 |
|
List Archives >
Reference Manager List Archive >
Archive by date >
This Month By Date >
This Month By Topic
RE: Clear marks -> records are only marked on
| RE: Clear marks -> records are only marked on |
|
Author: Thomas
Posted: Thu, 22 Jun 2006 14:40:00 -0800
|
You could always try creating a reference index from those marked
records, peform a new search and then later on adding the new hits to
your old reference index. In that way, all marks can be preserved.
Thomas D'haenens
Bibliotheekmedewerker
Instituut voor Natuur- en BosOnderzoek
Tel. (0) 54 - 43 61 98
Mob. (0) 472 - 21 52 93
e-mail "thomas.dhaenens"
-----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
Van: "Robert.Palermo" "mailto:Robert.Palermo"
Verzonden: woensdag 21 juni 2006 23:15
Aan: "RIS-List"
Onderwerp: FW: <RefMan> Clear marks -> records are only marked on
retrieved
Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2006 14:50:00 -0800
Sender: "listmaster"
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: "ris-list"
I also believe it an inconvenience that records marked in a retrieved
list are not also marked in the original database. So I hope the RIS
folks are monitoring this thread.
In finding relevant references by a search, I often determine only a
subset of the retrieve references are suitable. I would like to mark
them, and then do an additional search, and then again mark additional
relevant references.
If these marks were all preserved and recapitulated in the main database
window, I could then sort by the marks and get the accumulated
references I want to insert.
There have been numerous instances when I would have exploited this
strategy.
-----Original Message-----
From: "Peter.Ma??????????????????????
[mailto:"Peter.Ma??????????????????????]
Sent: Monday, June 19, 2006 3:37 PM
To: "RIS-List"
Subject: <RefMan> Clear marks -> records are only marked on retrieved
tab
Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2006 16:10:00 -0800
Sender: "listmaster"
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: "ris-list"
I just wrote a posting, that RM clears the marks after having made a new
F5.
After further investigation I found out that this is actually not what
happens. Rather, RM handles marks in the retrieved tab and on the tab
for the actual database, separately. So even though I mark certain
records on the retrieved tab, this is not reflected on the tab of the
database.
I think that the retrieved tab is a new instance of a subset in the
original database, should be considered purely a reference to the
original record, and whatever manipulation you make on the retrieved tab
should be reflected in the original database. I know that marking
records is not really ammending the database records, but still it would
be more logical if RM replicated the marking of records made on the
retrieved tab on the tab of the database. Because F5 (or F4) is the only
way to find the records, you want to mark, and the whole logic behind
marking records is that first you mark a number of records, and then you
do something with them. In Endnote you don't have this problem, as you
can just type the first letters of the author, and it will jump to that
author, you are still in the correct database window and can just mark
it. But as this is (regretably) not possible in RM, you are left with
search for records in order to mark them.
Of course - and that will probably be what I have to do - I can find the
records by browsing up and down in the database, but this is really not
feasible in a large database.
Have I overlooked something?
Peter, Denmark.
|
[View Complete Thread]
Previous by date: Advantages & disadvantages of version 11 - feedback, David R Price
Next by date: web url, Vasileios Karalazos {PG}
Previous thread: Importing from WoS problem, Mark
Next thread: web url, Vasileios Karalazos {PG}
|
|
|
RSS Feeds
collection
