> […] presumes a particular type of information being manipulated. In the context of a online notebook there is a lot of cut and pasting.
I was struck by the comment "the time we spend writing text is mostly about rearranging it" and started to bear it in mind as I constructed a TW specifically to research a new topic. I consciously thought about my process and was surprised that the tweaking of a fresh vanilla TW, looking at the source and altering the way the TW prompted through its design, influenced way the hypertext evolved. It was interesting to do this with a self imposed contraint: no plugins. I found that I wanted to compare things and comment on them as well as classifying them and I found transclusion useful for comparing. I would do it more if it were easier i think. On an Ipad, if there there were a gesture (like in dolphin browser) to evoke "select tiddler for transcultion" then I think it could be a powerful feature. A the moment transclusion involves quite a bit of cutting and pasting and bracket adding, and double brackets are a nightmare to find. I found tended to refactor my notes with transclusion in mind. The " boundary between narrative text and computer code" is useful as inspiration for sense making in hypertext. I would not have come across re-factoring if I hadn't been exposed to code and code writing culture through TW. Alex On 19 March 2012 13:44, Chris Dent <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On Saturday, March 17, 2012 8:56:23 PM UTC, Jeremy Ruston wrote: >> >> I remain very excited about touch interfaces. Talking to a computer >> with a keyboard and mouse always felt a bit like poking at something >> with a long stick through a narrow slot; touch puts you in direct >> control with high bandwidth and high precision. We think of touch as >> being a mismatched interface for text applications, but it seems that >> we spend most of our time navigating and reading text. Perhaps even >> the time we spend writing text is mostly about rearranging it. > > > To be pedantic for a moment[1], I think it is important to keep it clear > that when you use an interface, you're interfacing with information, not the > computer. The computer is mediating the interaction, but the stuff being > manipulated are abstractions of information. I agree that touch is promising > for navigating, reading and high level editing but that presumes a > particular type of information being manipulated. > > TiddlyWiki has historically (and positively) munged the boundary between > narrative text and computer code and thus is probably especially fertile > ground for seeing where touch leads. > > > [1] Hah! I'm pedantic all the time! > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "TiddlyWikiDev" group. > To view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msg/tiddlywikidev/-/VmR3kF8ErhYJ. > > 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. -- 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.
