Sonny Software

Jon et al --

Forgive me if I've missed this is the documentation and forums, but I don't see that Bookends can generate a subject bibliography (organized by keyword, for example). If not currently a capability of the system, is this in queue for implementation in a future version?

Thanks

Hi,

Bookends can't generate a subject bibliography. It's not in our near term plans, and I really can't say beyond that (because I dont know if it's something we would address or not).

Jon
Sonny Software

Jon --

Thanks for the info. I would like to submit this as a feature request: ability to generate a subject bibliography (organized by keyword or other user-defined variables).

Some prospective users--e.g., librarians, archivists, and scholars working on bibliographical studies--will need to generate subject bibliographies with abstracts/notes as discrete products. I've done so using ProCite, and Endnote has this capability. Given Bookends' superior search and management tools, this capability would help to make Bookends the obvious choice for a wider pool of users.

It has been requested before here, under another title.

We'll have to wait...

eleuteruiz wrote:It has been requested before here, under another title.

We'll have to wait...

I'd like to add my voice to those requesting such a feature. The differentiation between not simply subjects or keywords but also primary and secondary sources would be beyond useful for a lot of people.

How would that work? It seems to me you'd have to either create a new Primary and Secondary Type, or use some identifier in a user-defined field that would let Bookends distinguish between them.

Jon
Sonny Software

Jon wrote:How would that work? It seems to me you'd have to either create a new Primary and Secondary Type, or use some identifier in a user-defined field that would let Bookends distinguish between them.

An identifier in a user-defined field, or the ability for Bookends to acknowledge static groups when creating the bibliography? This isn't really an issue on the level of type: although, roughly, you could identify certain groups of types as 'usually' primary or secondary. But it would depend on the context of one's research as to exactly what is identified as a primary or secondary material. So I think that groups would be the way to go, if it were technically possible. Not sure what anyone else thinks!

I think it would be difficult to do based on groups, for several reasons (for one thing, a reference can belong to more than one group). It makes the most sense to do it based on fields, or perhaps on color label (which is kind of like static groups).

Jon
Sonny Software

I don't see how you can define it based on fields.
It could be based on color labels (one record cannot have more than one color, right? Then it is not the same as groups), and/or in reference types.
In any case, it should be possible to choose more than one label/ref type as "primary" or "secondary" (what about "tertiary" or even more?)

There are 10 color labels, so up to 10 different subject types could be defined this way.

Jon
Sonny Software

Hi,

The color labels are very useful for other things, not for this. It would be better to use the keyword field, but add a tool to manage the keywords (for example to design a simple taxonomy). BTW It doesn't matter if a reference is listed under several keywords.

Maarten

Keywords would work in this case if that's all you used them for (primary, secondary, etc.). But if you use them for other things as well they wouldn't do. Defining another field for this purpose would work. But so would defining color labels. I don't see them as mutually exclusive, BTW. You could use a field or labels to create the subject headings, it would be your choice.

Jon
Sonny Software

Definitely, more flexibility (color labels or field, as a choice) would be better, to meet different needs and situations.

Is there any foreseeable news in this feature request?
(I am getting to my deadline... and bibliography is becoming a main point now).

Thank you

Eleuterio

Hi,

I never say that Bookends will have a feature unless I've actually added it in a development build. Since I haven't gotten to it yet, I don't know how easy/hard it will be to do, so I won't commit. I am hard at work on the next major update to Bookends, but I don't have a release date yet. I can tell you that it will address a lot of user requests.

Jon
Sonny Software