But it’s quite frustrating because it’s pretty light and doesn’t get updated so often. You can check through Internet Archive’s Wayback Machine.
Some objectives like the one for PDF annotations is in the roadmap, but I don’t understand why because it says they will implement if other devs ship the feature in the library. It seems out of scope of a roadmap somehow.
PDF annotation
Currently waiting for native support in PDF.js.
In comparison, I love how release notes are very detailed in terms of features and fixes. Thankfully, it’s not just like some (big) Android app release notes:
Latest fixes and app improvements
I’d be like, “Oh wow, you basically just gave another longer definition of an update”
It’s vague on purpose.
For some of those features on the roadmap we only have some basic ideas how they will work.
It’s also why some features are missing entirely, because they are very rough ideas.
As for the PDF annotations, it’s listed there to let people know that we have not abandoned adding that feature.
I understand that’s your objective to be vague. Furthermore, in some sense, it allows you more freedom to not implement some feature that you initially planned without creating a wave of indignation.
It’s just that from a user perspective, I have always been more excited and in confidence when I saw a more detailed roadmap. For example, some public Trello or Github project like where I could see more detailed objectives, including what’s currently being implemented (without many details) and issue tracking. I have to admit, it’s rarely done.
Regarding Obsidian, what’s hard is to see some simple feature (not in terms of coding but UX improvement) being asked for years without info of how Obsidian team is considering it in terms of temporality and priority. Some old examples are in my comment here: Request: Have more detailed and updated Obsidian roadmap - #2
Apart from that, I am grateful when some issues are tackled quickly (minus version release timings), often announced by @WhiteNoise
The post has been flagged and hidden.
I don’t know how to keep it accessible for other community members to be able to join the discussion.
What did I do wrong according to the guidelines?
The feature requests you linked (or any specific feature request for that matter) are not relevant to the question asked in this thread and answered by joethei.
I don’t want this thread to turn into a “why isn’t FR X or Y included in the roadmap?”
Did you find a better method to track “Obsidian roadmap changes”?
Additionally, I second this request (or the actual request if it exists outside of the Meta category), it would be handy to have more details and generally a more informative roadmap. If something is not completely clear how will be implemented it can easily be tagged with brainstorm tag and items don’t have to be open to commentary, read only would be fine for me. Same way for experimental ideas.
Having the pdf annotation waiting for years seemed weird to me too and as a more current example: I noticed “Open individual Markdown files” is in the Planned section (I’d say since May 13) which is a relief and very good news but I wish to know what were the items competing against it.
On the other hand “Kanban view for Bases” is Active but the description doesn’t make it clear if it’s going to be interactive. This is in contrast to “Calendar view for Bases" which includes: “Display files as an interactive calendar.” How interactive? I’ll have to wait.
To finish, I hope it’s safe to assume the kanban view it’s going to be at least embeddable, like the rest of views, but is not going to be completely interactive and together with the calendar view won’t be able to replace/close most features/issues of “Kanban, Task Board, Task Notes, Task Genius, Cardboard” etc.
And, in case it does solve some issues, I can’t know which ones, to take a better decision on which plugin then I should focus on. There are lots of options not mentioned here, each with its own strengths and drawbacks.
