Bibliographic workflow within scrivener...

User avatar
Posts: 4369
Joined: Fri Feb 02, 2007 5:22 pm
Platform: Mac

Fri Mar 30, 2018 5:11 am Post

Randall Lee Reetz wrote:Asking for the integration of writing with bibliographic research IN NO WAY suggests that the bibliographic research done in the context of one project would not be available to a writer/researcher in while writing another project.

How? Are you visualizing a separate cross-project database as a substrate under your hypothetical writing tool? And how does that mesh with the fundamental goal of making each individual Scrivener project self-contained?

Scrivener Support Team

User avatar
Posts: 2974
Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 4:24 pm
Platform: Mac + iOS
Location: Sweden 64° N

Fri Mar 30, 2018 6:03 am Post

Randall Lee Reetz wrote:And again, Responses that have zero to do with what I am saying or suggesting..

Maybe we simply don’t understand the genius in what you are suggesting, being stuck in Byzantine ways of thinking. How about showing us? Why don’t you simply write the software you envision? :)
I am a user, writing non-fiction and science, using:
* Mac Scrivener 3 on a Macbook 12”, MacBook Pro 13”, and iMac 27”, all running the latest MacOS
* iOS Scrivener 1 on an iPhone 8, iPad Air 9.7”, and iPad Pro 12.9”, all running the latest iOS

Posts: 382
Joined: Mon Aug 11, 2008 9:58 pm

Fri Mar 30, 2018 9:20 am Post

In general, if you want help it’s best not to insult the people who are trying to help you.

You still haven’t specified what you would like to do, so people are just taking best guesses.

Posts: 16
Joined: Sun Jul 20, 2014 2:08 am
Platform: Mac

Mon Feb 11, 2019 5:10 am Post

Microsoft Word now has a simple bibliography system built in. So it fits the “integrated,” but it is weak in every other respect. 

Groups (academics, open source software etc) seem to come up with about one new “system to do everything for researchers” every year. Often they are specialized to a particular field, e.g. biology. Many of these are mentioned somewhere on these Literature& Latte forums, e.g. software based on “zetelkausen (?) method.”

All software involves compromises. Occasionally, someone or some group comes up with a way to rethink basic tradeoffs that solves multiple issues. Those people start companies which are eventually bought out, and they often become rich. 

It sounds like the OP has never written out design specs for what he has in mind. Once he does, he can probably find something to do 80% of what he wants. 
We all want a magical system that requires no wasted effort. And instead we all juggle our needs, and spend inordinate amounts of time looking at new software with the dream  it will be a better fit to our own (not fully known!) needs.