upsert

Bingo, we need to expand on what is Silo and what not The word silo comes from Spanish silo, meaning “pit for storing grain,” which traces back to Greek siros or seiros — a pit for holding grain or corn.

First used in English in the 1830s to mean underground grain storage; the metaphorical/organizational use (as in "data silo") started in the 1970s–1980s in business and IT contexts.

In practice... when you have 3 matches that are identical and want to select one of them and archive an do other things you do need a "forced" ID this was my conclusion after a few rounds of prototyping

https://www.fedex.com/fedextrack/?trknbr=286005179179&trkqual=12029~286005179179~FDEG

Hurd, Cuthbert C., ed. Proceedings: IBM Computation Seminar December 1949. New York: Internation Buisiness Machines Corporation, 1951. http://archive.org/details/bitsavers_ibmproceedeminarDec49_14295048.

In a variety of context here the idea of "cards" could be held to be synonymous with "notes".

Collision cards (though used in a physics setting) could be a bit hilarious with the idea of "atomic notes" and the idea of "combinatorial creativity".

An indication of the state-of-the-art in punch card systems from 1951 to 1958, particularly with respect to practical applications.

Casey, Robert S., James W. Perry, Madeline M. Berry, and Allen Kent. Punched Cards: Their Applications To Science And Industry. 2nd ed. 1951. Reprint, New York: Reinhold Publishing Corporation, 1958. http://archive.org/details/PunchedCardsTheirApplicationsToScienceAndIndustry.

Begun, George M. “Making Your Own Punched Cards.” Journal of Chemical Education 32, no. 6 (June 1, 1955): 328. https://doi.org/10.1021/ed032p328.

George Begun used a template of "heavy galvanized iron" to drill holes into his 5 x 8" index cards to create his own edge-noted card system for use in his chemistry work. Rather than using commercially made sorting needles, he recommended the use of a ice pick with a dulled point "for safety".

Edge-Notched Cards: A queryable database...made of paper by [[Soren Bjornstad]]

https://warrenpaper.com/product/1001/

Value of knowledge in a zettelkasten as a function of reference(use/look up) frequency; links to other ideas; ease of recall without needing to look up (also a measure of usefulness); others?

Define terms and create a mathematical equation of stocks and flows around this system of information. Maybe "knowledge complexity" or "information optimization"? see: https://hypothes.is/a/zejn0oscEe-zsjMPhgjL_Q

takes into account the value of information from the perspective of a particular observer<br /> relative information value

cross-reference: Umberto Eco on no piece of information is superior: https://hypothes.is/a/jqug2tNlEeyg2JfEczmepw

Inspired by idea in https://hypothes.is/a/CdoMUJCYEe-VlxtqIFX4qA

Casey Newton makes this blanket statement. Any real evidence for this beyond his "gut"?

Many "paper machines" like Niklas Luhmann's zettelkasten were almost custom made not just for searching, but for browsing through regularly much like commonplace books.

Perhaps the question is really, how is your particular database designed?

Oh, wow, so the workload themselves are dynamically scaling up and down "vertically" as opposed to "horizontally" - I think this is a bit like dynamically changing the size of Docker containers that are running the databases while they're running

reply to u/DinoPup87 at https://new.reddit.com/r/typewriters/comments/1efzeor/adler_tippa_id/

It's a common misconception that the database lists all serial numbers.

You'll need to identify the make (and preferably the model) to search the database. Then you'll want to look at the serial numbers which your serial number appears between to be able to identify the year (or month if the data is granular enough) your machine was made. Reading the notes at the header of each page will give you details for how best to read and interpret the charts for each manufacturer. Notes and footnotes will provide you with additional details when available.

You can then compare your machine against others which individuals have photographed and uploaded to the database. Feel free to add your typewriter as an example by making an account of your own. Doing this is sure to help researches and other enthusiasts in the future. Don't forget photos of your manual, tools which came with your machine, your case, and original dated purchase receipts if you have them.

There are likely other metadata he may be missing here: - in particular dates/times/time periods which may be useful for the historians. - others? - general forms of useful metadata from a database perspective?

Otlet's effort was more than a "database for all subjects", wasn't it? This seems a bit simplistic.

Duncan, Dennis. Index, A History of the: A Bookish Adventure from Medieval Manuscripts to the Digital Age. 1st ed. London: Allen Lane, 2021. https://wwnorton.com/books/9781324002543.

annotation link: urn:x-pdf:a4bd1877f0712efcc681d33d58777e55

https://jonudell.info/h/facet/?user=chrisaldrich&max=100&exactTagSearch=true&expanded=true&url=urn%3Ax-pdf%3Aa4bd1877f0712efcc681d33d58777e55

Certainly! Let's break down the provided code snippets:

1. What is it and why is it used?

In Mongoose, a schema is a blueprint for defining the structure of documents within a collection. When you define a schema, you can also attach methods to it. These methods become instance methods, meaning they are available on the individual documents (instances) created from that schema.

Instance methods are useful for encapsulating functionality related to a specific document or model instance. They allow you to define custom behavior that can be executed on a specific document. In the given example, the findSimilarTypes method is added to instances of the Animal model, making it easy to find other animals of the same type.

2. Syntax:

Using methods object directly in the schema options:

javascript const animalSchema = new Schema( { name: String, type: String }, { methods: { findSimilarTypes(cb) { return mongoose.model('Animal').find({ type: this.type }, cb); } } } );

Using methods object directly in the schema:

javascript animalSchema.methods.findSimilarTypes = function(cb) { return mongoose.model('Animal').find({ type: this.type }, cb); };

Using Schema.method() helper:

javascript animalSchema.method('findSimilarTypes', function(cb) { return mongoose.model('Animal').find({ type: this.type }, cb); });

3. Explanation in Simple Words with Examples:

Why it's Used:

Imagine you have a collection of animals in your database, and you want to find other animals of the same type. Instead of writing the same logic repeatedly, you can define a method that can be called on each animal instance to find similar types. This helps in keeping your code DRY (Don't Repeat Yourself) and makes it easier to maintain.

Example:

```javascript const mongoose = require('mongoose'); const { Schema } = mongoose;

// Define a schema with a custom instance method const animalSchema = new Schema({ name: String, type: String });

// Add a custom instance method to find similar types animalSchema.methods.findSimilarTypes = function(cb) { return mongoose.model('Animal').find({ type: this.type }, cb); };

// Create the Animal model using the schema const Animal = mongoose.model('Animal', animalSchema);

// Create an instance of Animal const dog = new Animal({ type: 'dog', name: 'Buddy' });

// Use the custom method to find similar types dog.findSimilarTypes((err, similarAnimals) => { console.log(similarAnimals); }); ```

In this example, findSimilarTypes is a custom instance method added to the Animal schema. When you create an instance of the Animal model (e.g., a dog), you can then call findSimilarTypes on that instance to find other animals with the same type. The method uses the this.type property, which refers to the type of the current animal instance. This allows you to easily reuse the logic for finding similar types across different instances of the Animal model.

http://www.schach-udo.de/dab/zwei.htm

MESON is comprised in part of card index collections of chess problems and puzzles.

http://www.bstephen.me.uk/meson/meson.pl?opt=top MESON Chess Problem Database

Compiled using a variety of sources including card indexes.

found via

As for the Pirnie collection, not counted it, but I am slowly going through it for my online #ChessProblem database: https://t.co/eTDrPnX09b . Also going through several boxes of the White-Hume Collection which I have.

— Brian Stephenson (@bstephen2) August 5, 2020

https://twitter.com/bstephen2/status/1290562798616031235

It Took Decades To Create This Chess Puzzle Database (30 Thousand), 2020. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y9craX0M_2A.

A chess School named after Genrikh Kasparyan (alternately Henrik Kasparian) houses his card index of chess puzzles with over 30,000 cards.

The cards are stored in stacked wooden trays in a two door cabinet with 4 shelves.

There are at least 23 small wooden trays of cards pictured in the video, though there are possibly many more. (Possibly as many as about 35 based on the layout of the cabinet and those easily visible.)

Kasparyan's son Sergei donated the card index to the chess school.

Each index card in the collection, filed in portrait orientation, begins with the name of the puzzle composer, lists its first publication, has a chess board diagram with the pieces arranges, and beneath that the solution of the puzzle. The cards are arranged alphabetically by the name of the puzzle composer.

The individual puzzle diagrams appear to have been done with a stamp of the board done in light blue ink with darker blue (or purple?) and red inked stamped pieces arranged on top of it.

ᔥu/ManuelRodriguez331 in r/Zettelkasten - Chess players are memorizing games with index cards

Wörgötter, Michael. “Schriftenkartei [Typeface Index], 1958–1971.” Photo sharing social website. Flickr, 2023. https://www.flickr.com/photos/letterformarchive/albums/72177720310834741. License: Creative Commons BY-NC-SA 2.0 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.0/

Found via: Coles, Stephen. “This Just In: Schriftenkartei, a Typeface Index.” Letterform Archive, November 3, 2023. https://letterformarchive.org/news/schriftenkartei-german-font-index/.

Munich-based designer and educator Michael Wörgötter digitally scanned and then printed bound copies of the 638 cards of the Schriftenkartei into two volumes with a supplementary guide for additional historical background. He subsequently donated the Schriftenkartei to the Letterform Archive.

Digital copies of the cards are available on Flicker (https://www.flickr.com/photos/letterformarchive/albums/72177720310834741) and the Letterform Archive intends to provide digital copies in their online archive.

Coles, Stephen. “This Just In: Schriftenkartei, a Typeface Index.” Letterform Archive, November 3, 2023. https://letterformarchive.org/news/schriftenkartei-german-font-index/.

Example of a zettelkasten covering the available typefaces produced from 1958 and 1971 in West Germany.

—Anne Frank (1929-1945), diary entry dated Saturday, February 27, 1943 (age 13)

Anne Frank was given an empty card file by her father who filled it with index cards that were blank on one side. They were intended to use it as a "reading file" in which she and Margot were "supposed to note down the books we've read, the author and the date."

In the same entry she mentioned that she'd bought a separate notebook for writing down new words she encountered. Recent words she mentions encountering were "brothel" and "coquette".

Are we stretching too far by saying that AI are currently emergent? Isn't this like saying that card indexes of the early 20th century are computers. In reality they were data storage and the "computing" took place when humans did the actual data processing/thinking to come up with new results.

Emergence would seem to actually be the point which comes about when the AI takes its own output and continues processing (successfully) on it.

reply to u/atomicnotes at https://www.reddit.com/r/Zettelkasten/comments/16njtfx/comment/k1tuc9c/?utm_source=reddit&utm_medium=web2x&context=3

u/atomicnotes, this is an excellent question. (Though I'd still like to come to terms with people who don't think it acts as a knowledge management system, there's obviously something I'm missing.)

Some of your distinction comes down to how one is using their zettelkasten and what sorts of questions are being asked of it. One of the earliest descriptions I've seen that begins to get at the difference is the description by Beatrice Webb of her notes (appendix C) in My Apprenticeship. As she describes what she's doing, I get the feeling that she's taking the same broad sort of notes we're all used to, but it's obvious from her discussion that she's also using her slips as a traditional database, but is lacking modern vocabulary to describe it as such.

Early efforts like the OED, TLL, the Wb, and even Gertrud Bauer's Coptic linguistic zettelkasten of the late 1970s were narrow enough in scope and data collected to make them almost dead simple to define, organize and use as databases on paper. Of course how they were used to compile their ultimate reference books was a bit more complex in form than the basic data from which they stemmed.

The Mundaneum had a much more complex flavor because it required a standardized system for everyone to work in concert against much more freeform as well as more complex forms of collected data and still be able to search for the answers to specific questions. While still somewhat database flavored, it was dramatically different from the others because of it scope and the much broader sorts of questions one could ask of it. I think that if you ask yourself what sorts of affordances you get from the two different groups (databases and word processors (or even their typewriter precursors) you find even more answers.

Typewriters and word processors allowed one to get words down on paper quicker by a magnitude of order or two faster, and in combination with reproduction equipment, made it easier to spin off copies of the document for small scale and local mass distribution a lot easier. They do allow a few affordances like higher readability (compared with less standardized and slower handwriting), quick search (at least in the digital era), and moving pieces of text around (also in digital). Much beyond this, they aren't tremendously helpful as a composition tool. As a thinking tool, typewriters and word processors aren't significantly better than their analog predecessors, so you don't gain a huge amount of leverage by using them.

On the other hand, databases and their spreadsheet brethren offer a lot more, particularly in digital realms. Data collection and collation become much easier. One can also form a massive variety of queries on such collected data, not to mention making calculations on those data or subjecting them to statistical analyses. Searching, sorting, and making direct comparisons also become far easier and quicker to do once you've amassed the data you need. Here again, Beatrice Webb's early experience and descriptions are very helpful as are Hollerinth's early work with punch cards and census data and the speed with which the results could be used.

Now if you compare the affordances by each of these in the digital era and plot their shifts against increasing computer processing power, you'll see that the value of the word processor stays relatively flat while the database shows much more significant movement.

Surely there is a lot more at play, particularly at scale and when taking network effects into account, but perhaps this quick sketch may explain to you a bit of the difference you've described.

Another difference you may be seeing/feeling is that of contextualization. Databases usually have much smaller and more discrete amounts of data cross-indexed (for example: a subject's name versus weight with a value in pounds or kilograms.) As a result the amount of context required to use them is dramatically lower compared to the sorts of data you might keep in an average atomic/evergreen note, which may need to be more heavily recontextualized for you when you need to use it in conjunction with other similar notes which may also need you to recontextualize them and then use them against or with one another.

Some of this is why the cards in the Thesaurus Linguae Latinae are easier to use and understand out of the box (presuming you know Latin) than those you might find in the Mundaneum. They'll also be far easier to use than a stranger's notes which will require even larger contextualization for you, especially when you haven't spent the time scaffolding the related and often unstated knowledge around them. This is why others' zettelkasten will be more difficult (but not wholly impossible) for a stranger to use. You might apply the analogy of context gaps between children and adults for a typical Disney animated movie to the situation. If you're using someone else's zettelkasten, you'll potentially be able to follow a base level story the way a child would view a Disney cartoon. Compare this to the zettelkasten's creator who will not only see that same story, but will have a much higher level of associative memory at play to see and understand a huge level of in-jokes, cultural references, and other associations that an adult watching the Disney movie will understand that the child would completely miss.

I'm curious to hear your thoughts on how this all plays out for your way of conceptualizing it.

Of course spreadsheets are databases of information and one can easily and profitably put all these details into index cards which are just as easy (maybe even easier) to move around

Phyllis Diller's gag file was arranged alphabetically by subject and ranged from "accessories" to "world affairs".

Thanks Sascha for an excellent primer on the internal machinations of our favorite machines beyond the usual focus on the storage/memory and indexing portions of the process.

Said another way, a zettelkasten is part of a formal logic machine/process. Or alternately, as Markus Krajewski aptly demonstrates in Paper Machines (MIT Press, 2011), they are early analog storage devices in which the thinking and logic operations are done cerebrally (by way of direct analogy to brain and hand:manually) and subsequently noted down which thereby makes them computers.

Just as mathematicians try to break down and define discrete primitives or building blocks upon which they can then perform operations to come up with new results, one tries to find and develop the most interesting "atomic notes" from various sources which they can place into their zettelkasten in hopes of operating on them (usually by juxtaposition, negation, union, etc.) to derive, find, and prove new insights. If done well, these newly discovered ideas can be put back into the machine as inputs to create additional newer and more complex outputs continuously. While the complexity of Lie Algebras is glorious and seems magical, it obviously helps to first understand the base level logic before one builds up to it. The same holds true of zettelkasten.

Now if I could only get the printf portion to work the way I want...

p xxvi

Hutchins closes his preface to his grand project with Mortimer J. Adler by giving pride of place to Adler's Syntopicon.

Adler's Syntopicon isn't just an index compiled into two books which were volumes 2 and 3 of The Great Books of the Western World, it's physically a topically indexed card index of data (a grand zettelkasten surveying Western culture if you will). It's value to readers and users is immeasurable and it stands as a fascinating example of what a well-constructed card index might allow one to do even when they don't have their own yet.

Adler spoke of practicing syntopical reading, but anyone who compiles their own card index (in either analog or digital form) will realize the ultimate value in creating their own syntopical writing or what Robert Hutchins calls participating in "The Great Conversation" across twenty-five centuries of documented human communication.

See also: https://hypothes.is/a/WF4THtUNEe2dZTdlQCbmXw

The way Hutchins presents the idea of "Adler's achievement" here seems to indicate that Hutchins didn't have a direct hand in compiling or working on it directly.

source apparently from: “Apparition de la fiche et constitution des sciences humaines: encore une invention que les historiens célèbrent peu.” Michel Foucault, Surveillir et punir. Naissance de la prison (Paris: Gallimard, 1975), 287, referring to A. Bonneville, De la recidive (Paris, 1844), 92–93.

Note taking can also be done to create a database (a la Beatrice Webb's scientific note taking).

Memindex, Inc. of Rochester, NY manufactured a plastic "Phonedex" in the mid-20th century. It was made of Dow Chemical Styrene and sat underneath a standard rotary dial telephone and contained index cards with one's lists of phone numbers on them.

Basic statistics regarding the TLL: - ancient Latin vocabulary words: ca. 55,000 words - 10,000,000 slips - ca. 6,500 boxes - ca. 1,500 slips per box - library 32,000 volumes - contributors: 375 scholars from 20 different countries - 12 Indo-European specalists - 8 Romance specialists - 100 proof-readers - ca. 44,000 words published - published content: 70% of the entire vocabulary - print run: 1,350 - Publisher: consortium of 35 academies from 27 countries on 5 continents

Longest remaining words: - non / 37 boxes of ca 55,500 slips - qui, quae, quod / 65 boxes of ca. 96,000 slips - sum, esse, fui / 54.5 boxes of ca. 81,750 slips - ut / 35 boxes of ca 52,500 slips

Note that some of these words have individual zettelkasten for themselves approaching the size of some of the largest personal collections we know about!

[18:51]

https://aaew.bbaw.de/thesaurus-linguae-aegyptiae

The Wörterbuch der ägyptischen Sprache was an international collaborative zettelkasten project begun in 1897 and finally published as five volumes in 1926.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/W%C3%B6rterbuch_der_%C3%A4gyptischen_Sprache

In the early twentieth century one might have created a card index to study a large textual corpus, but in the twenty first one is more likely to rely on a relational database instead.

I love the fact that the image for "Research & History" here is a six drawer card index!

Lustig, Jason. “‘Mere Chips from His Workshop’: Gotthard Deutsch’s Monumental Card Index of Jewish History.” History of the Human Sciences, vol. 32, no. 3, July 2019, pp. 49–75. SAGE Journals, https://doi.org/10.1177/0952695119830900

Cross reference preliminary notes from https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0952695119830900

Finished reading 2023-02-21 13:04:00

urn:x-pdf:6053dd751da0fa870cad9a71a28882ba

A digitized version of Gertrud Bauer's zettelkasten has been available online since 2015.

https://refubium.fu-berlin.de/handle/fub188/24570

Some interesting programming and structured data with relationship to the Gertrud Bauer Zettelkasten Online.

Richter, Tonio Sebastian. “Whatever in the Coptic Language Is Not Greek, Can Wholly Be Considered Ancient Egyptian”: Recent Approaches towards an Integrated View of the Egyptian-Coptic Lexicon.” Journal of the Canadian Society for Coptic Studies. Journal de La Société Canadienne Pour Les Études Coptes 9 (2017): 9–32. https://doi.org/10.11588/propylaeumdok.00004673.

Skimmed for the specifics I was looking for with respect to Gertrud Bauer's zettelkasten.

As a complete aside I can't help but wonder if Tami Gottschalk is related to Louis R. Gottschalk, the historian who wrote Understanding history; a primer of historical method?

61 Available online at http://research.uni-leipzig.de/ddglc/bauerindex.html. The Work on this parergon to the lexicographical labors of the DDGLC project was funded by the Gertrud-und Alexander Böhlig-Stiftung. The digitization of the original card index was conducted by temporary collaborators and volunteers in the DDGLC project: Jenny Böttinger, Claudia Gamma, Tami Gottschalk, Josephine Hensel, Katrin John, Mariana Jung, Christina Katsikadeli, and Elen Saif. The IT concept and programming were carried out by Katrin John and Maximilian Moller.

Digitization of Gertrud Bauer's zettelkasten was underway in 2017 to put the data into a MySQL database with the intention of offering it as an online user interface sometime in 2017.

After browsing through a variety of the cards in Gertrud Bauer's Zettelkasten Online it becomes obvious that the collection was created specifically as a paper-based database for search, retrieval, and research. The examples and data within it are much more narrowly circumscribed for a specific use than those of other researchers like Niklas Luhmann whose collection spanned a much broader variety of topics and areas of knowledge.

This particular use case makes the database nature of zettelkasten more apparent than some others, particularly in modern (post-2013 zettelkasten of a more personal nature).

I'm reminded here of the use case(s) described by Beatrice Webb in My Apprenticeship for scientific note taking, by which she more broadly meant database creation and use.

In the 1990s Professor Alexander Böhlig of the University of Tuebingen gave Gertrud Bauer's zettelkasten to Professor Peter Nagel of Bonn. He in turn forwardd the seven cardboard boxes of slips to the Database and Dictionary of Greek Loanwords in Coptic (DDGLC) office for their use.

The Database and Dictionary of Greek Loanwords in Coptic (DDGLC) has scanned and placed the original slips from Gertrud Bauer's zettelkasten into a database for scholarly use. The database allows the replication of the hierarchical structure of Bauer's original compilation.

Goitein's index cards provided a database not only for his own work, but for those who studied documentary Geniza after him.

Goitein accumulated more than 27,000 index cards in his research work over the span of 35 years. (Approximately 2.1 cards per day.)

His collection can broadly be broken up into two broad categories: 1. Approximately 20,000 cards are notes covering individual topics generally making of the form of a commonplace book using index cards rather than books or notebooks. 2. Over 7,000 cards which contain descriptions of a single fragment from the Cairo Geniza.

A large number of cards in the commonplace book section were used in the production of his magnum opus, a six volume series about aspects of Jewish life in the Middle Ages, which were published as A Mediterranean Society: The Jewish communities of the Arab World as Portrayed in the Documents of the Cairo Geniza (1967–1993).

https://genizalab.princeton.edu/resources/goiteins-index-cards

<small><cite class='h-cite via'>ᔥ <span class='p-author h-card'>u/Didactico</span> in Goitein's Index Cards : antinet (<time class='dt-published'>12/15/2022 23:12:33</time>)</cite></small>

Reference for UltraRecall (UR) being the most DEVONthink like Windows alternative. No mobile companion for UR. Look into this being paired with Obsidian

Natto https://natto.dev<br /> built by Paul Shen https://twitter.com/_paulshen

https://www.loom.com/share/a05f636661cb41628b9cb7061bd749ae

Synopsis: Maggie Delano looks at some of the affordances supplied by Tana (compared to Roam Research) in terms of providing better block-based user interface for note type creation, search, and filtering.

These sorts of tools and programmable note implementations remind me of Beatrice Webb's idea of scientific note taking or using her note cards like a database to sort and search for data to analyze it and create new results and insight.

It would seem that many of these note taking tools like Roam and Tana are using blocks and sub blocks as a means of defining atomic notes or database-like data in a way in which sub-blocks are linked to or "filed underneath" their parent blocks. In reality it would seem that they're still using a broadly defined index card type system as used in the late 1800s/early 1900s to implement a set up that otherwise would be a traditional database in the Microsoft Excel or MySQL sort of fashion, the major difference being that the user interface is cognitively easier to understand for most people.

These allow people to take a form of structured textual notes to which might be attached other smaller data or meta data chunks that can be easily searched, sorted, and filtered to allow for quicker or easier use.

Ostensibly from a mathematical (or set theoretic and even topological) point of view there should be a variety of one-to-one and onto relationships (some might even extend these to "links") between these sorts of notes and database representations such that one should be able to implement their note taking system in Excel or MySQL and do all of these sorts of things.

Cascading Idea Sheets or Cascading Idea Relationships

One might analogize these sorts of note taking interfaces to Cascading Style Sheets (CSS). While there is the perennial question about whether or not CSS is a programming language, if we presume that it is (and it is), then we can apply the same sorts of class, id, and inheritance structures to our notes and their meta data. Thus one could have an incredibly atomic word, phrase, or even number(s) which inherits a set of semantic relationships to those ideas which it sits below. These links and relationships then more clearly define and contextualize them with respect to other similar ideas that may be situated outside of or adjacent to them. Once one has done this then there is a variety of Boolean operations which might be applied to various similar sets and classes of ideas.

If one wanted to go an additional level of abstraction further, then one could apply the ideas of category theory to one's notes to generate new ideas and structures. This may allow using abstractions in one field of academic research to others much further afield.

The user interface then becomes the key differentiator when bringing these ideas to the masses. Developers and designers should be endeavoring to allow the power of complex searches, sorts, and filtering while minimizing the sorts of advanced search queries that an average person would be expected to execute for themselves while also allowing some reasonable flexibility in the sorts of ways that users might (most easily for them) add data and meta data to their ideas.

Jupyter programmable notebooks are of this sort, but do they have the same sort of hierarchical "card" type (or atomic note type) implementation?

Gotthard Deutsch (1859-1921) had a card index of 70,000 items relating to Jewish history.

There is a difference between various modes of note taking and their ultimate outcomes. Some is done for learning about an area and absorbing it into one's own source of general knowledge. Others are done to collect and generate new sorts of knowledge. But some may be done for raw data collection and analysis. Beatrice Webb called this "scientific note taking".

Historian Jacques Goutor talks about research preparation for this sort of data collecting and analysis though he doesn't give it a particular name. He recommends reading papers in related areas to prepare for the sort of data acquisition one may likely require so that one can plan out some of one's needs in advance. This will allow the researcher, especially in areas like history or sociology, the ability to preplan some of the sorts of data and notes they'll need to take from their historical sources or subjects in order to carry out their planned goals. (p8)

C. Wright Mills mentions (On Intellectual Craftsmanship, 1952) similar research planning whereby he writes out potential longer research methods even when he is not able to spend the time, effort, energy, or other (financial) resources to carry out such plans. He felt that just the thought experiments and exercise of doing such unfulfilled research often bore fruit in his other sociological endeavors.

Who is using these forms in practice? I'd love to see some examples.

This sort of set up could be used with some outlining functionality to streamline the content creation end of common note taking practices.

Is anyone using a spreadsheet program (Excel, Google Sheets) as the basis for their zettelkasten?

Link to examples of zettelkasten as database (Webb, Seignobos suggestions)

syndication link

Similar to the examples provided by Beatrice Webb in My Apprenticeship, the authors here are talking about a sort of scientific note taking method that is ostensibly similar to that of the use of a modern day computer database or spreadsheet function, but which had to be effected in index card form to do the sorting and compiling and analysis.

Do the authors here use the specific phrase scientific note taking? It appears that they do not.

Moreover

A zettelkasten type note taking method isn't only popular and useful for scholars by 1898, but is useful to "statisticians, financiers, and men of letters".

Note carefully the word "mechanically" here used in a pre-digital context. One can't easily keep large amounts of data in one's head at once to make sense of it, so having a physical and mechanical means of doing so would have been important. In 21st century contexts one would more likely use a spreadsheet or database for these types of manipulations at increasingly larger scales.

Beatrice Webb was using her custom note taking system in the lead up to the research that resulted in the publication of Industrial Democracy (1897).

Is there evidence that she was practicing this note taking/database practice earlier than this?

Mongoose Validation. This is essential.

Chawla, D. S. (2021). Hundreds of ‘predatory’ journals indexed on leading scholarly database. Nature. https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-021-00239-0

Notice the order: this is printed last, after the outer (real) transaction is committed, not when the inner "transaction" block finishes without error.

important qualification: the outer transaction, the (only) real transaction

At least I think this is talking about this as limitation/problem.

The limitation/problem being that it's not good/useful for performing after-transaction code only for specific actions.

But the next sentence "This is beneficial..." seems contradictory, so I'm a bit confused/unclear of what the intention is...

Looking at this project more, it doesn't appear to solve the "after-transaction code only for specific actions" problem like I initially thought it did (and like https://github.com/grosser/ar_after_transaction does), so I believe I was mistaken. Still not sure what is meant by "instead of specific model actions". Are they claiming that "before_commit_on_create" for example is a "specific model action"? (hardly!) That seems almost identical to the (not specific enough) callbacks provided natively by Rails. Oh yeah, I guess they do point out that Rails 3 adds this functionality, so this gem is only needed for Rails 2.