On 28 Apr 2008, at 10:27 PM, Adam M. Goldstein wrote:

> On Apr 28, 2008, at 1:28 PM, James Howison wrote:
>
>>
>> On Apr 26, 2008, at 5:36 PM, Andrew Cerniglia wrote:
>>
>>> First, thanks for a wonderful program.
>>>
>>> I did a hour long presentation in my graduate course this past week
>>> demonstrating my use of BibDesk, Skim, LaTeX, VoodooPad and TextMate
>>> ($80 total). The people (5-10 doctoral students and two professors)
>>> were blown away by the quality and power, especially the integration
>>> of BibDesk and Skim.
>>
>> Screencast/Video?  That would be cool.
>>
>>> I have a suggestion, for what it's worth. I am frustrated by the
>>> quality and consistency of the keywords, admittedly author supplied,
>>> that are included with the download of reference information from
>>> online databases. Certainly, it is possible to delete these and
>>> supply
>>> my own. What I would find more useful would be the ability to tag
>>> files using a controlled vocabulary. That it, a user created,
>>> hierarchical list (including synonyms) of keywords.
>>>
>>> I use the same sort of thing to tag photos. For examples, see 
>>> http://www.controlledvocabulary.com/
>>> .
>>
>>
>> There are obviously pros and cons of controlled vocabulary.  The  
>> major
>> one, from the perspective of an open source project, is that
>> maintaining them is administration heavy.  I don't think it's
>> appropriate for BibDesk, or any application, to take on that task.
>>
>> Now if there were a source of a known controlled vocabulary, managed
>> by someone else and available online in a  machine parse-able format,
>> then one could conceivably design a field in BibDesk that would only
>> accept keywords in that vocabulary (and perhaps make cross- 
>> referencing
>> suggestions, depending on the semantic machinery provided by the
>> keyword controlling authority).  Was that more what you had in mind?
>>
>> --J
>
>
> I think it would be nice just to have the ability to create a
> controlled vocabulary for one's self, that is, to have a term list
> independent of the keywords that are entered into the keyword fields.
> Maybe a CSV file could be loaded in.
>
> Note that you can do something somewhat like controlling your own
> vocabulary by setting the groups pane to show keywords; Then you see
> things like "Philosophy" and "philosophy," and you can consolidate.
>
> That won't work, of course, if there are terms that are not
> linguistically alike, but you want to use as synonyms.
>
> The issue of nested groups has come up many times on this list (though
> not recently, I am pretty sure) and Christiaan and Adam have always
> said it was too difficult; I would imagine that that remains their
> opinion for this case too.
>

Definitely. The simple answer is this: as long as BibDesk does not use  
a proprietary format instead of bibtex for saving, any of this is just  
wishful thinking.

Christiaan


-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by the 2008 JavaOne(SM) Conference 
Don't miss this year's exciting event. There's still time to save $100. 
Use priority code J8TL2D2. 
http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;198757673;13503038;p?http://java.sun.com/javaone
_______________________________________________
Bibdesk-develop mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bibdesk-develop

Reply via email to