Actually, it's not about *visual* differentiation (which I can do), but differentiation that can, say, be discerned by an AppleScript or a Smart Folder. (For the record, 4938 refs, 3119 single files, and 304 > 1 file).
For example, I put together syllabi with an AppleScript that copies references and PDFs to a separate directory for easy distribution. The AppleScript can't tell the difference between a local file that is the actual PDF and a local file that is a related PDF. But if I could tag the correct local file (or, much easier, tag the incorrect ones!) then an AppleScript or a smart folder could do it. My current smart folders allow me to find articles that don't have PDFs (of the article) easily; the new architecture doesn't. Now, I certainly don't think this needs to be in 1.3.13 (I already have a workaround for my scripts through script hooks: everything added to the local-url field is added automatically as a linked file, and vice versa if local-url isn't yet filled in) I'm partially thinking out loud about how the current metadata-in-a-file support in BibDesk (Skim notes!) could be expanded to include tagging files with other metadata. One way to do it would be to use Finder metadata; another just to store it in xattrs on each PDF. Of course, that might take forever to read in, so it might be easier (faster?) to do it within BibDesk instead. -AHM On 2008-01-07, at 7:57 PM, Derick Fay wrote: > Here are my #s: > 847 total refs. > 1 w 14 files (a complete book) > 1 w 13 files (a complete dissertation) > 1 w 6 files (a complete book) > 1 w 4 files (2 sets reading notes, two articles on the pub.) > 3 w 3 files > 12 w 2 files (all reading notes and text) > 205 w 1 file (a mix of reading notes and texts) > > and the balance with none (but this is largely because I imported 550 > or so items from an old Paradox database -- most will have files > added eventually; likewise many with one will have two). > > Or about 2% with >1 file. > > Looking through the items, I can differentiate each attachment from > the preview image, filename &/or file type (sorry Alex :) ) so it's > not a serious problem for me. > >>>> >> Alex, do you have a lot of references with multiple attachments, or >> is it a small percentage? I generally work with references that >> will have 1 or 2 attachments at most, so I'm interested in hearing >> about problems from others. I'd also like to make sure that it's >> a /real/ problem before solving it :). >> > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- > Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace. > It's the best place to buy or sell services for > just about anything Open Source. > http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;164216239;13503038;w?http://sf.net/marketplace > _______________________________________________ > Bibdesk-users mailing list > Bibdesk-users@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bibdesk-users > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace. It's the best place to buy or sell services for just about anything Open Source. http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;164216239;13503038;w?http://sf.net/marketplace _______________________________________________ Bibdesk-users mailing list Bibdesk-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bibdesk-users
