> the primary motivation is to reduce the initial load time of a
> large TiddlyWiki, and generally to improve scalability
Personally, I'm more concerned about scalability than initial load time
(gzip seems to do a good job reducing that).
The TiddlyWiki client hits a wall if there's a massive amount of
tiddlers to be processed (think for-each-tiddler operations like
calculating the timeline, tags etc.).
Those should probably be considered two separate, though related issues.
I guess the way to approach this is tackling load time first, then see
what we've learned about scalability.
> distinguish two approaches to delayed loading of tiddlers
As discussed, I think that distinction is correct and important.
Even though one might argue about the semantics of "lazy" vs.
"on-demand" loading, let's just stick to those labels for now and use
"dynamic" loading for the more general concept.
I've tried to summarize the basic points raised so far on our wiki:
http://tiddlywiki.org/wiki/Dev:Dynamic_Loading
> would it yield faster results if tiddler data instead of being
> written to the dom was written to the store in javascript world in
> the head of the document as packed javascript and added to the
> storeArea div when required by displayTiddler?
Well, you seem to be confusing store and story there.
However, you're indirectly raising the issue of a different store
implementation (using JSON instead of HTML) - which might very well be
worth discussing, though preferably in a separate thread.
-- F.
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"TiddlyWikiDev" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/TiddlyWikiDev?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
