List Archives >  EndNote List Archive >  Archive by date >  This Month By Date >  This Month By Topic

Excessive complexity in EndNote?

Search email archive for  

Excessive complexity in EndNote?
Author:    Posted: Mon, 12 Sep 2005 12:18:01 -0400
The following quote from a recent post really resonated with me (author not cited, to protect the innocent): Endnotes CWYW [Cite While You Write] is just [a] killer. It creates problems in all sorts of evil ways, and I disabled it long ago. I've never figure[d] out how it is a "feature" in the first place, but it's not worth whatever advantage it's supposed to offer. It would indeed be interesting to know: Has the added benefit of CWYW compared to just straightforward citation entry actually created enough additional productivity for those who successfully use it to balance off the lost productivity, hassle, and resulting anger and frustration for those who try to use it and run into problems? Although I've never tried to use CWYW myself, I suspect the answer is, "No, it hasn't". But to look at this more generally, I think the deeper and more fundamental problem with the current evolution of EndNote is quite simply ***excessive complexity***. That is: * "Features" and complexities that create more problems for the users who try to use them than they're worth in increased ease of use and productivity for those users. * "Features" and complexities that take longer to figure out and learn than the time saved by using them. * "Features" and complexities sufficiently complex that they're impossible to remember between uses. * "Features" and complexities that have unanticipated side effects and "gotchas" or require large numbers of special cases. And perhaps most important: * "Features" and complexities whose inclusion burns up vendor programming effort and program design resources that could better be used in making sure the basic capabilities of the application are really solid, well designed, and well implemented That, I really believe, is the situation that Thomson has gotten itself into with EndNote, with CWYW just being one example. Other fundamental examples besides CWYW include excessive numbers of reference types and reference fields, requiring excessively complex style definition and reference type table maintenance procedures; excessively complex styles, style syntax, and style rules; excessively complex import and export rules; excessively complex term list rules; and in general an attempt to add built-in features to deal programmatically with every possible special case or oddball situation that any obscure situation or user might call for. The contrast to this would be a lean, simple, readily grasped application that focuses on fundamentals and does most if not all of what most users want, and then lets those with special needs do post-processing of their manuscripts or bibliographies in their own word processors or text editors to implement their own specialized needs. The cover of the EndNote 8 manual says "Bibliographies Made Easy(TM)" (and I'd praise it as being actually a quite well done manual). But when the instruction manual for what's supposed to be, not your life's primary mission but just a simple auxiliary tool to assist in your real work, gets up to ***586 pages*** of densely packed material, something has gone wrong.

re: Excessive complexity in EndNote?
Author:    Posted: Tue, 13 Sep 2005 16:11:16 -0400
--- siegman@stanford wrote: The following quote from a recent post really resonated with me (author not cited, to protect the innocent): Endnotes CWYW [Cite While You Write] is just [a] killer. It creates problems in all sorts of evil ways, and I disabled it long ago. I've never figure[d] out how it is a "feature" in the first place, but it's not worth whatever advantage it's supposed to offer. --- end of quote --- I'm about to install EndNote 9 on Windows, and soon, probably, EndNote 9 on Macintosh. Somehow I avoided 8 altogether. I think that was perhaps a good move. I'm a Reference Librarian at Dartmouth College. I teach this stuff (mostly EndNote and Refworks, but now there's WriteNow and Connotea and RefViz and OnFolio and so much more...) And I'm a Mac-lover, so I have to be "bi-platform." And I'm something of an old-timer. SO... YES! EndNote is too darned complicated! I think that long ago there were TWO PRODUCTS. EndNote and "EndNote-Plus". One of them was lean and mean. Before THAT, EndNote was actually a "desk-accessory" -- For you youngsters, think "widget..." -- a tiny capable helper-program, easily invoked from the Apple menu, like a little calculator or printer-chooser thing. Take me back! (Except those were the days of MacWrite on a Mac-Plus (insert floppy; insert floppy; insert floppy, etc.), which choked and died after about 8 pages or so...) ______________________ -- Tom Mead Biomedical Libraries Dartmouth College HB 6168 Hanover, NH 03755 603 650-1741 office />

Re: Excessive complexity in EndNote?
Author:    Posted: Tue, 13 Sep 2005 16:08:52 -0400
On 12 Sep 2005, at 17:18, wrote: It would indeed be interesting to know: Has the added benefit of CWYW compared to just straightforward citation entry actually created enough additional productivity for those who successfully use it to balance off the lost productivity, hassle, and resulting anger and frustration for those who try to use it and run into problems? One benefit I have found is that it seems to have removed some strange kind of 'credibility gap' for new users. We used to get regular complaints on the lines of, "This useless program just puts in the author's name and a number and I wanted proper references!" It was sometimes hellishly difficult to convince them they really would end up with formatted references if they persevered to the end of the workbook. I would guess ISI used to get similar calls to their technical support and CWYW fixed it. Rosemary Rodd, LLCC

FW: Excessive complexity in EndNote?
Author:    Posted: Thu, 15 Sep 2005 16:43:51 -0400
I fully agree with recent postings on excessive complexity in EndNote. I am a long-time user of EndNote, currently using version 6. I just downloaded a trial version (ver. 9) and is really unhappy with the fact that EndNote's clunky interface has not been revamped. EndNote needs a real face-lift that makes it easier to use, with better menues and a more user-friendly (even professional-looking) graphic interface. Even in version 9, EndNote looks like an old Windows 3.1 product. Another suggestion: stop shipping Endnote with hundreds (perhaps 1000s) of output styles etc. we cannot use (I still never find styles for the journals I need). Instead sell EndNote in a basic version with an offer of "plug-ins" that users buy according to needs and preferences. And, yes, give the interface an "extreme makeover"! Yours, Are Knudsen Senior researcher, PhD Chr. Michelsen Institute (CMI) P.O. Box 6033 Postterminalen, N-5892 Bergen Tel: 55 57 42 40 | Fax: 55 57 41 66 | www.cmi.no

RE: Excessive complexity in EndNote?
Author:    Posted: Mon, 19 Sep 2005 14:20:20 -0400
I disagree. This topic is extremely important for all user-group members to email suggestions about. But be careful what you wish for! They usually hear about "please make it do this" and "please make it do that" - and then they may select some to respond to (the traveling library, for example) and we complain about it. However, I have a feeling NOBODY asked for journal word templates (and who uses them?). I doubt anyone ever asked for the capacity to handle figures or tables (I have asked on this group, and nobody uses that feature either). But please, don't make us have to decide and purchase subject specific "plug-ins"! Rather than purchasing the plug-ins, why not just have a central, ISI web-based for downloading (and uploading). This benefits all the users, as a corrected or updated version of a style would be available for everyone, not just the people who notice and bother to update the one they have, or create a new one. I actually throw away the majority of the styles and only keep the ones I use in the Endnote folder- I keep many others in a "store-room" folder, in case- but certainly not all of them and move them into the folder when needed. That is something everyone should customize. Just because they are there, users don't have to keep them! Ditto for the connection files. Finally, we don't need an upgrade every year. We need a solid program. They need a longer beta testing period-particularly when they completely rework the guts of the program as they did between Endnote7 and Endnote8. If it works, who cares about the look of the interface! Leanne -----Original Message----- From: Subject: FW: Excessive complexity in EndNote? Another suggestion: stop shipping Endnote with hundreds (perhaps 1000s) of output styles etc. we cannot use (I still never find styles for the journals I need). Instead sell EndNote in a basic version with an offer of "plug-ins" that users buy according to needs and preferences. And, yes, give the interface an "extreme makeover"! Yours, Are Knudsen

Excessive complexity in EndNote, Annoyances and clunky interface
Author:    Posted: Tue, 20 Sep 2005 18:38:46 -0400
I have been watching the commentary, and finally felt compelled to add my voice. I am a professor, a doctoral student, and former owner of a software company that produced a specialty database for financial planners to keep records of their client's investments, communications, risk profiles, and goals and objectives. My perspective is that EndNote is complex, but so are most database programs if they are powerful and flexible. The interface is clunky, particularly when revising styles, but the overall program is otherwise so useful that I wouldn't part with it. As to the utility of the Cite While You Write feature, it is one of the major reasons that I bought EndNote. In my current role as a doctoral student working on my dissertation, and as a professional submitting articles to scholarly journals, CWYW and the automatic updating of the reference list are extremely valuable. (Other reasons are that EBSCO Host and ProQuest download references directly into EndNote including the abstracts.) Yes, I have to tweak all the references in the text and in the reference list when I finish -- which is an annoyance -- but at least I know that they are there where they should be. Everything that I write is in APA 5th style, and the template has many errors in it. I have corrected some of them, but not enough that I would feel comfortable uploading it for others to use. (Some of the things that I corrected were that references should use sentence case, use only one initial for author's names and that the reference list should be double-spaced, etc.) I am using EndNote 7. I bought EndNote 8 and installed it and went back to 7 when it 8 proved incompatible with Windows XP Service Pack 2. I know that they said that they fixed that, but since I am in the throes of my dissertation, I don't want to take a chance. Here are the things that are currently bugging me: 1. Need an APA 5th ed. style that is corrects in all areas and types of citations. 2. The Save to Endnote feature of ProQuest databases does not put the year into the proper field. Also, journal articles are characterized as General references instead of Journal references. 3. The angst I suffered trying to get it to put H. Mintzberg instead of Henry Mintzberg in CWYW and the reference list. (I had to look at every Mintzberg reference in every library and make them all uniform to correct this.) 4. This next one may be what our IT guys call DEU (Defective End User). It may be possible to do this and I just don't know how. I would like to be able to go through a library and mark the items that I want to include in a separate bibliography, not a reference list for a paper, and then, once the entries were marked, click on a button and have the bibliographic list (in proper APA 5th style, of course) go directly into a Word document. I would like to be able to choose whether to make in annotated with the abstract or not annotated. Sometimes editors want an abstract of your paper and a reference list separately from the paper itself. 5. Finally, some journal articles have their names in the library databases in ALL CAPS (Harvard Business Review does this.) I would like to have those automatically saved in Title case or sentence case. I'm sure that I have other things to correct, but those are the ones that I can think of as I write this. In conclusion, folks, I think that the program is far from perfect, but it is still very good. As someone who once owned a company that marketed a special purpose database program, I can tell you that it isn't easy to please everyone, and specific feedback from users -- not just general complaints -- help the developers improve the product. Rosilyn H. Overton, MS, CFP(r), CRPS, LTCP Assistant Professor of Finance Graduate Coordinator for Finance Department of Business Administration New Jersey City University Jersey City, NJ /> -----Original Message----- From: /> On Behalf Of "Rosemary.Rod=??????????? Sent: Tuesday, September 13, 2005 4:09 PM To: /> Subject: Re: Excessive complexity in EndNote? On 12 Sep 2005, at 17:18, wrote: It would indeed be interesting to know: Has the added benefit of CWYW compared to just straightforward citation entry actually created enough additional productivity for those who successfully use it to balance off the lost productivity, hassle, and resulting anger and frustration for those who try to use it and run into problems? One benefit I have found is that it seems to have removed some strange kind of 'credibility gap' for new users. We used to get regular complaints on the lines of, "This useless program just puts in the author's name and a number and I wanted proper references!" It was sometimes hellishly difficult to convince them they really would end up with formatted references if they persevered to the end of the workbook. I would guess ISI used to get similar calls to their technical support and CWYW fixed it. Rosemary Rodd, LLCC

RE: Excessive complexity in EndNote, Annoyances and clunky interface
Author:    Posted: Wed, 21 Sep 2005 16:42:02 -0400
Rosilyn, The way I would handle request 4, which is not exactly what you ask for (in that it is permanent) is to add a unique keyword to each of the references you want in your final list, and then to use the subject bibliography tool. Make sure the style output you want is selected first in endnote. - and have two styles, one annotated with the abstract and one not. 5. The import facility (filter and connection files) have a field parsing option, to convert ALL CAPS. This should be set to convert Uppercase to Headline or Sentence (your choice) to achieve an automatic conversion. You should also add any specific all caps words to the change case list in the preferences options of endnote. The file containing this list is a text file in the user's documents and settings folder. Leanne -----Original Message----- From: Rosilyn.H.Overton Sent: Tuesday, September 20, 2005 5:39 PM To: /> Subject: Excessive complexity in EndNote, Annoyances and clunky interface As to the utility of the Cite While You Write feature, it is one of the major reasons that I bought EndNote. In my current role as a doctoral student working on my dissertation, and as a professional submitting articles to scholarly journals, CWYW and the automatic updating of the reference list are extremely valuable. 4. I would like to be able to go through a library and mark the items that I want to include in a separate bibliography, not a reference list for a paper, and then, once the entries were marked, click on a button and have the bibliographic list (in proper APA 5th style, of course) go directly into a Word document. I would like to be able to choose whether to make in annotated with the abstract or not annotated. Sometimes editors want an abstract of your paper and a reference list separately from the paper itself. 5. Finally, some journal articles have their names in the library databases in ALL CAPS (Harvard Business Review does this.) I would like to have those automatically saved in Title case or sentence case.

RE: Excessive complexity in EndNote, Annoyances and clunky interface
Author:    Posted: Wed, 21 Sep 2005 16:40:25 -0400
> 2. The Save to Endnote feature of ProQuest databases does not > put the year into the proper field. Also, journal articles > are characterized as General references instead of Journal references. > See the information on our website at: http://www.library.uq.edu.au/faqs/endnote/proquest.html In EndNote 9, the direct export from Proquest seems to work quite well, although I haven't tested it extensively. In EndNote 7, you need to follow the instructions on the above-mentioned page. > 4. This next one may be what our IT guys call DEU (Defective > End User). It may be possible to do this and I just don't > know how. I would like to be able to go through a library and > mark the items that I want to include in a separate > bibliography, not a reference list for a paper, and then, > once the entries were marked, click on a button and have the > bibliographic list (in proper APA 5th style, of course) go > directly into a Word document. I would like to be able to > choose whether to make in annotated with the abstract or not > annotated. Sometimes editors want an abstract of your paper > and a reference list separately from the paper itself. The inability to mark references is definitely a limitation in EndNote. Of course, you can hold down the Ctrl key and select multiple references, and then use the File>Export command to create a bibliography in Word in RTF format. If you want to include the Abstract, you would need to make another version of the APA style which includes the Abstract. It's easy to do this by amending the Bibliography>Layout settings in the output style. John East University of Queensland Library Email: />

Re: Excessive complexity in Endnote?
Author:    Posted: Wed, 21 Sep 2005 16:41:08 -0400
If I understand you correctly, I did this way back in about Endnote 2 or 3 when I compiled my doctoral bibliography semi-manually. I put an asterisk in each reference I'd cited (I added it to the Keyword field after a semi-colon, but there are other ways). Then I did a search, formatted them and inserted them as a bibliography. To include an annotation (let's say from the Abstract field) I have created a style with the Abstract field added. Shalom, Ross Langmead On 21-9-05 4:00 PM, Rosilyn Overton wrote: > This next one may be what our IT guys call DEU (Defective End User). It > may be possible to do this and I just don't know how. I would like to be > able to go through a library and mark the items that I want to include in a > separate bibliography, not a reference list for a paper, and then, once the > entries were marked, click on a button and have the bibliographic list (in > proper APA 5th style, of course) go directly into a Word document. I would > like to be able to choose whether to make in annotated with the abstract or > not annotated. Sometimes editors want an abstract of your paper and a > reference list separately from the paper itself.

Re: Excessive complexity in Endnote?
Author:    Posted: Thu, 22 Sep 2005 10:53:16 -0400
I do this once in a while with my trusty old Endnotes 6.0. I highlight all the items I want (usually by doing a search first to get all the relevant citations into a box, which I can then select-all). Then I do a mass alt-2 to put them in a word document as citations. (There is a maximum of 50 in a mass alt-2, but my bibs don't often require more than one insertion.) Once all the citations are in the Word.doc, just format the bib (using any format that you want). I've had a couple of odd experienced when this didn't work, but I've just chalked those up to software weirdness. On the whole, this is a pretty straightforward process. dale > > On 21-9-05 4:00 PM, Rosilyn Overton wrote: > > >>This next one may be what our IT guys call DEU (Defective End User). It >>may be possible to do this and I just don't know how. I would like to be >>able to go through a library and mark the items that I want to include in a >>separate bibliography, not a reference list for a paper, and then, once the >>entries were marked, click on a button and have the bibliographic list (in >>proper APA 5th style, of course) go directly into a Word document. I would >>like to be able to choose whether to make in annotated with the abstract or >>not annotated. Sometimes editors want an abstract of your paper and a >>reference list separately from the paper itself. > > > > >

Re: Excessive complexity in EndNote, Annoyances and clunky interface
Author:    Posted: Thu, 22 Sep 2005 10:53:54 -0400
on 21/09/2005 10:40 PM, wrote: > The inability to mark references is definitely a limitation in EndNote. Of > course, you can hold down the Ctrl key and select multiple references, and > then use the File>Export command to create a bibliography in Word in RTF > format. Another solution is to "mark" the references by using one of the custom fields. It is then possible to search for a keyword (such as "dissertation" or "JARCE article"). Best, Troy Sagrillo

Previous by date: RE: Query about sorting an exported list, 
Next by date: RE: Citations won't update when primary author or year change, 
Previous thread: server exception, 
Next thread: Citations won't update when primary author or year change,