Note Relationships
Table of Contents
My graph shows extends, contradicts, implements, alternative - not just two notes mentioning the same word.
Key Concept
- Four pair types in
relationshipsfrontmatter show how ideas push and pull - not just that two notes mention each other. - Level 1: Four link types show how ideas build on, fight, carry out, or swap with each other - like signs on roads that say merge, stop, detour, or share lane, not just that two streets cross.
- Level 2: Note relationships use four pair types in frontmatter - extends, contradicts, alternative, implements - to show push and pull.
- Level 3: Relationships frontmatter names how ideas relate - not co-mention, but whether one builds on, fights, or swaps with another.
- Level 4: When you link two notes, pick one relationship type - that edge beats ten tags that only say both notes exist.
- Level 5: Linking by Meaning supplies the edges; typed relationships keep the garden honest when Atomic Notes bump without folder proximity.
- Extends asks what this idea builds on; contradicts names the tradeoff it pushes against.
- Implements names what makes the idea real; alternative names another path that does the job.
Examples
- I am updating the family chore chart and add “feeds into: Saturday yard work” next to “take out trash” plus “conflicts with: bedtime when done late” before I tape it to the fridge.
- The coach's whiteboard lists “feeds into: secondary break” beside each drill - players see how today's reps connect before they leave the gym.
Note Relationships
| Relationship | Wikilink | Reason |
|---|---|---|
| alternative | PARA Method | Body link types vs folder sort when typed links beat project buckets |
| contradicts | Maps of Content | when a hand-curated hub beats typing every edge in frontmatter |
| extends | Link Typing | Generic PKM term for what this page formalizes |
| implements | Linking by Meaning | Typed rows carry vague wikilinks into named push and pull |




