[itohihiyt]

> I think Zim does not really fit into the discussion because it does not rely on easily exchangeable standard software like a file explorer and browsers.

Zim is very much based on the file system. Each note is a text file and if it has attachments or embedded images they go into a folder named after that text note.

Whilst not in markdown the markup used is easy to understand and convert. Zim itself allows you to copy a note to the clipboard in pandoc markdown and export the note to markdown and/or html (though admittedly the styling for html it atrocious).

[Pfeil]

Yes, but you rely on a working installed software. If it is not properly maintained, you will need to switch at some point, and therefore change your current workflow. The assumption here is that file and web browsers will exist for a long time and not only make the data sustainable, but also the way you use it. Some of the other approaches shown in the comments make the browser not only the viewer, but also the tool. I am not saying zim and obsidian are completely different, but the assumption made above is significantly less likely to hold for these tools.

I am not against zim or obsidian. In fact, I currently use plain markdown wit vs code, which boils down to a similar situation. But vs code and its extensions may be gone in a while and then I will have to look what to do.