Although outlining as a user interface is a very powerful way of organizing one's thoughts, it imposes a very digital structure on the information at hand. In addressing information with fuzzy boundaries, outliners fail since they dictate a line be drawn between data domains, and it is difficult to encapsulate organization where the boundaries are not quite sharp. Perhaps there is a way to write an outliner that overlays one mode of organization over another, thus permitting some kind of fuzzy thinking?

I invite some discussion on this issue.

Yes, there is:
Matrix

While I take Dave's point on "sharp thinking", I think the deficiency of the outliner paradigm is that it imposes sequential ("this, then this") order on data, which doesn't work too well if you're wanting to build relations based upon lateral thinking: metaphorical connections, tangential parallels and so on. The Brain goes some way towards this, as does Inspiration, but the kind of mind-mapping tool I'd like to see needs an additional function: the ability to label and classify connections ("x is linked to y because...", with no limit on connections). Actually, the best interface for this I've seen is Matt Webb's Dirk, which is about as fuzzy as you can get in its current form, but which could easily be a useful mapping tool when run as a personal app.

Very interesting! I've used mind maps (Buzan style) to memorize large amounts of information before, but I am wondering what would be the practical uses of these "fuzzy outliners" on a computer? Some of what people describe here is similar to that "Map of the Internet" that shows different colors and thicknesses for connections between sites based on bandwidth. I've also seen similar things for datamining. However, I am wondering how you would use this on a personal level, with your own collection of information. That is, what would the fuzzy outliner help you do?

Thanks

Semnet is at: http://naturalsciences.sdsu.edu/tutorial.html - very interesting indeed.

Our brainstorm tool (http://www.agora.co.uk/groove/MMTool.htm is mainly useful for its "reorganizing" capabilities, which I feel are easier in 2-d space than in an Outliner user interface. But 2d space also restricts its usefulness as, say, a Web authoring tool; by adding "relative positioning on a plane" you lose the "sequential order".

I remember some software that apple was developing a few years ago called "Hot Sauce" which gave a 3-d look to bookmarks etc...and I thought it would be very useful to have that 3rd dimension to allow for mapping that goes both wide and deep...

As to the fuzzy thinking idea... my assumption (look out with that assumptin' thang) is that this is someway tied to fuzzy logic which could be helpful... In those "forest for the trees" moments when the problem maybe has not been defined...a fuzzy mechanism might be of assistance in discovering (albeit recursively) what the real problem is... (I am struggling to find a word not heuristic, not hierarchical....) it is an H word though... that is where fuzzy tools could help.

So, while I never favor intentionally more complex tools that serve no purpose beyond l'n'f I'd be interested in having something like this as a way of organizing ideas, formulating solutions etc.... If you've seen the movie "High Fidelity" it would make some sense to have multiple connections to the same data sets but in different "synaptic" connections....

There's no question that hierarchical outliners impose a certain structural model on what one puts into it, and hierarchy alone may be the wrong model.

In other instances hierarchy may be appropriate, as long as it's insightful. Often we mis-specify hierarchy initially and have to go back and re-work the structure. Given good drag-and-drop tools the mechanics shouldn't be too tedious, however much also depends on gaining insight and maintaining a sense of flexibility so that one always regards an initial structure as provisional.

Outliners can be top-down or bottom-up tools. Perhaps the latter is more useful in the sense of delineating only the relationships that one is highly confident of and deferring decisions about higher level relationships as long as possible. This way one marinates in the actual data and perhaps the chances of devising an insightful structure are better than in attempting to impose one at the beginning. There could well be an analogy with the task of doing a jigsaw puzzle without looking at the picture: you don't have the big picture yet, so you assemble lower-level structures for a while.

- Dave Mason