Some Questions from a new Zettelkasten user
Hello,
I recently started applying the Zettelkasten Method and wanted to ask you guys for some insight
My first question is how do you know whether to go back to a structure note versus linking to a new zettle inside of a note you are already working on? I ask this because I noticed that it could get quite exhausting to keep going back to a structure note and creating new entries in it versus what felt more natural which was to link to a new note inside of the one I was already making. I noticed however that I couldn't fully get rid of the structure notes though because they were useful for organizing different but related ideas. This is what made me ask the question.
My second question is how important is software independence? I ask this because I am using Obsidian and it has three features which I find very useful.
The first is being able to name zettles their proper name versus using the dated method that was taught in the overview article. It was way easier to find a zettle this way when I needed to link to in a note I was working on in the moment. (for context Obsidian changes the file name when you change the title of a note)
I guess this also extends to another question I had of how do you find what you are looking for and not get lost in a Zettelkasten that uses dated titles? I guess this may give me an answer to my first question huh, on structure notes, I'm sure it would be easier to find stuff if you have structure notes.
The second feature I found useful was Obsidian's ability to have pictures. sometimes having text from the original source is not possible or more practical as a picture of a drawing I have made or one from the source. If we are sticking to a pure markdown file mentality then sadly this would be lost.
The last feature is the ability to have table, I like tables because it lets me go back to my thinking when I am done free writing a zettle before I go back to refine to find a singular idea for a zettle. the table is like having margins where I can later ask questions to sharpen my thinking. I noticed tables break on markdown files.
Sorry if this feels like a ramble and all over the place and thank you in advance if you respond 
JMJ,
Starwarp
P.S. also I'm not sure how to respond to individual comments on this forum, sorry I am a zoomer haha and it's pretty easy on discord and reddit to respond to individual comments but I could figure out how to do it here.
Howdy, Stranger!
Comments
It's more ergonomic to work on a new note from right where you are? Then why not do it
You can 'file' the new note in the appropriate structure note, too, if it adds value. Structure notes don't replace direct links. So if notes and connections A→B→C would come naturally with the topic, the recommendation for structure notes is not to skip the links.
Can you illustrate what your understanding is there a bit?
You'll know when you want to switch softwares
That's perfectly fine if you have tools to rename the links when you rename your notes. Its more brittle; the numerical IDs have no reason to ever change, so that's the selling point. The worst outcome would be to leave a capable tool like Obsidian and then lose the flexibility to rename your notes because you can't auto-update links to match the new title.
You probably don't want even the slightest hindrance when working with your ideas and concepts to refine the content just because the tooling gets in the way.
I want to nudge you to think more about the ergonomics of thinking and writing here. Your approach can work fine with that, but if you notice your thinking and writing are hindered, the tooling needs to adjust.
Can you elaborate why you believe one would get lost?
Agreed, pictures are nice
Tables are also nice!
Can you share an example screenshot of what breaks for you?
You're not doing anything wrong, this forum is just not set up for threaded replies like Reddit
Author at Zettelkasten.de • https://christiantietze.de/
It's a trade-off. Have you tested your vault with apps like Marked, Zettlr, iA Writer, VSCode, …? Some even recognize hashtags and wikilinks.
In my experience some of Obsidian's advanced features fail gracefully. For example I love callouts. They don't look pretty in other tools, but they still convey the same meaning.
You might be pushing Markdown beyond its limits. Markdown supports tables only as basic tables, not as layout tools. I settled on callouts for annotations.
That's a tough one. Personally I strongly dislike those dates. But Christian makes an excellent point. Those dates are a simple method to get unique permanent IDs. You can easily create them by hand. So if you want a simple and reliable technique, those dates are it.
I've experimented with various naming schemes. I don't think there's a one-size-fits-all solution. I settled with a mixed schemed that appends random 6-character IDs to the filename, because I prioritize alphabetic sorting and shorter IDs. But those names require some extra effort.
In my experience it helps to have at least some kind of unique permanent ID somewhere in your file name or your note's content. It's difficult to identify or locate notes with other tools, if they don't have an ID.
That's a really tough one. I haven't found an elegant solution, only more or less clumsy workarounds. For example I store pictures in the same folder as the text file and I use the same filename plus some identifier. So when I browse a folder with other tools than Obsidian, I immediately recognize what pictures belong to what Markdown files. It's a hack, but better than nothing.
Yes, and it will cause problems once you start using your note links in external applications where links won't get renamed automatically (this was also discussed here).
Another problem with unstable (changeable) note IDs appears when you want to use versioning (like with git/GitHub) and/or collaborate with others on your note corpus as one renaming action may cause changes to lots of other notes.
I do something similar. I use NotePlan for my ZK. Any images associated with (and referred to in) a particular note automatically get stored in a subfolder with the same name as the note. So, it's easy to find the images. That's a bit different than The Archive, which stores all the images in one subfolder. I originally preferred The Archive's approach but after a while decided I liked NotePlan's approach better.