Forum Posts Feed
ConnectedText versus Ndxcards
< Next Topic | Back to topic list | Previous Topic >
Pages: < 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 > Last ›
Posted by Ken Ashworth
Oct 18, 2007 at 08:43 PM
Yes, I also found Manfred’s article very interesting and will require a couple more readings to digest.
Something that I found confusing:
Rather, he gave every slip of paper what might be called a numerus currens that had nothing to do with any systematic consideration of order or classification. In fact, he explicitly rejected any ordering based on the contents of the card index because he realized that such a system will inevitably run into problems having to do with changing needs, interests, and insights in coming years. Systematic considerations are far too inflexible and limiting. Giving the note cards abstract numbers, like 1, 1.1, 1.3.6 and even 1.1a.5 ... “sometimes up to twelve digits,” allows for infinite possibilities for further ordering and sub-ordering. Any given slip can lead to different internal branching of the card index.
==============
This seems to speak to the database concept of a unique record id, or auto-generated sequence number for each new record, but also seems to speak to a numbering sequence imposed by the user.
Is this user defined numbering system something that is imposed when temporarily grouping cards (thoughts or records), then discarded when the grouping is not needed, then re-imposed when a new grouping is created?
Just trying to understand the system that is being described.
Posted by Manfred
Oct 18, 2007 at 08:49 PM
With CT you can search all open databases or topics and link to topics in another project, etc. So, I think it does not really matter. My main projects are called Personal, Notebook, and Writing, with Notebook being the central one. I also have some for particular projects. I am writing a commentary on a philosophical text, and I have that text and the comments in a special Project with many links to the Notebook.
Manfred
Posted by Daly de Gagne
Oct 18, 2007 at 10:49 PM
Manfred, I really enjoyed your article on the CT site about note-taking.
I guess I am just not able to get my head around the whole wiki notion—part of me rebels, first of all at having to remember conventions, as Stephen spoke about. Why can there not be programming that gives you bold or italic or title at the press of a button. That’s one objection based on doing less than to me seems reasonably possible.
But then I guess I lack the imagination to think of how I would start linking stuff up, and whether I would be consistent.
I know I am missing something here, and I have that feeling everytime I download CT or another wiki for a trial.
Daly
Manfred wrote:
>I am not sure whether you saw this. Nor am I sure how helpful it will
>be:
>
>http://www.connectedtext.com/manfred.html
>
>I agree that there is a
>learning curve, and that the conventions of a wiki take getting used to ...
>
>I am
>convinced that the usefulness of a Note-taking applications, no matter which one you
>choose, increases exponentially in relation to the time and effort you put into it. I
>know this must appear (and is) paradoxical, for you must commit before you really
>know. And after you have committed, you will never really know whether another one
>might have been better. Reminds me of marriage that way ;)
>
>On Index Cards: I tried it,
>but it appears to me that it does not translate the index card method into an electronic
>equivalent and is too much of a copy of the paper-based model, but that is my very
>subjective view. (I also did not find it “intuitive” - again, a very subjective
>reaction that has to do with my prior experience.
Posted by Manfred
Oct 18, 2007 at 11:22 PM
“This seems to speak to the database concept of a unique record id, or auto-generated sequence number for each new record, but also seems to speak to a numbering sequence imposed by the user.”
Yes, remember I describer a paper-based system. It’s just a card index. What’s interesting is that Luhmann (long before there were computers) treated each card like a database record. But, of course, in those days the unique record id could not be auto-generated. He had to generate it himself.
What makes Luhmann’s approach (somewhat) interesting is that some people are trying to rebuild this system - and especially his way of using keywords to refer to such unique record ids. My point—apart from simply describing this system as a historical oddity—is that the keyword approach is not necessary any more, and that what he was aiming at can be realized better with a hypertextual system and fullext search..
Posted by Manfred
Oct 19, 2007 at 12:00 AM
Daly,
once tastes in note-taking, outlining, and writing are in many ways personal and subjective, so different people like different approaches.
There is a large contingent of Zoot supporters in this forum, and while I have long decided that I will not use Zoot, I still enjoy hearing about how and why people use it. Sometimes I even find something that I can translate into my scheme of things.
One of the reasons why I think it’s worth to make the effort to get involved in Wiki technology is that it opens up a door to a KIND of note-taking application. Since it uses a structured language, it can easily be translated into another structured language. If, at some point, I would need to change to another application, I can just export the whole database to HTML, which is basically text. And I could then import it (probably fairly easily into another application).
Too many of the other contenders have (or used to have) proprietary databases that don’t easily transform.
Manfred