Jump to content

Talk:Outliner

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Pombredanne (talk | contribs) at 09:56, 2 June 2010 (raising question about the wiki reference). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Wikis ?

I see this phrase at the beginning of the article: "Mind Mappers and Wikis are related types of software." ... I agree with mind mappers, but not really with wikis... I do not know of a wiki that would offer outliner capabilities. Including this one for a start. wikis do not offer as a typical feature the ability to manage hierarchies neither to expand/collapse them nor to manipulate these trees.

Macintosh outliners

I added two links under the Macintosh only site: Notebook (Circus Ponies) and Notetaker (Aquaminds). Feel free to edit the name, but these are certainly pieces of software that should be included in the list. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.252.102.194 (talk • contribs) 15:37, 16 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

TVO/VMO comparison

TVO is described as a better vim-based outliner than Vim Outliner/VMO. I'm curious about the reason for this. I use VMO a little bit, but am not strongly biased either way. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.217.47.241 (talk • contribs) 03:36, 22 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I am curious about TVO vs VMO as well. The TVO web page (http://bike-nomad.com/vim/vimoutliner.html) was last updated 13 October, 2004 where as the VMO web page has postings as recently as 21 December, 2005. If nothing else, development on VMO seems more recent. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.140.129.155 (talk • contribs) 23:50, 16 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
TVO is a cross-platform solution that requires only Vim to work, while VMO requires a Perl-installation. TVO also has support for the UTL-script, making it easy to hyperlink between different outlines. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.161.213.105 (talk • contribs) 19:59, 17 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Add a reference to Dave Winer?

Suggestion: Perhaps there should be a reference to Dave Winer as well as Doug Engelbart?? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 80.175.204.98 (talk • contribs) 11:58, 30 August 2006 (UTC2)

Agreed! Plus links to his papers on the history of outlining. No? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ftwrks (talk • contribs) 16:45, 28 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Outliner Tools

Commercial interests here, which is almost OK. There's no claim of notoriety, just seems to be a fairly random selection that isn't authoritative, with the list getting long. See WP:NOT advertising. Widefox 11:03, 18 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ayup, the link spam is pretty overwhelming. We're not a web/software directory either... We probably should have articles about actually relevant and notable software. As things are now, it's a minefield for spam. --wwwwolf (barks/growls) 22:36, 21 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

clarify or omit

The commented-out section is either inaccurate or imprecise enough to be confusing. For example:

  • Microsoft Word *does* allow both 'extrinsic' and 'intrinsic' outlines to be exported to other formats (intrinsically as HTML with headers, for example, and extrinsically with stylesheets);
  • jEdit does support View/Edit/Search operations on outline elements (either natively or with plugins);
  • the node-relationship constraints mentioned in this article are supported by both Word and JEdit. dr.ef.tymac 20:47, 16 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Still no outline mode in OpenOffice

Article suggest most word processors have outliner built-in. Alas OpenOffice's Writer is still missing this feature as of Jan 2007 its been Number 3 on the wish list for the last 4 years ([1]). 80.7.195.184 15:05, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've removed a fairly staggering collection of commercial and promotional links that has gathered here over the last year. Please refer to WP:NOT and WP:EL before re-adding any links. If I've removed a link that improves the article and is not simply a vendor link, please start a discussion here. Kuru talk 05:22, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You just rendered the article useless. --The NeveR SLeePiNG 12:23, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I think you have over-interpreted the guidelines. Removing the links without testing the water strikes me as bring heavy-handed. The links to the specific outliners does not conflict with Wikipedia guidelines. While Wikipedia is not, according to guidelines, a directory, the Outliner topic is difficult to understand without examples. Many people have difficulty grasping the nature and possibilities of the topic, and seek examples. The guidelines list circumstances in which lists are advisable. There is nothing spammy about an objective, annotated list of outliners. Outliners have very interesting diversity of GUI's, features, and overall design. It is very interesting and gratifying to compare them. Many of them are free. The Open Directory Project does not have a list of outliners that I could find, and it has several drawbacks that make it troublesome to rely upon as a source for this kind of information (e.g., poor organization, politics, terse and vague annotations, and editors who may ignore public input and allow their topic to go out of date). The list of outliners was not staggaring, it was a useful list that contributed to the article. I found it very useful. The links should be restored. That list appears to have taken a lot of work to create. It even contains historical references that some will find useful. Robert A. Yourell, LMFT 19:08, 7 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Update

I'm visiting almost a year later and no more comments. But thank you (whoever you are) for leaving in these links. They are important to explorers of this form of information organizing. It would be great if a die-hard outliner lover would add some history and some key concepts in using this kind of software. Robert A. Yourell —Preceding comment was added at 09:57, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

They're gone now anyway, and won't be coming back. See WP:NOT#REPO, WP:EL. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 14:19, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
What about one of those "Comparison Of" or "List of" pages a-la the List of personal information managers? MarkTAW 4:31AM March 20, 2009 (UTC)
For anyone else curious, Outliner&oldid=271217873 shows the linklist that was pruned.
I'm going to add a few images to get a least some links to the ones we have articles on, and I agree that a comparison list is a good idea. See the List of mind mapping software and Comparison of e-mail clients for inspiration. -- Quiddity (talk) 08:52, 7 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Weasel Words

Don't you think "Generally Acknowledged" is a bit weasel wordy? How do I add the (bracket)weasel words?(bracket) thing to that? I'd like to see it marked. It seems like we should have sources, not pretend that it is supposedly "generally acknowledged". Just so you know, I agree with the comment, but not with the wording. Ryaxnb (talk) 18:33, 31 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Outliner&oldid=365610948"