shall do. is there any particular difference in features i should look for / try in the course of using both scripts? thx.
i think i follow you. but let me ask this: instead of reproducing the same group in different tag - folders, why not just create one “global” in one tag - folder, and then replicate it in other tag - folder taxonomies? wouldn’t that work - and avoid the clutter you detailed? thx.
Depends on your preferences, IMO. I cannot comment on what those might be.
Replication of group tags may work just fine. I was offering an explanation to your question as to why group tagging is an option rather than the standard modality. Group tags were enabled by default when tagging was first introduced, but were later made optional as they can be confusing, and unpredictable, for the new user. Or even the experienced user.
My own experience over the years of working with group tags, as well as assigning regular tags to regular groups, is that it is a less than ideal means of document classification. As a result, I’ve done away with both as I’ve found it preferable to organize related documents by groups using the AI in DEVONthink, and manually assign additional metadata about the documents with tags. That keeps my number of tags to a minimum, which makes it much easier for me to actually use tags when searching and organizing relationships among documents.
The database organization that works for me may be very different from what works for you, and it’s great that DEVONthink has so much flexibility to accommodate a variety of organizational strategies.
just tried using that you created, at the very top of this thread. is that the one you were referring to? thx.
thx. i think i follow you. just to clarify, i was only planning to use tags as part of this annotation process - i.e., one thought, one tag (or theme). otherwise, i agree: using tags would otherwise seem dangerously extraneous.
ok, bottom line, i’m def. interested in trying this group - tag approach with the scripts in this thread. is it possible to make the modifications you mentioned as a way of doing this? (right now i tend to use Frederiko’s script more regularly - just thought it was the same as yours, but i’m trying out yours now.) thx.
Sure, but sorry I’m not going to be doing custom rewrites any more 
Too costly, and I’ve moved on to Highlights.
@korm, Can you explain why you moved onto Highlights? I like the app very much as well, but it doesn’t have the ability to use the tag / note / link features in your script and @Frederiko’s script. Or is there a way that you use Highlights - and then use these scripts?
Thanks for your input. It just helps inform the best approach for me!
understood. so, how would you suggest i make the necessary modifications you suggested? i don’t have any experience writing scripts/code. i defer to you and other users. thx again for your help and input. hope i can find a solution.
I can’t guarantee anything but …
if you
a) mock up the user interface, using any graphics editor, and the elements from http://www.bluem.net/pashua-docs-latest.html; and
b) very carefully describe the behaviour you want, preferably with screenshots of the expected end results; and
c) describe how you would achieve the results manually;
so that you understand very clearly how you want DT to perform the task and how DT would actually perform it.
I will have a look and see if its doable in a reasonable amount of time.
Defining what you want to do and how to do it, is often 80% of solving the problem. You need to understand your workflow very well before you can map it out in this way.
A good way to start, is to look for other tools that may have elements of what you want. In my case I played with casemap and watched various training videos to decide what were the most important features for me to replicate.
Frederiko
first of all, i want to thank you very much for your work, and korm’s work, creating this script. it’s a tremendous contribution, and it isn’t lost on any of us.
second, thank you for considering my requested modification. i really do appreciate it.
i honestly don’t think your dialogue box interface should be changed at all - that’s not at all the issue for me. really - i’d only reproduce what you’ve already created. i’d only add two wishes to the interface, if they’re all achievable: 1) a longer drop down scroll length for the drop down bars (as there a bit tight on width), and 20 instead of having the “Annotation name” auto-fill with the file name, it would be great to have it auto-fill with the first few words of the citation. again - just wish list ideas, but i think they’d be great enhancements.
anyway, i’d use the same hierarchical tags that already come with the script, i.e., “Issues” and “People” (as well as “follow up research” and other research-related task i’ve created under your Annotations tag).
i’ve attached the following screen shot of what i’m seeking, per your instructions.
the process is actually identical to yours, with one difference: instead of using the tag taxonomy located in the the root database hierarchy (i.e., the default setup for tags, for DTP databases), i’m trying to create tag taxonomies located in different groups within the same database - so that i can replicate certain tag - folders between groups.
in the screen shot, i’ve assign a project to its own database to create distinct tags per groups - where there are unique “Issues” and “People” for a given project. but…there are some crucial instances in which a person or issue would overlap elsewhere, and should belong to (or be replicated to) another project. for instance, when i’m working on disparate projects, i sometimes find common themes / points of convergence (specific “global” issues that should be replicated between projects). or, if i’m writing a book, i’d like to have focuses chapters with particular “Issues” and “People,” per chapter, but certain “global” themes that run through the whole book.
we’ve established that one cannot replicate tags between databases, so…i made a dummy database, and created two groups in it - Project A and Project B - which are located outside of the root database hierarchy (that is, Dummy Database->Project A and Project B), and then i created tag - folders inside of both groups by turning off “Exclude Groups from Tagging” in database properties. as you can see, i manually created the same hierarchical (or parent) tags that already come with your script: “Issues” and “People” (as well as “follow up research” under your Annotations tag).
my objective was to replicate a tag - folder, and therein its contents, for “Issues” and “People” that have “global” significance, and therefore ought to be replicated elsewhere. through my setup, i was able to replicate the “global” tag-folder (and its contents) between different project-groups - Project A and Project B - in the same database. again, this allow users to have distinct tags per groups, while also providing an option to replicate certain tag - folders.
so, the modification seems to boil down to trying to figure out how to make your script work with a tag - folder set up (as opposed to DTP’s default tag set up) by turning off “Exclude Groups from Tagging” in database properties. btw, i tried using your script with this setting, and it didn’t work…
the only thing i fear is that replicating tag - folders with this approach could also mean replicating all of the parent “Issues” and “People” tags. if possible, it would be great to eliminate all other such parent folders - since it would seem to create a bloated system of extraneous tags.
i think that about covers it. i will say that the script is amazing in its current form, and (again) we’re very grateful. i’ll tack on one more to the wish list: it would be great if there was a way to also create something like this for the iPad as well, since i do most document annotation on the iPad - and it would therefore speed up my work process considerable to add in tags during that annotation process. (think TagNotate - but for an app that actually works, syncs with DropBox, has been annotation, and interfaces with DTP!)
i thank you again for your amazing work, and for even considering this request. as alway, i’m happy to consider different suggested modalities. thx!
Hi,
I know this is a long thread, so forgive another post. @Frederiko and @korm have developed a wonderful script, and we’ve greatly benefited by it. So, thank you again, guys!
While I seriously dig @NZT-48’s suggestions, I realize it might entail a bit of work to make it happen. So…I’m just wondering if it might be possible to accommodate just two of the requests that were last mentioned, that is:
-Is there’s a way to make longer drop down scroll length for the Tag drop down bars - since it would be super helpful for those of us w/ many tags and folders!
-As @NZT-48 said, “instead of having the 'Annotation name; auto-fill with the file name, it would be great to have it auto-fill with the first few words of the citation”? Possible? (Please say yes!)
It would be amazing if there’s any way to accommodate those small changes. I’m happy to make inquiries at another forum as well, if that would make it any easier.
Thanks so much everyone!
No i am afraid not. Its an internal constraint of the gui interface.
Yes, v3 will have this as an option.
Afraid however I have not come up with a method to accommodate @NZT-48 suggestions.
Frederiko
I see. Makes sense. Do you have another suggested approach for grouping & viewing tags, given this limitation? Happy to even try to hack a solution… Thanks!
Hooray!!! This will seriously speed up my work process - significantly! Cannot wait for v3! Thank you so much (in advance), Frederiko! Looking forward to seeing what you’ve done next…whenever v3 is available! Thanks again!
i realize my last post on this thread was a bit long (was just trying to clearly detail what i was seeking), and the methodological request was probably too difficult - and too much to ask. apologies for that. i suppose i’ve just been trying to find an organizational approach that will enable me to maintain focused tags per each project, while at the same time not bloating my tag system so that it doesn’t become unmanageable and difficult to sort through. i thought i found a possible solution to that through the aforementioned approach, but it’s obviously not in the cards.
actually, i was wondering the same thing.
if there’s some way to achieve this - by making tag folders / subfolders easier to manage and navigate, especially in the dialog box’s drop down scrolls - that might solve a big portion of the tag organizational problem that i’m facing.
please let me know if you have any ideas or suggested approaches in this regard. thanks.
just out of curiosity, when do you think v3 will be available? i’m only asking because i’d love to annotate a batch of work, and would prefer to hold off on it if v3 will becoming out soon.
thanks again for your extraordinary efforts producing this - and answering our questions. really appreciate it.
How could I modify this script to increase the font size of the resulting rtf file?
I can hardly read the files as it is.
Thanks, this is a great script!
This script has been updated with a new version in this thread
[url]Annotation Pane (Annotation with Links, Notes, Tags v3)]
The new script has a template file stored in the database which is easily edited for format and font style.
Frederiko