Keywords: home improvement project, project folder, folder system, multiple project, multiple file, multiple house, quickly capture, journal file, devonthink, replication, end, method. Powered by TextRank.
In the digital age, the amount of accumulated information is astonishing. Twenty years ago, if you wanted to keep a copy of all your communications, receipts, and other records, you would need a dedicated archival room filled with filing cabinets. Today, all of that fits comfortably on a personal computer.
For me, I enjoy reflecting on the past. This might involve looking up a simple fact to satisfy my curiosity or revisiting a solution I implemented long ago. Keeping detailed records is also helpful for end-of-year performance reviews. Personally, I find journaling and tracking project details invaluable. When preparing for behavioral interview questions, it's essential to reflect on past projects and interactions with teammates—and having those experiences documented saves a lot of effort. Whatever your reasons, capturing, documenting, and archiving your life is a habit worth developing.
As your collection grows, accessibility becomes a challenge. There are many systems to manage this chaos, but the right solution is highly personal. Everyone interacts with their data differently, which is why it's crucial to customize a system to match your workflow. Most tools—whether it's Evernote or a plain text editor enhanced with CLI tools—can handle 99% of the job. I wouldn't recommend overanalyzing software options, as the tools themselves aren't the bottleneck.
I want to briefly share the system I designed, using DEVONthink, and explain why it works for me. It's a simple framework influenced by the PARA method.
This is the main outline:
The key idea is that I need documents within context, right in the location or project where I might need to refer to them. Often, this means that the same file needs to appear in multiple locations. A traditional folder system can't easily accommodate this, as it relies on a strict hierarchy. You need to use symbolic links or in DEVONthink terminology "replication".
Let's say I'm planning to replace the doors in my house. I've already completed several home improvement projects this year, and I want to review what I've accomplished and how much I've spent. Here's how I organize this project in my system:
Home improvement is an ongoing activity, not a one-time project so it's too big to be a project and qualifies as a resource. I created a folder in the resources section for home improvement. My folder structure looks like this:
+ 00 Projects - 01 Resources - ... Home improvement - ...... 2023-01 Fence repair + 03 Archive + 04 Store
(+) represents a collapsed folder, (-) represents an expanded folder.
So, let's say I'm ready to start my door replacement project and want to collect quotes. This means I need to create a project folder specifically for it.
- 00 Projects - ... 2023-04 Door replacement - 01 Resources - ... Home improvement - ...... 2023-01 Fence repair + 03 Archive + 04 Store
I got two quotes from vendor A and B and I'll file them in the project. I may need to reference these for future projects so I'll save the originals in the Store under respective vendors and replicate them to the project folder.
Here's the updated folder structure:
- 00 Projects - ... 2023-04 Door replacement - ...... Vendor A (r) - ...... Vendor B (r) - 01 Resources - ... Home improvement - ...... 2023-01 Fence repair + 03 Archive - 04 Store - ... Vendor A - ... Vendor B
Notice how the original quotes are stored under each vendor in Store and replicated to the project folder using (r) to indicate replication. This way, I maintain a clean and organized archive while still having quick access to the relevant documents within the project folder.
Sometimes, it's helpful to add metadata to organize your data better and make querying or grouping easier. The best way I've found for this kind of lightweight annotation is by using tags.
Let's revisit the previous example. Imagine we had multiple houses, and we wanted to quickly view all home improvement reports for House A. One option would be to introduce additional folders to group related projects, then replicate each project into the appropriate folder (e.g., House A, House B). However, a simpler approach is to use tags, such as HouseA or HouseB.
Replication and tagging serve similar purposes—they both allow you to organize and access data flexibly across multiple contexts. I think of them as two sides of the same coin. For my workflow, I use replication as my primary indexing method because I find it easier to visually process replicated items within folders. Meanwhile, I use tags as a secondary indexing key for situations where I need to apply additional context or quickly filter across broader categories.
Managing documents you didn't create is straightforward—you have the document, and you just need to file it. But when it comes to notes that you create, the question becomes: How granular should my notes be? Should I maintain one giant file with all my journal entries, using a level 1 heading for each day and subheadings for specific events? Or should I keep a separate file for each day?
I've experimented with both approaches. If you follow the Zettelkasten method, which emphasizes linking small, atomic notes into a hyperlinked graph, then you'll want to keep your notes granular—many small files with individual pieces of information. However, since DEVONthink doesn't support linking to specific headings within a single note, you're limited to using multiple files to maintain the necessary connections.
Personally, I'm not a big fan of hyperlinking between individual notes. Instead, I prefer to link to containers of notes, giving me easy access to the full content when needed. Because of this, I lean toward larger files that group multiple entries. For example, rather than creating a new file for each journal entry, I keep one journal file with entries for all days, structured with headings and timestamps for easy navigation.
I chose DEVONthink to manage my data because of the powerful features it offers on both macOS and iOS. The replication feature is essential for my system to function effectively. Here's a list of the features I rely on the most:
And the list goes on…
For the functionality it provides, I believe it's well worth the $100 for the macOS version and $15 for the iOS app.
1264 words
Powered by TF-IDF/Cosine similarity
First published on 2024-04-07
Generated on 13 Dec 2024 at 12:12 AM
Mobile optimized version. Desktop version.