You know how certain issue / ticket tracking software lets you specify the type of link between two issues or tickets? Jira has four types, one that I use in my life uses more – “is caused by”/“causes”, “is fixed by”/“fixes”, etc. I want flexible types of relations between notes along these lines. “This reminds me vaguely of this” separately from “I found this when I was looking into this” separately from “I think this is the same thing as in this other domain over here.”
This is fantastic - and reminds me of some of the flexibility I’ve seen with
Webmentions. (They can be used to
summon, they can
be used to chat, they can be used to just
plain bookmark…) And it reminds me of some of the metadata used in
Webmentions: like one can imagine u-is-caused-by in a microformat.[1]
But yeah - a free text equivalent to that would be sweet. You’re on to
something. Keep it rolling, my
friend.
This then means that there has to be some thought put into the UI about
letting an author privilege certain edges other people have applied, while
still allowing discovery of that persons wrong opinions about accents.
I personally would just moderate contributions that show up - sure that means
that I end up with a queue and conversation isn’t real-time that way. But that’s
a fine tradeoff I think. And if you want real-time, you can make unmoderated additions
monochromatic or something to set them apart.
In a federated world, I wouldn’t want to publish stuff if I don’t know what it
is - and sifting through all that stuff and hand-selecting the good stuff is key
effort that I think we have to get used to.
You can decide how to shape it all.
I mean the other way of doing this is like the public self-modelers did. They
just gave each other direct access to each other’s wikis and trusted each other
to take care of it. That worked really well.
Oh! You should also check out everything2.
They’ve been doing this kind of thing for a very long time. I bet there’s some
good nodes about this.[2]
paragraph based, not an outliner
Yes yeah.
Not that I’m big on microformats - but just am already knee-deep in them. ↩︎
Reply: Captured Patterns
This is fantastic - and reminds me of some of the flexibility I’ve seen with Webmentions. (They can be used to summon, they can be used to chat, they can be used to just plain bookmark…) And it reminds me of some of the metadata used in Webmentions: like one can imagine u-is-caused-by in a microformat.[1]
But yeah - a free text equivalent to that would be sweet. You’re on to something. Keep it rolling, my friend.
I personally would just moderate contributions that show up - sure that means that I end up with a queue and conversation isn’t real-time that way. But that’s a fine tradeoff I think. And if you want real-time, you can make unmoderated additions monochromatic or something to set them apart.
In a federated world, I wouldn’t want to publish stuff if I don’t know what it is - and sifting through all that stuff and hand-selecting the good stuff is key effort that I think we have to get used to.
You can decide how to shape it all.
I mean the other way of doing this is like the public self-modelers did. They just gave each other direct access to each other’s wikis and trusted each other to take care of it. That worked really well.
Oh! You should also check out everything2. They’ve been doing this kind of thing for a very long time. I bet there’s some good nodes about this.[2]
Yes yeah.
Not that I’m big on microformats - but just am already knee-deep in them. ↩︎
Question is… where…? ↩︎