Great questions, thanks for raising these. > * Do I understand it right that there are currently *three major* and, > from a regular end-user-point, incompatible paths in the going, i.e; > classic TW, TiddlyWeb, TW5. More?
My way of looking at it is that TiddlyWiki and TiddlyWeb are two sides of the same coin, embodiments of the same simple ideas, one as a piece of client software and one as a piece of server software. They can be used independently or together. TiddlyWeb's purpose is to answer the needs that standalone TiddlyWiki can never address: large data sets, multi-user access, security. TiddlyWiki5 is the next stage in the evolution of TiddlyWiki. As the text in the prototype discusses, there has always been a tension between the desire to extend TiddlyWiki to resolve some of it's long standing problems, versus the need to keep it stable to let everyone benefit from the ecosystem of plugins and experience. TiddlyWiki5 allows us to embrace the opportunities offered by browser advances, and also sort out some of the internal issues with TiddlyWiki that give it performance problems. > * If I understand it right, TiddlyWeb adds a fundamentally different > set of features to what is possible in classic TW. For this reason, > I'm wondering if TW5 is being designed with any respect to TiddlyWeb? I wouldn't see it like that. It's more that in order to support the features mentioned above, TiddlyWeb has had to introduce things like revisions and security descriptors, which are not supported by classic TiddlyWiki. So we've retrofitted those things onto TiddlyWiki classic via a set of plugins. It works OK, but it's a kludgey and inconsistent arrangement, and it means that we don't have consistent behaviour between the client and the server. So, TiddlyWiki5 is being driven by TiddlyWeb to the extent that these features need client side support. > * Are there any quantitatively different features (from an end users > veiw!) that TW5 is intended to provide that are not possible with > classic TW? E.g going from "wiki markup to wysiwyg markup" doesn't > really change what is possible with TW whereas many of the core > concepts behind TiddlyWeb do differ very much from what is possible > with classic TW. How will TW5 compare with classic TW in this regard? As Paul notes, the text in the prototype is intended to answer that question. > * Since Osmosoft holds the core team of developers and because it is > also the official representative for new releases (correct? It does > own tiddlywiki.com to name one thing, right?) then I'm wondering what > the intentions are on the future for classic TW. I.e is active > development for it going to be abandoned in Osmosoft? Paul's already answered this: Long ago I made over all the TiddlyWiki "properties" to the non-profit UnaMesa foundation. I expect people to still be using classic TiddlyWiki for many, many years to come. > * Any particular reflections on how, or if, TW5 and TiddlyWeb (and > more?) are evolving to/with the various tec trends we see? Since the > inception of TW, a few things have happened - most notably perhaps the > partial transition to mobile devices and also the increased popularity > of social services (facebook, chatting, skype...) and more. Obviously > most trends and fads are reflected on the plugin level, but I'm asking > if you consider some things fundamental enough to justify > considerations at core level? Good question. TiddlyWeb, for me, was partly influenced by the transition to mobile devices. It gives us the ability to serve tiddlers to dumb clients that don't support javascript, which are an important subset of the mobile space. But for the most part the drivers were my awareness of the things that I wouldn't be able to do within TiddlyWiki itself. I think of TiddlyWeb as being upside down compared to most serverside environments, because it focusses on being the smallest possible mechanism to give us those few features that standalone TiddlyWiki can't manage. TiddlyWiki5 is much more a response to external changes in the tech landscape, notably decent cross browser support for SVG and rich text editing. But, frankly, the drivers that I've spent more time thinking about is (a) what we've learned from five years of TiddlyWiki being used in anger by many thousands of end users (b) the benefit of hindsight showing me where the original internal design was sub-optimal (primarily with respect to performance, but also with respect to ease of comprehension and extension). Best wishes Jeremy > > I don't expect any consensus on these blurry matters, I'm just curious > to hear your thoughts on this. > > Cheers :-) > > -- > 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. > > -- Jeremy Ruston mailto:[email protected] http://www.tiddlywiki.com -- 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.
