[dev-biblio] new endnote x1 support for odt files?
does anyone know more about this? The EndNote X1.0.1 update for Windows includes many highly requested features including: * EndNote for Windows Mobile / Pocket PC * Expanded groups—create hundreds of groups in each EndNote library * Formatting support for Open Document Type (ODT) files using the Format Paper command * The reference preview now displays active URLs for quick access http://www.endnote.com/enx1info.asp -- Matt Price [EMAIL PROTECTED] signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [dev-biblio] new endnote x1 support for odt files?
On Fri, 2007-11-02 at 15:19 -0700, Matthew Yates wrote: There is no compelling reason that I would not use Zotero, except now it only offers a handful of output styles and no way to (easily) customize styles. Therefore, it is not much of a time saver at this point. Maybe I need to spend more time learning Zotero. It looks very promising though. I'm convinced that there will be an open source way to do this in the future that works as well as EndNote. Journal formatting styles are not a moving target. It seems like developers of Zotero or Openoffice will get there eventually. The EndNote ODT support seems like a good stopgap. My first choice would be an open source way of doing bibliographies, but I need to have it do the formatting styles I need to save time. -Matt my main interest in broaching the subject is to help my colleagues, who all use endnote, to move to openoffice. if indeed matt finds that he can move his research group to openoffice, that would make a difference. despite zotero's manifest superiority in many areas, most of my colleagues are more wedded to endnote than to any other program. os this would be a big step. matt --- Bruce D'Arcus [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 11/2/07, Matthew Yates [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: ... As I said, I think this is great. My graduate students use MS Word and EndNote, while I use Openoffice.org on Linux for most things. Since this appears to work (almost) flawlessly in wine, I think I may be able to switch my group over to openoffice.org and we will all be editing ODT files with no lost formatting when exchanging documents back and forth between Windows and Linux. But is there any reason you wouldn't use Zotero? Particularly when they roll out the server functionality, it will offer seriously compelling advantages over Endnote (beyond being free). Bruce - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Matt Price [EMAIL PROTECTED] signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [dev-biblio] Bibliographic Issues should be added to the marketing strategy
Quoting Bruce D'Arcus [EMAIL PROTECTED]: On Jun 14, 2006, at 2:49 AM, David Wilson wrote: Given this situation I propose that a fifth dot point be added to this list- [...] In terms of the higher Education market bibliographic support is not 'feature', it is a strategic requirement. If we do not have it we are not in it. I have to say, I've about lost all faith in OOo. The community (ahem, let's be specific: Sun) seems really not to understand or care about what we are trying to do, and even the generic requirements we have to make it technically easier for developers to implement seems not to be a priority. Even worse, I have no sense of a community process that actually sets these priorities. The reality is Word is a better word processor than Writer, it is used by 99% of the people in my field (I have literally never heard of anyone who uses OpenOffice, but simply assume there are one or two out there), and it will now have really good built-in citation support. So why would even I or anyone else in higher ed bother with OOo? I'm afraid I have to echo this point, perhaps not quite so harshly as Bruce (I haven't noticed any otheri mportant deficiencies in OO Writer, while Bruce I guess sees some). As a scholar in the humanities, I have been hoping for years that OOo would introduce some kind of decent bibliographic support. For the second year in a row, the OOo core team has set the priority of the biblio project so low that no one is even willing to supervise a Google SoC student to do the necessary work. I think OOo needs to understand two things that David has already mentioned: (a) scholars CAN'T use OOo in its present state, and thus will never recommend it to their students; (b) it is precisely in the higher-education learning environment that people set their software-using habits for their adult lives. That is, if people don't start using OOo at University or other post-secondary institutions, they are highly unlikely to ever pick it up later, or to incorporate it into their small/medium/large businesses. So while higher education may seem like a niche market, it's actually very important (which is why MS products are handed out cheap at universities). I'm embarking on a new research project now, and for the first time in 5 years I've kept the windows partition on my new computer; I'm going to install MS Office and EndNote. I hate to do it, but I feel I really have no other choice. Matt - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [dev-biblio] Bibliographic Issues should be added to the marketing strategy
Quoting Matthew Yates [EMAIL PROTECTED]: I was really hopeful a year or so ago that better bibliographic support would be built in by now. As was I, and I should say that one of the reasons the current situation really bums me out is that there are a number of python-based teaching projects I *could* potentially manage on my own which I think would be really cool -- e.g., integrating OOo with a web-based bibliography course wiki, thus allowing for persistent content over multiple iterations of a course (so for instance my course Science Technology and Modernity, which I have a high opinion of, could be transformed into a significant web resource for a larger community by virtue of the collective efforts of students). I guess I could try them without OOo -- try something like Peter Sefton's very cool courseware -- but without it it'll be much harder to get the teaching payoff I feel my students need. So I certainly am disappointed. Matt - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [dev-biblio] citation/bib support in Word 2007
On Tue, Jun 06, 2006 at 06:26:57PM -0400, Bruce D'Arcus wrote: Just found out today that MS is offering citation and bib support in Word 2007. http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/ms406055.aspx#office2007wordwhatsnew_othernewfeatures Still trying to find out the details, and if there's a way we can have good interoperability with ODF. ah well. we should have been first, now we'll be playing catchup have a significant lag behind them. lost opportunity! On the other hand, I suppose we'll probably need an improved bibliographic component if OOo is to be able to handle word 2007 docs... so I suppose that will help prod the Sun folks into action. I wonder whether it would be possible to write a grant proposal to support the development of the bib component? I mean, if the main developers see no importance in this functionality. matt Bruce To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- .''`. Matt Price : :' : Debian User `. `'`hemi-geek `- -- - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [dev-biblio] Fwd: Summer of Code : 6 Projects Above the Line
On Wed, May 24, 2006 at 09:24:48AM -0500, Bruce D'Arcus wrote: On 5/23/06, Matt Price [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Is there someone one might write to about the importance of this task? I think if the coding team understood (a) the extent to which current bibliographic functions block adoption by academics, and (b) the importance of educational markets in adoption of new software, then there'd be a somewhat different valuation of priorities (e.g., a native SQLite driver would be great, but I doubt we'll pick up a whole lot of new users that way!). We know who to talk to, and have. However, you are assuming above the same thing that I once assumed: that large corporations like Sun care about this market. I don?t think they do. If you were a cash-strapped corporation looking for oppoertunities to make more cash, would you prioritize edu? Not trying to be a downer; just to give a sense of what we are up against. I see your point. I htink though that the edu market is the place where folks learn how to use office software, and they stick with what they know thereafter. so if I can't in cgood conscience recommend OOo to my students, they will take up using a pirated word, and be MSOffice users ever after. SO I'd like to see someone at Sun grapple with that argument. matt Bruce To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- .''`. Matt Price : :' : Debian User `. `'`hemi-geek `- -- - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [dev-biblio] develop parallel application to test toolchain and api?
On Wed, Apr 05, 2006 at 06:59:43PM -0400, James Howison wrote: I may be crazy, but has anyone considered building a 'proof-of- concept' _application_ that works similarly to the way intended for OOo? Yes, developing it outside OOo, but using the future file format as much as possible (obviously not doing the rich formatting etc, but getting the mechanics of the citation processing down) It seems to me that the grounding of developing a working system would help the great discussions that are happening now---sometimes it is just simpler to see it in code. It also seems that the complexity and dependancies inherent in working with the OOo base are holding back the project. Perhaps a simple java (for cross platform testability) application would help us get a feel for the challenges of the toolchain and help us shape the APIs for eventual incorporation into OOo. Or a slightly different strategy: how about angling to modify bibus to work with the new system? It's the only reference manager that works with the current system; if we do some of the development, in effect, from within bibus, then we'd have the advantage that a functioning bibliographic manager would be available from the moment the new file format is approved. minimally, I suppose what would be needed is to modify the UNO calls in Bibus to attach to CPH's new hooks when inserting a reference (probalby not hard), and then also to call citeproc for bibliographic and citation formatting (rather than using the native styles it uses right now). Of course the latter necessitates (a) a fully functional citeproc port, preferably in python, and (b) an export filter from Bibus to one of the richer formats CiteProc supports. More ambitiously, I suppose it would be cool to redesign Bibus with a richer db model like the one we're working on. Of course this is all very ignorant and perhaps inappropriate to propose here without talking to the Bibus author, Pierre Martineau. Matt -- .''`. Matt Price : :' : Debian User `. `'`hemi-geek `- -- - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [dev-biblio] Re: Re: embedded references/functional requirements wiki page
On Wed, Apr 05, 2006 at 12:18:27PM -0400, Bruce D'Arcus wrote: On Apr 5, 2006, at 12:12 PM, Matt Price wrote: sorry, I didn't mean URI's, I meant the metadata work atthe ODF TC. OIC. There's nothing yet, but so long as we agree on allowing standard embedded metadata, I believe there's consensus support for defining one or more linking attributes that would associate content (like citations) with that metadata. That was uncontroversial when we last talked about it at least. in this context doess standard embedded metatdata mean metadata that follows already existing standards or a new OASIS standard for document metadata? m Bruce To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- .''`. Matt Price : :' : Debian User `. `'`hemi-geek `- -- - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[dev-biblio] Minimal Target
Hi Folks, I've just been going through the list archives some ofthe wiki documents trying to figure out some priorities for all this work that lies ahead. Seems to me it would be useful to define several targets -- say minimal, intermediate, and polished and lay out what needs to be done for each. We have a number of descriptions of ideal-world functionality, and I'd like to see more discussion of how to get there. THis would perhaps help in the identification of roadblocks. So what follows is an attempt to define a minimal target. My general ignorance about e.g. the state of the OASIS file format negotiations and the level of flexibility within the currently available OASIS framework, will doubtless be evident. SO, tell me if you think it's a useful document. Minimal Bibliographic Interface Target Goals: Allow expert users to insert useful citations by (a) creating durable citation infrastructure within sw; (b) designing a new bibliographic database structure; (c) creating a minimal interface which uses citeproc to link (a) and (b). Obviously missing functionality: aiblity to create and modify database directly within OOo. It is a ssumed that database management per se will take place through an existing interface (endnote, bibus, or the like) and be funnelled through some kind of filter to produce a native bibliography. Tasks: (1) Modify the sw code to enable citation data to be saved and displayed, to making citations avialable by UNO hooks. (these are CPH's '1-4' of an earlier post.) Assigned to CPH. (2) Complete design of database. Not assigned (3) port Citeproc to python. Not assigned. - 1-3 can be worked on simultaneously and starting from now, I reckon. - (4) build filters to generate database records and xml/rdf metadata records from MODS datasets. THis might be conceived as an extension to bibutils? (5) build a UNO application that provides a graphic user interface to the bibliographic data, allowing insertion and (per-document) formatting of citation data). This involves - 4 will probably be tricky in its particulars but it might be possible to get something basic off the ground quite quickly. 5 seems to me a good candidate for a Summer Of Code or other ambitious programming project. It would be nice to have the supporting framework in place for any ambitious individuals wanting to make a push. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [dev-biblio] Minimal Target
On Wed, Apr 05, 2006 at 08:42:30AM +1000, David Wilson wrote: Matt, In the the developer Page ( http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Bibliographic_Project's_Developer_Page ) Stage 1, was intended as the 'minimal' requirement. And Stage 2 as the intermediate . I can see it would be better to state this as a clear objective. ah. that's really excellent, thank you. This also pointed me to wiki/Bibliographic_Document_XML_Format which I had skimmed over before, but is now much clearer to me. I have to say the changes to the file format look so simple and manifestly superior to the current setup that it's astonishing they haven't been approved yet. Your suggestions are good so I will have a go at re-working the page with Bruce's and your comments. I agree with Bruce the OOo database is not a minimal requirement. I like the idea that the OOo database would behave like any other Internet data source. If we built the DB interface to work via Zoom / Z39.50 interfaces direct to internet sources - (library catalogues, etc) then the Internal OOoBib database becomes more complex to build because we would need to build a Z39.50 server for it as well, or other programming to make look as if it was working behind a such a server. I see you and Bruce are not of one mind about this, I can't say I know enough to have an opinion. Also CiteProc is working right now using data stored in an eXist xml database. The quickest way to build something that works would be to build a xforms based browser to work with eXist and a function to inset the selected citation into Writer. I know nothing about Xforms. Is this something that could be built, as it were, from within OOo? Or are you talking about a separate application? sound in any case as though the minimal target is not quite so far away as I'd htought, which is very good news of course. Matt - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [dev-biblio] Re: [users-biblio] Work documents on the wiki.
On Fri, Mar 31, 2006 at 04:53:22PM +1100, David Wilson wrote: On Friday 31 March 2006 9:41 am, Matt Price wrote: I'm just thinking that if we (I know the first person is a bit iffy here, as I'm hardly active) can start parcelling the project up a bit better, we might find that there are a fair number of bits that non-C programmers can work on. I am open to suggestions on how to do this. I have had list of tasks up on the web site for some years - with not many takers. But we also need to develop and document the tasks much better than we have so that people can assess what they would be getting themselves into. CPH is doing some good work documenting the biblio coding. I think now that someone (CPH!) is actually starting to work on reconding the writer bits, it becomes apparent, at least to me, how much other stuff still needs to be done and I think if (as you suggest) the tasks arebetter defined and documented the chances of getting folks to slice off bits takethem on, are higher. gotta run. matt Matt To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- .''`. Matt Price : :' : Debian User `. `'`hemi-geek `- -- - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[dev-biblio] Re: [users-biblio] Work documents on the wiki.
Hi David, On Thu, 2006-03-30 at 17:03 +1100, David Wilson wrote: Moving some of our documents to the wiki have proved to be very successful. (The full list is at http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/User:Dnw ) I have add two more documents on the wiki in the hope that this will enable interested people to add to and improve the bibliographic projects' documentation. In the past people have written some documentation but it does not not seem to get used or improved or updated. This will be easier to do on the wiki. I have add 'Enhancements need in Writer to support an improved Bibliographic' module http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Writer_enhancements_for_OOBib and 'Functional Requirements of the OpenOffice Bibliographic Module' http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/OOoBib_Functional_Requirements regards David It's really great to have this stuff on the wiki. Just added some comments made some minor typographical changes to the 'Writer Enhancements' page. Also very nice to have the Functional Requirements page up. I wonder though whether it might not be a good idea to start prioritizing all these tasks. So for instance, given CPH's list of SW tasks: 1) parse the citation data (done) 2) associate that with the relevant part of the paragraph (working on it) 2) save the data in the correct format to disk 3) display the citation *as is* (as a first pass) 4) provide hooks for the manipulation of the citation data to produce the required format in the paragraph (i.e. a UNO interface for your scripts to generate the format you require) 5) format the citation for the footnote/endnote (is this needed?) 6) format the citation for bibliographic table(is this needed ?) Would (5) and (6), which Bruce calls a separate chunk of code that would use the UNO interface, be a logical next step after CPH does 104? What form do folks think it should take? Alternatively, would it make most sense to design the bibliographic database next -- since there are so few C coders here, but many people with some database experience? I'm just thinking that if we (I know the first person is a bit iffy here, as I'm hardly active) can start parcelling the project up a bit better, we might find that there are a fair number of bits that non-C programmers can work on. Matt - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [dev-biblio] Developer Article Competition
now if only osmeone understood the OOo bibliogrpahic code they oculd enter this contest and CPH would be able to work on the coding we all so desperately need! matt On Thu, Mar 23, 2006 at 09:07:41AM +1100, David Wilson wrote: Hi, You may have noticed OpenOffice.org is a running competition for developer articles. These are articles written to help developers working on OOo. The award sum is $750 USD. The official announcement of the competition is below. All, OpenOffice.org, with the support of Team OpenOffice.org e.V. and extra sponsorship from Sun Microsystems, announces the Developer Contest. The goal of the developer contest is to generate more developer documentation. We are also interested in promoting OpenOffice.org to developers at the same time. The current deadline is 31 March 2006. Each month, a new deadline will be set for the end of that month. As part of the contest, developers are asked to write articles about developer topics, such as porting, add-on and filter development (e.g. new wizards, Calc functions, chart types, etc.), bug fixing, etc. Every month a committee will pick the best article from the pool of submitted articles. Articles that did not initially win will stay in the pool, so that they can still win later. Detailed rules can be found here: http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/ OpenOffice.org_Developer_Article_Contest (http://tinyurl.com/kptj3) The developer contest team wishes all participating developers and writers good luck! We look forward to receiving the first articles. Best regards, The OpenOffice.org Developer Contest Team To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- .''`. Matt Price : :' : Debian User `. `'`hemi-geek `- -- - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[dev-biblio] Re: [users-biblio] Re: [dev-biblio] Re: [users-biblio] a research broup bibliography for transitioning from endnote
On Wed, 2006-03-01 at 18:41 -0500, Bruce D'Arcus wrote IIRC, you're into Python. We should see if Peter pops his head up, since they're using it as well. I got the sense it can be integrated with Word. that's right -- python is the only language I'm really comfortable with. It would be nice for me if there was already a good project going in Python. On the other hand, refbase looks to have a pretty good feature set already. Matthias tells me he has just added full bibutils suport to refbase, which I guess means that endnote support is pretty good (probably imperfect though). And with SRU, the prospect of wp integration is much better than it has been in the past. As I understand it, one would set up a system like this: A. Refbase as main db (1) upload existing refs into refbase using endnote import (would be nice if dupe protection was implemented, I imagine it's not). (2) continue to add refs either via endnote (or jabref or whatever) data entry or through web interface B. Citeproc as citation formatter I guess a fair amount of dull labour still has to be undertaken to create journal styles? C. Write Components for individual Word Processors that allows (1) query of db (2) processing through citeproc. I supose 1 is a special case of 2 (a 'list' style that gives access to a list of relevant refs ) this means: - learn something about word (!) implement an interface, copying endnote's or refwork's. I have no idea how one would do this. - wait for OOo to implement a real bibliographic interface! or write a python component that can insert fields via citeproc/refbase modify them. So the labour would be in writing the wp components, and perhaps in creating a couple dozen xml stylesheets for citeproc. Is that about right? Matt - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[dev-biblio] Re: [users-biblio] Re: [dev-biblio] Re: [users-biblio] a research broup bibliography for transitioning from endnote
Hi Bruce, I wasn't subscribed to the dev- list until just now, so I may have missed some of the conversation. But to answer some of your questions (possibly not in order): On Mar 1, 2006, at 1:29 PM, Matt Price wrote: - has very good interaction with endnote, to the point that QUITE technically illiterate scholars can easily up- and down-load references; Oh, I missed this. OK. I guess where I want to go is to get rid of Endnote, and have a script within Word and OOo that allows formatting of references from web sources. Clearly that'll take some work though. That sounds great -- though my preference would not be to get rid of the desktop application altogether. There are lots of occasions when a desktop tool is very handy (e.g., in the library when taking notes on your aging non-wifi laptop). In any case I don't have the impression that such a tool actually exists yet. Or do you think lots of the pieces are already out there? I think it depends on a few things: 1) how much money do you have, for what sorts of purposes? er, probably shouldn't give a number here; among otherthings, this part ofthe grant is still being worked out. I would hope, however, that some money could be diverted to pay for a little (tiny) bit of development. This question is rather fluid at this point. 2) how wedded are your Endnote-based colleagues to that application? Must be it Endnote, or might they be happy, for example, if they could get the same effect with something else? How tolerant of they of DIY solutions? As you may have gathered -- not necessarily wedded to EndNote per se, but also not very technically competent. 3) what kinds of stuff do you need to store? a) journal articles, books, chapters -- the standard humanities reference types; b) Working Papers of the research group members -- so references linked to PDF/doc/odt files, perhaps? c) one individual has a scheme for storing and tagging video clips from the news (technical details NOT AT ALL thought out at this point). In principal such clips might be tied in to the bibliographic system. Integrating (c) into the bibliography might be a way to ensure that there's funding to hire someone to do some sql/php/python programming. emphasis on *might*. Matthias Steffens emailed me offlist, and suggested - Basilic - EPrints - Greenstone - Koha - refbase - WIKINDX of which refbase seemed to me the most immediately intuitive. I haven't looked at the codebase yet, but given that it's written in PHP, interacts well with MODS and bibutils, and that several modified versions are already in operation elsewhere, I imagine it's not hard to add features or change the look. As Bruce mar recall, I'm something of a fan of RefDB, but that seems quite inappropriate for this project, given the userbase. So: look forward to hearing more ideas. Matt -- .''`. Matt Price : :' : Debian User `. `'`hemi-geek `- -- - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
