Why would a sidebar change anything? If we want the tree smaller we need to make its layout more compact. Maybe also allow multiline nodes for long titles
i think having a sidebar tree with toggle-able nodes is better for maintaining a zettelkasten on a long term because you can have arbitrarily long titles and arbitrarily many links, and you can choose the depth of each node individually
Oh I will share the layout plan I drafted that features a sidebar. The idea was that you could toggle the bar to show the index, search bar/results, and probably uplinks. image.png
I'm working on a redesign of the uplink tree. Trying to put it in the left sidebar. Would be the same 'forest' - but it is built from the mother vertices, top down.
Maggie Appleton is an art director, anthropologist, and metaphor-making illustrator. This is her digital garden for growing visual explanations about technology, culture, and programming
The big advantage of the current design in contrast to the former is, in my opinion, that it is visually clear, what the semantics are. I like it very much because of this. In the old design I always had to stare at the bottom panel for a while to figure out, what it is actually telling me about the position of the graph I am in. A simple revert would be really unfortunate.
Personally I would like tree that sort of "fades out" on edges, giving me the rough idea of connections to other zettels - when clicked on, it could e.g. open page with complete tree view, or even turn into zoomable draggable "tree map" if that isn't too fancy to put together :slight_smile:
it needs to be well thought through to be an actual improvement on the current situation.
I agree on that.
On problem with the current design is that portal zettels with multiple children appear only on top of one of those children. But that's an issue with bfs/dfsForest algorithm itself, and there is nothing we can do about it without figuring out more general graph layout with tree shape.
just noticed this: image.png
the uplink tree can get quite big
@EyebrowHairs ^
yet another reason for a sidebar uplink tree ....
Yeah I'd like a sidebar as well, I think we can use something like this https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/HTML/Element/details which doesn't require any JS
Why would a sidebar change anything? If we want the tree smaller we need to make its layout more compact. Maybe also allow multiline nodes for long titles
i think having a sidebar tree with toggle-able nodes is better for maintaining a zettelkasten on a long term because you can have arbitrarily long titles and arbitrarily many links, and you can choose the depth of each node individually
Oh, toggleable nodes is interesting indeed
Oh I will share the layout plan I drafted that features a sidebar. The idea was that you could toggle the bar to show the index, search bar/results, and probably uplinks. image.png
Here's a similar layout, which also reminds me of Gitbook: https://shakebook.site/docs/getting-started/index.html
It's similar to wiki/documentation style pages! Sometimes I feel that it looks too boring/similar, but it's pretty simple and functional I guess
I'm working on a redesign of the uplink tree. Trying to put it in the left sidebar. Would be the same 'forest' - but it is built from the mother vertices, top down.
It would more or less be like the ZIndex tree, but built only from the "sub graph" (the backlinks tree of the zettel)
In zettelkasten-speak, the left sidebar will tell you all the 'branching' it takes (from root/portal zettels) to get to the current zettel.
Part of me wonders, if I should just go back to the old UI, the 'connections panel' shown in these screenshots https://neuron.zettel.page/2014601.html
Mainly because this one is already mobile-friendly.
The only downside is visual - the links appear below, and requires scrolling down to see them in many cases.
I like the sidebar idea and was going to show you this for possible footnote layout: https://maggieappleton.com/neocyborgs
Can there be an option to show it on the bottom for mobile/smaller screens? Like being responsive?
Or maybe a 'swipe left/right to see the menu' sort of thing?
The big advantage of the current design in contrast to the former is, in my opinion, that it is visually clear, what the semantics are. I like it very much because of this. In the old design I always had to stare at the bottom panel for a while to figure out, what it is actually telling me about the position of the graph I am in. A simple revert would be really unfortunate.
I am not against a redesign per se, but it needs to be well thought through to be an actual improvement on the current situation.
Personally I would like tree that sort of "fades out" on edges, giving me the rough idea of connections to other zettels - when clicked on, it could e.g. open page with complete tree view, or even turn into zoomable draggable "tree map" if that isn't too fancy to put together :slight_smile:
I agree on that.
On problem with the current design is that portal zettels with multiple children appear only on top of one of those children. But that's an issue with bfs/dfsForest algorithm itself, and there is nothing we can do about it without figuring out more general graph layout with tree shape.
I see no obvious solution. So i'll defer this for future.
I like the sidebar in this image: https://cloverapp.co/static/media/masthead-dark-2.6dda80cc.jpg
https://cloverapp.co/static/media/masthead-dark-2.6dda80cc.jpg
We could have all clusters, each of them displaying their portal zettels (mother vertices of the graph)
And then drill down...
We get 'free navigation sidebar' for documentation like sites too, cf. https://nix.dev/anti-patterns/language.html
Uptree is not suited for left sidebar though (conceptually). BUT ... we can come up with a new concept ... "navigation tree".
Both uptree/navigation-tree can be generated from folgezettel graph/links.