Without wanting to pre-empt the suggestions (and I value all feedback on this issue), I thought I would add a little to the background and motivation behind the current syncing capability and what I am looking to change in Aeon for the current version.
When I did the integration for version 1, I was aiming at a minimum impact process that left as much of the Scrivener data untouched as possible. For that reason, Aeon only interacted with its own custom metadata fields rather than any existing Scrivener fields (Document notes, synopsis, keywords etc).
Now that I am working on Version 2 as a larger release, everything is on the table. This would range from deeper integration into Scrivener (such as being able to edit the Scrivener notes inside Aeon Timeline) to improvements in Usability and User Interface, which is likely to be re-designed and re-written from scratch anyway.
As one example of UI changes, there may be more interactive ways to perform the linking than the current table-based approach (eg. drag and drop events directly into a representation of the Scrivener binder so they go where you want without the intermediate holding folder).
Some suggestions I have had previously, such as being able to always limit syncing to just the Manuscript/Draft folder will also be looked at.
I'm one of those users!
IMHO, Aeon has some metadata that it would be useful to use in Scrivener on a more structured way. For instance:
- Dates: could be used as a sort column in Scrivener's outline. As dates are stored now (plain strings), they cannot be used as such.
- Aeon tags and Scrivener keywords could be synced to each other, thus avoiding you to duplicate info and help maintain data integrity among both apps.
I've also noticed that splitting or duplicating a document in Scrivener creates two documents with the same Aeon ID, which may introduce a conflict later at sync time. I don't know if this can be fixed easily, but it seemed to be worth to mention.
Just my 2 cents.
Thanks for the comments.
1) I would need to check in the software later, but there may already be an option to use the yyyy-mm-dd format which allows for string-based sorting to be in date order. However, I anticipate being able to address this properly in future.
2) Yes, this makes sense and should be achievable.
3) I will give some thought to the duplicated Aeon ID issue and see if I can work out a good path to fix that problem.
reepicheep wrote:If I'm honest I've a) not tried to integrate Aeon Timeline documents into Scrivener and b) that's because I don't like the description of what happens. It all seems overly complex and convulsed with too many things that have to be "just so". I was put off even trying it. In other words have an integration that is more transparent and simple.
Hi, thanks for the feedback. I agree with you that simplicity needs to be a design goal here. The Scrivener syncing is quite a difficult feature to get right, and at the moment a bit too much of the complexity is passed onto the user to handle rather than being solved via clever design on my part.
I have made significant UI improvements in other areas for Version 2 of Aeon Timeline, and I hope to achieve the same here so that the process itself becomes easier to work with and get right.
If you have specific ideas or suggestions - or even specific points about what in particular put you off - I would like to hear them.