I've been using Workflowy for a long time now and appreciated the choice of having a single endlessly nesting list for all your notes. It just makes total sense. All the knowledge is in a tree structure, where each node is in itself a tree and thus categorization and organization is automatically established.
Now I want to move over to Dynalist because of all the features it has that Workflowy is lacking like Markdown and images.
I already love Dynalist. However, I have a hard time understanding the choice of adding folders and documents on top of the tree structure paradigm. I mean, literally folders and documents are trees themselves. Trees on top of trees.
If I have a folder A and a document B and inside the list C, then it is identical to having a top-node A with a sub-node B with a sub-node C. It is exactly the same. Why have such a redundancy? I do not understand what benefits it has, I only see the added complexity and burden of managing a tree on top of trees.
Instead of documents, just have the bookmarks feature. It's all you need. And if you really desperately need a tree on top of a tree, then let us put the bookmarks into folders. But why split the notes into half here half there?
I am heavily tempted to fully ignore the folders and documents, but oh well, I can only share a whole document with someone else. Bummer. Now I am forced to rip apart my structure and move half my nodes from feature-set A (the note tree) to feature-set B (the folder tree) to elevate my document to the boundary level between those two in order to have it shared. Wow.
I only hear positive statements about the folders and documents feature. This baffles me, I surely cannot be the only one having a very hard time with this.
What are your thoughts? Is anyone thinking the same way I do?