On Thursday, June 11, 2015 at 4:54:07 PM UTC+2, Henry Padilla wrote: > > I think this is what he is asking. After the initial setup that grants > access we wouldn't have the save issues that plague the file version. >
But imo a lot more others. IMO there are no problems with the file version, except multi user access. > It looks like this is a mobility issue. But, for those of us that have to > resort to Nodes.js mobility is still an issue. > Why do you need node.js? TW works perfectly fine without it. IMO the nodejs server is for testing and local purposes only. If you expose it to the web, it creates more problems, than advantages atm. Not enough security. > Is there a version of TW that uses the local browser Db? > Why? You have a lot of cross browser, cross OS problems. IMO browser internal DBs are not up for the task, in the way TW needs it. Local storage was "dead on arrival". So developers use frameworks on top of them to "hide" the problems. So imo Danielos approach would even fit better. .... But you didn't tell us about your usecase? Why do you think an internal DB would have advantages. If you look at the details, there is a mine field. -m -- 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. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywikidev/7ddc7d00-f043-48d6-9c09-be0385c915f6%40googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
