Is there a way to (with a keystroke) insert date and time in a note name? This is to generate a unique id for zettelkasten purposes.
⌘-/ and ⌘⌥-/ insert the date and the date+time respectively.
An OnAdd action can set the $Name without regard to what you entered, or can append date or time as you wish.
$ID is also a unique ID.
Sequential user attributes can be used for IDs as well; these are often overlooked.
Thanks very much. Most helpful.
You could use a $DisplayExpressions such as:
$Name + ":" + $ID + ":" + $Created.format(mdy)
Thank you. I have been a low expertise user of TBX for several years. Building a Zettelkasten is forcing me into a new zone.
Is the unique ID randomly generated or is its structure generated in a systematic way that could be exploited?
Might I suggest viewing this thread. Towards the end, I think we have a pretty helpful solution, and work is ongoing.
Statutory reminder: the zettelkasten concept dates from the pre-computer age. So, no search, no links other than card-index look-up numbers. Be careful that you are using current technical affordances appropriately rather then slavishly following old ideas in the hopes of magic results.
Packrats have an
/Applications folder rammed full of the next ‘best’ data roach motel apps.
UniqueID is a timestamp coerced to a long unsigned, save that two UniqueIDs generated at the same time will not be equal.
In fact. I don’t see any reason to adopt that method at all.
Also because the way they use it is based on a series of files in a single directory.
Now, every file has an a unique id, it is the creation date that every file system register when the file is created. So, the requisite of sequence is satisfied.
Is there any reason to put the creation date on the name of the file? Probably to create links from other text file to that id-name?
The author of this brilliant system needed to search that unique id in a number of thousands paper cards, take that card, work on it and then put back in its place at a drawer -container of elements from number 653436 to 653800 for example.
If you use a computer why you have to reproduce this approach ?
Actually, he had keyword and bibliographical indices (on paper), so he didn’t search all cards every time he wanted to find one.
But, point taken and I agree. Best use of “current technical affordances”, in @mwra’s terms, make more sense.