I took a look at JabRef. It certainly looks like a useful program. It looks substantively pretty similar to Pybliographic. There are clearly some differences (e.g., JabRef seems to have more built in tools for querying various online bibliographic databases), but there may be further significant differences that are not immediately obvious.
Being bibtex-centered is fine, because I need my bibtex database anyway for TeXing up papers. This could use JabRef or Pybliographic. If I developed a system of naming for files, I could presumably create a new field in the bibtex entry for each paper giving the paper location, and put in abstract information. I could tag things either in the keywords field or, again, by adding an additional field. That sort of setup would not be entirely ideal, but it would probably be acceptable. I'm getting a lot of intriguing thoughts here (clearly I asked the right group), and I'll certainly check out Zotero to see if it would be a better solution. I did read about the lawsuit on Slashdot, but I'm not going to worry about that too much yet as long as it looks like I'd be able to get most of my data back out in a format other software could understand. Thanks, Nick Mehmet Atif Ergun wrote: > Hi, > > I happily use JabRef to have my database organized and searchable. All > papers, articles, readings, whatever are stored in one directory, and > all their information are stored in JabRef entries. > > However, JabRef is very bibtex-centered and seem no to allow indexing > of file attachments (to entries), so Zotero (Firefox add-on) might be > a better choice for you. Zotero does exactly what you are looking for > by allowing for tags and in-file searches for all entries. > > Mehmet. > > Note: Zotero got sued by EndNote recently, so download a copy now just > in case... > > On Wed, Oct 1, 2008 at 2:08 PM, Nick Cummings <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> For a while I've really wanted to have some sort of database that would >> allow me to keep track of papers relevant to my research. Basically, >> right now I just download papers I find that are of interest, and put >> them in a hierarchy of directories by subject. This has a couple of >> problems: 1) It takes time to do the organizing. 2) The subject matter >> of papers is not hierarchical, it's more of a web. 3) There's no easy >> way to store metadata about the paper (e.g., author & title) such that >> it can be browsed through without opening every paper. 4) No convenient >> way to track read/unread status. 5) It's not searchable. I'm hoping >> there's a piece of software one can use on Linux to help with this sort >> of thing, either software specifically for this purpose or one that >> could be adapted without very much work (or much programming >> expertise). Surely some of you bright academics have tried to find a >> solution to this sort of problem before. :-) I'm also open to web >> services for these purposes, my only hesitation is that I may then end >> up with my info locked into it with no possibility to migrate later. >> >> I've come up with some idea for solutions, but none seem all that good: >> 1) I could simply keep a spreadsheet (or text file) with each paper's >> associated information (bibliographic info, read/unread status, >> tags/keywords) and the file name of the paper (if it exists). 2) Try to >> use my BibTeX bibliographic database and Pybliographic GUI to keep track >> of all the info about papers and, again, point to file locations (not >> sure how feasible this is). 3) Hope I can find a URL for the abstract of >> each paper and use del.icio.us to bookmark and tag each one. Make sure >> to put all bibliographic info in the notes section. >> >> Of those, #1 seems like the most plausible solution but far from ideal. >> >> Regards, >> >> Nick >> >> >> > > > >
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
