*"Everyone who uses TW regularly but who uses only one TW, raise your 
hands!... Nobody? Not a single individual?"*

With the restart in TW5, or generally really, why is there so much focus on 
the wiki as opposed to the individual tiddlers (like in tiddlyweb/space)? 
There is talk about keeping tiddlers pure (altho not expressed that way), 
but they are very much tied up in one wiki. To paraphrase cdent who has 
written on this topic - tiddlers are not first class citizens in TW. If TW 
is "designed to fit around your brain" (I love that!) then why do most of 
my TW's only fit arount *minor parts* of my brain?

Every now and then single tiddlers or even a whole subjects really need to 
be available in multiple TW's. My own notes for stuff, in the family TW. 
References from one wiki suddenly needed in the GTD system. 

Not to mention the constant revisits at the various plugin places 
(wonderful as they may be!) For every TW I make, I must install copies of 
quite a few plugins that I like. Taking a step back, that's a lot of 
redundancy. And they must all be updated too.

As much as I love TW, I can definitely see disadvantages with the 
wiki-centered approach as opposed to a pure tiddler centered approach. And 
much(?) of the work and thinking on how to implement this is already done 
in TiddlyWeb and TS. Why is this not taken advantage of? Am I missing 
something? - With TW5, why is the wiki paradigm chosen once again?

I can see a few objections:

One might want the collection of tiddlers to be only one single file. But 
what, actually, is so holy about that? That vision is already "broken" with 
the jar file and need for tiddlyfox. Maybe TW5 does not require these, I 
don't know. Not to mention that backups result in a folder filled with 
files. Why can't all be a folder instead? Is the one file concept still a 
driving idea in this? To me it feels secondary to what would be possible 
without it. ...and, besides, a complete universe of tiddlers could also be 
one file, no?

Is it too big of a conceptual change? Could the limitation to a single wiki 
paradigm perhaps be a conceptual remnant of previous technological 
limitations that are not as relevant today? 

Another objection might possibly be that things would grow too complex. I 
have little knowledge about this, but it seems to work with tiddlyweb/TS. 
Besides, anyone who actually *prefers *to deal with many TiddlyWikis would 
in no way be hindered from this.

Now, one valid objection is that "So, Mat, do you only have one TW on TS?" 
Well, for one, there is a lot of integration between wikis there, in a way 
that is impossible with regular TWs. But more important than anything: 
Whatever is separated there is *intentionally *so.

So, I'm curious to hear your thoughts.

...or IS my premise totally off - DO you actually only use on giant TW?


<:-)


-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"TiddlyWikiDev" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/tiddlywikidev.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Reply via email to