Obsidian launches "properties"

[PaulWalters]

@webline

In a Tinderbox forum, we should really make sure that we discuss the software in comparison or collaboration with or to Tinderbox

As long as I’ve been a member of this forum, and its predecessor forums, free and open discussion of software or methods that readers find useful, usually in the “tools for thought” category, has been the norm. This aspect of the community is admirable.

Not infrequently Eastgate has noticed a feature or technique mentioned here that other software supports, and has used that information in enhancing Tinderbox for the rest of us.

So, no, there’s no wall here. It’s easy to ignore or mute a topic that isn’t interesting.

[eastgate]

@kdjamesrd

Yes, Tinderbox has “lists” with bullet points, but it is NOT an outliner.

I think you meant that Obsidian has “lists with bullet points”?

[satikusala (Michael Becker)]

@webline

A list of why is software XYZ sooo great somehow doesn’t fit here.
Obsidian is a competitor to Tinderbox. Users who work with Obsidian will hardly be motivated to use Tinderbox - the advantages of one or the other solution only become apparent later anyway. If we want to preserve the community around Tinderbox, we should really consider whether we should spread this hype about yet another simple notebook software here.

@webline, I hear you, but then again, I think the whole thread is compare and contrast. Tinderbox does not stand alone in the sea of apps. Also, some people may not have the nuanced familiarity with Tinderbox to make such a comparison. Their comment about one app is useful as it may trigger someone else response about the other.

For example, @MartinBoycott-Brown’s comment about being able to create “metadata” on the fly in Obsidian is a great example. To do this, he is relying on a Dataview addition and plugin. One could do the exact same thing in Tinderbox, but we don’t call it Dataview, we call it action code. An action code could be written to perform exactly the same result that @MartinBoycott-Brown wants, including the creation of the attribute and populating the value. This latter point is why I personally prefer Tinderbox: I’m not limited by what someone else has coded; I can do all the coding myself or borrow from others. In other words, all our action code and template examples are similar to the plug-in developer community for Obsidian, it is more flexible as they are editable and extensible.

[PaulWalters]

@satikusala

To do this, he is relying on a Dataview addtion and plugin. One could do the exact some think in Tinderbox, but we don’t call it Dataview, we call it action code. An action code could be written to perform exactly the same result that @MartinBoycott-Brown wants, including the creation of the attribute and populating the value.

Not exactly. “Dataview” in Obsidian is different than action code in Tinderbox, not similar. Different concepts and use cases. The author describes Dataview as “an index over Markdown files that supports live-updating views and metadata”.

One can add “inline fields” to a document, such as name::Poe, which Dataview queries can locate, but these are not attributes of the document in the sense of Tinderbox attributes.

[dominiquerenauld]

I don’t think that a picture is — always — worth a hundred words, but I enjoy so much the way Tinderbox allows me to view my data and play with digital cards as if I used index cards on a desk. There would be so many serious things to say just about this topic that I can’t resist to show a picture of my calendar, a part of one only file I use to write down all my notes:

[sumnerg (Sumner Gerard)]

@satikusala

I’m not limited by what someone else has coded, I can do all the coding myself or borrow from others

Well, in Obsidian you could do all the coding yourself and borrow from others if you want! It seems to be endlessly customizable, a tinkerer’s dream.

But there would be a substantial switching cost, as the tinkering would eat into time for actually getting something done.

It’s the old trade-off: alluring LANA (learn about new applications) vs. sensible STEF (stick to the existing and familiar).

“Coding” in Obsidian (I mean plug-ins, not the adding of metadata and structuring of queries in the body of a note) seems more separated from the user interface, tucked away under the hood, but accessible IF one learns where to look and what to do.

AFAIK Tinderbox is a far more capable outliner than Obsidian, even when Obsidian is souped up with relevant plugins. Loqseq, another tinkerer’s dream, is supposedly an outliner at heart, but that is another story…

[webline (Detlef Beyer)]

The “it’s easy to ignore a thread” argument is an old one…
I just wanted to point out that from my point of view (!) this discussion is not very helpful for TBX users and that both apps are in a direct competitive situation - simply because the context of use (not the functionality) overlaps a lot.
But I will gladly accept the original tip and ignore this topic here.

[PaulWalters]

Agree – The Tinderbox map is the most intelligent (in many ways) graphical mapping tool available. Especially now with Posters. The complexity and utility of Tinderbox maps is wonderful.

Obsidian’s canvas is more of an afterthought than a useful feature, IMO.

[archurhh (Art Currim)]

I can appreciate this position.

To clarify - I will NEVER use Obsidian as a replacement for Tbx. In fact, as indicated in my earlier post, I eschew most or all the structural aspects of Obsidian. In fact, one could say that I use Obsidian as a Drafts replacement, that would be more accurate. Since my data ends up in Tinderbox anyway, I use Obsidian to gather, assemble, and bundle Notes for import into Tbx. I can achieve this rapidly in a multi-pane, hotkey, outline-enriched workspace that Drafts could not provide.

Of late I find that I use Drafts to gather more random scrap data for which I don’t yet have a specific purpose; it’s like a spare parts bin

I do agree with the comment above about usefulness of seeing and working with text in a combined Outliner/Editor paradigm - I picked up this habit from TaskPaper, and am loath to abandon it. If there is a single feature I would like to see in Tbx now, it’d be the ability to fold text blocks in a Tbx Note. Attributes can kind of provide some of that, but not really. Obsidian achieves it (as does TaskPaper) by allowing the user to fold any text that’s indented beneath its preceding line. Also, I’m aware I could achieve this by Exploding Notes and/or structuring Parent/Child groups and viewing them in Preview mode, but that adds unnecessary steps (in my case, up to hundreds a day).

[eastgate]

I don’t think we’re really worried about defections to Obsidian just now. I always find it useful to look at what other thoughtful systems do. Now, Obsidian’s thoughtfulness is a sort of complex construction, because so much of the product evolution seems to be driven by plugins. But, never mind.

I missed this year’s hypertext conference — where Mark Anderson and his co-author David Millard won this year’s Engelbart Prize for a stellar paper on Seven Hypertexts, in which they describe seven kinds of hypertext over the years. There were a BUNCH of interesting papers in the proceedings; I’ve been reading them with great interest. A lot like the old days…

[satikusala (Michael Becker)]

@archurhh

it’d be the ability to fold text blocks in a Tbx Note.

@archurhh, but can you not accomplish this now. In outline view, if you welcome one ore more notes you can edit them all at once.

[PaulWalters]

@eastgate

I missed this year’s hypertext conference — where Mark Anderson and his co-author David Millard won this year’s Engelbart Prize for a stellar paper on Seven Hypertexts, in which they describe seven kinds of hypertext over the years.

Whoa! Congratulations @mwra !!

That’s a heavy lift – with the honor well-deserved.

[mwra (Mark Anderson)]

Well the last time I won something was when I was about 6 year old (and I’m pretty sure every kid got a prize), so this was a surprise.

Turns out the chair for next years HT Conference is a Tinderbox user and the big in-conference citation dataset I made—for visualisation experiments such as this (press Tab to toggle viewspecs) and this—is getting some use. So Tinderbox is helping me make a real contribution, especially for those coming new to the conference. Funny as the exercise started with wanting to have a ‘clean’ set of data with which to experiment.

[mwra (Mark Anderson)]

@sumnerg

It’s the old trade-off: alluring LANA (learn about new applications) vs. sensible STEF (stick to the existing and familiar).

Very true and something to which we are all prone: complaining about LANA to justify STEF. This applies within apps as well as between different apps.

[archurhh (Art Currim)]

Congratulations, @mwra !!! What an honor

[archurhh (Art Currim)]

@satikusala

but can you not accomplish this now. In outline view, if you welcome one ore more notes you can edit them all at once.

(I have a bit of an issue of “what-I-might-not-see-itis, contradicts with that! )

Edit - I take back the above comment! I’m working on a way to do this now. I think I have figured it out; will bullet-test and report.

[wajakob (William Jacobs)]

Dominique,
Would you be able to post the TBX map view setup details that produce the index card display? I, and others from the index card world, would be so grateful.
Will Jacobs

[dominiquerenauld]

This is the file I use:
One file.tbx (204.0 KB)

[owrede (Oliver Wrede)]

I am using Obsidian. Like most PKM tools, it has aspects to dislike, but many features are quite polished and neat. I also like that it is quite fast in everything it does.

The essential DataView extension allows users to detect data (such as a line with a task) within a note and extract those tasks into organized overviews. In combination with effective tagging, metadata, and the ability to run classes for notes (similar to Prototypes), this becomes a powerful task tracking tool. For instance, there’s no need to place a task into a new note to monitor it.

Several extensions are particularly useful: Dataview, Tasks (which enhances the base functionality), Mermaid Diagram Renderer, Templater, Linter, Auto Classifier, Tag Management, Folder Note, and AI-Commander, just to name a few. All of these extensions allow users to customize the base application to their preferences without compromising its core functionality.

I’d be thrilled to see some of the “alternative views” that Tinderbox offers. Additionally, I’d appreciate a scripting integration, such as Python, to facilitate a more scripted approach to data handling and task completion, especially when interfacing with other APIs or databases.

While all these features are beneficial, they also present challenges. Transforming a chaotic collection of notes into a structured and useful system requires significant “meta planning.” Ultimately, the tool doesn’t guide you to a structure; you must invest effort and adhere to the application’s concept. This challenge seems common among most tools of this nature.

I appreciate that Obsidian stores notes as Markdown files in the file system. It reminds me of Ted Nelson, who once confessed that, after all these years, the MacOS Finder remains his preferred knowledge management tool.