FYI, my bookmarks add about 3000 items to the catalog and they don't get in the way.
To me it's like google. If what I want is the in the first page of results, I don't care if there are another 180,000 pages of them. Howard On Jul 23, 2012, at 8:51 AM, mason k wrote: > Good morning all you fine Quicksilverers. I have a few pontifications to > lavish. > > In the words of the 20th century lama Chögyam Trungpa, "precision breeds > relaxation." Having my Bookmarks in the Catalog triples the size of the > Catalog, which is why I don't want it. (Having my iTunes music in there would > multiply the size of the Catalog 100x and is laughably out of the question.) > > In my father's carpentry shop, his single organizational principle is "ready > to hand/out of the way". That is, each item in the shop must be either close > to hand or out of the way. The reasoning behind each item's placement is > actually less important than the discipline of the message: each item must be > explicitly the one or the other. The human mind will certainly find excellent > "whys" to fill in blanks. > > In QS, this means that I carefully curate what goes into the Catalog. Perhaps > hmelman has the answer: perhaps, given time, QuickSilver's machine learning > will correctly organize the shop for me. I certainly haven't given it enough > time to claim that it doesn't. Less the possibility of that deus ex machina, > each person needs to draw the line between "ready to hand" and "out of the > way" differently. I do believe that the very act of drawing the line is a > useful clarifying exercise: even if the computer would eventually (and > implicitly) draw much the same lines on my behalf. > > All of that said, "which water is too pure has no fish". So, I'm going to > dump the bookmarks into my beautiful Catalog for a week and see whether I'm > still rifling through garbage at the end. > > On Saturday, July 21, 2012 12:32:53 AM UTC-4, hmelman wrote: > > On Jul 20, 2012, at 4:31 PM, Daniel wrote: > >> A more general solution would be a way of making any set of Catalog scanners >> into a separate Catalog. Essentially, a way of maintaing n Catalogs on n >> different key sequences. >> >> That is an absolutely awesome idea (something I've thought of before, >> myself). +1 if there's anyone interested in implementing. > > So why is this useful? I'm sure there's something I'm not understanding. It > strikes me as "I want to find this stuff but not have it in the catalog, well > put it in the catalog". > > What's the issue with having one catalog with everything? When you want to > find something it's still in there. Just type a little more the first few > times and then QS learns. Are you browsing the results list rather than > continuing to type to find something in it? > > Howard > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > Quicksilver group. To post to this group, send email to > [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send > email to [email protected]. For more > options, visit this group at > https://groups.google.com/d/forum/blacktree-quicksilver?hl=en -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Quicksilver group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at https://groups.google.com/d/forum/blacktree-quicksilver?hl=en
