The ability to display markdown files which are in sub-folders. I am trying to store all my tasks in Notenik and it would be nice to be able to see them all in one place: a master list of all open tasks. At the same time, the tasks are easier to organize and archive if they are stored in separate folders and Notenik collections based on the project they pertain to. One could do both if a parent folder Notenik collection could display Notes from one sub-folder down. The advantage of one project per sub-folder is that when a project is completed, one could just archive it by moving the project folder to a different location.
This struck me as kind of a nifty idea, so I’m starting work on an implementation.
Let me lay out the way I would envision this working:
Introduction of a new field type called Folder.
A folder field would need to be part of the template file for what we might call the master folder – the one that contains the sub-folders.
The folder field would appear as a combo box on the Edit tab, allowing selection from a list of existing sub-folders, or creation of a new one.
When the master collection is opened, it will show Notes stored directly in the master folder, plus Notes stored in sub-folders.
The values of the folder field will be populated with the actual sub-folder names.
Adding a new folder value will create a new sub-folder; selecting a different folder value will move the Note from its original location to the new one; leaving the folder value blank will indicate that the Note is located in the master folder.
If a sub-folder is opened directly, then it will appear as an ordinary Notenik Collection, with no folder field.
Note Identifiers (normally consisting of the Title field) will need to be unique across all included folders; that is, the same Title cannot be repeated across subfolders.
Does all of this make sense? Does it sound useful? Do you seen any potential problems?
Looking forward to hearing thoughts from @rkp135 as well as from the rest of the community.
This sounds great and very much along the lines of what I had in mind. I would just add that it would be useful to have one or more Collection sort options based on the sub-folder .
This will also lead to a very convenient organizational tool. Say you have a bunch of notes in a Collection and you want to organize them quickly. You can then create sub-folders and move notes to the appropriate one. One can still view them in the main collection, but they will be sorted according to sub-folder.
I look forward to playing with this when you have a beta!
Loved the folder/sub-folder idea. This would also be very useful for those who share their folder with non-Notenik users. For the non-Notenik user, current flat structure could make the shared folder not so ideal for sorting, finding etc.
The values of the folder field will be populated with the actual sub-folder names.
I would like to have an option to edit folder field value to sort those folders in Notenik the way I want them to be, not based on their actual names in Finder. Or maybe a folder sequence field…
This is such an obstacle for dummies like me. I hope that you mean “file name” and not “note title.”
I know that when I create new notes I rarely use the same title, so what’s the problem? Recently I’ve been doing something similar to @rkp135, using Notenik to manage a group of tasks that I manage on a recurrent schedule. I start by opening my “People” collection or my “Jobs” collection. Each has a lookback link to the “work notes” collection where I keep my notes about the time spent on what I am doing. I click on the last of the links to open the “work notes” collection and duplicate the note. That saves me from having to enter a lot of information, I simply modify the date/time, and serendipitously, my notes from the previous section are in front of me. And, magically, the note gets a unique file name based on date. Would this type of workflow remain possible?
Liking the sound of this. Just trying to picture how it might work in practice…
Would it be the master collection’s template that is applied to all sub-collections? Or would / could the sub-collections have their own in addition?