Some ways to comment in logseq

General
1
  • Several ways to use comment within logseq,
  1. org syntax
  2. markdown syntax
  3. logseq-block-ref column
  4. logseq-outline-zoom
  5. Or is there a better way?
  1. Use org syntax, similar to
#+BEGIN_COMMENT

#+END_COMMENT
  • works, but kinda sucks, (because unless you click the block, you don’t know there are comments here, And the comments are all in one place, making the text a bit crowded,)

  1. Use markdown syntax, similar to
    it is a block ,[^1]

    [^1]: just used as test template

    • Manually drop it to the last line?
    • Another question, jumps within pages? (Still using block-ref?)
  1. Use block-embed/ref +filter like this,

    • it directly utilizes what logseq provides, you can see it marked on the right, (but still not enough,)

    • Assuming that the page where you write something is test, then the page for commenting is in test/comment, (the advantage of this behavior is that this page is very clean,)

    • or at the end of this page, embedded under the heading of comments, (the advantage of this behavior is that you can simply search in Notepad (or any application that supports Ctrl+f), just use “Ctrl+F” ,)

    • IMG_20220512_101001
      IMG_20220512_1010011080×1164 82.8 KB

    • A little bit of code can effectively improve the experience, (but I don’t know how to do it,)

    • In the linked reference, there is *<comment (or some other identifying mark, ), which displays a comment mark next to the block on the normal page, such as this, “:speech_balloon:”,

  1. Use zoom to comment below outline,-comment -This is for the parent, unless I nested this habitually,
    • But here I also want to get a “:speech_balloon:” on the right side of the parent block, and hide this comment in the child block,

Why is it not good to write directly? Not good, because the comment is more like meta-note. For this problem, the block itself is marked, not the specific content of it.
(Visually direct differentiation is required, not based on analysis，)

Or is there a better way?

3 Likes