One way to navigate the paradox inherent in Prefer linear work products but non-linear working environments: by making non-linear structures available for work-in-progress, you create a release valve for tangential thought—which in turn can free the author to focus on their “primary” line of thinking.
For instance, on a whiteboard or in a notebook, if you’re developing a “main” bulleted list or diagram and something occurs to you that doesn’t quite fit in, you can simply write it off to the side and perhaps drawn an arrow.
Likewise, in a Hypertext Note-writing system, tangential thoughts can always be captured in another note and linked in: Evergreen notes lower the emotional stakes in editing manuscripts. But this benefit isn’t necessarily about building up a well-connected ontology (as described in Evergreen notes should be densely linked); it’s more about maintaining hygiene and attention.
Linear authoring environments like word processors force the author to create bubbles of non-linearity inside their linear work, e.g. by making appendices or colored “stray notes” sections or using Google Comments. These approaches all feel strained and unnatural: Tyranny of formality in interfaces
Per Ted Nelson (source, via Mark Knight):
…the ideas were constantly trying to escape. What is a parenthesis but an idea trying to escape? What is a footnote but an idea that tried — that jumped off the cliff?
Q. In what sense does the treatment of tangential thought in non-linear working environments act like a release valve?
A. Stray thoughts can be usefully captured and related for later attention without interfering with one’s primary focus. ☉
Q. How does the “release value” theory of non-linear writing subvert the usual narrative around hypertext note systems?
A. Maybe the value of non-linear writing isn’t in the future value of the embedded links, but rather that capturing tangential thoughts can help authors focus on their “primary” line of thinking while writing. ☉
Original observation from Nick Barr, 2020-09-25