On Sunday, February 23, 2020 at 7:09:33 PM UTC-5, Thomas Passin wrote: > > With the command to add a backlink, I would say that we have a working > zettelkasten system that has essentially all the features of the original > paper system, with better searching and reorganizing abilities. >
I am attaching the requirements that I wrote up a while ago. They may have changed a tiny bit since then. I just went over them and yes, I think that with the three commands I've come up with, and the outline structure, we meet everything in them. #3, *Simple Section Demarkations*, is not specifically provided for. But with the single-line notation like *:cite: xxxxx*, and the ability to use RsT to put in sections and things like footnotes, I think #3 is covered. #10, *Display Styles*, is still a bit limited, but since you can build a tree section using clones, you can build any node arrangement you want in addition to the original tree. I expect that eventually we'll know what other kinds of display we want, and a plugin would be a good place to put code for implementing them. #11, *Citations*, can be done in any number of ways, and it might be different for different types of citations. A URL of a web page can be put in, say, a *:url: xxxx.edu* kind of marked line. Leo automatically makes that ctrl-clickable to open the web page. Academic citations could be put in a *:cite: xxxx line*, and a set of zettels could be used to hold all the complete citations. That's what the original zettelkasten did. BTW, be aware that the *":meta-name: xxx"* RsT notation requires a space after the second colon character. RsT often wants to have a blank line at the end, and this is especially important if you merge a number of the nodes in a subtree together as viewrendered3 can. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "leo-editor" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/leo-editor/7357ebb7-eafc-46b5-9f72-bb0082cf5b92%40googlegroups.com.Title: <string>
zettel_requirements.txt
Purpose
To replicate the essential features of the paper-based Zettelkassen system, with potential improvements.
Basic User Requirements
1. No Lockin
Requirement: The notes data must be in such a form that they may be transferred to another notes system (even a paper one) without losing any essential data.
Discussion: If the note-keeper decides to change to another notes mangement system, the data must be useful outside the Zettel-box, so that months or years of research not be lost. What is the most basic alternative system? That would probably a full-text search system. Another basic system would be a paper system like the original zettelkasten.
These needs lead to the next requirement.
2. Text Files
Requirement: The zettel-box notes must be in a text format. They may be one note per file, all notes in one file, or a combination. Alternatively, the system must be able to export such files with no loss of data.
Definition: "Text format" includes slightly structured text-based formats like Markdown or ReStructured Text. It excludes more complex formats such as XML. The intent is that the note files must be easily readable by a person.
Discussion: Using one file per note seems to be the simplest way to emulate the original paper-based system, which had one card per note. However, a larger file could be used if there is simple way to extract or recognize individual notes. This would allow a computer program to separate the individual note if needed.
3. Simple Section Demarkations
Requirement: If a note needs identified sections, the section demarkations must be easy to type, easy to read, and easy to parse by computer.
Discussion: An identified section could be a URL, a group of references to other notes, a tag or indexing aid, a citation list, etc.
4. Unique Identification
Requirement: Each note must be uniquely identifiable, so that it can be referenced by other notes.
7. Time Stamp
Requirement: Each note must be able to have an optional timestamp.
Discussion: A number of people have written that having a timestamp is helpful in reconstructing the context of recent work, since the most recent notes most likely represent work that was recently done.
It is currently unclear about whether only a creation date would be enough, or whether a last-modified date will also be helpful. It the interest of simplicity in a potential move to hand-created or paper notes, a single date would be better.
8. Tags
Requirement: The system must be capable of optionally attaching one or more "tags" to any note. Tags must be easy to create, delete, and attach.
Definition: A tag means a property represented by a name (a string).
Discussion: Tags serve primarily as a filtering mechanism, to help identify notes in a general area of interest.
9. Backlinks
Requirement: For every link to another note that is inserted into a note, the system must create a corresponding link in the target back to the first note. Alternatively, the linking system may be inherently bi-directional, such that backlinks occur automatically.
Discussion: If the system exports data to text files, the backlinks must be included in the exported notes data.
10. Display Styles
Requirement: Selected subsets of notes must be displayable in both a hierarchical display (where parent/child or sibling relationships exist) and a non-hierarchical display of associated notes.
Discussion: A strength of the original zettelkasten paper system was that one was not forced into thinking about the notes as having any kind of a strict hierarchy. This feature must be preserved in the new system. The apparently hierarchical identity coding was mainly for locating notes in the note boxes. However, notes near each other were more likely to relate to each other.
It would be possible to have parent/child relationship between notes that were not located near each other, but having them close together tends to make them more available when working on a subset of notes.
Requirement: It must be possible to add additional types of displays besides a basic parent/child.style.
Discussion: This should not be taken to imply that any arbitrary display idea should be easy or even feasible to implement. It is intended to indicate that other display styles than a straight parent/child hierarchical display will probably be found to be desirable, and that the system should make it possible to implement at least some kinds.
Display Styles
In Leo, the most obvious way to display subsets of notes would be to clone them and move the clones under a single organizing node. This collection could be ephemeral or permanent as the user desires.
For a non-hierarchical display, the simplest way would be to have all the notes (or their clones) as siblings under a single organizing node.
LeoVue is one system that makes possible coordination with browser-based displays, some of which can be be interactive so that actions in the browser can be reflected back to the Leo file. There are probably other such systems.
This is one way in which new display kinds could be created, ones that Leo's panes and display mechanisms may be less suited for. The cost, aside from the effort of implementation, would be that a web server would have to be involved, most likely on the user's computer. However, such relatively simple personal servers are not hard to install and get working.
11. Citations
Requirement: It must be possible to maintain a collection of citations to source material. It must be possible for a zettel-box note to reference any of these citations. It must be possible to retrieve the text of the citation when desired.
Definition: "Citation" means a standardized means of reference to a specific source material.
Discussion: An academic citation includes title and and publication data in a standardized form. This is the main kind of citation envisioned here. Possibly, a citation could also be a URL to an on-line resource.
