Our great sponsors
-
organice
An implementation of Org mode without the dependency of Emacs - built for mobile and desktop browsers
-
logseq
A local-first, non-linear, outliner notebook for organizing and sharing your personal knowledge base. Use it to organize your todo list, to write your journals, or to record your unique life.
-
SurveyJS
Open-Source JSON Form Builder to Create Dynamic Forms Right in Your App. With SurveyJS form UI libraries, you can build and style forms in a fully-integrated drag & drop form builder, render them in your JS app, and store form submission data in any backend, inc. PHP, ASP.NET Core, and Node.js.
Sorry, but _what exactly_ «it seems to do» from your point of view?
My «second brain» now is almost 300Mb of text, pictures, sound files, PDF and other stuff. As I already mentioned, it contains tables, mathematical formulae, sheet music, cross-references, code samples, UML diagrams and graphs in Graphviz format. It is versioned, indexed by local search engine, analyzed by AI assistant and shared between many computers and mobile devices. And (last but not least) it works: it allows me to solve my tasks way more faster than with the assistant of external, non-personalized tools (like ChatGPT, StackExchange or Google).
I know no tools for all this tasks except org-mode. Well, maybe Evernote in the 2010-s was something similar — but with less features, with more bugs and with worse interface.
Personal note-taking _is_ a complex task per se (well, at least for someone like typical HN visitor). I've seen many note-taking tools, that were ridiculously featureless, stupid and inconvenient because they were _not_ complex enough.
> Sure if one wants to do emacs-gardening it is fine.
1)You can use org-mode outside Emacs. See for example Logseq (https://logseq.com/), organice (https://organice.200ok.ch/) or EasyOrg.
2)Org-mode works in Emacs out of the box, you don't need any «emacs-gardening» to use org-mode.
3)The term «Emacs-gardening» itself sound a bit like hate-speech for me. The complexity of Emacs customization is overrated, mostly due to opinions of people who never used Emacs or used it in the previous millennium.
Sorry, but _what exactly_ «it seems to do» from your point of view?
My «second brain» now is almost 300Mb of text, pictures, sound files, PDF and other stuff. As I already mentioned, it contains tables, mathematical formulae, sheet music, cross-references, code samples, UML diagrams and graphs in Graphviz format. It is versioned, indexed by local search engine, analyzed by AI assistant and shared between many computers and mobile devices. And (last but not least) it works: it allows me to solve my tasks way more faster than with the assistant of external, non-personalized tools (like ChatGPT, StackExchange or Google).
I know no tools for all this tasks except org-mode. Well, maybe Evernote in the 2010-s was something similar — but with less features, with more bugs and with worse interface.
Personal note-taking _is_ a complex task per se (well, at least for someone like typical HN visitor). I've seen many note-taking tools, that were ridiculously featureless, stupid and inconvenient because they were _not_ complex enough.
> Sure if one wants to do emacs-gardening it is fine.
1)You can use org-mode outside Emacs. See for example Logseq (https://logseq.com/), organice (https://organice.200ok.ch/) or EasyOrg.
2)Org-mode works in Emacs out of the box, you don't need any «emacs-gardening» to use org-mode.
3)The term «Emacs-gardening» itself sound a bit like hate-speech for me. The complexity of Emacs customization is overrated, mostly due to opinions of people who never used Emacs or used it in the previous millennium.
There are two reasons why I call Org mode standardized.
> I imagine there aren't really various flavors of Org Mode, but that doesn't make it standardized.
All the implementations that call themselves org-mode follow the conventions set by the canonical implementation - the Emacs org-mode. While this may not sound like a good reason to call it standardized, the practical implication is a vast difference from what you get with various markdown flavors. In the latter case, the only way to make sure that your markdown is correct, is to test it with the target implementation.
The second reason is that there is an actual effort to standardize org-mode - called Orgdown [1]. Org-mode is already more or less uniform across implementations. This effort tries to write it down as a reference. Markdown has a similar effort called CommonMark. But if you want to know why it's different, you have to look at the history of why it isn't called 'Standard Markdown'.
[1] https://gitlab.com/publicvoit/orgdown