search

TiddlyWiki / TiddlyWiki5

A self-contained JavaScript wiki for the browser, Node.js, AWS Lambda etc.
https://tiddlywiki.com/
Other
7.99k stars 1.18k forks source link

Let us release standard and empty editions #4363

Open AnthonyMuscio opened 4 years ago

AnthonyMuscio commented 4 years ago

Folks,

It has being raised several times but I believe we should publish two editions of tiddlywiki the empty as is currently done and a standard (and default) distribution more suited to new and regular users.

This would help stop the "in Core wars", allow us to add (limited) user friendly features to the standard distribution like a working contents tab, yet allow empty to remain true to name. We could flag any standard distribution additions so they can be removed to create an empty.html, provide a save as empty option in the standard distribution and more.

Rather than mess with current terminology perhaps empty becomes standard and a new minimal edition is produced thus prior discussions referring to empty remain somewhat relevant.

What do you think?

The following is a reproduction of my comment in Proposal: add Print-River to core

4352 which relates to additional print handling.

Can I suggest if this is to goes into core it should have the added advantage of allowing further adjustment of the UI to map it to the print output. Ie WISYWIG basically we could introduce one or more print like themes that can be used for display and/or at print preview. Why develop features and not give them also to the UI ?

Some tiddlywikis could thus be published as if they were "White papers" or interactive documents in a selected print like theme, with a print button.

Until such tiddlywiki I too feel it should remain a plugin even if that plugin is considered so useful it is provided in the empty (however not everyone wants a print facility and instead would like a minimal edition).

Once again this reinforces my suggestion that we should publish a minimal empty.html and a standard.html with key functional plugins installed. Thus plugin or themes for print would be in standard not empty.

Originally posted by @AnthonyMuscio in https://github.com/Jermolene/TiddlyWiki5/issues/4352#issuecomment-548184086

sukima commented 4 years ago

I am curious what the new user feedback is. Are there many new users blocked when using the empty version?

I can only speak for myself an experienced TW user but the empty seems just fine for my needs. When I want more plugins I just add the plugins. On a related note I would love it if my current TW could export an empty and save me from having to use the internet and TiddlyWiki.com to make a new one. Or maybe a way to clone an existing TW with its bells and whistles but no data.

In any case could we get some user statistics on the current delivery (empty) and how users would get a value add with something else?

AnthonyMuscio commented 4 years ago

Sukims, also @Jermolene and @pmario

Thanks for you input. My point is people with sufficient knowledge know what they want to do with empty.html new users do not know what they want to add until they learn what is not available. This is an unfriendly way to get started.

If new users are blocked using empty.html we only get a negative response, they go away, so I am not sure we can know what you ask.

Many including myself, some years ago, thus spent a lot of time on tiddlywiki.com, even downloaded the whole tiddlywiki.com because it had contents, tiddlers with which I could experiment and learn. We do not even provide a link to do this.

The idea with a standard.html is to include some really low level basic additions that support an everyday tiddlywiki, learning how to use it and finding content already added.

One advantage as I said is we then have another edition/tier to which to publish whilst maintaining perhaps even reducing empty.html even further for use when building ones own. An example is most people do not start learning a word processor with an empty document, they do so with a sample document containing all the standard elements. Off the top of my head I would

Other contenders are

Perhaps even provide it with a list of widgets and standard macros that link to tiddlywiki.com so if you type radio you see a radio widget exists, or now and tag macros are listed. I will share an example soon.

Regards Tony

AnthonyMuscio commented 4 years ago

List of references into tiddlywiki.com that could be included in a standard release so a search results in a link to the documentation. The result needs to be captured such that it maintains the full url.

<$list filter="[tag[Widgets]] [tag[Macros]] [[tag[Messages]] [tag[Filter Operators]] [tags[]has[title]] -[[$:/deprecated]] +[sort[]]">
  <$link to=<<currentTiddler>> ><$text text=<<currentTiddler>>/></$link>
  <br>
</$list>