Two questions for you #pkm folks and those that use #zettelkasten (-derived) methods:

In your eyes,
1.) Should permanent notes be edited once created, or should they let be and a fresh note refering to them be made instead?
2.) what differentiates a permanent note from an evergreen note?

@spinningthoughts

1. Whatever works for you.
2. Whatever you decide, should you choose to use those note categories.

I think what’s important to understand is that the ZK method – or any method for note taking – only works once you’ve made it your own.

Spending to much time thinking about adhering to some arbitrary rules is just a time waster.

That said: Reading about what others do and how they formalize their note taking style provides important inspiration.

@anders also, generally agreed - but the way we define those notes is because of context of use - they are workflow anchors- and there‘s a lot of patterns and anti-patterns in the workflow discussion, so it‘s interesting to see what properties and workflow outcomes are valued why - and how these outcomes are supporter by structure.
@spinningthoughts Returning to this thread! Tried to search the web for "workflow anchor”. Seems to be a somewhat established term, but I can't find any good intros. You don't happen to have a link or two?

@anders First of all, I love that you come back to this old idea, I *totally* love this! This is how dialogue on microblogging should (also) work!

Second, I‘m afraid I grappled for and confabulated the term right then and there to suscintly try and express the idea of "tags define the context of a note in a system" and "for knowledge management to work, we need to trust the system" and "tags as metadata are also a memory aid, just like the note itself" and turn it into A Thing

@spinningthoughts Returned thanks to my GTD-system. Never felt that I had processed this enough, and now it was surfaced in my weekly review. :)

Will try to think about it some more on my own then. Will probably return here once again. :)

@anders I‘ll have to blog about it at some point. I have a bunch of ideas about workflows and systematization (how much, how far, what outcomes are supported and why) laying around that are slowly bubbling up into Something.

Let me know what comes up for you! Maybe also if you have contrasting ideas in your own ideas stack or your references.

I think at this point I‘ll keep an eye on it.

@anders out of interest for contrast-building: what sources did your search flag up?

@spinningthoughts Alright, back here once again!

When I returned to Obsidian with Tana, I had the concept of supertags with me. Framed in Obsididan terms, a supertag is a note template. And the most important supertags I have in Tana are Source, Highlight, Thought, Idea, and Thread – something of a sequence where thoughts are sparked by highlights taken from books, podcasts etc. Each supertag is now a note template with a couple of important properties.

@spinningthoughts Three are of particular value: Spark, Topic, and Inbox.

Spark links back to – surprise – the note that sparked the idea to create the new one.

Topic links to one or more topic notes to build clusters of notes.

Inbox links to a supporting note type: Question.

@spinningthoughts The Question notes are really important to me. They are the most important things I think about at work, and tries to find answers to. Whenever I create a note I make sure to link it to at least one question. That way, I can rest assured that I will discover it again, later on.
@spinningthoughts And I think this system is a good practical implementation of "workflow anchors". I’m starting to build muscle memory for note creation, linking, etc, lowering the friction to input things – and by linking back to topics and question also make sure to rediscover when I need them to create things.