@neil nice one. Outbound links or inbound or both? A second layer graph (the notes connecting to the notes connecting to the note in focus) I find is often more valuable, the old adagium of you don't hear much news from your closest connections, but from their connections.
@ton Inbound and outbound - I could show the direction arrows on the graph.
Ah really good point - I can also change the distance to 2 to see neighbours of neighbours.
However... After the enthusiasm of hacking yesterday, I'm wondering how useful a graph view actually is on my public garden.
I can view it locally already within my tools for my own sense-making. I'm not quite sure how much utility it adds to others browsing my wiki.
@neil yes, most valuable personally I agree. Yet a graph that only shows the first layer of surrounding nodes does not add new info: links are apparent from the note in focus as the visible links in the text (except maybe inbound ones). Showing the links to/from links to/from the note in focus gives a sense of the neighbourhood so to speak imo
@neil yes. I see the 2 and 3 distances as the weak ties around a note, and imo usually the origin of associative jumps and emerging connections. Seeing them visually is a diff experience from clicking those same paths back and forth in texts. It's how The Brain https://www.thebrain.com/ (which I used as my primary desktop in the late 90s) shows connections while navigating your stuff.
Ton's personal Mastodon instance