Sonny Software

I'm not a programmer, so this might not be feasible, but what about adding a function like "add new text note" to the "inspector" window? That way, in addition to viewing links and current attachments, the inspector window could act as a very simple "note card." Any new text notes would be added right into the current attachments file for that reference, OR any determined sub-folder for that reference.

Here, the idea would be that you could have any number of sub-folders attached to the reference (ie a "Notes" sub-folder, a "Quotes" sub-folder, etc.). Then, from within the "inspector" window, you could create a new text card, and then attach that card (file) to either the main reference, or file it within a sub-folder that is attached to the given reference.

I've noticed the inspector window currently does not display files that are stored in an attached folder. So, the inspector would need to be modified to allow for this. Also, to really useful, one would need to be able to effectively search, from within Bookends, the attached text notes/cards.

This is potentially interesting. Perhaps automatically add, to each card, a link to the original reference, or additional metadata. We could then index these cards in applications such as DEVONThink.

Hi,

I think there may be something here (but I'm not exactly sure what). The notion of allowing users to create (and edit) text notes might be useful. I'm not sure if the attachment inspector is the best place (although it makes sense). Why not in the List View lower pane (where attachments are used)?

The new text note would simply be a text file (it might automatically receive the name Bookends would ordinarily assign an attachment plus the word " note"

Adams & Smith 2004 note

This would automatically be placed in the default attachments folder. Perhaps is a dedicated subfolder called "Bookends Notes"? You can already use Spotlight in Bookends to search for references with attachments that match in the default subfolder.

This would mean that all notes would be in the same default folder subfolder. Alternatively, Bookends could display the usual attachment dialog and let you put it anywhere.

The comment about adding a link from the "card" to the original reference makes no sense in this scenario, because it's not a "card", just a text file that can be opened in any text editing app.

What are your thoughts?

Jon
Sonny Software

Jon,
I think a lot of what you've said sounds great. Here's some of my thoughts:

I think there may be something here (but I'm not exactly sure what). The notion of allowing users to create (and edit) text notes might be useful.

I think one of the biggest benefits is that something like this would allow Bookends to become a little more functional as a stand alone bibliographic & note-taking app., and that might just fit the real needs of some, if not many, users. Sure, a lot of Bookends users use BE with DevonThink (or similar apps). However, some of us do not, and don't really want to add another app to our workflow--at least at this time. In any case, for those who don't need all the functionality of a DT-type app, Bookends would be the only reference/note-taking app they would need. Yet, for those users who do need a DT (or for those who eventually do, but don't just yet), what you've mentioned would still allow for the notes taken in BE to be indexed or copied to DT. In short, individuals like homeschoolers, undergrad students, or users with more modest needs could start collecting and taking notes on references in Bookends, and might never need anything else. Yet, if they eventually did, then they could "upgrade" or "graduate" to include something like DevonThink into their research workflow.

I'm not sure if the attachment inspector is the best place (although it makes sense). Why not in the List View lower pane (where attachments are used)?

Sounds great to me. I was just playing around with the inspector earlier today and noticed that attachments show up in a hierarchy, and then thought to myself, "hmmm . . . what if . . ." .

The new text note would simply be a text file (it might automatically receive the name Bookends would ordinarily assign an attachment plus the word " note"

Something like that sounds good, too. I would say, it would be good to be able to modify that identifier (ie. be able to manually change it to end with "quote" "Key Point" or whatever).

Or, even better, if you're thinking about adding some kind of pop-up menu item, down where those other menu items are, at the bottom of the list view, you might just as well be able to add some kind of user-identifiable choices. Kind of like how a user can add a new source name in the Preferences, but here a user could add a new kind of "card" or "note card" name.

Additionally, maybe when a new type of card is created, a default folder for that type of card is created as a sub-folder for that reference (kind of an expansion on what you mention below). Thus, just as in the Preferences there are several pre-named reference types, and some user-namable reference types, there might, too, under the Preferences be a tab for "note cards" with one pre-named "notes," and a few more options that could be named whatever the user desires. Then, if/when the user actually creates one of the various types of "note cards" Bookends would pick up the name of that type of note card and create a sub-folder for that reference with that name (ie. "Adams & Smith 2004 notes" or "Adams & Smith 2004 quotes" or whatever). Finally, whenever the user created an additional "note" or "quote" or whatever for which that type of note card has already been created, the additional "note" or "quote" or whatever would be automatically filed in the correct corresponding sub-folder.

Regarding the note cards being automatically appended like you mentioned (ie Adams & Smith 2004 note), would it be possible to make successive text notes to be additionally appended with a number and ordered as such (ie Adams & Smith 2004 note1; Adams & Smith 2004 note2; ect)?

This would automatically be placed in the default attachments folder. Perhaps is a dedicated subfolder called "Bookends Notes"? You can already use Spotlight in Bookends to search for references with attachments that match in the default subfolder.

This would mean that all notes would be in the same default folder subfolder. Alternatively, Bookends could display the usual attachment dialog and let you put it anywhere.

All that sounds Great!

The comment about adding a link from the "card" to the original reference makes no sense in this scenario, because it's not a "card", just a text file that can be opened in any text editing app.

I think the files being just text files works great. Again, if someone really needs the power of a DevonThink (now, or in the future) they can upgrade to DT, either index or copy the sub-folders and text files created in Bookends to DT, and use the existing functionality within BE to link to DT. Also, as MetaData becomes more refined, something might be able to be added then, but for now, for simple--but effective and usable--reference management and reference note-taking, I think simple text files and simple folder hierarchies would be great!

What are your thoughts?

Well, that's my 2 cents worth. Again, I don't know if any or all of this is feasible. But, it sounds like the functionality is nearly there, and if so, then BE could become a simple, one-stop reference management and note-taking app!

Thanks for listening, and for seriously being open to dialogue with your users. I don't know what your personal story and background is, and I don't have a lot of dealings with software folks, but I'm being honest when I say you're just about the best software tech/developer I've run across. Your attitude toward, and responsiveness to, your users is very impressive! And I'm sure I'm not the only one who believes that.

Blessings,
Tony

Tony Higgins wrote:Something like that sounds good, too. I would say, it would be good to be able to modify that identifier (ie. be able to manually change it to end with "quote" "Key Point" or whatever).

Hi,

If the usual attachment window comes up, you'll have the chance to rename it before completing the attachment process.

Additionally, maybe when a new type of card is created, a default folder for that type of card is created as a sub-folder for that reference (kind of an expansion on what you mention below). Thus, just as in the Preferences there are several pre-named reference types, and some user-namable reference types, there might, too, under the Preferences be a tab for "note cards" with one pre-named "notes," and a few more options that could be named whatever the user desires. Then, if/when the user actually creates one of the various types of "note cards" Bookends would pick up the name of that type of note card and create a sub-folder for that reference with that name (ie. "Adams & Smith 2004 notes" or "Adams & Smith 2004 quotes" or whatever). Finally, whenever the user created an additional "note" or "quote" or whatever for which that type of note card has already been created, the additional "note" or "quote" or whatever would be automatically filed in the correct corresponding sub-folder.

Yes, but the attachment dialog obviates that (you can select an existing folder or create a new one for this attachment).

Regarding the note cards being automatically appended like you mentioned (ie Adams & Smith 2004 note), would it be possible to make successive text notes to be additionally appended with a number and ordered as such (ie Adams & Smith 2004 note1; Adams & Smith 2004 note2; ect)?

You can name that yourself. If Bookends finds a duplicate name (they're not allowed) it will append a random number to it.

Well, that's my 2 cents worth. Again, I don't know if any or all of this is feasible. But, it sounds like the functionality is nearly there, and if so, then BE could become a simple, one-stop reference management and note-taking app!

Very good. If anyelse else who thinks this would be useful (or not), please let us know.

And thanks for the kind words.

Jon
Sonny Software

This is really just thinking aloud, but a minimalist (ish) implementation of the ideas in this thread would simply(?) entail adding a number of extra Notes fields, e.g. Notes 2, Notes 3, and so on. If users were able to set up templates for these in Preferences (perhaps adding bullets and sub-headings in lieu of real sub-fields) this would get pretty close to what is being suggested here. But I suppose Jon's idea of using attachments with citation info plus note1/note2 etc. makes more sense, and I assume would be preferable in terms of not adding unwanted complexity to the database structure. I think in this case the dedicated Bookends Notes subfolder makes most sense.

A note about Jon's comment about adding a link from the "card" to the original reference not making any sense in this latter scenario: I'm not sure that's true. I understand that every Note file would belong to a reference in the database, and that it would be very easy to find all the Notes files that pertained to any given reference. But the Notes files themselves, if they are to be plain text files that could be opened anywhere, would take on a life of their own. It would therefore be quite important to be able to trace them back to the reference from which they were created. So automatic insertion of the Bookends ID or similar would be necessary or at least preferable.

Whichever way it goes, it sounds like this is quite a major step forward.

[I wrote this before seeing Jon's latest post. Apologies if that renders any of this obsolete.]

ricki articulated, far clearer that I have, the rationale for including in the notes a link back to the reference. I suppose the notes would need to be RTF for that to work.
Thanks for being open to this!

Jon,
I just thought of one reason why to put the "note card" functionality in Inspector window versus in the bottom pain in the list view.

If it's in the Inspector window, if you're reading a PDF or other attached document within Bookends, the "note card" would act as a kind of floating "pop-up" window. Basically, you could be reading along, hit the quick keys to activate the note card, quickly jot a note or quote, and keep on reading without missing a beat.

However, if the note card function is in the list view, when your reading a PDF or other attached file and you want to take a note or record a quote, the note-taking flow would not be as fluid. Unless, maybe some other kind of floating window could pop-up with a keyboard shortcut (ie. Command+Option+C).

Blessings,
Tony

I see your point. Let me think about this some more.


Jon
Sonny Software

Actually the discussion about external NOTE files is superfluous as such files can be created in any application and attached to Bookends references already. Alternatively, a clickable URI to any file can be entered (pasted) for example in the notes field. In the latter case the user is free in respect to naming, location, and kind of such file (which includes links to database entries, e.g. DEVONthink or NoteTaker). Implementation of NOTE files as discussed here will restrict the user to plain text, maybe fixed location and naming scheme with the doubtful benefit of being able to edit such NOTE inside of Bookends. If you really want a third method for external plain text NOTES then automatically put the URI in the Notes field so that people get used to this already existing feature and only handle the NOTE through this link. An option click on the link opens the NOTE within the right panel in the list view (limited to plain text files), a standard click opens files in their default application. Bookends should not take responsibility for the location of the file (display a standard file dialog and let the user specify name and path). So you need just one command (in menu, popup buttons, and as shortcut) 'New External NOTE' which opens the standard file dialog to specify name/path. Afterwards Bookends adds the link to the Notes field and switches to the new NOTE tab in the right list view pane. This tab has save and cancel buttons and that is it. External NOTES are manually deleted by the user and not by Bookends. Do not burden the app with user file maintenance crap, maybe use 'command click' to reveal the linked file in the Finder as a convenience feature.

Rudi

Just adding some thoughts here: I generally don't mind using several dedicated apps for tasks if they do 'their thing' really well. So while the idea of BE becoming also a note taking app I wonder if it would not be equally fruitful to focus energy on integrating BE with a note taking app like Slipbox.

Slipbox can already link to the BE reference and if this would work the other way around (looking for the notes linked to one ref in BE from within BE via a command) that would be great. I make the point because Slipbox has all the features needed IMHO (keywords, URL and file linking and flexible searching) that a note taking app would need. I am not sure if all these features could be implemented in "BE with notes" (it would be creating a sort of new app within the app?) and I tend to think it is better to see tighter integration between two different apps than a notes feature that is less developed as is that of SB.

This is just my preference of course, I know many people do like the all-in-one idea, but perhaps a chat between Jon and Markus would be productive

Best,
Gerben

What if notecards work along the lines proposed in the attached screenshot?

Clicking on the X button would plug in a citation in the word processor of choice (e.g. {Polt #122445@17}, or maybe the entire notes content if the user shift-clicks).

Also: I prefer not treating notecards as sort of attachments, but as children objects of the reference. In the provided screenshot, a search such as "Jovellanos and Adam Smith" would highlight the page 9 notecard *even though Jovellanos is not mentioned in the note*. Precisely because the note is not self-contained but depends on the parent reference object, I can then search both Jovellanos (from the reference) and Smith (from the notes) even though only one word is present in the note. Moreover, I'd get the relevant note (as a highlight or filtered selection), not the entire reference with all the note stream, so I don't need to do a second search inside the txt/pdf/note to find the instance.

Double clicking on the notecard would open a Notes tab in the Reference window that also contains the multiple instances of notecards, perhaps following Scrivener's Corkboard idea.

Finally: I don't like the inspector idea because notes are intrinsic to the functionality of a reference program (e.g. Zotero). I want to have the word processor on one side of the screen, the notes on a different window. If I have focus on the WP, then I can't show the inspector. Moreover, what if I have multiple notecards (after all, a notecard doesn't contain many words... that's the concept of a notecard!). I want an easy way to see all my notes altogether and cite from them easily.

My two cents.

It would be great to hear from even more people about this – it is a very intriguing idea! Some things that came to my mind so far:

• Putting the note field in the same window as the attachment field would be counter productive – if it is either in the pane to the right or in a separate window (not an inspector for the reasons given above!) one could read the attached article (i.e. a PDF) and enter notes at the same time.
• For notes to be useful for entering citations/quotes, I would need the possibility to enter italics (otherwise I would have to put tags about italics that exist in the citations – which would be a drag).
• Allowing links (to other entries in the DB but also URIs in general) in notes would be neat.

Despite of all of these great possibilities, I am a bit sceptic too. It will be hard for Bookends to compete with dedicated note taking apps or outliners (I use OmniOutliner for writing excerpts etc.). Adding a substantial note-taking feature to Bookends will make the UI even more complicated, which is a drawback, since Bookends already allows so many things, most of which will only be used by a small part of the user base. Because of that, it might perhaps just suffice to refine Bookends’ interaction with third party apps? (The adding of links was a great step in that direction, and probably there would be other ways in which Bookends could improve its interaction with other apps.)

One example could be the ways in which attachments are accessible right now. Somehow the small inspector and the marginal position of the attachment pane don’t seem to do justice to the great importance that attachments attained in the course of the last years. (In my case, it is usually turned off because it competes with the Formatted view which I always want to see. In addition, my vertical screen estate is too cramped to allow for simultaneous viewing of my list of references and a PDF and I don’t want to drag the horizontal separator up and down each time I want to view an attachment…) Downloading PDFs, managing attached notes, websites, etc. has become at least (!) as central to my everyday Bookends tasks as producing bibliographic output.

Incrementally, the things that I do with Bookends have changed enormously, even though the UI does not seem to have changed that much (which might also be an misperception on my part, because Bookends did change a lot while keeping to its own style when compared to the way many other apps have changed with fancy aqua/iTunesy/cocoaesque UIs.) Others will probably see this differently though!

aechallu wrote:What if notecards work along the lines proposed in the attached screenshot?

I heartily second this motion. Well-said. Exactly what I need.

Kenton

aechallu wrote:What if notecards work along the lines proposed in the attached screenshot?

I also like this! (Down to the nice visual differentiation of using different colors for the note card and keeping to the note card / post-it style that is also used in Apple’s apps and in Adobe Acrobat etc.) Not making notes attachments sounds good insofar as it keeps file clutter down and makes the DB more moveable. The disadvantage is also clear: that you can’t edit them separately etc.

In my view, a tighter and better integrated implementation seems preferable to a looser and more customizable implementation… but this is only a tendency.