In-text links

djdrysdale

The recent post on back-linking has me thinking about my own link strategy. I often use in-text links—that is, I'll link a phrase in a sentence to a related note. I am wondering if this is limiting my ability to create new connections in that it doesn't really afford a way to explain the reason why the link is there. It is sort of contextualized, but not with any substantial explanation. Does anyone have any thoughts on this method of linking?

Here is an example of a note where I've done this.

learning_ran

I think it is a problem with Obsidian. It is better to ask the developer to render the file.

I don't think this is a markdown stander, but GitHub renders in-file link with this type of format:

## Title

### Place 1

Hello, this is some text to fill in this, [here](#place-2), is a link to the second place.

### Place 2

Place one has the fun times of linking here, but I can also link back [here](#place-1).

### Place's 3: other example

Place one has the fun times of linking here, but I can also link back [here](#places-3-other-example).

Ref:
https://stackoverflow.com/a/45508928/4565840

I like your notes. It's really neat.

Sascha

To me, it looks like that you are mixing a personal with a public writing approach. This is a good example of writing for the public:

It's not as clear cut as we might like to think.

1. I'd expand the link text to note as clear cut because the not is important information of the sentence being a commentary to the one before.
2. The link on the root note has a very general decription. "Not clear cut" can mean a lot. In 10 years the links will feel obscure for you as they feel now for me.

The links remind me of blogposts in which you place links that are just enough opaque that one gets triggered to click the link. This is good in public writing. This way however is not future proof.