Rough šŸ’­s on large spaces

First of all, excellent work on tags. Iā€™ll need some time to explore them. I might find that they help me achieve some of thee things Iā€™m about to bring up, but I did also want to share some rough thoughts.

Iā€™m starting to build up some busy spaces (> 100 cards), like my digital garden. I really love seeing everything spatially and arranging clumps of cards related to a topic/concept. Iā€™ve got a ā€œnowā€ area, kinopio-related, things to blog, movies Iā€™ve watched, stuff I own/want, etc.

As this space grows, it has gotten harder to manage. One area is moving/arranging. Painting requires more precision since there is less space. The select-all-connected is nice, but itā€™s not always practical to connect all cards in a clump. It makes the clump noisy and harder to see the other relationships. I think I want a way to group cards that are in close proximity.

Tags donā€™t seem appropriate. If you take the clump of cards about Kinopio. Tagging all of them with [[kinopio]] doesnā€™t make sense.

Nor do connections. Same clump, I already have various connections. Connecting all of these cards with a single connection type would really distract from that.

Iā€™ve raised before idea that you could draw a region, and everything touching that region can be manipulated as a group. You could imaging filtering by group, where everything else is faded. And moving by group to more easily rearrange cards.

What Iā€™ve found is that I frequently have clumps of cards I want to manipulate like this.

So then Iā€™m wondering, what if I use spaces to organize? I take each of my clumps, and move them to their own space. The huge disadvantage here is that I lose the ability to see everything at once and the ability to connect things across concepts/clumps in a visual way (yes, I realize tags kind of do this, but only conceptually.)

Now, if you could ā€œembedā€ a minimap of a space within a space, that might preserve the spatial relationships enough to really work. I donā€™t think I like the idea of arbitrary zoom and all the complexity that comes with it, but perhaps having a single scale factor could work (hereā€™s where a visual mockup would go if I had skills and time). But imagine a space scaled to 25% embedded in a normally scaled space. You can see the small cards, their relative positions and connections. Clicking on that would nav you to the normal space, and then a easy way to jump out to any spaces that ā€œcontainā€ it. Iā€™m def in brainstorm land at this pointā€¦

Thanks for reading. I appreciate Kinopio and the thought and care that goes in to it. ( Ķ”Ā° Ķœ Ā°)

1 Like

i wonder if filters + tags might be able to help you define and toggle views of clumps?

I donā€™t have it yet, but I could even add a way to select all filtered cards

I definitely like the filtering aspect. But the problem with tags is they are too noisy and intrusive in this use. Iā€™d need to add the tag to every card. I canā€™t select a clump and tag, in other words. And also, it forces all the cards to include that tag in the name. Which is noisy and not necessarily semantically what I want. Thereā€™s no easy way to rename tags. More like a Trello-style tag. :slight_smile:

1 Like

re the idea of clumping, the parallel to this idea in design software is ā€˜groupingā€™ . The way it works is you select a bunch of shapes together and hit cmd-G to group them. Once grouped clicking one selects them all, and moving one selects the other. The layers toolbar puts groups into ā€˜foldersā€™, that part of the ui abstraction would have to be very different in the kinopio context

Itā€™s a pretty advanced concept but certainly useful there. Something Iā€™ll consider for the future

1 Like

Yes, grouping is essentially what Iā€™m talking about here, but I know it adds a bit of complexity, so Iā€™ve avoided asking for that formally and also tried to think of other ways to solve this :smiley_cat:

1 Like