Thank you to @cannibalox, @Peng_Xiao, @Aryan. I would pay money to accelerate this specific development.
use-case :
- Concept maps,
- argument maps,
- debate graphs,
- controversy mapping,
- complex system interaction visualization
Logseq et al talk of their “knowledge graphs” which indeed are useful but not real graphs of knowledge. Well, if so, they are lower-order. Information becomes knowledge when the conceptual relationship between info blocks is articulated. Currently the link is basic hypertextual. Higher-order linking would articulate how one data block influences/modifies/compares etc to the other. These links can be tailored depending on the conceptual model or philosophical framework being employed. And a data block can sit in multiple models or frameworks.
most wanted features :
- Link text/types are real. They exist as blocks/pages just like notes do. They are not just a text box.
- hide/unhide links between blocks. (There may be multiple)
- export to html and svg
- nested maps/whiteboards.
- drop-down and/or scroll-over/tooltip of block in map to reveal more info.
- Shift-click or similar to open map/whiteboard node as note in sidebar to read detail
- Multiple line types available for multiple link types
- Map templates
experience with whiteboards:
Cmap Tools (concept mapping)
Tinderbox
Rationale (argument mapping)
Compendium (Dialogue mapping)
questions / random thoughts :
In these notetaking 2.0 communities, there is much talk of “Maps of Content”…but they are not maps. They are lists. This functionality could make a real map!
Trillium Notes seems to do what i’m talking about quite well already but everything else is inferior to Logseq.