To clarify my last point about TWO configs, nasty & irritating as the idea 
is :-(...

I think it very LIKELY that PMario's Custom Markup system will be, 
eventually, widely used by AUTEURS (originating author geeks).

I am NOT convinced that a TW that uses that brilliant system should expose 
it to every user. I think it would be a support issue of scale to do so.

Ongoing thoughts. Just thoughts.
Best wishes
TT

On Friday, 25 September 2020 10:59:08 UTC+2, @TiddlyTweeter wrote:
>
> This for PMario & TonyM
>
> Its a thought.
>
> *TWO config modes ...*
>
> Config 1 - that adds the editing tools to enable the PMario Custom Markup 
> explicitly (i.e for any user)
>
> Config 2 - that adds the tool BUT adds NOTHING to the editor. I'm thinking 
> of cases where USER needs basic usage but NOT to ever see complexity of 
> PMario Custom Markup system.
>
> Thoughts on real utility (never add visible tools an end-user does not 
> need).
> TT
>
> On Friday, 25 September 2020 10:26:40 UTC+2, @TiddlyTweeter wrote:
>>
>> Ciao TonyM
>>
>> As ever from you an inclusive, broad reply.
>>
>> I'm actually wondering a slightly different way. Narrower. But very real. 
>> ... For instance ...
>>
>> *Does it matter if an end-user on web has the markup character in a font?*
>>
>> Personally I like to use glyphs from any of the UTF-16 doable Unicode 
>> (=Unicode “Basic Multilingual Plane”, choice of 55k plus characters). That 
>> way you can have symbols that actually have *meaning* (open, close, 
>> paragraph, section etc). I have local fonts available for that. So *I* will 
>> see them in TW (OS font substitution or explicit invoke in TW settings). A 
>> user may not; likely will not. 
>>
>> BUT, since the BESPOKE markup is mine for my use they DO NOT need to have 
>> the font for the markup character since they will NEVER edit a Tiddler in 
>> an application I build using this approach. that would be blocked. Its for 
>> reading, not editing.
>>
>> In any case it would not be compatible with providing, on-line, 
>> *editable* TW. 
>> BUT it is GOOD from point of view of author making TW for USE, not edit, 
>> by users.
>>
>> I think this comment encapsulates my point well enough?
>>
>> Regarding the OP I am wondering a bit about whether PMario's setting of 
>> the "base glyphs" to be in a "European language" font is necessary.
>>
>> Its a thought :-) I'll expand on a bit later.
>>
>> Best wishes
>> TT
>>
>>
>> TonyM wrote:
>>>
>>> TT,
>>>  
>>>
>>>> But, as I work with it myself I sometimes struggle with the 
>>>> PERMUTATIONS possible.
>>>>
>>>
>>> This is so often the case in tiddlywiki, the customisations and 
>>> possibilities are virtually infinite in many directions.
>>> This is just another few dimensions of control.
>>>  
>>>
>>>> My main wondering is WHO is it FOR, mainly?
>>>>
>>>
>>> Just as for tiddlywiki, we will not know except through lived 
>>> experience. 
>>>
>>

-- 
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/7e09e227-ea21-4998-9d57-805f64626752o%40googlegroups.com.

Reply via email to