Comment

Comment on TriliumNext Notes - The last note taking app you should ever need

So to reiterate, you’ve just stated that all the following[^1] doesn’t need to be exported

links to attachments,
modification dates,
internal links (Obsidian doesn’t even follow markdown standard here, so just say goodbye to it)
titles,
tags,
folder structure

How about you just delete this metadata then? if in case of outage/transition to other notetaker it’s going to be lost anyway, why you even need it, right?

c’mon, mate. I can feel you’re smarter than this

[^1] This is called “front matter” format btw and all responsible usercentric notetakers offer an export of your metadata to it. But Obsidian is not one of them

source

Sort:hotnew top

kata1yst@sh.itjust.works ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago
Its dangerous to send goalposts flying around that fast, be careful or you’ll hurt yourself.

Your response is condescending, arguing from ignorance, and arguing in bad faith. I will reply this time, because once again you’re trying to build an argument on extremely shaky ground and I don’t enjoy people spreading lies unchallenged. However I won’t engage any further and feed whatever you think you’re getting from this.

I haven’t suggested that people should use Obsidian over OSS solutions. I was simply pointing out your argument against Obsidian’s architecture was poorly founded.

The data you’re insinuating will be lost is pure FUD. While the format isn’t standard markdown, none of the well implemented solutions are, because as you so rightly pointed out, markdown has little to no support for most of these features.

However, obsidian’s format is well documented and well understood. There are dozens of FOSS plugins and tools for converting or directly importing obsidian data to nearly every other solution. Due to obsidian’s popularity, it’s interoperability this way is often far superior to FOSS solutions’.

source
- graphito@sopuli.xyz ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago
  
  obsidian’s format is well documented and well understood. There are dozens of FOSS plugins and tools for converting or directly importing obsidian data to nearly every other solution. Due to obsidian’s popularity, it’s interoperability this way is often far superior to FOSS solutions’.
  
  To reiterate this claim: just because Erica gave Shida enough time to document his work in the open, she is entitled to exploit foss contributors for profit. Is that your point here?
  
  Also not only she can exploit foss contributors when it suits her, she also can remove their work from the ecosystem whenever momentum for acquisition is ripe. Do you think it’s false?
  
  If Erica doesn’t pay you to write these comments, does it feel morally right to you defending these capitalist practices?
  
  source