I have written a few times about Luhmann's Zettelkasten and how it can be reproduced it without reverting to keywords as the main means for connections, for this does not seem to me very "Luhmannian." He relied on direct connections between different entries. This can be easily reproduced with other programs, like Notetab and Softfile. Other programs, like Jot+ Notes, which allows easy linking to existing topics by enclosing them in square brackets, can do this too. But I have never seriously used such a scheme. The upkeep would be just too laborious and links can easily be deleted inadvertently. It would just not be worth the effort.
A personal wiki, like ConnectedText, is, I am convinced, a much better means of reproducing Luhmann's main idea, just because it relies on direct links and makes continuations and branchings of topics very easy. Since it is based on a database, the user does not even need to be aware of the unique identification number of each of the topics. The program takes care of this.
But I have been wondering whether the decisions one has to make in thinking about the numbers has a cognitive advantage. In the paper-based system one had to decide when it was best to continue a series of topics, when it was best to branch off, and when one should start an entirely new series of topics. And after one had created many topics, one had a strong visual indication of where different clusters of concern had formed. The numbers gave rise to a "map" of the topics.
So, I thought about re-creating such a map in Connectedtext. The result was this: Making ordered lists with ConnectedText. I have a hunch that it will allow me to recognize clusters of topics in an easer way than otherwise possible. But I don't know whether this is true. It may not add anything of value to wiki-notetaking, but I will try it out with a smaller project (and report back at some point).