On Dec 21, 2007, at 11:41 AM, Adam R. Maxwell wrote: > > On Friday, December 21, 2007, at 08:25AM, "Adam M. Goldstein" <[EMAIL > PROTECTED] > > wrote: >> On Dec 21, 2007, at 10:16 AM, Adam R. Maxwell wrote: >> >>> >>> On Dec 21, 2007, at 6:05 AM, James Harrison wrote: >>> >>>> On Dec 21, 2007, at 1:18 AM, Adam R. Maxwell wrote: >>>> >>>>> Isn't 60-70 characters per line the optimum value for minimal eye >>>>> strain? There's a reason for LaTeX's crazy narrow \textwidth. >>>>> >>>>> Anyway, I hacked together a sample this evening and posted a >>>>> screenshot here: >>>>> >>>>> http://homepage.mac.com/amaxwell/.cv/amaxwell/Sites/.Public/detail_table.jpg-zip.zip >>>>> >>>>> and a partly working demo here: >>>>> >>>>> http://homepage.mac.com/amaxwell/.Public/BibDesk.app.zip >>>>> >>>>> The content of the table on the right would be determined by a >>>>> template. Right now it's just a subset of the current detail >>>>> view, >>>>> and it uses the new Leopard gradient because I was curious about >>>>> it. >>>>> Anyone think this is worth pursuing? >>>> >>>> >> >> Well, one issue about this is that it's pretty jagged along the right >> edge. If the text is not going to be justified or at least close to >> it, then it is rather hard to read. > > Aargh! This was a quick-and-dirty demo of a concept, so nitpicking > isn't fair :). In addition, fonts are wrong, title shouldn't be > first, citekey and keywords shouldn't be there at all... >
:-) > Here's an idea: look at the references list in a journal paper. How > much space does each reference take up? Is that easier to read at a > glance than a series of table columns? Is it easier to read than > our present formatted view of every bit of information associated > with a reference? > I think that reading the citation is clearer, certainly, than the table view; but in many cases, the narrow output of citations in journals is obtained by abbreviation, for instance, in medical journals. One issue with the table view is that it is quite irregular, for instance, there is a paper by a single author listed just before one with several, and then all the titles are pushed over by the multiple- authors paper and there's a big blank space to the right of the single author's name. This is why I usually have the LaTeX preview in the preview pane, because it is the most readable at a glance. > That's the usage I see for this: displaying each selected item as a > citation in a small area. For instance, keywords are only used for > searching and grouping, so they shouldn't be displayed there. I > acknowledge that this may be completely useless to everyone else, > and that's all I'm trying to find out. > As for what we might call the "citation view," I think that it is a good idea. I think also that having it in a sidebar is a good idea as well, if it can be made to look good. ================================= Adam M. Goldstein PhD MSLIS Assistant Professor of Philosophy Iona College -- email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] web: http://www.iona.edu/faculty/agoldstein/ tel: (914) 637-2717 post: Iona College Department of Philosophy 715 North Avenue New Rochelle, NY 10801 ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2005. http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/ _______________________________________________ Bibdesk-users mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bibdesk-users
