Public beta 2

And no announcement? Only 15MB for the Pro Office version? Am I missing something?

There was an announcement to the DEVON blog and I also received an email announcing PB2. The Pro Office is (temporarily) missing the OCR plug-in, thus the smaller size. More info on the blog here.

Any clue when tags / multiple classification will be available? I am waiting to import tons of info in DT but really cannot without this (unless there is some recommended approach to avoid re-doing it all again later).

I’m really looking forward to tagging also, so I’m hopeful it will appear soon.

Thanks Greg. So Beta 2 was released because a time stamp expired, that’s good to know. :confused:
I’ll stick to my 1.5.4 for now, especially since it isn’t openly available for download anymore :wink:

I third the motion by Kay and Greg above. Can you give us a timetable for implementation of tags? I too am reluctant to import anything into DTP until the feature is in place. The recent developments with OpenMeta (Tags, Tagit, etc) make the absence here all that much more vexing …

Speaking of timetables, is there a target date for the gold release of DEVONthink 2?

Have they ever said they were implementing tags? It seems to me like systems tend to be oriented around tags, or oriented around some other method of indexing and filing. I bought DT because its NOT tag centric. If anything is added in regard to tags, I hope that it can be turned off or ignored so as not to disrupt the current way that DT works… which is very good.

Absolutely. Tagging, along with having multiple databases open concurrently, are arguably the two most anticipated features of DT 2. Tags are already in the beta, sort of. They are not user-manageable yet, but (assuming you are using a DT 2 beta) look in the Information panel for the tags section. Given what I know about tagging in DT 2, I don’t believe that there is any need for concern that you will be forced to change your workflow because of tags.

I’m glad to hear from a kindred spirit!

Having worked with computers and databases since the 1960s, and with large collections of documents before then, I’ve always viewed most tagging systems, such as assigning keywords to documents, or organizing them in a very tightly structured filing system, as boring drudgery that was necessary to find a particular piece or paper or book or was necessary in the primitive databases of the early days of computing.

I’m fundamentally lazy, and will find any excuse available to avoid boring tasks such as tightly organized filing or adding keywords to the more than 150,000 documents in my DTPO databases. The whole point of putting my material in a good computer database is to help me avoid that kind of nonsense.

My attitude is also based on a recognition that routines such as keyword assignments to individual documents tend to be subjective and time-bound (what I think is a salient keyword at the moment of assignment). The result is that keywords can be not only logically inconsistent, but can be an impediment to looking at tagged documents from a different perspective than at the time of tagging.

So I take a very different approach than conventional tagging. I use topically designed databases, each of which contains documents that are useful to me (I don’t put everything on my computers into my databases).

A topical design is in itself a form of tagging. My databases range from two that reflect my professional interests in environmental science and policy and regulatory issues, to others that have a simpler purpose, such as collections of financial records containing banking and investment accounts, tax records and so on.

Within each database I use another form of tagging, organization of content into groups that contain “clouds” of similar information content. I rarely do very detailed sub-organization of my groups.

I never assign keywords to, or annotate/mark up my reference documents such as scientific papers or copies of regulations. But I’ll often associate rich text notes with some of those references, my own searchable notes and comments, which become part of the database.

If I’m working on a writing project, I’ll create a new group or even a new database for that project. I’ll glean useful reference materials from one or more of my databases for that project by using searches, smart groups and/or See Also lists. I will likely duplicate some of those references into the project group or database, and perhaps mark up or summarize them – leaving the original reference documents untouched. Within a project group or database I may use more detailed tagging, perhaps by assigning Label and/or State cues that have a specific meaning for the project, or even, once in a while, keywords – as I have a specific perspective for that project. When I’m finished with the project, especially if it’s a group within a database, I’ll erase such temporary tagging as Label or State tags, so that I can reuse them for other purposes within that database.

So yes, I do use some forms of tagging, but I do it the lazy way, maximizing use of DEVONthink’s abilities to help me find the information I need for a particular purpose, whether that is writing an article or collecting documentation for filing an income tax report.

DEVONthink 2 will introduce a new tagging system that’s flexible and easy to use. I’ll add that to my arsenal, but will keep to my habits of minimizing the work of tagging at the “front end” when new documents are added, while spending a bit more time at the project level to assemble and use the information in my databases.

Bell_DeVille and convergent,

I really like the powerful search engine of DT also, but tagging will be a plus alpha.
If I can add some key word which is easy to memorize and is not included in the document, it’ll be easier to find that objects.

Both of the above statements are true.

But I can see myself spending 5 minutes or more per document (counting subsequent revisions and additions to keywords) choosing and typing the most appropriate keywords for each. To tell the truth, I would find assigning keywords to many of my documents an intellectual challenge.

Example: Several times I’ve talked about how See Also identified a paper on factors that affect chemical reaction equilibria as similar to a paper about the influence of invasive species on the population dynamics of native species in an ecological setting. Indeed, that similarity is beautifully and fundamentally true. But how the heck could I have, a priori, assigned keywords to each of those documents that would have tagged them as related? I’ve spent hours thinking about that.

OK. I’ve got more than 150,000 documents in my databases. I didn’t assign keywords as they were added to databases. How much time would it have taken me to assign really useful keywords to each of them? What would have been the payoff for expenditure of that time and effort?

The new tagging system in DEVONthink 2 is a more powerful and searchable extension of the concept of assigning documents into groups. It’s flexible and adaptable. so — after having discovered that relationship noted in the example above — it’s easily created in the tagging structure.

Bill, I don’t think going back through 150,000 documents to tag them (at 5 minutes apiece) would necessarily be practical.

But I can see a personal use for tagging… when I create a document (typically an RTF), I might want to note something as a bug or a feature request or even something I have to follow-up on. I would like to be able to simply add these tags, so I can do a smart search. Right now, if I do a full text search, I may get 4000 documents which have the word “bug” or “flu bug” or “buggy” when none of those are what I want. I want items specifically with the tag bug.

And I cannot put those items in a specific area of the hierarchy labeled “bug” to get that tag as it is now. The documents belong where I personally file them.

I can in fact use the notes area to do this right now, but it lacks autocomplete or any kind of hierarchy support, and so is fairly inefficient, and is quite hard to access as well (I have to use the inspector, as showing it as a column screws my view settings totally).

Tags handle this nicely, and I don’t know of anything else that will really suffice as cleanly.

The new tagging system in DT 2, when activated, will let you identify the tag “bug” to any document. The documents will still be where you filed them.

Even I may use it.

It has been interesting to see how the terms I use have shifted as my interests have changed. The sources I have organized are still useful but I’ve come to view them differently. That’s why, for example, I appreciated that the site I used for years that let me tag bookmarks (like delicious) had an easy way to rename tags and merge them. So, any app that adds tags must absolutely have an easy way to manage them. I hope when this is implemented in DTP2 that there will be an easy way to say “y’know that tag X that I’ve applied to 200 PDFs over the last two years and that tag Y that I’ve applied to 10 in the last week? Well, I’d like to use Z as the term now for all of them instead of X & Y.”

There’s a site I use for music - It records your listening data. It also lets you tag tracks there in your “music library.” A couple years ago they made some sort of change that took down their tag management feature. So you can still tag, but changing a tag requires you to go to each track and change it. I don’t use the tagging feature there because I know I’ll change my mind every couple years.

When will tagging be available?
Also, I have been using Keyword Manager for iPHoto for a long time and find it to be the easiest way to organize and assign tags. typing in the first few letters of a tag and having it pop up makes it easy to assign 5 tags to a document in just a few seconds. The way there are tags and sub-tabs makes keeping them organized really simple and powerful. I really despise systems (like Evernote) that make you drag your documents onto a tag in a very very long list, in order to assign tags to multiple documents.

When DEVONtechnlogies releases it. :slight_smile:

Seriously… no release dates for tagging, global inbox, etc. have been pre-announced and probably won’t be. Sometimes DTech says a bug has been fixed or a feature will be available in the next or a future release but rarely gives specific dates.

I like KM’s tag UI, too.

Me too! I just got my scanner and have scanned my entire file cabinet, but it would be a waste of time to organize it all in DT without tags. It would be a mess, actually.

Each time I look at my “folder hierarchy” in DT I get quite nervous about just what kind of tag implementation and interface we will see… and when :confused: