Author Topic: I'm thinking of going primitive, with discursion into zettelkasten (Read 1,750,448 times)

Dormouse · « **Reply #50 on:** October 29, 2019, 02:17 AM »

I've finished the Ahrens book. Making notes on the way. I slightly expanded the system I already had in mind, so on to the internet next to see if there's anything more to add.

I don't think I'd recommend the book. Too much exhorting students to do things the way he thinks is best. Too strong recommending his preferred software, with no discussion at all of disadvantages or alternatives. And the zettelkasten bits scattered randomly throughout the book. Too much focus on academic use.

It would seem that my system may not be a pure zettelkasten - there was mention of text only; I can see that Luhmann would have been text only, but see no reason at all why the system should require it. Also seems to be a tension embedded in the system between following a very focused, selective reading and note making workflow and having cross fertilisation from different topics. I think my system is better than the one he described. Naturally.

superboyac · « **Reply #51 on:** October 29, 2019, 04:35 PM »

Quote from: kfitting on October 27, 2019, 05:27 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.

super interesting post, kfitting, thanks.

I understand now. This sounds like the problem of hoarding, only with digital/text things. I struggle with this also, and i see the value in being able to break away from it. This has made me once again interested in zettel, lol. I have just collected a bunch of notes, but why? do i use them? not most of them. what's the point? yes they come in handy occasionally, but most of it is a waste and I'd rather have actual growth in knowledge in myself than be comforted by all the notes i physically have. hmmm.....

superboyac · « **Reply #52 on:** October 29, 2019, 04:39 PM »

Quote from: superboyac on October 29, 2019, 04:35 PM

and now with Dokuwiki.

you ever considered ConnectedText?

superboyac · « **Reply #53 on:** October 29, 2019, 04:48 PM »

i am interested in NOT being a knowledge hoarder. I want to be a practical, productive individual.

I'm going to give ConnectedNotes a shot and see if it helps me organize my notetaking process.
Onenote will still remain in my system as a big dump of things i collect. But if I change my approach, i can see using onenote less.
I use MLO for tasks, so those aren't really notes.
I also use the Journal (davidrm) for writing purposes. If I have to write a story or screenplay or something organized like that, I will do it in the journal as it's less about collecting notes, and more about making progress each day.

All very interesting. The main point with me is I really dont want to be a hoarder, I am disturbed by the idea.

Dormouse · « **Reply #54 on:** October 29, 2019, 07:12 PM »

Quote from: superboyac on October 29, 2019, 04:35 PM

This sounds like the problem of hoarding, only with digital/text things. I struggle with this also, and i see the value in being able to break away from it.

Quote from: superboyac on October 29, 2019, 04:48 PM

i am interested in NOT being a knowledge hoarder. I want to be a practical, productive individual.

Quote from: superboyac on October 29, 2019, 04:35 PM

I'd rather have actual growth in knowledge in myself than be comforted by all the notes i physically have. hmmm.....

I think that some of the key zettel principles for this are:-

That you have a single integrated workflow, that you become expert in using
That notes have to sustain repeated iterative processing, potentially with new notes for new thoughts. If information/thoughts/notes aren't worth this degree of processing, then they don't deserve to be in the zettel.
The processing should produce growth in your understanding, but will also duplicate that understanding in the zettel
Which means that you can go away from that part of the zettel for ten years and still pick up from where you left off, long after you will have forgotten most of the detail of what you had learned

The problem I see in what you are suggesting is that you will be following multiple workflows.
I can't see why you couldn't use ConnectedText, OneNote or The Journal for all your writing and a zettel

IainB · « **Reply #55 on:** October 29, 2019, 10:09 PM »

Some comments here (above) seem to be redolent of comments along the same lines at two excellent reference links:

Outliner Software forum: where there's a long history of useful discussion on all Notetaking and PIM-related methods, workflows, software/apps. Still in search of the Holy Grail of PIMs though.
Taking Note blog: has very useful thoughts on Notetaking methods/philosophies in general and Notetaking software/apps. Strongly favours the Connected Text PIM, but I gather CT may no longer be being developed/maintained (its future seems uncertain/obscure). Seem to have been no posts since December 2018, though comments from readers have been added since then.

superboyac · « **Reply #56 on:** October 29, 2019, 10:25 PM »

Quote from: Dormouse on October 29, 2019, 07:12 PM

Quote from: superboyac on October 29, 2019, 04:35 PM
This sounds like the problem of hoarding, only with digital/text things. I struggle with this also, and i see the value in being able to break away from it.
Quote from: superboyac on October 29, 2019, 04:48 PM
i am interested in NOT being a knowledge hoarder. I want to be a practical, productive individual.
Quote from: superboyac on October 29, 2019, 04:35 PM
I'd rather have actual growth in knowledge in myself than be comforted by all the notes i physically have. hmmm.....
I think that some of the key zettel principles for this are:-
That you have a single integrated workflow, that you become expert in using
That notes have to sustain repeated iterative processing, potentially with new notes for new thoughts. If information/thoughts/notes aren't worth this degree of processing, then they don't deserve to be in the zettel.
The processing should produce growth in your understanding, but will also duplicate that understanding in the zettel
Which means that you can go away from that part of the zettel for ten years and still pick up from where you left off, long after you will have forgotten most of the detail of what you had learned

The problem I see in what you are suggesting is that you will be following multiple workflows.
I can't see why you couldn't use ConnectedText, OneNote or The Journal for all your writing and a zettel

thanks for this, this is very thought provoking for me, and helpful.
this is all very interesting to me, not so much from the which-tool? standpoint, and more so about the benefits of the methodology.
after 20+ years of using notetaking software, one thing i am absolutely certain of is that i am not doing it in a good way as far as productivity. and what the zettel talks about, like the progression of an idea, and being able to continue where you left off, etc...this is all very much what i want.

now, onenote has the bracket feature, and the other features necessary to do it, but overall, i dont think it is very conducive to it. more of a GUI thing than anything else.

Connectedtext...not happy to hear about development ending. But it seems more purpose built for this sort of thing.

Journal, it may do it, but I would not use the journal for notetaking. i like it for writing big projects like screenplays or books.

INFOQUBE! hey Pierre. I just read that you implemented brackets in yoru software. I should give this another try as well. the thing with IQ is that it is VERY structured. But maybe that is perfect for this sort of thing. I'd imagine most software would not have the linking capabilities IQ has.

superboyac · « **Reply #57 on:** October 29, 2019, 10:40 PM »

ok...i think i know a critical feature that would help me choose a software.

versioning...
which software provides the best versioning history?
if this method requires me revisiting notes, and rewriting parts, I am going to want to know what i am redoing and rewriting, so good versioning and easy to use/see would be important to me. I think connectedtext has it, but maybe the others do not.

superboyac · « **Reply #58 on:** October 29, 2019, 10:50 PM »

nice article that concludes Infoqube is the best. Nice Pierre, well deserved!
https://pauljmiller.wordpress.com/tag/connectedtext/

Quote

Conclusions
As far as a comfortable writing environment goes InfoQube gets my vote.

Dormouse · « **Reply #59 on:** October 29, 2019, 10:55 PM »

Quote from: superboyac on October 29, 2019, 10:40 PM

if this method requires me revisiting notes, and rewriting parts

I don't think it requires rewriting notes. A revision would be the result of a new thought. A new thought requires a new note.
Additions to notes, yes, - especially in the way of new links.

Better than versioning really because you have a history of why you have changed your idea.

Of course, I might be wrong about this. But, for me, that's the logic derived from the principles.

Dormouse · « **Reply #60 on:** October 29, 2019, 11:34 PM »

Quote from: superboyac on October 29, 2019, 10:50 PM

nice article that concludes Infoqube is the best. Nice Pierre, well deserved!
https://pauljmiller.wordpress.com/tag/connectedtext/

And this review is a year old, IQ has gone on apace and CT stayed exactly where it was.
I fully agree it should be supported and bought a licence ? days ago although I haven't tried it for years and don't really expect to in the near future.

Dormouse · « **Reply #61 on:** October 30, 2019, 12:00 AM »

Quote from: superboyac on October 29, 2019, 10:25 PM

Quote from: Dormouse on October 29, 2019, 07:12 PM
That you have a single integrated workflow, that you become expert in using
after 20+ years of using notetaking software, one thing i am absolutely certain of is that i am not doing it in a good way as far as productivity. and what the zettel talks about, like the progression of an idea, and being able to continue where you left off, etc...this is all very much what i want.

One of the problems with the zettel approach is that it is very demanding. My guess is that the majority of people who have been able to sustain one fail to reap the rewards because their implementation falls down somewhere. My other guess is that the majority of people who start one stop. Or stop and start, stop again, switch method and start again and on and on. I think the system is great for lightening cognitive load and facilitating the ability to concentrate on the actual work (almost irrespective of the rules you decide to follow). But only if you implement it all the time. That requires stability and discipline and great practiced familiarity with your workflow and method. And ideally an immunity to CRIMP.

I'm going down a simple document route because I know that, if I can follow that system now, I will be able to do it in ten and twenty years time. I accept many software alternatives may have advantages (though it is too easy for them to pull me down into CRIMP), but I'm not sure they will ever fade into the background leaving only the work to absorb my attention.

So far (ie barely started), I have found it easy because of the reduced load. But repetitive, and the notes and thoughts can't be left half done or half processed.

Dormouse · « **Reply #62 on:** October 30, 2019, 12:09 AM »

I hadn't realised that the method of one card, one idea originated with the immortal Beatrice Webb (one of the founders of the London School of Economics, the Fabian Society, and the New Statesman amongst many other things).

Quote

Monday, April 19, 2010
One Fact, One Card ...
Beatrice Webb wrote in the Appendix of My Apprenticeship of 1926 that "The method of writing one fact on one card enables the scientific worker to break up his subject-matter, so as to isolate and examine at his leisure its various component parts, and to recombine them in new and experimental groupings in order to discover which sequences of events have a causal significance."

She claimed: "To put it paradoxically, by exercising your reason on the separate facts displayed, in an appropriate way, on hundreds, perhaps thousands, of separate pieces of paper, you may discover which of a series of hypotheses best explains the processes underlying the rise, growth, change or decay of a given social institution, or the character of the actions and reactions of different elements of a given social environment."

This advice has lost none of its saliency, even though computer programs allow you to create "cards" or notes of great length. To restrict yourself to one detail, fact, item, idea, or thought is not crippling but enabling. There is great virtue in breaking things down into their constituent parts. Luhmann spoke in this regard of "reduction with a view of building complexity."
Posted by MK at 1:40 PM

from the TakingNoteNow blog
Thank you , Manfred Kuehn

Dormouse · « **Reply #63 on:** October 30, 2019, 12:15 AM »

Quote from: superboyac on October 29, 2019, 10:25 PM

onenote has the features necessary to do it, but overall, i dont think it is very conducive to it. more of a GUI thing than anything else.

Journal, it may do it, but I would not use the journal for notetaking. i like it for writing big projects like screenplays or books.

I think these observations are critical. They are all about the process and workflow as experienced by you. If they don't fit you, or irritate, then there's no chance you will be able to sustain their use in the way a successful zettel demands. Unless you have superhuman discipline, of course.

Shades · « **Reply #64 on:** October 30, 2019, 01:35 AM »

Quote from: superboyac on October 29, 2019, 10:40 PM

ok...i think i know a critical feature that would help me choose a software.

versioning...
which software provides the best versioning history?
if this method requires me revisiting notes, and rewriting parts, I am going to want to know what i am redoing and rewriting, so good versioning and easy to use/see would be important to me. I think connectedtext has it, but maybe the others do not.

Using versioning software requires discipline. And there are many too choose from. Git is the most popular tool among coders. But if you aren't a coder, all the features it has is overkill to the n-th degree. Besides that, you have several free online places that allow you to store public repositories (everyone has access to your repository), while private repositories means you need to fork over cash on a monthly or yearly basis.

Does that not sound appealing? There is GitLab. Well, their Community Edition, to be more precise. This you could host yourself in the house where you live for nada. But again, it is intended to be used with Git and might be overwhelming to set up. Oh, and it doesn't run on Windows. And as Docker appears to be in financial trouble, building a dependence on their container software to make it more or less work in Windows might not be the best of ideas. So you'll need a (virtual) Linux or Mac computer.

And then you still need to get your head around client software to communicate with the versioning server.

Versioning requires a serious investment in time to get your head around the concepts and most likely a lot of time for setup and maintenance. And cash for another monthly subscription or hardware to run it yourself. If you are serious about creating and maintaining software, you should make such an investment. For other use-cases like zettelkasten, versioning might take up so much of your time you won't even get to spend time on those.

With the above in mind, I have a difficult time seeing how versioning would help you out.

Deozaan · « **Reply #65 on:** October 30, 2019, 03:48 AM »

Quote from: Shades on October 30, 2019, 01:35 AM

Using versioning software requires discipline. And there are many too choose from. Git is the most popular tool among coders. But if you aren't a coder, all the features it has is overkill to the n-th degree. Besides that, you have several free online places that allow you to store public repositories (everyone has access to your repository), while private repositories means you need to fork over cash on a monthly or yearly basis.

Does that not sound appealing? There is GitLab. Well, their Community Edition, to be more precise. This you could host yourself in the house where you live for nada. But again, it is intended to be used with Git and might be overwhelming to set up. Oh, and it doesn't run on Windows. And as Docker appears to be in financial trouble, building a dependence on their container software to make it more or less work in Windows might not be the best of ideas. So you'll need a (virtual) Linux or Mac computer.

If you're going to be using Git, I believe that both GitHub and Bitbucket offer unlimited free private repositories these days. But if you're concerned about 3rd parties having access to your repository, you could go with Keybase, which has encrypted private git repositories for free, and it works on all major OSes, including mobile devices. The encrypted part means even they don't have access to your repositories.

Personally, I prefer Mercurial (Hg), but it's hard to find any free services that support Hg these days. I recently installed RhodeCode Community Edition (on Linux) and it does the trick for my simple needs. But honestly you don't even need anything that complex. If you don't need to worry about common coding processes like issue tracking, merge requests, forking, branching, etc., then something really simple like TortoiseHg should be adequate for basic version control. TortoiseHg is probably the simplest way to go if you want to use Hg (only on Windows). It will automatically handle installing Mercurial and a useful GUI front-end and explorer integration.

Dormouse · « **Reply #66 on:** October 30, 2019, 09:39 AM »

Quote from: Dormouse on October 29, 2019, 07:12 PM

Quote from: superboyac on October 29, 2019, 04:35 PM
i am interested in NOT being a knowledge hoarder.
I think that some of the key zettel principles for this are:-
That you have a single integrated workflow, that you become expert in using
That notes have to sustain repeated iterative processing, potentially with new notes for new thoughts. If information/thoughts/notes aren't worth this degree of processing, then they don't deserve to be in the zettel.
The problem I see in what you are suggesting is that you will be following multiple workflows.

I've thought further. The system was designed for academic use and only academic use.
Most of the commentators are academics only looking at academic purposes ie writing books and papers in the chosen field.

I think that their nuances are all wrong. System efficiency (and your own expertise) is increased by using it for everything (ie not just academic stuff). But only stuff that warrants thought.

There's no problem with having a life outside the zettel. There's no problem with reading stuff that, at this point, does not warrant active thought. There isn't a problem with having a private hoard, unless you're a greedy dragon wanting to hoard everything: it's just a collection of bits, curated by yourself, that might warrant thought at some point in the future. As long as you have an efficient collection method and fast search, it is probably better than having to use libraries and the internet. So long as you are doing the reading anyway. The minute something warrants thought it goes in the zettel.

But ideally only one hoard, not lots of hoards in different rooms.
And no disruption to your main workflow or work time.

kfitting · « **Reply #67 on:** October 30, 2019, 09:57 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.

wraith808 · « **Reply #68 on:** October 30, 2019, 04:05 PM »

Quote from: Nod5 on October 28, 2019, 06:25 PM

Quote from: TaoPhoenix on October 26, 2019, 11:23 PM
- More fun things to do with file reader output : if you put a special character (not above the number key but like zz), after the "regular" part of the file name and before all your tag-y things, then you can import that directory output into Excel, and chop it up into sections and then your notes can reference the fragment of the file name.

The idea of using special characters to distinguish the tag section and individuate tags in filenames is used by the TagSpaces application, https://docs.tagspaces.org/tagging#tagging-based-on-filenames . I remember trying it very long ago but might go and have another look at it now, as it seems to be actively developed.

I stopped using tagspaces. Many times I have a blank screen; there's something in their electron application that fails at times- at least for me. I even reinstalled and the problem was there. I rebooted, tried again, and it worked for a bit, but stopped again after a short time. I lost a lot of the work I'd done organizing with it when I had to switch, so that was a bummer. Just something to watch out for.

Dormouse · « **Reply #69 on:** October 30, 2019, 05:44 PM »

Quote from: wraith808 on October 30, 2019, 04:05 PM

I lost a lot of the work I'd done organizing with it when I had to switch, so that was a bummer. Just something to watch out for.

If it saves tags in the filename, what got lost?

superboyac · « **Reply #70 on:** October 30, 2019, 07:56 PM »

Quote from: kfitting on October 30, 2019, 09:57 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.

very helpful again thanks.

So I am still going to try all this. In my searches for windows software for zettel, this is what i've come across.
infoqube is pretty good in that it naturally has IDs and db-like for the notes created. it doesn't feel quite "natural" for this though.
then there are the purpose-built zettel software, of which there are no windows commercial versions. other than connectedtext, that is, which everyone thinks is going to soon not be developed any longer.

there is the sublime text editor. someone made a plugin specifically for zettel for it. it's ok. difficult to setup and install. i couldn't get through the search plugin installation as i dont know how to compile binaries and stuff like that.

but then, i found this:
https://forum.zettelkasten.de/discussion/226/renes-sublimeless-zettelkasten
now this seems cool!!
this is similar to what the mac software "The Archive" which people consider a brilliant zettel software. so i'm trying this open source windows version and it's FANTASTIC! so i'll be trying this out for a while. it's beautiful looking, it is true zettel and files are all text files, and it's fast, and its free and open source, so we can modify it!

superboyac · « **Reply #71 on:** October 30, 2019, 10:43 PM »

Quote from: Dormouse on October 29, 2019, 10:55 PM

Quote from: superboyac on October 29, 2019, 10:40 PM
if this method requires me revisiting notes, and rewriting parts
I don't think it requires rewriting notes. A revision would be the result of a new thought. A new thought requires a new note.
Additions to notes, yes, - especially in the way of new links.

Better than versioning really because you have a history of why you have changed your idea.

Of course, I might be wrong about this. But, for me, that's the logic derived from the principles.

ok i am not really understanding completely then.
So Ive started practicing this...i am writing an outline for a screenplay.
so i created the note, a zettel, if you will.
now, i am going to work on the note and finish it. so now what? i start typing all over the note, however it makes sense.
i am done for now.

some time passes
now i am ready, to work on that outline a little more.
do i continue working in the note i created previously? or do i start a new note? shouldn't i keep working in the first note?

Dormouse · « **Reply #72 on:** October 30, 2019, 11:33 PM »

Quote from: superboyac on October 30, 2019, 10:43 PM

So Ive started practicing this...i am writing an outline for a screenplay.
so i created the note, a zettel, if you will.
now, i am going to work on the note and finish it. so now what? i start typing all over the note, however it makes sense.
i am done for now.

some time passes
now i am ready, to work on that outline a little more.
do i continue working in the note i created previously? or do i start a new note? shouldn't i keep working in the first note?

First, remember that the system is designed for academic research. Sources, notes on sources, thoughts about those sources, new thoughts.
You are doing creative writing. Maybe you have no research, no sources. That means that you have to make decisions about how to structure your zettel. Remember each note is limited to one thought.

I'm using folders purely as stages or components of the zettel. So I have one for sources. One for resources (stuff I have written myself that's a resource for the writing part - might be a setting). Another for the writing. And then the Notes/zettel itself. One might be about the purpose of a scene. Another might be about the style of dialogue and why. Each new thought has a new note. Ultimately there would be the writing of the scene - probably in segments. The sequence, of course, can be the other way round; depends how you work.

So you have your note. If it's an unfinished note, then you simply continue. If you're not happy with it, you should probably write a critique explaining why. And then a new note which is effectively the second draft.

These are just ideas as they come. I've not started anything creative in it yet myself. The important constraint is one thought per note (but up to you what constitutes a note). And not constantly rewriting in a note (because then you are losing all the thinking about why you want to change it, and it's the thinking the system is designed to capture).

Here's a quote from the Ahrens book about the writing stage of an academic paper:

Quote

Turn your notes into a rough draft . Don’t simply copy your notes into a manuscript . Translate them into something coherent and embed them into the context of your argument while you build your argument out of the notes at the same time . Detect holes in your argument , fill them or change your argument . 8 . Edit and proofread your manuscript .

For me, the writing itself would be outside the zettel but available for linking. Including the outline.
The zettel would contain notes with ideas, comments, criticisms.

sphere · « **Reply #73 on:** October 31, 2019, 12:17 AM »

Quote from: kfitting on October 30, 2019, 09:57 AM

but then, i found this:
https://forum.zettelkasten.de/discussion/226/renes-sublimeless-zettelkasten
now this seems cool!!
this is similar to what the mac software "The Archive" which people consider a brilliant zettel software. so i'm trying this open source windows version and it's FANTASTIC! so i'll be trying this out for a while. it's beautiful looking, it is true zettel and files are all text files, and it's fast, and its free and open source, so we can modify it!

I have not gone fully down the zettkasten rabbit hole, but I do find myself circling around to it often. I have seen a number of people compare this to https://www.zettlr.com/
As I understand it it uses a graph database, where each item is a container- so rather than emulating a "card" for each thought/note/idea, it is a container... which makes it more friendly for storing other types of media. It is opensource with Windows, Mac and Linux versions.

Similar programs I have been intending to look at are https://mindforger.sourceforge.io/ (I believe windows and Linux- though originally just Linux) and also https://github.com/zadam/trilium which is windows.

I personally really like it when there is a way to easily link to email. I can generate an email link, but would rather it was done automatically.

wraith808 · « **Reply #74 on:** October 31, 2019, 03:24 AM »

Quote from: Dormouse on October 30, 2019, 05:44 PM

Quote from: wraith808 on October 30, 2019, 04:05 PM
I lost a lot of the work I'd done organizing with it when I had to switch, so that was a bummer. Just something to watch out for.

If it saves tags in the filename, what got lost?

Well, if I had another client that would actually use that format, then I suppose nothing would have been. But moving to something else that doesn't do the same... Not vendor locked is not the same thing as usable in another platform. There's also the matter of the time spent color coding the types of files/folders.