As long as the so-called external tags were displayed, we would have something virtually identical to workspaces. What you call ‘real’ workspaces would differ only in that you would save yourself a top-level tag for some tags. On the other hand the concept of ad hoc workspaces offers possibilities that would not be possible at all in so-called ‘real’ workspaces (different and independent databases).
I’m trying to put forward my best arguments 
You shouldn’t underestimate your users. Every user is familiar with their tag structure and knows which tags they have set. Firstly, they would see the sub-tags of the tag they are focusing on, and secondly, they would be able to deduce that the tags displayed separately are those that are also contained within the notes containing the focused tag. What else are they supposed to think? These are the absolute basics of working with multiple nested tags within a single note. If you really think that needs explaining, what more would you need than presenting the feature in an appropriate manner (e.g. a blog post)?
I know I’m repeating myself, but it’s not an insignificant point when we’re talking about confusion: it would be genuinely confusing to add a tag to a note and not see it appearing in the sidebar. That would need explaining.
That’s indeed horrible to mix them by displaying them sorted alphabetically. And as far as I can summarise the discussion, that was the main reason why some people didn’t want to see the external tags, even though there was no argument against them per se.
This argument is not convincing. The two tags with the same name would be displayed in two separate blocks of tags. As long as you know what the two blocks of tags represent (see above), this causes neither confusion nor is it particularly inconvenient.
The key point, however, is that displaying external tags alone eliminates the need to use duplicate taxonomy. Currently, #work/todo is the only way to display solely work-related to-dos without using the search function in the notes list. However, if the ‘focus on tag’ feature is implemented in such a way that external tags are also displayed, then there is no longer any reason not to simply write #todo in every note.
There are two types of users: those like me, and those who follow a strict notebook-oriented approach and therefore consciously opt for duplicate taxonomies. But if that is the case, then for them the likelihood of tags with the same name is even lower anyway. It is even probable that they do not see any external tags if they follow a rigid notebook based approach.
… just call it "‘smart tag filter” (or maybe add “smart persistent tag filter”), and we’re all settled, afaics 
1 Like
I would prefer „Set as Workspace“ as name rather than“Focus on Tag“ or „Filter by Tag“
I hear you.
But think naming what actually happens (applying tags as global filter) is more straightforward … & minimalistic.
While I see the reasoning path the team has traveled here, and do like the idea of global filters in principal (big fan of globally persistent filter systems!), I also ‘hear’ all the people and arguments of people objecting to the fact that this is a ‘real’ workspace implementation.
So IMO it can be confusing and offputting, even if only to one (substantial) part of user group. As such – as we have seen in this thread – it only creates pathways to unnecessary conceptual, communicative, and ultimately practical confusions.
Then & after all, my comment was really specifically aimed at giving a tactical ‘off-ramp’ for the proposal I deem the conceptually most adequate & elegant: allow persistent global filtering by tag combinations – … a bright proposal which in my perception (and obviously also the perception of the original presenter of that idea) only suffers from an unfortunate labelling as ‘smart folder’, which goes against the grain & walk of ‘the Bear’… 
We completely understand the need, but separate databases come with significant technical drawbacks on our end; they make sync considerably harder and break cross-referencing across your notes.
Bear is designed to be a single unified knowledge base, and that’s not something we’re planning to change for the time being.
1 Like
It’s not about underestimating our users, it’s about designing for a really broad audience. Not everyone has a deliberate tag structure or uses tags with a clear system in mind. The goal is a feature that’s easy to understand and useful regardless of how you organize your notes.
This is actually one of the central questions we’re struggling with: how do you communicate that clearly in the UI? A simple spacer between two identically named tags doesn’t feel like enough.
We’re still looking for the right way to surface “external tags” within the feature, but so far a solution that feels clean and intuitive is proving hard to pin down.
1 Like
What you’re describing is actually something we already have planned, interenally we’re calling it “Saved Searches” and it’s on our roadmap. But it’s a separate feature from what we’re discussing here, which is specifically about isolation, focus, and privacy.
3 Likes
It’s on our list for the future, so stay tuned!
4 Likes
thx @matteo ,
I think I understood the two scenarios floating around.
So, this was aimed particularly at the question of persistent filtering, what you qualify as “isolation” & “focus”.
To hopefully make it clearer:
I understood @Koralfx insertion as not trying to blur the delineation of persistent isolation (“workspace”) and “saved searches” - but to point out that it would be beneficial to use the question of “workspaces” (persistent filters) to reflect upon which paradigm(s) of tag use to support within these “workspace” logics.
As some in this thread have pointed out: real tag use treats them as a system different from arcane and deep branched (buried) folder structures. So, some users at least try to work w/ a “flat” more versatile tag structure which only knows (produces) “separate” work domains by combining tags - and not following only one deep branched “path” (which is effectively & structurally pure folder logic).
So, making “workspaces” work for those who try to keep a lean/versatile tag structure (relying on only shallow tag hierarchies) would actually require ability to “isolate” a user defined set of tags.
So the argument here is not about isolation/focus vs search results; it’s about what logically defines a “workspace” to be isolated, given people have different strategies of using the tag system.
(- and one might add: with a flat tag system in some ways being true to a conscious distancing from replication of folder structures & its logics)
Even in case @Koralfx didn’t men it this way (though I think he did, as it was a dedicated contribution to the threads question), I still would hang on to this specific argumentation.
Which I also think is very much following Bear logic, given its very open tag system.
– In a way, I think it even underlines why I would caution (@Koralfx ) to use the label “smart folders”, at least in this context. Describing the mechanism and wanted outcomes/behaviors leaning on given established terminologies (tags, search, filtering) is the safe way to get to shared understanding & progressive clarification, IMO. I think labels like “smart folders” and “workspaces” if used hastily/ambiguously only lead to misunderstandings and talking crossways here…
… and I’d like to see the best possible solution come out of this!
Just creating some mockups of how I think it would work. I’m in the camp of “Focus on Tag” should mainly focus on the content in the tag, without surfacing content from other tags. Hence, the tag structure should transform into the second level of the tag that was focused, hiding all the other tags away. To indicate what tag is being focused, the Notes label will change to the name of the focused tag. There should be some indicator that this view is temporary (or focused) which I have used dotted lines for, but there is probably a better UI metaphor here.
This achieves the “workspace” feature better, at the cost of adding hierarchy to your tags structure. Of course, as the devs have said, this will be optional, similar to how pinned tags are not forced upon you.
Maybe the only exception to search globally (outside of the focused tag) is to use the global search bar (or add a new ⌥ modifier to the current shortcut). If you select a note outside of the focused tag, it will exit the focused tag mode and open the selected note in the normal view.
1 Like
Love to hear this!! The focus feature seems interesting and I look forward to seeing it play out but saved search is something I personally know I’d use constantly
1 Like
Wow, this information could make a lot of people stay longer with the subscription. Definitely me. 
1 Like
Ah OK, I see now what you’re worried about although I don’t see it as such a big deal. All you really need to understand is that in Bear’s nested tag system a note can contain multiple tags. If am not mistaking that’s something you get quickly. However, you’re right that ideally a feature should be self-explanatory. Here some quick ideas that can stand on their own but can also be combined:
-
The name of the feature should be chosen so as not to give the impression that it is something like a drill-down or zoom-in feature. In this regard “focus-on” is actually a poor choice. I had suggested “Set as workspace”, but “Filter by tag” also gets the point across, even though it sounds a bit technical. “Explore tag” would also be quite nice.
-
Some might reject the following idea but in order to avoid confusion it should not be underestimated. The focused tag should appear as a top-level tag in the sidebar, rather than simply listing its sub-tags. For example: if you focus on the “contracts” tag under #work/contracts/…, the “contracts” tag will then also appear in the sidebar. This makes the filtering function clearer and avoids any misunderstanding that this is a drill-down.
-
Any kind of animation that hints what is going on?
Here rather poor ideas:
-
I wouldn’t like the following idea but perhaps it is a solution after all, given that it helps to improve understanding. The selected tag is not displayed as a top-level tag in the sidebar, instead its sub-tags are listed there. I suspect most people would prefer it that way. Then the external tags could then be displayed under a section header with an explanatory name such as “Related tags”. It could work but doesn’t look good.
-
Would an introductory window when using the feature for the first time be a way of explaining it? Or a help icon or a hover pop up? I strongly suspect however that you’re perfectionists enough to see something like that as an admission that you haven’t done a better job.
Strongly agree, this is the cleanest approach IMHO.
I’d add one small refinement: place the focused tag at the very top of the sidebar for two reasons:
-
Visibility: it won’t get buried if you have many tags in the filtered view
-
Quick access: one click to collapse/expand the whole tree
This would be especially useful for those of us who use few root tags with deep nesting. Right now I’m imagining subtags scattered across the sidebar. Having them all neatly under a collapsible, top-level parent would feel much tidier.
If I could add one request to the focused tag feature, it would be that Bear would automatically remember the focus tag, even after closing out of the app completely. It would be nice if I could open the app without getting hit with all of my notes at once.
2 Likes
On the whole, I totally love this idea, for the reasons you’ve already stated (it’s natural, works with the existing tag system, and has nice benefits that come from tagging [vs folders] such as a note being able to appear under multiple tags).
This would be incredibly beneficial for me as I use Bear both for my postgrad studies, for general “life” admin stuff, and for my various hobbies.
One thing I’d love to be able to do is have multiple Bear windows open, each scoped to their own top-level tag. That way I can work across multiple Mac desktops (I already tend to have a separate desktop for studying, for example) and have Bear open on both. This would make it a true “workspace” feature rather than just a context-switching feature.
5 Likes
Honestly, I am not reading through the comments…this is just brilliant. Go on and do it! Superb idea.
3 Likes
One thing I just thought of is maybe the capability to switch themes based on the focused tag; It would really helps with context switching.
1 Like
Yes yes and yes please! I proposed something similar to this in the past: Why we need workspaces - #8 by cipher
The one question I have about this requirements for this feature is how does it interact with auto complete? #… and [[… Will these still suggest completions for tags/notes “outside of” the focused tag?