On 2009-05-12, at 2:21 PM, Christiaan Hofman wrote: > > On 12 May 2009, at 7:33 PM, Alex Montgomery wrote: > [snip]
>> 2)when the file is double-clicked in Spotlight, Skim opens up the PDF >> and searches the *PDF text* for the Spotlight search term, not the >> *Annotations* for the search term, whereas the intended behavior >> would >> be to search in the domain that the text was discovered (in this >> case, >> the annotations). Can this be fixed, or is this impossible to do? > > It is simply not known whether Spotlight matched information from the > PDF or the notes. So what's the 'intended' behavior is simply not know > (if Skim would use the Notes search field instead, you'd complain when > you used spotlight to find some text in the PDF, wouldn't you?) So > neither approach would be 100% right, but the current behavior would > have the largest chance to get it right. Well, that's true if a .pdfd is clicked, since Spotlight would in that case be searching both the .pdf and .skim files. But if a .skim file comes up with a hit in the Finder, then Spotlight has matched information from the notes, not the PDF, so wouldn't it make sense if Spotlight passes a .skim file and a search term to Skim to have it search the Notes field instead of the PDF? Thanks, -AHM > >> Last, is there any application other than BibDesk (well, and >> Spotlight) that allows for searching of Skim notes content? I note >> that EagleFiler and DevonThink have some rudimentary support, but >> neither seems to search the content of the notes. >> >> Thanks! >> -AHM > > I use neither, but I've certainly read that EagleFiler uses their own > importers for searching PDF, which includes Skim Notes. > > Christiaan > >> On 2009-05-12, at 10:19 AM, Bill Mohler wrote: >> >>> I think, from my experience, that Christiann's suggestion of adding >>> text-tags (e.g. [xyz] ) to the text of the note is the best >>> approach. >>> You can add them to highlight and other "quoting" notes as well as >>> your own notes. >>> >>>> On 12 May 2009, at 6:54 PM, Alex Montgomery wrote: >>>> >>>>> Folks- >>>>> >>>>> I've been thinking about and discussing with some of my colleagues >>>>> different workflows that involve Skim and/or BibDesk. One of them >>>>> asked if annotations could be tagged or have any other type of >>>>> metadata associated with them; for example, if one is going >>>>> through >>>>> documents looking for quotes from a particular person, each quote >>>>> could be highlighted and tagged. Then a file (or multiple files, >>>>> if >>>>> doing this from BibDesk) could be searched for that particular tag >>>>> separate from the content of the actual highlighting. >>>>> >>>> >>>> No, there's no support for annotation tags possible. See the >>>> various >>>> closed RFEs. >>>> >>>>> It occurred to me that there is already some metadata associated >>>>> with >>>>> annotations (color, line width, etc.), so this might be an easily >>>>> extensible property of skim notes. Or it might be a pain to >>>>> implement, >>>>> or impossible, or not worth it. >>>>> >>>> >>>> Impossible, as we won't diverge any more from the PDF specs. >>>> >>>>> Thoughts? Are there suggestions for ways this could be done within >>>>> the >>>>> existing program that I'm entirely unaware of? >>>>> >>>>> Thanks >>>>> -AHM >>>> >>>> No, unless you count adding some text to the text associated to a >>>> note >>>> and using the search field. >>>> >>>> Christiaan >>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ The NEW KODAK i700 Series Scanners deliver under ANY circumstances! Your production scanning environment may not be a perfect world - but thanks to Kodak, there's a perfect scanner to get the job done! With the NEW KODAK i700 Series Scanner you'll get full speed at 300 dpi even with all image processing features enabled. http://p.sf.net/sfu/kodak-com _______________________________________________ Skim-app-users mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/skim-app-users
