I guess you could say I use it to manage my references. E.g. I add references using the functions in doi-utils.el. I can search them using helm-bibtex (which is not part of org-ref, we just use it because it is awesome), and from that I can see groups of references with keywords, etc... helm-bibtex provides the "table"view I think you are referring to as a helm selection buffer. Alternatively in org-ref you could use the older reftex interface.
When I click on a cite link, there actions available to do things like open the entry, find related articles, etc... (org-ref-build-full-bibliography) allows you to build a pdf version of a bibtex file pretty conveniently. the jmax-bibtex.el file in org-ref provides additional functionality to clean up bibtex entries, etc... so, it is fair to say emacs+org-ref+helm-bibtex is how I manage my references, and use them in writing. John ----------------------------------- Professor John Kitchin Doherty Hall A207F Department of Chemical Engineering Carnegie Mellon University Pittsburgh, PA 15213 412-268-7803 @johnkitchin http://kitchingroup.cheme.cmu.edu On Sat, Jun 13, 2015 at 3:06 PM, Xebar Saram <zelt...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi list and John > > Thank you all for all the great advice i will start incorporating them > into my daily workflow > > John: org-ref looks great but is it also used for "managing" you > references? that is searching for entries, grouping by keys, exporting them > to html, adding etc. does it have a "table" view or other? if not what do > you use for managing your references? > > best > > Z > > On Fri, Jun 12, 2015 at 5:02 PM, Ken Mankoff <mank...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Hi Julian, >> >> On 2015-06-10 at 10:16, Julian Burgos <jul...@hafro.is> wrote: >> > a) I first write in org-mode. Export to Word, either exporting first >> > to ODT and then to Word, or to LaTex and then use pandoc to convert >> > LaTex to Word. My coauthor can edit the document as he wishes, using >> > the "Track changes" option. Then, I transcribe their edits back into >> > the org-mode document. Advantage of this approach: your coauthor >> > receives a clean word file, that could include figures, references, >> > etc., and he/she uses the tools she likes to edit the file. >> > Disadvantage: you have to manually incorporate the changes to the >> > org-mode file each time there are edits. >> > >> > b) I write the manuscript in org-mode. Then I send the org-mode file >> > to my coauthor. Because the org-mode file is just a text file, my >> > coauthor can use Word to edit it. I ask him/her *not* to use "track >> > changes" and to save the edited version also as a text file. Then, >> > when I receive it I use ediff in emacs to compare both documents and >> > incorporate the edits I want. Advantage of this approach: the merging >> > of the documents is easy using ediff. Disadvantage: your coauthor has >> > to edit a weird-looking document, with markup, code blocks, etc. >> >> It seems like with a bit of extra (scriptable?) work you could remove >> both disadvantages. >> >> Why can't you use method (a) above, and then DOCX -> Org via pandoc (with >> --accept-all option)? >> >> I know pandoc introduce some of its own changes to the Org syntax but not >> the document itself. You can get around this. You can remove the >> pandoc-generated changes automagically so that only co-author changes >> appear in Org format, which you can then use with your (b) above and emacs >> ediff. >> >> Original: Your Org source >> A: Org -> DOCX for co-authors (using pandoc) >> B: Org -> DOCX -> Org (using pandoc). >> C: A -> Org (using pandoc and --accept-all-changes) >> D: B-Original >> >> The difference between B and Original are pandoc-introduced changes that >> you do not want. Ignore/remove these changes from C, call it D and then the >> difference between D and the Original are your co-author comments. Now your >> authors can edit DOCX with Track Changes and you can work on those edits >> with Emacs ediff. >> >> -k. >> >> >