Just a thought on the issue with caching of the betza.js and betzaNew.js scripts. Perhaps using a version number might be useful either directly in the name e.g. betzaNew-1.2.0.js, or tagged on as a parameter betzaNew.js?nocache=true&ver=1.2.0. Obviously they both have their issues. Including the version in the name means that all versions of the script need to exist so people keep access to their diagrams, and including the version number as a parameter doesn't guarantee that the version of the script will match the version in the parameter. Personally I've used both, but the version number as a parameter is a useful cache busting mechanism, and helps users know what version is current, and that they may need to update their version number to get the latest features, without effecting other users. It's easier to manage as well. Just include the latest version number on the page, and in the generated examples so users know something has changed.
Just a thought on the issue with caching of the betza.js and betzaNew.js scripts. Perhaps using a version number might be useful either directly in the name e.g. betzaNew-1.2.0.js, or tagged on as a parameter betzaNew.js?nocache=true&ver=1.2.0. Obviously they both have their issues. Including the version in the name means that all versions of the script need to exist so people keep access to their diagrams, and including the version number as a parameter doesn't guarantee that the version of the script will match the version in the parameter. Personally I've used both, but the version number as a parameter is a useful cache busting mechanism, and helps users know what version is current, and that they may need to update their version number to get the latest features, without effecting other users. It's easier to manage as well. Just include the latest version number on the page, and in the generated examples so users know something has changed.