Great explanation. How do you feel about using classes rather than exclusively tags? For example could you have a note of class "meeting" (type) with "subject" property. Would that add any value?
Great question! I tried that for a couple of months and found that it works exactly the same as using a tag. The reason I switched to using only tags is two-fold: I aim to keep my vaults as simple as possible, and using tags for everything is easier to explain to people who are just starting with Obsidian. I prefer a clean workspace, and adding an extra metadata property felt like unnecessary clutter. Ultimately, it's a matter of personal preference. I encourage you to try using classes for a few weeks or months to see if they work for you. :)
Suppose you have notes about the subjects of "aesthetics" and then there's notes that have aesthetics in them. The question would then be whether you want the class to be the first thing ie #about/aesthetics, #is/aesthetics or you wish for the subject matter to be on the forefront and the class only specifies the context eg #aesthetics/is and #aesthetics/about - both the contexts are then nested within. In the former, the same subject matter is distrubuted across contexts. So personally I prefer the latter. ig if you're still trying to add an overarching type you can still use the #type/* tag in addition to these. That'd be ideal! Do let me know your thoughts on this type of tagging scheme tho.
I think you are on to something here. My thoughts on tagging is always evolving. So I try to keep it as simple as possible, and if at the time of entry I feel that there might be difficulties finding this in the future, I'd add another tag, the overarching type that you mentioned. Please keep sharing your ideas with this. Maybe another example?
@@construct_by_dee yea, I think tagging should always be with reference to how you'll want to look things up at a later stage. After some contemplation I've figured that it'd be helpful if I can tag starting from the thing, or from the category it belongs to. An example for thing-first tagging. So suppose under #book I have nested /about, which covers everything about books, book/is that goes on everything that is a book, ../out would maybe cover notes or articles that are pointers to books. The neat thing about this is that all possible relations wrt books are nested under the parent tag. Alternatively you may also have catg first tagging such as genre/horror, or media/book, event/meeting etc. If you take this even a step further and want to take control of another level of semantic abstraction, you may as well go onto tag like verb/eating, noun/person or place etc. The paradigms you use for these categories or things can be as subjective as you'd like, or based on something a little more objective like semantics or ontological or hierarchical constructs like inheritance.
This is actually amazing holy shit. I hope this gets picked up by the algorithm.
Yet another brilliant video! Thank you so much for the knowledge you share on here.
Great explanation. How do you feel about using classes rather than exclusively tags? For example could you have a note of class "meeting" (type) with "subject" property. Would that add any value?
Great question!
I tried that for a couple of months and found that it works exactly the same as using a tag.
The reason I switched to using only tags is two-fold:
I aim to keep my vaults as simple as possible, and using tags for everything is easier to explain to people who are just starting with Obsidian.
I prefer a clean workspace, and adding an extra metadata property felt like unnecessary clutter.
Ultimately, it's a matter of personal preference. I encourage you to try using classes for a few weeks or months to see if they work for you. :)
@@construct_by_dee Thanks that makes sense. I'm looking forward to using the Logredis methodology.
Suppose you have notes about the subjects of "aesthetics" and then there's notes that have aesthetics in them.
The question would then be whether you want the class to be the first thing ie #about/aesthetics, #is/aesthetics
or you wish for the subject matter to be on the forefront and the class only specifies the context eg #aesthetics/is and #aesthetics/about - both the contexts are then nested within.
In the former, the same subject matter is distrubuted across contexts. So personally I prefer the latter.
ig if you're still trying to add an overarching type you can still use the #type/* tag in addition to these. That'd be ideal!
Do let me know your thoughts on this type of tagging scheme tho.
I think you are on to something here.
My thoughts on tagging is always evolving. So I try to keep it as simple as possible, and if at the time of entry I feel that there might be difficulties finding this in the future, I'd add another tag, the overarching type that you mentioned.
Please keep sharing your ideas with this. Maybe another example?
@@construct_by_dee yea, I think tagging should always be with reference to how you'll want to look things up at a later stage. After some contemplation I've figured that it'd be helpful if I can tag starting from the thing, or from the category it belongs to.
An example for thing-first tagging. So suppose under #book I have nested /about, which covers everything about books, book/is that goes on everything that is a book, ../out would maybe cover notes or articles that are pointers to books. The neat thing about this is that all possible relations wrt books are nested under the parent tag.
Alternatively you may also have catg first tagging such as genre/horror, or media/book, event/meeting etc.
If you take this even a step further and want to take control of another level of semantic abstraction, you may as well go onto tag like verb/eating, noun/person or place etc.
The paradigms you use for these categories or things can be as subjective as you'd like, or based on something a little more objective like semantics or ontological or hierarchical constructs like inheritance.
Genius
Cool❤
👍👍👍
The IA images are disgusting to look at 😢
Yeah. Some of my AI images in my videos aren't for everyone 😪