Is there a way to know what collections (or other links) tie to a document I'm editing without doing a search for some inherent text? Or merely, to know whether the document IS linked/collected?
(This would be of use, particularly if my changes take the text in a direction other than its original.)
[Windows 7 Pro; Scriv 1.9.0]
What links to the document I'm editing?
3 posts
Page 1 of 1
Hello dbc,
There's a useful way of doing just that by using custom meta data. Set a custom meta data field up labelled collections and whenever you add a document to a collection ensure you complete what collection it is for in the custom meta data field. Each document would then state if and where it belonged. So when you bring up a document its meta data will state if and what collection it is in. This field can also be added to the outliner, showing you at a glance what document belongs to what collection. Scrivener is the ultimate in customisable ways of doing things, and can be set up just as you want it.
As to your last point, remember that changes to a document are carried through to the document in the collection. They are the same document but referenced from a different place.
There's a useful way of doing just that by using custom meta data. Set a custom meta data field up labelled collections and whenever you add a document to a collection ensure you complete what collection it is for in the custom meta data field. Each document would then state if and where it belonged. So when you bring up a document its meta data will state if and what collection it is in. This field can also be added to the outliner, showing you at a glance what document belongs to what collection. Scrivener is the ultimate in customisable ways of doing things, and can be set up just as you want it.
As to your last point, remember that changes to a document are carried through to the document in the collection. They are the same document but referenced from a different place.
Thanks shass.
My guess is that metadata goes along with any document duplication?
Re ...
My last point was just for the reason you mention: My plan as that routinely, intentionally, occurs (and when I move to a paid Scrivener, whether v1.9.x or waiting for v3.x) is to split the document appropriately into separate, more focused, thought/thread documents and to delink the new digressive document from the 'now' irrelevant collections. (It is not unusual for my thoughts to be found initially applicable to 3, 4, ... 7, 8 spinning wheels.)
... Or to similarly unravel the original document's threads, yet keep them together as sub-documents of some organizing placeholder, linking individual collections to progressively finer, sub-doc considerations.
I had thought to stay away from the metadata (being somewhat pampered by, used to, my current outliner of two decades), but seeing the connected collections via Scrivener's quick synopsis-revealing keystroke has advantages over doing a search for an arbitrary text string every time I tweak a thought. (A keystroke would be nice though, to 'Highlight Linked Collections' -- though back, the metadata might be more apparent once I decide on the desktop layout.
...)
Thanks again.
My guess is that metadata goes along with any document duplication?
Re ...
shass wrote:As to your last point, remember that changes to a document are carried through to the document in the collection. They are the same document but referenced from a different place.
My last point was just for the reason you mention: My plan as that routinely, intentionally, occurs (and when I move to a paid Scrivener, whether v1.9.x or waiting for v3.x) is to split the document appropriately into separate, more focused, thought/thread documents and to delink the new digressive document from the 'now' irrelevant collections. (It is not unusual for my thoughts to be found initially applicable to 3, 4, ... 7, 8 spinning wheels.)
... Or to similarly unravel the original document's threads, yet keep them together as sub-documents of some organizing placeholder, linking individual collections to progressively finer, sub-doc considerations.
I had thought to stay away from the metadata (being somewhat pampered by, used to, my current outliner of two decades), but seeing the connected collections via Scrivener's quick synopsis-revealing keystroke has advantages over doing a search for an arbitrary text string every time I tweak a thought. (A keystroke would be nice though, to 'Highlight Linked Collections' -- though back, the metadata might be more apparent once I decide on the desktop layout.
...)Thanks again.
Page 1 of 1