Hello Felix, When I started with tiddlyDrive project it was very clear on my mind that I did not want to create a syncAdaptor. The main reason is because the syncadaptors are focused on server side, so unless the server is running on your own machine you end up with nothing. I wanted to provide a way to sync your wiki across different devices and computers. I started with something not too ambitious but useful: uploading and downloading single tiddlers. I want to maintain the philosophy of tiddlywiki: you own your data and it is self contained. The syncadaptors forget about the second Idea, and that is what I wanted to avoid with TDrive: I want your tiddlers to be INSIDE your wiki, and if you want to, sync them to the server, but the wiki file should be the main store for that. What we are describing here starts to look like a syncadaptor (in fact to recommended me to review its code, something that I though about also) and that scares me a bit.
After saying that: Hmm, I don't think so. You can only do this by passing <<currentTiddler>> > as an argument to the widget and reading that argument later with > getAttribute(). But this only works if the widget is inside a tiddlers body > (text). If you create a widget in the tiddler's menu, you cannot get the > current tiddler and pass it as an argument. I have to review the code of my encrypt plugin. It is on the control tiddler bar and it access the current tiddler, I think. this would mean to sync files to the client That is not the same that I said? on server --> not on client If you are not doing it already, try running tw on node.js and see how it > syncs files when creating a tiddler in one browser and after one minute it > will appear in the other browser window. Syncing is difficult though. Of course I do. A long time ago I developed a couple of widgets on the browser and it was a nightmare. In fact I open the developer console quite often and the terminal where the server is running and I find that it saves changes to the server too often. I feel like google apps script responds better when you send a couple of data than when you send small data. Well, in fact it took the same time to process the save of one tiddler than to process saving ten tiddlers. Feel free to check it out and let me know what do you feel, I'm horrible making measurements. yes, this is a good idea, however the drawback is you lose fulltext search > and fields Only until you download it. If I'm not mistaken, syncadaptors does something similar. At least you can search by title. It's better than nothing, and after you download it you have the full tiddler and can keep it on your TW. This makes me thing in another point: when you have a tiddler uploaded on the server but you keep it on your TW also, how do you know when you should download a new version? Maybe we should ask the server if there is a newer version of the tiddlers that we have and display a small info under the title: there is a newer version of this tiddler. yes this is a good idea. maybe a button next to the normal save button that > says (in a symbolic way) upload all changes now. That is exactly what I was thinking about. This is all very difficult :) Indeed, but fun :) Thank you Felix for all your points an suggestions. They are helping me A LOT. -- 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/d/optout.
