newbie on information overload (Mellel + Bookends)

[JohnPaul]

I am a beginning doctoral student and have just recently I've purchased both Mellel and Bookends, and I must admit, I'm on information overload at the moment, considering the manuals for each program are 300+ pages...that's a lot of info to try to digest at once.

My biggest issue for the short term is that I can't seem to get the citation objects that BE inserts into Mellel to be short abbreviations; whenever I type a footnote and then use the Command-Y in BE to insert it into Mellel, what gets inserted isn't some nice brief placeholder like the pdf manuals for both BE and Mellel display in their examples (something like, "Johnson, Biotechnology, #33452"). Instead, the citation object is essentially the full entire bibliographic citation information from BE. Do I have to manually create a shortened form of the citation object every time I put a citation in?

The second issue really bugging me for now might be related to the first, I'm not sure. But I can't for the life of me get page numbers (for individual footnotes) to show up. So if I have a BE-inserted citation object inside a footnote in Mellel, I try to follow the directions for specifying page numbers by adding (for example) a @23-34 immediately after the citation object (no spaces, no punctuation)...but when I scan the document, nothing happens...all I'm left with is a footnote with all of the bibliographic info and then @23-34, rather than the info followed by "pp. 23-34" or anything at all similar.

I realize these are basic things that shouldn't be difficult, but as far as I can tell I'm following the directions given in both the BE and Mellel user guides, but what I'm seeing on my screen isn't matching what these user guides tell me I should be seeing on my screen. If someone could point me in the right direction, I'd appreciate the jump start.

EDIT:

Forgot to mention, related to my first question, I can tell I must be doing something wrong because even when I go in by hand (by double-clicking the citation object) and create my own shorter abbreviation, okay that is fine at first, but if I scan the Mellel document and then later unscan, my shortened form disappears and what reappears in the citation box (and as the citation object in the Mellel document) is the whole big long bibliographic entry.

[Jon]

My biggest issue for the short term is that I can't seem to get the citation objects that BE inserts into Mellel to be short abbreviations; whenever I type a footnote and then use the Command-Y in BE to insert it into Mellel, what gets inserted isn't some nice brief placeholder like the pdf manuals for both BE and Mellel display in their examples (something like, "Johnson, Biotechnology, #33452"). Instead, the citation object is essentially the full entire bibliographic citation information from BE. Do I have to manually create a shortened form of the citation object every time I put a citation in?

Hi,

You probably changed the setting (in preferences) from Cite By Author/Date/Unique ID to a format. Change it back and you'll get something "Johnson, 2001, #33452"

The second issue really bugging me for now might be related to the first, I'm not sure. But I can't for the life of me get page numbers (for individual footnotes) to show up. So if I have a BE-inserted citation object inside a footnote in Mellel, I try to follow the directions for specifying page numbers by adding (for example) a @23-34 immediately after the citation object (no spaces, no punctuation)...but when I scan the document, nothing happens...all I'm left with is a footnote with all of the bibliographic info and then @23-34, rather than the info followed by "pp. 23-34" or anything at all similar.

You have to double-click on the citation object and add the @23-34 at the end of the citation. If it's outside the citation object, Mellel will consider it plain text.

Jon
Sonny Software

[JohnPaul]

Okay, a partial success!

I had indeed messed up that option in the Preferences, switching it now gives me the citation object w/ Unique ID as I was hoping. So that part is all fixed.

As for the page numbering, realizing I have to edit the citation object was a big help, I can now get the proper page number(s) listed at the end of the footnote, which is good. However, it has created two new (though lesser) problems, both when citing a journal article. This is in Turabian format, btw.

1. The first is that the first time I cite the article, if I append a page range ("@23-24" type of thing) to that citation, then after the document scans, I am left with some funky formatting in the footnote. So for example, I get the first line (below) instead of what I would want, which would be the second.

John Doe, "Why Unicorns Prefer Carrots," Journal of Mythical Biology, 23 (1999):, 23-34.
instead of
John Doe, "Why Unicorns Prefer Carrots," Journal of Mythical Biology, 23 (1999): 23-34.

I realize this is something I need to adjust within the Formats Manager, my problem is I don't know how to tell it that if there isn't a specific page range appended to this particular footnote, to print the entire page range whereas if there is a page range appended for the citation, to "cut out" that comma between the colon and the appended page range. Clearly the program is smart enough to realize that if I am citing just a particular page range, it shouldn't print the entire page range first (e.g. if this unicorns article ran from page 20-50, then clearly it's realizing the footnote should not say, "... 23 (1999): 20-50, 23-34". But I can't figure out how to tell it to not only drop the page range, but drop the comma preceding the page range also.

If it helps, this is what is currently listed in the Formats Manager for Turabian, Journal Article, "Primary Order" box:
a, “t,” f, v $no. $i (d): p-`.`

Thanks for your help getting me going, and for you (or anyone else) helping me with this too.

[Jon]

Hm, I think that's ( the :,) is something I'll have to take care of in the code. You'll see it in the next udpate.

Jon
Sonny Software

[JohnPaul]

Okay thanks. I've heard from others the quality of support from you guys is A+++, and from the little I've seen that's certainly the case.