#23

thanks a lot for that! By the way, super good work that you did in this file. I’m still exploring it but it already taught me a lot!

#24

Nice! I notice a lot more use of folders in this version. Wonder if any of our discussions contributed or if it evolved organically as need arose. I’ll take a look at the notes later and respond back later! Thanks for sharing.

1 Like
#25

Hey Rishi, glad you noticed, and yes, you are correct. @cotemaxime 's heavy use of folders made me consider ways I could use their inherently exclusive nature to my benefit.

You had previously asked about “People” as a folder, which seems fine to me. I’m experimenting with other folders for Things that have one clear, overriding description. So along with “People”, I’m experimenting with “Quotes” and “Images” and “Source Notes”.

The _pHabits and the _pMOCs folders are examples of Incubation Folders. They were sort of nice to have, even though I was building my MOCs at the same time; but now they are both gone. Now all of the notes they contained are in my main folder collection. But for the kit, I kept them there as an example, so people could see less dogmatic uses of a note collection.

It’s worth noting in Obsidian, that folders are not as exclusive as in a traditional file system since every note can be linked from anywhere, regardless of the folder.

But still, there is a point of diminishing return. That point is probably when a person tires from having to twirl and un-twirl folders too often. In that sense, I still want to approach folders with a certain caution/reluctance, but I’m not afraid to use a few.

4 Likes
#26

Thanks for the reply. I see your point about finding some balance and not getting carried away by all the folder hierarchy goodness! I was particularly curious about the Resources folder where I also saw one for images. At first I was taken aback by seeing multiple levels of subfolders then I realised that I’ve been facing issues with my one attachments folder myself and wish every note had a hidden folder with all its attachments. Are you using a script to generate subfolders for your attachments or doing it manually?

I was also curious about another thing and wanted to seek some clarification on MOCs. Since our last conversation, I’ve begun setting up a few myself and I was wondering how deep does it make sense to go. Right now, I’ve the main MOCs similar to your setup but less than 10. From my Interests MOC, I link to some of my interests which themselves are MOCs, like a Chess MOC. That in turn, links to other notes like Chess lessons, chess jokes, chess people I follow, etc. Over time, I’ve begun linking my chess lessons and elaborating each lesson in their separate note. This made me think that it could itself become an MOC. But then I realised I’m going too many levels deep perhaps. And after the first 2 or 3 levels, I found it more useful to transclude the notes instead of just linking. This way they become more of a structure more as opposed to an MOC. Have you run into this issue yourself? And if so, how do you deal with it? Again, I still have to check v3 in depth so still asking questions from the previous one.

One last question, I noticed that you were using MOC and TOC as tags. But I didn’t see any description if it’s supposed to be different or just the same.

Lastest thing! I just want to thank you for the entire demo but specifically the quotes MOC was quite useful to me. I was quite confused how to handle quotes since I collect a lot of them. And your idea of using onTopic tags all collected in the Quotes MOC with categories was just a brilliantly simple idea that seems like I’d be powerful in the long run for discovery. Also having those tags in one page helps me relate those tags with quotes so next time I add a quote I can remember existing tags better. Having the tags list in the sidebar isn’t as good. Great work! Highly appreciate it.

4 Likes
#27

Thanks very much for this starter kit!

2 Likes
#28

Are you using a script to generate subfolders for your attachments or doing it manually?

I’m doing it manually. Maybe there is a scriptable way, but my programming chops max out with some basic Keyboard Maestro macros.

This made me think that it could itself become an MOC. But then I realised I’m going too many levels deep perhaps.

I’m getting Inception vibes here, lol!

And after the first 2 or 3 levels, I found it more useful to transclude the notes instead of just linking. This way they become more of a structure as opposed to an MOC. Have you run into this issue yourself?

I haven’t. If you’re putting together a linear sequence, transclusions or TOC notes should be fine.

I’m trying to use the power of transclusion, but I usually run into a lot of mental friction because that means each note I transclude is being reviewed in one knit-together, linear viewpoint, which means I might edit the language of the note to flow with the notes above and below, which is fine for the higher-level note, but it potentially softens the evergreen nature of the individual notes. But you might have a perfectly fine use case for it, so I don’t want to discourage this approach.

I noticed that you were using MOC and TOC as tags. But I didn’t see any description if it’s supposed to be different or just the same.

I should clarify that more. A Table of Content note (TOC) is only when I want to keep a sequence that is specific, linear, and final.

  • Example 1: When writing a final project like an essay or research paper.
  • Example 2: Possibly to arrange notes from a lecture, like your situation above with each chess lesson. (Or you might find that each lesson can all fit into one note, just by using headers).

Conversely, MOCs are Evergreen Notes, just at the next level of emergence. They are not final products, but they can quickly and easily be shaped into final products. There’s more to say about this transition between MOC and deliverable for another time.

Thanks for your appreciation on the management method for Quotes. It took years of trial and error, figuring out edge cases and what not. Cheers!

5 Likes
#29

Thanks for sharing your thanks! If you have any comments or insights, feel free to share

#30

First of all many many thanks for this kit, I’m still crawling my way into the PKM world and this helped me a lot.
You mention Fluid Frameworks throught the kit, what are they, how can they be used, et cetera
But besides MOCs I didn’t really understood what were other Fluid Frameworks that you use. For example do you consider the way you use tags to be one of those? If not could you give me some examples of other Fluid Frameworks?

1 Like
#31

I appreciate your close reading of the material. Fluid frameworks can be defined generally having some combination of the following: non-limiting, coexisting, heterarchial, overlapping, non-exclusive…

There isn’t enough written about fluid frameworks, kind of intentionally so. I wanted to give myself—and the community—room to explore useful variations of fluid frameworks. Here are some that I like:

  • MOCs, and any variation of a note consisting mostly of links.
  • tags, and specifically a few Boolean searches of tags, i.e. #tag1 AND #tag2 NOT #tag3, which Obsidian will have in the near-future.
  • Transclusion-heavy notes
    • This might include what @Klaas called Story Rivers, although maybe he would prefer his weaving analogy (I do, wink wink, nudge nudge… maybe Story Knitting/Weaving/Strings. anyways I digress…)
  • And of course, the undisputed champion: Direct Links themselves!
#32

My analogy was actually “knitting”, but guess what …… I prefer “weaving”. I have yet to come up with a good replacement for story rivers that includes the word “weaving”, although I do like the idea of fluidity too as that links to fluid frameworks.

Zettel cascades? Woven stories? Interwoven zettel stories? The latter is a mouthful, though it does reflect more accurately what they are.

Actually, I do like story river, it’s a very appropriate label, even though I nicked it (pun not intended). Also, I spoke about it a couple of times in one of the channels (#knowledge-management I think) and people now associate that with me, so I am not keen to change it.

1 Like
#33

I’ve been avoiding tags because I couldn’t really see how I could use them after adding them to notes, thinking that if I had a large enough number of notes with a specific tag searching for it wouldn’t really help. But using that kind of approach through Boolean search, I can definitely see how they can be of better use.

Regarding transclusions seeing how @Klaas uses it made me realize I wasn’t really using its true potential. I don’t think I would use it exactly as he does, but just knowing about it makes me think about how can I use them differently. (And for that thanks @Klaas :slight_smile: )

I must confess I still wasn’t thinking outside of the box, and was limiting myself to think about the ones I saw you mention. Your sentence makes me want to “make” my own.

Thanks for your reply, I’ve learned a bit more again.

1 Like
#34

Hi @nickmilo the link to download your V3 kit doesn’t seem to be working! Hope you can update it (or put it on the discord channel) cos I’m really excited to take a look :slight_smile: thanks!

#35

It is pinned to the # knowledge-management channel on Discord

3 Likes
#36

It’s working now, Github was with some issues at the time you checked.

2 Likes
#37

WOW, this is really awesome. I’m starting to write notes using zk and reading your framework gave me a bunch of ideas!
How long did it take to you write all your notes? I really like to make notes and keep them, but the amount of time it takes to write, summarize and think is huge, so I usually just give up.

3 Likes
#38

This is impressive indeed. There is one that’s even more impressive about zettelkasten, compiled by @lizardmenfromspace, it’s mind-blowing.

1 Like
#39

That’s great you’re interested in linking your thinking. It’s a lot of fun.

I’m not sure where you’re at in terms of your experience with note-taking, but I’d recommend to just start writing and making new notes as needed.

Then you’ll start seeing ways of connecting those notes. But you just need to make a bunch of notes first for the magic to really take effect.

The best mindset I’d suggest adopting is to just “trust the process.”

There comes a point when the pain of not taking durable notes outweighs the extra time it takes to make them.

Then, there comes a point where the pleasure of taking durable notes becomes a joyful positive feedback loop.

Think if you just created 1 or 2 durable notes per day for a year. Well, you’d have around 500 quality notes in your back pocket. Not too shabby :slight_smile:

7 Likes
#40

@nickmilo This is amazing. How do you recommend incorporating your system with an existing vault? Also, do you use mobile to sync? Currently, I’m using 1Writer, which as you probably know, only supports backlinks with a flat folder structure. Any recommendations for mobile and IMF?

1 Like
#41

@renerodriguez I recommend doing less with the Index at the start. Instead, spend more attention towards gathering a few related notes together, and just call them "related notes" MOC. You’ll probably find just that process alone opens up some beneficial ways of thinking.

I use 1Writer as well. I wish it did more, but it’s the best we’ve got currently. I don’t overly use mobile—usually just reviewing things before bed—so I just work with the limitations.

Hope this is helpful. I’ll be available here and on discord if you want to continue the convo

1 Like
#42

@renerodriguez @nickmilo A new preference in Obsidian allows you to set filepaths when you create new links, such that 1Writer is able to use links between folders too. I think it was introduced in 0.8.0.

1 Like