[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [O] org-mode for knowledge management
From: |
Daniel Clemente |
Subject: |
Re: [O] org-mode for knowledge management |
Date: |
Sun, 12 Oct 2014 14:48:38 +0700 |
User-agent: |
Wanderlust/2.15.9 (Almost Unreal) SEMI-EPG/1.14.7 (Harue) FLIM/1.14.9 (Gojō) APEL/10.8 EasyPG/1.0.0 Emacs/24.3 (i586-pc-linux-gnu) MULE/6.0 (HANACHIRUSATO) |
> […]
> 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 obvious
for you, you cannot change topic, … Whereas in notes, you're free. 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.
… However, I don't consider that rewriting (specific→general) you mention as
a necessary task or a burden (I don't do it), because in your notes (generic
knowledge) you can simply refer to the specific one (e.g.: „see what I did in
this case ([[link_to_the_report]])“.). 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 reports 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 „code style
guide“ because I did it already in project X, so I add knowledge in
projectX.org and just link to it. If some particular knowledge grows 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 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
> > sources, but it gets complex. I think there's no such thing as „templates“
> > 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*: „this is a concrete implementation of [[that generic knowledge]]“
> > - *related*: „related to this is: [[that]]“
> > - *same-as*: „this and [[that]] are exactly the same topic, so write only
> > under that header, not here“ ← this is poor man's transclusion, or more
> > like „symbolic links“ in ext4. With it, 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 find 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 same 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.
>
Note that:
- I don't suggest you abuse links and link every header. You can link to
interesting topics. Like in Wikipedia: you /could/ link every word, but it
makes sense to link only interesting information (only: in WP they link too
much 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 future).
- In my example, the link meant „this is the same as that“, and I think this is
always a basic concept, even in complex scenarios. In your case, your link may
mean something different (like: „this heading is a specific wording of that
knowledge“)
- That header with empty contents that says „for this, don't look here but look
there: [[there]]“ 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 wrong place after a text
search and want to link to the good one for the next time).
- Re: [O] org-mode for knowledge management, (continued)
- Re: [O] org-mode for knowledge management, John Hendy, 2014/10/12
- Re: [O] org-mode for knowledge management, Eric Abrahamsen, 2014/10/12
- Re: [O] org-mode for knowledge management, Daniel Clemente, 2014/10/12
- Re: [O] org-mode for knowledge management, Samuel Wales, 2014/10/13
- Re: [O] org-mode for knowledge management, Daniel Clemente, 2014/10/13
- Re: [O] org-mode for knowledge management, Eric Abrahamsen, 2014/10/13
- Re: [O] org-mode for knowledge management, Daniel Clemente, 2014/10/11
- Re: [O] org-mode for knowledge management, Brady Trainor, 2014/10/11
- Re: [O] org-mode for knowledge management, Daniel Clemente, 2014/10/12
- Re: [O] org-mode for knowledge management, John Hendy, 2014/10/12
- Re: [O] org-mode for knowledge management,
Daniel Clemente <=
- Re: [O] org-mode for knowledge management, John Hendy, 2014/10/13
Re: [O] org-mode for knowledge management, Thomas S. Dye, 2014/10/09
Re: [O] org-mode for knowledge management, Brett Viren, 2014/10/13