyWiki-DocsWiki/wiki? You're welcome to > it. I have it set open so anyone can edit it and if that creates too many > problems or we start dealing with trolls from outside, we can either close > it or I can add some of you as contributors. > > I would love to see something happen. I have thought about this many > times. > > Arlen > > On Fri, Sep 20, 2019 at 7:55 AM @TiddlyTweeter <tiddly...@assays.tv > <javascript:>> wrote: > >> Ciao TonyM >> >> *I like Mohammad's approach because I think its proof of a method that >> works.* >> >> Mohammad's main information wikis "harvest" some of what TW does in a >> form that is both (1) instructional; (2) illustrated by use cases. >> I think its a good combination >> >> --- >> >> Worth stressing is: I pursue things I ENJOY the most. >> >> So, for instance, I enjoy regular expressions. (Somewhat like some people >> like the Times Crossword Puzzle). >> So I find it fun--so its more easily sustainable to contribute docs & >> solutions to that theme. >> >> --- >> >> TBH, I'm not overly bothered what fora we use for documenting TW. >> >> Though TW itself seems pretty good. >> And to use the tool to document the tool seems to me sensible unless >> there good reasons not to. >> It directly supports iterative learning that way. >> >> --- >> >> I think the issue is more about "major listings" so good things don't go >> awol. >> >> David's Toolmap is really good even though its not TW itself. >> But it mainly links directly to TWs. So you back in TW immediately. Which >> is good. >> >> --- >> >> Dave's list is resources in general. >> >> *I think we need a complimentary "short-list" only of dedicated "help" >> wiki/sites.* >> >> *---* >> >> Regarding helping beginners, which I think is important, I'm really NOT >> sure. >> *I seen so many efforts to do that that have failed.* >> >> I am not fully clear why. >> >> My idea, maybe wrong, is to make beginner support the one premiere >> collective initiative >> that a big project like you suggest might work for. >> >> *My one thought was for a FAQ format for beginners. * >> >> The simplest reason is individual questions are more easily contributed >> to by others, >> where they can focus on what they understand to be able to contribute. >> Seamless text isn't so easy. >> >> --- >> >> After a lot of debate on docs (which I have contributed to a lot---& >> changed my mind about a lot) I think we could leverage what we have on GG. >> And harvest it. And use it to collaborate. Which we do already. >> >> Leverage of what we do already seems workable. >> >> I'm not sure is needs a "leader" so much as a "model of what works." >> >> Just thoughts >> Josiah >> >> On Friday, 20 September 2019 02:49:41 UTC+2, TonyM wrote: >>> >>> I only have a *little time* available in coming weeks, but are keen to >>> proceed. >>> >>> *My carefully considered response to this thread.* >>> >>> I think there is furious agreement what must be done, and there will >>> always be differences on how. Because the how is difficult to answer, >>> enthusiastic contributors build their own "repositories" and unfortunately >>> get left to administer them on their own. Separate repositories means >>> people have to look for them or visit each to acquire the information they >>> need and they are at the behest of the repository designer for the value of >>> search and indexing provided in that repository. These repositories are >>> very valuable but they remain a little isolated. >>> >>> Owners of such private repositories need to be squirrels collecting >>> relevant info that fits the scope of the repositories often unstated >>> purpose. Some community members will suggest suitable information however >>> it is usually the owners responsibility to collect the "nuts". When an >>> owner has less time the nuts grow old and some go off and the repository >>> looses some value. The prospect of bringing it up to date feels like a >>> chore, and if you have no idea of its value to others and the number of >>> visitors it could be hard to build motivation to revisit it. >>> >>> We could all dream of an ultimate repository of all things tiddlywiki >>> but is it even achievable?, if it is it will only be in time and >>> participation. The best way to start is build a hybrid environment of >>> centralised records that document the decentralised records. This >>> environment need the following qualities as its key features; >>> >>> - Easy for anyone to contribute to >>> - A structure that forces curation, organization on contributions so >>> as to extract maximum value from the least effort and avoid admin >>> overheads >>> - Easy to reference external resources >>> - The ability to discuss and contribute to the material on the site >>> - An opportunity to leverage tiddlywiki as much as possible >>> - Ability to build a team of enthusiasts to maintain and grow the >>> community resources. >>> >>> >>> Like any smart project the best effort should be expended up front to >>> structure the solution effectively, rather than on an ad hoc basis. The >>> danger of ad hoc which we are all familiar is fragments, overlapping >>> material, gaps and duplications, and perhaps worst of all confusion and >>> fragmentation. >>> >>> In fact tiddlywiki itself could inspire this fragmentation because it >>> has many object, and components within it. >>> >>> The only solution in my view is using an analysis process to determine >>> the pieces we want to collect together as a community and synthesis to >>> build a unified view of the pieces. The solution needs to keep this >>> modularisation from the analysis process alive so contributions can be made >>> by the community at any level. A small configuration detail, a code >>> fragment through to plugins and whole wiki editions. The solution will >>> bring together all the pieces in a consistent browsable and searchable >>> whole, however as it evolves it will be pointing to many external resources >>> so the ability to provide excerpts or keywords against external resources >>> should make those resources more findable. >>> >>> In time enthusiasts will most likely migrate these external resources >>> into the central community resource where others can help maintain it and >>> add value. The beauty of tiddlywiki will also allow people to download and >>> export content as needed. >>> >>> I will proceed given sufficient support and acknowledgement! >>> >>> What do I need Initially?, >>> >>> - sufficient support and acknowledgement! >>> - A degree of authority to proceed and run with my design strategy >>> - Of course I always remain open to criticism and alternative >>> perspectives, but I will not let it cripple the process >>> - This is evolution not revolution >>> >>> I would like people with one or more of the following! >>> >>> - Those with Knowledge and Information management skills >>> - Database design and management skills >>> - Strong User interface skills >>> - Lived experience with tiddlywiki >>> - Some enthusiastic reviewers and contributors >>> - Team or collaboration experts >>> >>> We also need a set of collaboration tools, we can pick from available >>> ones, no need for permanent solutions. >>> >>> Your thoughts? >>> Your support? >>> >>> If you want to know more about HOW I plan to do this, if what I have >>> said in my posts in this thread is not enough join the team. >>> >>> Regards >>> Tony >>> >>> Regards >>> Tony >>> >>> On Friday, September 20, 2019 at 4:53:25 AM UTC+10, Mohammad wrote: >>>> >>>> Example of high quality documentation prepared by community (procedure >>>> and how to) >>>> >>>> https://devguide.python.org/docquality/ >>>> >>>> >>>> I think Tiddlywiki itself is best for nonlinear documentation while >>>> learning should be somehow linear a trail is needed >>>> So, the vanilla edition is not good for documentation, may be something >>>> like Sphinx or a TW edition with some linearity >>>> like the trail you see on TW-Scripts or similar ... >>>> >>>> --Mohammad >>>> >>> -- >> 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 tiddl...@googlegroups.com <javascript:>. >> To view this discussion on the web visit >> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywiki/51beaab3-5a6d-47dd-ae74-4d7626acaf5c%40googlegroups.com >> >> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywiki/51beaab3-5a6d-47dd-ae74-4d7626acaf5c%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> >> . >> > -- 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 tiddlywiki+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywiki/fafad18f-59ba-4f7e-8b30-5b661aced52a%40googlegroups.com.
