Forum Posts Feed
Outlining and cloned entries
< Next Topic | Back to topic list | Previous Topic >
Posted by Skywatcher
Feb 6, 2023 at 11:06 AM
Sounds like Tinderbox is exactly what you’re looking for.
Posted by MadaboutDana
Feb 6, 2023 at 02:13 PM
Hot diggity darn! Treeline is still going – amazing!
Posted by James Salla
Feb 7, 2023 at 05:01 AM
Treeline implements cloning differently from Brainstorm. In Brainstorm a cloned node has a button next to it that looks something like “[<>].” For these entries, the right and left arrow keys will let you hope from one instance of the node in the outline to another. Treeline puts a window at the top of the screen that shows every location where that node appears.
Posted by 22111
Feb 27, 2023 at 04:29 PM
Two citations from above:
“This is the core of what InfoQube is and can do. Items are like individuals, i.e. you and me.”
“Sounds like Tinderbox is exactly what you’re looking for.”
Perhaps.
It’s the specifics which make the difference, and so I - but that’s just me, really… - I always give’em.
You know I work with Ultra Recall, so here’s my report: It’s not about single items, being cloned - that’s quite easy (whilst developers like “RightNotes”’, e.g., don’t even provide that, and, btw, RN’s “tagging” feature (which is often mentioned as “sort of a replacement”, in RN’s context) is a joke (and proves RN’s developer doesn’t know much about the users’ interaction with software) -,
but it’s especially about whole subtrees being cloned “forever”, and then staying “equal”, wherever they are, and wherever they go.
(This being said, SQLite’s in-real-life-limits (whilst not being acknowledged by SQLite evangelists, relentless citing theoretical limits, but obviously none’o'em administers about 400k items, totaling about 10 gb…) will somewhat thwart your verve to set up “the perfect IMS” for yourself…)
As you know, any ontology is “just by ONE (albeit “major”, “principal”, “basic”, whatever…) trait, and thus, the necessity of “cloning” arises… BUT the “good news” is, most - I don’t say: all - such needs then will not concern single items / records, but entities comprising quite a lot of “descendants” (I prefer the terms “ascendants” and “descendants”, to “parents” and “children” / “child items”, since the former terms only comprises the notion of hierarchy within that group of records).
Thus, pay attention to any (possibly unwanted) “effects” your then, seemingly, “free choice” of the occurrence of that cloned entity might have, for any editing, addition, re-arrangement, etc., and then, how “robust” it’ll be, i.e. if you can really rely upon it.
And yes, this (currently) excludes “subscriptionware” like “Ulysses App” if I’m not mistaken, but then, when somebody’s right, I’m delighted to acknowledge they are, and thus, see https://writing.stackexchange.com/questions/43444/how-to-do-a-global-find-and-replace-in-ulysses where “RJStanford” says, “Considering that Ulysses is designed to hold all of your writing for all time [well, well, well: wait!, I’d say… but then:], a true global F&R would almost always be the wrong solution.” - so true, as far as I’m concerned…
As far as “the third dimension” is concerned, UR’s my choice for Windows, haven’t found any better yet.