To respect the "be polite" rule, I just want you to know I use Scrivener for at least ten years, and your amazing software has been my daily companion since we first met. I love Scrivener very much, and using it is a great pleasure, every day ! So, a big thank to you sir ! (and to all the L&L team ofc).
The version 3 has been a huge update, and made its use more and more simple AND powerful, which is an amazing thing in the software development.
My wish of the day could be for the v4, if it implies huge core modifications, but I think that would improve Scrivener A LOT : thinking the core of Scrivener, the behind-the-scenes, the documents and the intra-Scriv links, as a graph database. Each document is linked to other documents through objectified relationships.
- each document seen as an object, adding a new metadata to identify it clearly
- each document can be linked to any other document thanks to as an objectified relationship, and the relationships can be created in the project settings
- you can show a "dynamic" view of the whole graph, and as the corkboard, the scrivenings and the outliner, the "graph" view can be shown to selected documents only (may need to choose between "include" or not the documents linked to the selected documents in the graph)
- templates and objects could be merged (next part of my wish)
And, to avoid making a second post, because I think these two ideas can be related : reforging the templates with two parts :
1st part : a "real" template, with placeholders where to display some variables, mainly some basic tweaks needed because documents are most of the time plain text, sometimes with styles
2nd part : some kind of form, where we note the values of the variables used in the template, so the variables used can be involved in filters and collections
Of course, the template should need a "free text zone" in which the user writes everything (s)he wants, and each instance of the template can also be filled freely, and the placeholders can be modified.
This second whish would allow documents to be objectified, and relationships exposed in the first wish could also be some "special" documents to link two documents.
I'm not sure about the "objectified" word, but in my french brain it's the best work I found to say "make like an object", and of course I talk about object in a development semantic field.
Well this 2 part wish could allow even more flexibility in Scrivener, allowing users to really work on some freeform organization. Thanks for reading me, thanks again for Scrivener, and long live this software !
Cheers from France !