Interesting thoughts. As to what is "important" we can get clues from other places; a major feature in, say, facebook is to write on eachothers walls. There are also options on how much stuff you want to show to various groups that you've defined yourself. Another key feature is of course to be able to block out individuals. Etc. I think it makes sense to try to take advantage of the X MUSD spent on research for that.
:-) On Oct 13, 3:38 pm, PMario <[email protected]> wrote: > On Oct 13, 1:32 pm, [email protected] wrote:> On Wed, 13 Oct 2010, Tobias > Beer wrote: > > > I would certainly understand if this overly stretched TiddlyWeb's > > > current design tenets. > > > Not TiddlyWeb's. TiddlyWeb itself has very flexible policies on bags > > that would allow the stuff you describe. > > > In TiddlySpace the UI does not expose all that flexibility. Whether > > that is a "yet" or not is unknown. We're still exploring. > > I think it is ok for TiddlySpace, to keep the UI as simple as > possible. Most users like/need it that way. > > On the other hand, I see some posts, which suggest to implement > "features" into tiddlyspace, which are allready part of tiddlyWeb. But > needs some type of "backwards" engineering to make it happen with > tiddlyspace. > > I think it would be cooler, to invest some time into hoster and push > it torwards tiddlyspace for ADMINS, instead of making tiddlyspace more > complicated. > > my 2€ents. > mario -- 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.
