First off, I realize based on your comments at the end of your
response that I missed the main thrust of your inquiry which was about
collaboration, I can try to address that in this thread as well, but
keep in mind that I'm just "having a conversation" here so may not
always see the details you want me to see unless you ask your
questions explicitly.
That out of the way on into some of your comments:
On Sat, 21 Jul 2012, tejjyid wrote:
TiddlyWiki specific; that is, there are a number of plugins that work in
the TiddlyWiki file format that don't work in Tiddlyspace.
True. But there are plenty of TiddlyWiki plugins that don't work in
TiddlyWiki when other plugins are in that TiddlyWiki too. The
incompatibility between plugins is a function of the plugins, usually
not TiddlyWiki (that is, the file "empty.html" that you get from
tiddlywiki.com) nor TiddlySpace.
There _is_ a subset of TiddlyWiki plugins that create and automatically
save tiddlers, that because of a bug in the core of TiddlyWiki, do not
quite work on TidldyWikis hosted on TiddlySpace: the tiddlers get
created but not saved. A fix for this has been made in the TiddlyWiki
core, but not yet released into the wild, and thus not into the
TiddlySpace ecosystem. There's activite discussion in the
[tiddlywikidev] group about the state of releases.
So what I'm trying to say is: using plugins in TiddlyWiki has always
been a bit of crapshoot, long before TiddlySpace ever came along, and
it is often the case that some experimentation is required to get
things to work as desired.
One of the early goals of TiddlySpace was to make it easy for people
to establish known-good collections of plugins that other people could
then include in their spaces using the inclusion mechanism. When I say
"people" here, I mean members of the using public.
I understand that now, but I note that you introduced a "new" concept,
TiddlyWeb to explain it.
That's pretty common when explaining anything isn't it? If you like we
can go back to first principles, but in the name of expediency and
efficiency I'd like to be able to assume that you have access to the
internet and are willing and able to learn?
http://tiddlyweb.com/
TiddlyWeb is the core web service that runs underneath TiddlyWeb.
If we are to go back to first principles then it is important that we
engage in a dialog rather than me guessing everything you might want
to know. I can't make that guess so my only option there would be to
write endlessly about things. If I did that there wouldn't be any
TiddlySpace. If I started doing that now, then when TiddlySpace broke
I would be too busy writing for you to fix it.
However, if we engage in dialog I can target my responses and we
_both_ become more aware of what matters, what is missing and we are
both empowered to share with other people.
I know it's true that a space MAY be thought of as a tiddlywiki hosted on
tiddlyweb, but it's clearly a bit misleading.
No, it's not "clearly". I'm not yet fully understanding where you feel
you've been misled?
I would never ask "why bother"; my questions would be much more along the
lines of
a.) Why keep it secret?
b.) What are some ideas for how/when/why to think about when to use each
path?
a) There's no intention to keep it a secret. It is, pretty much, a
resource allocation problem. The information is out there, but it is
not discoverable and that is bad. There have been some
misunderstandings about how or who is supposed to be managing taking
the esoterica that people like me write and packaging it into coherent
pieces of documentation. There's hope that this will improve somewhat
now that the technical underpinnings of the service have reached some
level of stability/maturity.
b) That's a very good question and I don't know that there is yet a
good answer because though the technical underpinnings have some
maturity, the UX does not. The decision tree at the moment is probably
something like:
* Do you like TiddlyWiki?
* then use the tiddlywiki path
* Are comfy with writing or assembling your own javascript, css and
html?
* Yes: then use the other path
* No: use the the tiddlywiki path
Well, I will - but I note that you haven't mentioned collaboration at all,
and I don't quite understand where it fits in to what you have said.
"Collaboration", as a use-purpose, and the primary reason I switced from
Tiddlyspot to Tiddlyspace, wouldn't be expected to be specific to one of
json/wikify/htm/txt/atom access methods, would it?. So is it built into
TiddlyWeb? Or is it a red herring? Or something else?
A few points:
* Because TiddlySpace/Web puts the tiddlers (including the tiddlywiki
form) on the web, it means that they are accessible from anywhere,
by anyone, at anytime (modulo net access but even that is fungible
by downloading a tiddlywiki and syncing it back up later).
* TiddlyWeb has the concept of users, which TiddlySpace uses to have
the concept of members. Any space can add as any members as the
existing members wish to add. For example you can add additional
authors in the andrewsimon space from here:
http://andrewsimon.tiddlyspace.com/_space
* Those additional representations provide a mode of tracking stuff.
For instance you can subscribe to the Atom feed of a space, by which
a group can then track what's going on it.
* TiddlyWeb supports a technique to avoid what is described as the
lost update problem[1]. What this means is that multiple people can
edit in the same space at pretty much the same time with low risk of
clobbering content.
* There's a project called AMBIT on TiddlySpace which is a good
example of collaborating groups:
http://tiddlymanuals.tiddlyspace.com/
http://ambit.tiddlyspace.com/
Those things above are for collaboration where there is a collection
of people who have already identified as some kind of group and
through the membership concept have access to the same content. There
are also proto-groups which collaborate by seeing other people's
content and annotating their own to refer elsewhere. The following and
reply concepts in TiddlySpace (which are not yet fully formed) are
designed to support this kind of interaction.
It's not a given that I'm necessarily interested in the Tiddlywiki
interface - it's just what I happen to know right now, and what I guess
most people coming into Tiddlyspace know. What I'm interested in is
functionality around collaborative work practices.
At the moment the most effective way to learn about and improve that
interest is to talk with people who are in the same boat. It's what
I'm interested in as well. Your input and feedback, but most
importantly conversation, will drive things forward.
[1] http://www.w3.org/1999/04/Editing/
--
Chris Dent http://burningchrome.com/
[...]
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"TiddlyWiki" group.
To post to this group, send email to tiddlywiki@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
tiddlywiki+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/tiddlywiki?hl=en.
