[tw5] Re: [tw] Re: History: Is TiddlyWiki A Card-Index System?

[David Gifford]

Wow thanks for pointing that out, I hadn't noticed that feature yet. Nice!

On Monday, April 30, 2018 at 3:00:40 AM UTC-5, AlexHough wrote:
>
> The new feature in the latest release where you can change the text for 
> "New Tiddler" is more useful that I ever imagined. It enables the user to 
> construct a more meaningful set of prompts with TW.
>
> It stuck me that prompts can be designed to help enhance the feeling of 
> collaboration with the technology -- like Luhmann 
>
>
>
> Alex
>
> On 5 April 2018 at 21:32, @TiddlyTweeter  > wrote:
>
>> Ciao TonyM
>>
>> Lovely reply. Actually I don't think we disagree at all. The point I was, 
>> centrally, trying to make was that TW is NOT inherently any kind of 
>> Card-Index. 
>>
>> You CAN use it to construct Card Indices, no problem. And it is. And I 
>> think YOU were saying that? Right? That I agree with FULLY.
>>
>> BUT. my key point was not opinion actually (despite some of my opinions 
>> around that)--rather it was focused on "what is the minimal unit in TW?" 
>> Its is certainly NOT a Card Index. Its a fragment before that. That 
>> fragment, Tiddler, can take on the guise of a Card Index but its basic 
>> state isn't one unless you intended that. Its just as much more like a note 
>> on the back of a fag packet :-).
>>
>> Josiah , x
>>
>> TonyM wrote:
>>>
>>> You say "2) [TW]  its native metaphor of basic data (fragments) are more 
>>> in-kin with "back-of-an-envelope" notes and "post-it-notes" of any size. 
>>> Card Index cards already have an implying of a series, a purposive 
>>> collection. Notes on scrap paper usually don't."
>>>
>>> That is your interpretation of TW "structure" or lack of, I do not share 
>>> this. I see it's potential both as unstructured and structured (multiple 
>>> alternatives).
>>>
>> -- 
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
>> "TiddlyWiki" group.
>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an 
>> email to tiddlywiki+...@googlegroups.com .
>> To post to this group, send email to tiddl...@googlegroups.com 
>> .
>> Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/tiddlywiki.
>> To view this discussion on the web visit 
>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywiki/aa1de5b7-ae97-4c85-9518-0cd1b3e98b14%40googlegroups.com
>>  
>> 
>> .
>>
>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>>
>
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"TiddlyWiki" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to tiddlywiki+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to tiddlywiki@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/tiddlywiki.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywiki/1a7016ce-7100-4a8a-aecf-660d81cdfe6a%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[tw5] Re: [tw] Re: History: Is TiddlyWiki A Card-Index System?

[Alex Hough]

The new feature in the latest release where you can change the text for
"New Tiddler" is more useful that I ever imagined. It enables the user to
construct a more meaningful set of prompts with TW.

It stuck me that prompts can be designed to help enhance the feeling of
collaboration with the technology -- like Luhmann



Alex

On 5 April 2018 at 21:32, @TiddlyTweeter  wrote:

> Ciao TonyM
>
> Lovely reply. Actually I don't think we disagree at all. The point I was,
> centrally, trying to make was that TW is NOT inherently any kind of
> Card-Index.
>
> You CAN use it to construct Card Indices, no problem. And it is. And I
> think YOU were saying that? Right? That I agree with FULLY.
>
> BUT. my key point was not opinion actually (despite some of my opinions
> around that)--rather it was focused on "what is the minimal unit in TW?"
> Its is certainly NOT a Card Index. Its a fragment before that. That
> fragment, Tiddler, can take on the guise of a Card Index but its basic
> state isn't one unless you intended that. Its just as much more like a note
> on the back of a fag packet :-).
>
> Josiah , x
>
> TonyM wrote:
>>
>> You say "2) [TW]  its native metaphor of basic data (fragments) are more
>> in-kin with "back-of-an-envelope" notes and "post-it-notes" of any size.
>> Card Index cards already have an implying of a series, a purposive
>> collection. Notes on scrap paper usually don't."
>>
>> That is your interpretation of TW "structure" or lack of, I do not share
>> this. I see it's potential both as unstructured and structured (multiple
>> alternatives).
>>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "TiddlyWiki" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to tiddlywiki+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> To post to this group, send email to tiddlywiki@googlegroups.com.
> Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/tiddlywiki.
> To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/
> msgid/tiddlywiki/aa1de5b7-ae97-4c85-9518-0cd1b3e98b14%40googlegroups.com
> 
> .
>
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"TiddlyWiki" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to tiddlywiki+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to tiddlywiki@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/tiddlywiki.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywiki/CALc1hYf%2B2WUF%2BQX4_6KcoC6riA-VtLrEL-JijJcTptgKJ%3Da%2Bww%40mail.gmail.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[tw] Re: History: Is TiddlyWiki A Card-Index System?

[@TiddlyTweeter]

Ciao TonyM

Lovely reply. Actually I don't think we disagree at all. The point I was, 
centrally, trying to make was that TW is NOT inherently any kind of 
Card-Index. 

You CAN use it to construct Card Indices, no problem. And it is. And I 
think YOU were saying that? Right? That I agree with FULLY.

BUT. my key point was not opinion actually (despite some of my opinions 
around that)--rather it was focused on "what is the minimal unit in TW?" 
Its is certainly NOT a Card Index. Its a fragment before that. That 
fragment, Tiddler, can take on the guise of a Card Index but its basic 
state isn't one unless you intended that. Its just as much more like a note 
on the back of a fag packet :-).

Josiah , x

TonyM wrote:
>
> You say "2) [TW]  its native metaphor of basic data (fragments) are more 
> in-kin with "back-of-an-envelope" notes and "post-it-notes" of any size. 
> Card Index cards already have an implying of a series, a purposive 
> collection. Notes on scrap paper usually don't."
>
> That is your interpretation of TW "structure" or lack of, I do not share 
> this. I see it's potential both as unstructured and structured (multiple 
> alternatives).
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"TiddlyWiki" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to tiddlywiki+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to tiddlywiki@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/tiddlywiki.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywiki/aa1de5b7-ae97-4c85-9518-0cd1b3e98b14%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[tw] Re: History: Is TiddlyWiki A Card-Index System?

[TonyM]

Josiah,

You say "2) [TW]  its native metaphor of basic data (fragments) are more 
in-kin with "back-of-an-envelope" notes and "post-it-notes" of any size. 
Card Index cards already have an implying of a series, a purposive 
collection. Notes on scrap paper usually don't."

That is your interpretation of TW "structure" or lack of, I do not share 
this. I see it's potential both as unstructured and structured (multiple 
alternatives). It is quite east to "impose" structures of TW through the 
modification of the interface to make it easy to use TW a particular way. I 
appreciate the unstructured limited barriers to capturing ideas which I can 
then access by a range of alternate structures. 

In fact I am building tools as I go to do this because I do very much focus 
on TiddlyWiki as a universal tool set, one idea is to capture notes, in a 
multilevel hierarchy then build an advanced next previous that allows a 
path to be followed through the whole heirachy with conditions available to 
determine if a set of children should be reviewed, or repeated for N cases.

(almost) Every form of structure can be imposed if desired in TW

Regards
Tony  

On Sunday, April 1, 2018 at 12:32:00 AM UTC+11, @TiddlyTweeter wrote:
>
> Ciao TonyM
>
> TonyM wrote:
>>
>> "Yes, but", - That is my answer to the question asked.
>>
>
> Right. And also "No, but..." 
>
> The fundamental architecture in TW is not "slot based". Classical card 
> indexes are. The "free-form" types of card-index are also still defined as 
> "slots" or "blobs" of data ... i.e. they are DISCRETE in foundation in 
> scope, even if content is YET to be organised/understood.
>
> Its a very interesting discussion to examine what is the "integral data 
> unit?"
>
> To cut to the chase on TW: (1) it can support easily the Card Index 
> approach; but (2) its native metaphor of basic data (fragments) are more 
> in-kin with "back-of-an-envelope" notes and "post-it-notes" of any size. 
> Card Index cards already have an implying of a series, a purposive 
> collection. Notes on scrap paper usually don't.  
>
> Just thoughts
> Josiah
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"TiddlyWiki" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to tiddlywiki+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to tiddlywiki@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/tiddlywiki.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywiki/480b7854-fdec-45ad-8d7c-c514a90bd291%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[tw] Re: History: Is TiddlyWiki A Card-Index System?

[Tristan Kohl]

Great recap Josiah, thank you for that :)

I want to drop my two cents as well: Before I came to TW I was just looking 
for a note taking application and tried many (DokuWiki, Zim, 
CherryTree,...) and mentioned Zettelkasten. Since I live in Germany it was 
pretty easy for me to get into the mostly german community as there was no 
language barrier for me to overcome. However after some months and dozens 
of cards I came to the conclusion that "finding emerging interconnections" 
is not the same as "note taking".

I then stumbled on TW and gave it a try as I did with all the others. Back 
then I did not expect that I would fall in love with it and TW bringing me 
an exciting new hobby waking the urge to learn programming. Today, looking 
back at my odyssey I see TW as a general purpose database which provides 
the (boring but necessary) backend (storing, linking, searching, saving, 
... )  to build any imaginable application on top. So I would second Tony's 
observation and state that TW can be used as the database to implement a 
full blown Zettelkasten. But you could not use Zettelkasten for everything 
TW can do (see my experiences above).

Nowadays I use TW as a tool to keep track of my bees, my honey wine 
production, home automation and many other things which I could not do on 
top of many other software other than a real DBM - but than I would have to 
recreate the frontend over and over again instead of just using a bunch of 
widgets and wikitext.

I just noticed that the author dropped the original Zettelkasten 
application in favour of his new app - TW still exists so I would say that 
is another win for us users :)

Cheers,
Tristan

On Thursday, March 29, 2018 at 4:07:03 PM UTC+2, @TiddlyTweeter wrote:
>
> Mark S. asked ... 
>
>> Perhaps with your background you could explain Zettelkasten. There seems 
>> to be an almost cult-like culture around a system of taking notes (by 
>> software or index cards). https://zettelkasten.de/ .
>>
>
> Mark S. asked me that interesting question in another thread, started by 
> Mat, comparing TW to other "similar software". I been thinking about Mark's 
> question. I wasn't sure if people here are interested in this, but then I 
> thought well, hey, they might be ...
>
> "Zettelkästen" is just the German for "card indices" in general. 
> https://zettelkasten.de/ is a specific "Zettelkästen Methodology" derived 
> from the work done originally (on physical cards) by the brilliant prolific 
> sociologist and systems theorist Niklas Luhmann.
>
> He was one of several social scientists who prefigured issues that would 
> come up in the development of software for "soft data" and "emergent 
> structure". The point being that in the social sciences, a lot of the time, 
> theories/patterns emerge during research, so you need flexibility--its not 
> like hard science which is more driven by strict prior hypotheses that have 
> clear "data slots"--nor is it like birth & death records, nor address books 
> etc. In short, social science (especially ideographic fieldwork) needs an 
> "open" way to record information. 
>
> The PRACTICAL issue for the Luhmann style Zettelkästeners, in software, 
> was (1) how to maintain the integrity of the record (the card) AND (2) 
> relate that record to other records (the cards) in an EMERGENT way. In 
> other words NOT be a strict database that only had determined prior slots 
> (hypothesised significant). At the time of emergence of such work it was a 
> hot issue.
>
> The "Zettelkästen Methodology" is interesting and clearly is still used to 
> good effect. Not so remarked upon, but significant, is that quite a lot of 
> the sense-making in it is EXTERNAL to the computer. Its about guesses 
> external to the data itself to find pattern. 
>
> Luhmann make two Zettelkästen (manual, physical) in his life, with 
> thousands of records each, and they informed and structured most all of his 
> voluminous writing. It worked. But I'm not convinced it worked without HIM 
> doing "in head" most of the cross-connection work.
>
> Zettelkästen Methodology now looks a bit like a "blast from the past" ... 
> I mean the oft discussion of the vitality of "Tags" OVER 
> "Topics/Categories" is already a done deal on the net nowadays. So in that 
> sense its a bit like a Philosophy of Knowledge that's done it job already.
>
> ---
>
> On the comparison of TiddlyWiki and Card Indices ... which OFTEN users 
> point to and celebrate ... well it works for SOME TiddlyWiki set up that 
> way. No harm in using that analogy. BUT the analogy quickly breaks down.
>
> Card Index systems (& computer equivalents) are base on *the sacredness 
> of the record (Card)* whilst TiddlyWiki is based on the *equality of the 
> fragment (Tiddler)*. So what in the Zettelkästen Methodology is seen as a 
> "basic unit" (card), in TiddlyWiki might also be a card, but could also be 
> composed of fragments (Tiddlers), decomposed and reassembled multiple ways. 
>
> Zettelkästen 

[tw] Re: History: Is TiddlyWiki A Card-Index System?

[@TiddlyTweeter]

Ciao TonyM

TonyM wrote:
>
> "Yes, but", - That is my answer to the question asked.
>

Right. And also "No, but..." 

The fundamental architecture in TW is not "slot based". Classical card 
indexes are. The "free-form" types of card-index are also still defined as 
"slots" or "blobs" of data ... i.e. they are DISCRETE in foundation in 
scope, even if content is YET to be organised/understood.

Its a very interesting discussion to examine what is the "integral data 
unit?"

To cut to the chase on TW: (1) it can support easily the Card Index 
approach; but (2) its native metaphor of basic data (fragments) are more 
in-kin with "back-of-an-envelope" notes and "post-it-notes" of any size. 
Card Index cards already have an implying of a series, a purposive 
collection. Notes on scrap paper usually don't.  

Just thoughts
Josiah

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"TiddlyWiki" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to tiddlywiki+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to tiddlywiki@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/tiddlywiki.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywiki/8622125d-01c2-4f7b-a0d5-2e8d118a83c7%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[tw] Re: History: Is TiddlyWiki A Card-Index System?

[@TiddlyTweeter]

Hi Lorenzo. Thanks for that post. I was glad to read it. And its worth 
repeating ...

LDL wrote:
>
> I've been a longtime silent reader of this forum and zettelkasten 
> practitioner.
>
> ... In my experience TiddlyWiki can be used as a valid digital 
> zettelkasten. The software itself is perfectly capable of implementing all 
> the basic requirements of the system, with some added bonuses like 
> backlinks, lists and transclusion. The guys at https://zettelkasten.de/ 
> make a big deal about adopting a plain text format for the sake of data 
> longevity, but as long as I'm able to export all my tiddlers as json file 
> (easy to parse and reuse with some basic coding skills) I'm perfectly fine 
> with storing my data in TiddlyWiki. 
>

I totally agree that its pretty easy in TiddlyWiki to create a valid, good, 
zettelkasten. And that its a good application of TW. There can be a good 
fit between the two.

My only concern, as of today, is reaching the limit in the number of 
> tiddlers and size of the file that TiddlyWiki can manage, but for now 
> everything is working smoothly.
>
 
Right. There are performance issues that can come up with TiddlyWiki at 
very large scale. FWIW, its being discussed and worked on at the moment. 
Some things can be improved a lot on speed. But there is a limit as TW 
doesn't use database style indexing. 

At what point it slows down is pretty much an empirical matter because of 
the complexities of specific TiddlyWiki. Some can be huge and efficient. 
Others only moderate size and inefficient. At the moment.

To anyone interested in the subject I highly recommend having a look at the 
blog 
> of Manfred Kuehn 
> , who also 
> translated into English two essays of Luhmann  
> himself about the Zettelkasten system. There is also the recent book 
> by  Sönke Ahrens  that offers a detailed and 
> thorough explanation of the method along with a lot useful resources about 
> note-taking and knowledge work.
>

For folk interested in the broader development of software sensitive to 
information philosophies I do find Luhmann & the zettelkasten method it 
inspired very helpful. Because it is explicit about what it is doing and 
why. So it helps, also, get other things in perspective.

Best wishes
Josiah

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"TiddlyWiki" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to tiddlywiki+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to tiddlywiki@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/tiddlywiki.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywiki/6eeb2268-ff01-4ea5-aae8-49352e183ea0%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[tw] Re: History: Is TiddlyWiki A Card-Index System?

[LDL]

Hello,
I've been a longtime silent reader of this forum and zettelkasten 
practitioner.

Thank you Josiah for your explanation and for the stimulating perspective 
on index cards. In my experience TiddlyWiki can be used as a valid digital 
zettelkasten. The software itself is perfectly capable of implementing all 
the basic requirements of the system, with some added bonuses like 
backlinks, lists and transclusion. The guys at https://zettelkasten.de/ 
make a big deal about adopting a plain text format for the sake of data 
longevity, but as long as I'm able to export all my tiddlers as json file 
(easy to parse and reuse with some basic coding skills) I'm perfectly fine 
with storing my data in TiddlyWiki. My only concern, as of today, is 
reaching the limit in the number of tiddlers and size of the file that 
TiddlyWiki can manage, but for now everything is working smoothly.

To anyone interested in the subject I highly recommend having a look at the 
blog 
of Manfred Kuehn 
, who also 
translated into English two essays of Luhmann  
himself about the Zettelkasten system. There is also the recent book 
by  Sönke Ahrens  that offers a detailed and 
thorough explanation of the method along with a lot useful resources about 
note-taking and knowledge work.

Regards,
Lorenzo
 

Il giorno sabato 31 marzo 2018 06:11:39 UTC+2, TonyM ha scritto:
>
> Josiah, 
>
> "Yes, but", - That is my answer to the question asked.
>
> The but comes in because it can be A Card-Index System or more. Most 
> algorithms, such as the card-index can be implemented in TiddlyWiki but 
> they can go way beyond, and any algorithm can be developed with continuous 
> improvement. This is a key reason I have committed to TiddlyWiki as my 
> platform of choice. Algorithms that have stood the test of time, have being 
> refined by practice and wisdom  are very good starting points. In fact I 
> moved to TiddlyWiki in the early days to escape the limitations of a 
> sophisticated personal information and task management system that was on 
> paper, yet really powerful.
>
> Regards
> Tony
>
>
>
> On Friday, March 30, 2018 at 1:07:03 AM UTC+11, @TiddlyTweeter wrote:
>>
>> Mark S. asked ... 
>>
>>> Perhaps with your background you could explain Zettelkasten. There seems 
>>> to be an almost cult-like culture around a system of taking notes (by 
>>> software or index cards). https://zettelkasten.de/ .
>>>
>>
>> Mark S. asked me that interesting question in another thread, started by 
>> Mat, comparing TW to other "similar software". I been thinking about Mark's 
>> question. I wasn't sure if people here are interested in this, but then I 
>> thought well, hey, they might be ...
>>
>> "Zettelkästen" is just the German for "card indices" in general. 
>> https://zettelkasten.de/ is a specific "Zettelkästen Methodology" 
>> derived from the work done originally (on physical cards) by the brilliant 
>> prolific sociologist and systems theorist Niklas Luhmann.
>>
>> He was one of several social scientists who prefigured issues that would 
>> come up in the development of software for "soft data" and "emergent 
>> structure". The point being that in the social sciences, a lot of the time, 
>> theories/patterns emerge during research, so you need flexibility--its not 
>> like hard science which is more driven by strict prior hypotheses that have 
>> clear "data slots"--nor is it like birth & death records, nor address books 
>> etc. In short, social science (especially ideographic fieldwork) needs an 
>> "open" way to record information. 
>>
>> The PRACTICAL issue for the Luhmann style Zettelkästeners, in software, 
>> was (1) how to maintain the integrity of the record (the card) AND (2) 
>> relate that record to other records (the cards) in an EMERGENT way. In 
>> other words NOT be a strict database that only had determined prior slots 
>> (hypothesised significant). At the time of emergence of such work it was a 
>> hot issue.
>>
>> The "Zettelkästen Methodology" is interesting and clearly is still used 
>> to good effect. Not so remarked upon, but significant, is that quite a lot 
>> of the sense-making in it is EXTERNAL to the computer. Its about guesses 
>> external to the data itself to find pattern. 
>>
>> Luhmann make two Zettelkästen (manual, physical) in his life, with 
>> thousands of records each, and they informed and structured most all of his 
>> voluminous writing. It worked. But I'm not convinced it worked without HIM 
>> doing "in head" most of the cross-connection work.
>>
>> Zettelkästen Methodology now looks a bit like a "blast from the past" ... 
>> I mean the oft discussion of the vitality of "Tags" OVER 
>> "Topics/Categories" is already a done deal on the net nowadays. So in that 
>> sense its a bit like a Philosophy of Knowledge that's done it job already.
>>
>> ---
>>
>> On the comparison of TiddlyWiki and Card 

[tw] Re: History: Is TiddlyWiki A Card-Index System?

[TonyM]

Josiah, 

"Yes, but", - That is my answer to the question asked.

The but comes in because it can be A Card-Index System or more. Most 
algorithms, such as the card-index can be implemented in TiddlyWiki but 
they can go way beyond, and any algorithm can be developed with continuous 
improvement. This is a key reason I have committed to TiddlyWiki as my 
platform of choice. Algorithms that have stood the test of time, have being 
refined by practice and wisdom  are very good starting points. In fact I 
moved to TiddlyWiki in the early days to escape the limitations of a 
sophisticated personal information and task management system that was on 
paper, yet really powerful.

Regards
Tony



On Friday, March 30, 2018 at 1:07:03 AM UTC+11, @TiddlyTweeter wrote:
>
> Mark S. asked ... 
>
>> Perhaps with your background you could explain Zettelkasten. There seems 
>> to be an almost cult-like culture around a system of taking notes (by 
>> software or index cards). https://zettelkasten.de/ .
>>
>
> Mark S. asked me that interesting question in another thread, started by 
> Mat, comparing TW to other "similar software". I been thinking about Mark's 
> question. I wasn't sure if people here are interested in this, but then I 
> thought well, hey, they might be ...
>
> "Zettelkästen" is just the German for "card indices" in general. 
> https://zettelkasten.de/ is a specific "Zettelkästen Methodology" derived 
> from the work done originally (on physical cards) by the brilliant prolific 
> sociologist and systems theorist Niklas Luhmann.
>
> He was one of several social scientists who prefigured issues that would 
> come up in the development of software for "soft data" and "emergent 
> structure". The point being that in the social sciences, a lot of the time, 
> theories/patterns emerge during research, so you need flexibility--its not 
> like hard science which is more driven by strict prior hypotheses that have 
> clear "data slots"--nor is it like birth & death records, nor address books 
> etc. In short, social science (especially ideographic fieldwork) needs an 
> "open" way to record information. 
>
> The PRACTICAL issue for the Luhmann style Zettelkästeners, in software, 
> was (1) how to maintain the integrity of the record (the card) AND (2) 
> relate that record to other records (the cards) in an EMERGENT way. In 
> other words NOT be a strict database that only had determined prior slots 
> (hypothesised significant). At the time of emergence of such work it was a 
> hot issue.
>
> The "Zettelkästen Methodology" is interesting and clearly is still used to 
> good effect. Not so remarked upon, but significant, is that quite a lot of 
> the sense-making in it is EXTERNAL to the computer. Its about guesses 
> external to the data itself to find pattern. 
>
> Luhmann make two Zettelkästen (manual, physical) in his life, with 
> thousands of records each, and they informed and structured most all of his 
> voluminous writing. It worked. But I'm not convinced it worked without HIM 
> doing "in head" most of the cross-connection work.
>
> Zettelkästen Methodology now looks a bit like a "blast from the past" ... 
> I mean the oft discussion of the vitality of "Tags" OVER 
> "Topics/Categories" is already a done deal on the net nowadays. So in that 
> sense its a bit like a Philosophy of Knowledge that's done it job already.
>
> ---
>
> On the comparison of TiddlyWiki and Card Indices ... which OFTEN users 
> point to and celebrate ... well it works for SOME TiddlyWiki set up that 
> way. No harm in using that analogy. BUT the analogy quickly breaks down.
>
> Card Index systems (& computer equivalents) are base on *the sacredness 
> of the record (Card)* whilst TiddlyWiki is based on the *equality of the 
> fragment (Tiddler)*. So what in the Zettelkästen Methodology is seen as a 
> "basic unit" (card), in TiddlyWiki might also be a card, but could also be 
> composed of fragments (Tiddlers), decomposed and reassembled multiple ways. 
>
> Zettelkästen Methodology also has no conceptual way of dealing with "the 
> software itself" and "the organisational system itself" being also equal 
> components. In Zettelkästen Methodology you have Cards, then an external 
> software framework to organise them. These are not distinct in TiddlyWiki.
>
> IMO, a Tiddler is hardly an "index card" at all in any normal sense. Its 
> outstanding characteristic is its a CHAMELEON :-).
>
> ---
>
> FWIW, to give some perspective to this issue, the "card analogy" actually 
> owes its greatest realisation in computing to stricter database structures. 
>
> The Index Card as an idea probably got its first airing in the 1640s in 
> Harrison's "The Ark Of Studies". Serious early application was by Linnaeus 
> to be able to organise the taxonomy of species in a flexible way where 
> records could be added and re-ordered at will (1760's). Then the Dewey 
> library card index system (1870's) was very significant, which was widely 
> adopted, 

Re: [tw] Re: History: Is TiddlyWiki A Card-Index System?

[Alex Hough]

Yes... I am a bg fan of all this

surely we'll have TWs which with AI soon

Alex

On 30 March 2018 at 08:13, Mat  wrote:

> Appreciated, Josiah!
>
> <:-)
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "TiddlyWiki" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to tiddlywiki+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> To post to this group, send email to tiddlywiki@googlegroups.com.
> Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/tiddlywiki.
> To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/
> msgid/tiddlywiki/bb38387e-3f86-4ba0-904c-1f0cd5475eed%40googlegroups.com
> 
> .
>
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"TiddlyWiki" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to tiddlywiki+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to tiddlywiki@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/tiddlywiki.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywiki/CALc1hYfsy1hh_U1Kr2fecHopJO%2BaDwry%3Dv7-UgTCzqsghs0hGQ%40mail.gmail.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[tw] Re: History: Is TiddlyWiki A Card-Index System?

[Mat]

Appreciated, Josiah!

<:-)

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"TiddlyWiki" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to tiddlywiki+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to tiddlywiki@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/tiddlywiki.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywiki/bb38387e-3f86-4ba0-904c-1f0cd5475eed%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.