Charlie, I think we agree furiously, but I will need to create a tiddler tagged Charlie with the title - *"Charlie just has a very niche semantic/philosophical perspective about hierarchies." * to see If I can remember to use this when this issue arises again :) ie: rather than "*Charlies love hate relationship with hierarchy*"
Ha Ha! Oh, and about pigs, this kind of subject makes me *"feel like a pig in mud"*, very happy. Tones On Friday, 4 December 2020 at 14:32:17 UTC+11 Charlie Veniot wrote: > I heartily second the motion of TiddlyWiki as best of breed platform. > (Well, unless page/tiddler revision history is important information, > and/or multi-editor solution is needed. Not sure I'm in love trying to > handle those things with TiddlyWiki unless somebody can show me an elegant > solution that doesn't bog down TiddlyWiki something silly.) > > Also, I've got to give out a hearty "hey hey hey, wait a second." (Or > "sure, I'll take the bait?") It isn't a love-hate relationship with > hierarchies. I just have a very niche (yeah, I was just starving for an > opportunity to use that word...) semantic/philosophical perspective about > hierarchies. > > I see every tiddler (any and every object, whether in a "hierarchy" or > not) as a first class citizen. And every tiddler has information (tags, > fields, whatever) that "aggregate" tiddlers can use for transclusion of > whatever tiddlers in any number of contextual views, most likely turning > out as hierarchies (because it is so easy to cognitively handle), but could > be any kind of structure that makes sense for that contextual view (loads > of great examples in Wikipedia's InfoMaps > <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:InfoMaps> page). > > So I see each tiddler as independently useful information (other tiddlers > be damned, but just for a moment), as equally important as any other > tiddler. And each tiddler is begging to appear in as many useful aggregate > tiddlers (or contextual views) with whatever visual structure rocks the > daylights out of the need/purpose. > > Often enough, my writing is very much helped by a hierarchical tiddler > creation process because it is helping me churn tiddlers. Much more my > norm: my writing is not hierarchical at all (i.e. helter-skelter non-linear > to the hilt), and I don't have hierarchy at all on the brain. Or I might > have some untold number of hierarchies simultaneously/spontaneously on the > brain. > > Whatever helps avoid "writer's block" at that particular moment. Churn > churn churn, don't get stuck in the mud, don't get sticks caught in the > wheels. > > Regardless, whatever tiddler I'm looking at, I can't think of a time where > I've ever thought of it as subsidiary to any other tiddler. I find that > when I lock myself into thinking of a tiddler as subsidiary to some other > tiddler in a structure, that stifles the potential (my ability) of > imagining alternative structural/informational possibilities. > > Well, that's how my mind works, and I don't fight it. Fighting my sponge > is like trying to teach a pig how to sing: waste of time, and annoys the > pig. (Now I'm trying to conceptualise which part of my sponge represents > the pig. Hmmm, bacon...) > > > On Thursday, December 3, 2020 at 10:31:19 PM UTC-4 TW Tones wrote: > >> Gentlemen, >> >> I just want to add if there has not being a database model before, >> tiddlywiki is an ideal platform to model any relationship. Of late I have >> endeavoured in any application to never compromise the ability to add an >> additional layer of organisation, an alternate view or a different >> simultaneous representation. An old line "not taking hostages of the >> future" my father quotes, is reinvented by me to "Not taking decisions >> that compromise the future" is an interesting approach on top of tiddlywiki >> especially when looking at alternate database or knowledge models. As one >> proceeds to "try different systems" on top of tiddlywiki we gain practical >> experience with a kind of meta database systems view. >> >> One Idea of my own that may be of interest, not withstanding Charlies >> love hate relationship with hierarchy ,is the following model I am keen to >> experiment with. >> >> - Every object is a tiddler >> - Every object is in a hierarchy, even if it begins with only one >> - Every attribute is a relationship to an object in another hierarchy >> - Hierarchies act as I kind of "fuzzy value" where with more >> information the hierarchies go deeper as they grow >> - When assigning an attribute a value you do so via a relationship to >> a hierarchy if you find it you use it, if not you add it, >> - If you do not have a detail ie it is coloured but no what color it >> is you point to an item in the color hierarchy such as color - or unknown >> colour. >> - Should you come across a database of colors you use it to populate >> the colour hierarchy, and where possible change items pointing into the >> hierarchy you move the relationship to a less fuzzy member of the >> hierarchy. >> - People, a group, a process can take charge of a hierarchy and do as >> they wish as long as the honour or improve the relationships already >> codified. >> >> Just some thoughts >> Tones >> >> -- 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 [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywiki/435b7891-7894-40a1-9365-1759926b8843n%40googlegroups.com.
