Newbie here - apologize if this is talked about somewhere else. I grok the central importance of the index to the JD system - as the analogy to a library card file. And I get the importance of using it to put metadata as to where the actual files reside (e.g., file system, iCloud, hard copy, Dropbox, etc.).
What I’ve not seen and would like comments on is the following. Lets say I’ve set up one ID - call it P01.21.03 - Project=personal, area/category = financial/Bank A. Now suppose I have some files electronic and some hard copy. Would I make two entries in the index for this entry (P01.21.03) indicating some files are electronic (and where) and some are hard copy (and where)? Or would I be better off having two entries (say P01.21.03 and P01.21.04)?
Try tagging your index entry with a note of which locations are in use. In my case, many are tagged Zotero, Obsidian or both if that’s the case.
You could do this. I’d probably just have one note and at the top I’d indicate that I have both hard and soft.
I use Bear, which would look like this. But how you do this isn’t really important as long as you understand what you mean.
In fact when I think about it, two notes is not recommended. The problem is that you find one note, read it, and it says that you have soft copies. But you forget to look for other notes, and so you don’t see the one where you told yourself you have hard copies, and now you’re confused.
One note keeps it simple.
No. A single ID relates to the files, wherever they are, in whatever format.
Thank you. - The one note approach was my first inclination, using the library card catalog analogy which might indicate the same call number in multiple locations.
