  I used to believe that my conventions for drawing diagrams for categorical
statements could be written down in one page or less, and that the only tricky
part was the technique for reconstructing objects "from their names"... but
then I found out that this is not so.
  This is an attempt to explain, with motivations and examples, all the
conventions behind a certain diagram, called the "Basic Example" in the text.
Once the conventions are understood that diagram becomes a "skeleton" for a
certain lemma related to the Yoneda Lemma, in the sense that both the statement
and the proof of that lemma can be reconstructed from the diagram. The last
sections discuss some simple ways to extend the conventions; we see how to
express in diagrams the ("real") Yoneda Lemma and a corollary of it, how to
define comma categories, and how to formalize the diagram for "geometric
morphism for children".
  People in CT usually only share their ways of visualizing things when their
diagrams cross some threshold of of mathematical relevance - and this usually
happens when they prove new theorems with their diagrams, or when they can show
that their diagrams can translate calculations that used to be huge into things
that are much easier to visualize. The diagrammatic language that I present
here lies below that threshold - and so it is a "private" diagrammatic
language, that I am making public as an attempt to establish a dialogue with
other people who have also created their own private diagrammatic languages.
