Lingo Talk ... User v. Maker

Café
#1

Looking at TW (here in Discourse) from an anthropological point of view I got very interested in how we often use the term "user" when we actually mean "maker".

I do understand “user” is used to identify people with emerging TW skills grappling with stuff they need master. But, TBH, I think that language a tad confusing.

Certainly I think of myself as the "author / maker" and the "userS" are the people I’m making stuff for.

Long story made short: "Makers" need grapple with TW. "Users" are consumers who want (only) the finished, polished, wiki.

Any contrary thoughts? :smiley:

TT

#2

As not exactly a contrary thought, but more of a refinement of the “maker” appelation, I’ve used:

  • "readers"
    • basic consumers of content. General “read-only” usage, with occasional input via controls ($edit-text, $select, $checkbox, $radio widgets) embedded in “view mode” content
  • "authors"
    • creators of wikitext content, input via “edit mode” (aka, “the tiddler editor”) with occasional use of simple <<macro>>, {{transclusion}} and <$widget>...</$widget> syntax
  • "designers"
    • creators of wikitext content, input via “edit mode”, with possibly sophisticated use of <<macro arg arg arg>> or <$macroname arg=..., arg=... />, {{transclusion}}, {{tiddler||template}} or {{||template}}, and <$widget>...</$widget>, as well as filters (via $list widgets and {{{ [...] }}} filtered transclusions), creation of macros with \define macroname(param,param,...), stylesheets (tagged with $:/tags/Stylesheet) and creation of templates referenced as parameter values passed to macros, widgets or transclusions argument values
  • "developers"
    • Full use of all wikitext syntax, as well as creation of Javascript modules to define new macros, widgets, filters, cascades, etc., plus possible customization of TWCore shadows, etc.

-e

1 Like
#3

Ciao @EricShulman, brilliant reply! The differentials you give are really accurate I think!

I’d say I’m definitely aligned with that. I think it really fits well observed behaviour.

Though I do think there is a natural fence below what you call “readers” (what I call “users”) you slightly underestimate. Below that"fence" you need to understand things about TW specifically. Above the “fence” you should never need to.

This is my dumbing down of your more detailed response …

"readers / users" – ultimate consumers (no knowledge of TW needed?)
— fence of knowing TW ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
"authors" – primarily creators of content with some occasional use of special TW functions
"designers" – create content, often with advanced use & mods of TW functions
"developers" – create new TW functions

Anyway, thanks for the illuminating answer, TT

#4

Bit of fun for @EricShulman …

Screenshot 2022-05-01 114323
Screenshot 2022-05-01 1143232195×793 165 KB

#5

I have also used ‘enveloper’ to describe myself. I am not at the developer level, but by putting Stroll together, and a couple other things, I am doing more than the description for the designer level.

2 Likes
#6

Ha! I think that “Enveloper” description is rather neat.

@EricShulman’s categories I think very accurate but we lack concepts of “transitionals” – meaning makers of wikis who often, over time, transition between “author / designer / developer”.

I think that is testament to TW also being it’s own learning environment.

A comment, TT