So for my paperwork I have a single "pile". Each document gets a unique reference number, it gets filed in alphanumeric order, and I keep a file with the number and every keyword I can think of that might be relevant. When I want something I do a keyword search on the file and that pops out all the related documents references, along with the other keywords so I can decide if it's actually relevant.
I'm doing a similar thing with texts, snippets, photos, PDFs, etc. I put everything in a wiki, migrate things freely, but retain with everything a reference number, and in an index file, a list of reference numbers with their keywords. To start with it felt like an effort, but it has paid off time and time again. Things tend to migrate to meet up with their friends, but the index means things are easy to find.
Search is fast, but having things migrate and cluster creates the opportunity for coincidences and serendipity to play a role.
Embrace, adapt, enhance, and do what works for you.
And have backups. Multiple backups. And test your restore process regularly.
So, what does your file structure in your home look like?
Are you now basically dumping everything into this wiki and you reference files by a number system?
If you mean physical files, such as letters, books, and paper documentation, I have a filing cabinet and things are simply stored by giving them a reference number, and then filed in that order. Then in a reference index in the wiki I put a single line with the reference number followed by all the tags I might want to use to find that document. I use everything I can think of here, because it costs effectively nothing to have as many tags as I choose.
If you mean files on a computer then I don't know what you might mean by "in your home." I store snippets, etc., in pages in a wiki, and each item is either obviously already searchable, or has some tags associated with it as a comment of some description. Large files such as PDFs, raw radar data files, downloads of book drafts, etc., are given a sensible name and assigned a reference number. Where they are stored in the computer's filing system depends on a whim, but usually they go in a structure xx/zz/yy/filename where the xx:yy:zz are the initial six characters of the reference number. Then again, it's indexed, one line containing the reference number, filename, and tags. It doesn't matter if it moves because I can always find it by filename with a "locate" search (if I'm running locate) or just by a find command.
> Are you now basically dumping everything into this wiki and you reference files by a number system?
Pretty much, yes. I find that having a routine stops me from having to think about how and where I put things. I just follow the routine blindly, and it's flexible eough that I can find things when I want them. More, the fact that things can be moved about, taking their reference with them, means things end up clustering without very much extra effort.
- Area (area of focus /context)
- Contact
- Group (e.g. an organisation or group of people)
- Message
- Target (a 'task')
- Event (something that was undertaken, to move a target towards completion)
- Item (tangible or intangible)
- Reference (a piece of information)
- Location
- Template (something repeatable to provide repeatable structure or considerations to another entity type)
- Argument (an argument, reasoning, statement, claim etc).
- Resolution (a resolution to be made / an agreement that is met / a contract, committment or promise)
- Statistic
- Rule (triggers and automation for the above entities - e.g. 'apply template x to create target y every thurs @ 9am')
All of the entity types can have many-many relationships with any other entity.
Therefore, for example: I could look up a target in my system called 'Deploy helpdesk module' - I can see when the due date is, what the hold date is ("hide this entity until X"), what the notes are, what the status is etc.
- I can see all of the 'sub-targets' - I.e. there is an unlimited nesting of tasks.
- I can see that it is linked to my 'Service Delivery' area, which is a child of my 'Business' area.
- I can see that I have added 2 completed events to it (showing what I have done so far)
- I can see what relevant locations are linked to it (and why).
- I can see what groups are linked to it (in this case, the primary 'Group' is the client that I am developing the module for)
- I can see what relevant items (e.g. tools) are linked to the target. For example, relevant online platforms (and credentials) are an example of an item.
- I can see all references attached to the target (For example, my personal considerations list / best practices for helpdesk modules, or perhaps ITIL reference information pertinent to Service Operations.)
- I can see all relevant Resolutions (in this case, it is the agreement I have made with my client to develop and deploy the helpdesk module)
- etc.
I believe that the above is more accurately representative of 'correct' entity theory than any software currently provides. I am currently using a complex spreadsheet. I have courted most productivity/task/project/time platforms.
The closest application ever available (that I am aware of) to this functionality was IQTELL (defunct) - And only as it was heavily customizable.
I have therefore resorted to developing my own application - I hired a remote team to assist me. It's for my own personal use, but I am considering opening up to other users in the future.
In my opinion, Todoist and other productivity platforms (either corporate or personal) are vastly immature, and tend to completely miss most functionality/scope/correct entity theory - We simply have so far to go here. I wish this space was 10 years more advanced than it is.