Would a rich commitment to hierarchies and classification be an anathema to Logseq culture?

Better UX for hierarchies is certainly one of the feature requests we’re exploring here. You are right about that @alex0. It was my own animating concern once we got started, and I still want that.

Whether it’s built on top of namespaces, or properties and queries, I myself definitely want a “Hierarchies” system link, with qualities like I’ve described above, between the “Graph view” and “All pages”.

Also, in his outstanding work on SKOS polyhierarchies in this thread, I don’t think when @gax writes things like “/Books/ByAuthor/Jameson/William”, he’s necessarily literally referring to the current [[parent/child/teddy]] style of namespaces based on page titles.

As this thread has developed, @gax has contributed ideas that are growing so rich and powerful. I would just love to implement his most recent ideas in a small test case - just to click around and see what it would feel like to navigate a small set of pages through rich/smart polyhierarchy (his “Ark Royal” example).

I don’t care if it’s using namespaces, queries, or burning corn to appease the god Moloch. Really any mechanism for experiencing this type of page traversal in Logeq would be amazingly helpful.

I want to apply outline thinking at a higher level than “indented blocks on the page”. I want “indented pages in the hierarchy”. I want to apply exactly the same kind of thinking, one level up.