exactly. Tags are emergent structure, and are not per se to describe the information stated nor to be used as a taxonomy. Vgl [[%On Tagging 20200818120917]] as associative emergence, as search/find history, as pivots in an exploratory path etc.

https://web.archive.org/web/20240503124032/https://karl-voit.at/2022/01/29/How-to-Use-Tags/

Long post on 'how to' tag with a set of rules. Not a word on why to tag as a personal practice. Retrieval is key, and not just retrieval but retrieval in contexts. Not merely descriptive but mostly associative. That there is e.g. a #longtail of tags only used once is also a piece of information itself. E.g. when finding the starting point for a new branch of exploration. I find that [[Tags are valuable as pivots 20070815104800]]. The mostly used tags (unavoidable if you use a limited set as suggested in rule 2) become useless because they no longer demarcate a manageble chunck of material.

Manuscript tagging

reply to Edmund at https://forum.zettelkasten.de/discussion/comment/18550/#Comment_18550

@Edmund since I don't do such a thing myself, I'm curious what sort of affordance your #type/NoteName tagging provides you with (especially if you're using more than just those two)? Do you use them regularly for search or filtering, and if so for what reason? How does it help?

To me it look likes extra metadata/work, but without a lot of direct long term value in exchange. Does doing this for long periods of time provide you with outsized emergent value of some sort that's not easy to see from the start?

reply to m_t_rv_s__n/ at https://www.reddit.com/r/Zettelkasten/comments/164n6qg/is_this_overkill/

First, your system is historically far more traditional than Luhmann's more specific practice. See: https://boffosocko.com/2022/10/22/the-two-definitions-of-zettelkasten/

If you're taking all the notes/highlights from a particular book and keeping them in a single file, then it may be far quicker and more productive to do some high level tagging on the entire book/file itself and then relying on and using basic text search to find particular passages you might use at a later date.

Spending time reviewing over all of your notes and tagging/indexing them individually may be beneficial for some basic review work. But this should be balanced out with your long term needs. If your area is "sociology", for example, and you tag every single idea related to the topic of sociology with #sociology, then it will cease to have any value you to you when you search for it and find thousands of disconnected notes you will need to sift through. Compare this with Luhmann's ZK which only had a few index entries under "sociology". A better long term productive practice, and one which Luhmann used, is indexing one or two key words when he started in a new area and then "tagging" each new idea in that branch or train of though with links to other neighboring ideas. If you forget a particular note, you can search your index for a keyword and know you'll find that idea you need somewhere nearby. Scanning through the neighborhood of notes you find will provide a useful reminder of what you'd been working on and allow you to continue your work in that space or link new things as appropriate.

If it helps to reframe the long term scaling problem of over-tagging, think of a link from one idea to another as the most specific tag you can put on an idea. To put this important idea into context, if you do a Google search for "tagging" you'll find 240,000,000 results! If you do a search for the entirety of the first sentence in this paragraph, you'll likely only find one very good and very specific result, and the things which are linked to it are going to have tremendous specific value to you by comparison.

Perhaps the better portions of your time while reviewing notes would be taking the 150 highlights and finding the three to five most important, useful, and (importantly) reusable ones to write out in your own words and begin expanding upon and linking? These are the excerpts you'll want to spend more time on and tag/index for future use rather than the other hundreds. Over time, you may eventually realize that the hundreds are far less useful than the handful (in management spaces this philosophy is known as the Pareto principle), so spending a lot of make work time on them is less beneficial for whatever end goals you may have. (The make work portions are often the number one reason I see people abandoning these practices because they feel overwhelmed working on raw administrivia instead of building something useful and interesting to themselves.) Naturally though, you'll still have those hundreds sitting around in a file if you need to search, review, or use them. You won't have lost them by not working on them, but more importantly you'll have gained loads of extra time to work on the more important pieces. You should notice that the time you save and the value you create will compound over time.

And as ever, play around with these to see if they work for you and your specific needs. Some may be good and others bad—it will depend on your needs and your goals. Practice, experiment, have fun.

Tagging and linking with AI (Napkin.one) by Nicole van der Hoeven

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p2E3gRXiLYY

Nicole underlines the value of a good user interface for traversing one's notes. She'd had issues with tagging things in Obsidian using their #tag functionality, but never with their [[WikiLink]] functionality. Something about the autotagging done by Napkin's artificial intelligence makes the process easier for her. Some of this may be down to how their user interface makes it easier/more intuitive as well as how it changes and presents related notes in succession.

Most interesting however is the visual presentation of notes and tags in conjunction with an outliner for taking one's notes and composing a draft using drag and drop.

Napkin as a visual layer over tooling like Obsidian, Logseq, et. al. would be a much more compelling choice for me in terms of taking my pre-existing data and doing something useful with it rather than just creating yet another digital copy of all my things (and potentially needing sync to keep them up to date).

What is Napkin doing with all of their user's data?

continuing from https://hypothes.is/a/ddn4qs8mEe2gkq_1T7i3_Q

Potential assignments:

Students could be tasked with finding new material or working off of a pre-existing list.

They could individually be responsible for indexing each individual sub-text within a corpus by: - providing a full bibliography; - identifying free areas of access for various versions (websites, Archive.org, Gutenberg, other OER corpora, etc.); Which is best, why? If not already digitized, then find a copy and create a digital version for inclusion into an appropriate repository. - summarizing the source in general and providing links to how it fits into the broader potential corpus for the class. - tagging it with relevant taxonomies to make it more easily searchable/selectable within its area of study - editing a definitive version of the text or providing better (digital/sharable) versions for archiving into OER repositories, Project Gutenberg, Archive.org, https://standardebooks.org/, etc. - identifying interesting/appropriate tangential texts which either support/refute their current text - annotating their specific text and providing links and cross references to other related texts either within their classes' choices or exterior to them for potential future uses by both students and teachers.

Some of this is already with DeRosa's framework, but emphasis could be on building additional runway and framing for helping professors and students to do this sort of work in the future. How might we create repositories that allow one a smörgåsbord of indexed data to relatively easily/quickly allow a classroom to pick and choose texts to make up their textbook in a first meeting and be able to modify it as they go? Or perhaps a teacher could create an outline of topics to cover along with a handful of required ones and then allow students to pick and choose from options in between along the way. This might also help students have options within a course to make the class more interesting and relevant to their own interests, lives, and futures.

Don't allow students to just "build their own major", but allow them to build their own textbooks and syllabi with some appropriate and reasonable scaffolding.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vLV4EDBtuas

Quotes I've made that I never expected to be excerpted... 🤣

Perry analogizes many people's experience of writing to passing a kidney stone and then contrasts it with me talking about the Mozart composing/cow peeing analogy.

Realisasi retribusi pelayanan kepelabuhanan DKP Jawa Tengah periode 1 Januari - 31 Agustus 2021 telah melampaui target.

Realisasi retribusi Pemberian Izin Kegiatan Usaha Penangkapan Ikan DKP Jawa Tengah periode 1 Januari - 31 Agustus 2021 baru mencapai 62,81 %. Hal ini wajar mengingat pelaksanaan kegiatan berjalan di pertengahan tahun anggaran. Meski demikian, pendapatan retribusi pemberian perizinan usaha penangkapan ikan di Jawa Tengah masih dapat ditingkatkan dengan mengoptimalkan pelayanan di sentra-sentra nelayan. Potensi pendapatan retribusi perizinan usaha dilakukan dengan menyasar pelaku usaha perikanan yang memiliki kapal perikanan 10 - 30 GT sesuai kewenangan Provinsi.

About TagTeam

And then again, if they did much of our thinking for us, this wouldn't necessarily be a problem.

cito--cites--1375511 says “this article CiTO:cites article 137511”.

Der formale Zwischenschritt wird kleiner bzw. verschwindet. Ich suche nicht über die Form des Autors nach den Inhalten, sondern direkter nach Inhalten. So gestaltet sich auch die Folksonomie / das social tagging als inhaltsorientierter - es ist nicht mehr wie die Enzyklopädie alphabetisch geordnet.

• musicbrainz:artist=<MBID>
• musicbrainz:release=<MBID>
• musicbrainz:track=<MBID>
• musicbrainz:label=<MBID>

Interesting way to classify different kind of tags, keyword tags are topical while categorical tags that are associated with automated actions.

Semantisches Tagging

• astro:name=NGC 4565
• astro:orientation=11.73
• astro:RA=189.083922302

The metadata is structured. So structured that we can represent the example machine tags in a table:

<table> <thead><tr> <th style="text-align:center">namespace</th> <th style="text-align:center">predicate</th> <th style="text-align:center">value</th> </tr> </thead> <tbody> <tr> <td style="text-align:center">astro</td> <td style="text-align:center">name</td> <td style="text-align:center">NGC 4565</td> </tr> <tr> <td style="text-align:center">astro</td> <td style="text-align:center">orientation</td> <td style="text-align:center">11.73</td> </tr> <tr> <td style="text-align:center">astro</td> <td style="text-align:center">RA</td> <td style="text-align:center">189.083922302</td> </tr> </tbody> </table>

Or in a tree:

  astro
  |-- name
  |   `-- NGC 4565
  |-- orientation
  |   `-- 11.73
  `-- RA
      `-- 189.083922302

How would this compare to using the tools mentioned in https://docs.aws.amazon.com/whitepapers/latest/tagging-best-practices/remediate-untagged-resources.html?

What's the intra-cloud (vs cross-cloud) benefit of steampipe w/respect to finding untagged resources?

Bai, H. (2021). Fake News Known as Fake Still Changes Beliefs and Leads to Partisan Polarization [Preprint]. PsyArXiv. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/v9gax

Hi Bob!! 👋

Throughout the story, the narrator figures the men and women as birds participating in courtship/pre-mating dances. Observe the narrator's ornithological language here: the men "glid[e] over the parquet" towards the women, who respond with "a joyful flutter." With part-of-speech tagging, we could zoom in on how the story's syntactical elements (especially verbs and adjectives) create this parallel between social and animal rituals.

This excerpt personifies the "landing-stage" with the verbs "came" and "swam." Where else does this occur in this story? And what does this device imply about the "voyage" that the story recounts? Part-of-speech tagging would allow us to examine when, how, and to what effect(s) objects becoming (grammatical) subjects through personification.

The story begins with the additive conjunction "and," which already suggests accumulation (and perhaps even festive excess) on a syntactical level. Some part-of-speech tagging and n-grams would allow us to see how often the speaker uses additive conjunctions, and to what effects.

This is an interesting reversal of typical subject-object relations. The diary, which is an object, is grammatically positioned as an informative agent, while Miss Clack, a person, becomes an object that is acted upon. Some part-of-speech tagging in scenes that feature document evidence would help us to better understand when and why this happens, and why it might be significant.

Another critical point.

Web annotation https://www.w3.org/annotation/

Each of these could be sets and then subsets of controlled tags input by teacher as part of course and used by students in their annotations throughout.

I add tags for people I need to discuss with. Then next time I know I am going to see them, i pull all the notes up. Like a "bring forward" system.

Interesting process. I have tended to export all notes from one reference in a batch, and then organize them in DevonThink. In theory, this process is more efficient (I think) because I can process large numbers of notes in one go without constant app-switching. On the other hand, though, the method outlined is wonderfully direct: when you find information you need, you put it where you're going to need it.

Bush is usually credited with conceiving of hyperlinks, right? But isn't he really talking about tagging?

git-annex provides file tagging, and tag-based views materialized as filesystem checkouts a git-based data store.

I think that this type of approach will be necessary for tagging methods.

Yes, I believe that this is the best compromise.

This is an entry

Selection by association, rather than indexing.

With the advent of Google Docs we're finally moving away from the archaic indexing mentioned here. The filesystem metaphor was simple and dominated how everyone manages their data-- which extended into how we developed web content, as well.

The declaration that Hierarchical File Systems are Dead has led to better systems of tagging and search, but we're still far from where we need to be since there is still a heavy focus on the document as a whole instead of also the content within the document.

The linearity of printed books is even more treacherously entrenched in our minds than the classification systems used by libraries to store those books.

One day maybe we'll liberate every piece of content from every layer of its concentric cages: artificial systems of indexing, books, web pages, paragraphs, even sentences and words themselves. Only then will we be able to re-dress those thoughts automatically into those familiar and comforting forms that keep our thoughts caged.

The essential feature of the memex is its ability of association; tying two items together.

I need a way to add tags to a document that will apply to all annotations in a particular document (except where explicitly canceled).

The problem is that I often want to query all annotations related to a specific document, collection of documents, or type of activity.

Type of activity requires further explanation: Given a document or collection of documents I may annotate the document for different reasons at different times.

For example, while annotating the reading materials, video transcripts, and related documents for the CopyrightX course there are certain types of annotations that may be "bundled together" so that when I search for those things later I can easily narrow my searches to just that subset of annotations; but at the same time I need a way to globally group things together.

While reading judicial opinions the first activity/mode of interaction with a particular document may be to identify the structure of the judicial opinion (the document attached to this annotation describes the parts of the judicial opinion I might want to identify: *caption, case citation, author, facts of the case, law of the case, disposition, concurring and/or dissenting opinions, etc).

The above-described mode I may use for multiple documents in one session related to the course syllabus for the week.

To connect each of these documents together I might add the tags: copyx (my shorthand for the name of the course, CopyrightX), week 1 (how far into the course syllabus), foundations (the subject matter in the syllabus which may span week 1, week 2, etc), judicial opinions (the specific topic I am focused on learning at the moment (may or may not be related to the syllabus).

Later on another day I might update my existing annotations or add new ones when I am preparing to study for an exam. I might add tags like to study, on midterm, on final to mark areas I need to review.

After the exam I might add more tags based on my test score, especially focusing on areas that received a poor score so I can study that section more or, if I missed some sections so didn't study and it resulted in a poor score in that area, add tags to study for later if necessary.

I have many more examples and modes of interaction in mind that I can explain more later, but it all hinges on a rich and flexible tagging system that:

• allows tagging a document once in a way that applies to all annotations in a document
• allows tagging a session once in a way that applies to all annotations in all documents connected to a particular session
• allows tagging a session and/or a document that bundles together new tags added to an annotation (e.g. tags for grammar/spelling, tags for rhetological fallacy classification, etc)
• fast keyboard-based selection of content
• batch selection of annotation areas with incremental filling-- I may want to simply select all the parts of a document to annotate first and then increment through each of those placeholders to fill in tags and commentary
• Mark multiple sections of the document at once to combine into a single annotation
• Excerpting only parts of a text selection, but still carry the surrounding textual context with the excerpt to easily expose the surrounding context when necessary
• A summary view of a document that is the result of remixing parts of the original document with both clarifications or self-containing summary re-writes and/or commentary from the reader
• structural tagging vs content tagging