Hi Christiaan,
first of all I am an amateur and don't really know anything about
programming, memory-space and such.
Why do I pursue this tags-stuff?
What I am looking for is a (robust) file-system-based tagging solution
to be able to trace and group files independent of their location on
disk(s). This goes a bit beyond mere spotlight-based search, because I
could organize things on my own terms: group files. So sources (e.g.
pdf-files) tagged as "chapter_III" and "Buchenwald" and "working
conditions" would show up in a Finder-SmartFolder, independent of
their location, where I might enable another, supporting order through
sorting them into folders according to archives, where they where
found etc..
So far I've done this through tags ins Spotlight-comments according to
the "&tag"-standard using several programs to apply and manage the
spotlight-comments-based tags. There are growing glitches with this
approach unfortunately, the people who made (and sold) TagBot have
gone a away though tags get overwritten, Quicksilver and Leopard are
not a happy marriage anymore.
References, literature and sources would still be managed by BibDesk
(I write with TeXShop), I can search and find my references for my
work, open up papers etc. from BibDesk. So applying the same keywords
as openmeta-tags to the linked files (via the mentioned script-hooks)
would be somewhat redundant. Still I'd like to have that ability,
since not everything I need to find in the context of that
"chapter_III" would be a reference within BibDesk.
I just checked, what happens when I open a file (manage in BibDesk
with manually applied openmeta-tag) in Skim, annotate it and save it:
the openmeta-tag is preserved. So Skim and an openmeta-based tag-
system would coexist happily.
Unfortunately I based my "workflow-question" on the speculation what
would happen if Skim did away with these openmeta-based tags and how
to get them re-applied. So it appears everything is well.
Thanks a bunch, looking forward to test the upcoming implementation of
openmeta-tag-support in BibDesk.
best regards,
Rolf
Am 26.01.2009 um 19:10 schrieb Christiaan Hofman:
On 26 Jan 2009, at 6:57 PM, Rolf Schmolling wrote:
…
I don't really understand your question. What do you mean by "those
tags"?
Remember that currently Skim does not handle and mess with open meta
tags. If Bibdesk would handle the tags, it would read/write them
immediately, it would not manage them in its own data model. Similar
to the way Finder labels are currently handled.
This is the real difference between Skim and BibDesk, because if
Skim would handle tags, it would be part of its data mode rather
than edit them immediately on the filel (because that's how a
document based app should behave). In other words, BibDesk manages /
references/ to the files, while Skim manages the /data/ for the files.
Christiaan
…
Rolf Schmolling M.A. Historian, [email protected]
http://rolf_schmolling.macbay.de/
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by:
SourcForge Community
SourceForge wants to tell your story.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/sf-spreadtheword
_______________________________________________
Bibdesk-users mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bibdesk-users
