Maurice,
What about 'Custom Tags'?

In SheetPlanner we use that term to describe columns that you set up yourself.

Peter

....I mean we use the term 'Custom Columns'

Peter

SheetPlanner wrote:

Maurice,
What about 'Custom Tags'?

In SheetPlanner we use that term to describe columns that you set up
yourself.

Peter

We keep coming back to Tags, so there must be something there. We probably just need to figure out a way to differentiate between the current outline tags and the new ones.

Since the new tags would be key/value pairs, what about "Compound Tags" for the new row level ones? I think it is descriptive and still familiar.

Hi Maurice,

Unless you plan on providing a single grid-like UI, I would avoid names that have too much of a visual aspect.
i.e. Nodes, Rows, Columns have visuals that users come to expect

As to Tags, AFAIK they are always Yes / No properties and hence do not have any values

So I would stick to more generic names, such as: Items, Tags and Values (or Properties)

This is how it's done in InfoQube IM

Pierre Paul Landry
IQ Designer
https://www.infoqube.biz/Home

Thanks for taking the time to reply. I always like listening to designers.

Pierre Paul Landry wrote:

Hi Maurice,

Unless you plan on providing a single grid-like UI, I would avoid names
that have too much of a visual aspect.
i.e. Nodes, Rows, Columns have visuals that users come to expect

You make a good point. If I want to make a tree view or mind-map view at some point, those terms will be confusing.

As to Tags, AFAIK they are always Yes / No properties and hence do not
have any values

That's how I see it too, but Tags might still be the closest thing we have yet.

So I would stick to more generic names, such as: Items, Tags and Values
(or Properties)

I think I understand where you are coming from. I think that you can make things so general that users don't have any frame of reference. I'm not huge on metaphor, but I do understand it is somewhat useful.

Tag as a metaphor makes some sense here. You can put tags (like price tags) on items to give them additional structured meaning. That could help the user grasp the concept faster than if it was called something that could mean anything.

This is how it's done in InfoQube IM

Pierre Paul Landry
IQ Designer
https://www.infoqube.biz/Home

You are referring to Data about data. Therefore... Dada

Okay, maybe a bit out there.

Marker? Attribute?

Token is not terrible... but I see and sense hesitation with it. I have similar thoughts.

mry53 wrote:

Marker? Attribute?

Row Attributes is the best name I've heard yet. It is succinct, descriptive, and not too scary sounding. It looks like a winner to me.

On a different topic...

I've been thinking about the Focus command that lots of outliners seem to have. I'm hesitant to implement it in Zavala because I haven't had anyone ask why I haven't yet. Besides, my outline editor context menu is almost too long as it is, which is where the Focus command would logically go. I can see that you might find part of your outline something that you want to focus on, but just zooming in on that row the best solution these days?

As an alternative, I am thinking about making an Extract command. If you "Extracted" a row, it would create a new outline with the row as the title of the new outline and any decedent rows as rows in the new outline. In its place would be a row with the title of the new outline linked to the new outline.

I think this has more utility than the Focus command and would be useful for creating knowledge graphs instead of just large outlines. It would add to the editor context menu, but I think it might be worth adding another item if it packs enough punch.

If I implemented the Extract command, does anyone think I would still need the Focus command?

Maurice Parker wrote:

On a different topic...

I've been thinking about the Focus command that lots of outliners seem
to have. I'm hesitant to implement it in Zavala because I haven't had
anyone ask why I haven't yet. Besides, my outline editor context menu is
almost too long as it is, which is where the Focus command would
logically go. I can see that you might find part of your outline
something that you want to focus on, but just zooming in on that row the
best solution these days?

Since the 80s I always liked how (what's now the app) Opal used "Outline Current Topic" in Preferences.

https://share.getcloudapp.com/GGu4z7b2

satis wrote:

Since the 80s I always liked how (what's now the app) Opal used "Outline
Current Topic" in Preferences.

Very different from what I was thinking of, but a good idea. I've created an issue to track this. https://github.com/vincode-io/Zavala/issues/135

As a Zavala user, I think this is an interesting idea.

I like the focus option too, mind you, simply because it often serves to focus the mind – you don't necessarily want to change the structure of your overall outline, you just want to zero in on a specific item/subitems.

You can see where this is going... A + B = hurrah!

;-)

Maurice Parker wrote:

On a different topic...

I've been thinking about the Focus command that lots of outliners seem
to have. I'm hesitant to implement it in Zavala because I haven't had
anyone ask why I haven't yet. Besides, my outline editor context menu is
almost too long as it is, which is where the Focus command would
logically go. I can see that you might find part of your outline
something that you want to focus on, but just zooming in on that row the
best solution these days?

As an alternative, I am thinking about making an Extract command. If you
"Extracted" a row, it would create a new outline with the row as the
title of the new outline and any decedent rows as rows in the new
outline. In its place would be a row with the title of the new outline
linked to the new outline.

I think this has more utility than the Focus command and would be useful
for creating knowledge graphs instead of just large outlines. It would
add to the editor context menu, but I think it might be worth adding
another item if it packs enough punch.

If I implemented the Extract command, does anyone think I would still
need the Focus command?

MadaboutDana wrote:

You can see where this is going... A + B = hurrah!

I deserved that. :-) I should have framed the question as an either/or thing.

I've really run out of space on the Editor row context menu. In fact, I'm stripping out Indent/Outdent from that menu in Version 2. (We've got plenty of other ways to Indent/Outdent and don't need another). If I add both Focus and Extract functions, I would have to add 2 more things to that menu. If software design wasn't a system of trade-offs, I would just implement both and stop wasting so much mental effort on it.

I had something of an epiphany today while reading up on Dave Winer's Drummer. He uses really large outlines with lots of different things in them. For example, one OPML file equals one blog with multiple days of entries in it. What is more common these days is to build your outlines into a knowledge graph, (Roam, Logseq, etc...) where each day of the blog would be a separate outline.

I think it boils down to the difference between a library type application (Zavala, Roam, Logseq, etc...) that manages the outline storage for you vs. a file based approach where it is easier to put as much as you can in each OPML file. You can expect smaller, interlinked outlines in a library application than you can in a file based one.

That leads me to believe that Extract is a better fit for Zavala than Focus. It encourages smaller, interconnected outlines that work well in a library type application. I'm not saying that Focus isn't still valuable. I just believe that it is less valuable when you aren't feeling like you have to stuff as much as you can into each OPML file.

Heh, sorry! But yes, it does boil down to a philosophical issue, perhaps, and Zavala is similar to Outlinely, in that it positively encourages one to create lots of outlines sitting together in one big outline (the navigation bar). In that sense, maybe extraction is better than focusing. On the other hand, maybe you're making it too complicated and you ought to use a Workflowy-like approach based on an extended left-hand touchplate – click the arrow and the outline folds/unfolds; click the area to the left (in European languages) of the arrow and you "focus" on that particular item (i.e. raise/lift it to a "virtual" top level).

Having just opened up Zavala and played with it alongside DynaList/Workflowy, however, I tend to agree that you could make your special thing extraction rather than focusing. Focusing can also, just occasionally, be really, really annoying! ;-)

However, if you're going to do that, I strongly suggest that you also introduce support for nested tags, so you can create a folding outline in the navigation bar as well. That would turn Zavala into a very powerful tool.

Cheers,
Bill

Maurice Parker wrote:

MadaboutDana wrote:

>You can see where this is going... A + B = hurrah!

I deserved that. :-) I should have framed the question as an either/or
thing.

I've really run out of space on the Editor row context menu. In fact,
I'm stripping out Indent/Outdent from that menu in Version 2. (We've got
plenty of other ways to Indent/Outdent and don't need another). If I add
both Focus and Extract functions, I would have to add 2 more things to
that menu. If software design wasn't a system of trade-offs, I would
just implement both and stop wasting so much mental effort on it.

I had something of an epiphany today while reading up on Dave Winer's
Drummer. He uses really large outlines with lots of different things in
them. For example, one OPML file equals one blog with multiple days of
entries in it. What is more common these days is to build your outlines
into a knowledge graph, (Roam, Logseq, etc...) where each day of the
blog would be a separate outline.

I think it boils down to the difference between a library type
application (Zavala, Roam, Logseq, etc...) that manages the outline
storage for you vs. a file based approach where it is easier to put as
much as you can in each OPML file. You can expect smaller, interlinked
outlines in a library application than you can in a file based one.

That leads me to believe that Extract is a better fit for Zavala than
Focus. It encourages smaller, interconnected outlines that work well in
a library type application. I'm not saying that Focus isn't still
valuable. I just believe that it is less valuable when you aren't
feeling like you have to stuff as much as you can into each OPML file.

Just noticed that Zavala got noticed by ThriftMac, a site which highlights Mac freeware.

https://www.thriftmac.com/organizers/zavala

Zavala 2.0 Beta 1 is now in TestFlight and can be tested on iOS and macOS. Testflight on macOS is still a little confusing. You have to be running macOS 12 Monterey and already have TestFlight installed from the Mac App Store. If you click the TestFlight link on macOS and don't have TestFlight installed, it will prompt you to install the iOS version. Not very helpful.

https://testflight.apple.com/join/iFbND23m

Some things we've discussed in this thread aren't in v2 and are slated to be built in v3. Those are Row Attributes (formerly Row Metadata) and the Extract command. Although, the Extract command might show up in a v2.1 or something.

The tentpole feature in v2 is Shortcuts support. I did my best to make sure every aspect of an outline was able to be manipulated. I didn't want to go all out like some apps (i.e. OmniiOutliner) and allow the UI to be extensible. There are a couple Shortcut Actions that fall into that category, but for the most part it is just directly working with outlines themselves. It isn't that I don't find an extensible UI to be useful. I'm just not convinced that I want to the added complexity just yet (if ever).

Here are some examples of things you can do with Shortcuts and Zavala 2.0.

https://zavala.vincode.io/help/Shortcut_Examples.md/

Another new feature that I added is the ability to go back and forward while working with outlines like you can in a web browser. This is very useful if you are interlinking outlines or are working with multiple ones at the same time. I think this really makes Zavala more friendly for folks using it as a PKB.

There is a lot more. If you want a full changelog and more details, here is a blog post about it.

https://zavala.vincode.io/2021/12/09/2.0_Beta_1.html

I'd love to get some feedback on the changes in 2.0. There are some UI changes in there that I think might be controversial and am curious as to if I am going to get pushback on them. I'm of the opinion that they are improvements, but you just don't know until other people have a chance to use them.

Nice one, Maurice, especially the Shortcuts compatibility and the forward/back buttons – funnily enough, I was going to write to you suggesting that!

Brilliant. I’ll look forward to playing with the latest version.

Cheers,
Bill

Very nice Maurice. Can't wait to get my hands on it, but unfortunately I'm staying put Big Sur until I switch over to a new M-series Mac in the spring.

Maurice,
Nice work. Shortcuts functionality is a big addition.
Regards
Peter

satis wrote:

Very nice Maurice. Can't wait to get my hands on it, but unfortunately
I'm staying put Big Sur until I switch over to a new M-series Mac in the
spring.

Zavala will run on Big Sur still on v2.0. You just can't test it yet because TestFlight doesn't work on Big Sur. Hopefully, I will get v2.0 released to production in January and you can give it a try then.

I like the interface revisions – all a big step forward, IMHO.

Cheers,
Bill

MadaboutDana wrote:

I like the interface revisions – all a big step forward,
IMHO.

Cheers,
Bill

Thanks for the feedback. I got a lot of design help from Brad Ellis in v2.0. He's a professional and very skilled designer. He pointed out lots of UI inconsistencies and made some good revisions. The new way to enter Tags was all his idea. I'm very happy with how it turned out.

I had wondered how people would react to my remapping command-[ and command-] to be "Go Backward" and "Go Forward" instead of Indent and Outdent. It is a little scary to be changing something like this even on a major version release.

In the end I felt it was more important to match the keyboard shortcuts of Safari and Finder than to match OmniOutliner. Besides, Indent and Outdent keyboard shortcuts are also available via the Move commands as we'll as Tab and Shift-Tab. I apologize to anyone used to using command-[ and command-] as Indent and Outdent. I realize how hard it is to retrain muscle memory.

As I was commenting in the OPML thread, it occurred to me that I should probably point out something that Shortcuts enables in Zavala 2.0. You can create a single archive of you entire PKB that contains interlinked outlines and images. It is in the zip format and contains PNG files and OPML files. There is also a companion script to load an archive into Zavala.

This means you can back up your entire Zavala account and then restore it if you need to in v2.0. You can also take the load script and use it as a starting point to make a Shortcut that imports from your existing outliner as long as you can get to the existing data.

Dang, that’s useful – I must try it out. What a great idea.

As for indent/outdent: like many others, I automatically use tab/shift-tab rather than OmniOutliner’s (idiosyncratic) shortcuts. So no worries!

Maurice Parker wrote:

As I was commenting in the OPML thread, it occurred to me that I should
probably point out something that Shortcuts enables in Zavala 2.0. You
can create a single archive of you entire PKB that contains interlinked
outlines and images. It is in the zip format and contains PNG files and
OPML files. There is also a companion script to load an archive into
Zavala.

This means you can back up your entire Zavala account and then restore
it if you need to in v2.0. You can also take the load script and use it
as a starting point to make a Shortcut that imports from your existing
outliner as long as you can get to the existing data.

I see that v.2x is now out in the Mac App Store, and adds Shortcuts support.

Still free, no Pro features/pricing yet.

I have no plans to ever try to monetize Zavala. I’m retired and I work on it and NetNewsWire, just to keep myself busy.

I’m pretty happy with the second version of Zavala. I spent a lot of time making the Editor faster and removing edge-case bugs. I also got some design help from a real pro. This release is much more polished than the previous ones.

I’ll post more on the Zavala blog soon about the process of building this release.