Not signed in (Sign In)
 

Quick Links

Vanilla 1.1.10 is a product of Lussumo. More Information: Documentation, Community Support.

    • CommentAuthornmarais
    • CommentTimeJul 13th 2007
     
    Hi,

    After being in the Citation Wilderness for a long time, a friend recently suggested that I look at Connotea. I was very exited by what I saw, and through Connotea also found Zotero and CiteULike. As an Electronic Engineering PhD student, a quick summary of my impressions are:

    Zotero: By far the best at getting actual bibliographical information, responsive pleasant user experience, most active developer community.

    Connotea: Best community features, weakest at obtaining bibliographical information (in my field anyway). Has almost no users in my field.

    CiteULike: Better at obtaining biobliographical info than Connotea, worse at community features/tagging. More but not many users in my field.

    Ideally I'd like to use Zotero to build my database, and then have the ability to sync it with Connotea for the community features. From reading the forums it seems that some kind of online support is being planned for Zotero, but it's not yet sure if it will be by supporting an external site, of by having a Zotero specific online site.

    If the Zotero online experience is as good as the local experience I'm all for it, but I'd vote very strongly for supporting existing community sites first. Partly because it's less risky and quicker, and partly to make use of their existing communities! Connotea seems ideal for this because of its Web API.

    So, I'd like to know:

    What is the prevailing opinion amongst Zotero developers about how to support online databases, and how far up the priority list is this feature ? What is the expected timeframe for such support?

    Thanks
    Neilen
    • CommentAuthornoksagt
    • CommentTimeJul 13th 2007
     
    but it's not yet sure if it will be by supporting an external site, of by having a Zotero specific online site.
    There WILL be a central zotero server. However, the devs have also encouraged others to build zotero "utilities:" additional firefox plugins to do things like sync to Connotea or CUL.
    Partly because it's less risky and quicker, and partly to make use of their existing communities!
    The data model of both Connotea and CUL are much simpler than Zotero's. One disadvantage of relying on a particularly third party provider would be the misfit between data models. An additional point is that Zotero has public funding to build this infrastructure & so isn't tied to a particular publisher (Connotea is from the Nature Publishing Group).

    Read what Dan has to say about plans for 2.0.
    • CommentAuthornmarais
    • CommentTimeJul 13th 2007
     
    Thanks, the plans for 2.0 link answers my questions :)
    • CommentAuthorbbolker
    • CommentTimeJan 16th 2008
     
    Just wondering if there were any thoughts on an interim Zotero-plus-Connotea solution. I certainly agree that in the long run an all-Zotero solution is great, but in the meanwhile jumping back and forth between Zotero (to save refs) and Connotea (to share them) is a pain in the ... . I wonder how long it would take to hack up a quick-and-dirty "push to Connotea" app? (I am, alas, technically incapable of this, although I would contribute $25 to a bounty for it.)

    Along these lines, it would also be helpful to find ways of being more aggressive about saving DOI links (or URLs), which Connotea demands -- often the DOI link is there somewhere on a page -- don't know if this is a matter of modifying scrapers or pushing publishers to add the metadata ...

Zotero Forums are powered by Vanilla 1.1.5a