I was looking for a way to mark certain PDFs as “not a duplicate” since they aren’t but get detected as such from DT. I couldn’t find anything, so I thought I’d ask in the forum. Here I am.
I would like to be able to store an original and an annotated PDF in the same Database without them showing up as duplicates. Has anyone had success in getting something like this to work? Right now I keep my annotated PDFs in another Database, but I would really like to merge the two.
Maybe even something like Papers has - supplemental data - gotten implemented in DT, but I couldn’t find it?
+1 This suggestion arises regularly, and it would be nice to be able to override false duplicates. (Says me, who doesn’t have to program what I suggest )
Haha! Thanks, korm for seeing things as they are. I don’t know how many times I’ve suggested things that I had no idea how easy or hard it would be to actually implement! LOL
the work around I posted above will fix the issue of it showing up in the duplicates folder.
BUT… it will still be colored blue - thinking it is a duplicate.
So a better would be to open the document that DevonThink is a duplicate, and add an annotation or a note. i.e. - a note that says it is not a duplicate. This will change the file size of the document, so DevonThink will no longer classify it as a duplicate.
Hopefully the programmers will come up with a simple solution to be able to right click and declare it as ‘not a duplicate’ — which would resolve the issue.
elaine, I’ve added a response to the other topic where you posted the same info as is here. There is a challenge with duplicate posts that can be just as frustrating as false duplicate documents in your database. Here on the forum, we can end up with multiple conversations in multiple threads that are hard to follow and have a good, continuous discussion.
I know this thread is like eight years old, but since I am struggling with this now: what is a reliable way to accomplish iHuman’s suggestion across filetypes? I can’t get rid of duplicate emails (even though the recipient is different, which I would hope would have done the trick).
I was already doing that, But for those edge cases, adding a tag to exclude them from the duplicates smart rule is totally fine. Thanks for getting back to me, though!
)