Notes Files Suggestion/PLEA
I've had Logos almost since it was first available and use it regularly. I like the convenience of the notes files, but the implementation remains amateurish. Could you AT LEAST make these improvements:
1. Make it so a note file can be split up into multiple files (export a portion of the tree) and allow a note file to be imported into another one.
2. Make the formatting actually work! (i.e. fonts actually change when you change them; links can be terminated, paragraph formatting really works.)
3. Allow note files to be exported into some common file format. Text file would be a good start, Word would be better.
4. Nice but not as critical: Make the indentation system to be more than just window dressing.
I know it may be a lot of work but why not make notes html files?
Just do something to show you care.
Have a great day,
jmac
Comments
-
JimMcDaniel said:
I've had Logos almost since it was first available and use it regularly. I like the convenience of the notes files, but the implementation remains amateurish. Could you AT LEAST make these improvements:
1. Make it so a note file can be split up into multiple files (export a portion of the tree) and allow a note file to be imported into another one.
2. Make the formatting actually work! (i.e. fonts actually change when you change them; links can be terminated, paragraph formatting really works.)
3. Allow note files to be exported into some common file format. Text file would be a good start, Word would be better.
4. Nice but not as critical: Make the indentation system to be more than just window dressing.
I know it may be a lot of work but why not make notes html files?
Just do something to show you care.
I hope Logos scraps the way they
do notes, and they implement something that is more user friendly and
works. This (notes) is my biggest issue
with the software.I would like the notes to be
searchable, added to the passage guide, be able connect a single note to more
than one passage, add items like sound and video.0 -
Let me start by saying we ARE improving notes in the next release, and implementing many of the most commonly requested features.
I'd also like to better understand what you want to do with notes. Longtime newsgroup readers know that I am very reluctant to turn our notes feature into a full-featured word processor (because it feels like a slipperly slope to writing a full-featured word processor, which is a very big job and not our goal).
I still (try) to think of notes as short, personal observations tied to a particular verse or passage. I think of notes as offering you the ability to create something akin to the notes in a study Bible, using your own content.
I understand why you'd want them to be searchable (they will be), and exportable, etc. But I don't get why you'd need strong indent/outlining features, multiple font support (beyond setting the default, and for Greek/Hebrew), paragraph formatting, etc. Aren't these things better suited to your word processor?
Or are users wanting to create larger documents than I envision, inside the notes system?
(BTW, our notes are stored in XML right now, and are also exportable. Create a Note File Summary and then use the Export feature, or just open the notefile in a text editor -- though that's a power-user feature for people comfortable with XML.)
-- Bob
0 -
Bob
I agree in that I am not wanting another word processor. It would only end up being a poor version with a lot of bloat that would slow loading.
I agree, multiple font support is not necessary (except for other languages)... but why bother supporting different styles of fonts? That just seems silly for a note taking system.
I do, however, think a simple bullet or numbering list would be useful. Sometimes when taking notes, it is nice to write down short statement that you will later amplify into a full fledged outline in a word processor. Bullet items, are convenient I think.
finally, is the plan to include all this in the upgraded Mac version with a simultaneous Windows & Mac launch?
0 -
Bob Pritchett said:
I still (try) to think of notes as short, personal observations tied to a particular verse or passage. I think of notes as offering you the ability to create something akin to the notes in a study Bible, using your own content.
I understand why you'd want them to be searchable (they will be), and exportable, etc. But I don't get why you'd need strong indent/outlining features, multiple font support (beyond setting the default, and for Greek/Hebrew), paragraph formatting, etc. Aren't these things better suited to your word processor?
Or are users wanting to create larger documents than I envision, inside the notes system?
(BTW, our notes are stored in XML right now, and are also exportable. Create a Note File Summary and then use the Export feature, or just open the notefile in a text editor -- though that's a power-user feature for people comfortable with XML.)
-- Bob
Bob, you know you're opening a can of worms here, by asking for what we want.
Notes are used in many ways by users. The two primary ways I use notes are to 1) help me remember stuff I discovered about a text that I may forget the next time I study it; 2) make little personal observations tied to a particular verse or text. The notes feature as currently implemented helps me do that second thing pretty well.
But it's more important to me to keep track of my study notes that go beyond simple personal observations. I want to remember how this NT passage is connected to an OT passage, how variations on noun and verb stems of a particular word are key to understanding this text, that author X made this interesting observation on this passage (include link), that there's a really cool sermon illustration that illuminates a key truth about this passage found in this resource (include link), that commentator X says this (include text/link?), and maybe: here are 5 reasons I differ with the translators' rendering of this passage.
I don't think you need to create a word processor. A simple interface for doing basic html-type coding would be enough. I'm looking at the top of the input interface for creating a post in this forum. It's enough for me (not that I need smilies!).
Thanks for listening!
Help links: WIKI; Logos 6 FAQ. (Phil. 2:14, NIV)
0 -
Bob Pritchett said:
Let me start by saying we ARE improving notes in the next release, and implementing many of the most commonly requested features.
I'd also like to better understand what you want to do with notes. Longtime newsgroup readers know that I am very reluctant to turn our notes feature into a full-featured word processor (because it feels like a slipperly slope to writing a full-featured word processor, which is a very big job and not our goal).
I still (try) to think of notes as short, personal observations tied to a particular verse or passage. I think of notes as offering you the ability to create something akin to the notes in a study Bible, using your own content.
I understand why you'd want them to be searchable (they will be), and exportable, etc. But I don't get why you'd need strong indent/outlining features, multiple font support (beyond setting the default, and for Greek/Hebrew), paragraph formatting, etc. Aren't these things better suited to your word processor?
Or are users wanting to create larger documents than I envision, inside the notes system?
(BTW, our notes are stored in XML right now, and are also exportable. Create a Note File Summary and then use the Export feature, or just open the notefile in a text editor -- though that's a power-user feature for people comfortable with XML.)
-- Bob
I agree that notes need not be a full-featured word processor. I do, however, expect a few things:
1. Ability to set a default font (which can be changed as needed)
2. "Sticky" formatting which is to say that when you set the formatting it STAYS SET. I tire of navigating away from a note only to find on return that it is a different size or a different font from what I had set.
3. Ability to link to more than one passage. (This could be problematic if its attempting to open up the same book to two different passages -- perhaps this could be accomplished by opening a new instance of the resource. This isn't one of the "big ticket" items since I can make an additional link to the second passage.
4. Finer granularity in linking to non-versified resources. Sometimes I link to a passage and am taken to the beginning of a page only to find that the passage I wanted is at the bottom of the page.
5. Could something be done about the entry of Hebrew? I find that if I am to enter Hebrew in a passage I need to anticipate any English that might be entered thereafter and pre-enter it before entering the Hebrew or it just doesn't work.
6. Searching is a BIG item. I am referring to being able to search all of one's notes and not simply a currently open file. Sometimes I remember something I noted previously, but don't remember precisely which note file it was in.
7. Inter-note linking. Sometimes I want to reference another note in another note file. I would prefer to not need to either cite the name of the note file and the note ID or to copy the contents of the note into the current entry.george
gfsomselיְמֵי־שְׁנוֹתֵינוּ בָהֶם שִׁבְעִים שָׁנָה וְאִם בִּגְבוּרֹת שְׁמוֹנִים שָׁנָה וְרָהְבָּם עָמָל וָאָוֶן
0 -
Joe Miller said:
Bob
I agree in that I am not wanting another word processor. It would only end up being a poor version with a lot of bloat that would slow loading.
I agree, multiple font support is not necessary (except for other languages)... but why bother supporting different styles of fonts? That just seems silly for a note taking system.
I do, however, think a simple bullet or numbering list would be useful. Sometimes when taking notes, it is nice to write down short statement that you will later amplify into a full fledged outline in a word processor. Bullet items, are convenient I think.
finally, is the plan to include all this in the upgraded Mac version with a simultaneous Windows & Mac launch?
It is already possible to bullet or number items in notes.
george
gfsomselיְמֵי־שְׁנוֹתֵינוּ בָהֶם שִׁבְעִים שָׁנָה וְאִם בִּגְבוּרֹת שְׁמוֹנִים שָׁנָה וְרָהְבָּם עָמָל וָאָוֶן
0 -
Thanks for asking, Bob.
In my mind, the Notes application should offer us capabilities that :
A. help us organize our thots ON THE FLY, as we study
IMO, to do a decent job of organization, it calls for some degree of outlining ... not just one bullet level. It also would be enhanced by interlinking of the notes themselves. Personally, I think that some easy way to change colors (text &/or background) also helps in this area. Finally, very fast and easy cut/copy/paste/move either of selected text OR of outline sections (promote/demote, move up/down) are a great help. Maybe a couple of compatible fonts, easily switchable, could help too, sort of like colors. Finally, some crude means of creating multicolumn tables would be helpful for organization purposes - even if they are not "pretty"
B. make it easy to "link" to different resources by pointers, rather than just copy and paste
This should allow us to "shorthand" our notes ... paste in a link to a page or paragraph or sentence (ideally, a highlighted selection) which would show up in the notes themselves with a user-assignable simple label, but when HOVERED over, would open up a window a la Libronix keylinks, so that we could read it and even click on it to chase ITS links.
A & B make a great team ... and could not be done in an external word processor.
C. let us complete the entire task of studying, or planning a lesson, without using TWO tools simultaneously
I agree that "pretty print" formatting should not be a part of this engine, nor should wordart or other graphics/publishing stuff like multiple columns, embedded pictures, etc. That can all be set up in a formal WP or Pub or PPnt package later, However ... I DO NOT want to have to keep going back and forth between those engines WHILE I'm in research, review, & correlate mode. I want to do all my "thinking" in the Notes engine ... then port the already-well-organized result into the prettyprint engine.
=============
Redeeming the time (Eph.5:16+Col.4:5) ... Win 10, iOS & iPadOS 16
Jim Dean0 -
JimDean said:
I agree that "pretty print" formatting should not be a part of this engine, nor should wordart or other graphics/publishing stuff like multiple columns, embedded pictures, etc.
I agree with the comment about desktop publishing kinds of features -- except that it would be helpful at times to put in a GIF or JPEG of a map, or illustration of an ancient object (lute, lamp, sling, shield, etc.). If I could copy/paste a Bible Encyclopedia article and include its graphics, that would be pretty cool.
As a matter of fact you can do that in a limited way now -- at least I have by copy/pasting from a web site (just don't tell anybody).
Help links: WIKI; Logos 6 FAQ. (Phil. 2:14, NIV)
0 -
George Somsel said:
4. Finer granularity in linking to non-versified resources. Sometimes I link to a passage and am taken to the beginning of a page only to find that the passage I wanted is at the bottom of the page.
I've really got to agree especially with this one -- I've seen several people teach lessons on an overhead projector straight from their logos notes. They use the links to show their class their references. This "finer granularity" is a pretty important feature, and would be a great enhancement.
0 -
Bob,
I do all my notes etc in a word processor already so I try to keep my results there and my libronix docs as lean as possible. To me it seems to make more sense because I then can add from other sources outside what is available within Libronix resources with greater ease. The word processor has all kinds of options, fonts, colors and organizing features built into it. From It is also easier to print, send to multiple recipients and locations, etc.
So I get what you are saying about the current level of notes, it is fine for me, I'm happy as a lark and I don't see what some of this fuss is about, just my humble opinion.
Pastor Chris McFarland
0 -
Bob Pritchett said:
Let me start by saying we ARE improving notes in the next
release, and implementing many of the most commonly requested features.I'd also like to better understand what you want to do with
notes. Longtime newsgroup readers know that I am very reluctant to turn our
notes feature into a full-featured word processor (because it feels like a
slipperly slope to writing a full-featured word processor, which is a very big
job and not our goal).I still (try) to think of notes as short, personal
observations tied to a particular verse or passage. I think of notes as
offering you the ability to create something akin to the notes in a study Bible,
using your own content.I understand why you'd want them to be searchable (they will
be), and exportable, etc. But I don't get why you'd need strong
indent/outlining features, multiple font support (beyond setting the default,
and for Greek/Hebrew), paragraph formatting, etc. Aren't these things better
suited to your word processor?Or are users wanting to create larger documents than I
envision, inside the notes system?(BTW, our notes are stored in XML right now, and are also
exportable. Create a Note File Summary and then use the Export feature, or just
open the notefile in a text editor -- though that's a power-user feature for
people comfortable with XML.)-- Bob
I want to say THANK YOU!!!!! for improving the notes
system. I just checked, and all of my
notes take up 30 Meg. I have notes for
every verse that is used in years A and B of the lectionary. My notes range in length from one or two
sentences to two or three pages in length.I do all of my writing, coping, pasting, ect... in a word
process, and then copy them to Libronix.I do not blame you in wanting to create a word processor,
but why cannot you embed one? OpenOffice
gives away their office suite for free.
Why can't you embed their word processor into Libronix? I realize that this is not as easy as it
sounds, and there are issues like bugs, updates, and licenses will need to be
worked out. Still, I think the work is
worth it. It will give your users a good
UI with all of the features that we have grown accustom to having (like spell
checker), you will not have to keep updating the notes system, and Sun
Microsystems will get some free advertisement for their software.On top of the items that are listed in my previous note
(searchable, added to the passage guide, be able connect a single note to more
than one passage, add items like sound and video), I would like the note system
to be faster. When I add a note, I tend
to have to wait a second or two before I can paste anything into the note. I know there were other times that I had to
wait for the program to do some work before I could do something, but I cannot
remember them off the top of my head.I have thought of another feature that I would like to see
in the notes system, and that would be able to link to a document, like the
ABD, from within the note. This might be
possible now, but I have not been able to figure it out.Bob Pritchett said:Or are users wanting
to create larger documents than I envision, inside the notes system?I am going to say yes, we are using the note system way
beyond what was first envision for this part of the program.Thanks again for updating the notes
0 -
tom collinge said:
I want to say THANK YOU!!!!! for improving the notes system. I just checked, and all of my notes take up 30 Meg. I have notes for every verse that is used in years A and B of the lectionary. My notes range in length from one or two sentences to two or three pages in length.
I do all of my writing, coping, pasting, ect... in a word process, and then copy them to Libronix.
I do not blame you in wanting to create a word processor, but why cannot you embed one? OpenOffice gives away their office suite for free. Why can't you embed their word processor into Libronix? I realize that this is not as easy as it sounds, and there are issues like bugs, updates, and licenses will need to be worked out. Still, I think the work is worth it. It will give your users a good UI with all of the features that we have grown accustom to having (like spell checker), you will not have to keep updating the notes system, and Sun Microsystems will get some free advertisement for their software.
Since I got my new computer running Vista my old Microsoft Office won't work (or so I'm told -- I haven't tried it). I have therefore been using Open Office until I get around to getting a new Microsoft Office. Open Office does get the job done, but it's about as clunky as it is possible to be. I'll be happy to be rid of it.
BTW: My notes are 91.5 Mb.
george
gfsomselיְמֵי־שְׁנוֹתֵינוּ בָהֶם שִׁבְעִים שָׁנָה וְאִם בִּגְבוּרֹת שְׁמוֹנִים שָׁנָה וְרָהְבָּם עָמָל וָאָוֶן
0 -
George Somsel said:
Since I got my new computer running Vista my old Microsoft Office won't work (or so I'm told -- I haven't tried it).
Hi George,
Office 2003 and 2007 work fine in Vista. Try installing an older version to see if it works! Be sure to apply the latest SP from http://office.microsoft.com/en-gb/downloads/default.aspx
Dave
===Windows 11 & Android 13
0 -
Dave Hooton said:George Somsel said:
Since I got my new computer running Vista my old Microsoft Office won't work (or so I'm told -- I haven't tried it).
Hi George,
Office 2003 and 2007 work fine in Vista. Try installing an older version to see if it works! Be sure to apply the latest SP from http://office.microsoft.com/en-gb/downloads/default.aspx
My Microsoft Office is Office 2000 with Word updated to 2003. Do you still think it might work? What is "SP"?
george
gfsomselיְמֵי־שְׁנוֹתֵינוּ בָהֶם שִׁבְעִים שָׁנָה וְאִם בִּגְבוּרֹת שְׁמוֹנִים שָׁנָה וְרָהְבָּם עָמָל וָאָוֶן
0 -
George Somsel said:
My Microsoft Office is Office 2000 with Word updated to 2003. Do you still think it might work? What is "SP"?
See http://support.microsoft.com/kb/932087
SP = Service Pack
Dave
===Windows 11 & Android 13
0 -
George Somsel said:
Open Office does get the job done, but it's about as clunky as it is possible to be. I'll be happy to be rid of it.
George, I am not a big fan of O.O., but it is better than our note system.
I think that I do not like O.O. is because I am not use to it. I complained when Microsoft change the UI with MS Office 2007. Now that I am use to 2007, I now complain about MS Office UI that came out before 2007.
So I am wondering if O.O. is clunky because you are use to it?
0 -
Bob Pritchett said:
I'd also like to better understand what you want to do with
notes. Longtime newsgroup readers know that I am very reluctant to turn our
notes feature into a full-featured word processor (because it feels like a
slipperly slope to writing a full-featured word processor, which is a very big
job and not our goal). I still (try) to think of notes as short, personal
observations tied to a particular verse or passage. I think of notes as
offering you the ability to create something akin to the notes in a study Bible,
using your own content.Bob:
This is the fourth time I have tried to send this note - but each time I finish, I try to add tags, press enter (without thinking) and poof, the message is gone. So here goes again.
It would seem to me that notes should be akin to the Study Bible that you mentioned. But they should also have some relationship to the kind of notes that I would make in my wide margin Bible. In practice, since I do not use the current notes feature, what I do is copy the important document, in its entirety (Bible passage, book chapter or section, etc) into either OneNote or David Michael's TheJournal. I then make notes to the side of the passage either from the keyboard (when using TheJournal) or by hand or keyboard (when using OneNote). The kinds of entries that I make, make use of the following features:
- Italics, boldface, and underline
- colored fonts (black, red, green, and blue, at the very least)
- serify and non-serif fonts (at least two of each)
- ordered (alphabetic and numeric) and unordered lists
- highlighting - both while making entries and after making entries
- indentation - to show qouted material
- links back to other LOGOS resources and to other linkable material (i.e. web pages, files, links embedded in other documents)
- insert images or other objects (e.g. MS Excel documents) into the notes.
- export to PDF (as well as the current HTML)
- adding markups to the copied passage - though these are usually hand drawn, smilies would do some of the same thing
Since I do own a Tablet PC (and plan to get a replacement with Windows 7), I would love to have the ability to make hand written notes as well, but I expect that would be bit over the top.
As someone noted earlier, the kind of formatting included in the reply section of these forums would be about right.
Thank you for considering all the requests that have been mentioned.
Blessings,
Floyd
Blessings,
FloydPastor-Patrick.blogspot.com
0 -
Peter Covert said:George Somsel said:
Open Office does get the job done, but it's about as clunky as it is possible to be. I'll be happy to be rid of it.
George, I am not a big fan of O.O., but it is better than our note system.
I think that I do not like O.O. is because I am not use to it. I complained when Microsoft change the UI with MS Office 2007. Now that I am use to 2007, I now complain about MS Office UI that came out before 2007.
So I am wondering if O.O. is clunky because you are use to it?
OO uses <alt-o, h> to change the font characteristics rather than <alt-o, f> which other programs use. It uses <alt-o, a> to change the paragraph format rather than <alt-o, p>. In other words, it changes all of the standard short-cut keys. Not only that, it seems that it is intent that everything is to be in Times New Roman. I haven't found a way to change the default font setting so I have to go into <alt-o, h> each time and reset the font to what I want. If I quote something which has a number such as a passage from some Church Father, up pops a snippet to deal with bullets and numbering. While I can make it do what I want, it's a pain in the posterior.
george
gfsomselיְמֵי־שְׁנוֹתֵינוּ בָהֶם שִׁבְעִים שָׁנָה וְאִם בִּגְבוּרֹת שְׁמוֹנִים שָׁנָה וְרָהְבָּם עָמָל וָאָוֶן
0 -
George Somsel said:Peter Covert said:George Somsel said:
Open Office does get the job done, but it's about as clunky as it is possible to be. I'll be happy to be rid of it.
George, I am not a big fan of O.O., but it is better than our note system.
I think that I do not like O.O. is because I am not use to it. I complained when Microsoft change the UI with MS Office 2007. Now that I am use to 2007, I now complain about MS Office UI that came out before 2007.
So I am wondering if O.O. is clunky because you are use to it?
OO uses <alt-o, h> to change the font characteristics rather than <alt-o, f> which other programs use. It uses <alt-o, a> to change the paragraph format rather than <alt-o, p>. In other words, it changes all of the standard short-cut keys. Not only that, it seems that it is intent that everything is to be in Times New Roman. I haven't found a way to change the default font setting so I have to go into <alt-o, h> each time and reset the font to what I want. If I quote something which has a number such as a passage from some Church Father, up pops a snippet to deal with bullets and numbering. While I can make it do what I want, it's a pain in the posterior.
Ouch! I hate it when a program does not use standard shortcuts. Because I do not use many shortcuts (I do a lot of right clicks), I do not think this would bother me too much.
0 -
Sorry to take so long to reply. The weekend was packed with events.
It's good to hear you will improve the notes functionality.
I use the notes to do research. I cut and paste stuff from various resources into the notes along with links back to the original source or I put a link in to a resource that I'd like to investigate further when I have more time. I add my own notes, but my notes are a small portion of what I put in the note files. At some point I print out a notes summary and have it handy when I'm thinking through a sermon, essay or just meditating on the text.
I'm very visual. Fonts and their characteristics are important for visual emphasis and organization. The font features you have are fine with me if they actually worked. They don't. For example when you paste info into the notes it seems to copy the font of the source. Fine, I can change it to some common font I want, but at times the notes file refuses! to change some of the text - I've tried over and over and over. Sometimes it refuses! to allow link fonts and sizes to change. Sometimes I've had to delete a note and start over because I inserted a link and for the life of me couldn't enter any text after the link that didn't become part of the link. If you indent a paragraph you may never be able to get subsequent paragraphs unindented. That's one reason I said it was amateurish.
I have note files for most books of the Bible. So say I start with a note file on a book and it grows as I study the book, perhaps over years. First it may reach a point where I want to split some portion of the book out into a separate file. (e.g. Suppose I start with Matthew and then want a file for The Sermon On The Mount", or perhaps a chapter) I'm not aware that I can do this from within Logos.
Now take my example. I've got a note file on Matthew with notes attached to verses all over the book organized by section or chapter and sub-organized by topic (cultural background, textual issues, application ideas) and verse. So I go to add a note to Matt 2:1. New notes are placed at the end of the notes list! I have to move it up through EVERY SINGLE note in the file to get it near the top. If I hope that if I could collapse notes, I could move the note where I want it far faster. Furthermore suppose I have notes that are topics, like "introduction", "manuscript notes" , "word studies", "application" etc. that have several notes indented below. If I could collapse these things and if you implemented the feature, then I could move them as a group to a the position I want in the note file so when I print or export or use the file, the order would make sense. Furthermore I would like to select the top of an indented list and export it to a new note file, or print just that section out (perhaps the note file summary feature could take advantage of these collapsible nodes in selecting what was to be printed).
I want the notes file to be my repository for my basic research with links to the sources because Logos is where all the resources are located. I also want to be able to organize that research and share it with other Logos users with a little more capability than you currently have.
Have a great day,
jmac0 -
Would you share your note files with us for testing?
We need sample note files to test the import feature for 4.0, and also tobetter understand how people use notes. If you're willing to share your notes with us, just email the notes file (found in My Documents\Libronix DLS\Annotations) to handouts@logos.com.
Any size attachment should be fine.
Thanks!
0 -
Bob Pritchett said:
Would you share your note files with us for testing?
We need sample note files to test the import feature for 4.0, and also tobetter understand how people use notes. If you're willing to share your notes with us, just email the notes file (found in My Documents\Libronix DLS\Annotations) to handouts@logos.com.
Any size attachment should be fine.
Thanks!
I tried to send you a note file, but the email bounced. Here is the error message:
Error Message said:Technical details of permanent failure:
Google tried to deliver your message, but it was rejected
by the recipient domain. We recommend contacting the other email provider for
further information about the cause of this error. The error that the other
server returned was: 553 553 mailbox handouts@logos.com
is restricted (Mode: normal) (state 14).0 -
How to I send you the file(s)?
Have a great day,
jmac0 -
Personally I would like to have some more possibilties for formatting text in notes.
But I also long for the opportunity to work on a Word document from within Logos. Something like Mindjet Manager has.
I work on my sermons and papers with Libronix and I get very tired from switching the screens: word -> Logos -> word -> Logos and so on.
0 -
A.J. van den Herik said:
Personally I would like to have some more possibilties for formatting text in notes.
But I also long for the opportunity to work on a Word document from within Logos. Something like Mindjet Manager has.
I work on my sermons and papers with Libronix and I get very tired from switching the screens: word -> Logos -> word -> Logos and so on.
I would also like this, but everyone does not have MS Word. If I create a note in MS Word, and then send it to someone, then that person must also have MS Word.
0 -
tom collinge said:
I would also like this, but everyone does not have MS Word. If I create a note in MS Word, and then send it to someone, then that person must also have MS Word.
Not necessarily. OO will import Word documents as will the Works WP. I can even open many Word documents with WordPad.
george
gfsomselיְמֵי־שְׁנוֹתֵינוּ בָהֶם שִׁבְעִים שָׁנָה וְאִם בִּגְבוּרֹת שְׁמוֹנִים שָׁנָה וְרָהְבָּם עָמָל וָאָוֶן
0 -
I use MS One Note for keeping all my notes and information. It is very flexible, able to add all medias etc. I would be very happy if Logos notes would just be linked to One Note and some other similar programs. You could then make simple notes directly in Logos and add any other more organized system to it in One Note or your preferred program. I would strongly discourage Logos to create some kind of Word processor type note editor. Just make linking with existing most popular word processors more advanced and easy to use. But linking with the One Note and other similar programs would be even bigger priority for me.
Bohuslav
0 -
IE can open MS Word docs. Also, there is a free, skinny Word Viewer available from MS for download (see later post for URL)
I do like the idea of slaving an instance of Word within Libronix, BUT with MS's characteristic "bloat" factor, it might slow down Libronix considerably. Maybe Office.org (free) would be a viable alternative?
Actually, if Notes in L could simply and reliably just do what WordPad does, plus automated inclusions of hyperlinks to just about anything else in L (incl other Notes), I think they'd be sitting pretty. If anyone else is fond of this KISS suggestion, then maybe we could create a (short) list of neceesary "extensions" to WordPad so that the L team can picture what we're talking about.
I think I know one thing that would make MJ happy - a button that toggles the view from normal to XML. Of course, adding any XML stuff would call for either a conversion-export to printer or plainjane wordpad - or would require the user to have an XML editor of their own to handle final copies.
What do y'all think about this "base-it-on-WordPad" approach?
=============
Redeeming the time (Eph.5:16+Col.4:5) ... Win 10, iOS & iPadOS 16
Jim Dean0 -
JimDean said:
Actually, if Notes in L could simply and reliably just do what WordPad does, plus automated inclusions of hyperlinks to just about anything else in L (incl other Notes), I think they'd be sitting pretty. If anyone else is fond of this KISS suggestion, then maybe we could create a (short) list of neceesary "extensions" to WordPad so that the L team can picture what we're talking about.
Another important note about this -
Most MS app's, such as Word and Excel, carry a HIGH exposure to being infected by viruses or worms, due to their inherent macro capabilities. WordPad (pure .rtf files) does NOT suffer from this danger. WordPad has been around since DOS days, as I recall. The source code is public domain in several books out there - or at least code to duplicate it is. I use it for most everything I can, due to it's "skinny" footprint and it's virus-immunity. It's much, MUCH better than NotePad for a variety of reasons.
For those of you who are unaware of WordPad ... go to Accessories folder in the Start menu and create a shortcut to WordPad on your desktop. Eazy-peazy.
[:D]
=============
Redeeming the time (Eph.5:16+Col.4:5) ... Win 10, iOS & iPadOS 16
Jim Dean0 -
Re the free MS viewers I mentioned earlier ... I had included an outdated URL. Here are the URL's for fully uptodate FREE viewers for Word, Excel and PowerPoint. You can't create or edit within these, but you can view and save and rename and print.
=============
Redeeming the time (Eph.5:16+Col.4:5) ... Win 10, iOS & iPadOS 16
Jim Dean0 -
One last comment re these Viewers ... altho they are skinny, and view/print/save-only, they ALSO are somewhat subject to viruses and worms as other MS (and prob OO) engines are ... so be sure to tie in to MS automatic updates to keep yourself protected. No big deal ... just wanted to provide the caution. These viewers are on all five of my computers.
=============
Redeeming the time (Eph.5:16+Col.4:5) ... Win 10, iOS & iPadOS 16
Jim Dean0 -
George Somsel said:tom collinge said:
I would also like this,
but everyone does not have MS Word. If I
create a note in MS Word, and then send it to someone, then that person must
also have MS Word.Not necessarily. OO
will import Word documents as will the Works WP. I can even open many Word documents with
WordPad.Very true, but if we (I know that I do) would like our notes
to be searchable, then all of our notes need to be stored in the same format so
the module that does the searching and indexing knows how to read the file.Therefore, the UI and the program that is needed to read and
write our note files needs to be the same for ALL Logos users. A simple reader will not suffice.Microsoft does not do anything for free. So the odds of them allowing Logos to bundle MS
Word with Libronix is somewhere between zero and not a chance.All Window uses have Wordpad, but this program saves its
documents in RTF, and RTF is a Microsoft proprietor format. This could leave our brothers and sisters who
use a Mac out in the cold.Issues like these limits what Bob and his crew can do. As I see it, they can create their own word
processor software, or they can embed someone else’s software. Each option has their own pros and cons associated
with them.We also have to be honest in what we are asking, and that we
are basically asking for a word processor.
We have asked for items like multi-font, multi-color, bullets, outline,
embed sounds and videos, linking, and if no one has asked as of yet – it will
be soon – a spell checker.As technology changes, the way we study (and take notes)
change. Who would have thought 10-15
years ago that we would want to keep video with our notes? I know that I didn’t, but I do now.In an earlier post, I said that I do not blame Bob for not
wanting to create a word processor. I
just read an article that a 12 year old boy created a word processor in Visual
Basic. Not to take anything away for
this young man, but if a 12 year old can do it; why can’t the Bob and his crew
do it?If there is a way for Bob and his crew to embed our own word
processor and get past the items I stated above, totally cool.0 -
JimDean said:
Re the free MS viewers I mentioned earlier ... I
But we don't want just a viewer, do we? Don't we need to write as well in order to create notes?
george
gfsomselיְמֵי־שְׁנוֹתֵינוּ בָהֶם שִׁבְעִים שָׁנָה וְאִם בִּגְבוּרֹת שְׁמוֹנִים שָׁנָה וְרָהְבָּם עָמָל וָאָוֶן
0 -
tom collinge said:
All Window uses have Wordpad, but this program saves its documents in RTF, and RTF is a Microsoft proprietor format. This could leave our brothers and sisters who use a Mac out in the cold.
I'm pretty sure that RTF is not a Microsoft format as it has existed for a long time and has been used for exchanging documents between different word processors. I think that the issue with RTF is that it is limited when compared to proprietary formats but I am sure that there are enough features within the format for a notes system.
A bigger challenge would probably be file management, a single RTF file would probably be hard to manage so Logos would probably have to create a super file that contained multiple RTFs or have an index system.
What would be cool about RTF would be the option for Logos to transfer the RTF to our preferred word process or to acces more options we could then save the file back to Logos as an RTF or use the save as feature to save the file outside of Logos in a proprietary format.
tom collinge said:In an earlier post, I said that I do not blame Bob for not wanting to create a word processor. I just read an article that a 12 year old boy created a word processor in Visual Basic. Not to take anything away for this young man, but if a 12 year old can do it; why can’t the Bob and his crew do it?
I don't believe that it is a question of progarmming ability but comes down to best use of time. If WordPad could be reused for WIndows then I am sure there is something included with the Mac that could also be used.
God Bless
Graham
Pastor - NTCOG Basingstoke
0 -
links to viewers were provided re the comment that some folks don't have MS office. sorry about the confusion ... just trying to help.
=============
Redeeming the time (Eph.5:16+Col.4:5) ... Win 10, iOS & iPadOS 16
Jim Dean0 -
afaik RTF is not proprietary ... nor is TXT [:D]
You can open an RTF in a hex editor and figure it out pretty quick.
Lots and lots of software supports it.
=============
Redeeming the time (Eph.5:16+Col.4:5) ... Win 10, iOS & iPadOS 16
Jim Dean0 -
tom collinge said:
All Window uses have Wordpad, but this program saves its
documents in RTF, and RTF is a Microsoft proprietor format. This could leave our brothers and sisters who
use a Mac out in the cold.Tom
RTF is not a Microsoft proprietor format. In fact, Pages, Mellel, and several other word processors that run on the Mac save their files in RTF.
Jack
0 -
A lot of you have now added thoughts/suggestions on specific technology, but I've only seen a few on HOW you use notes, you know, the role notes files have in your use of Logos an/or study/preparation process, which is what Bob Prichett said he was interesting in understanding. I realize that this may have been addressed in the past, but Bob was asking for it and I think we should help him as best we can.
I have to admit this does seem a bit like surveying a group of people with a broken leg about how they walk. In other words the way we use Logos notes is a function of its capabilities, or lack thereof besides our personal styles.
The one thing that Logos does for me is to link a huge library to what I'm interested in at the moment either directly or indirectly (through searches) which is a big advantage over having physical books. The one thing it doesn't do with the same quality and usefulness as the rest of the program is to link my research findings on a topic or verse and make that research useful to me (printing, exporting, reorganizing, linking, searching).
I mentioned in another post that I use notes for a repository of research and personal observations. I then copy useful stuff to an external program when I'm actually going to present anything since the final form can be some combination of file, published document, slide show, or speech so no one set of presentation tools will ever be adequate. I would like the ability to select nodes in my notes tree and transfer all the material in that node and any indented nodes in one operation.
I seem to remember Mo (Morris Proctor) saying that he developed his sermon outlines in Notes, (I could be wrong about that) but I haven't found that practical for me.
A few thoughts brought up here would certainly enhance my use beyond what I was originally thinking about:
- Embed Links to outside web resources and local files - this would allow me to collect more research into one place, I like that a lot.
- Links to multiple verses - tricky but very useful. Perhaps a note could have a "Reference" attribute where you could list the verses it applies to and by the was allow you to change the verse(s) it is linked with.
- Searchability (How about adding notes files to collections that can then be searched like any other resource? That would really give us flexibility)
- Finer resolution on links to resources (I can live with paragraph level, thought I would much prefer sentence level since some resources have very long paragraphs)
Question: What about the ability to have links inside notes work from outside Logos? Say I copy a note with a link to a commentary embedded in it to a Word document. Can I click on that link in Word and have Logos open to that resource and be positioned at the desired place?
I'm curious to understand the role of notes in other people's study process, perhaps I could learn some new techniques while we give Bob the input he needs.
Have a great day,
jmac0 -
JimMcDaniel said:
A lot of you have now added thoughts/suggestions on specific technology, but I've only seen a few on HOW you use notes, you know, the role notes files have in your use of Logos an/or study/preparation process, which is what Bob Prichett said he was interesting in understanding. I realize that this may have been addressed in the past, but Bob was asking for it and I think we should help him as best we can.
Personally I have a number of note files the two main ones are called Commentary and Quotes the others are related to specific subjects that I am looking at. The two main ones are always open and the others are open whilst I am working on them and are often not used again after I have finished the specific study. Having collected the information in a Logos notes file I export it to Word to produce a final output.
My most important note file is the commentary one here I collect my own personal observations on specific verses along with information copied and pasted from other sources either as I study a text or as I read a specific book. I tend to copy and paste any interesting observations about the texts and save them with the verse as input to future study.
The way that I use quotes is probably a bit strange because I effeciively use it as a way to highlight interesting parts of a book in much the same way as I underline in a hardcopy book. I actually cut and paste the text into the note file linking the note to the selected text. WIth the note file open this ensures that the text is highlighted the next time I view the book but it also means that I can browse the note file to remind myself of some of the interesting points made by a book. One feature that I would really like to see is the ability to collapse notes by actual book as this would significantly improve navigation of note files that span multiple books.
I appreciate that there is probably a better way to manage the highlighting/quotes within Logos but this system works well for me and gives me what I feel that I need.
When managing my commentary file, the main challenge I have is tidying up the notes. I tend to ad any new observations or text from other sources at the bottom of the file and make no real attempt to tidy the notes up. The main feature that I would like to see for this use is the simple export of multiple notes to a single word file by verse range i.e. Matthew 5-7 for the Sermon on the Mount.
Another great feature for me would be the ability to send the selected text to a designated notefile for the active Bible verse, this would really simplify the capturing of interesting observations in commentaries.
God Bless
Graham
Pastor - NTCOG Basingstoke
0 -
I use note files in a variety of ways...
- My primary use is taking notes @ church (yes, I take a laptop to church & run Logos). My pastor and others use PowerPoint slideshows. Keeping them in a notes file allows me to easily link to & jump to other Scriptures as I'm taking notes; plus it keeps me from flipping back & forth between applications (i.e. Logos & Word).
- I also use notes file for taking my own notes as I study and prepare lessons for both church & my website. I'll use the notes file to create my own outline as I'm studying (again to keep from using multiple apps) and it allows me to more easily link to material I find that I'd like to use later on. I've got an outline right now for 1 Thessalonians 1 that is roughly the equivalent of a 10-12 page MS Word doc.
- Like most others, I also use it to jot notes & questions to myself, creating my own study Bible of sorts within the software. I also enjoy being able to tag them and put the note icon in my Bible so that I can remember that I made a note on a particular passage.
Those are the primary ways that I use the notes files, and they are definitely an invaluable resource to me while I'm studying. I'm also open to finding new & better ways to use the notes files that others may already be doing :-)
lj.
Urban Scholar - http://urban-scholar.com
Christ-centered Hip-Hop - http://www.sphereofhiphop.com0 -
JimMcDaniel said:
I have to admit this does seem a bit like surveying a group of people with a broken leg about how they walk. In other words the way we use Logos notes is a function of its capabilities, or lack thereof besides our personal styles.
The one thing that Logos does for me is to link a huge library to what I'm interested in at the moment either directly or indirectly (through searches) which is a big advantage over having physical books. The one thing it doesn't do with the same quality and usefulness as the rest of the program is to link my research findings on a topic or verse and make that research useful to me (printing, exporting, reorganizing, linking, searching).
I mentioned in another post that I use notes for a repository of research and personal observations. I then copy useful stuff to an external program when I'm actually going to present anything since the final form can be some combination of file, published document, slide show, or speech so no one set of presentation tools will ever be adequate. I would like the ability to select nodes in my notes tree and transfer all the material in that node and any indented nodes in one operation.
I'll give a hearty "second" to all of Jim's comments, in particular the first paragraph. [:(]
I've tried on MANY occasions, over the years, to get Notes to "work" for me ... but I kept getting frustrated. It wasn't that they would not fit "my style" - it was that I could not IMAGINE a "style" that they could be used for that would not involve multiple brick-wall encounters. [:S]
I think that the key to this is to get FOCUSED on what "the task" really is. Then each suggestion can be evaluated against that paradigm.
LOGICALLY, there seems to me to be a clear dividing line, which Jim expressed and I'd like to further define. That dividing line has stage(s) we might call "research" and "correlation" on one side, and stages that we might call "presentation" and "application" on the opposite side. If we ask L to create something that works on both sides of the line, I think we'll just end up running in circles, and neither side will be adequately handled. That's where we are now ... let's not just get a fancier version of confused.
So, presuming that we agree conceptually on the distinctions between the two sides of the line, which one should be the prime focus of L's "new nifty notes" (NNN) ?? I think that's also a foregone conclusion ... the purpose of LIbronix is to help us study and learn ... it's NOT intended primarily as a visual-presentation platform (though it can be used that way, with a sufficiently-interested audience and a high-resolution projector).
THEREFORE, my strongest recommedation would be that "features" which would exists primarily to make things "look pretty" should be 86'd. I'd far prefer to see L apply its talents and time to aiding me in my research and correlation.
OK, so where does THAT take us? Well ...
RESEARCH is of course the process of utilizing L's tools and books to gather information into "interlinked baskets" that we will go back to later and sort through. Of course, even though one often undertakes an initial study in one massive thrust, it is often the case that we will later go back to that same topic and add additional information &/or categories to it. On the other hand, sometimes we have no such initial organized approach, but later on we decide to "collect" disparate notes and highlights together into a grouping that currently holds interest to us.
CORRELATION is the process of organizing the information into some coherent categories and sequence. The same collection of bits of data can be correlated in many different ways ... thus, the results of our Research might yield, over the years, many different useful vignettes from different perspectives, with different teaching-goals. So, we need to be able to have a way to leave the research in place, organized in whatever manner makes sense for the process of researching, and somehow, without disturbing that "orderly mess", have a way to reorganize bits of it into whatever pattern that fits our current task.
This need to reorganize-without-disturbing-the-original is the heart of the problem, in my view. The simplest solution is to just make an extra copy of the entire research-collectiton, then hack and slash away the stuff that's not relevant to the current task, and finally organize the remainder into something that's amenable to porting to a DIFFERENT application, for "pretti-fying" (such as PowerPoint).
That copy+hack-n-slash method does work - it's how I usually do my own preparation - but it has two major flaws: first, it often involves a LOT of material, especially if it includes extensive quotations from scripture or other sources. This makes it just plain awkward to do. The second flaw is: if you want to add to or modify the research data at a later time, there is no "automatic" updating of the correlated results ... in fact, it's nearly impossible to figure out what research stuff is the "new' stuff, since completion of the original correlation task.
So, my strongest to-the-point request regarding NNN is that intense effort be made to allow for quick and easy and targetted links to be available at all levels, between all objects. Of course, L is all about links! However, those links don't "port" with a click-n-dragged selection when we paste it somewhere else. That is, right-clicking on that copied entity does not bring up a menu similar to Libronix's. Nor does double-clicking or hovering over it provide us with any additional information. If we want to take THAT info (the linked stuff) with us to our Research-collection area, and later to our Correlation-worktable, we need to copy and paste it ALL! Ooof. Reminds me of moving out of a house. Ya gotta take it ALL.
Additionally, we need a new layer of links that currently don't exist in Libronix ... ones that we build. That is, we need to be able to link our notes ... our reseach data ... into customize chains of whatever sort we can imagine. Then, we need links to link the links in different patterns, as we go through the Correlation process. Huh. I know, this sounds like gobbledegook, and sort of makes my head spin trying to write it out ... but I believe that this process is what we ACTUALLY DO, somewhat unconsciously and haphazardly, as we study and prepare, under the Spirit's direction.
I'm not too concerned, personally, about links to non-Libronix stuff such as external URL's. Sure, it would be nice, but there is so much already IN Libronix, I believe that we must make research within that universe the top priority. If for no other reason ... the multiple thousands of (wisely) invested dollars (many of us) have in this resource. (I try not to think about this too much). Besides ... incorporating outside links may well cause the "tightness" of whatever L might otherwise build to be mangled ... I'd rather be told to "add it myself, manually" re that other stuff, than to find that there's extra work, or additional limitations, in using the Libronix resources as a result of including the other stuff.
OK - that's as thorough an analysis that I can provide of the TASK's necessities. It "shore wud bee grate" if a thousand replies came in with the words - "Yeah - what he said" ... but I seriously doubt that will happen. However, maybe we could try to discuss this for a while WITHOUT getting off into the "mechanics", because as Jim said before, everyone has their own style.
What we need are the tools to interlink all this info in ways that no one has yet imagined. IMNSHO, it would be REALLY helpful if the L team could make a "list" of the KINDS of "linking" which are reasonably possible, and which kinds are a real time-consuming hair-pullilng bear of a job that we should try to avoid asking for.
Then, after those research+correlation "framework" capabilities are defined, I think it would be useful to start discussing the grab-bag of formatting options that would be useful. Actually, THAT part of it is the SIMPLE part (I speak as a four-decades programmer at this point). As someone already pointed out, a 12-year-old can write a word processor. However it takes a Pritchett to write keylinking!
Summary: I've tried to apply structured systems-analysis methods to this problem. I hope that I've explained it well enough. Thanks for being patient with the wordiness!
=============
Redeeming the time (Eph.5:16+Col.4:5) ... Win 10, iOS & iPadOS 16
Jim Dean0 -
Say Bob, I was thinking about your question regarding the hierarchy / indentation of notes and got to wondering which would make Logos run faster, one huge note file filled with links to Bible verses, or a bunch of smaller files. I have a file for each Bible book. I usually have them all enabled because I'll forget which ones are or aren't when I'm focused on studying. Is there any large difference in overall speed?
Have a great day,
jmac0 -
Bob Pritchett said:
I'd also like to better understand what you want to do with notes.
When using notes, I would like to see a 300 person orchestra and 175 person choir to come alive, singing any song or hymn I want.
Just a joke, I do not use note files at all. I just Copy and Paste, use MS Word when ever writing an article or blog, preaching notes.
Of course, in my experiance a year ago preaching off of my computer using Logos since I had given my bible to another Pastor who only had one bible for his church.
0 -
JimMcDaniel said:
Is there any large difference in overall speed?
In 3.x, all the note files are loaded unless you "turn one off". So speed should be similar in both configurations, though you can improve speed by splitting into multiple files and turning one file off. But that's more awkward.
0 -
JimDean said:
Summary: I've tried to apply structured systems-analysis methods to this problem. I hope that I've explained it well enough. Thanks for being patient with the wordiness!
I appreciate all the feedback (and want more!). It's looking to me, though, like everyone has a different methodology, which is why it's difficult to build something everyone's happy with. I think that's why there are dozens of outlining tools, and why some people write sermons in Word, some in WordPerfect, some in OneNote, some in PowerPoint, and some on yellow legal pads!
Moving forward, I know we'll continue to emphasize "build my own study Bible" type notes, and we are definitely working to improve the little editing annoyances. We're also working to offer new ways of storing your thoughts, organizing research from the books, etc. My hope is that out of multiple tools every user can build a workflow that works for them.
I think we'll also see changes in our workflows simply in response to the technology. Improved searching may, for example, make linking a quote to it's source become less important. If you can search for the text of the quote in a keystroke or two, and find it in a second or two, why would you clutter your note / Word doc / slide with something like libronixdls:jump|res=LLS.1.0.1.43&ref=LLSAO:345:10340 ?
Please keep the ideas and feedback coming!
0 -
Bob Pritchett said:
I think we'll also see changes in our workflows simply in response to the technology. Improved searching may, for example, make linking a quote to it's source become less important. If you can search for the text of the quote in a keystroke or two, and find it in a second or two, why would you clutter your note / Word doc / slide with something like libronixdls:jump|res=LLS.1.0.1.43&ref=LLSAO:345:10340 ?
I write my notes so that I can copy them and paste into Word with only a little polishing. I don't wish to need to stop my workflow in order to search for a passage no matter how fast the search may be.
george
gfsomselיְמֵי־שְׁנוֹתֵינוּ בָהֶם שִׁבְעִים שָׁנָה וְאִם בִּגְבוּרֹת שְׁמוֹנִים שָׁנָה וְרָהְבָּם עָמָל וָאָוֶן
0 -
Bob Pritchett said:
I think we'll also see changes in our workflows simply in response to the technology. Improved searching may, for example, make linking a quote to it's source become less important. If you can search for the text of the quote in a keystroke or two, and find it in a second or two, why would you clutter your note / Word doc / slide with something like libronixdls:jump|res=LLS.1.0.1.43&ref=LLSAO:345:10340 ?
Bob, I am going to
disagree. I do want to link to a source after I find it.I think you are forgetting
about the time it takes to dig through the search results. Once I found
something, I do not want to redo my search so I can find what I found again.I would also like to see
the links be more like HTML links. I might want to copy the quote, and
have it linked back to the source. I do not bring with me a bibliography.
This way when someone asked me, “Where did I get this information?” I can
go back to my notes, click on the quote, and then get the bibliography
information for this person.I think linking is VERY
VERY important for items within Libronix and to other items on the web, my hard drive, etc...0 -
Bob Pritchett said:
I think we'll also see changes in our workflows simply in response to the technology. Improved searching may, for example, make linking a quote to it's source become less important. If you can search for the text of the quote in a keystroke or two, and find it in a second or two, why would you clutter your note / Word doc / slide with something like libronixdls:jump|res=LLS.1.0.1.43&ref=LLSAO:345:10340 ?
Please keep the ideas and feedback coming!
Bob, I've had trouble finding source material for quotes before, so maybe my frustration is showing, but I would minimally want to attribute a quote in the note file. Why not put a keylink in the attribution? It just seems to make sense to me. If I could highlight a text and get the code to jump to it from a right-click menu, that would be really cool! Or, if the code to jump to a text were automatically included (by option of course) in the copy/paste opperation -- along with the bibliographical data -- that would also be welcome.
Help links: WIKI; Logos 6 FAQ. (Phil. 2:14, NIV)
0 -
Bob Pritchett said:
think we'll also see changes in our workflows simply in response to the technology. Improved searching may, for example, make linking a quote to it's source become less important. If you can search for the text of the quote in a keystroke or two, and find it in a second or two, why would you clutter your note / Word doc / slide with something like libronixdls:jump|res=LLS.1.0.1.43&ref=LLSAO:345:10340 ?
Please keep the ideas and feedback coming!
Bob
I must agree with the others that the ability to link to source files from the Notes would be a valuable feature. Of course, it will be much better when that feature is present in the Mac version [H].
Jack
0 -
Regarding linking in general (and this is not addressed to any one person's post), let's say one could link from notes in Libronix to other files on your computer and maybe you can already do this-I don't use notes at all, never have. What happens, and I don't know the answer, when I get a new computer or move files around that have links "to" them--I'm thinking that the links are associated with a given location and they would no longer work. I know there are such things as "relative" links that somehow make a shift.
Let's say they wouldn't survive the move or shift, then I would only want note files and links to work within Libronix and link to places within Libronix because I wouldn't want to do them all over again.
Thank you for bearing with me. I tried to describe this situation using the appropriate words and I might not have said it very well.[:)] One last word. I would definitely use notes in Libronix if I could search over them at the same time.
0
