Questions about Logos 5/6 Library to Zotero (best way to organize)
Okay, I am ready to send my Logos Library to Zotero. Currently, I have Logos 5, but I am about to upgrade to 6. What is the smoothest and best way to send your Logos Bibliographic information to Zotero? I am doing this for the first time, and I think I understand, but I want to export in an organized manner that causes me the least amount of work. So answer just one question or all of them. 
So the more details the better. Questions are below:
1. Is there a way to send your Logos library to Zotero and have Zotero organize it in your folders for you?
2. If 1 is unavailable, can you send Logos library in by the way Logos organizes your resources? (ex. Bibles, dictionaries, commentaries, ect.)
3. If 2 is not available, can you make collections in Logos then send it in by your collection?
4. What is the smoothest and fastest way to send your Logos library into Zotero? (Is bibtext still the best exporting option?)
5. If I export when I have logos 5, then want to export when I get new resources will it create duplicated bib. info in Zotero? How can you keep exporting new resources without duplications?
Thanks!
Comments
-
I'm glad you asked this. I use Zotero as well and I have never been very happy about the quality of the Zotero entries when I have imported my Logos library. The citations have been poor and incomplete and with a sizable library this is labor intensive to fix. I am confident that the same poor bibliographic data would also apply to anyone using Endnote, or Mendeley or any other bibliographic software. Any suggestions or advice would be welcome.
0 -
Hi Austin,
I would now recommend just using Zotero as a bibliographic resource listing for citation purposes, rather than as a place to categorise your library in addition to doing so in Logos. But that's just how I do it.
I started out a few years ago trying to maintain my resource listing in Zotero on the same lines as my collections in Logos. But somewhere along the line the collection info stopped being exported from Logos. Also, it became more of an unprofitable use of time trying to keep Zotero collections/folders synchronised with collections in Logos. I ended up abandoning keeping more than simply bibliographic data in Zotero. Instead of over hundred collections/folders in Zotero initially, I now have just a handful; Print books, Website resources/blogs, Illustrations, Journals, Audio/visual media.
When exporting from Logos, I use BibTex format. I then open the file in MS Word, remove existing keywords [using a find/replace searching for (keywords = \{)(*)^13 using wildcards and replacing with nothing], then adding _Logos as a keyword [by finding }}^p and replacing with },^pkeywords={_Logos}}^p but without using wildcards in the search]. That way I can search for either Logos resources or non-Logos resources (I use other tags like _eBook or _eBook (Google) or _eBook (Kindle) which helps too).
So, effectively I now have the vast majority of my resources in Logos, and search or navigate for them using collections and mytags in Logos. I use Zotero simply as a single location of all resources for bibliographic entry into MS Word using the Zotero addin. I don't use Zotero for categorising my library any longer, because I was duplicating the task I had already done in Logos, and it wasn't particularly helpful since it only benefited me for the much smaller number of hard copy resources I have outside Logos. (I also categorise resources within Logos into collections using mytags based on a detailed but selective use of the Dewey classification.)
0 -
Austin Decker said:
5. If I export when I have logos 5, then want to export when I get new resources will it create duplicated bib. info in Zotero? How can you keep exporting new resources without duplications?
I should have suggested about that too. When I get new resources in Logos, I add mytags to each one, based on the Dewey system I mentioned, by copying and pasting from a spreadsheet. For each batch, I also add a new export tag, such as "ZZ exported 2 Nov 2014". This tag changes for each batch exported. I also add a universal tag "XXtagged" for every batch, which helps me sort out new resources from updated ones [in the library search pane I enter "* ANDNOT mytag:XX" and only new resources which are untagged are shown; this is the last tag to enter against the resources to stop the filter removing them from view before I've finished tagging them]. When I've entered all the tags, I then create a new collection (and delete it afterwards), based on the exported mytag. I then export that collection, which includes just those new resources, and import them into Zotero as normal. A quick filter in Zotero to separate journals from books, and that's me sorted.
If we get management for mytags (hopefully it will come soon), I'll delete all the obsolete 'exported' tags. But that's not a big problem.
0 -
Charles Williams said:
I use Zotero as well and I have never been very happy about the quality of the Zotero entries when I have imported my Logos library. The citations have been poor and incomplete and with a sizable library this is labor intensive to fix. I am confident that the same poor bibliographic data would also apply to anyone using Endnote, or Mendeley or any other bibliographic software.
Hi Charles, as you note, the same problem would be true of exporting and importing to any software, so it can't be avoided. I leave the data as-is in Zotero, but when I'm making a citation of a previously uncited resource I check it for accuracy. Checking only the ones I use is much less labour instensive than correcting them all.
0 -
Both of your replies were incredible! I love the details. I will definitely be taking all of this advice into account for what I do.
0 -
This is a useful thread and thanks for the comments. The point I was making however is that the accuracy of the data that gets imported into bibliographic software depends on the accuracy of the metadata on each resource file and the accuracy of the bibtex export routine built into Logos. It seems to me that there is a problem in one or both of these if the import data in any bibliographic software is consistently inaccurate or incomplete. If I do an import from EBSCO for comparison, the bibliographic data is almost always perfect. If I do an import from Amazon or Library of Congress, the data is good with a few errors. Clearly the determining factor is the metadata and export routine in the source. Import of data from Logos it is almost always very incomplete or just plain wrong. This leads me to think the problem is in Logos and that is can be fixed. I only use Zotero for citations
Anyway its' not a big deal and it does not detract from how much i love Logos. It is an amazing and wonderful tool. I use it constantly in sermon and lesson prep and in academic writing and research. I can't imagine life "before Logos." Tuning up this particular problem would simply make Logos even more efficient in its support for writing.
0 -
Hi Charles, I agree with all you've said. EBSCO, British Library and Library of Congress all result in near perfect results. Amazon falls down mainly in not having the location of the publisher, but is otherwise very good. The problem seems to lie with Logos not exporting consistently well. But it suffices for unpublished sermons for me, but I put more attention into the citations when others would see it. I'm just pleased to be able to export as-is, although it would be better if either metadate or the export process were more accurate.
On a related topic, it would be wonderful to be able to select some journal articles to export too, instead of having to create these mostly manually each time a citation is needed (from the journal publication volume overall). Imagine being able to right-click on a journal article or journal publication and either select to copy the citation(s) to clipboard, or export. That would save a lot of work, especially for the more scholarly and published users of Logos.
0 -
I agree that (especially with the galaxie and some other of other older journals) the bibliographic information can use a tuning up. However outside of the journals, for the most part I've had quite good luck with proper formatting when pasted into word.Charles Williams said:This is a useful thread and thanks for the comments. The point I was making however is that the accuracy of the data that gets imported into bibliographic software depends on the accuracy of the metadata on each resource file and the accuracy of the bibtex export routine built into Logos. It seems to me that there is a problem in one or both of these if the import data in any bibliographic software is consistently inaccurate or incomplete. If I do an import from EBSCO for comparison, the bibliographic data is almost always perfect. If I do an import from Amazon or Library of Congress, the data is good with a few errors. Clearly the determining factor is the metadata and export routine in the source. Import of data from Logos it is almost always very incomplete or just plain wrong. This leads me to think the problem is in Logos and that is can be fixed. I only use Zotero for citations
Anyway its' not a big deal and it does not detract from how much i love Logos. It is an amazing and wonderful tool. I use it constantly in sermon and lesson prep and in academic writing and research. I can't imagine life "before Logos." Tuning up this particular problem would simply make Logos even more efficient in its support for writing.
L2 lvl4 (...) WORDsearch, all the way through L10,
0
