From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Daniel Clemente Subject: Re: org-mode for knowledge management Date: Sun, 12 Oct 2014 14:48:38 +0700 Message-ID: <87k345hgo9.wl-n142857@gmail.com> References: <87oatkkdes.fsf@wmi.amu.edu.pl> <87siiwc4gd.wl-n142857@gmail.com> <87oatihm88.wl-n142857@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI-EPG 1.14.7 - "Harue") Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:45357) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XdDtq-0001xu-8e for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Sun, 12 Oct 2014 03:49:12 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XdDtk-0002hw-6u for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Sun, 12 Oct 2014 03:49:06 -0400 Received: from mail-pa0-x22b.google.com ([2607:f8b0:400e:c03::22b]:35366) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XdDtj-0002hs-R5 for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Sun, 12 Oct 2014 03:49:00 -0400 Received: by mail-pa0-f43.google.com with SMTP id lf10so4199394pab.16 for ; Sun, 12 Oct 2014 00:48:58 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: 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: John Hendy Cc: emacs-orgmode , Marcin Borkowski > [=E2=80=A6] > 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. I find it very different to write notes for yourself and to write for an = audience. In a report you need to follow a structure, you need to choose a = particular natural language, you need to explain things that might be obvio= us for you, you cannot change topic, =E2=80=A6 Whereas in notes, you're fre= e. Therefore I think it makes sense to have two different places for both. > 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. =E2=80=A6 However, I don't consider that rewriting (specific=E2=86=92gene= ral) you mention as a necessary task or a burden (I don't do it), because i= n your notes (generic knowledge) you can simply refer to the specific one (= e.g.: =E2=80=9Esee what I did in this case ([[link_to_the_report]])=E2=80= =9C.). A header with 1 or 2 or N links to specific reports is a good start = before continue focusing on other generic-knowledge topics. So you decide where you will work the most (either in the specific report= s or in the generic knowledge) and then the other can refer to it. I do it like that. E.g. I'm not writing in my generic notes a =E2=80=9Eco= de style guide=E2=80=9C because I did it already in project X, so I add kno= wledge in projectX.org and just link to it. If some particular knowledge gr= ows too big for that projectX_code_style, I develop it in my generic notes = (another file, project-unrelated). > > Of course copy+paste is a nightmare to maintain (see: DRY). I am stil= l forced to do it with some org tables which do complex calculations. I thi= nk org offers dynamic tables to apply the same process to different data so= urces, but it gets complex. I think there's no such thing as =E2=80=9Etempl= ates=E2=80=9C where you change the base one and all uses of it (in all file= s) are automatically updated. > > > > About links: in org-mode they all look the same, but semantically the= re are many types, like: > > - *is-a*: =E2=80=9Ethis is a concrete implementation of [[that generic = knowledge]]=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 = write 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= it, a header seems to be present in many places at the same time; in reali= ty 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 f= ind it anyway by following maximum 1 link. X can link to Y, or Y can link t= he X; what's important is that reading both X or Y you'll find exactly the = same thing (not copy+pasted contents). > > > > So, it's all about finding a manual algorithm to organize things >=20 > 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... >=20 > 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. >=20 > 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. >=20 Note that: - I don't suggest you abuse links and link every header. You can link to in= teresting topics. Like in Wikipedia: you /could/ link every word, but it ma= kes sense to link only interesting information (only: in WP they link too m= uch because they don't know what exactly will be interesting to the reader;= but in your notes, you know already which links will you need in the futur= e). - In my example, the link meant =E2=80=9Ethis is the same as that=E2=80=9C,= and I think this is always a basic concept, even in complex scenarios. In = your case, your link may mean something different (like: =E2=80=9Ethis head= ing is a specific wording of that knowledge=E2=80=9C) - That header with empty contents that says =E2=80=9Efor this, don't look h= ere but look there: [[there]]=E2=80=9C is only one line and doesn't get in = the way. And you use it only when you need it (e.g. when you ended in the w= rong place after a text search and want to link to the good one for the nex= t time). =20