discussing a tiddler

[Joe Armstrong]

A couple of questions:

1) Is there a "definitive" TW (definitive in the sense that it serves as some kind of master 

reference copy for  documentation of how TW works -- I'm assuming this is at

https://tiddlywiki.com/

2) Every wikipedia has a Talk page - for discussions about a page.

This seems like a good idea - currently the only way to comment on a page

is to make a better version and send a push request to github -- this seems

a bit awkward

Case in point :the SetWidget has an example saying

<$set name="myVariable" value="Some text">
<$text text=<<myVariable>>/>
</$set>

But the text says name is a variable - but the <<myVariable>> is a macro expansion.

So here set has defined a macro. The Variable tiddler talks about 'special types of variable'

It might be difficult to explain this in the SetWidget tiddler itself so one could have a convention

that (say) SetWidget-talk always had discussions about SetWidget (somewhat like the Wkikpedia)

Cheers

/Joe

[BurningTreeC]

Hi Joe,

you could take a look at https://tiddlywiki.com/#Variables%20in%20WikiText

<<something>> are variables

Quote: "Macros are a special form of variable whose value can contain placeholders that get filled in with parameters whenever the macro is used."

see: https://tiddlywiki.com/#Variables

Simon

[Mark S.]

Setting up an independent Wiki about TiddlyWiki that could be updated in real-time would be an advantageous thing.

What I've wondered, and asked before, is whether it is legal/acceptable to import the content of TiddlyWiki.com into such a wiki. If not, it would take years to generate comparable material.

-- Mark

[Joe Armstrong]

On Thursday, 8 March 2018 17:38:52 UTC+1, Mark S. wrote:

Setting up an independent Wiki about TiddlyWiki that could be updated in real-time would be an advantageous thing.

What I've wondered, and asked before, is whether it is legal/acceptable to import the content of TiddlyWiki.com into such a wiki. If not, it would take years to generate comparable material.

Given the fuss over the copyright status of Tweets I think that it would be prudent

to have a licence and original author in every tweet, otherwise reusing the

content would be problematic.

Ted Nelson wanted a flexible licensing model for transcluding content allowing a

spectrum of usage from free to paid-for - but this sounds pretty complicated to me.

Keeping an edit trail for each tiddler might not be too space consuming -

and would be related to the problem of keeping all old edits - I suspect the overheads

are rather small since the author and licence will presumably not change often

between edits

/Joe

[Steven Schneider]

Interesting discussion on the "definitive" TiddlyWiki. There has been much talk here lately about documentation, community, etc, and this thread becomes a part of it.

In my view, the community of tiddlywiki users is, and always will be, self-organizing. Though we all use different aspects of the community, I would currently identify the following as elements of it (I'd be interested in the aspects that I've missed):

* github: https://github.com/Jermolene/TiddlyWiki5 --  - repo for tiddlywiki5. I'm not an active github user, and don't participate in this community at all. But there is activity: https://github.com/Jermolene/TiddlyWiki5/pulse/monthly suggests in the past month, 21 merged pull requests, 7 new issues. Perhaps someone here could elaborate on the ways in which the community participates through github, especially for those of us who are not active github users.

* tiddlywiki google group (this group: https://groups.google.com/forum/#!forum/TiddlyWiki -- a long-lived group (first message available that I could find is from 2005!), with ~6500 members. In February, there were 922 posts in 107 topics; January 1,329 (155)  and December 1,275 (143). In March to date, there are 229 posts; about 3/4 of them have been written by the 10 most active posters. (see https://groups.google.com/forum/#!aboutgroup/tiddlywiki)

* tiddlywiki dev google group: https://groups.google.com/forum/#!forum/tiddlywikidev.  1677 members, 165 posts, 25 topics in February. Most active posters for March have some overlap with end-user group. I don't read or write to this group; perhaps someone could elaborate on what happens here?

* tiddlywiki docs google group: https://groups.google.com/forum/#!forum/tiddlywikidocs. 92 members, relatively inactive most of the time.

* reddit: r/TiddlyWiki (75 subscribers) and r/TiddlyWiki5 (272 subscribers). (most posts by one user, the moderator https://www.reddit.com/user/surelynotmymainacc/

* twitter: https://twitter.com/search?q=%23tiddlywiki&src=typd

I'm very interested in continuing to develop tutorials and guides and help systems and better documentation etc.. In the spirit of tiddlywiki, and in the spirit of open source software, we should just do it. There is no real need to change tiddlywiki.com -- but if there were a group or an individual user who wanted to modify / add on to the contents of TiddlyWiki.com, it would be sort-of-easy. 

Perhaps one could use github, and allow folks to submit "pull requests" (might not be the right term) that consisted of additional tiddlers built within tiddlywiki.com. We could run a quasi-independent repository (plus.tiddlywiki.com?) that included the current version of tiddlywiki.com plus any additions "we" made.  Any one of us could do something like that, and it might yield interesting results. 

As to Mark's question, is this kind of effort ethical or legal: I believe it it fully in the terms of the license and spirit of open source software generally and tiddlywiki specifically. Here is the quote from https://tiddlywiki.com/#License: "you can take TiddlyWiki (meaning, I believe: tiddlywiki.com) and do anything you want with it without any license fee payment or other legal obligation to the creators of TiddlyWiki or anyone else"

I hope this was helpful to our ongoing discussion in this thread.

//steve.

[Mark S.]

If you haven't tried to submit a document or document change to TiddlyWiki on github you should try it. It's not a user-friendly experience, even once you learn the ropes or have your own forked version set up.

And that's not even getting to the part where you make a pull request. In order to make a PR, you have to "sign" the copyright or permission document. So that's how the IP issues are dealt with. And then each document and/or change has to await approval the same way it would if you were submitting a major change to the core.

There's no accreditation given to contributors. Since github keeps everything I suppose there is some way of spelunking the depths to find out who made what change when, but it's not trivial.
 
Creating a fork and making it semi-publicly available would quickly run into history problems I think. For instance, someone on the fork would submit a document about feature "A". Meanwhile, someone else would submit another document about feature "A"  and it then gets merged. When the next version of TW comes out and you try to reconcile the two trees, you now have two tiddlers about feature "A", that may be somewhat inconsistent. Which one is canon?
 
All this is why having a real stand-alone wiki would be so much more expeditious. But it would take forever to populate if you couldn't grab an existing information source as a starting point.

Thanks!
-- Mark

[Joe Armstrong]

One thing that I've been thinking about is the difficulty of making a trivial change to the standard tiddlywiki at widdlywiki.com.

If I download the page at tiddlywiki.com and edit a page I get a prompt saying 'how to improve this documentation'

To do this you have to 'clone the repository' find the correct tiddler - edit it and push the change back to the repository. The receiver has to check the push request and accept or reject them.

This strikes me as being far too onerous for a casual user. Correction of simple things like spelling errors should be one mouse click away without any sign-ups or any repository cloning or any knowledge of github. There must be many people who could use the tiddlywiki but not understand how to use github.

I have only seen one web site that does this properly.

The Real World Haskell site is amazingly good at this. See http://book.realworldhaskell.org/read/

If I'm reading a page and notice a typo or want to ask a question - it's literally one mouse click away with no sign up.

I suggest taking a quick look at any one of therio pages to see how they have organised things.

It would be very nice to have this kind of functionality in the TW.

Cheers

/Joe

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the Google Groups "TiddlyWiki" group.
To unsubscribe from this topic, visit https://groups.google.com/d/topic/tiddlywiki/Fd53v6QTJao/unsubscribe.
To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to tiddlywiki+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to tiddl...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/tiddlywiki.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywiki/6a10f737-b314-4d5b-af4f-dbc33271bb2e%40googlegroups.com.

For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[@TiddlyTweeter]

Ciao Steve & all

Steven Schneider wrote:

...In my view, the community of tiddlywiki users is, and always will be, self-organizing...

I get what you mean in spirit. But its one of those "slam-dunk" phrases we use but no one can quite say what it means :-).

If you ask me what the single most blatant problem with getting the best from TW resources & documentation is ... its FINDING relevant materials at the time you need them. Its very fragmented. Huge swathes of "near documentation" and "near complete" code already exist on GG that are constantly lost.

This is another way of saying I believe we need a better system that JOINS THE DOTS UP (aggregation of plugins, documentation, wiki showcases etc). If it can "self-organise" so much the better! :-)

Best wishes
Josiah

[Jeremy Ruston]

Hi Everyone

1) Is there a "definitive" TW (definitive in the sense that it serves as some kind of master 

reference copy for  documentation of how TW works -- I'm assuming this is at

https://tiddlywiki.com/

Yes, the docs at tiddlywiki.com (and tiddlywiki.com/dev) are intended to be the authoritative reference docs for TiddlyWiki.

The reference docs live in GitHub so that they are in lockstep with the code; one can check out an old version and be confident that the docs will line up with the code.

The contribution process to GitHub is indeed too complex for casual users. I’d like to tackle it in several ways:

* To take the non-reference docs out of the TW repo, and provide a lower friction path for contributions (eg Google Forms, or a custom server app - see below)

* To make it easier to contribute directly to GitHub using something like this new JS library that runs in the browser: <https://github.com/octokit/rest.js> - users might only visit GitHub to create their account, and then perform everything else through the TW UI

We’ve also got some work underway to speed up the deployment process through a continuous integration build server.

2) Every wikipedia has a Talk page - for discussions about a page.

This seems like a good idea - currently the only way to comment on a page

is to make a better version and send a push request to github -- this seems

a bit awkward

I agree that it would be useful for the same reason as Wikipedia.

The aspiration we’ve long discussed is to have a federated discussion community based on a mix of P2P tech (Dat/Beaker), centralised services, and personal servers.

Case in point :the SetWidget has an example saying

<$set name="myVariable" value="Some text">
<$text text=<<myVariable>>/>
</$set>

But the text says name is a variable - but the <<myVariable>> is a macro expansion.

So here set has defined a macro. The Variable tiddler talks about 'special types of variable’

The double angle brackets when used as the quotes for an attribute cause it to be interpreted as a transclusion of the raw text of a variable; using the double angle brackets syntax as an element will transclude the variable and also “wikify” it (parse and render it).

What I've wondered, and asked before, is whether it is legal/acceptable to import the content of TiddlyWiki.com into such a wiki. If not, it would take years to generate comparable material.

Absolutely, yes, the documentation content on tiddlywiki.com is licensed under the same BSD license as the code (because we’re treating the docs as part of the code). Remixing the documentation is positively encouraged.

All this is why having a real stand-alone wiki would be so much more expeditious. But it would take forever to populate if you couldn't grab an existing information source as a starting point.

This is our million dollar question, and has been for some time. Things are changing, though. As I think I’ve mentioned elsewhere, over the last 18 months I have built a scalable TiddlyWiki serverside based on Amazon’s cloud services, called Xememex. For the old timers, it’s like TiddlySpace, except that I can run a batch script and create a whole new instance in just a few minutes.

It’s what I’ve wanted to make with TiddlyWiki for many years: a traditional multi-user TiddlyWiki, with user accounts, authentication, access control, and the ability to build lightweight static pages from tiddlers.

I’ve funded the development through the consultancy work I’ve been doing through my company Federatial. It’s now reached the point where it could support either or both of our community documentation efforts and our discussion requirements, and we could consider whether we wanted to adopt it.

The challenge is that this cloud infrastructure costs money to run; Amazon’s web services are billed by usage, so there’s no charge for an app or site when nobody is using it, but conversely the charges can rise rapidly with heavy usage.

The idea of charging users money to participate in the TiddlyWiki community is unacceptable to me (because — duh! — I think I learn so much from the community that if anything I should be paying them/you, and not the other way around).

Anyhow, it’s a good time to be talking about this.

Best wishes

Jeremy.

Cheers

/Joe

--
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 post to this group, send email to tiddl...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/tiddlywiki.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywiki/5a5fcc58-adf3-4ac3-8b27-a38a639346bc%40googlegroups.com.

[Mark S.]

I hope this doesn't mean that the stand-alone TW won't lose it's support and/or interest.

Just to get past the sticker shock, about how much does Amazon charge for say 20 active contributors and a drive-by load equivalent to what TiddlyWiki.com gets now?

Thanks!
Mark

[TonyM]

Jeremy,

I hope this amazon solution could be open, because many of us may be prepared to host our own shared environments on Amazon ourselves, even at some cost.

Not withstanding that for community access solutions that have back-end costs please never underestimate community contributions from  Crowd funding (initial and ongoing) Patrion to optional donations and tip jars to fund such services. The addition of a target that shows % funding raised can also be helpful.

Non coercive opportunities to fund community projects is not commercialisation, it is simply permitting the community to empower itself.

Perhaps larger larger than plugin solutions such as tiddlyDesktop, TiddlyAmazon should have a one of or reoccurring contribution option, regular contributors could then post an I Support TiddlyWiki (financially) certificate on their site, which also promotes TiddlyWiki and further donations.

If surpluses occur you can return to the community with awards and commissions for key deliverables.

Regards

Tony

[Jeremy Ruston]

Hi Tony, Mark,

> I hope this doesn't mean that the stand-alone TW won't lose it's support and/or interest.

Not at all. TiddlyWiki is the main component of Xememex. Or put another way, Xememex is just another platform on which TiddlyWiki can run (alongside Node.js, the browser, TiddlyDesktop etc). 

The guts are actually already open source — see the plugin:

https://github.com/Jermolene/TiddlyWiki5/tree/master/plugins/tiddlywiki/aws

It can take a wiki folder and package it up as a single JS file that can be executed within Amazon’s Lambda environment. The heart of Xememex is just running TiddlyWiki as a Lambda function in Amazon’s cloud.

> Just to get past the sticker shock, about how much does Amazon charge for say 20 active contributors and a drive-by load equivalent to what TiddlyWiki.com gets now?

One would need to break that down to the level of individual Lambda executions and data accesses in order to do a robust estimate, but it wouldn’t be very much.

It’s important to understand is that AWS pricing is incredibly cheap, and getting cheaper all the time. For any given load it’s pretty much always cheaper than a dedicated server would be. What requires a different way of thinking is that in the old world of servers one provisioned a service by choosing the server one could afford. The service would then scale up to the capacity of that server, and when saturated it would fail in some way. The advantage of that architecture is that you have a cap on the monthly costs because the cost of the server is fixed.

In serverless environments like AWS you don’t have that cap. If demand grows, the infrastructure just keeps scaling. It’s incredibly useful; I had a task that was taking 20 minutes to perform as a sequence of four or five Lambdas, and I was able to reduce the execution time to 20 seconds just by splitting the work into 200 parallel lambdas. The ultimate promise of running TiddlyWiki in the cloud is that we will be able to use it for the kind of “big data” projects that overwhelm TiddlyWiki running on a single machine.

Anyhow, we do have one important capability to limit runaway costs which is that Amazon includes a content delivery network that caches static content at the edge of the network. That avoids the crippling costs associated with, say, being featured on a high traffic website like HackerNews or SlashDot.

I hope this amazon solution could be open, because many of us may be prepared to host our own shared environments on Amazon ourselves, even at some cost.

Some of the new components I’ve built for Xememex are already open sourced, and I’ll continue to open source stuff as it makes sense.

Not withstanding that for community access solutions that have back-end costs please never underestimate community contributions from  Crowd funding (initial and ongoing) Patrion to optional donations and tip jars to fund such services. The addition of a target that shows % funding raised can also be helpful.

I’m enthusiastic about using crowd funding to kickstart a business or social enterprise, but I know from friends who have done it successfully that it requires a lot of time and attention to get it right. Patreon is a bit more interesting because it focusses on managing ongoing revenue, and seems ideal for covering running costs of some modest community infrastructure.

I have not explored community funding along those lines because I would still need to be doing something else commercial to earn an income. So, my current approach is a commercial initiative: trying to build a sustainable business by offering other businesses and individuals a professionally managed cloud TiddlyWiki service.

Non coercive opportunities to fund community projects is not commercialisation, it is simply permitting the community to empower itself.

Absolutely. I should have said that one of the simplest models I can see for funding community infrastructure would be to simply ask people signing up to donate as much as they can afford of a suggested donation. If we find that we’re coming up short then we can have a funding drive and try to drum up more donations. As you note, services like Patreon have made it easy to manage that sort of thing. I’d be pretty confident that we could cover the costs in that way.

But, I’m pretty bad with money, and the prospect of managing cash for the community rather terrifies me.

Perhaps larger larger than plugin solutions such as tiddlyDesktop, TiddlyAmazon should have a one of or reoccurring contribution option, regular contributors could then post an I Support TiddlyWiki (financially) certificate on their site, which also promotes TiddlyWiki and further donations.

If Federatial were doing well enough out of offering Xememex as a commercial TiddlyWiki cloud hosting service then it would be entirely appropriate that Federatial should donate the community hosting services.

If surpluses occur you can return to the community with awards and commissions for key deliverables.

We have talked about this in the past, and it’s an attractive idea, but it turns out that few open source projects have made this work well for them. More common is to have commercial activity layered on top of an open source ecosystem that is in turn donated by the major players in that commercial activity.

If Xememex is commercially successful then of course Federatial can fund further development of TiddlyWiki by paying developers from the community, and that’s something I’d love to do.

Anyhow, my interest in all of this is really driven by the new capabilities that TiddlyWiki can gain when you put it in the cloud.:

* first and foremost being ease of use; TiddlyWiki in the cloud can be as easy to use as any online service

* adding a tiddler by sending an email to a special email address

* real time notifications via SMS/email etc

* integration of other online services: image recognition, OCR, speech transcription, automatic translation services

* scability to cope with millions of tiddlers

I love the prospect of having all those facilities, and still being able to download a wiki to work on it offline, or to perform destructive experiments on it without disturbing the original.

Best wishes

Jeremy.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywiki/efa622c9-d174-4dbf-822d-2f252aeec819%40googlegroups.com.

[Mark S.]

Hi Jeremy,

Sounds very exciting. It seems I have a bunch of learning curves to ascend.

The thing about cloud-based services, is there is just no way for you to know what's going on behind the scenes. Evernote does most everything I want, has limitless capacity and is reasonably priced. Of course it can't slice and dice like TW, but it can suck entire articles including images and formatting all at once. BUT ... I'm reluctant to use it for personal data. Especially since the shell-shock exploit. In theory, every cloud-based service should be shutting down their machines and applying a firmware patch that will actually reduce the performance of their machines. But are they?  Without the patch, one rogue client might be able to capture the data of 1000s of other clients.

What would make me more comfortable with cloud-based services if client-side encryption were available. I know that nixes some of the big data possibilities (but not all, if meta data is available) but it would make people feel more comfortable. Also, if the corporations you work with have HIPAA-like requirements, internal encryption would be pretty much mandatory.

Thanks!
-- Mark

[Jeremy Ruston]

Hi Mark

Sounds very exciting. It seems I have a bunch of learning curves to ascend.

From the perspective of a user, Xememex behaves almost exactly like the stock Node.js configuration of TiddlyWiki.

The thing about cloud-based services, is there is just no way for you to know what's going on behind the scenes. Evernote does most everything I want, has limitless capacity and is reasonably priced. Of course it can't slice and dice like TW, but it can suck entire articles including images and formatting all at once. BUT ... I'm reluctant to use it for personal data. Especially since the shell-shock exploit. In theory, every cloud-based service should be shutting down their machines and applying a firmware patch that will actually reduce the performance of their machines. But are they?  Without the patch, one rogue client might be able to capture the data of 1000s of other clients.

Cloud-based services aren’t suitable for everybody all of the time. The trade-off is that one gains scalability, availability, and access to a bunch of useful “black box” functionality. Personally, I use a mix of cloud services and things running on my own machines.

AWS have patched Shell Shock and the flaws that were reported earlier this year. But it would be prudent to assume that similar issues will be found in the future.

But of course, part of the point of TiddlyWiki is that one can use it in a rigorously private manner, and that capability is not going away. The possibility of using the same app across such a wide spectrum of contexts is pretty unique.

What would make me more comfortable with cloud-based services if client-side encryption were available. I know that nixes some of the big data possibilities (but not all, if meta data is available) but it would make people feel more comfortable. Also, if the corporations you work with have HIPAA-like requirements, internal encryption would be pretty much mandatory.

A subset of AWS services are HIPAA-compliant; including supporting encryption for data at rest.

There’s no obstacle with using client side encryption with Xememex or any other TW serverside; it just needs some work on the client to make things work.

Best wishes

Jeremy.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywiki/aaf36897-a263-46ab-9cda-2b94715f2c1b%40googlegroups.com.

[@TiddlyTweeter]

Ciao Jeremy


Jeremy Ruston wrote:

... all of this is really driven by the new capabilities that TiddlyWiki can gain when you put it in the cloud.:

* first and foremost being ease of use; TiddlyWiki in the cloud can be as easy to use as any online service

* adding a tiddler by sending an email to a special email address

* real time notifications via SMS/email etc

* integration of other online services: image recognition, OCR, speech transcription, automatic translation services

Yes. I can see it.
 

* scability to cope with millions of tiddlers

 IMO scalability & PERFORMANCE are becoming issues. In my own case I been playing around to see if I can use TW for some larger scale projects. In terms of what TW can DO its absolutely ideal. In terms of PERFORMANCE, optimising it seems over complicated, and perhaps there is just a top limit what you can expect in a local browser.

Cloud-based services aren’t suitable for everybody all of the time. The trade-off is that one gains scalability, availability, and access to a bunch of useful “black box” functionality. Personally, I use a mix of cloud services and things running on my own machines.

 

But of course, part of the point of TiddlyWiki is that one can use it in a rigorously private manner, and that capability is not going away....

 

The possibility of using the same app across such a wide spectrum of contexts is pretty unique.

Yes. AND having ONE solution that works universally IMO is absolutely essential for wider uptake

17 part options before breakfast covering every platform in rich ways IS a real testament to TW's brilliance.

But I simply do NOT believe that is a selling point.

A selling point is having ONE.

If Cloud can deliver that so much the better for wider uptake.

Best wishes
Josiah

[Mark S.]

How does this scalability work? If TW's gui is still browser based, it's not going to be able to access millions of tiddlers. I'm guessing the server side will just pass a limited selection of tiddlers on demand?

Thanks!
Mark

On Friday, March 9, 2018 at 3:47:15 AM UTC-8, Jeremy Ruston wrote:

[Jed Carty]

About 'one way' to use tiddlywiki being desirable,

One method of doing something is never going to work for everybody. Many of the largest problems with technology come from people in positions of authority insisting on that approach. Privacy on social media is a problem because people expect there to be one single solution and give that all the power. A cloud based solution may be ideal for you but it would be unusable for me. I am often in a position where I don't have any access to the internet. Having one solution is a great way to have one way that works for people it works for and excludes everyone else. You don't hear complaints about facebook on facebook because the people who it is made for use it for everything and never hear the people who have trouble with it because the 'one universal' solution isn't universal. If we do the same thing with tiddlywiki than the people who can use it may have a slightly better experience, but it would just exclude everyone who can't use that 'one way' instead of letting people decide on how they want to use it.

[@TiddlyTweeter]

Ciao Jed

Great points, all of which I, basically, agree with.

But I also want to push back and point out it overlooks something equally important. I think its good to have this discussion because the kind of point I'm trying to make often is getting lost.

I am not saying the wonderful diversity of TW should go or be hidden. But shoving it in your face if you are a simple user just wanting to just learn what TW can do can be overwhelming. A serious put-off.

IF there were one universal starting point to try, maybe through Cloud, since that works on most everything, it would be a real plus IMO to getting TW better known. That is: one start point for newbies and then diversity. Not diversity first. Its a complication too far. 

I am absolutely convinced that take-up of Tiddly-Wiki is way below what it should be. And I think the mess of getting it running, and the sheer number of options, is one major part of that.

Best wishes
Josiah

[TonyM]

Supporting Josiahs Post

"Yes. AND having ONE solution that works universally IMO is absolutely essential for wider uptake"

I would restate s

Yes. AND having ONE RELIABLE solution that works universally IMO is absolutely essential for wider uptake.

This in no way takes away from anyother solution. As Jeremy intimated such Cloud Wikis could be saved as single file wikis.

The problems?, I have considered a number of use cases to provide accessible and rapid access tools via tiddlywiki, I have looked at every save solution I can, even considered ways to co-opt some of these towards my desired outcomes and every solution falls down in some way. The key reasons are multi-user and saving/hosting.

Global access to Tiddlywikis, optionally secured, with online update (multiuser even if serial), in browser saves, and/or shared edits, easy to own or fork (download), easy to accept comments (otherwise Read Only), low cost hosting.

.....

All this is there in some way or other but not available as solutions, as there are too many exceptions.

I am building a features table tool in TiddlyWiki right now to help me understand the TiddlyWiki save, access and Hosting ecosystems and detect when I may be able to implement real, public and commercial solutions on top of TiddlyWiki.

Regards

Tony

[TonyM]

Jeremy,

Adding a little nuance to your line

one of the simplest models I can see for funding community infrastructure would be to simply ask people signing up to donate as much as they can afford of a suggested donation

Many people signing up do not yet understand the value they will receive, they have to speculate, and that typically will keep such donations low. Some way to detect higher usage and request a donation when you know they understand the value to them, should be built in to any such donation model. I believe this will increase donation size and regularity.

Regards

Tony

[Handoko Suwono]

Hope this is correlated.

"Speaker: Owais Zahid In this session, we will discuss the concept of serverless architecture, which is also called FAAS (Functions as a service). We will take a closer look at what this often confusing term means and how we can take advantage to create new generation solutions. AWS Lambda being the most popular implementation (yet), we will look at a sample implementation, challenges and other concerns."

https://youtu.be/7L99woyLfOc

Cheers,

handoko -

[TonyM]

See my recent post, in DIscussion https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/tiddlywiki/X6R3Nunh_KU

Reproduced here

I love to hear all this talk, I am looking for the same holly-grail. [Easy save and use of TiddlyWiki]

Here are some additions to the discussion.

TiddleyMultiUser single executable (Jeds is brilliant, and with the improvements mentioned hear is very cool) this is even before I have exploited the MultiUser features)

   As jed points out you can have it running in more than one tab or browser safely, but another advantage is you can spawn multiple sessions against the one wiki, to have multiple views of the same wiki

  A lot more will follow

TiddlyServer latest version allows folder wiki creation in the browser

  All it needs for single file wikis is to have the upload file make copies not overwrite, and point to a nominated list of editions

A possible much neglected solution for Windows (other platform?) is renaming a single file wiki to .hta hypertext application

  I am also working on renaming a singlefile wiki to *.aspx to use on sharepoint (Tip save in WebPages library)

NoteSelf is also very powerful allowing hosted solutions with data saved in each users browser. 

  Wikis can subsequently be saved or have user updated plugins exported.

  On thought is to allow user updates to be emailed as a json file from the noteself wiki as a submission process, to be imported into a consolidated wiki.

These are exciting times, and my not fully articulated dreams are coming true as new possibilities multiply, no increase exponentially.

Next? Members of the community collaborating to provide services even income on top of the open platform.

Regards

Tony