Main Area and Open Discussion > General Software Discussion
I'm thinking of going primitive, with discursion into zettelkasten
Target:
no problem
FWIW I generally look at the active topics list to see what's new, and that's what I see....
Dormouse:
I do see that's an issue.
I look at the thread titles on the Discussion page (specifically usually only General Software Discussion), and then I notice post titles when I'm there. Even doing this post there's the topic but a separate Subject title for the post - which is what I edit because it always has the Topic Title as default. I don't think the Forum should even show Post Titles as Topic Titles since it is clearly designed to separate them.
As I said I'd like to keep editing post tiles sometimes to indicate the subject. I can see many people knowing they don't have any interest in x or y even though they like following z in the thread. Possibly a few variants - "going primitive ... post title" or "going primitive zettelkasten ... post title" & etc if ever needed. Hopefully that will leave everyone knowing where they are.
When I post on a topic that I don't think is part of this thread's process, I do post it separately.
wraith808:
Though I use VS Code (and Sublime Text, though vanishingly as VS Code has gotten better), the one I really like lately is Deepdwn. I'll have to try to give an overview of why when I get a chance.
Dormouse:
I'll have to try to give an overview of why when I get a chance.
-wraith808 (February 25, 2022, 07:20 AM)
--- End quote ---
Please.
I don't mind no WYSIWYG.
I don't need wikilinks in every program, though thinking the syntax is something else could be a problem.
I assume it's particularly good at something to make you like it.
Dormouse:
While I was working with IW, I noticed that I had copied a web page to IW and was immediately, automatically highlighting. ??? Why? IW was for writing not research. So I thought I needed to understand this. It's something I've had to make myself deliberately do usually.
Question 1 is about the highlighting. And comments.
IW's highlighting isn't great, and not especially easy to do. Also rather glaring. Pasting in to IW is easy though. It doesn't transfer to markdown, so exporting highlights means exporting to docx. So why then was I highlighting automatically here, when I haven't been in the apps I'd intended for the purpose? (That is Obsidian mainly.)
I tested options in the programs I am using (I'm sure there will be better out there), using a clip form the web. Looking at highlighting and comments. Word and Workflowy were great. OneNote was good. Obsidian was workable. But there was a general problem in exporting the highlighted text to other formats and programs; ultimately the highlighting was best done in the program where it would be used.
Comments on individual programs:
SpoilerObsidian
Ordinary highlighting using mouse is a pain. I'd need left hand for the == but that's not a convenient part of the keyboard to reach.
The colour highlighter works okay, but is a slowish and deliberate process. Workable but not smooth.
Comments can be added fairly easily
OneNote
Web clipping and highlighting is good. Comment boxes can be added. Pretty effective for this part of the operation.
Workflowy
Highlighting is easy and good. But I couldn't find a way of exporting it. Easy to paste into outline (note doesn't work well). Very good for comments.
Word
Highlighting and annotating etc is superb. But highlighting doesn't transfer to markdown if converted through Typora (not surprising since markdown doesn't have colour, and presumably Typora doesn't want to make assumptions about highlight syntax.
So good, if docx is final saved form.
(Otherwise best for document parts to be saved to markdown and then use the colour highlighter - but that's no so good for productivity.)
Atlantis
Just to check whether it is better than Word.
About the same. Slightly better highlighting, worse commenting.
Databases might be the key
I saw the potential power of using duplicate, split and merge when going through this note-taking part of the research process. Obsidian can do this (though I think it is clunky) and it feels as if it's something databases might be much better at.
I noticed IW doing a lot of the visual part of this in the Library (outline) rather than in the files.
Comment on individual programs:
SpoilerInspire Writer
Very quick and easy.
Obsidian
Duplicating a file is easy.
Splitting isn't. Really needs the Note Refactor plugin and using named h1-h3 headings. And having set up a folder for them to be put into (else they become lost). Maybe they could all be named split and automated with text expansion.
Merging files again works, but seems slightly clunky.
Workflowy
Splitting is quite easy because everything is in blocks. Merging too. And duplicating is instant. Manual rather than automatic though - which has advantages and disadvantages.
OneNote
No splitting etc. Can be achieved manually. But not the best workflow; wouldn't be efficient at all. Noticed that splitting was one of the Gem additions, so not an uncommon issue.
Word
Splitting apparently possible, but extremely cumbersome. If it were to be done, probably best done in IW first followed by highlighting etc in Word if colours are needed.
Overall conclusions
Images always had to be handled manually. No major difference between the programs.
I was surprised that IW was probably the best for overall efficiency and productivity. Duplicating, merging and splitting probably best in class. Highlighting works and exports to docx. Comments fine. By far the best export options overall.
Obsidian will do all the jobs to a reasonable standard, but is much slower and less inviting to use.
Word and Workflowy are good in their ways. Workflowy good across the board, but export options are very limited. Word less good at document management than I had anticipated.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version