写作与思考2013gingkoapp.com
Gingko：一款树状结构的文档编辑器
Show HN: Gingko, a tree-document editor
导读
这是 Gingko 树状文档编辑器的 Show HN 帖，作者宣称这会成为未来大多数人阅读和写作的新媒介。高赞评论并不买账：树状层级 LaTeX/HTML 早已支持，铺开的空间界面反而让读者难以扫读、丢失上下文，并追问它到底新增了什么。对写作者的价值在于反向提醒——结构上的新奇不等于更好读，线性文本加文字线索往往更高效，宣传新格式前先回答它解决了什么以前做不到的问题。
可以直接用的写作要点
- 01
层级结构不是新发明：LaTeX 的 \section、HTML 的嵌套 <section> 早就能做树状组织，动笔前先想清楚“新形式到底增加了什么”，别为结构而结构。
- 02
读者需要能快速扫读和定位；把所有内容同时铺开会让读者失去上下文，写作与排版时应保留一条清晰的线性阅读路径。
- 03
用文字线索（标题、过渡句、链接）提示结构和重点，通常比用空间位置、视觉布局更高效也更易维护。
- 04
少用“这将改变未来写作方式”式的夸大；先回答“它解决了什么以前做不到的问题”，否则读者只会反感。
HN 评论精选
追问工具是输入还是发布格式、结构如何概念化、是否开源，提醒对“革命性新格式”的浮夸宣传保持警惕。
我很被这个想法吸引，也倾向于正面看待它，甚至愿意忽略“这种新媒介将成为未来大多数人阅读和写作的方式”这种可笑的傲慢。但作为一个从 HN 点进来的人，我有很多困惑，既然开发者在这里推广，不妨请他回答：1）这是输入格式、发布格式，还是阅读器？是否依赖 LaTeX 或 Markdown 这类久经考验的纯文本标记？2）文档系统的概念结构是什么？一张截图说明不了你如何构思文档——内容与输出、输出与阅读器是否分离？3）有部分是开源的吗？是否整合了已有的成熟技术？如果听起来苛刻请见谅，但这个话题很重要，我已经厌倦了那些关于考虑不周的“革命性”新文档格式的花哨展示。
mgualt查看英文原文
I'm certainly drawn to the idea and am inclined positively towards it. I'm even willing to overlook the ridiculous hubris of "This new medium will be the way most text is read and written in the future." However, there are many confusing things to me as a person who arrived at the site through HN. Since one of the developers is promoting the "app" here, it might be useful to hear from him on these points: 1. Is this an input format or is it a publication format, or is it a viewer? Does it rely on a time-tested plaintext markup format like LaTeX or markdown? Perhaps it is a HTML viewer for a LaTeX markup document with special structure, rather than an actual typset web publication format. 2. What is the conceptual structure of the document system? Giving me a screenshot does not show me anything about the way you are conceptualizing your document. Is there a separation of content and output, output and viewer? 3. Is any part of this open source? Are you incorporating any other major technologies which have already been developed? I apologize if any of the above seems harsh, but this is an important topic and I have become slightly tired of seeing flashy presentations about poorly-thought out "revolutionary" new document formats/tools/whatnot.
树状界面让读者难以扫读和保持上下文，且它本质上只是既有层级结构的新排版，必须说清“新增了什么”并考虑无障碍。
希望这个批评有帮助。抱歉，我觉得它很难读。我没法滚动或扫读，一下子面对各种元素，所有东西始终可见，我不知道自己在看什么。我在最底层往下读了一点却没有上下文；点一下才知道自己在哪，但已经跳过中间一堆内容，只好往回滚去找刚才读到哪。这大概是视觉呈现的问题，而非想法本身的硬伤。我折腾半天才发现不是每个节点都有子节点，而这只能靠“点了没反应”来判断（和“本该有反应却没反应”无法区分）。这其实只是给已有的同一套文本结构换了个格式器，所以那种夸张让我反感：\section{标题}、正文、\subsection{子标题}……或者 HTML 的 section 嵌套，不就是这样？为什么需要新东西？增加了什么？以前做不到而现在能做什么？这才是我听到“新的层级文档”时想知道的。还有，屏幕阅读器能读好吗？源码顺序大概会一列一列地读，那讲不通。
IanCal查看英文原文
Hopefully this criticism is helpful. I find this really hard to read, sorry. I can't just scroll through or scan read, and I'm met with a variety of different things all at once. Everything's always visible, so I don't know what I'm looking at. I've scrolled down on the lowest level, and read a bit but have no understanding of the context. Clicking on it makes me realise where I am but I've skipped over a load of stuff in the middle so I'm scrolling back up that to find where I left off... I think this is a visual thing though rather than a major issue with the idea. Fiddling a bit I've only just found that not every node has children, but this this is only indicated by nothing happening (which is identical to something that should happen but doesn't) This is really a different formatter for the same structure of text we've already been using, so the hyperbole is a bit of a turnoff for me. \section{some title} Explanatory text \subsection{subsection title} Sub text etc. Or <section> <h1>heading</h1> <p>Text</p> <section> <h2>heading 2 Why do we need something new? What's being added? What couldn't I do before that's now possible? These are the things I want to know when you tell me you've got a new hierarchical document. Can I already read these well with a screen-reader? The ordering in the source would (I think) read each column individually, which wouldn't make sense. Try loading your viewer without CSS. Imagine a screenreader hitting the massive block of JSON at the bottom of the page. Why is that in the body?
空间化、图形化的文本结构随内容增长而导航成本剧增，文字线索比视觉线索更高效，线性自足的文章更可靠。
首先，恭喜做出一个全新的实验性界面！但我认为“树状或图状组织文本对一般读写有益”这个想法，接近“图形化编程的谬误”。空间布局最终会因三点而失效：(1) 内容增长时，手动导航的难度和取回某段所需的无意识视觉线索数量会指数级上升；(2) 尽管想法似乎以层级形式出现，我们通常并不把文本、代码、故事、记忆或知识想象成视觉图形；(3) 文字性的强调与链接线索比视觉线索更高效、更灵活。维基百科乍看是图状结构文本的正面例子，但那种结构通常不用于主要导航，文章本就期望对有一定背景知识的读者自足。
3rd3查看英文原文
First of all, congratulation for pulling off a new and experimental user interface! However, I believe, the idea that tree- or graph-like structuring of text is beneficial for reading and writing text in general, comes close to the graphical programming fallacy. Eventually, the spatial make-up fails because of the following three reasons: (1) The manual difficulty of navigation and the count of subconscious visual cues necessary for retrieving a passage increase exponentionally as the content grows, (2) altough thoughts do seem to come in hierarchical structures, we usually don’t think of text, code, stories, memories nor knowledge as visual graphs and (3) textual hints for emphasizing and linking text are more efficient and flexible than visual hints. At first glance, Wikipedia seems like an affirmative example for graph-like structured text, but that structure is usually not used for primarily intended navigation. The articles are actually expected to be self-contained for readers with only a fair amount of prior knowledge.
同类还值得读
不要想好再写，要写来思考
Don’t think to write, write to think
这篇短文主张不要把写作当成思考完成后的记录，而要把写作本身当作思考的工具：动笔的过程会逼出想不清楚的地方。
写作与思考2022 · 553 分 · 145 评4 条写作要点编辑精选写作即思考：学会自信地写作
Writing Is Thinking: Learning to Write with Confidence
这是一篇讲“写作即思考”的博客：作者认为写作不是把想好的东西誊写出来，而是借助写作本身把想法想清楚，因此写作者应当建立信心、敢于先写烂稿。
写作与思考2019 · 529 分 · 83 评4 条写作要点编辑精选如何用写作来思考
How to think in writing
这篇文章讨论的是「用写作来思考」：作者认为写作不只是把想清楚的东西表达出来，更是想清楚本身的工具——文字落在纸上，你才有机会看见自己思路里的跳跃、含混和漏洞。
写作与思考2024 · 424 分 · 120 评4 条写作要点编辑精选写作，帮你逃离默认的人生设置
Write to Escape Your Default Setting
文章的核心主张就写在标题里：写作是帮你逃离「默认设置」的手段——日常的思维和表达都有惯性默认的默认模式，而落笔能逼你跳出来，重新看清自己到底在想什么、要说什么。
写作与思考2025 · 407 分 · 93 评4 条写作要点编辑精选写作就是思考
Writing is thinking
文章以“写作即思考”为题，讨论写作不只是把已有想法记录下来，而是帮助澄清、组织和推进思考的过程。
写作与思考2025 · 330 分 · 128 评4 条写作要点编辑精选