Positional and Tactical chess

I see the terms tossed around a lot, and am a very tactical player, trying to become a better positional player. I have a hard time understanding positional chess without tactics in the mix. What exactly is the balance between the two and some positional fundamentals I could learn? The site here has a tactics trainer. But there's no "positional" trainer other than chess lessons to the best of my understanding. What's the thought process involved with positional chess and how does it differ from tactical chess?

Go through Chessbase or PGN databases following your favorite players or even amateurs and analyze the games. Note strategic ideas and what each move accomplishes or neglects; eg, creating a weakness. To me, planning and positional play go hand in hand.

I guess this could be seen as chess.com's "positional trainer":

https://www.chess.com/lessons/courses/search?keyword=positional

Well, there are (almost) always tactics in the mix. Just like there's strategy in the mix when calculating a tactic. For example you probably wouldn't go out of your way to win a pawn really early in the opening when your opponent gets all his pieces developed because you'd just know that it's unsafe.

The biggest difference between the two is like that. It's a feeling or just knowing without needing to calculate. Endgame knowledge improves positional play this way. As an easy example in an IQP position it's well known that heavy piece endings like Q+R vs Q+R is very difficult for the side with the IQP (and sometimes losing). So in the middlegame the side with the IQP tends to avoid a lot of minor piece trades. This isn't something they realize through calculation, but understanding the long term potential of the position.

Other than pawn structure, another static advantage is control over key squares (like dark squares, a key file, key diagonal, etc). In this case it often mixes with tactical ideas. For example opening lines against the enemy king. Not because you calculated mate, or calculated anything, but you just know that it will be useful.

Positional fundamentals are things like pawn structure, space, king safety. There are also more dynamic elements to positional play like exchange sacrifices and initiative.

There is a very informative page of "Positional Motifs" here: https://chesstempo.com/positional-motifs.html though it doesn't tell you much of what to do when you identify them. Still, being able to identify them helps you get to the next level.

Otherwise, here are a few books I like a lot:

The 2nd chapter of GM's Keres' and Kotov's The Art of the Middlegame is a 50-page masterpiece by Kotov called "Strategy and Tactics of Attack on the King" that are the best 50 pages I've ever read on evaluating a position.  For example, it not only tells you that you should attack the enemy King with Pawns when you castle on opposite sides, it tells you how to determine if it is to your advantage to castle opposite your opponent.  The rest of the book has a lot of positional stuff that's worthwhile.

Next, Fred Wilson's Simple Attacking Plans, a relatively short 173 page chess book, is a good exposition on his four straightforward principles including, "Whenever possible, point all your pieces at your opponent's king." It's done through 37 example games.

Finally, there's Jeremy Silman's masterpiece, How To Reassess Your Chess, 4th Ed. (400+ pages of instruction, 200+ pages of detailed problem answers and indexes) which teaches a system of identifying imbalances, then looking for tactics or key-square control that gives you an advantage where you are strong or prevents you from being weak.

It also lists a bunch of rules of thumb that are easy to remember like, in general: A N on ranks 1-3 are weaker than a B, a N on rank 4 is equal to a B, a N on rank 5 is stronger than a B, a N on rank 6 is devastating, a N on ranks 7-8 are weaker than rank 6 and vary greatly in strength.