Replies: 1 comment 1 reply
-
Yes. There's no reason to do more, especially because the user can add a folder icon (or any other icon of his/her choice) to nodes which he considers to be "organizers". Adding codes to remove features (in this case, the ability to add notes to "organizers") doesn't seem good to me. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
1 reply
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
-
Hey there guys, I came across this project a few days ago and I've been testing it out. So far, I'm liking it. Currently, this project is one of the best alternatives to Onenote. However, a few enhancements could be made to help organize the node tree and improve the overall experience.
The idea is to introduce folders, much like sections in Onenote. Sections help users organize a specific set of pages under a particular theme or label. This mirrors how Onenote manages sections and section groups with a simple yet familiar concept.
With folders, users can create them to separate and organize nodes within the node tree. Currently, something similar can be achieved by making nodes children of another node. However, this method always leaves a parent node empty or without content if the user just desires that to be an organizer node and not a functional node (with content inside).
Implementing this idea would significantly enhance the user experience, and I believe it should be considered for future updates.
Thanks in advance.
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
All reactions