Related tab

nlowhor
I'm using the Related tab as links to the references which are cited. I see that when this Related link is created, both sources show the other one as being related. However, there is no indication given as to which direction the relationship exists. It might be useful(at least for me) to have some indication of whether the the particular relation is because it cites the other source or is being cited by the other source.

Also, in this usage, perhaps an optional field for the citation number in the original source?

Thanks! Loving this extension so far!
  • bibliografree
    Here is another possible use for a directional Related feature as suggested by nlowhor. The direction of the relation could convey that one (or more) reference(s) is a response to another. The purpose of this could be to make creating a collaborative bibliography more interesting because the gathering of references could take the form of a discussion or debate.
  • ewandro
    I was also thinking to use the Related tabs as links to the references but the directional relation absence also came as an issue.

    Thanks for the great job
  • bibliografree
    Here is a way that a directional relation might link through a note added to each reference:

    First save references 1, 2, 3, etc. to Zotero,
    then add note 1 to reference 1,
    relate note 1 to reference 2,
    add note 2 to reference 2,
    relate note 2 to reference 3,
    and so on

    If the directionality is understood to be through note n to reference n+1, a reference sequence could be followed far into the past.

    Note n could also be used, for example, to hold a quote of interest taken from reference n.

    Hope this works.
  • Heckscher
    My problem is not knowing whether there's a related reference unless I click on the tab, which one does not do in the normal course of events. Would it be possible to mark the tab in some way if there is a relation under it -- so you could see at a glance that you should click on it?
  • mark
    nlowhor, bibliografree and others: there's a big thread about hierarchical item relationships; this is a planned feature.
  • aszszelp
    I'm using the related tab to reference e.g. chapter–book, article–journal relationships. Good to hear a "proper" hierarchical relationship is planned.
  • bdarcus
    Odd; why would you use this feature to encode redundant information (the container data is included in the parts)?

    Admittedly, though, "related" is so vague as to be meaningless.
  • mark
    edited September 27, 2009
    Odd; why would you use this feature to encode redundant information (the container data is included in the parts)?
    You know this of course; the 'related' tab gives you a clickable list. Especially for books and chapters this is great (the multiple to one relationship moreover is not included in the parts).
  • aszszelp
    Look, maybe I have missed something — I'm new to Zotero —, but if you mean by the "related data" being "contained in the parts" the field in the Info tab where I can enter the title of the containing work, it is quite unusable. If I've overseen some other option, please forgive me (and please, update me on that).

    By adding relationship by "related" between books and chapters/parts, I get for one a clickable-navigatable list, i.e. a logical relationship is established between the objects, not a mere labelling. Also, such I get full information about the containing work, including author, publisher, etc.

    It's quite clear, that enabling a relationship — in a relational data model sense — makes absolutely sense for a biblography application. Not only contained-container information can be realised such (part-book, article-journal), but also e.g. editions of manuscripts to those, or reprints of books to the original, etc.

    Also, such a formalized relationship could help to make the navigator part even more usable: you could have in the openable tree structure for each document (which now holds notes and attachments) these sub-parts (i.e. chapters for books, etc.).

    Just my 2c...
  • aszszelp
    Actually, one of the great features is, I can — by using the relationship tab — instantly find another chapter from the same book, which is not doable otherwise in the navigation view (as only the item title is displayed, not the container, and the author can be different). Such I can get from any chapter to any other chapter of the same book in two clicks. (First click takes me to the main book, which then lists all its "related" — here: contained — items, which I can navigate to immediately by a second click).
  • wbeers
    I agree that some kind of directional relational setting would be helpful. Many of the reports, orders, and letters I've compiled for my graduate historical work reference explicitly numbered "other" reports, orders, and letters, often from various echelons of bosses. I code "report number" for the cited item and "extra" for reports it refers to but I have yet to see whether all this work will be helpful. I just realized today that there is a "related" tab.

    Has anyone found all the work involved with using "related" tabs worth the trouble and how did you make it work for you?

    I read the first several posts regarding "hierarchical structure" that Mark referenced, but I'd like to know - where is the status of that?

    Thanks
    Wynne
  • ajlyon
    I use the related tab extensively, especially for different versions of a text or to connect a bibliographic item with the bibliographic source where I found it -- connecting a catalog or censor's log with the specific volumes that I have looked for or consulted. Any connection that exists between items in my library, I try to connect via a relationship and annotate that using a note. Similarly, if I mention another work in a note, I always add a relationship to the mentioned item. It certainly works for me.
Sign In or Register to comment.