On Tuesday, April 15, 2008, at 02:28PM, "Adam R. Maxwell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
wrote:
> 
>On Tuesday, April 15, 2008, at 02:09PM, "Christiaan Hofman" <[EMAIL 
>PROTECTED]> wrote:

>>As has been said here many times by now, the old URL fields are not
>>supported anymore. They are treated just as string fields.
>>
>>Again: you should drag to the file icon view in the side pane.
>
>Depending on the bibliography requirements, that may not be sufficient.  If 
>you're dealing with a type and/or style that requires the URL field to be 
>printed out, you'll need to copy the link back to the URL field.  If you add 
>those frequently, a script hook that fires on "Add File or URL" might be worth 
>setting up to copy the link to the URL field.

Thinking about this a bit more, maybe it would make sense to copy the first 
non-file: URL dropped on a reference to the URL field if URL is a 
required/optional field for that type?  I know I'd find the current behavior 
annoying if I was adding a bunch of web citations.

-- 
adam

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
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-users mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bibdesk-users

Reply via email to