*>Trilium's weaknesses:>There is no minibuffer and no way to execute commands by name. *
True, but not fundamentally blocked. In the Awesome Trilium <https://github.com/Nriver/awesome-trilium/> list is a js plugin for adding a command-palette. I imagine it's modelled after vs-code's Ctrl-Shift-P type-name-looking-for. *>There are no menus! Instead, small icons must suffice* yeah, I'm not so fond of there being no menu at all. Mitigating that a bit is the F1 popup quick reference for the most used keyboard shortcuts. It is excellent. *Trilium can not create external files. Unless I am mistaken, one can only export nodes.* Yes, a big difference and a lack from my perspective. *Fundamental differences* (observed so far)*:* Leo is plain text first, and achieves rich text and media by rendering. Trilium is rich text and media first, with the primary entry mechanism through the 3rd party CKEditor which saves as html. This is the foundational split behind the whole VR and multiple panes *(pains? heheh)* vs single pane thinking and attendant mitigation machinery. Trilium doesn't have to think about rendering hardly at all, since it's the embedded browser that does that. Leo uses the file system for storage and Trilium uses sqlite. This gives Leo its external files extended abilities very nearly for free. For Trilium to adopt such features would be an exercise of some effort. Otoh, being able to run sql queries across all nodes can't be anything but powerful. (In Trilium access the SQL Console via Alt-0 or the flower logo at top left; yeah, speaks to lack of menu). It's this db backend which enables syncing one's entire KB across all devices in a pretty much set-and-forget manner. It's almost as good as Fossil SCM in this regard. This is very, very attractive. Another Trilium limit: there's only a single knowledge database. ALL your Trilium work is one place. There is discussion on a future with multiple db but nothing substantive that I've seen. I'm new to the space and might be missing the action though.) -matt On Fri, Apr 26, 2024 at 12:50 PM Edward K. Ream <[email protected]> wrote: > On Fri, Apr 26, 2024 at 2:38 PM Thomas Passin wrote: > > The Easter Egg is the only way to expand the VR pane. An optional floating >> VR window would solve that problem. >> >> >> Here you go: >> >> ns = c.free_layout.get_top_splitter() >> ns.open_window('_leo_viewrendered3') >> > > Wow. Thanks for this. > > And thanks for all the comments. They have all been helpful. > > Let me summarize the discussion so far: > > - I'm convinced. Replacing the body pane is a *preference* *worth > considering*. > > - That preference should also allow opening the VR pane as a separate > window. > > - A modular architecture for the VR pane (including VR3) is a separate > issue. > > I'm interested in both issues, but neither is an urgent priority. > > Let's continue this fruitful discussion! > > Edward > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "leo-editor" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected]. > To view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/leo-editor/CAMF8tS2UMXdzzfz2jvCRzQj8x6NRRF4yoK_OjEedFfkJ5dG0UA%40mail.gmail.com > <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/leo-editor/CAMF8tS2UMXdzzfz2jvCRzQj8x6NRRF4yoK_OjEedFfkJ5dG0UA%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> > . > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "leo-editor" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/leo-editor/CANGB9XRmAw-oUBGXBUHqw5EMQGbKw4GvbGdHu8mNx5bba0OfRg%40mail.gmail.com.
