Sonny Software

On review, it seems to me that we do NOT need a Vol # field in the drawer except for those references whose Volume field is used for some other data (e.g. the Book Title for a Book Chapter reference). OK?

Jon
Sonny Software

I can't tell this from the screenshots -- Will there be a way to open and close the drawer (where the additional fields are listed) when the header of the reference window is collapsed? Good point. I'll have to add a disclosure triangle on the right edge when the toolbar is collapsed. Jon Sonny Sof...

First, to be clear, the Book Title is just another name for the Volume field for, uh, books. The Vol # is for the number of the volume. BUT, there is nothing that prevents you from putting the volume number in the same field as the volume title if you want to. Bookends doesn't care. Then just leave ...

The only thing that bothers me slightly is the Volume thing, on three different grounds. I may be totally wrong regarding all three, but I guess it won't hurt for Jon to clarify this a bit. First, in Book Chapter the Volume field (which has an embedded Issue field) becomes Book Title. Now, imagine ...

One thing it does do is clutter up the term list for keywords. If attachments are to be left in the keywords field, why not (if possible) exclude them from the keyword term list. I can see no advantage to having them listed in both places. Having them in the Term List does no harm, that I can see (...

I'm using 'User 1' for call numbers. I've rewritten my most used import filters to import this information. Would I need to move the call number data in my existing references into the new field? And would I need to change the import filters too?Sue Yes, that would be advisable. Moving the data in ...

1. Assume that I follow a sentence by at least three references. These are annotated in the text as 1, 2, 3. How is it possible to change this to 1-3? This is standard in all scientific journals that I am aware of. Hi, Yes, it's standard AFAIK too. And Bookends does this for you automatically. If i...

No. For several reasons. First, is would have to be a scrolling field (you can have many attachments per reference). Second, it would break existing attachments. Third, there would be no Term List for attachments. Fourth, I see no advantage. I think attachments in the Keywords field works well. Why ...

They work here. Did you have a new proxy server installed perhaps? Contact support directly at support@sonnysoftware.com for advice.

Jon
Sonny Software

Yes, that's a problem that even a larger button wouldn't solve...the labels are much the same as in EndNote, BTW, except with some abbreviations. And frankly, there is some flexibility here, because different people have different needs, and there are no rigid rules regarding reference information. ...

Hi, You can't customize this. If necessary, Bookends will try to use the first 10 words of the title to create an unambiguous citation. If you have an example where this doesn't work, please send it to me at support@sonnysoftware.com (zip the db first) and tell me why the citation generated is inade...

Thanks, Tom. Of course you are right. They were changed by mistake, and will be changed back to Address and Date.

I have uploaded the revised image for Journal Article.

Jon
Sonny Software

To those following this thread, you might want to see and comment on the new thread, GUI sneak peek.

Jon
Sonny Software

Here are screen snaps of the proposed new reference Types and fields. This will be the last opportunity to comment on this -- once the next version of Bookends is released, it will be difficult to change. So please take this opportunity to examine the layouts in detail. One specific question: does i...

Hi, The way that seems to work for most people is: 1. Unformat the Word doc (remove EN formatting). 2. Import refs into Bookends via XML (that way, the EN record # becomes the Bookends unique ID). 3. Make sure Bookends is set to recognize the citation delimiters (either {} or [], set in Bookends Pre...