Man, this topic is SO huge for me. Thanks for sharing this question/post. I also do not have definitive feelings, concepts or methodologies. But here’s how I’ve thought for me so far:
- I think important people, books, articles and websites/companies as entities and they deserve to exist with the brackets. I give them a different {} at the main name mainly for org reasons (ex: articles are {a}, books are {b}, evernotes are {e}). I still enjoy them at the correct folders (articles, books, videos) than hashtags, but I believe that has to do anything with my studies on library sciences.
- I mainly use tags for aggregating “themes”, “call-to-actions” and “statuses” - ex: some meta-articles have a tag I’ve named #StudyGod. This helps me remember common concepts, what do they serve me for in my study/life strategy and also for having the grouped in a weekly note called “Atomic Ideas”;
- Instead of creating one note for each Quote or important text I’ve found, I prefer aggregating them at “Evernotes”. For instance, yesterday I’ve read an article in which some paragraphs serve me for a mental note called “Blogging is the best way to study something”. Then I saw a video today with the same theme… I mainly link those two entities (video and article) to ONE Evernote, but with backlinks to the direct quotes and citations (mainly directly to headers);
Those strategies give me less of a fell of an archive (which I’d be a specialist at finding quotes everywhere), make me focus on my study strategies/questions I’m answering each week, and to, every weekend, make the ideas come together by reviewing and linking them.
So answering briefly:
- Pros - gives a sense of organizing and practicality in names or pastes / Cons - need to be clean and just to organize (ex: Albert Einstein I’d prefer to link with the quote rather than leave it at the name. We have powerful search strategies which don’t require the linked text or concepts to be explicit);
- Pros - give an existence and relation in the graph view, even if you’re not filling/writing anything. I enjoy this visual representation, but that’s because I don’t read/follow too many authors/people / Cons - may overpopulate the database with no reason. I mean, why are we linking to an author after all? Only to see it at the graph view or to really fill some info at the notes?
- Pros - gives me a reason, a call-to-action in each text/document/video I take action on / Cons - can’t be way too many… they have to be aggregate themes or else I’ll have “On(…)” for everything"! Do I actually need it? I question myself on this constantly.
- This one is rough for me. But for all said above, I believe [[tag-pages]] are better for things that actually exist or need to be seen at graph view (ex: I use [[26-05-2020]] for today, just for linking with everythng I’ve done). And tags for basically reason 3.
Hope I contribute this way and looking forward to hear critics/new strategies on this!
Cheers
edit: @nickmilo - there’s also this recent post on forums (Tags vs page/link). Are we aggregating discussions in some manner? How does it work here? Should they be [[]] or #? hahaha Thanks!