@neil I realize now I want to run a query in the Agora of the sort "all subnodes from neil that refer to [[free, fair and alive]] :)

I want to have a sort of table of contents/summary tree in the Agora, and I see you have done a lot of it already.

@flancian Like a filter on backlinks to a node maybe? Backlinks by user?

I did start doing that - linking to specific sections of the book. But I fizzled out at some point and just linked to the top-level [[Free, Fair and Alive]] - not sure which is better - wdyt?

@neil I think user-specific backlinks makes sense; now that I've moved subnodes to the same template that nodes use that should be easy-ish to implement actually :)

so [[@neil/free-fair-and-alive]] should soon be productive in this respect

@neil haha, agora bot failed hard on that just now, needs a fix/workaround

@neil honestly I think working together to assemble a structured (but distributed and of course heterarchic) analysis of pattern languages is a great application for the Agora.


@flancian Ah got you, yeah I did start a list of the patterns in FFA anagora.org/triad-of-commoning (under each of those sections)

Β· Β· 1 Β· 0 Β· 1

@neil nice! the one thing I would add to that subnode is [[pull]] before the parts, as that would bring in a lot more data and structure and make it into a pretty awesome index/summary. I know you're torn about using bits of [[agora protocol]] in notes as it's Agora specific, though, and I understand.

@neil if you'd like to signal transclusion/pulling in some other way that doesn't interfere with your writing as much, let me know if you think of anything!

e.g. the Agora could interpret you writing bullet lists with just a single link in each bullet as an 'auto pull' directive.

@neil or, perhaps even better, it could recognize a pattern of you writing 'part of X' in Y, and including a link to Y in X, as an intention to pull. You seem to be following this pattern.

@flancian Good shout!

I guess I'm currently not sure what I gain from inline transclusion.

Comes from a position of having not tried it though - not from a position of 'I have and didn't like it'.

e.g. - why pull a link inline rather than clicking to visit? Is it purely a preference of a top-to-bottom document structure versus forward/back navigation?

I should give it a go and get some feels for it

@neil that makes sense! it's a great question -- I've been experimenting for a while and I've got a few possible answers, but I'm just feeling things out essentially. To some extent this might reduce to [[link vs transclude]]. Anyway, here goes:

1. pulls are like 'strong links' -- a pull is a particular kind of annotated link that specifies a stronger relation than a regular backlink. In 'graph space', they result in nodes coming closer together.


2. pulls are akin to assembling a default reading list within a space, whereas bare links are more like an opportunity for the reader to assemble their own. Put another way, links allow for completely free roaming whereas pulls are more like directed 'tours' of shared graph space.


3. finally, I have the hypothesis that the integration of many pulls interpreted as hints might let us converge socially on meaning -- solve disambiguation, equivalence, other interesting relations between entities without having to agree on stricter schemes.

This follows what I call the 'minimum effort constructive action' principle of design: if I'm in a particular Agora context and I determine that another context is relevant to this one for any reason, I just need to pull it -- no need to write down the specific relation that links the two (and agree on a taxonomy of relations, or an ontology) at that particular point in time.

Sign in to participate in the conversation

A Fediverse instance for people interested in cooperative and collective projects.