Ok, I just bought tinderbox today. I’m trying to do something very simple, and given that I have zero experience with this sort of software, I’m struggling. here is what I would like to do in very simplified form: I have a bunch of notes (let’s say 100). 50 of them refer to a specific topic. 25 of them refer to another topic. 25 refer to the last topic. Ideally, I would like to tag these batches with three distinct tags (is “tag” even the right word for this in tinderbox?). I would then like to create an agent (I think that’s what it is called?) to gather the notes into their three distinct tags, which I can then see displayed on a specific map designed for that purpose. I have been using obsidian for a while and it’s dead simple to do it there, but I am spending more time trying to figure out how to do this with tinderbox than I am with my data. Can someone point me to directions on how to do this? I am not finding the answer in the help info. I know it’s likely simple, but it is not simple to me so I’d love some guidance. TIA!
If you have been using Obsidian you will be used to seeing Properties, or YAML frontmatter, if you want to use that naming convention. The rough equivalent to this in Tinderbox is “Attributes”, and you can have as many of these as you want. You can invent your own, and you can make them Displayed Attributes for any note, or see them in the Attributes Browser. Have a look for “Attributes” in the documentation, or in aTbref and that should help. Or search here on the forum.
Edit: an Attribute called “Tags” already exists in Tinderbox, but you might find you want to create your own Attribute for the task you have in hand – just as you might create a new Property in Obsidian. And do look at the instructional videos that are available here:
Tinderbox, from 2001, doesn’t work like Obsidian because the latter wasn’t invented until 2020. Thus it uses habits of its time: Markdown-centic, wiki-style links, etc. There’s no right/wring here but ‘status quo bias’—systematic preference for the familiar option, independent of merit— means we assume the think we’re more used to is the ‘correct’ method.
Tags. This is the recent term for keywords that got traction in the early 200s through the likes of Flickr and Delicious. Indeed, Tinderbox even has a system attribute $Tags to assist more recent users to store their keywords/tags. But, as @MartinBoycott-Brown has pointed out, Tinderbox is no more limited than Obsidian in adding custom metadata (Tinderbox:attributes or Obsidian:properties).
Having stored your metadata in an attribute, how then to query and see it? There are two ways:
- The oldest method is to add an agent. However, this scales badly as it is easy to assume the idea is to add an agent for any (attribute) value that might exist.
- Attribute Browser view. Here you chose your attribute, e.g. ‘Tags’, and scope (default is whole document) and then all notes are listed under their value for that attribute. You can even add an agent (see above) to sharpen AB views’s focus.
For new users, I think Attribute Browser is the better route. Agents can do more but also date from a time (c.2001) when many of Tinderbox’s current affordances didn’t exist.
The trick here is to not assume what you’re used to (Obsidian) is the ‘normal’ method for the task at hand. The reverse applies: this isn’t a zero-sum issue. I think @MartinBoycott-Brown has provided the primary conceptual mapping: Obsidian’s property → Tinderbox’s attribute, and vice-vera.
On agents: I think they can be powerful here, though Attribute Browser is clearly the first stop on the railroad.
For example, an agent might collect all notes with tags. Then, examining the note’s tags and other properties ($Created, $DueDate, $Prototype), it chooses a suitable map location for that note and potentially adds some additional tags.
Thanks everyone. I am slowly figuring it out. I’m trying to go the attribute route and am getting stuck but a combination of google, claude, many videos, and the tinderbox reference guide are helping. when I actually get this working its going to be very satisfying:)
There are two parts to parse out, once we move beyond “doesn’t it just…” 
- Input. How do I set the tag/keywords?
- Review. How do I see what I’ve set.
Writing this, I’m even more positive about AB view even if for us long-time users it seems odd. But, it does quickly show you which notes have which value. Plus if you use the built-in agent support in AB view you don’t even need a stand-alone agent just to see per-note value.I write this as someone whose long-time use used to suggest you used an agent. In truth, the latter just ends in 10s, 100s of agents to do something the AB view does better.
In my own particular case, Map view is the main reason why I use Tinderbox. The only other one I use is Outline. We’re all different, with different requirements.
One of Tbx’s many facilities is the manner its features tie into each other, and therefore how rapidly the new users grasp of concepts could web outward.
Example - you have:
- 50 Notes on topic A
- 25 Notes on topic B
- 25 Notes on topic C
Some questions to explore:
- what do I eventually want to do with or extract from these Notes? Do I already know this or will I play with them until a structure emerges {incremental formalization}?
- Would I like Notes of each topic to be visually distinct for ease of identification {Prototypes}? Will these topics be distinct, or could Notes belong to one or more topics {Set-type Attributes}?
- Will I be appending additional Notes under each topic, and if so would I feel like doing this graphically {Map View, Adornments} or in an Outline/list {Outline View} (a list being simply a flat Outline)?
- Will I link Notes within or across topics {Linking}?
- While working with these Notes, would I like them to develop behaviours based on their content or Attributes {action code, primarily housed in Functions, Stamps, and Agents}?
- Will these topics ultimately form into sections? Will those sections be fixed, or fluid? Will they gain hierarchies, and will those hierarchies be exclusive?
- Do the contents of my project have external utility - do I intend to Export some/all of my results and if so in what format {look into Exporting, Pandoc export, Posters} - do I want to generate html or markdown or rtf documents?
Just scratching the surface here. Think about attending our weekly Meetups (there’s one starting in 45 minutes I believe). Welcome to Tinderbox.
@wvaughan, check out last week’s meetup…you’re post inspired a great conversation.
Tinderbox Meetup 26 JUL 26: Musing on Data (what is it) and Tagging Strategies in Tinderbox
Very cool, I’ll check it out. Thanks!