Easy moving and copying of items between collections and subcollections
Hi,
Two requests:
1. Easy moving of items between collections:
Presently, dragging an item into a collection copies it there. To move an item requires then separately removing the item from its original location.
2. Non-linked copying ("duplication") of items:
Presently, copying an item creates a linked copy, in which changes to either item are reflected in the other; the "same" item is in both collections at once. Sometimes it may be desirable to duplicate an existing item and then make changes to the duplicate. This may be particularly useful when it is necessary to enter the details of several similar items by hand.
Cheers,
Andrew
Two requests:
1. Easy moving of items between collections:
Presently, dragging an item into a collection copies it there. To move an item requires then separately removing the item from its original location.
2. Non-linked copying ("duplication") of items:
Presently, copying an item creates a linked copy, in which changes to either item are reflected in the other; the "same" item is in both collections at once. Sometimes it may be desirable to duplicate an existing item and then make changes to the duplicate. This may be particularly useful when it is necessary to enter the details of several similar items by hand.
Cheers,
Andrew
This discussion has been closed.
For #2, there is a "Duplicate Selected Item" option in the context menu when right-clicking on items. http://forums.zotero.org/discussion/1965/drag-cite-problem/
TIA
- ft
"For #2, there is a "Duplicate Selected Item" option in the context menu when right-clicking on items."
Unfortunately the Hungarian version of the option name is bad:
"Kiválasztott elem" (Selected Item) only, without Duplicate, so it's misunderstandable.
The correct version would be:
"Kiválasztott elem duplikálása".
Please fix it. Thanks.
There are some other minor Hungarian language bugs in the translations. Where could I fix them or take suggestions?
Maybe make "move" the default (I guess it is what people expect), and ctrl-move copy? If you want to keep the current default, swap that, or make it configurable ...
Further, it'd be nice if the shown dragged one was compressed - instead of showing the full details, "<N> item(s)" would be sufficient.
I totally agree with this! I think folder should work like they do on a normal computer. My main folder is getting really big and messy and I want to move stuff into smaller folders without it getting duplicated so that I can tell what has been moved and what still needs to be sorted.
iTunes, for what it's worth, copies between playlists (as in, creates an equivalent link to the library item). I think we would keep copying between collections the default, but a modifier key to move instead is possible. I'd be more inclined to do it if we could get Firefox to display a "+" icon over the cursor when copying, which may or may not be possible.
I think a debate about what "people" expect and what is more "orderly" is not going to lead anywhere (and considering what apple has done in terms of how people approach computing I'd also be a little more hesitant with those assertions. Most younger academics I know do use i-tunes...).
It depends on what type of environment people are socialized on, how they think about collections, how they use them (e.g. one of the best ways to use collections appears to be to use a collection for each project, while using tags for sorting by topics - which is a) really orderly and b) would lead you to expect copy to be the default. - but obviously there are other ways of using collections that may work better with moving items)
I think the crucial issue is that there should be a key combination (e.g. holding down the ctrl key) that allows moving rather then copying between collections. I still don't see that (or is that working on other OSs?), and I think it's a more than reasonable request to be pursued with pretty high priority. Depending on how hard this is to program I could also see a preference option that allows to toggle the default on this - though I think it should be quite acceptable if this remains low priority as of now.
I have no idea what Michael meant as I'm not a mindreader, but I do think that anyone who want things to work "like in any OS" does want to fundamentally change the way Zotero organizes items, so I think Dan's answer was quite reasonable.
I don't believe Zotero duplicates items on pressing ctrl and I'd be more than surprised if that was planned - at least on my OS, btw., the + sign appears whenever I drag an item, regardless of pressing any key.
But let me say this. My point in rethinking Michael's comment was not primarily to read his mind (all communication involves some mind reading, after all); it was merely to point out the folly in presuming that the user doesn't know what he's doing rather than trying, first, to understand why his comment might make perfect sense.
From Michael's posts it's clear that he's taking issue with the fundamental design of Zotero, used in iTunes, Gmail, and many other contemporary programs, in which objects exist in a main library, and playlists/folders/collections contain many-to-one links to the main object. Whether by "main folder" he meant "My Library" or another folder is irrelevant, because his request is still for items to only exist in one and only one place. That part of Zotero's design isn't going to change, and it's not the subject of this thread.
If Michael thinks, for example, thinks that he is "copying" an item as he would be in an OS, he would be very surprised to see that a change he makes to the "copy" of the item in folder/collection A will automatically apply to the "copy" of the file in folder/collection B (because in reality this is one item, linked to from two different places).
Or that, if he deletes an item from the library, it will also disappear from all the folders/collections it is in. I think it is very important for users to understand these differences, because they might get quite upset otherwise.
Even if "move" is the default, people who use collections as if they were folders are going to find Zotero's behavior in many points outright "weird" - and might even destroy part of their work. (and I'm not making this up. There have been cases here where people have complained about just that). It sounds like you're actually saying that OS-type folders and Zotero-style collections are very similar and only distinguished by said default behavior - but it is crucial for Zotero users to understand that that is very much not the case!
And so Dan is right to insist on the fact that there is actually a big difference. I don't think he believes that Michael "doesn't get it" - he is just telling him that what he wants is not going to happen.
I have no quarrel with Zotero's underlying structure. Anyone who has peered under the hood knows it's quite lovely. And, sure, it's helpful to understand what that structure is to avoid certain problems, but you don't need to be a mechanic to drive a car. In the real world many users care mainly about functionality and not a hoot about underlying structure (admittedly, at their own risk). The key is that the software remain flexible where feasible and customizable within manageable limits. To imbue the machine with "thought" may at times be a useful metaphor, but my sense (cents?) is it tends to exalt rigidity over plasticity. A philosophical and belabored point, I know, but one that I think is worth mentioning in the context of an open-source project.