On Thursday, September 12, 2019 at 8:26:19 PM UTC+4:30, SylvainComte wrote: > > Hello all, > > pretty interesting thread indeed. I'm not sure to be the most capable > person on this subject but this last message reminds me of my first time > developing plugin. > > > Plugins are the work of an "auteur" and we respect that. Perhaps too >> much? > > Actually they are. Sometimes because of the "auteur" but in most cases in > my humble opinion, because he's the only one that can fully understand what > he did. Even when documenting the code, each author has a very own plugin > structure. In my case, it has no consistency from one plugin to another. > Just can imagine anybody looking at it would consider it's a mess... > I wish I had some kind of instructions about plugin structure, good > practices (and bad ones) when I made the first (and the others) ;-) > I'm also aware that this is some very useful freedom for contributors. > World is not black nor white... > > > I mostly avoid things that the visitor might mistake to be the plugin >> when it is not. > > I think this is a good practice I do not apply now. But i definitely shall > (and will) > > Speaking from macro, shouldn't they be "self-documented" ? For "classic" > macro (i.e. non JavaScript) the documentation regarding usage parameters > etc. could be directly included in the tiddler. Just as you have self > documented functions in your favourite terminal function (`myfunction > -help` you know)... > > This is quite true! Have a look at https://tw-scripts.github.io/Yazd/ Yes is a resource for single or small multi macros! Macro has a single tiddler with documentation! NEVER forget examples more is better!
> Cheers, > > Sylvain > @sycom > > > Le jeudi 12 septembre 2019 13:55:45 UTC+2, @TiddlyTweeter a écrit : >> >> TonyM wrote: >>> >>> The social pressure placed on me with people like Mohammad and those of >>> you beforehand publishing great content, is for me to publish more of my >>> tools and utilities, has led me to build and automate a process to publish >>> content. >>> >>> I am starting this thread to solicit suggestions for such standards for >>> publishing. I often see github, demo and source wikis published for a >>> plugin. What should these contain? >>> >> >> ... >> >> One of the issues here is I have a lot of wiki macro solutions that do >>> not need to be plugins, they can be installed without save and reload so >>> they can be "dropped" on any wiki and used, for exploratory purposes. >>> >>> I can try and build me own solution but I would prefer to do so based on >>> the wisdom and experience of the community so this post. >>> >> >> I'm not sure my wisdom is orthodox :-). I'd say that JSON format is the >> premier format for sharing work, regardless of whether its a plugin or >> humble macro. >> >> The plugin mechanism is very good for fact of shadow tiddlers & >> recuperation from change errors. The plugin format is also good for being >> consolidated, in the sense you can remove it in one go. The addressing >> contains it. >> >> As I have mentioned before I think there is a social-psychological aspect >> to "plugins" that maybe sometimes inhibit breaking them down for reuse. >> Plugins are the work of an "auteur" and we respect that. Perhaps too much? >> >> Best wishes >> TT >> > -- 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 view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywikidev/6a7040b2-7b69-44ab-86b9-c0bb70446074%40googlegroups.com.
