Messages - kfitting [ switch to compact view ]

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 118next
1
Calibre? You've probably stumbled across this already though.

https://calibre-ebook.com

2
Tomos: that's the definition. In this context, I often start a note, then as i think more about the topic and revisit it I'll see different facets within what I've written. So I reorganize the information, splitting some into new notes that are more specific, but none of the original information is lost.

The point is that you don't have get the one thought per note right the first time.

3
Yep... just dive in.

One thought per note is one of those things that I strive for, but rarely achieve. When you create a note, you rarely know what specific thing you are writing about. That comes in time and as you re-analyze a topic you'll start to see where different facets come in. Also, the archive should reflect your mind: topics you care about will be detailed and have one thought per note. Topics you dont care about will be generic and more nebulous. PHD's have specific knowledge... why do we think we can achieve such specificity for every one of our notes?

My number one rule?

Refactor, refactor, refactor.

4
General Software Discussion / Re: I'm thinking of going primitive
« on: October 30, 2019, 04:57 AM »
superboyac, yes it is about digital hoarding... and yes dormouse, it is time-consuming and hard. For myself, I treat the zettel information as theory, something to strive for and capable of producing insights into my own process and information-saving ability. But I dont strive for 100% compliance, or anything close.

I have topic notes which can be just lists of links to internet articles, links to my other main type of page (sources). Source pages are so I can either: save the article, save the bits of the article I like, or pull the article apart because I'm trying to understand it. The topics allow me to collect different sources. Sometimes my topics have been refined and rewritten, sometimes they are basic.

My point is that the hard part of zettel is also the most rewarding. The topics that I spend the most time on... are the ones I go back to the most. The sources that I take the most time to understand are the ones that have impacted me the most. But I do allow for different kinds of processing.

Superboyac: regarding why I didnt choose connectedtext. I almost did. Then I found the zettelkasten.de site and went on a text-only binge for a year and a half or so. This was great because I saved money. When I found dokuwiki, it added just the right amount of frills, cheap, and I could access it from anywhere. My biggest problems with connectedtext right now are the cost and the fact that it is not maintained. Also, I feel like starting minimal allows you build your process without all the frills. Add the frills as you find the use for them, not just because they are there.

Once again, use the zettel idea to help you understand what you're looking to do. Just like GTD... if you try to follow it religiously... you're following it religiously. But it has some incredibly insightful ways of thinking about things. And again... feel free to mix and match. I copy entire articles... I summarize them... just depends on how much time I have and how much I want to understand the article.

5
General Software Discussion / Re: I'm thinking of going primitive
« on: October 27, 2019, 12:27 PM »
Interesting discussion... I've responded about zettelkasten in IanB's discussion on OneNote, but here are a couple of thoughts from loosely following this thread:

Having loosely followed the zettelkasten idea for a few years, I believe you're correct in noting that's a little more process oriented than tool-oriented.

Back a few posts there was some discussion about ideas vs facts. Don't know if you've read the post on the Collector's Fallacy: https://zettelkasten.de/posts/collectors-fallacy/  I find this very true and something I fight against continually. It is so important to collect why the fact was interesting.... and try to relate it to other things. A jumble of other people's text bits is meaningless to me. A file system of my own thoughts continues to show it's power, again and again.

I've "started" a zettel several times now, with tree-based information managers, with markdown textfiles, and now with Dokuwiki. My biggest piece of advice: just start capturing information, attempting to always write why you found the information important. Eventually, YOUR OWN system will come into being and things will flow more smoothly.

Random thoughts, I know, but hopefully something will prove stimulating!



Aside: the tagging discussion (and this entire discussion in general) reminds me of a debate about tags vs links. Here is a critique of tags:

"Tags are vague. They’re a very primitive way of spelling out how things relate to each other. A tag on a news article says “this article has something to do with this concept or thing”. But what exactly? A tag doesn’t tell you whether an article is a critique of a person, an interview with a person or whether it just mentions that person in passing. A tag doesn’t even tell you if the reference to Samuel Adams is about the person or about the kind of beer (which is why we so desperately need vocabularies). A tag can’t tell the difference between an event that merely took place at the local café and an event that the aforementioned pub actually organized." http://debrouwere.org/2010/04/07/tags-dont-cut-it/

Instead, use meaningful relationships (links with explanations). Some like to call it "tight" vs "loose" linking (http://takingnotenow.blogspot.com/2011/08/loose-links-versus-tight-links.html). With a zettel, you're trying to link things tightly, not just throw things into your garage randomly.

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 118next
Go to full version