getting organized

6.4: obj db's may be merged:

[11.27: intro:

. the fs (file system) is referring to the way that
files should be organized by folders
for the purposes of assisting in my pim (personal info' mgt) .
. the current pim is obj'oriented
meaning that info is categorized by source {self, other} .
. within the author folder is the log and the obj.db (topics database):
. the log is for placing info chronologically;
many old papers being scanned-in have no known create.date,
so they cannot be logged precisely by month or even year,
although most can still be fitted within era.folders;
however, in an earlier version of the pim,
articles without a date-stamp were simply not logged,
being placed into an obj.db instead .
. copies of important articles within the log
are then ordered by subtopic into obj.db folders .
. some subtopics correspond to physical objects,
whereas others are objects only within conceptual space .
. this pim was designed some time ago
and I'm finding that the reorganization has not fully materialized!
. I'm having a renewed interest in the organization of the obj.db's
because I want a space for organizing the velomobile design project .

. reviewing the obj db's
I'm wondering why I wanted the obj.db's separated into
{L(lexical, text),M(multimedia)} branches;
it is not obj-oriented and starting to complicate things
because the pictures and pdf's are not with the text of the same
subtopic .
. there have been many times when it's been easier to
use an application if all the files of similar type were together;
eg, when backup space is limited,
and text has a much higher priority than multimedia
then separating out multimedia makes for a compact backup of text .]

. some of the files are in the obj.db simply because they
existed before the current pim:
they are date-stamped yet not in the log .
. many emails are in the obj.db
-- even though they are datestamped --
perhaps because it seemed like too much work .
. later I started using mac's sparse bundles for encryption
that's easy to backup with Apple`timemachine;
obj.db now contains only log`copies or exo's (from other authors) .
. many of the scans are in obj.b because they are
important more as objects than as loggable events .

. the obj`L schema has been:
care/bus (gear involving wheels)
care`dev (abrasives, solvents)
care`gear (clothes, appliances)
care`maint (tools, lube) .
. that system is not working;
eg, tools can be for both maint and dev
so then you have to check 2 categories to cover a subtopic .
. I started the merge of the {L,M} forks into obj.db
for just the currently hot subjects (eg, {gear/composites, gear/trike})

6.5: log-based pim:

. the aspect.folder of my pim
is a place to copy important logged entries
into categories that are not obj-oriented:
eg, history, policy, address.book, and todo's
are folders that mix info belonging to any subtopic .
. like the todo file, the best way to maintain the aspect.folder
is to always keep the current working version of it in the log,
at filename: 99 {todo, pos, hist, addr ...}
-- always near the current date when ordered by name .
. unlike the monthly subj.files or folders,
the 99 files are moved from month to month rather than copied,
since they really belong in aspect.folder,
but are in log as a way to quickly access and backup
recent updates to them .
. just like the log is merged with obj.db's after being reviewed,
the log-based pim is occassionally merged with the aspect.db .


. doubting whether {tech, pos(position or policy)},
should be in the aspects.folder .
. whatever I was thinking, I should have shared it with clueless!

6.12: pos"keeping track of what's blogged:


. integrate blog posting with transfers to obj.db:
. to keep track of what's transfered from log to obj.db,
I started an obj/subj/todo dates.folder
whose name is updated with what range of log has been
successfully reviewed and copied
. when it says that part of a log has been merged,
you know that those notes have also been posted online .
. problem with that
is a future where you need to merge in object,
but you don't have access to the web .


. as usual, keep in obj`X/net.x
a mirror of what is on the site"x
. this system would be extended to blogging sites .

[11.28: idea#3

. a problem with that having to wait until
the entire month's log is reviewed and copied to obj.db
before anything can be blogged .
. the current system is to add a link to any log entries
showing the url where they were blogged .

6.12: pos"overview

. "(addn) was originally conceived as an abstract category
for including all the technologies I was using:
{ mac, pc, net, ... --. office equipment .
, fs --. how to organize my data portably across equipment .
, pim --. how to organize my self (viewed as office equipment) .
} .
. adds -- amer'dream doc subjects .
. addx -- amer'dream doc software systems .

. dev.{platform | lang} has been about how to develope
for a certain platform or lang .
. the syntax was dev.x
rather than x.dev;
because, the primary interest was in knowing how to control things,
and figuring out how to do this;
while secondary to that,
was an interest in what things were being controlled .

. if you're using a net service to provide subj content,
then it could be filed under subj or some meta.subj like
addn, adds, or addx .
. if the most important thing about the interaction
was that you were interacting with co.workers or talking about co's,
then it could be filed under co .
. for example, a project that put personal info on a social site,
would go under co.net/site .

. most writing actually should fall under the heading of
and if you think the matured writing is generally usable,
then sharing it would go under the heading of
proj.addn/dev.co.subj .
. this insight could mean a change in obj`X/net.site
moving all net.site.folder's to folder"addn/dev.co .
. then again,
that brings us back to the original intent of the dev.heading:
. also, dev was a subheading of addn -- cybersphere .
. from that perspective, dev.co should be reserved for
ways to influence people and make them do what you want .
. legal and psychological power moves would go under dev.co;
they are about creating systems of cooperation
where we develop interfaces that define how we agree to
serve, command, or interact .

6.12: mis"platform vs dev.platform:

. I've been inconsistent with how I'm using the categories
{ addn/dev.net
, addn/net } . not sure how to file instance of
putting info about myself on a website .
. a project that put personal info on a social site,
would go under co.net/site .
. I have mistakenly been putting this under addn/net.site;
but, that should be about the service at that site
(what's there, how to use it, mistakes made, policy about its use) .

6.18: mis"stuck again on naming system:

. adding content to my google'code site
( linking it to an active blogger site)
is tagged as dev.net .
. not sure what the obj' is? break then review pos .
. net.g'code.com is an app I'm learning how to use .
. adding content to a site is primarily communicationg;
it's now being tagged as co.net/g'code.com .

6.25: pos"co.net:

. the co.net log will no longer include delicious.com;
that info is preserved in bookmarks .