a spinoff from the "state of the art" thread.

I've come to a few conclusions (for my own use, anyway).

An "outliner", in a strict sense, is a tool for displaying text segments of variable length in the familiar hierarchical tree, the highest level starting at the left (except for Hebrew and Arabic I guess!) and each subsequent lower level being indented one tab stop to the right than the next preceding higher level. To be an "outliner", a program has to enable you *within the confines of a single-pane* to:

(1) see the entire outline in a single pane, or as many items as will fit in the pane.
(2) expand or collapse the entire outline or any item to any desired level, using keystrokes.
(3) split an item via keystroke into two items, or merge multiple items into a single item.
(4) move items (with their subitems) to any other place in the hierarchy, using keystrokes.

Examples: Grandview, Ecco, Infoqube.

I contrast this with programs that display the contents of only a single item at a time in an editor pane, with arrangeable item "titles" in a separation navigation tree pane. (e.g. UltraRecall). I need to be able to see the entirety of the multiple text items in their context as I am expanding, collapsing, splitting, or rearranging them.

(In UR, you can display a grid of child items, and you could display a column of multi-line "item text" cells in this grid - but they are not indented in the grid.)

Now UR looks like a great information manager - for displaying / filtering / sorting multi-field items in a grid. But I've come to realize that when I'm brainstorming, the outlining functions mentioned above are essential.

Ecco and Infoqube do a good job of combining the outlining functions, AND the grid of multi-field items.

Of course, sometimes we deal with units of information - entire web pages, tables, graphics, etc that don't fit well into the outliner pane - these properly go into a separate editor/viewer pane. UR and Infoqube do well on this.

Generally I think it's a bad idea to put your information into the "text editor pane" as opposed to the outliner pane, unless you really have to. The more you break up your info into separate outline items, the more flexibility you have for viewing/arranging/filtering/sorting that info.

Another little point about terminology - I've never liked the term "single-pane" outliner, because it implies that the fewer panes you have the better. It's not how many panes you have, what matters is how much you can do in the outliner pane, without having to jump between panes. But if "single pane" outliner means that you have the full panoply of outlining functions all within the contents of a single pane, then that's ok.

So for my purposes Infoqube looks like the state of the art, though I'm still relying on Ecco for now.

(btw - "Mindmap" programs leave me completely flat - give me outlines and grids!)

jimspoon wrote:

An "outliner", in a strict sense, is a tool for displaying text
segments of variable length in the familiar hierarchical tree, the highest level
starting at the left (except for Hebrew and Arabic I guess!) and each subsequent lower
level being indented one tab stop to the right than the next preceding higher level. To
be an "outliner", a program has to enable you *within the confines of a single-pane*
to:

(1) see the entire outline in a single pane, or as many items as will fit in the
pane.
(2) expand or collapse the entire outline or any item to any desired level,
using keystrokes.
(3) split an item via keystroke into two items, or merge multiple
items into a single item.
(4) move items (with their subitems) to any other place in
the hierarchy, using keystrokes.

I agree with this list, but would add to it the following:

VIEW META-TEXT INLINE. The "tree" part of the outline usually consists of the headings/topics, not the content associated with each. When you write two paragraphs about sub-sub-head X, where do you want to view that meta-text? If my outline is of an article or a report, I want to view that meta-text inline, as part of the tree, not in a separate window. Why? Because reports or articles (any written communication), the information is not read as a collection of individual index cards, but as a whole and the writing should flow properly. If you have to view the notes you've associated with each topic as individual blocks (as a two-pane outliner forces you to), you can't as easily make your writing readable as a whole.

My blog post about Grandview shows how that application did this better than any outliner I've ever used since:

--- http://welcometosherwood.wordpress.com/2009/10/10/grandview/

Steve Z.

Steve just from glancing at it Org-Mode might do everything that Grandview did, and if not you can certainly customize it.

See here and skip down to the Org Mode Intro section. http://www.cyborganize.org/productivity/videos/fast-start/emacs-org-mode-installation-configuration-and-tutorial/

I don't use Org-Mode for heavy duty outlining anymore but I used to.

Steve, just occurred to me - given the strengths of Grandview, and how good it looks so many years into a post-DOS world, I wonder if you have any thoughts on why no one has tried to make a Windows version or equivalent to Grandview?

Thanks.

Daly

Stephen Zeoli wrote:

jimspoon wrote:
>An "outliner", in a strict sense, is a tool for displaying text

>segments of variable length in the familiar hierarchical tree, the highest level

>starting at the left (except for Hebrew and Arabic I guess!) and each subsequent
lower
>level being indented one tab stop to the right than the next preceding higher
level. To
>be an "outliner", a program has to enable you *within the confines of a
single-pane*
>to:
>
>(1) see the entire outline in a single pane, or as many items as
will fit in the
>pane.
>(2) expand or collapse the entire outline or any item to any
desired level,
>using keystrokes.
>(3) split an item via keystroke into two items,
or merge multiple
>items into a single item.
>(4) move items (with their subitems)
to any other place in
>the hierarchy, using keystrokes.
>

I agree with this list,
but would add to it the following:

VIEW META-TEXT INLINE. The "tree" part of the
outline usually consists of the headings/topics, not the content associated with
each. When you write two paragraphs about sub-sub-head X, where do you want to view
that meta-text? If my outline is of an article or a report, I want to view that meta-text
inline, as part of the tree, not in a separate window. Why? Because reports or articles
(any written communication), the information is not read as a collection of
individual index cards, but as a whole and the writing should flow properly. If you
have to view the notes you've associated with each topic as individual blocks (as a
two-pane outliner forces you to), you can't as easily make your writing readable as a
whole.

My blog post about Grandview shows how that application did this better than
any outliner I've ever used since:

---
http://welcometosherwood.wordpress.com/2009/10/10/grandview/

Steve Z.

Steve,

I agree about the need to view flowing text as a continuous whole. At the same time, I like the kind of bird's eye view that the navigation tree of a 2-pane outliner gives me. I am hopeful that I have found the best of both worlds in Sense, where the right pane shows the text from start to finish and the position is synced with the tree.

Admittedly I have not put it to heavy use; since late last year I have done very little longform writing. This is probably destined to change soon, so I should be providing some further testimony.

Stephen Zeoli wrote:

If my outline is of an article or a report, I want to view that meta-text
inline, as part of the tree, not in a separate window. Why? Because reports or articles
(any written communication), the information is not read as a collection of
individual index cards, but as a whole and the writing should flow properly. If you
have to view the notes you've associated with each topic as individual blocks (as a
two-pane outliner forces you to), you can't as easily make your writing readable as a
whole.

Daly de Gagne wrote:

Steve, just occurred to me - given the strengths of Grandview, and how good it looks so
many years into a post-DOS world, I wonder if you have any thoughts on why no one has
tried to make a Windows version or equivalent to
Grandview?

Someone did. But the software had problems and development ceased.

-cassius

Stephen Zeoli wrote:

I agree with this list,
but would add to it the following:

VIEW META-TEXT INLINE. The "tree" part of the
outline usually consists of the headings/topics, not the content associated with
each. When you write two paragraphs about sub-sub-head X, where do you want to view
that meta-text? If my outline is of an article or a report, I want to view that meta-text
inline, as part of the tree, not in a separate window. Why? Because reports or articles
(any written communication), the information is not read as a collection of
individual index cards, but as a whole and the writing should flow properly. If you
have to view the notes you've associated with each topic as individual blocks (as a
two-pane outliner forces you to), you can't as easily make your writing readable as a
whole.

My blog post about Grandview shows how that application did this better than
any outliner I've ever used since:

-------
A single pane outliner can still have a "heading" problem: If one is, say, in a sub-sub-topic and it is lengthy, one may have to scroll up several pages to see the higher level topics. To help with this, in GrandView, I wrote a macro that reversed the order of the outline: Starting with a sub-sub topic, the higher level topic headlines appeared in reverse order so I could see "from whence I came." In this sense, a two-pane outliner might be more useful.

-cassius

---
http://welcometosherwood.wordpress.com/2009/10/10/grandview/

Steve Z.

@Daly,

I have no idea why no one has tried to create -- or at least succeeded in creating -- a Windows version of GrandView. Frankly, I don't even think there is anything on the Mac that is as fully functional as GrandView, though there are some apps that come close. I have found this very perplexing and not a little frustrating.

@Alexander,

In GrandView you could toggle the meta-text on and off, so it was pretty easy to go back and forth from the aerial view to the text flow view.

Steve Z.

You can do this in Sense as well. Double clicking in any title in the Edit Workspace (the right --detail- pane) will expand/collapse the metatext, leaving just the title visible.

You can also completely hide the Content Browser (the left --navigation tree- pane) in essence turning it into a single pane outliner: http://www.silvaelm.co.uk/news.shtml

However, this expand/collapse the metatext in Sense only applies to the specific title's metatext. It might be useful to have some kind of 'expand/collapse all' with a keyboard shortcut in the Edit Workspace (in dual pane view, you can do this more or less from the Content Browser by expanding/collapsing at the top of a hierarchy). I'm not sure whether this is something that Grandview could do.


Stephen Zeoli wrote:

In GrandView you could toggle the meta-text on and
off, so it was pretty easy to go back and forth from the aerial view to the text flow
view.

Stephen Zeoli wrote:

I agree with this list,
but would add to it the following:

VIEW META-TEXT INLINE. The "tree" part of the
outline usually consists of the headings/topics, not the content associated with
each. When you write two paragraphs about sub-sub-head X, where do you want to view
that meta-text? If my outline is of an article or a report, I want to view that meta-text
inline, as part of the tree, not in a separate window. Why? Because reports or articles
(any written communication), the information is not read as a collection of
individual index cards, but as a whole and the writing should flow properly. If you
have to view the notes you've associated with each topic as individual blocks (as a
two-pane outliner forces you to), you can't as easily make your writing readable as a
whole.

My blog post about Grandview shows how that application did this better than
any outliner I've ever used since:

---
http://welcometosherwood.wordpress.com/2009/10/10/grandview/

Steve Z.

That's a really nice post about Grandview, and the comments are very interesting too. I'm going to have to reinstall Grandview just to refresh my memory about some of its features. I think the last time I tried, I got it running under DOSBox.

As I understand it, in Grandview you could attach a "document" to an outline item, and you could view that "document text" inline with your outline, or you could edit it in its own document editor window. So, there is a distinction between "outline text" and "document text".

I used the MS Word outlines in between Grandview and Ecco Pro (in fact, I went from PC Outline to Grandview to MS Word to Ecco Pro), and MS Word made a similar distinction, I think. In Word you had 9 outline levels, and you could put in "body text" under any outline item.

Usually, instead of entering text as "document text" or "body text" (distinct from outline text), I would just make that text into an outline item at the next lower outline level. That way I could do everything with that text that I could do with any other outline item.

I also think that when I'm brainstorming, I would often find that text I initially entered as "document text" would better be made into an "outline item". So long as I can easily split and move "document text" into outline items, then I'm ok with that feature.

jim

This discussion reminds me of a similar one we had here (and on Google Wave) some 18 months ago... The bottom line was that "outliners" is a generic term, and means a different thing for each of us, depending on our needs.

http://www.outlinersoftware.com/messages/viewm/6922

It's interesting to see the different approaches to a "navigation pane".

In a file explorer (e.g. Windows Explorer), the folders are "pure containers". They aren't data items in themselves; they only "contain" data items (files). If you click on a folder in the navigation tree, all the files in that folder are shown in the files pane in a grid view, with metadata being shown in columns (e.g. date/time, size, attributes, etc.)

In some PIMs, the navigation pane contains only items. Some items may be parent items, but there is no grid pane for viewing all the child items with their fields (if any).

In UltraRecall, the tree contains both data items, but any data item can also be a container - i.e. if you click on an item in the tree, you can see all of its child items with some of its fields in a grid view (the related items or child items pane).

In Ecco - the folders in the folder pane are the data fields. An item is "in" the folder if it has a value in that data field - and that value can be text, numeric, yes/no, or date. The folders/fields can be arranged in a hierarchy like a file system tree, but it doesn't work quite the same way. When you click on a folder in Windows Explorer, the file pane shows all the files that are in that folder. When you double-click on a folder in the Ecco folder pane, a Scratch pad opens showing all the items having a value in that field.

I've often thought that Ecco could have been improved if more of the functions of a file system tree could have been implemented in the Ecco folder/field tree. For example - if you initiate a search "in" a folder, it would be assumed you were searching for items "in" that folder and its subfolders. Other concepts might be applied analogously.

I find Infoqube to be similar to Ecco in that the Properties pane contains a list of the fields, which can be arranged hierarchically in a tree of fields. And, as in Ecco, if you double-click on a field, a Scratch pad opens showing all the items with a value in that field. The fields are not presented as "folders" though. The Infoqube properties pane contains much more than a field tree, however - also item properties and forms.

So, what are all the single-pane outliners then that allow inline viewing (but ideally editing as well) of notes (which is what I assume is meant by meta-text in this thread)? [for the PC]

I've only just discovered what a nice thing it is to have the ability to see inline text, when I bought CarbonFin outliner on the iPad/iPod. My other outliners can't do it. Bonsai displays notes at the bottom of the page, while Whizfolders is a two-pane outliner, so it can't do it. Here is a picture of a CarbonFin outline with the Notes view enabled:
http://carbonfin.com/iPad-script-edit-small.png

I'm looking at this from a writer's perspective, so I'd like to be able to see the all the text elements of the outline in a single pane, with everything collapsable (including the notes).

Dr Andus wrote:

Here is a picture of a CarbonFin
outline with the Notes view
enabled:

Sorry, here is a bigger image:
http://carbonfin.com/iPad-script-edit.png

Dr Andus wrote:

So, what are all the single-pane outliners then that allow inline viewing (but
ideally editing as well) of notes (which is what I assume is meant by meta-text in this
thread)? [for the PC]

There's the rub. There are few outliners for PC that have this ability. Off the top of my head, I can only think of one: Inspiration. Likely I'm forgetting one or two.

Even on a Mac, there are few choices, but at least three: OmniOutliner, Tree and Neo. Of all of these, I think Neo has the best implementation, but none of them match GrandView, I'm afraid.

I'm sure other commenters will add to the list, but it won't be a long one.

Steve Z.

Dr Andus wrote:

So, what are all the single-pane outliners then that allow inline viewing (but
ideally editing as well) of notes (which is what I assume is meant by meta-text in this
thread)? [for the PC]

Piggydb features inline viewing and editing of fragments at any depth, with recursion. Inline editing is new with version 5; editing previously took the user to a dedicated form.

Jerome

Infoqube and Sense. Both can have additional panes (e.g. Infoqube for properties, Sense for Navigation) but they can also work as one-pane outliners displaying metatext inline.



Stephen Zeoli wrote:

There are few
outliners for PC that have this ability. Off the top of my head, I can only think of one:
Inspiration. Likely I'm forgetting one or two.

There's an (apparently) new Windows entrant, Outline4D http://www.screenplay.com/p-77-outline-4d.aspx , which can display metatext inline, among many other views. Outline4D also has a timeline view, so I'm cross-posting it in a relevant thread.

It seems to be an evolved version of an earlier Write Brothers' program (they seem to specialise in tools for writing movie scripts) which provided the same vertical-outline / horizontal-timeline view. I don't remember the name of that software, but I had surely written about it here at the time --several years ago. I recall that its price tag was quite higher --probably double- than Outline4D.

Outline4D does not seem to provide a trial version, but there are plenty of screenshots in the above website, as well as several videos here http://www.learnoutline4d.com/

Many thanks for the great suggestions, keep them coming!

I'm ashamed to admit that in my hour of need last night I ended up using MS Word 2010's built-in outliner (after owning it for about a year and not once bothering to check it out). It was an OK experience actually, though I'm mystified that in that huge, wealthy organisation there is not a single person who would want to champion the idea of hierarchical outlining. I like simple when it comes to outliners, but MS Word is just poverty-stricken in terms of features...

I do suggest that you try out the Writing Outliner Word add-in http://writingoutliner.com/ if you haven't done so already.


Dr Andus wrote:

I'm ashamed to admit that
in my hour of need last night I ended up using MS Word 2010's built-in outliner (after
owning it for about a year and not once bothering to check it out). It was an OK
experience actually, though I'm mystified that in that huge, wealthy organisation
there is not a single person who would want to champion the idea of hierarchical
outlining. I like simple when it comes to outliners, but MS Word is just
poverty-stricken in terms of features...

Alexander,

Outline4D looks interesting.

I just downloaded demo - and can't believe my eyes - the trial period is for five days - 5 days, for a complex program.

That's nuts, and means no matter how good I'll probably not buy it just because I won't have time to do a proper trial.

Daly

Alexander Deliyannis wrote:

There's an (apparently) new Windows entrant, Outline4D
http://www.screenplay.com/p-77-outline-4d.aspx , which can display metatext
inline, among many other views. Outline4D also has a timeline view, so I'm
cross-posting it in a relevant thread.

It seems to be an evolved version of an
earlier Write Brothers' program (they seem to specialise in tools for writing movie
scripts) which provided the same vertical-outline / horizontal-timeline view. I
don't remember the name of that software, but I had surely written about it here at the
time --several years ago. I recall that its price tag was quite higher --probably
double- than Outline4D.

Outline4D does not seem to provide a trial version, but
there are plenty of screenshots in the above website, as well as several videos here
http://www.learnoutline4d.com/

I used to think outlining ("physical" ordering of information items in a tree structure) to be an inferior method of organizing the items. Rather, I've thought that the definitive or ideal organization was the relational database model of tables, fields, values. In outlines, items are ordered arbitrarily according to a scheme that need not be thoroughly thought out. But now I think that the physical ordering of items is good. The database model depends on our skill in querying that database; and we may not be sure that we've retrieved all the items that we wanted, or that they are arranged in the way we want them. When we put items in an outline, however, we can be always retrieve those items, arranged just the way we placed them. Both methods can be employed in an outliner/PIM, though.

In this sense, I guess UR does have the essential feature of an outline - hierarchical arrangement of info items - even though the the tree is a tree of item titles, and not a tree of the items (e.g. text paragraphs) themselves. (The item content being placed in the "child items" grid pane and the editor pane.)

just thinking out loud.

jim

Agree 100% jim

As far as outliners with in-line text for authors, I have used Writing Outliner pretty extensively and, more recently, have used the Word 2010 built-in outliner.

Writing Outliner does not really provide in-line editing. It's more like a 2-pane outliner for word with a great contextual search function. You can compile your outline into one big word file with inline text, but the compiled file does not have any outliner features.

I really like the Word 2010 outliner. In the left pane is an outline of items - no in-line text. In the right pane is your document where you can view, edit, or collapse items, sub-items, all in-line. In either pane you can drag items to other locations in the outline -- and sub-items and text move with the parent item, as expected. That's about it for the functionality, though: no hoisting or other advanced outlining features. Of course, the best part is the support for rich text formatting, hyperlinks, and embedded objects -- in item titles as well as the body text -- this is something almost every other outliner struggles with.

jimspoon wrote:

In outlines, items are ordered arbitrarily according to a
scheme that need not be thoroughly thought out. But now I think that the physical
ordering of items is good. The database model depends on our skill in querying that
database; and we may not be sure that we've retrieved all the items that we wanted, or
that they are arranged in the way we want them. When we put items in an outline, however,
we can be always retrieve those items, arranged just the way we placed them.

I think that the relational database as the underlying model of data is unbeatable in its flexibility. Thereon, however, I find it quite useless in representing information in any meaningful way. That's where the outlines, mind maps, concept maps etc. come into being, because they provide the 'big picture', in terms of structure and associations.

A typical example is the entering of goals, objectives, principles, talents and the like in a database. They have never helped me plan my future; it is the overview of their interconnections that provides a perspective to my life.

UltraRecall has an underlying relational database, which we will never need to see, in the same way that we will never need to look at the strings of 0s and 1s that underlie any computer image.