@ngan just to make sure I understand what you’re saying, the concern is: why isn’t there a way to delink or unlink the annotation file in DT3 versus “Remove”, which unlinks and trashes the note?
I think I get what you’re saying. Currently, there is only one annotation file allowed per document using the inspector annotation feature. This means that if you want to start a new annotation file, the only way is to “Remove” the current annotation, which also trashes it. With the DT2 method, you could generate multiple annotations by manually removing the URL from the file being annotated and run the annotation template again.
I also think that @BLUEFROG has a good point. Unlinking the annotation would mean that the bi-directional referencing between the annotation and the file being annotated is severed. If the annotation still pertains to the file being annotated, it would seem prudent to preserve the bi-directional reference. Otherwise, there would be a build up of semi-orphaned files.
-
As it currently stands, the “Remove” function completely cleans the annotated document of the annotation file. This allows for a new annotation to be created.
1a. Those who use the annotation for a fleeting note, rather than a permanent note, might find this to be a very useful feature.
1b. [quote=“ngan, post:1, topic:48551”]
User may hit remove accidentally
[/quote] This is a good point. I think it can be addressed fairly easily. Either, when you click remove there is a secondary prompt that asks you to confirm (similar to when a database is deleted). OR because the annotation file is moved to the trash, but still linked to the annotated document, the “Remove” function should change to “Restore” function. That way a user could go into the trash and restore the note that was accidentally or otherwise removed.
1b1. The issue with restore is, what if the user has created a new annotation in the meantime? How can one retain both annotations? -
I think what we might be looking at here is the need for a feature or function called annotation stack.
2a. Annotation Stack would allow for a subfolder to be created in the Annotations group that is titled something like " ‘annotated file name’ stack".
2b. This would allow the user to generate multiple bi-directionally linked annotation files for any given document while keeping all of those files organized in the subgroup. -
This raises a further question: how would the inspector Annotations feature be modified to accommodate the Annotation Stack?
3a. By default it displays the most recent annotation or last accessed annotation.
3b. It also includes an option to View Annotation Stack or View All Annotations, which would allow the user to select which of the multiple annotations they want to view. OR this would reveal the Annotation Stack/subfolder where the user could then see all the annotation files.
This is basically what I have in my Zotero workflow. For a given bibliographic entry, I have multiple annotations (Zotero calls them “Notes”) that build up for each file. Each of the annotations serve slightly different purposes, and it is much more efficient to view them as separate Notes rather than have all that text in a single file.
And when some notes - the fleeting ones - serve their purpose, I can trash this information, while retaining the permanent Note/annotation.
In Zotero’s version of the inspector (right sidebar) I can see and manage all these additional notes that pertain to the selected bibliographic entry.
@ngan What do you think about all of this? Perhaps what we’re looking at here is expanding the Annotation feature, rather than necessarily a problem with the “Remove” function itself?