Charlie, I think I may be able to dictate directly into tiddlywiki on my android. I must recheck.
tones On Wednesday, 21 July 2021 at 12:21:26 UTC+10 cj.v...@gmail.com wrote: > G'day Si, > > You've got me thinking about "fleeting notes", and don't think I've ever > really thought about that much. > > Seeing as I've sold my soul to Google, you've got me thinking about using > dictation to throw quick notes into Google Keep as a way to take fleeting > notes. > > For fleeting notes, I'm thinking of more often making use of my > Chromebook's dictation accessibility feature so that I can dictate my notes > in Keep when it makes sense to have individual notes, or maybe just add > notes in a Google Doc so that I don't have to futz around with creating a > new "whatever" for each note. > > Thanks to all for the good stuff in this thread. You've got me > thinking/rethinking things. > > On Tuesday, July 20, 2021 at 2:28:40 PM UTC-3 Si wrote: > >> @Soren >> >> Interestingly your description of Random Thoughts has made me realize >> that there are a couple of ways in which I already do something kind of >> similar. >> >> First is just capturing fleeting notes while reading, which I later link >> to evergreen notes (see here >> <https://groups.google.com/g/tiddlywiki/c/gbEHUyX8dc0/m/r1yF5JdXCAAJ> for >> my rough workflow). While notes are in the fleeting note stage of their >> life cycle they are pretty similar to RT. In fact my the only heuristic I >> use for deciding what to capture is just "whatever strikes me as >> interesting". Some of these notes will not relate to any larger ideas, and >> I will keep them just as quotes or something, very much like RT, but the >> rest will evolve and move elsewhere. >> >> The other thing I do is use Evernote as a kind of GTD inbox. This >> basically is also just a way to capture fleeting thoughts, but also tasks, >> links etc. I use Evernote for quick capture of ideas, then later act on >> them, or copy them to a more permanent home, archiving the original note. >> >> I've only just realised that this does automatically give me a kind of >> random-thoughts-list, though it's kind of a mess since my random thoughts >> are split between Evernote and TiddlyWiki, and the ones in TiddlyWiki are >> often not permanent. >> >> > So IMO the best option is two complementary systems (or parts of one >> system) where you can move things from the quick-write one to the >> flexible-thinking one when they become important. >> >> Yes this is very well-put. I feel like what I have (described above) >> could be converted into such a system, but it's not quite coming together >> in my mind just yet. >> >> I definitely want to move away from Evernote though. Ideally I would like >> to use TiddlyWiki for both sub-systems, but as you point out the most >> important thing is the ability to capture stuff with zero friction, and IMO >> this is one of the major weaknesses of TiddlyWiki. I'm tempted by your >> approach of using a text file. Do you have a good way to add stuff to it on >> mobile? >> On Tuesday, 20 July 2021 at 13:04:07 UTC+1 Soren Bjornstad wrote: >> >>> *Walt,* the thing that bugs me most about the “immutable title/ID” idea >>> is that unless your notes are also going to be immutable, the *content* of >>> a note can still change so much as to make the reference not effective >>> anymore. So I don't see much point in bothering, as long as you can avoid >>> having links break. Presumably the thing you were looking for won't move so >>> far away from the updated note that you'll be unable to find it, anyway >>> (probably not more than one link away). >>> >>> It is a good point on external links breaking, though. It would be cool >>> if you could set up redirects within TW, so that you could at least have an >>> incoming link to an old title go somewhere somewhat relevant. I guess you >>> could just leave the old title with a link to the new one, but without an >>> obvious way to distinguish redirect tiddlers from other tiddlers, they >>> would probably get in your way and make you think they were the “real” >>> tiddlers all the time. >>> >>> *TT,* I like your phrasing of the “category error” involved in applying >>> one notes system to everything. There are likely very few people who have >>> needed to work with notes of such a wide variety of types that they can >>> speak confidently on all of them. We've found some general patterns, but >>> they don't all work well for every purpose. >>> >>> On the topic of places where the author's mechanism would be good, I've >>> wondered if it would be handy for project or work diaries…almost like a >>> more general Git commit log. I used a custom PowerShell script called >>> “Daylog” at work for a year or two that worked kind of like this – you >>> wrote a text file with a bunch of chronological entries in it and could >>> chain them together into topics, responsibilities, todo items and notes on >>> their completion, etc. >>> >>> *Si,* I realized I never responded to your characterization of my >>> Random Thoughts as kind of like incremental note-taking way up-thread. I >>> think it might be a little dangerous to attribute too much intentionality >>> to that structure, because I started it when I was 14 years old (!) and >>> chronological bits was just the obvious structure to put it in since I >>> didn't really know much about notes at the time. But that said, it has >>> turned out to work well over the following 11+ years, at least once I went >>> back and added ID numbers to it so I could cross-reference things, so it >>> can't be too bad of a system. Perhaps the main difference between it and >>> evergreen notes is that it's optimized for ease of insertion, while >>> evergreen notes are optimized for ease of later use and flexibility of >>> thinking. Those are, I think, fundamentally irreconcilable; you can reduce >>> the weaknesses of one system in the opposite area, but nothing is ever >>> going to be great at both. So IMO the best option is two complementary >>> systems (or parts of one system) where you can move things from the >>> quick-write one to the flexible-thinking one when they become important. >>> >>> I have a vague draft on the principles of RT as I've accidentally >>> discovered them here: >>> https://zettelkasten.sorenbjornstad.com/#SketchOnCommonplacing >>> >>> On Tuesday, July 20, 2021 at 5:52:20 AM UTC-5 ludwa6 wrote: >>> >>>> That's an important point @TT about the WHY of "Luhmann's Rule," i >>>> would say, regarding immutability of the index field. >>>> In the world of hard-copy artifacts he was designing, this makes >>>> perfect sense... And also on the WWW, still today, where the problem of >>>> link-rot is a serious PITA. >>>> >>>> BUT in the domain of a standalone TW instance with the Relink plugin >>>> -e.g. my own desktop Digital Garden- that rule becomes a serious >>>> impediment >>>> to the kind of refactoring that is wanted. >>>> >>>> OTOH: In case of a public TW instance, where you want to encourage >>>> content sharing & reuse via permalinks, this is where one might do well to >>>> apply Luhmann's Rule. >>>> Still: i find it hard to forbear from changing names to reflect changes >>>> in my thinking and/or popular usage. A constant struggle! >>>> >>>> /walt >>>> >>>> >>>> On Tuesday, July 20, 2021 at 9:36:12 AM UTC+1 TiddlyTweeter wrote: >>>> >>>>> Ciao Si, >>>>> >>>>> FOOTNOTE ON ZETTELKASTEN >>>>> >>>>> Luhmann's Zettelkasten were, of course, only on paper. He was very >>>>> dedicated to NEVER changing the INDEX to an entry. >>>>> He never said, or implied, you could not UPDATE an entry if you wanted >>>>> too. >>>>> The Zettelkasten thing is about NOT spawning clone entities, rather >>>>> fixing the Index of one forever. >>>>> >>>>> Best wishes >>>>> TT >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Thursday, 15 July 2021 at 21:18:48 UTC+2 Si wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> I just came across this post: https://thesephist.com/posts/inc/, and >>>>>> it challenges a lot of my own views on effective note-taking practices, >>>>>> so >>>>>> I thought it was worth sharing here. >>>>>> >>>>>> The author advocates for a kind of chronological system, where as a >>>>>> rule notes are never updated after they are made, meaning that they >>>>>> retain >>>>>> a fixed position in time. It kind of reminded me of Soren's random >>>>>> thoughts: https://randomthoughts.sorenbjornstad.com/ >>>>>> >>>>>> Anyway this approach seems completely counter to my current approach >>>>>> to note-taking, where I want my notes to represent ideas that I am >>>>>> building >>>>>> over time with little regard to where or when they originally came from. >>>>>> >>>>>> I'm not particularly convinced, but I'm curious if anyone here has >>>>>> any thoughts? Do you see any advantages to this approach? Disadvantages? >>>>>> Do >>>>>> you think it could gel with the zettelkasten philosophy, or are they >>>>>> polar >>>>>> opposites? >>>>>> >>>>>> Just interested in hearing other peoples thoughts. >>>>>> >>>>> -- 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 view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywiki/9b06923b-df11-4261-8898-67bce65498c4n%40googlegroups.com.
