Zettelkasten Forum


What are the most important terms for our upcoming glossary?

Give me your wishes. :)

I am a Zettler

Comments

  • edited September 3

    I will list a few I found confusing and had to research:

    • Structure Note
    • Buffer Note
    • Tags vs. Keywords (I am not sure if this belongs here, but still a confusion)
    • Link vs. Reference vs. Relation vs. Connection (I tend to use these like they mean the same, although they don't)

    And some basic ones:

    • Atomicity
    • Multiple Storage
    • Open organization
    • Folgezettel
    • Zettel
    • ID / UID
    • Internal Branching
    • Fixed filling place (less important for digital implementation, although I think it explains the idea behind unique IDs and titles - a lot people avoid titles even, to my big surprise)
    • Hubs / Clusters

    I am not sure if these are relevant:

    • Keyword Register
    • Entry Point
    • Bibliography (in terms of implementing it in Zettelkasten method)
    • Bibliographical notes / Literature notes
    • Relations of relations
    • Knowledge work
  • edited September 3

    I wish for a Wiki instead of a Glossary and one with the ability for us to leave comments below entries! The above list by @ethomasv seems solid to me.

  • Here is my list of terms I'd like in a glossary.
    1. Love :)
    2. Kindness :)
    3. Happiness :)
    4. Bliss :)

    1. Evergreen/Complete
    2. The verb for zettelkasting
    3. The noun for notes (put to rest rather which is proper for the plural for notes is it zettel or zettels)
    4. The noun for zettelcaster

    Will Simpson
    I'm a Zettelnant.
    Research: Rationalism, Zen, Dzogchen, Non-fiction Creative Writing
    kestrelcreek.com

  • @ethomasv Thanks!

    @Nick What is the problem you want to solve with your idea? Is it that the terms should be found by the community rather than set by the evil overlord @sfast ? Or for optics?

    @Will Way to positive. Haha.

    I am a Zettler

  • @Will said:
    Here is my list of terms I'd like in a glossary.
    1. Love :)
    2. Kindness :)
    3. Happiness :)
    4. Bliss :)

    +1 :)

  • edited September 4

    @sfast there is no problem I am trying to solve, I just find wikis to be more fun. Especially since I think a wiki would go a long way towards helping newbies than just having a glossary (glossary still being a good idea) would. I'm fine with you as our evil overlord because I trust your judgment on zettelkasten matters, even if I disagree with you here and there. Community part is just because a one man wiki is a lot of work.

  • edited September 5

    Ah, ok. I think you might have a glossary with just one or two lines per entry in mind. I think 400--500 words per entry will be the end result. :)

    And: Because we want to make this page the hub for the Zettelkasten Method I won't create dogma. Rather I will use a bit of etymology and a softer approach of guiding the beginner (or intermediate) through all that lingo.

    I am a Zettler

  • i also have one line each in mind. I'd have needed this in the beginning to follow some discussions.

    my first Zettel uid: 202008120915

  • So, I talked with Christian: Our idea is to automatically highlight the first instance of Zettelkasten words in eache thread. If you hover with the cursor over it a short definition will pop up. The longer discussion of terms will be published as a series of blogposts.

    Any objections?

    I am a Zettler

  • @sfast said:
    So, I talked with Christian: Our idea is to automatically highlight the first instance of Zettelkasten words in eache thread. If you hover with the cursor over it a short definition will pop up. The longer discussion of terms will be published as a series of blogposts.

    Any objections?

    Perfect! Thanks @sfast and @ctietze

  • This is a great idea. However, I would regret not having a central place to direct people to for terms and definitions. I often send people to the getting started overview page. In my opinion, for completeness, a link form that page to the main glossary page should be included.

    There is great value in searching the site and forum for answers and information but not everyone is wired like that. Curated entry points, such as the overview page about the method and a glossary for terms would be beneficial as well as on spot definitions as you encounter them in the forum and blog.

  • @MikeBraddock Good point. Then the glossary should have its own hub.

    I am a Zettler

  • edited September 7

    while we're at it could someone clarify what a note archive is?

    Edit: found the answer here. Interesting, i always thought the archive was the Zettelkasten. I have still the same structure and workflow but i named my archive "zk".

    Post edited by zk_1000 on

    my first Zettel uid: 202008120915

  • @zk_1000 said:
    while we're at it could someone clarify what a note archive is?

    Your Zettelkasten. (Or your note archive if you don't adhere to the Zettelkasten Method)

    I am a Zettler

  • @sfast said:
    @Will Way too positive. Haha.

    Peace Love Dove
    Flower Child

    Will Simpson
    I'm a Zettelnant.
    Research: Rationalism, Zen, Dzogchen, Non-fiction Creative Writing
    kestrelcreek.com

  • another confusing one, that i had to research: content note

    my first Zettel uid: 202008120915

  • when we are referring to "atomic Zettel" we are using "atomic" merely as a property to describe our Zettel: the Zettel is atomic. We don't use it as a term like "content note", do we?

    my first Zettel uid: 202008120915

  • Speaking of terms, "self-contained / self-standing note" also comes to mind.

    By this I mean the idea that each note contains all necessary information (like relevant citation / reference info) so that one could copy/export this note somewhere else w/o the loss of any relevant information.

  • @zk_1000 said:
    when we are referring to "atomic Zettel" we are using "atomic" merely as a property to describe our Zettel: the Zettel is atomic. We don't use it as a term like "content note", do we?

    Yes, it's used as a property, and no, I don't think people use this like a "flavor" similar to "content note". It's not like "Nuka Cola", which is different from e.g. "Coca Cola" :) An atomic note tries to focus on one thing, while a non-atomic note might be a messy collection on the way to being smashed into atoms. (A structure note/overview/index/etc is also atomic and self-contained inasmuch as its focus is the structure itself, and in turn not some unique content that is not on other Zettel.) Btw I personally don't like the distinction between "content note" and .. what? Content-less notes? 🤷‍♂️

    Author at Zettelkasten.de • https://christiantietze.de/

  • edited November 19

    Great. I had to confirm because after rereading an old discussion i realized that i was mixing this up and misunderstanding the context.

    @ctietze said:

    An atomic note tries to focus on one thing, while a non-atomic note might be a messy collection on the way to being smashed into atoms. (A structure note/overview/index/etc is also atomic and self-contained inasmuch as its focus is the structure itself, and in turn not some unique content that is not on other Zettel.)

    Yesn't. I agree with this definition but i doubt this is the context being referred to whenever "atomic something" is used by forum members. I think it is more often used incorrectly.

    Btw I personally don't like the distinction between "content note" and .. what? Content-less notes? 🤷‍♂️

    There is no definition for "content note". There are two types of notes in a Zettelkasten. One type is structure notes, another content notes. Content notes are part of the bottom layer of a Zettelkasten. They form the base for more complex layer.

    Post edited by zk_1000 on

    my first Zettel uid: 202008120915

  • @zk_1000 said:

    An atomic note tries to focus on one thing, while a non-atomic note might be a messy collection on the way to being smashed into atoms. (A structure note/overview/index/etc is also atomic and self-contained inasmuch as its focus is the structure itself, and in turn not some unique content that is not on other Zettel.)

    Yesn't. I agree with this definition but i doubt this is the context being referred to whenever "atomic something" is used by forum members. I think it is more often used incorrectly.

    Hmm I believe I see what you mean. The way I perceive English on the web and how flexible the same word combinations can be used to apparently express different things, I don't see what we all could do about it :) Maybe a glossary would help in that regard to avoid confusion? (At least people can then say "I don't mean X in the way that the glossary talks about it, but...")

    Btw I personally don't like the distinction between "content note" and .. what? Content-less notes? 🤷‍♂️

    There is no definition for "content note". There are two types of notes in a Zettelkasten. One type is structure notes, another content notes. Content notes are part of the bottom layer of a Zettelkasten. They form the base for more complex layer.

    Of course, sorry, I must've been stuck in a weird thought train yesterday: I was thinking about all the different types like "literature note" and "permanent note" and mixed "content note" in as another one of those types. As if a note with a quote has no content. That was sloppy thinking. -- I do realize that I used the distinction of structure/content note in the past myself, and that I do in fact still use it, and that this means I am supporting usage of the term :) I apologize for the confusion.

    Author at Zettelkasten.de • https://christiantietze.de/

  • edited November 22

    I was thinking about all the different types like "literature note" and "permanent note" and mixed "content note" in as another one of those types.

    Exactly what has happened to me with "atomic notes" :lol:

    @ctietze said:
    The way I perceive English on the web and how flexible the same word combinations can be used to apparently express different things [...]. Maybe a glossary would help [...]?

    A glossary allows using a common language. It avoids hundreds of user describing the same idea in their own words. I wouldn't want to do that every time i type "Zettelkasten". It also helps with the questions: Do others understand my description? How is the general understanding different from my variant?

    @ctietze said:
    I was thinking about all the different types like "literature note" and "permanent note"

    This distinction is made in Ahrens book. I'll stop using these terms here in the forum, it's not like i am relying on note types when talking about content, structure or literature.

    I recently created a note about literature notes vs literature notes. There are Luhmanns literature notes and Allen's, which one am i referring to in the forum? What's the difference? I wouldn't even know myself :cold_sweat:

    Post edited by zk_1000 on

    my first Zettel uid: 202008120915

Sign In or Register to comment.