Excited about it too! I've been wanting this sort of functionality for quite a long time. Now the task of bringing my content across from Roam and modifying it to express what I actually wanted to express, but wasn't able to with the limitations!
My Understanding: Semantic Function: Part of - Task Part of a Project Extending an Existing Tag = Generalization and Specialization (in UML/SysML) meaning "Make a Call " # is extending a Todo # ... basically the "Make a Call" takes the attributes of Todo and add some Attributes... and if you search for Todo then "Make a Call" # will also be found Does @cortexfutura agree? Thank You
Not immediately, no. Mastering Tana Core is not about specific features, and does not cover every feature Tana has or adds in the future. In a future revision this will likely be included, but it doesn't change the general approach to designing supertag systems - which is what MTC is about.
@@cortexfuturatools Okay, I understand. I haven't gone through the course yet, as you are starting with the book example and it's not my priority now so I started to play around (yeah, I know it is a mistake). Now, I'm telling myself to go back and learn fundamentals. Haha! :)
Would love to know if there is actually any advantage to coda where you can define a function part of, and name a property part of (what I find even more clear than naming it after the tag, for example project and having is part of hidden, and it’s hard to explain but I have a feeling that it’s better/ logical to put 2 things that have part of in a same supertag or database, So I would make a part of property in coda, and then use a prepered formula that. Recursively asks for the same property. I think this would basically be exactly the same complexity + maybe even cleaner
Please tell me if I should explain it better. By the way, you answered me in the past about why it’s not necessary to have so complex link filters like in roam and I kind of agree with you, I think it’s a good solution that supertags can be combined but normal references not
So my main question is there an actual usecase in which it would really be beneficial to make a part function of 2 levels of more, Between (completely ) different databases/supertrags. It seems to me like a good simplification that the parent always needs to have some structure in common, I mean of course you could do it like you did it in your video, but i wonder if there is really some necessary/highly leveraged useless for this, which goes beyond simple documentation, for what nodes for example also would be sufficient and where it would not be somehow beneficial to have some similar structure, I mean for example if the things you put in a box have a width the box also has a width, maybe that’s why you want to have a connection between these 2
Still brand new to Tana so not sure I fully appreciate the power Semantic Functions yet (could you not just search “Area=Health” before; why does specifying the relationship of Health to Area matter?). More so, would Semantic Functions be useful for Discourse Graphs in which the relationship between nodes needs to be defined as Question, Claim or Evidence? Or is that more semantics between nodes rather than within Supertags?
Yeah, totally get that. And then other people tell me that I'm moving too fast and not repeating things enough so that they can follow along. Rock and a hard place :D
I can do the same thing and much more simply with nested tags in Obsidian. #Art/Romanticism/French_Romanticism et voilà. and even without nested tags, I could add each tag to a note, like "#art #romanticism #french_romanticism" and every time I click on one of them I can see all the notes under that category.
for one I can see that in tana you don't need to set all these tags for all the nodes, you only set the relevant for this (e.g. project of a task), and all the other tags are computed on the fly, and can be searched in a complex way
![[LIVE] : ONE ลุมพินี 90 วันนี้ | คู่เอก "ก้องไกล vs แอนตาร์"](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/VugIvOstzRI/mqdefault.jpg)
Will the Mastering Tana course be updated in the future to adjust the related videos?🥺
Excited about it too! I've been wanting this sort of functionality for quite a long time.
Now the task of bringing my content across from Roam and modifying it to express what I actually wanted to express, but wasn't able to with the limitations!
Thanks Lukas! Appreciate the clear and concise examples!
Thank you Tomi!
Very exciting development. I am already considering my former template for creating my Zettelkasten.
Right?! Exciting times
Cool 👍. This is positively going to change things. I was doing it by grouping but not even close.
Right? Such an important and powerful feature
Great content, as usual!
Very interesting, thank you
Excellent video! Thank you! Why is’t the function toggled ON by default? Can anyone see a case where you would want it OFF?
Can you explain what is the difference between Semantic Functions of a tag and extending an existing tag?
My Understanding:
Semantic Function: Part of - Task Part of a Project
Extending an Existing Tag = Generalization and Specialization (in UML/SysML) meaning "Make a Call " # is extending a Todo # ... basically the "Make a Call" takes the attributes of Todo and add some Attributes... and if you search for Todo then "Make a Call" # will also be found
Does @cortexfutura agree? Thank You
Are you going to update your course according to this change?
Not immediately, no. Mastering Tana Core is not about specific features, and does not cover every feature Tana has or adds in the future.
In a future revision this will likely be included, but it doesn't change the general approach to designing supertag systems - which is what MTC is about.
@@cortexfuturatools Okay, I understand. I haven't gone through the course yet, as you are starting with the book example and it's not my priority now so I started to play around (yeah, I know it is a mistake). Now, I'm telling myself to go back and learn fundamentals. Haha! :)
Would love to know if there is actually any advantage to coda where you can define a function part of, and name a property part of (what I find even more clear than naming it after the tag, for example project and having is part of hidden, and it’s hard to explain but I have a feeling that it’s better/ logical to put 2 things that have part of in a same supertag or database, So I would make a part of property in coda, and then use a prepered formula that. Recursively asks for the same property. I think this would basically be exactly the same complexity + maybe even cleaner
Please tell me if I should explain it better. By the way, you answered me in the past about why it’s not necessary to have so complex link filters like in roam and I kind of agree with you, I think it’s a good solution that supertags can be combined but normal references not
So my main question is there an actual usecase in which it would really be beneficial to make a part function of 2 levels of more, Between (completely ) different databases/supertrags. It seems to me like a good simplification that the parent always needs to have some structure in common, I mean of course you could do it like you did it in your video, but i wonder if there is really some necessary/highly leveraged useless for this, which goes beyond simple documentation, for what nodes for example also would be sufficient and where it would not be somehow beneficial to have some similar structure, I mean for example if the things you put in a box have a width the box also has a width, maybe that’s why you want to have a connection between these 2
Exciting! Although I can't come up with a usecase for my personal setup in Tana, yet 😊
Yeah, for sure! It's a powerful but (so far) niche feature - not necessary for everything :)
The search works even if don't specify the first "#task" tag. But I'm not sure why.
Still brand new to Tana so not sure I fully appreciate the power Semantic Functions yet (could you not just search “Area=Health” before; why does specifying the relationship of Health to Area matter?). More so, would Semantic Functions be useful for Discourse Graphs in which the relationship between nodes needs to be defined as Question, Claim or Evidence? Or is that more semantics between nodes rather than within Supertags?
this is huge
I thought that you will take some days off 😅
Next week! ;)
This would have been an awesome a 5min video without repeating everything a couple of times
Yeah, totally get that. And then other people tell me that I'm moving too fast and not repeating things enough so that they can follow along. Rock and a hard place :D
@@cortexfuturatools For what it's worth, I don't find this intuitive, so value the longer video with examples
@@cortexfuturatools The way you handled that in this video is perfect IMO
I can do the same thing and much more simply with nested tags in Obsidian. #Art/Romanticism/French_Romanticism et voilà.
and even without nested tags, I could add each tag to a note, like "#art #romanticism #french_romanticism" and every time I click on one of them I can see all the notes under that category.
for one I can see that in tana you don't need to set all these tags for all the nodes, you only set the relevant for this (e.g. project of a task), and all the other tags are computed on the fly, and can be searched in a complex way