What does HackerNews think of contextualise?
Contextualise is an effective tool particularly suited for organising information-heavy projects and activities consisting of unstructured and widely diverse data and information resources
Contextualise excels at organising information-heavy projects and activities consisting of unstructured and widely diverse data and information resources.
Contextualise is open-source: https://github.com/brettkromkamp/contextualise
It's a MIT-licensed open source project: https://github.com/brettkromkamp/contextualise
I've been working on knowledge graph-related problems (and accompanying applications) for years and Contextualise is probably the most visible component of that work.
Currently, working on my (Python and JavaScript-based) Storyteller project, an interactive 3D storytelling web application based on semantic events: https://brettkromkamp.com/posts/narrative-events/
You can check out an exhaustive list of (personal) knowledge management applications, here: https://github.com/brettkromkamp/awesome-knowledge-managemen...
It's open source: https://github.com/brettkromkamp/contextualise
At a professional level use KGs for educational web services in relation to curricula taxonomies.
With Contextualise, I am really scratching my own itch. That is, I am developing Contextualise for my own needs: I am using the application to structure and document the development of Contextualise itself but also as a tool to organise and document my other hobbies and research projects. Although, as mentioned, I am developing Contextualise for my own needs, I really do hope that other people find it to be useful for their own purposes.
This is a difficult problem. In trying to reduce the noise by choosing who gets to speak, you immediately encounter a number of issues related to gatekeeping. Moreover, filtering by source doesn't directly address what I see as the underlying problem of presenting relevant information to the user.
Competent and aggressive moderation seems to work fairly well for setting a standard of discourse without excluding anyone (HN is a good example here) but it's time consuming. And it doesn't do much of anything to address the problem of filtering for relevant information.
I think conversations themselves (ie actual back-and-forth with meaningful input from all sides) ultimately just don't scale well beyond a small group. Topic specific mailing lists seem to be the least-worst solution to date, and a Facebook group or subreddit is essentially the same thing implemented using a proprietary platform.
It seems like we still lack the models and tooling to address these problems on a fundamental level. Plenty of academic research exists surrounding knowledge graphs, ontologies, and relationships, but in practice all the mainstream tooling that "just works" is restricted to hierarchical folders (and tags if you're lucky). Zotero is very much a least-worst reference management solution in my opinion (I detailed my thoughts in an HN comment sometime within the past year if you're curious). On the literature front we have things like Arxiv Sanity Preserver and Semantic Scholar, but we're still proverbially drowning in new publications. Tools like Memex (https://github.com/WorldBrain/Memex) and Contextualise (https://github.com/brettkromkamp/contextualise) look promising, but aren't (yet?) a complete solution.
I'm probably still a couple of months away from completing the application, so if you need something straight away this would be of no use to you. But, topic mapping in general is something that could be of use to you in this context: https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/previous-versions/aa480048(...