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.
Lots of work; little scaling up. The is something WRONG.Best wishesTT
--
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.
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.
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
How many documentation improvement initiatives for TW have you seen? (I've seen, maybe, 12)
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.
□ Start with the creation of new material.
... 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.
... 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, ...
We can only move forward doing tasks
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.
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!
"There is also a discussion group specifically for discussing TiddlyWiki documentation improvement initiatives": http://groups.google.com/group/tiddlywikidocs
Illustrating the multiple fora problem;"There is also a discussion group specifically for discussing TiddlyWiki documentation improvement initiatives": http://groups.google.com/group/tiddlywikidocs
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.
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?
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.
Q: How do I save my TiddlyWiki?
Q: How do I find my last 5 Tiddlers?
Q: Why do some Tiddlers start "$:"?
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to tiddl...@googlegroups.com.
Ciao ArlenCould you add an "Issues" tab? Just to be able express thoughts on scope.
...
Best wishesJosiah
--
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.
@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.
@Gloom Looks interesting! Have you got a link to share?