Hi Mat, I'm not sure to understand your point, but for people like me the "one single file" concept is a key feature of TW. And I want different files for different things: one for my thesis notebook, one for my lessons, etc.
Alberto Le dimanche 2 février 2014 01:28:08 UTC+1, Mat a écrit : > > *"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.
