Empowering the notebook with tags

[codemer]

I'm pulling this topic in from the beta testers group so more people can have a chance to comment. I would like the ability to use the notebook, which already supports wiki links, to create dynamically structured notes by adding support for tags and tag based menus.

 

To simplify explanations, I put together a sample of what my current wiki based notes might look like: http://noscience.net/sample.html

 

Desired Features:

* Add multiple tags to a notebook entry

* When a notebook entry name matches a tag that is in use, all entries with that tag will show up in a menu in that entry.

* Ability to remove all predefined character sheets, settings, etc. and use notebook exclusively.

* Any untagged entries in the notebook automatically fall under a "misc" or "untagged" tag to make them easier to spot and fix.

* A split view with both notes and manuscript visible. I like having my manuscript visible when I consult notes.

 

You can see that the first three features essentially match what is available in the wiki in the sample link, but what I really want is tight integration with Storyist.

 

I believe these features could be implemented in such a way that advanced users can take advantage of them, leaving the current structure available to typical users.

 

IF

[Steve E]

Okay Isaac. Since you moved your comment I'll move mine as well. So let's talk about how Steve might "tightly integrate" TiddlyWiki-like tags and linkages to Storyist.

 

Yes, I can see how it might be integrated into the Notebook just by adding a tags field to the Note pages. The name of the Note would be the name of the tag, hence no untagged entries, but if you change the name of the note you should automatically change the name where it exists in other note's tag fields or text. Add a tag to a Note's tag field, or perhaps to the body of the note, and it either links to an existing Note or creates a new blank one whose name appears in the Project Pane under Notebook.

 

I still don't see getting rid of the different kinds of sheets (in effect, turning everything into Notes) since there is value in the specialized sheet's structure for most people. But as an option, sure. Possible alternative: you can create a new tagged sheet from a list of specialized types: Characters, Settings, etcetera. Perhaps there could be the option of creating your own kind of specialized sheet category. Such specialized sheets would be listed under their own type headings in the Project Pane (yes, I'm angling for Prop Sheets).

 

For those of us who like Character sheets, Do we want tags to be able to link to other kinds of sheets? And just to take a step too far (as we always do), how could we integrate this system of tags into the manuscript text? Do we want to? I can see value in clicking on a bit of text and pulling up a (for example) Settings sheet.

 

So, what y'all think?

 

Does Asiihah have a sister? She must be hot!

-Thoth.

[marguerite]

Okay Isaac. Since you moved your comment I'll move mine as well. So let's talk about how Steve might "tightly integrate" TiddlyWiki-like tags and linkages to Storyist.

 

Yes, I can see how it might be integrated into the Notebook just by adding a tags field to the Note pages. The name of the Note would be the name of the tag, hence no untagged entries, but if you change the name of the note you should automatically change the name where it exists in other note's tag fields or text. Add a tag to a Note's tag field, or perhaps to the body of the note, and it either links to an existing Note or creates a new blank one whose name appears in the Project Pane under Notebook.

 

I still don't see getting rid of the different kinds of sheets (in effect, turning everything into Notes) since there is value in the specialized sheet's structure for most people. But as an option, sure. Possible alternative: you can create a new tagged sheet from a list of specialized types: Characters, Settings, etcetera. Perhaps there could be the option of creating your own kind of specialized sheet category. Such specialized sheets would be listed under their own type headings in the Project Pane (yes, I'm angling for Prop Sheets).

 

For those of us who like Character sheets, Do we want tags to be able to link to other kinds of sheets? And just to take a step too far (as we always do), how could we integrate this system of tags into the manuscript text? Do we want to? I can see value in clicking on a bit of text and pulling up a (for example) Settings sheet.

 

So, what y'all think?

 

Does Asiihah have a sister? She must be hot!

-Thoth.

The sample does look good, although I would advocate an approach closer to the one Storyist currently uses. For example, the addition of Events sheets as well as Prop sheets would be useful, especially if the events could be arranged in a timeline (an often-requested feature). Cross-linking between types of sheets would be very useful (some of that is possible now through the custom fields in the sheets—for new users who may not have discovered this feature, you can add a new field and specify that it will link to a setting, character, or plot point). But I would also like to be able to link directly from, say, a note to a Character sheet by typing something like [character: Voldemort]. This, too, has been discussed elsewhere.

 

The custom fields are also a way to keep track of character traits (accent, etc.), mentioned in the beta tester part of the discussion. I guess it could cumbersome if you have a lot of details; I haven't run into that problem yet.

 

Eliminating all the existing sheets? I wouldn't want to do that myself, but isn't it possible to get rid of them already, just by hitting the Delete key? At most, you'd be left with the top level of the hierarchy (Plot, Characters, etc.), which doesn't take up much real estate.

 

Adapting the Storyboard for better display of notes while writing could be a solution to the split-screen problem. I can certainly imagine circumstances in which it would be useful to display a full character sheet or note in the storyboard while typing madly away in the main window.

 

What I'd like even more, though, is to cut-and-paste settings or characters between stories....

Best,

Marguerite

[Steve E]

Eliminating all the existing sheets? I wouldn't want to do that myself, but isn't it possible to get rid of them already, just by hitting the Delete key? At most, you'd be left with the top level of the hierarchy (Plot, Characters, etc.), which doesn't take up much real estate.

Just thought I'd mention that any member of the top level of the hierarchy (Plot, Characters, etc.) can be removed from the Project Pane and brought back by choosing that sheet type from the Display Option in the pop-up menu triggered by the Action Button directly under the Project Pane. (Yep. Steve hid that one real good.)

 

Adapting the Storyboard for better display of notes while writing could be a solution to the split-screen problem. I can certainly imagine circumstances in which it would be useful to display a full character sheet or note in the storyboard while typing madly away in the main window.

Interesting use of the Storyboard. I've though about an option to make the Storyboard a second Main View but decided that it muddied the waters too much, methodologically speaking. Then again, maybe not.

 

Just a thought,

-Thoth.

[codemer]

Yes, I can see how it might be integrated into the Notebook just by adding a tags field to the Note pages. The name of the Note would be the name of the tag, hence no untagged entries, but if you change the name of the note you should automatically change the name where it exists in other note's tag fields or text. Add a tag to a Note's tag field, or perhaps to the body of the note, and it either links to an existing Note or creates a new blank one whose name appears in the Project Pane under Notebook.

 

I'm a bit confused by "the name of the note would be the name of the tag". In tiddliwiki, an entry name can be the name of a tag group, but untagged entries are untagged. I don't necessarily want anything that is not tagged to show up at the top level of the notes because that could slow down organization.

 

I still don't see getting rid of the different kinds of sheets (in effect, turning everything into Notes) since there is value in the specialized sheet's structure for most people. But as an option, sure. Possible alternative: you can create a new tagged sheet from a list of specialized types: Characters, Settings, etcetera. Perhaps there could be the option of creating your own kind of specialized sheet category. Such specialized sheets would be listed under their own type headings in the Project Pane (yes, I'm angling for Prop Sheets).

 

Did you see that I put a Props section on that sample?

 

In the beginning, I liked the layout of characters and settings and plot points in Storyist, but I missed my old layout, which is why I'd like to be able to simply apply my own dynamic hierarchy to everything. It's nice to have the templates provided by Storyist, but it's a trade off.

 

For those of us who like Character sheets, Do we want tags to be able to link to other kinds of sheets? And just to take a step too far (as we always do), how could we integrate this system of tags into the manuscript text? Do we want to? I can see value in clicking on a bit of text and pulling up a (for example) Settings sheet.

 

I would support a universal tagging mechanism. Again, if linking to [[ship]] in the manuscript or notes takes me to the entry that points to everything tagged with "Ship", that would be just what I need. If the same mechanism could also point to entries in the Character or Settings areas, that would be great too.

 

Does Asiihah have a sister? She must be hot!

 

900 degrees, my friend.

 

IF

[Steve E]

I'm a bit confused by "the name of the note would be the name of the tag". In tiddliwiki, an entry name can be the name of a tag group, but untagged entries are untagged. I don't necessarily want anything that is not tagged to show up at the top level of the notes because that could slow down organization.

My fault. I should have made it clear that I wasn't planning to copy TW exactly for the sake of a more integrated fit with Storyist. Simply put, you create a blank Note first. It's name acts like a tag. Whenever this tag is used in another Note you can access the original Note sheet by clicking on the tag. If you add a tag (i.e., a string of characters) to the "Tag Field" at the bottom or top of a Note sheet (a new kind of field) a blank Note is created with the new tag as its name. In effect, everything gets tagged but that tag may not be referenced anywhere else. Don't want such tags to appear on the Project Pane? Only want certain tags to appear? Make that an option.

 

Did you see that I put a Props section on that sample?

Yes. Thank you. I should have said something earlier. Something slobberingly grateful perhaps? But I see you envision top level tags (in TW's TOC) the way Steve sees sheet types (in S's PP, wait, that sounds vaguely dirty, I mean, in Storyist's Project Pane). Sure, TW would let me create any number of "sheet types" (i.e., top level tags in its Table Of Contents pane) but none of them would be specialized to remind me of the information I need to gather for that type of sheet.

 

In the beginning, I liked the layout of characters and settings and plot points in Storyist, but I missed my old layout, which is why I'd like to be able to simply apply my own dynamic hierarchy to everything. It's nice to have the templates provided by Storyist, but it's a trade off.

Yep. Everything in life and software and writing is a tradeoff. But we're only human (even you Beagle Bunny) so we tend to prefer what we're used to.

 

I would support a universal tagging mechanism.

Me too but, again, what should it look like?

 

Again, if linking to [[ship]] in the manuscript or notes takes me to the entry that points to everything tagged with "Ship", that would be just what I need. If the same mechanism could also point to entries in the Character or Settings areas, that would be great too.

Clicking on a tag takes you to an entry that contains links to every entry also containing that tag. This is what you want? Do I have that right?

 

Maybe we're both over-thinking this. Wouldn't a simple tagging system like YouTube's or Flickr's work just as well for you?

 

900 degrees, my friend.

Hot'cha!

-Thoth,

[marguerite]

Just thought I'd mention that any member of the top level of the hierarchy (Plot, Characters, etc.) can be removed from the Project Pane and brought back by choosing that sheet type from the Display Option in the pop-up menu triggered by the Action Button directly under the Project Pane. (Yep. Steve hid that one real good.)

Just a thought,

-Thoth.

Thanks for mentioning this! One of the (many) things I didn't know about Storyist.

 

Course, I've never wanted to hide the top levels....

 

But if those who want to can eliminate individual sheets and hide the top levels, then Isaac is halfway to his goal, no? He just needs more flexible tagging, which I think Steve said he wanted to provide anyway.

Best,

Marguerite

[Steve E]

Thanks for mentioning this! One of the (many) things I didn't know about Storyist.

Any time.

 

But if those who want to can eliminate individual sheets and hide the top levels, then Isaac is halfway to his goal, no? He just needs more flexible tagging, which I think Steve said he wanted to provide anyway.

Ah. But what kind of tagging does Steve have in mind? Sophisticated like TiddlyWiki's or simple like Flickr's. Steve never said. Which really makes it hard to talk about. That's why we're really just batting around Isaac's feature request for tagging. Steve? If you're out there, just what did you have in mind when you said you were thinking about tagging?

 

Stumbling around in the dark,

-Thoth.

[astillac]

Wait, wait, I think I'm getting it. I have a small glimmer of it, at any rate, and what I can understand seems good. Something Thoth said in the previous thread actually struck a chord with me in regards to the tagging - about managing the details. I finally got back into the first book to do some editing and I realized that I gave the same perfume to two different girls. (And that's a bad, bad thing.) Also, they have a little cook stove and they keep building gorram fires. (That's a prop issue...) How could I manage things like that? Will tagging help me?

 

Slow... so slow...

- Callista

[Steve E]

Wait, wait, I think I'm getting it. I have a small glimmer of it, at any rate, and what I can understand seems good. Something Thoth said in the previous thread actually struck a chord with me in regards to the tagging - about managing the details. I finally got back into the first book to do some editing and I realized that I gave the same perfume to two different girls. (And that's a bad, bad thing.) Also, they have a little cook stove and they keep building gorram fires. (That's a prop issue...) How could I manage things like that? Will tagging help me?

 

Slow... so slow...

- Callista

Hi Callista

Will tagging help? It might, depending how you use it. Or, you could add a Perfume field to your Character sheet. And what's a gorram fire anyway? I did a Wikipedia search and got 500 responses. The top two were: a Mandarin euphemism for FRACK (a Battlestar Galactica euphemism for, well, you know); and some sort of theme park in the Firefly universe.

 

Quick like a bunny beagle,

-Thoth.

[codemer]

My fault. I should have made it clear that I wasn't planning to copy TW exactly for the sake of a more integrated fit with Storyist. Simply put, you create a blank Note first. It's name acts like a tag. Whenever this tag is used in another Note you can access the original Note sheet by clicking on the tag. If you add a tag (i.e., a string of characters) to the "Tag Field" at the bottom or top of a Note sheet (a new kind of field) a blank Note is created with the new tag as its name. In effect, everything gets tagged but that tag may not be referenced anywhere else. Don't want such tags to appear on the Project Pane? Only want certain tags to appear? Make that an option.

 

I've seen what you're referring to in other products, like Tiki Wiki (not TiddlyWiki), called "hot words", but never on by default. A hot word is a word that the user specified as a word that should be linked any time it appears. I'm actually not a fan of this approach only because it can make the text a little too colorful, making it harder to proofread off the screen. When I write wiki articles, I try to only link to an external entry one time in the current entry.

 

Yes. Thank you. I should have said something earlier. Something slobberingly grateful perhaps? But I see you envision top level tags (in TW's TOC) the way Steve sees sheet types (in S's PP, wait, that sounds vaguely dirty, I mean, in Storyist's Project Pane). Sure, TW would let me create any number of "sheet types" (i.e., top level tags in its Table Of Contents pane) but none of them would be specialized to remind me of the information I need to gather for that type of sheet.

 

In my real novel wikis, I tend to copy/paste in a character template. Maybe I should have put that in the sample. It would probably be possible to allow the default templates in an arbitrary note page, but we'll save that for another feature request.

 

Me too but, again, what should it look like?

 

A can of spray paint. It sounds silly, but there.

 

Clicking on a tag takes you to an entry that contains links to every entry also containing that tag. This is what you want? Do I have that right?

 

Yep, that's the gist of it.

 

Maybe we're both over-thinking this. Wouldn't a simple tagging system like YouTube's or Flickr's work just as well for you?

 

I think "simple" is too abstract a term. In the end, I think Steve will decide what he can implement in a reasonable amount of time so he can also work on other features.

 

But if those who want to can eliminate individual sheets and hide the top levels, then Isaac is halfway to his goal, no? He just needs more flexible tagging, which I think Steve said he wanted to provide anyway.

 

Yep. If I had an API to tweak Storyist, I could probably get the rest of the way through.

 

I finally got back into the first book to do some editing and I realized that I gave the same perfume to two different girls. (And that's a bad, bad thing.) Also, they have a little cook stove and they keep building gorram fires. (That's a prop issue...) How could I manage things like that? Will tagging help me?

 

Tagging is just an organizational/search tool. Ultimately, you have to decide how much information to put into your notes. I tend to go a little heavier on my notes than I probably need because I'm planning out sequels, and don't know what bits of trivia I might wish to revisit.

 

I'm so glad you guys are interested in this feature! Thanks for all the commentary.

IF

[Steve E]

I've seen what you're referring to in other products, like Tiki Wiki (not TiddlyWiki), called "hot words", but never on by default. A hot word is a word that the user specified as a word that should be linked any time it appears. I'm actually not a fan of this approach only because it can make the text a little too colorful, making it harder to proofread off the screen. When I write wiki articles, I try to only link to an external entry one time in the current entry.

Simple solution though: an option to turn the color (and underlining) off.

 

In my real novel wikis, I tend to copy/paste in a character template. Maybe I should have put that in the sample. It would probably be possible to allow the default templates in an arbitrary note page, but we'll save that for another feature request.

Sure. But expanding your example wouldn't hurt.

 

A can of spray paint. It sounds silly, but there.

Come down to NYC sometime. Every other car on the B Train has a turquoise Thoth tag.

 

Yep, that's the gist of it.

Thanks for the clarification. Now I can tell you, with confidence, that it's not quite my thing. Sorry.

 

In the end, I think Steve will decide what he can implement in a reasonable amount of time so he can also work on other features.

Work? I thought he used magic! I guess we'll just have to wait until he weighs in before we can seriously continue with this.

 

I'm so glad you guys are interested in this feature! Thanks for all the commentary.

On behalf of myself and the other intrepid forum contributors, it was our pleasure.

-Thoth.

[Steve]

Work? I thought he used magic! I guess we'll just have to wait until he weighs in before we can seriously continue with this.

 

You guys and gals are doing fine!

 

Thanks Isaac for the example.

 

At the model level, the tagging really is straight forward. RDF statements take the form subject/predicate/object and the RDF for tagging would simply be ' has a tag with value ' You could argue that RDF was designed for just this type of case.

 

There is no reason to limit the tagging to the notebook, since all thing in the project pane are RDF subjects. The issue that I want to resolve is how this is presented in the interface.

speak>

 

-Steve

[Steve E]

You guys and gals are doing fine!

 

Thanks Isaac for the example.

 

<geek speak>

At the model level, the tagging really is straight forward. RDF statements take the form subject/predicate/object and the RDF for tagging would simply be '<some subject> has a tag with value <some tag value>' You could argue that RDF was designed for just this type of case.

 

There is no reason to limit the tagging to the notebook, since all thing in the project pane are RDF subjects. The issue that I want to resolve is how this is presented in the interface.

</geek speak>

 

-Steve

Thanks for the vote of confidence.

<techno typing>

Since RDF web specifications were originally meant to support metadata models, yes, I can see that. Both Isaac and I have presented possible interface models (several in fact) but we (I) need some guidance as to which way to go since we have very different notions about the best way to make tags fit Storyist. For example, I don't think tags should require a special syntax. I understand why they do. But isn't that (forgive me) just laziness? The double brackets we currently use to make links are completely consistent with many other applications as well as the link "standard" but they are (again, forgive me) geeky and completely inconsistent with the feel of the rest of the program. Understand that I'm not saying they are hard to use. They just feel like they belong in a different kind of program. Do other users feel the same way?

</techno typing>

Knew the "magic" comment would get your attention.

-Thoth.

[codemer]

<geek speak>

At the model level, the tagging really is straight forward. RDF statements take the form subject/predicate/object and the RDF for tagging would simply be '<some subject> has a tag with value <some tag value>' You could argue that RDF was designed for just this type of case.

 

There is no reason to limit the tagging to the notebook, since all thing in the project pane are RDF subjects. The issue that I want to resolve is how this is presented in the interface.

</geek speak>

 

It sounds like a appropriate format. That means it should be easy to add tags anywhere one might want a tag. Now how do would you implement tag menus/searches/api?

 

IF

[astillac]

This is really interesting and I wish I understood it on a deeper, more technical level. I wonder if Alex could explain it to me.

[Steve E]

This is really interesting and I wish I understood it on a deeper, more technical level. I wonder if Alex could explain it to me.

Repeat it, yes. Explain it, no. We'll have to wait for the new A.I. Mac for that.

 

Sorry if you're feeling left out, Calli. Basically we're just talking about how tags should work and what they should look like. It's the "what they should look like" (interface) part that Steve is interested in. I'm a little resistant to introducing another parenthetical syntax to Storyist. I'm not even comfortable with the square brackets syntax for existing links. That doesn't mean I don't use them. But if I'm uncomfortable I can only imagine how you feel.

 

Please hang in there. My spidie sense tells me that once you plow your way through all the geekerish you'll have some insightful comments to make.

 

-Thoth.

[codemer]

Sure. But expanding your example wouldn't hurt.

 

Done.

 

http://noscience.net/sample.html

 

I've thrown in a couple templates and updated a few of the characters to demonstrate the template. You'll notice that my templates don't match the Storyist templates. It's just my preference.

 

IF

[Steve E]

I've thrown in a couple templates and updated a few of the characters to demonstrate the template. You'll notice that my templates don't match the Storyist templates. It's just my preference.

Thanks Isaac. And you know what? I rather like your tables. It definitely has more of a Storyist feel.

 

Sex = R ?

-Thoth.

[marguerite]

At the model level, the tagging really is straight forward. RDF statements take the form subject/predicate/object and the RDF for tagging would simply be ' has a tag with value ' You could argue that RDF was designed for just this type of case.

 

There is no reason to limit the tagging to the notebook, since all thing in the project pane are RDF subjects. The issue that I want to resolve is how this is presented in the interface.

speak>

 

-Steve

What was that that you just said?

 

Well, at least when you get the "geek speak" part working to the satisfaction of Isaac and Thoth, you'll know where to turn to check that the interface bit works for the nondeveloper part of the Storyist community.

 

Hanging in there by the tips of my fingernails,

Marguerite

[astillac]

Repeat it, yes. Explain it, no.

Bah, that's exactly what happened!

 

Please hang in there. My spidie sense tells me that once you plow your way through all the geekerish you'll have some insightful comments to make.

Once I figure it out, I will! Tell me if I'm off course here, but doesn't Flickr use tagging? I understand that king of tagging. The moving boxes just confound me. (EDIT - you know I say confounded now, but the more I look at it the more I understand it. Still grappling with the idea of how it would help in the writing process - I guess it's more of planning/researching/referencing thing?)

 

Having tea underwater with Lady M,

- Calli

[Steve E]

Once I figure it out, I will! Tell me if I'm off course here, but doesn't Flickr use tagging? I understand that kind of tagging. The moving boxes just confound me. (EDIT - you know I say confounded now, but the more I look at it the more I understand it. Still grappling with the idea of how it would help in the writing process - I guess it's more of planning/researching/referencing thing?)

 

Having tea underwater with Lady M,

- Calli

Yes. Flickr uses a simple tagging scheme. It tags pictures. We want to tag blank or customized sheets and maybe other stuff.

 

Don't let the box animation throw you. Think of the moving boxes in Isaac's example as sheets. Notebook sheets, Character sheets, etcetera. In theory they would be popping up in the Storyist main view just like sheets do now.

 

How does it help the writing process, you ask? You answered your own question: It's a planning/researching/referencing thing. (See? I knew you had insight.) The potential advantage, depending on how it's implemented, would be making annotation and information retrieval easier. Adding a tag on the fly should be easier than stopping (however briefly) to fill out or modify a character sheet or note. At least that's what I'm hoping. Take another look at Isaac's example and examine his character heading, then click on the first character. It's a good example.

 

Sharing a brandy and Evil Alien Overmuffins in orbit with Isaac.

-Thoth.

 

BTW: We haven't had a two page feature request in a while.

[codemer]

Thanks Isaac. And you know what? I rather like your tables. It definitely has more of a Storyist feel.

 

I'm glad you like it.

 

Sex = R ?

 

Do you know how hard it is to keep track of sexes for a race that has more sexes than letters in the alphabet?

 

IF

[Steve E]

Do you know how hard it is to keep track of sexes for a race that has more sexes than letters in the alphabet?

Nope. The Tralfamadorians use numbers. For example, sex 14. But only odds can mate with evens, unless the odds are prime. Fibonacci numbers are wild, literally.

 

Thinking too much about sex. Need to get out more. Should find myself a nice 42. One with her own Lego™ set.

-Thoth.

[codemer]

Nope. The Tralfamadorians use numbers. For example, sex 14. But only odds can mate with evens, unless the odds are prime. Fibonacci numbers are wild, literally.

 

Let me think about this. 1,1,2,3,5,8,13,21... Does that mean a 1 and 1 can mate? Man, I haven't thought about Fibonacci numbers since I implemented that sample FPGA. But I go off topic...

 

Thinking too much about sex. Need to get out more. Should find myself a nice 42. One with her own Lego™ set.

 

It sounds like you have the answer, but you are really searching for the question.

 

IF