Re: [Bibdesk-users] differentiating multiple files
"is/is not" is not possible, as that doesn't make sense for multiple linked files. For AppleScript, Finder should be sufficient. And I wouldn't know how to do it anyway (and nobody on the applescript-implementors list can or wants to tell me either). Christiaan On Jan 17, 2008 8:07 PM, Alexander H. Montgomery <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > That's pretty slick-looking. > > If the underlying representation is categorical, is/is not with a > selector for color would be fine. > > [On a totally different note, has anyone thought about nested boolean > logic for smart groups (a la the 10.5 finder)?] > > AppleScript would be convenient as well, but it's pretty easy just to > access the finder directly, so that's unnecessary, e.g., > > tell application "BibDesk" >set thePubs to the selection of document 1 >repeat with thePub in thePubs >set linkFile2 to linked file 2 of thePub >tell application "Finder" >set theFile to linkFile2 as alias >set the label index of theFile to 2 -- red >end tell >end repeat > end tell > > ...sets the label of the second linked file of selected publications > to red. > > On 2008-01-17, at 10:32 AM, Christiaan Hofman wrote: > > > To come back to this, now that we have support for Finder labels in > > the recent nightlies. What smart group support for this would be > > useful? > > > > Note that currently you can add smart groups based on the number of > > linked files/URLs. > > > > Christiaan > > > > On 8 Jan 2008, at 5:35 AM, Alexander H. Montgomery wrote: > > > >> 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 > > > > > > > - > > This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft > > Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008. > > http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse012070mrt/direct/01/ > > ___ > > Bibdesk-users mailing list > > Bibdesk-users@lists.sourceforge.net > > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bibdesk-users > > > > > - > This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft > Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008. > http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse012070mrt/direct/01/ > ___ > Bibdesk-users mailing list > Bibdesk-users@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bibdesk-users > - This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008. http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse012070mrt/direct/01/___ Bibdesk-users mailing list Bibdesk-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bibdesk-users
Re: [Bibdesk-users] differentiating multiple files
That's pretty slick-looking. If the underlying representation is categorical, is/is not with a selector for color would be fine. [On a totally different note, has anyone thought about nested boolean logic for smart groups (a la the 10.5 finder)?] AppleScript would be convenient as well, but it's pretty easy just to access the finder directly, so that's unnecessary, e.g., tell application "BibDesk" set thePubs to the selection of document 1 repeat with thePub in thePubs set linkFile2 to linked file 2 of thePub tell application "Finder" set theFile to linkFile2 as alias set the label index of theFile to 2 -- red end tell end repeat end tell ...sets the label of the second linked file of selected publications to red. On 2008-01-17, at 10:32 AM, Christiaan Hofman wrote: > To come back to this, now that we have support for Finder labels in > the recent nightlies. What smart group support for this would be > useful? > > Note that currently you can add smart groups based on the number of > linked files/URLs. > > Christiaan > > On 8 Jan 2008, at 5:35 AM, Alexander H. Montgomery wrote: > >> 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 > > > - > This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft > Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008. > http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse012070mrt/direct/01/ > ___ > Bibdesk-users mailing list > Bibdesk-users@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bibdesk-users > - This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008. http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse012070mrt/direct/01/ ___ Bibdesk-users mailing list Bibdesk-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bibdesk-users
Re: [Bibdesk-users] differentiating multiple files
To come back to this, now that we have support for Finder labels in the recent nightlies. What smart group support for this would be useful? Note that currently you can add smart groups based on the number of linked files/URLs. Christiaan On 8 Jan 2008, at 5:35 AM, Alexander H. Montgomery wrote: > 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 - This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008. http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse012070mrt/direct/01/ ___ Bibdesk-users mailing list Bibdesk-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bibdesk-users
Re: [Bibdesk-users] differentiating multiple files
On Jan 7, 2008, at 11:04 PM, Adam R. Maxwell wrote: > On Jan 7, 2008, at 8:35 PM, Alexander H. Montgomery wrote: > >> 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). > > Thanks, that's a pretty important distinction! I hacked some trivial > Finder label support in, but it'll be disabled until after the next > release (if it ever does make it in) since it has the potential to > kill performance. It'll take some work to make it aesthetically > pleasing, also. If it helps at all, Finder labels will be displayed in the next build and settable via the context menu. -- adam - 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
Re: [Bibdesk-users] differentiating multiple files
On Friday, January 11, 2008, at 02:07PM, "James Harrison" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >On Jan 11, 2008, at 4:23 PM, Alexander H. Montgomery wrote: > >> Ah, I see, they're ordered horizontally, not >> vertically (I had a narrow window such that they were vertical, so I >> thought dragging the second pub above the first would move it. Turns >> out you drag it to the *left* of the first pub. > >Now, wouldn't this more intuitive if one could display the file icons >in a horizontal row in the bottom pane and show the preview or details >text on the right side? > >:) Probably. Let's see what the response is after 1.3.13 is released this evening before opening that can of worms again... -- adam - 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
Re: [Bibdesk-users] differentiating multiple files
On Jan 11, 2008, at 4:23 PM, Alexander H. Montgomery wrote: > Ah, I see, they're ordered horizontally, not > vertically (I had a narrow window such that they were vertical, so I > thought dragging the second pub above the first would move it. Turns > out you drag it to the *left* of the first pub. Now, wouldn't this more intuitive if one could display the file icons in a horizontal row in the bottom pane and show the preview or details text on the right side? :) Jim Harrison UVa - 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
Re: [Bibdesk-users] differentiating multiple files
On Friday, January 11, 2008, at 01:23PM, "Alexander H. Montgomery" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >On 2008-01-08, at 3:55 PM, Adam R. Maxwell wrote: > >> Hopefully you know that you can drag files to rearrange them >> currently, and the order will be preserved? That's sort of tedious, >> but you can probably script it as well. > >Really? I don't see this in the latest nightly. Dragging vertically >doesn't seem to rearrange. > > Ah, I see, they're ordered horizontally, not >vertically (I had a narrow window such that they were vertical, so I >thought dragging the second pub above the first would move it. Turns >out you drag it to the *left* of the first pub. Yeah, if you widen the view or shrink the icons so you have multiple columns, this is more intuitive. Remember it's an iPhoto-style grid layout. - 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
Re: [Bibdesk-users] differentiating multiple files
On 2008-01-08, at 3:55 PM, Adam R. Maxwell wrote: > Hopefully you know that you can drag files to rearrange them > currently, and the order will be preserved? That's sort of tedious, > but you can probably script it as well. Really? I don't see this in the latest nightly. Dragging vertically doesn't seem to rearrange. Ah, I see, they're ordered horizontally, not vertically (I had a narrow window such that they were vertical, so I thought dragging the second pub above the first would move it. Turns out you drag it to the *left* of the first pub. -AHM - 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
Re: [Bibdesk-users] differentiating multiple files
On Jan 11, 2008 7:08 PM, Christiaan Hofman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On 11 Jan 2008, at 6:46 PM, Adam R. Maxwell wrote: > > > > > On Friday, January 11, 2008, at 09:29AM, "Christiaan Hofman" > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> > >> On 8 Jan 2008, at 5:35 AM, Alexander H. Montgomery wrote: > >> > >>> 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. > >>> > >> > >> I don't think tags for local files can ever be scriptable. Linked > >> files in AppleScripts are just file objects (which are nothing but > >> URLs). > > > > Unless we added a tag property that was stored in BibDesk, within > > the link blob (so not a Finder tag)? That would only work if the > > linked file objects aren't destroyed/recreated from a URL, and it > > wouldn't be visible to other apps. > > > > No, my remark is more fundamental about scripting support. The object > returned for scripting is nothing but a bare URL. It has no knowledge > of anything in BibDesk. It is also virtually impossible to define > properties for those built-in types (at least, I haven't got a clue > how to do it, certainly not using Cocoa). > > Of course it could have been done differently, but that requires an extra layer of objects, which is annoying for scripting. E.g., you couldn't pass the object to Finder or in any other way use it as an ordinary file objects. You'd have to do something like 'file of linked file 1', which is weird. And also 'linked files contains aFile' would not work. Christiaan - 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
Re: [Bibdesk-users] differentiating multiple files
On 11 Jan 2008, at 6:46 PM, Adam R. Maxwell wrote: > > On Friday, January 11, 2008, at 09:29AM, "Christiaan Hofman" > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> On 8 Jan 2008, at 5:35 AM, Alexander H. Montgomery wrote: >> >>> 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. >>> >> >> I don't think tags for local files can ever be scriptable. Linked >> files in AppleScripts are just file objects (which are nothing but >> URLs). > > Unless we added a tag property that was stored in BibDesk, within > the link blob (so not a Finder tag)? That would only work if the > linked file objects aren't destroyed/recreated from a URL, and it > wouldn't be visible to other apps. > No, my remark is more fundamental about scripting support. The object returned for scripting is nothing but a bare URL. It has no knowledge of anything in BibDesk. It is also virtually impossible to define properties for those built-in types (at least, I haven't got a clue how to do it, certainly not using Cocoa). > If we allow get/set Finder label (not sure how hard that would be), > you could get the files and query Finder for the label. Definitely > not in 1.3.13, though :). > > -- > adam Getting Finder label from a file is possible, yes. Christiaan - 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
Re: [Bibdesk-users] differentiating multiple files
On Friday, January 11, 2008, at 09:29AM, "Christiaan Hofman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >On 8 Jan 2008, at 5:35 AM, Alexander H. Montgomery wrote: > >> 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. >> > >I don't think tags for local files can ever be scriptable. Linked >files in AppleScripts are just file objects (which are nothing but >URLs). Unless we added a tag property that was stored in BibDesk, within the link blob (so not a Finder tag)? That would only work if the linked file objects aren't destroyed/recreated from a URL, and it wouldn't be visible to other apps. If we allow get/set Finder label (not sure how hard that would be), you could get the files and query Finder for the label. Definitely not in 1.3.13, though :). -- adam - 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
Re: [Bibdesk-users] differentiating multiple files
On 8 Jan 2008, at 5:35 AM, Alexander H. Montgomery wrote: > 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. > I don't think tags for local files can ever be scriptable. Linked files in AppleScripts are just file objects (which are nothing but URLs). Christiaan > 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 - 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
Re: [Bibdesk-users] differentiating multiple files
On Tuesday, January 08, 2008, at 03:42PM, "Alexander H. Montgomery" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >On 2008-01-07, at 11:04 PM, Adam R. Maxwell wrote: > >> >> On Jan 7, 2008, at 8:35 PM, Alexander H. Montgomery wrote: >> >>> 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). >> >> Thanks, that's a pretty important distinction! I hacked some trivial >> Finder label support in, but it'll be disabled until after the next >> release (if it ever does make it in) since it has the potential to >> kill performance. It'll take some work to make it aesthetically >> pleasing, also. >> >> You'd probably have to AppleScript Finder to get/set those labels, >> even if we do display them. It might be possible to use smart folders >> with Finder labels, but extending them to arbitrary tags would take >> some thought. > >I suppose they could be stored in some bdsk-file-1-attrs field... Yeah, that just gets messy when you start adding too many fields, and then you have to deal with BibTeX limitations. We could add attributes into the alias blob for each field, though...which would allow you to get/set via AS, and sync them between machines without syncing the individual files. Hmmm. >>> 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. >> >> One suggestion is to reserve the first slot for the "actual" PDF. >> This is a drawback of having everything in one bag, but at least it's >> ordered. > >True; a drag-and-drop arrangement interface would work (but wouldn't >distinguish between an entry that had one PDF that was the article and >an entry that had one PDF that was a summmary of something...) Hopefully you know that you can drag files to rearrange them currently, and the order will be preserved? That's sort of tedious, but you can probably script it as well. >> The tagging ideas will probably stay on the back burner for a while. >> I like xattrs and they're fast to read/write, but I'm not sure if it's >> worth the support costs... > >Yes, there seem to be a lot of PEBKAC problems involved with Skim's >use of xattrs (really due to lack of good support for xattrs by Apple). That's what I was thinking of as well :). Apple's support for it is half baked, though they've fixed some of the worst problems in Leopard. Size limits are still unclear. -- adam - 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
Re: [Bibdesk-users] differentiating multiple files
On 2008-01-07, at 11:04 PM, Adam R. Maxwell wrote: > > On Jan 7, 2008, at 8:35 PM, Alexander H. Montgomery wrote: > >> 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). > > Thanks, that's a pretty important distinction! I hacked some trivial > Finder label support in, but it'll be disabled until after the next > release (if it ever does make it in) since it has the potential to > kill performance. It'll take some work to make it aesthetically > pleasing, also. > > You'd probably have to AppleScript Finder to get/set those labels, > even if we do display them. It might be possible to use smart folders > with Finder labels, but extending them to arbitrary tags would take > some thought. I suppose they could be stored in some bdsk-file-1-attrs field... >> 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. > > One suggestion is to reserve the first slot for the "actual" PDF. > This is a drawback of having everything in one bag, but at least it's > ordered. True; a drag-and-drop arrangement interface would work (but wouldn't distinguish between an entry that had one PDF that was the article and an entry that had one PDF that was a summmary of something...) > The tagging ideas will probably stay on the back burner for a while. > I like xattrs and they're fast to read/write, but I'm not sure if it's > worth the support costs... Yes, there seem to be a lot of PEBKAC problems involved with Skim's use of xattrs (really due to lack of good support for xattrs by Apple). -AHM - 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
Re: [Bibdesk-users] differentiating multiple files
On Jan 7, 2008, at 8:35 PM, Alexander H. Montgomery wrote: > 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). Thanks, that's a pretty important distinction! I hacked some trivial Finder label support in, but it'll be disabled until after the next release (if it ever does make it in) since it has the potential to kill performance. It'll take some work to make it aesthetically pleasing, also. You'd probably have to AppleScript Finder to get/set those labels, even if we do display them. It might be possible to use smart folders with Finder labels, but extending them to arbitrary tags would take some thought. > 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. One suggestion is to reserve the first slot for the "actual" PDF. This is a drawback of having everything in one bag, but at least it's ordered. The tagging ideas will probably stay on the back burner for a while. I like xattrs and they're fast to read/write, but I'm not sure if it's worth the support costs... -- adam - 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
Re: [Bibdesk-users] differentiating multiple files
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
[Bibdesk-users] differentiating multiple files
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
