What's the point of effort?

[@TiddlyTweeter]

I want to start a thread about "worthwhile effort" and where it goes to ...

Purely open ... but this helped me begin to see the issue really clearly ...

 

Mark S.

... Like others, I had started my own documentation for TW, but then realized that it would be an

enormous amount of work, and would only have whatever visibility it happened to gain via Google.

How many documentation improvement initiatives for TW have you seen? (I've seen, maybe, 12)

How many of them do you use or know now?

There is a MISSING piece.

Lots of work; little scaling up. There is something WRONG. 

Best wishes

TT

 

[@TiddlyTweeter]

repeat for email ...

Lots of work; little scaling up. The is something WRONG. 

Best wishes

TT

 

[Birthe C]

You do not need to repeat over and over again, there is something wrong. At least I think we all know that it would be nice to have something better.

Earlier threads like this has lead to other places to discuss and collect wisdom. It sounds nice but mostly leads to even more scattered information.

What we need it THE SOLUTION.

I do not think we should keep complaining. I do not have any suggestions. Do you TT have any suggestions to how to achieve what you want. Are you able to create it yourself and make it available or are you asking for help in doing so.

We need to discus where, how and who would take part in creating it. With no answers to this we will keep complaining.

Birthe

[Vishnu Chada]

Who is the person who can create a mind map of all the features available on tiddlywiki? If there is one, People can contribute documenting each branch of the mindmap. Owner of the mindmap can update the branches as and when there is new features added. This is only one method to document. Key is if we do not define and develop a process for documentation which everyone understands, there is never going to be  complete documentation. We will always endup with similar concerns and enormous expenditure of energy and attention.

My 2 cents

Vishnu

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TiddlyWiki" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to tiddlywiki+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywiki/dc6e0221-27aa-41ac-b1d7-1e1b3ef554b7%40googlegroups.com.

--
Regards,

Vishnu

[@TiddlyTweeter]

Ciao Birthe

Good post to call me out.

I'm not sure I could DO a solution. I'm not technically apt enough. 

But it seems pretty clear to me is we need a mechanism to bring stuff together. 

It is all there, waiting.

1 - Registrar of resource: new initiative on docs gets address added to a search list of sites.

2 - Standard TW.

3 - Far better search of Google Group. It could be done. It just needs thinking through.

My 3 cents

TT

[Birthe C]

Oh TT,

I know you write everything out of love for Tiddlywiki ;-).You are an eager tester and I think you know a lot.

I think that maybe there a too few people with the knowledge and no one with all that time.  You are right that it is the collection of knowledge that could make it, that was also in Vishnu's idea.

I am not, absolutely not tehcnical, have a hard time understanding most of the time, but is this not some of the thoughts behind Jed Carty's work on twederation. If so I think that is the way to go. As mentioned a lot of the documentation might be written already. If collected, should it all be included or only the best...and what IS the best. We are all on different levels of understanding.

Also even the best documentation can be difficult for some of us due to language barrier.

Birthe

[TonyM]

Lets face this

• To be sure - I have already proposed a solution - perhaps one of TT's 12
• I will not proceed without help. 
• It always bogs down in peoples debate about the technology
• We are terrible at reaching consensus outside purely technical issues

Now let us say I told you I know someone with 30+ years ICT experience, who charges between $1,000 and $1,500 a day to commercial clients who would be happy to lead a project to do this (at no cost), has researched in depth a solution and has the skills to implement but will only do so if others sign up to help develop a truly effective and properly designed solution. 

Would WE say YES - No we don't!

That person is me but there is no way for me to secure any support and a commitment to let me lead such a project, not withstanding the fact I would always be open to input we need leadership and choices made on our behalf without full knowledge or byte by byte debates, but this leadership needs to be informed by substantial experience to avoid compromising decisions that could damage the maintainability of the result. So It can't be anyone, simple enthusiasm is not enough.

Why would I now be reluctant? because people will try and debate me into submission over various details and technical approaches. Before I start I need to persuade people the approach I have waiting in the wings is a good one, and I know it will be controversial. I can't afford the time to do this IF I HAVE TO SELL IT BEFORE I BUILD IT

LETS JUST DO IT

Tony for Tiddlywiki community resources president!

Regards

Tony 

[TonyM]

Post Script,

I have a vision and it involves some novel use of existing technology and this would help me justify the time, because I get to innovate and further develop my skills. This is in part why I could justify taking this on. If you ask me to consider other approaches and platforms this may not be relevant and makes it harder for me to justify.

Why do I need justification? Because I am starting a business and currently in need of income.

Regards

Tony

[Birthe C]

Waw Tony,

That was enthusiastic, open, loud and clear.

I do think you have to tell a little about the direction and the end goal. What can be achieved. Not necessarily in detail, but to secure you some feedback. What will you need? What kind of skills? You need answers from people able to take part in it, having the knowledge and able to use the time necessary.

You will all want to be sure, that everyone will back you up before using lots and lots of time on this.

If enough is interested in taking active part, should we have a vote about it?

No matter how this ends up, I want to thank you for you offer.

Birthe

[TonyM]

Birthe,

There will be plenty of time for feedback during and after a solution is developed. However few people necessarily understand a vision for an end solution and the best way is to build it and then get feedback. I will quickly outline the approach but avoid places with debate. 

 

You will all want to be sure, that everyone will back you up before using lots and lots of time on this.

I only need a few people to be involved. I do not need everyone to back me up, how can they until they see the results. 

 

If enough is interested in taking active part, should we have a vote about it?

Look even the optional voting in the US and UK have given rise to perverse outcomes, I am not sure we have an established voting process that would provide much value.

 

No matter how this ends up, I want to thank you for you offer.

Thank you.

You say

I do think you have to tell a little about the direction and the end goal. What can be achieved. Not necessarily in detail, but to secure you some feedback. What will you need? What kind of skills? You need answers from people able to take part in it, having the knowledge and able to use the time necessary.

Here is a first high level attempt.

Direction:

Provide a structured community resource and database providing a way for cumulative development and sharing but leveraging existing resources.

End Goal

Solve all our community issues as currently experienced and they arise.

What will we need?

I need some commitment from some volunteers and support promoting its use when it becomes available. Especially as we build the resources up, this includes people who can test and build the documentation to make adoption of the community resources accessible to everyone. I am sure we could ask for some additional specialist skills and particular skills from volunteers but the key would ultimately be people with tiddlywiki knowledge.

What is needed for effective communities?

• It should be so easy to use it does not cost people any additional time to contribute to the community. If people can trust this and spend time they would have otherwise building their own private resources to put this effort into the community resource. Similarly provide methods for the easy transfer of content into the community from public and private records.
• It should not impose excessive obligation on anyone (including me)

High level requirements

• We need a platform that is aware of the features and objects within tiddlywiki such that any documentation can be easily developed, linked and discussed.
• The platform needs to allow high level control to build and maintain structure whilst being as open as possible to collaboration, change, conversations and feedback
• Collaboration, feedback and contributions need to be as seamless as possible.
• A correctly structured resource will minimise maintenance effort and reduce volunteer time demands. 
• We need to seamlessly as possible integrate existing resources in a complementary manner but with the opportunity to migrate services into the community resources to benefit from further integration and cross referencing.
• The Platform needs the ability to grant and control access to a range of users and contributors including a degree of anonymous access, this should be retractable in case of spam or other problems. So it needs a strong underlying user authentication and control mechanism.
• Most importantly TiddlyWiki needs to be fully integrated such that it is easy to publish tiddlywikis and tiddlywiki objects from within it. However controversially I do not believe it should use tiddlywiki at is core, because it is not necessarily the right tool. However as tiddlywiki matures and new methods develop we should be able to plugin new tiddlywiki solutions. To place the development of the right solution in tiddlywiki on the projects critical path is to increase the time to a solution and may cause it to fail. In time we may place tiddlywiki at the core but until we have a comprehensive community resource we will flounder.
• We need to be quite permissive to encourage contributions but we need to be able to reverse malicious activities.
• Ideal we allow Open ID and other authentication methods to open access to more people with less administration.
• All standard self serve, access management etc...  needs to be automated to reduce the maintenance overheads. 
• The solution needs to be EXTREAMLY scalable, movable and standards compliant. 
• Ideally information and tiddlywiki objects will be stored in one place so that we can always return to a "source of truth".

What is a tiddlywiki object? Tiddler, plugin, json, macro, theme... edition... library...

Regards

Tony

[Mohammad]

Great idea!

 Start please!

Keep going, you are getting there.

[Birthe C]

Tony,

Thank you. I think you guessed it, I didn't know that all these goodies were possible. 

Mohammad, as the creator of a lot of the stuff we need to assure everyone can easily find, your enthusiasm  talks highly....go go go

Birthe

[Mohammad]

:-)

[Devin Short]

Tony,

I'm new but I'd be happy to support your effort in order to learn more about tiddlywiki and to make some kind of mature documentation accessible. I have a technical background, some (not expert) programming skills, and I'm in a PhD program, so I'd be interested in working on defined tasks rather than bogging you down with "input" and independent solutions.

Devin

[TonyM]

Devin,

That is a kind offer. I need to think If I will jump into this, given I need to seek more income. I will reply soon.

Tony

[A Gloom]

Devin

Are you aware of the TiddlyWikiDocs Google Group? if you want to help with documentation-- best to do coordinated with others versus on your own.

[A Gloom]

How many documentation improvement initiatives for TW have you seen? (I've seen, maybe, 12)

I saw the last one but I didn't see anyone get involved-- would any further new initiatives suffer the same fate-- and why start another while ignoring previous efforts (quite the snub to those that devoted so much effort to those previous efforts)

[Devin Short]

I wasn't and I'll follow it now, but looking at it I'm not sure what I should do there. I'm new to the community and I have hardly any time, so if someone wants to bring me on for something specific and give me tasks I'd love to hear more, but as it stands I don't have the general knowledge or the bandwidth to sort through that list of posts and figure out where I can be helpful. 

[Devin Short]

I wasn't and I'll follow it now, but looking at it I'm not sure what I should do there. I'm new to the community and I have hardly any time, so if someone wants to bring me on for something specific and give me tasks I'd love to hear more, but as it stands I don't have the general knowledge or the bandwidth to sort through that list of posts and figure out where I can be helpful. 

On Wednesday, September 18, 2019 at 8:13:52 PM UTC-7, A Gloom wrote:

[A Gloom]

Devin

I wasn't and I'll follow it now, but looking at it I'm not sure what I should do there. I'm new to the community and I have hardly any time, so if someone wants to bring me on for something specific and give me tasks I'd love to hear more, but as it stands I don't have the general knowledge or the bandwidth to sort through that list of posts and figure out where I can be helpful. 

Post a message there introducing yourself and ask for the info/places that info may be on how to get involved-- there's a proctol for the offficialdocumental

Here's somwthing to shed light on matters-- https://tiddlywiki.com/#HelpingTiddlyWiki

also start a simiiar post here -- you'll probably get more responses here-- don't be shy

[Luis Gonzalez]

We can only move forward doing tasks:

□ Explain the goal of this project.

   □ Have a list of all documentation personal projects.

   □ Create new documentation.

□ Ennumerate the feature needs of the platform.

□ Find where existing documentation is stored:

• Github
• Tiddlyspot

□ List possible platforms.

□ Choose a platform.

□ Collect all existing documentation personal projects.

• http://herramientas.tiddlyspot.com/#Introducción
• Wiki Reference
• Scrip master
• Guía de Tiddlywiki
• tb5
• TW5 Magic
• TiddlyWiki toolmap
• Plugins and Hacks for TiddlyWiki 5
• Tiddlywiki examples
• Apprendre TiddlyWiki et ses plugins
  

□ Start with the creation of new material.

I  think google groups is not a good starting point. If the question is about documenting tiddlywiki, we will have to deal with many types of documents: .html, .doc, odt, mindmaps, images, ...

I think we need a leader to guide all activities.

[PMario]

Hi Folks,

That's a very interesting question. Last year, I did crate an experiment, which is a working proof of concept. Using 100% open source components.

Everything is explained with several videos. The video "auto transcription" is a complete mess, that's why I will manually transcribe them and start a new thread here in the group, when I have enough to read for those who prefer to read ;)

have fun!

mario

[A Gloom]

thank you Luis, I was about to start a thread to collect a list of ref wiki's from member's input

I have this mad coding experiment where from a single tiddler can send "search queries" to any online wiki using a story filter with search filter operators acting as a search query-- just need their url which I building a data tiddler of.  Also building table of contents of any content/ to sidebar tabs.

[@TiddlyTweeter]

erm ... don't we need an address? :-)

[Luis Gonzalez]

Hi, A Gloom. I can help you.

Maybe we can start choosing a platform and open an account to start collecting all this information: all the links and other files. Maybe we can choose google docs to store the docs and google groups as a way of communicate with the rest of the people.

As I said, the only way to progress is by doing things.

[@TiddlyTweeter]

A Gloom wrote:

... a single tiddler can send "search queries" to any online wiki using a story filter with search filter operators acting as a search query-- just need their url which I building a data tiddler of. 

Right. There was some work done on that idea some months ago. But its not been fully brought together.

Actually its a good idea also for more than TW. A SPECIALIST searcher mechanism that you can record addresses of sites for and launch a precise search. (I working on one for the film-industry.)

For TW we have mechanism for landing directly as it has its own search engine. For other sites they can have their own interface to search too. Failing that Google or the Duck thing.

Best wishes

Josiah 

[@TiddlyTweeter]

Luis Gonzalez wrote:

... I  think google groups is not a good starting point. If the question is about documenting tiddlywiki, we will have to deal with many types of documents: .html, .doc, odt, mindmaps, images, ...

 I agree. But its quite good for FRAGMENTS of information.

IF we could search GG better it might help. The native search mechanism in GG is awful. But there are other ways to search it. 

For instance via ... https://www.mail-archive.com/tiddlywiki@googlegroups.com/ 

My own feeling is the GG constantly produces useful solutions and documentation. Mohammad's work basically illustrates that point, as he gathers posted solutions.

Side thoughts

Josiah

[@TiddlyTweeter]

I just wanted to comment that Mohammad's approach to this issue has been interesting and produced several very useful effective resources.

Taking just one of his works ... http://tw-regexp.tiddlyspot.com/, about Regular Expressions.

The way he built it was to pose problems on the list and then took the best solutions to the wiki.

I think its a good, workable, approach. That accepts the current mess in GG and makes the best of it.

When he started it I stopped my own work to make an info wiki for regular expressions. 

Better to have ONE resource, not two.

I have contributed to it, as did several others, especially Mark S. Its a limited collectivism that I think works.

Just reflections

TT

[@TiddlyTweeter]

Ciao Luis

We can only move forward doing tasks

Right. That was pretty much my starting point. 

Though with the caveat (=will it get attention?) "is it worth it?" 

I have seen many initiatives start and many fail.

Its depressing to see great efforts get nowhere.

Part of the issue may be what KIND of documentation is needed.

I personally prefer issue focused solutions like Mohammad's. That inform whilst solving.

So I think there is an issue what is meant by "docs". 

For beginners I often wondered why we don't go for a FAQ format with Questions and Answers.

It would be much easier to contribute to.

Just thoughts

Josiah 

[coda coder]

On Thursday, September 19, 2019 at 6:22:53 AM UTC-5, @TiddlyTweeter wrote:

For beginners I often wondered why we don't go for a FAQ format with Questions and Answers.

It would be much easier to contribute to.

This.

[Watt]

Nice one TT! Collaboration, limited collectivism and sharing the load get my vote.

In my opinion GG is actually TW's strongest resource at the moment.

*GG is a brain dump - a silo - anything and everything goes in it.

*GG is the reliable silo. The entire conversation takes place here. Splinter discussion groups will splinter the conversation. IMO Avoid multiple silos. Open, unified discussion in a single established location is powerful, inclusive and democratic.

*GG is the first, officially recognised point of call if you're a TW beginner. You can find answers here and ask questions. The community is courteous, diverse, helpful and very knowledgeable.

*That idea of community has enormous value - the level of unforced user engagement on GG is extraordinary.

*GG has limitations but in its favour it's still here, 24 hours a day, it's neutral - not subject to an individual's whims and styles, it is egoless, 'owned' by the group, not one individual. It has everything in it, there is a chronology. It's searchable - granted hitting the right search term is difficult but difficulty can be 'educational'.

*GG has a personality - acquired from it's collective membership - it also quickly reveals who the TW 'adepts' are. You learn to trust inputs from particular names - (Don't stop sharing you lovely people).

So, I like GG despite its faults.

I think your emerging model of Official TW documentation, supplemented by GG as the big brain dump where everything goes, supplemented by super useful TW resource lists like Dave's Toolmap, supplemented by user generated 'area specific' solution wikis such as Mohammad's pioneering TW-Scripts and Regex Solutions is a pretty good model.

Maybe it's the area specific solutions that could be collaborated on and extended? Mohammad has got the ball rolling already I think and did float an input tool for contributions of solutions found on GG. Perhaps he'd be willing to brush up the mechanism and users could discuss and agree on a formalised, recognised, findable accepted method of chipping in solutions around particular problematic topic areas?

Some features I'd prefer;
No single individual shoulders the burden
Self maintainiing
Easy input
Topic defined
Formally recognised and promoted
Uses TW wherever possible

Other things this thread might have ideas on;
Structure of contribution
Input method
Collection point
Agreed topic areas
Method of publicising

Collating those solution inputs would be the work that might need sharing and how to go about that could discussed further.

The FAQ idea is another possible route, I think administering one, maintaining answers and establishing whose responsibility it would be need careful discussion. Avoiding multiple information silos and diluting the collective but anarchic authority of GG might be considerations.

Anyway just my 2 cents, here's a simple 3 hit helpline hierarchy for any beginners out there;

Tiddlywiki Official Docs - https://tiddlywiki.com/

--Google Groups -http://groups.google.com/group/TiddlyWiki

---- Dave Gifford's Toolmap - https://dynalist.io/d/zUP-nIWu2FFoXH-oM7L7d9DM see relevant sections

Dave's already created a beautiful resource - so why reinvent that wheel? Adding area specific solutions to his toolmap, solution sites with examples, created along the lines explored by Mohammad seems like it could be coordinatable and doable. 'Lets Snowball that cumulative group knowledge'.

Keep up the good work guys. Big thanks to all you TW-ites for your efforts and the continuing conversation. It is much appreciated!

[Watt]

Illustrating the multiple fora problem;

"There is also a discussion group specifically for discussing TiddlyWiki documentation improvement initiatives": http://groups.google.com/group/tiddlywikidocs

[Mohammad]

Hi Watt,

 

On Thursday, September 19, 2019 at 10:20:03 PM UTC+4:30, Watt wrote:

Illustrating the multiple fora problem;

"There is also a discussion group specifically for discussing TiddlyWiki documentation improvement initiatives": http://groups.google.com/group/tiddlywikidocs

This is a dead group! few message per year!  For example in 2019 (by Sep) we have only 18 message!

--Mohammad

[Watt]

I think I agree Mohammad, I was trying to illustrate my point in the previous post that multiple 'silos' are a bad idea. Keep the conversation in a single location gets my vote.

Do you still have a link to your solution sharing input form? It might be something that could be discussed here.

On a total sidenote - I like how you frequently post 'Added to TW-Scripts' when encountering solutions here. Can I ask you to turn that into a link to TW-Scripts? I often want to go directly to TW-Scripts and see your implementation. Big thanks for your many contributions Mohammad.

[Mohammad]

On Thursday, September 19, 2019 at 6:52:09 PM UTC+4:30, Watt wrote:

Nice one TT! Collaboration, limited collectivism and sharing the load get my vote.

In my opinion GG is actually TW's strongest resource at the moment.

*GG is a brain dump - a silo - anything and everything goes in it.

*GG is the reliable silo. The entire conversation takes place here. Splinter discussion groups will splinter the conversation. IMO Avoid multiple silos. Open, unified discussion in a single established location is powerful, inclusive and democratic.

*GG is the first, officially recognised point of call if you're a TW beginner. You can find answers here and ask questions. The community is courteous, diverse, helpful and very knowledgeable.

*That idea of community has enormous value - the level of unforced user engagement on GG is extraordinary.

*GG has limitations but in its favour it's still here, 24 hours a day, it's neutral - not subject to an individual's whims and styles, it is egoless, 'owned' by the group, not one individual. It has everything in it, there is a chronology. It's searchable - granted hitting the right search term is difficult but difficulty can be 'educational'.

*GG has a personality - acquired from it's collective membership - it also quickly reveals who the TW 'adepts' are. You learn to trust inputs from particular names - (Don't stop sharing you lovely people).

So, I like GG despite its faults.

 

I think your emerging model of Official TW documentation, supplemented by GG as the big brain dump where everything goes, supplemented by super useful TW resource lists like Dave's Toolmap, supplemented by user generated 'area specific' solution wikis such as Mohammad's pioneering TW-Scripts and Regex Solutions is a pretty good model.

Maybe it's the area specific solutions that could be collaborated on and extended? Mohammad has got the ball rolling already I think and did float an input tool for contributions of solutions found on GG. Perhaps he'd be willing to brush up the mechanism and users could discuss and agree on a formalised, recognised, findable accepted method of chipping in solutions around particular problematic topic areas?

 

Thank you TT and Watt for supporting TW-Scripts. As you know it mainly focuses on problems needs some scripting e.g. at least writing a filter!

I really welcome any kind of cooperation and even I am ready to transfer it to community or tiddlywiki.com itself.

TW-Scripts approach is learning through examples and acts like a solution manual. Actually it is one of the best resources created by INDIRECT collaboration!

INDIRECT means few people showed interest to  prepare material for TW-Scripts, but many gave their solutions to questions in GG and I tried to collect and compile into TW-Scripts format!

Of course I selected some of these solutions first because I should be interested in that solution, second and more important I should understand the solution to document it.

In a failed try, I created a GitHub organization called tw-scripts (https://github.com/orgs/tw-scripts/dashboard) with some projects focused on documentation. We did this in collaboration with Talha.

It is simple for everybody has  a GitHub account to collaborate! But as we did not receive any request, I remained with the original version of TW-Scripts maintained on https://github.com/kookma/TW-Scripts

By the way writing documentation for Tiddlywiki is a sad story!

If you dig into GG you will see many people tried to prepare or collaborate on TW documentation, but all these efforts failed and at maximum resulted in stranded individual wikis.

The same story is for plugins! we have not a plugin library at least an unofficial one! to simply locate plugins and install them like the official get more plugin! There is no rating mechanism nothing...

Mohammad

[Mohammad]

Hi Watt,

 See my longer reply to your previous post!

--Mohammad

[Mohammad]

Sure, I will do! One reason I do not put the link is I monitor the group and when I see something I understand and I can document it, I post Added to TW-Scripts.

Then in my local version I create a task to document it and later at the weekends, free times, ... I implement it in TW-Scripts. So, it is not available then.

TW-Scripts normally is uploaded to GitHub every two three weeks so there is a gap. Sorry for this 

I can change the note as Will be added to the next revision of TW-Scripts

What do you think?

[Mohammad]

tw-regexp is a collaborative project. Big thanks to Mark S and Josiah!

Actually it was Josiah enthusiasm to have a resource on regular expression in Tiddlywiki!  and the talent of Mark pushed the project to proceed!

While we have not many people involved but few other people also indirectly helped through GG like Mat.

So yes, these are examples of limited but fruitful collaboration!

--Mohammad

[Mohammad]

Example of high quality documentation prepared by community (procedure and how to)

https://devguide.python.org/docquality/

I think Tiddlywiki itself is best for nonlinear documentation while learning should be somehow linear a trail is needed

So, the vanilla edition is not good for documentation, may be something like Sphinx or a TW edition with some linearity

like the trail you see on TW-Scripts or similar ...

--Mohammad

[TonyM]

I only have a little time available in coming weeks, but are keen to proceed.

My carefully considered response to this thread.

I think there is furious agreement what must be done, and there will always be differences on how. Because the how is difficult to answer, enthusiastic contributors build their own "repositories" and unfortunately get left to administer them on their own. Separate repositories means people have to look for them or visit each to acquire the information they need and they are at the behest of the repository designer for the value of search and indexing provided in that repository. These repositories are very valuable but they remain a little isolated.

Owners of such private repositories need to be squirrels collecting relevant info that fits the scope of the repositories often unstated purpose. Some community members will suggest suitable information however it is usually the owners responsibility to collect the "nuts". When an owner has less time the nuts grow old and some go off and the repository looses some value. The prospect of bringing it up to date feels like a chore, and if you have no idea of its value to others and the number of visitors it could be hard to build motivation to revisit it.

We could all dream of an ultimate repository of all things tiddlywiki but is it even achievable?, if it is it will only be in time and participation. The best way to start is build a hybrid environment of centralised records that document the decentralised records. This environment need the following qualities as its key features;

• Easy for anyone to contribute to
• A structure that forces curation, organization on contributions so as to extract maximum value from the least effort and avoid admin overheads
• Easy to reference external resources
• The ability to discuss and contribute to the material on the site
• An opportunity to leverage tiddlywiki as much as possible
• Ability to build a team of enthusiasts to maintain and grow the community resources.

Like any smart project the best effort should be expended up front to structure the solution effectively, rather than on an ad hoc basis. The danger of ad hoc which we are all familiar is fragments, overlapping material, gaps and duplications, and perhaps worst of all confusion and fragmentation. 

In fact tiddlywiki itself could inspire this fragmentation because it has many object, and components within it. 

The only solution in my view is using an analysis process to determine the pieces we want to collect together as a community and synthesis to build a unified view of the pieces. The solution needs to keep this modularisation from the analysis process alive so contributions can be made by the community at any level. A small configuration detail, a code fragment through to plugins and whole wiki editions. The solution will bring together all the pieces in a consistent browsable and searchable whole, however as it evolves it will be pointing to many external resources so the ability to provide excerpts or keywords against external resources should make those resources more findable.

In time enthusiasts will most likely migrate these external resources into the central community resource where others can help maintain it and add value. The beauty of tiddlywiki will also allow people to download and export content as needed.

 

I will proceed given sufficient support and acknowledgement!

What do I need Initially?, 

• sufficient support and acknowledgement!
• A degree of authority to proceed and run with my design strategy
• Of course I always remain open to criticism and alternative perspectives, but I will not let it cripple the process
• This is evolution not revolution

I would like people with one or more of the following!

• Those with Knowledge and Information management skills
• Database design and management skills
• Strong User interface skills
• Lived experience with tiddlywiki 
• Some enthusiastic reviewers and contributors
• Team or collaboration experts

We also need a set of collaboration tools, we can pick from available ones, no need for permanent solutions.

Your thoughts?

Your support?

If you want to know more about HOW I plan to do this, if what I have said in my posts in this thread is not enough join the team.

Regards

Tony

Regards

Tony

[@TiddlyTweeter]

Ciao TonyM

I like Mohammad's approach because I think its proof of a method that works.

Mohammad's main information wikis "harvest" some of what TW does in a form that is both (1) instructional; (2) illustrated by use cases. 

I think its a good combination

---

Worth stressing is: I pursue things I ENJOY the most.

So, for instance, I enjoy regular expressions. (Somewhat like some people like the Times Crossword Puzzle).

So I find it fun--so its more easily sustainable to contribute docs & solutions to that theme.

---

TBH, I'm not overly bothered what fora we use for documenting TW. 

Though TW itself seems pretty good. 

And to use the tool to document the tool seems to me sensible unless there good reasons not to.

It directly supports iterative learning that way.

---

I think the issue is more about "major listings" so good things don't go awol. 

David's Toolmap is really good even though its not TW itself. 

But it mainly links directly to TWs. So you back in TW immediately. Which is good.

---

Dave's list is resources in general.

I think we need a complimentary "short-list" only of dedicated "help" wiki/sites.

---

Regarding helping beginners, which I think is important, I'm really NOT sure.

I seen so many efforts to do that that have failed.

I am not fully clear why. 

My idea, maybe wrong, is to make beginner support the one premiere collective initiative

that a big project like you suggest might work for.

My one thought was for a FAQ format for beginners. 

The simplest reason is individual questions are more easily contributed to by others, 

where they can focus on what they understand to be able to contribute. 

Seamless text isn't so easy.

---

After a lot of debate on docs (which I have contributed to a lot---& changed my mind about a lot) I think we could leverage what we have on GG. 

And harvest it. And use it to collaborate. Which we do already. 

Leverage of what we do already seems workable.

I'm not sure it needs a "leader" so much as a "model of what works."

Just thoughts

Josiah 

[Arlen Beiler]

Josiah, 

Do you want to use the wiki on https://github.com/Arlen22/TiddlyWiki-DocsWiki/wiki? You're welcome to it. I have it set open so anyone can edit it and if that creates too many problems or we start dealing with trolls from outside, we can either close it or I can add some of you as contributors. 

I would love to see something happen. I have thought about this many times. 

Arlen

I'm not sure is needs a "leader" so much as a "model of what works."

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TiddlyWiki" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to tiddlywiki+...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywiki/51beaab3-5a6d-47dd-ae74-4d7626acaf5c%40googlegroups.com.

[@TiddlyTweeter]

Ciao Arlen

Could you add an "Issues" tab? Just to be able express thoughts on scope.

I'd have interest in contributing to real beginner issues.  IF it were a FAQ like ...

Q: How do I save my TiddlyWiki?

or 

Q: How do I find my last 5 Tiddlers?

or

Q: Why do some Tiddlers start "$:"? 

WHY? Because I could concentrate on one topic. 

Best wishes

Josiah

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to tiddl...@googlegroups.com.

[HansWobbe]

I added an Issues page.

On Friday, September 20, 2019 at 11:43:01 AM UTC-4, @TiddlyTweeter wrote:

Ciao Arlen

Could you add an "Issues" tab? Just to be able express thoughts on scope.

...

 

Best wishes

Josiah

[A Gloom]

@Luis @TT

sorry was out due to medic al

what I can do to kick things off

is create a public GDoc with the info from this thread and since it will be a published Doc I should also be able embed and link it to a online version of WikiWichry (containing just ref wiki search tiddlers)

still finishing the ref wikis search tiddler-- currently making it where a online siki's url can be typed on or selected from a premadt list of known ref wikis, below is where I'm cureently at

[Arlen Beiler]

Ok, sure, I've re-enabled issues. I can understand how that could be useful, especially to discuss certain pages, or work on more in-depth projects. I wonder if we can't use Github for a different kind of hub. 

Arlen

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TiddlyWiki" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to tiddlywiki+...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywiki/f89f19d8-44ad-4229-baf1-40853da12e67%40googlegroups.com.

[A Gloom]

Applying the maddening methodically haphazard KAOS theorems (M2HKT) of WikiWitchery...

i1,i2,i3,i4 = ideas
i1 + i2 = o.0
i1 + i3 = 0.o
i1 + i2 +i3 = >.<

i1 + i2 + i4 = 0.0

ie threw a bunch of code from Tobias, Jed and yours truly together and came up with something that may work-- a central portal that can be built up and used in any wiki

reveals expanded to show whats hidden

[Watt]

@Gloom Looks interesting! Have you got a link to share?

@Mohammad - sorry for the delayed response - just a simple link to your active TW-Scripts site was what I was thinking, not to any specific solution. After your github problems I wasn't sure of the correct location. Thanks.

[Mohammad]

Hi Watt!

Sure I will!

Cheers

Mohammad

[A Gloom]

@Watt

@Gloom Looks interesting! Have you got a link to share?

Will have one soon-- moving all the reference and search tiddlers to their own wiki for this thread-- currently they're in my testbed wiki which has a lot of other things that would baffle and lead visitors astray.  Showed screenshots elsewhere but been working on a central search query generator (& some in tiddler display of search results) of other wikis, TW static pages, TW/Docs/Dev Groups, various Google search queries (like definitions), Wikipedia pages-- all from a wiki

TWScripts URL -- https://kookma.github.io/TW-Scripts/

@Mohammad

Could I ude the code from the search Toolmap tiddler (https://kookma.github.io/TW-Scripts/#Search%20in%20Tiddlywiki%20Toolmap) at TWScripts for the referenced search demo I'm putting up for this thread?  Currently I'm not using it but just linking to it because I felt it was a unique feature of your wiki and I didn't want to diminish that uniqueness by also having it.

[Watt]

Thanks @gloom - will keep an eye out for it. Hope the medical went well.

[@TiddlyTweeter]

Thanks Arlen

I made some tentative initial comments & queries on possible scope at: https://github.com/Arlen22/TiddlyWiki-DocsWiki/issues/1#issue-497036444

Best wishes

TT