[smeej]

I just use Logseq and put double brackets around my key terms. Whenever I need to revisit a topic, I can quickly review what I've a already learned about it, when, and what else it was connected to.

My understanding is that Obsidian is pretty similar? The point of my PKM isn't to turn my notes into shipped things. The point of my PKM is that when I do want to work on something, I don't have to repeat all my old mistakes to get back to where I was before, or reinvent all my own wheels.

[item007]

Totally get that — that’s a great PKM goal: not “ship from notes”, but “don’t re-derive everything from scratch next time”.

And yes, Logseq/Obsidian-style wikilinks are really good at building that personal context graph. The thing I’m trying to validate isn’t “everyone should convert notes into tasks”, it’s whether there’s a subset of people who also want help with re-entry when they do decide to work on something: resurfacing the few most relevant past notes/links/emails/posts for the current project, in a way that stays lightweight and doesn’t require changing their PKM.

For your workflow, what’s the ideal re-entry experience when you pick up a topic again:

1. a “brief” that consolidates what you previously learned (with links back), or

2. just fast navigation/recall via links and search (no consolidation), or

3. something else entirely?

Details in my HN profile/bio if you’re curious what I’m validating.

[smeej]

At the bottom of each Logseq page, there's a "Linked References" section that just lists every use of that page tag in reverse chronological order. I can collapse any heading if I want. I can review it very quickly and find out what I thought was important last time I was working on that topic. I can also filter by other tags so I can narrow it down to "[[this tag]] and also [[this other tag]]" if my interest is something specific.

Works great for my purposes. Doesn't need any improvement for my use.

[appsoftware]

Obsidian is similar but without the block structure you have to be very specific about linking notes rather than using parent child relationships.

[item007]

Yep, that matches my experience. Logseq’s block tree gives you “structure by default” (parent/child context), so you can get away with being a bit looser with explicit linking. In Obsidian, because the unit is the note (not the block), you often have to be more intentional about creating/maintaining the links and structure.

Out of curiosity: do you find Logseq’s block hierarchy alone is enough for re-entry, or do you still rely heavily on consistent wikilink naming/tags to avoid the “I swear I linked this but used a different term” problem?

Details in my HN profile/bio if you want the angle I’m exploring around minimizing organization overhead while improving re-entry.