Zotero integration please!!!

User avatar
Orpheus
Posts: 73
Joined: Thu Jan 05, 2017 3:27 pm
Platform: Mac
Location: Lost in the material world.

Thu Aug 10, 2017 4:04 am Post

nontroppo wrote:
Indeed commercial tools like Scrivener comes with ample warnings about what it can and cannot do. So all software comes with limitations. But it is the case that when something doesn't work right in Bookends or Scrivener, I bug Jon or Keith, and they will fix it or tell me of an alternative route to do what I want. There really is something to be said about a well supported program from a dedicated and passionate developer & support team.



The salient point is not whether it is open source or commercial, it is actually the support provided to make it a working tool. Some open source projects like FireFox go to a lot of effort to make it work. While some commercial products seem like they find customers to be a nuisance. One commercial product that gets rave reviews from its customers is this creator of Dreamweaver extentions http://projectseven.com. I am one of their very satisfied customers. :D

Anyway, now to test drive BookEnds.

User avatar
Orpheus
Posts: 73
Joined: Thu Jan 05, 2017 3:27 pm
Platform: Mac
Location: Lost in the material world.

Fri Aug 11, 2017 6:38 am Post

nontroppo wrote:
Orpheus wrote:I would prefer to be writing than tracking down software bugs. :evil:


Honestly: don't use Zotero. You get what you pay for, and Zotero is free/open source[1]. I do use Zotero to maintain a shared reference list with one collaborator, but it is painful to use compared to Bookends. Bookends was released in 1984(!!!), yet still gets monthly updates by a super supportive developer, Jon. Bookends fully supports extracting annotations from the PDFs it manages — AND you can use Applescript to copy these notes (with citekeys linked to page numbers) directly into Scrivener. It does a thousand other things better than Zotero (managing keyword lists, detailed duplicate management, SQL querying, a very flexible UI, amazing format and import editor, a version for iOS with full sync, including annotations etc. etc. etc.). I see Scrivener and Bookends as critical tools for a fluid academic workflow, and each is carefully crafted by a dedicated paid developer. Most pertinently to this thread, Bookends works flawlessly with Scrivener. Or if you really want to save money, probably take some time off writing, learn to code, and contribute to build a better Zotero...


Installed Bookends. Created a test page with dummy text to place footnotes in. Command Y worked in both programs. I was able to compile it with Scrivener (wrong font came out but that is different problem), and Bookends scanned it quickely but there is absolutely no difference between the original text and the scanned text. All the footnotes are in the footer in curly brackets looking like this:

{Bādarāyaṇa and Baladevavidyābhūṣaṇa, 1979, #53964}
{Bādarāyaṇa and Baladevavidyābhūṣaṇa, 1979, #53964@78-81}
{Valens, 1993, #44863@pp 34-37}
{Valens, 1993, #44863}
{West, 1971, #24995@pp 3-5}
{West, 1971, #24995}
{West, 1971, #24995@9-12}
{Copleston, 1993, #3540}
{Zeller, 1881, #21665}

So is this a problem with Scrivener, or Bookends or MS Word? :? What must I do to make it a flawless experience?

User avatar
Orpheus
Posts: 73
Joined: Thu Jan 05, 2017 3:27 pm
Platform: Mac
Location: Lost in the material world.

Fri Aug 11, 2017 7:29 am Post

Orpheus wrote:
Installed Bookends. Created a test page with dummy text to place footnotes in. Command Y worked in both programs. I was able to compile it with Scrivener (wrong font came out but that is different problem), and Bookends scanned it quickely but there is absolutely no difference between the original text and the scanned text. All the footnotes are in the footer in curly brackets looking like this:

{Bādarāyaṇa and Baladevavidyābhūṣaṇa, 1979, #53964}
{Bādarāyaṇa and Baladevavidyābhūṣaṇa, 1979, #53964@78-81}
{Valens, 1993, #44863@pp 34-37}
{Valens, 1993, #44863}
{West, 1971, #24995@pp 3-5}
{West, 1971, #24995}
{West, 1971, #24995@9-12}
{Copleston, 1993, #3540}
{Zeller, 1881, #21665}

So is this a problem with Scrivener, or Bookends or MS Word? :? What must I do to make it a flawless experience?



Problem solved. When all else fails, read the manual. I was probably making the same mistake in Zotero. :)

User avatar
nontroppo
Posts: 757
Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2007 5:22 pm
Platform: Mac
Location: Airstrip One

Fri Aug 11, 2017 11:56 am Post

Well, the bookends manual is > 400pages so reading it for a quick solution may not always be, um, quick! :P ;-) The Bookends forum is fairly efficient (but low traffic), and Jon often replies within a day.

I can recommend you have a look at some of the Applescripts shared on the forum there, they can provide a really nice addition to the UI. If you use Alfred there are some nice Bookends workflows too. In fact I've been asked by a friend to convert my Applescripts into a workflow which I'll do on her machine sometime soon (I prefer Quicksilver to Alfred), and can share it back.

User avatar
Orpheus
Posts: 73
Joined: Thu Jan 05, 2017 3:27 pm
Platform: Mac
Location: Lost in the material world.

Sun Aug 13, 2017 6:00 am Post

nontroppo wrote:Well, the bookends manual is > 400pages so reading it for a quick solution may not always be, um, quick! :P ;-) The Bookends forum is fairly efficient (but low traffic), and Jon often replies within a day.


It was the 58 page tutorial, considerably smaller. It works but it doesn't have the Citation style I want. It has 4 different versions of Chicago but not the version I want, Chicago 16th edition (note) :( Zotero has it but not Bookends.

Instead of getting this as a footnote

Copleston, A History of Philosophy, Vol. 1.

I get this

Frederick Copleston, A History of Philosophy, Vol. 1: Greece and Rome From the Pre-Socratics to Plotinus (New York: Image, 1993).

And there doesn't seem to be a way of importing styles, at least I haven't found it yet. Will look in documentation to see if I can find anything. Though it does say I can make a custom style based on an existing style. So maybe that would work. But would prefer to just import a working style.




nontroppo wrote:I can recommend you have a look at some of the Applescripts shared on the forum there, they can provide a really nice addition to the UI. If you use Alfred there are some nice Bookends workflows too. In fact I've been asked by a friend to convert my Applescripts into a workflow which I'll do on her machine sometime soon (I prefer Quicksilver to Alfred), and can share it back.


Thank you for that. Once I get the basic workflow going in both programs (having problems with Compile in Scrivener) then I can explore the more powerful aspects of BookEnds.

User avatar
nontroppo
Posts: 757
Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2007 5:22 pm
Platform: Mac
Location: Airstrip One

Sun Aug 13, 2017 9:26 am Post

In Biblio > Formats Manager... — isn't Chicago 16th A the one?

Screen Shot 2017-08-13 at 17.16.43_SMALL.png
Screen Shot 2017-08-13 at 17.16.43_SMALL.png (80.59 KiB) Viewed 379 times


It differentiates between the first and subsequent footnote cite. As far as I can see this is correct according to Chicago 16th documentation on the notes style:

http://www.chicagomanualofstyle.org/too ... guide.html

Nevertheless if you want them to be the same just copy the from "Subsequent" back to "Field order", then you get the simpler citation everywhere. You can easily customise the formats, and the Format Manager is one of the most powerful I've used. As I use Pandoc with Scrivener, I actually don't use Bookends formats any more, but the CSL files that Zotero, Papers and many others use. They are more difficult to edit (mendeley has a clunk editor, otherwise you are hand editing obtuse XML!), and have a different set of limitations. But in my field of study, we don't have difficult bibliographic formatting to worry about...

User avatar
Orpheus
Posts: 73
Joined: Thu Jan 05, 2017 3:27 pm
Platform: Mac
Location: Lost in the material world.

Sun Aug 13, 2017 1:59 pm Post

nontroppo wrote:In Biblio > Formats Manager... — isn't Chicago 16th A the one?


Seems there are more http://www.citethisforme.com/guides/chi ... ite-a-book

What I did is make a new format based on Chicago 16th A and just deleted the unnecessary items. Seems to work so far. Now if I can only figure out how to get ibid to work. I have registered on the Bookends forum just waiting for approval and will hopefully find out what to do there.



nontroppo wrote:Nevertheless if you want them to be the same just copy the from "Subsequent" back to "Field order", then you get the simpler citation everywhere. You can easily customise the formats, and the Format Manager is one of the most powerful I've used. As I use Pandoc with Scrivener, I actually don't use Bookends formats any more, but the CSL files that Zotero, Papers and many others use. They are more difficult to edit (mendeley has a clunk editor, otherwise you are hand editing obtuse XML!), and have a different set of limitations. But in my field of study, we don't have difficult bibliographic formatting to worry about...


I'm not constricted so I can choose what I like. This format gives the essentials without making a mess at the bottom of the page. Why use Pandoc if you are already using BookEnds? What is the advantage?

User avatar
nontroppo
Posts: 757
Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2007 5:22 pm
Platform: Mac
Location: Airstrip One

Sat Aug 19, 2017 1:29 pm Post

Orpheus wrote:Why use Pandoc if you are already using BookEnds? What is the advantage?


Pandoc is a first and foremost a very powerful markdown conversion system with bibliographic support. The trivial answer to your question is that I don't have to manually scan anything, I compile to markdown in Scrivener, and automagically get a fully referenced document in the style of my choice output, no manual fiddling involved. But that only scratches the surface. Say I have a manuscript and one copy is to go to LaTeX and Nature style citations, the other to DOCX and APA. I can specify a front matter document that lets Pandoc generate both documents simultaneously from the same compile. No manual fussing. For Word, Pandoc generate a proper outlined document, with fully styled output and I can give Pandoc a word template with my preferred document/paragraph/character styles and it will use this as the basis to generate the DOCX. And so on, and so forth!

Bookends is still essential to my workflow. It is my second brain where I store and keyword, and manage, and discover the references that are the lifeblood of any academic! It makes it easy to search for, annotate, and clean up my references (standardise author and journal names for example is really great in BE).

User avatar
Orpheus
Posts: 73
Joined: Thu Jan 05, 2017 3:27 pm
Platform: Mac
Location: Lost in the material world.

Sat Aug 19, 2017 2:38 pm Post

nontroppo wrote:
Orpheus wrote:Why use Pandoc if you are already using BookEnds? What is the advantage?


Pandoc is a first and foremost a very powerful markdown conversion system with bibliographic support. The trivial answer to your question is that I don't have to manually scan anything, I compile to markdown in Scrivener, and automagically get a fully referenced document in the style of my choice output, no manual fiddling involved. But that only scratches the surface. Say I have a manuscript and one copy is to go to LaTeX and Nature style citations, the other to DOCX and APA. I can specify a front matter document that lets Pandoc generate both documents simultaneously from the same compile. No manual fussing. For Word, Pandoc generate a proper outlined document, with fully styled output and I can give Pandoc a word template with my preferred document/paragraph/character styles and it will use this as the basis to generate the DOCX. And so on, and so forth!


Are there any videos that teach how to use Pandoc + Scrivener?

User avatar
nontroppo
Posts: 757
Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2007 5:22 pm
Platform: Mac
Location: Airstrip One

Sun Aug 20, 2017 8:21 am Post

I intend to make my scrivener+pandoc tutorial much more comprehensive soon, but I'm waiting for Scrivener 3 to go fully public first.

I don't really like video tutorials, but did find this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N31E_NZYQQY & https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BrZRIU8IHaI

Here are some older written workflows and tutorials:

http://www.larryullman.com/2013/04/10/m ... -yii-book/
https://www.davidsmith.name/2014/05/23/ ... umanities/
http://www.parkerderrington.com/scriven ... t-writing/

User avatar
Orpheus
Posts: 73
Joined: Thu Jan 05, 2017 3:27 pm
Platform: Mac
Location: Lost in the material world.

Sun Aug 20, 2017 11:45 am Post

nontroppo wrote:I intend to make my scrivener+pandoc tutorial much more comprehensive soon, but I'm waiting for Scrivener 3 to go fully public first.

I don't really like video tutorials, but did find this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N31E_NZYQQY & https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BrZRIU8IHaI

Here are some older written workflows and tutorials:

http://www.larryullman.com/2013/04/10/m ... -yii-book/
https://www.davidsmith.name/2014/05/23/ ... umanities/
http://www.parkerderrington.com/scriven ... t-writing/


Thank you for that information I went through it all; the first one on Github looked interesting. However, on further consideration it would be over kill for my needs. I think that at least for now BookEnds and Scrivener should do just fine if I can just figure out why Scrivener is sending out the wrong version of Baskerville to MS Word as I mention here viewtopic.php?f=2&t=39043

However, if my needs ever change I now know where to look. Again, than you for taking the time to point out the possibilities and tools available, it's very much appreciated.

User avatar
Orpheus
Posts: 73
Joined: Thu Jan 05, 2017 3:27 pm
Platform: Mac
Location: Lost in the material world.

Sun Sep 10, 2017 3:18 am Post

:D
nontroppo wrote:
Orpheus wrote:I would prefer to be writing than tracking down software bugs. :evil:


Honestly: don't use Zotero. You get what you pay for, and Zotero is free/open source[1]. I do use Zotero to maintain a shared reference list with one collaborator, but it is painful to use compared to Bookends. Bookends was released in 1984(!!!), yet still gets monthly updates by a super supportive developer, Jon. Bookends fully supports extracting annotations from the PDFs it manages — AND you can use Applescript to copy these notes (with citekeys linked to page numbers) directly into Scrivener. It does a thousand other things better than Zotero (managing keyword lists, detailed duplicate management, SQL querying, a very flexible UI, amazing format and import editor, a version for iOS with full sync, including annotations etc. etc. etc.). I see Scrivener and Bookends as critical tools for a fluid academic workflow, and each is carefully crafted by a dedicated paid developer. Most pertinently to this thread, Bookends works flawlessly with Scrivener. Or if you really want to save money, probably take some time off writing, learn to code, and contribute to build a better Zotero...



Been using BookEnds and so far it works flawlessly as advertised, unlike Zotero. Thank you for pointing me in the right direction. I am a lot more productive now. :D

User avatar
nontroppo
Posts: 757
Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2007 5:22 pm
Platform: Mac
Location: Airstrip One

Sun Sep 10, 2017 7:45 am Post

If you want to be even more productive, you may find my recently released Bookends Tools for Alfred useful:

https://github.com/iandol/bookends-tools

For Scrivener, they package methods to search texts selection in Scrivener directly in Bookends, a tool to create OPML files from selected references you can import into Scrivener Binder and some quick author search interfaces to directly add a citation without switching to Bookends at all.

User avatar
Orpheus
Posts: 73
Joined: Thu Jan 05, 2017 3:27 pm
Platform: Mac
Location: Lost in the material world.

Sun Sep 24, 2017 4:03 am Post

nontroppo wrote:If you want to be even more productive, you may find my recently released Bookends Tools for Alfred useful:

https://github.com/iandol/bookends-tools

For Scrivener, they package methods to search texts selection in Scrivener directly in Bookends, a tool to create OPML files from selected references you can import into Scrivener Binder and some quick author search interfaces to directly add a citation without switching to Bookends at all.



BookEnds on Steriods :D

User avatar
Orpheus
Posts: 73
Joined: Thu Jan 05, 2017 3:27 pm
Platform: Mac
Location: Lost in the material world.

Sun Sep 24, 2017 4:21 am Post

nontroppo wrote:For Bookends, you can use an existing directory to link to your existing PDFs, but it probably will not handle sub-folders. But it does usually work with PDF files directly and not aliases (I think anyway, I haven't tested it). 20,000+ PDFs is a colossal amount :shock:



I found that BookEnds works well with PDFs. You have the option to import a PDF into BookEnds or BookEnds can just link to a PDF in an existing folder no matter how deep it gets into sub-directories. I prefer the latter option. I suppose the former is ok if you only have a small number of documents or you don't mind duplicating. But I have a large number of files that I have organized into topic folders and I prefer to just link to a file in an already existing structure that I understand. I will only link BE's to PDFs on an as-needed basis, not the whole collection.

So it looks like BookEnds is going to be my citation tool of choice to work with Scrivener. Again, that you for pointing me in the right direction and out of the wilderness.