![]() The issue I was addressing is not that auto-sync would bring potential users to the BE space. The analogy here is saying the more families with children will buy a base-level Ford SUV rather than a base-level Honda SUV when the former would include an automatic, daylight/night-time sensing rear-view mirror rather than a manual one. In this regard, let's also face it that the only productive macOS options for citation management are Mendeley, ReadCube Papers, Bookends, JabRef, and Zotero and that these tools have distinctively different approaches that go well beyond whether the app has automatic sync with a BibTeX file. They will choose one or the other based on considerations that do not always include in-built automation, especially when the manual options that could be automated already are flexible and efficient. Folks in academia (as I am) can tend to be rather particular about their favorite software tools. I find the manual option to export to BibTeX approach works well enough.įinally, I believe the argument that more folks in academia would purchase Bookends if it included an auto-sync option may be stretching the limit of reasoning on why to implement the feature. To counter as one who uses BibTeX, I am not immediately interested in whether Bookends includes an auto-sync option (I think the discussion here BTW is about auto-export, not auto-sync, since the BibTeX file is not "re-imported" back to Bookends if it changes). ![]() JabRef) to do additional checking on the integrity of a Bookends database (referencing the comment from last year). Similar to what has been implemented in Watch Folder.Īt a minimum, I would appreciate any efforts to help avoid that we need to go to outside tools (e.g. What ideas come to mind? My suggestion is that the whole library of references does not need auto-sync necessarily, but a static group one is working with. A lot of people in Academia use LaTeX and/or Markdown, and could potentially buy BE if this feature could be implemented somehow. I suppose the reason for the small number of users is precisely because BE does not offer auto-sync. Since Bookends can export the necessary file on demand, with or without an AppleScript, it's unlikely we would implement such a feature. That adds lots of overhead to benefit a small number of users. I'm guessing (really just a guess) that Mendeley keeps a BibTeX-formatted copy of each reference in the database and writes them to a file with each reference import/edit (which would be much faster, because the formatting has already been already done). Imagine Bookends formatted 1000 references as BibTeX every time you change a comma in a field. It's not possible because, as you say, it's slow. This has been discussed on the forum (several times, I think). But yes, Jabref is an excellent choice especially for LaTeX / Pandoc users otherwise. But, the workflow with bookends overall is better, management of author names is better, global changes are easier, note taking from PDFs more refined, the iOS app is brilliant, and Bookends is much easier to integrate into my workflow, so that the small inconvenience of having to regenerate the bib file is worth it. The options to manage journal abbreviations are brilliant, as is the interface to merge online information into an existing reference. bib file even with thousands of references. bib from Bookends, load it into Jabref to run the report then find refs in Bookends to clean up. ![]() Jabref has some really nice management features, I agree! I actually utilise Jabref to cleanup my Bookends library, the "Check Integrity" tool returns a brilliant "health report" on the state of the database items like duplicate DOIs, malformed journal names, rogue HTML entities and lots of other checks.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |