it also requires using my fork of Logseq

Logseq schema

I suggest continuing to use the existing simple syntax convention for relationships to add any grammar. This feels more in line with the outliner DNA of Logseq, as it uses the block hierarchies to encode information, and keeps everything visible in the markdown (rather than in an extra layer of data that only exists within the plugin).

Logseq has a stated goal to build a World Knowledge Graph. Here’s what I think they should build:

Notes

Logseq

Logseq inside Obsidian

These notes are written in Logseq and published using my custom built system for converting Logseq notes to a Hugo website. It’s an experimental system and it has some bugs. But it’s a good space to publish notes exactly the way I write them locally on my system, and experiment with Building a knowledge graph in Logseq. That being said, some Logseq functionality has not been transferred yet to the website form (e.g. page aliases, search). Here’s to having time to improve that one day.

More Thoughts

We already see some of this from the unification of tags and pages in Roam Research and Logseq

The only limit to our structure is the file under the hood. It is a text file.

My proposal for a generic, extensible note “grammar”:

Logseq has the goal to build a world knowledge graph

Logseq’s own json export doesn’t have enough information, so I have to essentially copy the whole edn database and convert that to json

Logseq

I extract the public pages and blocks from Logseq and publish them using hugo. For more details on how this flow works, you can read about how I publish this website.

Uses existing block hierarchy structure already core to Logseq

I’m not sure how Logseq is planning to build their stated World Knowledge Graph, but this seems like a reasonable way to begin letting users add structure to their personal knowledge graphs that could eventually be integrated with other knowledge graphs.

LATER fix current need to wait for Logseq to reindex before Logseq Export works

I write notes in Logseq, which uses a block structure and supports links and backlinks between notes.

We already see some of this from the unification of tags and pages in Roam Research and Logseq

Logseq

Some nice things this system currently supports and brings over from Logseq

This has some similarities to the already richly supported properties in Logseq. I would suggest that making it possible to create rich relationships in line in one’s writing makes a huge difference (when I tried to use properties to do this, I ended up writing a lot of my notes in the properties, making my notes look more like a database table than an outliner or writing tool). I’m happy to discuss this more as I think the difference between this proposed functionality and properties is a subtle but important one.

These notes are written in Logseq and published using my custom built system for converting Logseq notes to a Hugo website. It’s an experimental system and it has some bugs. But it’s a good space to publish notes exactly the way I write them locally on my system, and experiment with Building a knowledge graph in Logseq. That being said, some Logseq functionality has not been transferred yet to the website form (e.g. page aliases, search). Here’s to having time to improve that one day.