Yes, Dictate directly into tiddlywiki.com from my android works after hitting the mic icon on the keyboards.
Must see now If I can get it working on my Windows desktop. Voice recognition without training is great now days. I wonder if we could trigger actions like a keyboard shortcut, to open a tiddler as well. eg "new tiddler" or "new task", even rather than "ok google" try "ok tiddlywiki", or tab to move from title to text. Unfortunately we need to say tiddly and wiki. Tones On Wednesday, 21 July 2021 at 12:27:00 UTC+10 TW Tones wrote: > 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/f5052610-582b-4aa0-b506-b79e431d0f5bn%40googlegroups.com.
