SlipBox

[PS]

I just started to use slip-box (around 60 slips) and already I couldn`t tell you what is on, say slip 37. If you implement titles in a future version, it would be useful to have them instead of the ids in the scent-box. The title could provide some context for orientation.

[mg]

Interesting. I'm still not convinced to make a separate title field, but I could certainly insert an option to display the first line of the slip instead of the ID in the Alternating Scent view (I guess that's what you mean). Any more supporters for this idea?

Markus

[PS]

Thanks for your quick responses.
Yes, I meant the Alternating Scent view. But there`s a general question behind: Is the slip-id relevant information for users?
Sure it´s a kind of chronological order, but e.g. a time stamp would do a better job. The id will probably not represent meaningful information to you, unless you open the slip itself. Maybe that sounds trivial, but it makes navigation cumbersome, if you have to click on every number to see what hides behind. To use a picture: I would like to see the actual flower(field), an anonymous scent is not enough. A title would be much more meaningful. However, I see the problem with graphical representations of long titles in tag clouds, sidebars etc.

Just an unrelated idea: Maybe it`s useful to colour-code the IDs/Titles in scent view by Type. I think a scent-flower metaphor could make powerfull use of colours for a more intuitive navigation. At the moment the Type field seems to be an unbeloved stepchild without real benefit. What do you think about an additional search function?

Paul

[mg]

Well, you're right, of course, that the ID is not really informative as such. However, it is part of the unordered or slightly anarchic slip-box system. In the original conception you would only know _that_ there is a scent between slips but not not anything about _what_ is on the related slip. But perhaps it would be a good compromise to set the tool tip to the title of the slip (if the user specified to use it; see the other post).

You're quite perceptive in recognising the Type field as the unbeloved stepchild. That's really what it is. And I don't really think it hold particularly interesting information (at least no in my boxes). I mean it's probably interesting to know whether I got a piece of information from a presentation or from a journal article, but if I have the information in the Source field I have that anyway. My problem is, again, that Types easily lead to to classifying slips, and that shouldn't happen. Implementing a search for Types is on the to-do list. I hope that for the version after 0.8 I finally get round to implement a more flexible search; something with multiple fields like you have in the Finder or basically any other decent Cocoa application.

I like the idea of colour coding. Perhaps not on the basis of Types, but there should be other uses for it.

Markus

[musubana]

Hi, I’ve just read the above.

I also think that slip-titles could sometimes be useful.
However, I do see the point of the present anarchy!

I suggest the developer makes a switch ”Show ID/Show Title/Show both”. Standard pages are just given the title ”Untitled” unless you switch to Title mode and give it a specific one…

Titles should, of coures, be searchable.

[jkr]

Having just discovered SB (which is exactly what I was looking for to store my academic research notes!) I might miss some further developments since these posts, but here goes:

[sourena]

I support having showing the titles in Search tab. One can easily find the slip he/she is looking for. You can still keep the ID there. I think it would be a good idea to show "Type" there too so the users can sort their slips based on any one of them.

[mg]

Well, you can display the titles in the Search View already (to be activated by a Preference item). As already pointed out elsewhere, the Types are the application's unbeloved stepchild, but I guess it would be consistent to display them as well.

[burak]

Forgive my bluntness but this whole idea of Slip IDs instead of Titles and that Slip Scents sidebar with those meaningless IDs is ridiculous and annoying. Make a fine car and then break its mirrors. Why? Because you need to impose your philosophy of anarchism in driving. That might be a better compromise in politics, but the worst one in this place.

[mg]

Yes, that is very blunt. Also usually not the best way to convince of something.

I understand your point (and titles are a constant debate, not only in this respect). The main reason is that there's not enough space in the sidebar to display titles. So the alternative really is only to not show the slip scents in the Slip View. I should perhaps make the sidebar collapsible so that you are able to use the space more productively.

As for browsing with titles, you can do that in the Alternative Scent View, even though that is not directly slip to slip. Slip title are also displayed in the tooltips.

But all of this is a rather moot debate anyway, because the layout for the next major release will change quite substantially. (That will not be anytime soon, though.)

[burak]

My apologies... My bluntness wouldn't seem so face to face.

This might kill all other note takers by having both worlds without compromise, the anarchic and the categorised, with a (hierarchical) Type side bar.

[burak]

Hmmm... Inspector as a side bar, with a hierarchical or outlining Type tab, or at least Alternating Scents View tab.

And auto-save data on exit.

Respectfully, for your efforts and the fine app...

[mg]

Hehe ...

I don't think that an Inspector in the side bar would be consistent with Apple's interface guidelines. The same is true for nested structures in outline views (Apple's rationale probably is that they would become too wide). I should start a thread on what people would like to see in an improved interface.

An option for auto-save on exit or automatically save changes might be an idea ...

[burak]

To be more specific, one nearly always needs the Keyword List in the Inspector to insert keywords, so that separate window (the Inspector) is always open just because of that. And it's not expandable, is cumbersome etc.

Instead of that separate window, an expandable side bar with the Keyword List or better still with the Alternating Scent view would be much nicer. So one can both have an outline of his/her notes and by (for example) option+clicking insert a keyword in the current slip. Yet I vote for a side bar with a nested Type (categories) view and Keyword List. The Inspector would stay as it is with or without the Keyword List.

Apple's own Pages.app is an example; the first four items under the View menu expand a wide enough side bar. As for the nested outlines, there are many examples of that among the note taker apps. It wouldn't be too wide, as just one level would usually suffice, but the user can decide that and widen it if he/she desires. If that is against some Apple rules, lets become a little anarchistic, can't we? Yet it doesn't seem that you would transgress anything, as both iTunes and Finder have (one level) nested side bars and one can widen these side bars indefinitely, as one can widen the current side bar of Slipbox indefinitely too.