On 22 May 2008, at 9:38 AM, Simon Spiegel wrote: > >>>> >>>> >>> I know that the template doesn't contain this information – yet. But >>> how about putting the template files and a plist file with the >>> needed >>> information in a package ... Doubleclick it and everything gets >>> installed as it should ... >> > >> Which makes it even more of a hassle for a user to add templates. >> Moreover you'll get questions about what takes preference, and >> reports >> from users saying that their pref settings are ignored. Sorry, I'm >> not >> going into that wasp nest. > > My point is the following: Let's say I create a template for > "incollection". The chances that I will use this template for anything > else but this specific entry type are very small IMO. So if a > mechanism could be established where a template can have a default > entry type I'd only see benefits. This default could always be > overruled by BibDesk preferences we already have, but I see little > potential conflict here. >
It's more a question for the field type (like author or URL fields) than for type info. Note that the template editor accepts templates referring to unknown fields. It can just be rejected when the type of field does not match. > >> The type info is totally separate from the templates, logically and >> in the >> code. I don't see how you could move that with the templates. For >> the >> rest, it sounds like you want a separate document type? That would >> preclude >> easy editing of templates in TextEdit. However, if the template >> editor's >> state could be archived and saved such that they could always be >> reopened, >> maybe it could become the exclusive way to edit templates? > > How it would be technically solved, I don't know. I also wouldn't mind > if it was a bit complicated to create such a template package. I'm > really more thinking about giving users who are not very tech savy a > way to easily use already existing templates. > > simon What I'm saying is that it would make it more difficult for the user to manage templates like this. And no way to change it by hand. Huge, enormous drawback. And I also say that it makes no difference: you still would not be able to use it properly, because the information is embedded in the program, and the program (in a general broad sense) does not know about the template. So the only thing you would gain is that you could open a few more templates in the template editor. That's certainly not worth the cost. Christiaan ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008. http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/ _______________________________________________ Bibdesk-users mailing list Bibdesk-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bibdesk-users
