From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: John Hendy Subject: Re: org-mode for knowledge management Date: Sun, 12 Oct 2014 00:03:39 -0500 Message-ID: References: <87oatkkdes.fsf@wmi.amu.edu.pl> <87siiwc4gd.wl-n142857@gmail.com> <87oatihm88.wl-n142857@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:50323) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XdBJo-00079E-3N for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Sun, 12 Oct 2014 01:03:45 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XdBJk-00070R-Mn for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Sun, 12 Oct 2014 01:03:44 -0400 Received: from mail-lb0-x231.google.com ([2a00:1450:4010:c04::231]:35044) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XdBJk-00070L-9o for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Sun, 12 Oct 2014 01:03:40 -0400 Received: by mail-lb0-f177.google.com with SMTP id w7so4877769lbi.8 for ; Sat, 11 Oct 2014 22:03:39 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <87oatihm88.wl-n142857@gmail.com> List-Id: "General discussions about Org-mode." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org To: Daniel Clemente Cc: emacs-orgmode , Marcin Borkowski On Sat, Oct 11, 2014 at 6:36 AM, Daniel Clemente wrote: > El Fri, 10 Oct 2014 16:48:39 -0500 John Hendy va escriure: >> >> On Fri, Oct 10, 2014 at 10:46 AM, Daniel Clemente wr= ote: >> >> > >> >> > I've been using org-mode for a variety of purposes for a few years.= I find >> >> > that it suffers from the same problem that other such tools do. The >> >> > problem is me. I can't remember week to week how I may have classif= ied >> >> > some scrap of information. Did I drop it into notes/someproduct.org= or was >> >> > it procedures/someprocess.org? >> > >> > 1. Every information should have a single location, not two. Mix secti= ons fast >> > if you detect repetitions. Use links extensively (C-c l) to connect on= e header >> > with another, specially after you get lost once. Don't bother too much= about >> > finding the right place at the first time, you'll eventually reorder o= r move >> > headers to the correct place. >> >> I'm curious about this. Is this a well-known recommendation/best >> practice? > > I find it it similar to the =E2=80=9EDon't repeat yourself=E2=80=9C pri= nciple. But I was just explaining my experience. Sure, and that makes sense. I just wanted to understand what you meant by "everything has one correct place." We're on the same page now: not copying text, but that doesn't mean something shouldn't be referenced/linked to. > >> I actually struggle with this a great deal. Often a bit of >> research or testing for a specific project at work is very possibly >> relevant to any number of future projects. So, working in product >> development, I find it hard to decide what the best "single location" >> is, and would love for it to act as though it were in multiple >> locations. >> >> When the current project is done, I'd like to archive everything >> specifically related to it while keeping around the general knowledge >> I've accumulated for use with future efforts. > > I use no tags or categories, just a clear and manual separation of conc= epts. E.g. it's not the same activity =E2=80=9EI'm learning about database = X=E2=80=9C and =E2=80=9EI'm considering database X for project Y=E2=80=9C, = because notes from the first one go to Databases.org and notes from the sec= ond one to ProjectY.org. Clocking is different (even if I'm learning about = X, I clock in Y if I'm doing it as part of a project). > Therefore I try to keep project notes at a minimum, because they are da= ted and ephimeral, whereas the general knowledge accumulates in other files= (one file per topic, encyclopedia-style). > >> >> Or is this what you mean by using links? Are you just saying that >> individuals should not be copying the same text around in multiple >> places? >> > > Of course copy+paste is a nightmare to maintain (see: DRY). I am still = forced to do it with some org tables which do complex calculations. I think= org offers dynamic tables to apply the same process to different data sour= ces, but it gets complex. I think there's no such thing as =E2=80=9Etemplat= es=E2=80=9C where you change the base one and all uses of it (in all files)= are automatically updated. > > About links: in org-mode they all look the same, but semantically there= are many types, like: > - *is-a*: =E2=80=9Ethis is a concrete implementation of [[that generic kn= owledge]]=E2=80=9C > - *related*: =E2=80=9Erelated to this is: [[that]]=E2=80=9C > - *same-as*: =E2=80=9Ethis and [[that]] are exactly the same topic, so wr= ite only under that header, not here=E2=80=9C =E2=86=90 this is poor man's = transclusion, or more like =E2=80=9Esymbolic links=E2=80=9C in ext4. With i= t, a header seems to be present in many places at the same time; in reality= the content is only in one place and the rest are links. The good thing is= , it doesn't really matter /where/ exactly is that tree, because you'll fin= d it anyway by following maximum 1 link. X can link to Y, or Y can link the= X; what's important is that reading both X or Y you'll find exactly the sa= me thing (not copy+pasted contents). > > So, it's all about finding a manual algorithm to organize things This is generally what I've tried to do, though I find this is cumbersome as I often use subtrees for more report-style/narrative analyses of data and experiments. Thus I don't find it as simple as your example to Brady with the PDF/HTML info, which is more basic. As I write this, I'm thinking I could probably still do this... For an example, let's say I'm making plastic widgets and we've been running a series of injection mold trials with a manufacturer. Some really novel understanding comes about with respect to part uniformity, extruder/die temperature, cooling time, holding pressure, etc. I think this is awesome general knowledge. But I'm documenting our learning in an experimental report for export and upload to my company's internal technical report repo. My initial thought was that links this way would get in the way... but I suppose now I could be writing along and create a link to the nearest headline in the report, then go to some other tree and insert a link to that headline with some note about the gist of the understanding or keywords for the future me trying to re-find that tidbit. What I'm often torn about is re-writing the learning/understanding/summary in a more general way since how it usually arises is laden with specific details for *this* product/project, whereas the information I want to retain is about how I see the new understanding more generally. Does that make sense? John . > > > Daniel