Looks like they go back into order when the preferences are set:
Gottfried Wilhelm Freiherr von Leibniz, G.W. Leibniz’s Monadology: An Edition for Students (University of Pittsburgh Pre 1714) para 17; WV Quine, Word and Object (Massachusetts Institute of Technology 1960) 220; Churchland (n 28) 70; Posner, Overcoming Law (n 5) 398; Pereboom (n 18) xiv; Pinker, How the Mind Works (n 23) 54.
@benjaminsigel: I wonder if you have found out more about the source for the erratic foot/endnote sizes in LibreOffice or even a workaround. I have the same issue: On exporting from Scrivener to .odt the file looks fine, all endnotes are of equal size. Once I run the scan all my endnotes get the wished for style but a) the font-size becomes uneven and b) the style format of Libre / Neo doesn't apply to the “uneven” notes anymore. It looks like epederick in this thread here over at the Scrivener forum has the same issue. His trick with Nisus works nice enough – if you're on Mac – but obviously at the loss of the final document's citation live connection to Zotero. However, I'd like to find out whether the issue could be fixed or somehow avoided altogether. Currently, I'm even unsure in who's ballpark it is.
Sorry to bring the bad news; I'm using 1.0.15. My document isn't confidential so I'd be happy to mail you a copy of the freshly exported version and another of the document after the scan.
On another note: Going back betweeen drafting and preparing chunks of a manuscript in Libre/Neo I'm using the Reverse conversion function of the plug-in to get the updated Libre document back into Scrivener. It works mostly well. I notice, however, a doubling of the page number segment after reverse conversion – i.e.
Original in drafting software: { | Wallace, (2006) | p. 61| |zu:17490:GGS2KNMS}, { | Kuan, (2008) |p. 42 | |zu:17490:ATVUTA83}
LibreOffice Version of text after odf-scan: (Wallace, 2006, S. 61), (Kuan, 2008, S. 42)
Re-converted Version in drafting software: { | (Wallace, 2006, S. 61) | p. 61 | |zu:17490:GGS2KNMS}, { | (Kuan, 2008, S. 42) | p. 42 | |zu:17490:ATVUTA83}
While this appears trivial in an individual instance it means for a document with many footnotes that I can't go back with an edited piece of text and re-import it intact into my drafting software to continue writing there. I wonder if anything can be done about that.
The problem lies with my faulty inference. I assumed the doubles would remain after the next odf-scan. Have in the meantime actually re-scanned the previously re-converted stuff (with double page numbers) and the doubling of page numbers in the resulting .odt file has indeed disappeared. While I don't quite understand why the doubles appear in the first place, they have (as your edit explains) no relevance for the next scan. Everything looks great and I'm happy that going back and forth between a draft with markers and scanned version with actual citations is possible. (By the way - greatly appreciate your documentation on zoteromusings.)
the doubles appear because the reverse scan just puts the actual citation from LO between the 1st and 2nd pipe. ODF scan actually doesn't interact at all with the Zotero database while doing the reverse scan. Changing that would probably be a relatively significant effort (though haven't looked at the code tbh).
Would think your's and fbennet's RTF/ODF-scan deserves a mentioning in the Plugins section of the documentation, presumably under Wordprocessors: https://www.zotero.org/support/plugins Edit: done.
I am having a problem similar to the one reported by lucasmacclure on September 18, 2013: when I try to run an RTF/ODF scan, it tells me that "There was an error processing this file." My ODT document does contain text, so I don't know what the issue is. Would someone care to look into this for me? If so, where should I send the file? Thanks so much.
@kithairon - thanks!
@micha
This is a scrivener-created .odt?
Send to my e-mail at the bottom of this blogpost
http://www.zotero.org/blog/summer-zotero-workshops/
sorry, we don't have the capacity to test or troubleshoot on outdated Zotero versions. You'll have to update to the most recent Zotero version (4.0.17) before we can help you (and there is, of course, a fair chance the error will just disappear in that case).
I would find it useful to know the current Zotero versions. would it make sense to place a "sticky" that includes the current versions of Z-FF, Z-SA, and the current beta? Unless I've not been looking in the right place, I need to dig through several screens to find the version numbers.
I don't have much of an opinion on this, but you can see the version numbers when you hover over the download buttons on https://www.zotero.org/download/
http://www.zotero.org/support/4.0_changelog also has the current version number(s) up top
I'd guess devs don't consider this particularly important because Zotero will in all regular settings either auto-update or tell you that an update is available.
Hi guys, many thanks for putting this piece of software together, much appreciated. However, I haven't had any success in getting the prefixes and suffixes to be rendered by RTF scan in LibreOffice. I.e., the scannable cite string {e.g., | Wilk, 1991 |p. 1 | |zu:0:2EFH2SBF} comes out as Wilk, 1991. I'm running LibreOffice 4.2.0.4, Zotero 4.0.17 and RTF/ODF 1.0.15 on a Mac 10.7.5. Any suggestions?
Hi just getting back to the discussion of garbled fonts raised by myself early in this forum and more recently by @benjaminsiegel and @kithairon. Just confirming that it persists with the latest update of Zotero and the RTF/ODF addin. The problem is compounded by LO's general weakness as compared with MS Word for handling of styles and footnotes. After compiling Scrivener to ODF I open in MS Word in order to allocate styles to fonts. Then back to LO to run the RTF/ODF scan, add the bibliography and set document preferences. This garbles the fonts in the footnotes as we have found. Finally back to MS Word where the damage can be easily enough fixed by doing a find on footnote text style and replace with correct font. But this needs to be your last step because opening in Word blows away the live citation fields. Interested in the idea that it is possible to get it from LO to Word keeping the live Zotero fields - not quite sure what you mean by saving as bookmarks however. A more general question - is it expected that eventually this scan can be run on an rtf document - why was it decided to make it ODF specific? Cheers.
Interested in the idea that it is possible to get it from LO to Word keeping the live Zotero fields - not quite sure what you mean by saving as bookmarks however.
that's a setting in the Zotero document preferences. Doesn't work for footnotes, so you'd have to select an author-date style, move to Word, and then select the desired footnote style again.
more general question - is it expected that eventually this scan can be run on an rtf document - why was it decided to make it ODF specific? Cheers.
no, this cannot, technically, run on RTF, because RTF doesn't have any way to save Zotero field codes. We use ODF because we're both using linux, so it's the obvious choice, but if someone were motivated to do it, the same functionality could be implemented for DOCX, which is also an xml format. It just won't be either Frank or me.
After compiling Scrivener to ODF I open in MS Word in order to allocate styles to fonts. Then back to LO to run the RTF/ODF scan, add the bibliography and set document preferences.
I wonder whether this is connected to the extra step through Word - if you go straight from Scrivener to LO, do you get the same issue?
Thanks Adam, alas yes it's the same issue. I've just learned that the initial step through Word helps to fix up the subsequent scramble. Ie by setting all footnotes to footnote text style, then later on it's easier to deal with them all together.
we'd want a sample document right before and after scan as well as with the wrong formatting (i.e. 3 versions total). The more minimal the better. Send to my (Sebastian) e-mail at the bottom of this blogpost:
http://www.zotero.org/blog/summer-zotero-workshops/
Re the uneven-sized foot/endnote fonts issue: I managed to produce an odf export from Scrivener and scan it (some 80+ endnotes) with rtf/odf-scan; the outcome was even in both LibreOffice and NeoOffice. Exported the same file as rtf from Scrivener, changed to .odt in Libre, ran the scan and the endnotes turned out uneven – a lot less uneven than two months ago but still with differing font sizes. (This is surprising since Scrivener's support for rtf is deemed to be superior to its odt handling.) The short of it: a correctly sized export from Scrivener via odt is possible in my case. The notes don't take the endnote style of Libre's default and need (individually) adjusting to default endnote format, but they are even-sized.
More on uneven fonts and weird formatting: the issue persists and seems to become obvious only after an odf-scan is run on an odt or rtf file compiled from Scrivener. Have described this in more detail over here. Have sent fbennet an affected document (end of last year) and he seemed confident that this can be fixed. Again, not sure whether this is Scrivener export, Libre's infelicitous handling of notes or something that can be changed via the ODF-Plug-in.
Upgrade Storage
Gottfried Wilhelm Freiherr von Leibniz, G.W. Leibniz’s Monadology: An Edition for Students (University of Pittsburgh Pre 1714) para 17; WV Quine, Word and Object (Massachusetts Institute of Technology 1960) 220; Churchland (n 28) 70; Posner, Overcoming Law (n 5) 398; Pereboom (n 18) xiv; Pinker, How the Mind Works (n 23) 54.
Original in drafting software:
{ | Wallace, (2006) | p. 61| |zu:17490:GGS2KNMS}, { | Kuan, (2008) |p. 42 | |zu:17490:ATVUTA83}
LibreOffice Version of text after odf-scan:
(Wallace, 2006, S. 61), (Kuan, 2008, S. 42)
Re-converted Version in drafting software:
{ | (Wallace, 2006, S. 61) | p. 61 | |zu:17490:GGS2KNMS}, { | (Kuan, 2008, S. 42) | p. 42 | |zu:17490:ATVUTA83}
While this appears trivial in an individual instance it means for a document with many footnotes that I can't go back with an edited piece of text and re-import it intact into my drafting software to continue writing there. I wonder if anything can be done about that.
edit: and just to be clear - for the purpose of the scan, what is between the first and second pipe (|) is entirely irrelevant.
(By the way - greatly appreciate your documentation on zoteromusings.)
Edit: done.
@micha
This is a scrivener-created .odt?
Send to my e-mail at the bottom of this blogpost
http://www.zotero.org/blog/summer-zotero-workshops/
http://www.zotero.org/support/4.0_changelog also has the current version number(s) up top
I'd guess devs don't consider this particularly important because Zotero will in all regular settings either auto-update or tell you that an update is available.
http://www.zotero.org/blog/summer-zotero-workshops/
Have sent fbennet an affected document (end of last year) and he seemed confident that this can be fixed. Again, not sure whether this is Scrivener export, Libre's infelicitous handling of notes or something that can be changed via the ODF-Plug-in.