[tw5] Farm of single-file TiddlyWiki instances ?

Google Group (Read Only)
#1

A short video to introduce a first step in a little TiddlyWiki research project: Farm of single-file TiddlyWiki instances for team collaboration/authoring. This first step involves getting two TiddlyWiki instances to “communicate” with each other via local storage. Why? It is part of this architecture idea I have in my head, which is too much of an intertwingled mess of things for me to explain just yet. This has (or will have) tie-in’s with these other threads of discussion:

Cheers !

3 Likes
#2

Is there a reason that the twederation plugin doesn’t work?

1 Like
#3

I didn’t know about it, and even if I did, I probably wouldn’t look at it until I’ve gone as far as I can go with my own exploring. (I prefer learn by doing than studying somebody else’s work.)

Besides, I look at that github page, and it isn’t clear to me at all what to do with that.

The wording of your question makes me feel like you are not happy, or taking offence, with what I’m doing. If so, sorry, eh? And apologies if I’m not interested in figuring out the work that you’ve done.

I loathe javascript, and don’t particularly enjoy trying to figure out javascript plugins that are complex or don’t have obvious/clear instructions on how to install. I tend to not include things in my wikis that I don’t understand.

#4

Likely it is no longer so known as a viable, interesting, useful, thing.

I love the work you done. Bob is stellar. Part of the issue, I think, is we quickly lose great work because there is no framework to record / renew great achievements persistently.

Just a comment
TT

1 Like
#5

Kudos on that. (Though I want to comment that Jed is one of the great TW thinker/programmers. He has not been so live recently, but basically the man has created great work in TW. He spearheaded the TW approach to “Federation”. In Bob he provides a superb way to maintain wiki.)

Side comment
TT

#6

Cool, but I’m getting a soupçon of desire to shut down the sharing of the stuff I’m doing. I get the feeling I’ve broken some kind of weird taboo, and there is a desire to use my OP as an opportunity to promote/advertise somebody else’s work (and now somebody else’s talents) when I didn’t address any of that in the OP. If you’re not interested at all in what I"m doing, why chime in?

It is all a little bit strange to me.

I’m just sharing something I find fun and interesting, the results of my own learning and research. What’s with all of the noise?

#7

@cj.v - thank you for sharing your stuff.
@Jed - thank you for your added information. It is totally relevant in the context and I was thinking the same thing.
@cj.v - focus back to you. This is, of course, a discussion forum. Another option is to publish stuff in a wiki. But I hope you write more about the OP here so you and others can contribute on the matter because it is a topic I’m very interested in.

<:-)

#8

Yeah, I can’t participate in a discussion thread that starts going outside of the original focus, the very thing being discussed.

You might as well start here a sub-thread related to what you had for breakfast this morning. Same thing. I can’t process something that has spilled outside of the very thing I was focused on. Cognitive overload and overstimulation because of too many things getting intermixed with something I was hoping to keep hyperfocused.

This is now your thread to generally discuss all things related to interwiki communication and multi-user wikis. I have to get out of this one. Too big. Too many instant intertwingled things in my head creating thread scope creep.

I’ll move to other existing/new threads to continue focused discussion somewhere else.

#9

I’m all for learning and doing things myself as well, so keep at it!

TT has a point, the more that is collected at TW com and Tools, the easier it is to become daunted by going through all the resources without some kind of guide.