Text based vs binary formatting
Looking at history, there seems to have been two streams of formatting for output, either for the screen, or for printing, on computers. MarkDown is similar to html and Wikitext coding. Back in 1981 one of my brothers published his book "How To Design Your Very Own Solar Home" on a 6809 Southwest Technical Products computer using Flex and a type of crude desktop publishing program similar to NROFF which used text coding because people didn't even have monitors then and the only input was a keyboard. But I was not exposed to this at all having got my first computer in 1990 when all the programs I had like AutoCAD, Word, Microsoft Access, CorelDRAW, and Ventura Publisher were now completely binary. So I'm guessing that still, high level document workflows like desktop publishing and Computer Aided Design are binary so only using text based formatting for all work flows is not practical.
What are notes going to be used for?
I think the bigger question is, what do I and other people want to collect notes for? Just for knowledge? The original goal of the Zettelkasten note taking system was to collect information for writing reports, papers, books, public speaking, and movies. In the field of computer aided drawing, blocks are created which are common items that can be inserted into drawings to save time. These blocks need to be created in the same computer format as the main drawing so they are compatible. So I think the same rational could be used when deciding which program to use for creating notes. I want to create notes in a program that uses the same file formats as I will use in the final publication.
The reason for program suites
The Affinity Publisher, Designer, Photo program suite is a great program for publishing a book in, is low cost, is considered very user friendly, and has small file sizes. Program suites were developed because that is the only way to ensure compatibility of three different file types. Can I use the Affinity Designer, Photo files in Obsidian? No. Can I use the svg and png files that are used on Obsidian in Affinity Publisher? Not really. So in my note taking I want to collect files that I can use directly in Affinity Publisher. So it makes sense to use Affinity Publisher for notes, letters, reports, user manuals, papers, pamphlets, and books. I save time only learning one program instead of many and save time by recycling material in the same format.
A super digital Zettelkasten system
In the original Zettelkasten system, there were three work flows. (1) Taking notes on the cards. (2) Typing the book draft from information on the cards. (3) Typesetting the book. In the super digital Zettelkasten system we create the pieces for the book digitally in the notes over time, then combine them together into letters, reports, user manuals, papers, pamphlets, and books without having to retype or recreate a lot of the text and images by using the same program. My training is in manufacturing engineering and this sounds like an efficient work flow. I think this is even more integration of work flows than Sarif even dreamed of when they decided to create the Affinity suite or than generally happens in the industry. In fact experts keep telling me that there should be more steps. But why? I think in the traditional publishing industry there is a great division of labor and many people are involved each doing a small part but this was the way letters were written in companies many years ago with many people involved in writing a single letter, now the executives just do it all themselves on a computer.
New Steps
In the fascinating 1992 Australian movie "Strictly Ballroom" there are those who want to do the "New Steps" while the traditionalist wanted to do the "Accepted Steps" But New Steps are only good if they make sense. So what do you think, do these "New Steps" make sense? Does using a desktop publishing program for notes lack some features of established note taking systems? Yes? But they could be added.
Bookmarks