Logseq and Obsidian.md Colaboration Projects

[Bakasan]

I found this too, but couldn’t find any reviews from others using it. I want to be sure there aren’t any vulnerabilities, etc (tried contacting author, but not response)

Can someone check the code?

[mlanza]

I see a lot of feature requests for Logseq to emulate some Obsidian feature. I get that these products are similar, but they are also different. I like that Obsidian appears to be built atop a plugin architecture where everything, even the core, is a plugin. I like that because it means I can opt out of a lot of cruft I don’t want (e.g. Zotero) but which is integrated into Logseq by default.

Other than that, I don’t like the idea of Logseq becoming more like Obsidian. I like the Logseq user experience better than Obsidian, at this point. So the notion of Logseq doing Obsidian is lost on me.

Now if the Obsidian must-haves are nothing more than plugins, that’s great because that doesn’t impose one person’s view (Obsidian does X better) on the whole community. And if Logseq makes plugins a centerpiece to its design then lots of Obsidian-like things can be supported via plugins.

As far as collaboration goes, I am sure Obsidian and Logseq are cross pollinating but I see no way around having to rewrite features/plugins for both. Basically, all this request amounts to is configurability. Let users choose what things to configure to be more like Obsidian and, with plugins, that’s possible.

[alex0]

Here there is a proposal for a committee or something like that to standardize the syntax of PKMS i.e. extensions to Markdown format:

Standardize syntax

Logseq takes advantage of Markdown as an universal standard but when adding features it introduces arbitrary syntax and this could reduce interoperability with other PKMS. I think it’s time to standardize these extensions to Markdown, for example #hashtags, [[wikilinks]] and queries. Please take inspiration from something like Matrix Spec Change Proposals, Python Enhancement Proposals, W3C standards, XMPP Extension Protocols etc. Maybe make it Logseq-agnostic and involve other PKMS like Obsid…

[stef]

Logsidian or Obseq?

If LogSeq will start using subfolders for namespaces it would be a great Obsidian companion!

[huy]

I wonder if Logseq could switch to a more common and user-friendly format for callouts, aka admonitions.

Obsidian has chosen to follow the syntax created by Microsoft. Github (owned by Microsoft lol) has gone somewhat different.
But all use a modified Blockquote, which I believe was chosen so that it renders decently in markdown processors that don’t understand callouts.

It would be great of Logseq moved away from the org-mode style #+BEGIN (which I’ve always found difficult to remember and type in my org-mode days, even before the better ``` syntax was invented)

[Ocarinalover]

I totally agree with you, there is no point in adapting to a universal standard format and creating a dialect-like barrier at the same time.