But I can't think of a way to get convenient, reliable transclude atomicity in a set of every changing plaintext files without a paying a price re (2). Seems like something has to give. Bet: transclusion will prove so useful that Markdown syntax will be extended for it. Hopefully in a standardized way. NetCommonMark (Net as in networked notes) on the horizon? Once standardized other note apps would have similar transclude views so there would be less of an lock-in effect to the Obsidian editor.
I can't think of one either. IF you allow arbitrary programs to access *and* edit the data, then all bets are off, period. Unless, of course, those programs all support the same standards. And then it's questionable what value using different programs would have.
Atomicity and transclusion is completely compatible with file-based systems though, as far as I can see. It may have a performance overhead, but there is nothing stopping a tool like Obsidian from having a "working database" or sidecar XML files or whatever it needs to support those raw text files to have extra features like block references and transclusions, etc. There is a repeated distinction made here between "database" and "file based" in relation to things like references, network views, and other things, and I just don't see them being that related. Having everything in a DB may make it easier or faster to do certain things like transclusion (since in theory all text is dynamically generated from the DB in all cases). But as far as I can see a reasonable version of similar functionality can be created using offline, text-based systems with augmentation. If I'm wrong someone please explain it to me.
- Oshyan








