This is exactly the solution to one of the final frictional-inertia usefulness issues remaining in Obsidian, which restricts its value to the information-presentation mindset of knowledge-working-tool design (a la unidirectional hyperlinks in the webpages of yore) instead of the more information-creation mindset of working with information to createnew knowledge.
Value to Create, not display.
Whatever the term: inline aliasing, annotation, defining, disambiguating, etc., the need is the same. An ability to further clarify meaning from message. While crafting (see, during creation) the message (and therefore its meaning) in realtime, not retrospectively. And certainly not at some future point, broken from flow, when picking out the color of the drapes while designing the webpage with which to present mere information, such is the pupal stage of knowledge’s growth.
In terms of biological development–explicitly–two data eggs exchanged their data → creating a new information larva → knowledge pupa → wisdom imago. Here wisdom is knowledge presented to the rest of existence for further digestion (and regurgitation).
Thread with much discussion and linkage regarding so many proposed solutions to essentially the same, simple problem.
Easy inline aliasing.
P.S. Aliasing here refers to the concept, not necessarily the technical term–aliases, so as to prevent further retread in the “YAML ain’t… YAML cain’t…”
Thanks! It took some iterations to formulate the simplest (?) solution for this very fundamental issue that I ran smack into within two weeks of using Obsidian. Which is amazing and has transformed my work
Great links with great ideas! They all point in the same direction, though I must admit that they already go far beyond my simple (fundamental) issue.
Which is that I don’t want to get additional functionality, but to simply be able to use the already existing functionality of “unlinked mentions”, which I have completely abandoned by now.
I cannot rely on them AT ALL if I have not manually lemmatized words with at least 5, but up to over 12 aliases (x2 for case sensitivity).
Let’s say I have a note on [Systems] (maybe linked under [Systems Theory] and maybe containing [Ant Mounds] or [Decentralized Synergy]). I might add the aliases (x2 for case-sensitivity):
nouns/ adj./ adv.
This is already a lot, and even in this case it would be great not have to do this in advance, but be able to spontaneously “send” an alias to this note if I happen to think of it when working on another note, without having to switch back and forth.
For German, the adjective and verb have to be adjusted according to the subject of the sentence (AND usually multiplied with the temporal tense, but I can spare you in this case ) (and as always, x2 for case sensitivity)
adj./ adv. (systematic)
systematisch (adjective stem)
systematisieren (verb infintive)
systematisiere (1st pers. sing.)
systematisierst (2nd pers. sing.)
systematisiert (3rd pers. sing)
systematisieren (1st pers. pl.)
systematischere (comparative sing. fem.)
systematisiert (2nd pers. pl.)
systematischerer (comp. sing. masc.)
systematisieren (3rd pers. pl.)
systematischereres (comp. sing. neutr.)
systematischeren (comparative pl.)
systematischste (superlative sing.)
systematischsten (superlative pl.)
Additionally, composite words can be and frequently are used like “systemimmanent” or “systemdestabilisierend” (system destabilizing) or “Denksystem” (thought system).
These ALSO need to be lemmatized or they disappear into the vault and have to be specifically searched for, loosing any chance of emergent ideas.
Firstly, I’m definitely learning German (modularity in composite word crafting and word use–think of all the wonderful neologisms)!
Secondly, I’m incorporating lemmatize in to my personal knowledge management framework (granularity in the disambiguation of terms)!!!
And I think conceptually, it nicely frames the current dialogue.
In the service of the meta and of simplification: how can we better define and frame this issue that it may get traction and resolution?
We recognize there is a fundamentalissue and that there is an essentialdirection pointing towards a solution. And it seems Obsidian natively has the capacity to resolve it, yet for reasons (jargon, language, semantics, tribalism, diversity of Developer & Userbase: technical skills, backgrounds, use cases, etc.) the issue remains unresolved…
That is, either the solution exists and we just don’t know it or this isn’t a problem because of essential limitations in either the tool or its intended Use/Userbase.