Check out the latest video and update from @zsviczian. I know this is cliché, but the possibilities are endless with so many ways to view data: links, virtual notes, inferred nodes which include siblings and backlinks, folders, tags, visual customization of all the above, and visual customization of the kind of Parent, Child, and Friend. I was demonstrating how a Parent node can be something other than a Parent to someone yesterday and found that grasping alternate Parent, Child, and Friend categories was easier when I talked about the gates rather than using Parent, Child, and Friend as nomenclature.
There are top-gate relationships, side-gate relationships, and bottom-gate relationships.
For instance, a Parent thought connects at the top gate, but relationships called based on, author, and source can all be top-gate relationships, too. Similarly, you can have Children with connections from the bottom-gate, but you could also have consists of, supports, and leads to coming from the bottom-gate.
It blasts the door wide open to different contextual paradigms for different types of data. It also greatly increases the usefulness of both the daily note, especially when they get lengthy. YMMV, of course, but I think about what happens after writing a lot of unlinked atomic notes sometimes as dropping them into a well. They’re there but in a pile at the bottom of a well. The visual feedback from Excalibrain at minimum shows from which daily note they started, assuming you use daily notes this way. It is like a webbing that catches atomic notes on their way down the well. I know this is a weird metaphor, but it was always hard to explain to people why TheBrain software isn’t really a mindmap as much as it is an alternate way of navigating, connecting, and developing thoughts. Excalibrain has now surpassed, IMHO, the usefulness of the TheBrain, but it comes at the price of choice-complexity that some might find overwhelming.