Notation: expository articles

One of the things I think about a lot is notation for making
calculations and investigations more reliable and productive. One of
my pet hates is articles that attempt to define some brilliant new
notation but just present definitions without actually giving any
examples of calculations. Obviously I recognise page limits and
annoying editors, but this
article doesn't do more than define things, without showing how
they can be useful. (Institutional subscription cookie might be required.)

[Update: the article is actually one of a long series, with the latter half actually doing some very interesting calculations in the diagram notation.]

In contrast, Predrag
Cvitanovic's book on Group Theory (which I'm still slowly working
through in off hours) does actually demonstrate some calculations. I
still can't help wondering why this is so rare though.

Constraints

I'm a computer vision researcher with various other mathematical and computer related interests. This blog is basically just me thinking aloud. I'm going to spell out the rules I'll be (hopefully) imposing on myself.

1. I'll only post about technical topics, possibly occasionally extending to rants or humour about technical issues. Nothing from me on politics, ethics or morals on this blog. Likewise nothing about my personal life.
2. There's no guarantee of regular posts. I realise this makes the blog less viable in linkage terms, but I doubt I'll achieve anything like regular posts.
3. I don't have time to spend ages deleting comment spam, so if leaving comments open causes issues they may be closed. Likewise, I reserve the right to act despotically in deleting comments.
4. Since this is thinking aloud, I won't apply the same standards I do to more formal publications. In particular, spelling mistakes and mathematical typos are bound to crop up occasionally.

Well, that's the agenda.