The finding/removing duplicates feature has a lot of flexibility in how one finds and removes duplicates, but it is not very streamlined for efficient and quick use. A situation that often arises for me is I need to merge a colleague's .xml file with my BE library while I am working on a manuscript or research proposal. In many cases, we will have duplicate refs down to the attached pdf file. When this happens, I usually do not want to delete my original reference since I probably have an edited pdf file that I don't want to lose. Since I typically will not want to keep the duplicate reference from the colleague even if it has the pdf while my original ref does not, it would be nice if we could default BE to mark the latter added duplicate for deletion. This would be a real time saver when we just want to quickly import refs and get rid of the duplicates that are newer as quickly as possible.
Mark
Feature request-removing duplicates
Re: Feature request-removing duplicates
Sorry, I may have misspoke in my post above. I was just working with a colleagues .xml file that was generated by Mendeley. Unfortunately, the paper clip icon is shown with many of the refs in the BE library, however, there is no attachment for many of these refs. I've probably created bigger problems for myself now.
Re: Feature request-removing duplicates
The logic of the automatic marking of dups to remove is given in the user guide:
"If two references are duplicates, the one with fewer attachments is removed. If the number of attachments is of the same, the one that has less information in Notes is removed. If the Notes are the same, the reference that does not belong to a static group is removed. If all of these conditions are the same, the reference that appears earlier in the library (i.e. has a lower sequential number) is removed."
Note that you can also click on the manual remove dups, in which case you see (and can change) all the ones that were marked. The reference number (not id) will reflect the order of addition (i.e. reference number 1000 was added after reference number 999). So you can make sure Bookends deletes the newer one.
As for missing attachments after a merge, if the XML file properly identifies the full path name, Bookends should find it. If it doesn't, you might try putting the attachment in the default attachments folder.
Jon
Sonny Software
"If two references are duplicates, the one with fewer attachments is removed. If the number of attachments is of the same, the one that has less information in Notes is removed. If the Notes are the same, the reference that does not belong to a static group is removed. If all of these conditions are the same, the reference that appears earlier in the library (i.e. has a lower sequential number) is removed."
Note that you can also click on the manual remove dups, in which case you see (and can change) all the ones that were marked. The reference number (not id) will reflect the order of addition (i.e. reference number 1000 was added after reference number 999). So you can make sure Bookends deletes the newer one.
As for missing attachments after a merge, if the XML file properly identifies the full path name, Bookends should find it. If it doesn't, you might try putting the attachment in the default attachments folder.
Jon
Sonny Software
Re: Feature request-removing duplicates
Thanks Jon,
Of the 20 references from the imported file that indicate an attachment, only 3 of them appear to point to the attachment correctly sitting in my Bookends attachment folder. I don't quite follow your last sentence about putting the attachment in the default attachments folder. How can I do this if Bookends cannot find it to begin with? I keep all of my attachments in my BE attachments folder that sits inside of DropBox, but the find and attach local PDF function always yields too many options for me to wade through.
It would seem that the Mendeley xml export dos not play nicely with Bookends.
Of the 20 references from the imported file that indicate an attachment, only 3 of them appear to point to the attachment correctly sitting in my Bookends attachment folder. I don't quite follow your last sentence about putting the attachment in the default attachments folder. How can I do this if Bookends cannot find it to begin with? I keep all of my attachments in my BE attachments folder that sits inside of DropBox, but the find and attach local PDF function always yields too many options for me to wade through.
It would seem that the Mendeley xml export dos not play nicely with Bookends.
Re: Feature request-removing duplicates
Bookends only stores the *name* of the attachment. It does not store paths for each attachment. It stores the names of folders (paths) that attachments have been placed in, and looks in those when it's looking up a file.
So if the XML file you imported has the wrong attachment name Bookends won't find it. If it has a pathname that is incorrect Bookends won't find it.
It's not clear what you are doing (you should follow up off-forum to tech support), but if the name of the file is correct (you can check that) and the file is in the default attachment folder, Bookends will find it.
Jon
Sonny Software
So if the XML file you imported has the wrong attachment name Bookends won't find it. If it has a pathname that is incorrect Bookends won't find it.
It's not clear what you are doing (you should follow up off-forum to tech support), but if the name of the file is correct (you can check that) and the file is in the default attachment folder, Bookends will find it.
Jon
Sonny Software