![]() While it is tempting to try to set up a direct integration with the Zotero client, the lack of a supported client-API makes this approach somewhat sketchy. High latency, documents (potentially very large) and information not sourced locally.Doesn’t work when offline or when Zotero is down.No privacy, need to sync entire Zotero collection and annotations to cloud.Expensive, needs unlimited Zotero subscription for any realistically-sized library.Overly tight integration with Zotero: if Zotero is down or there is a problem with the plug-in Logseq doesn’t work either.Currently only option is to install local server into Zotero using the debug-bridge and then send js commands Can automatically add a note to a Zotero item that links back to all Logseq pages that reference the item.The plugin could provide bidirectional coupling and Logseq could modify Zotero items. Tight integration with a custom Zotero client plugin: A plugin that runs in the Zotero client provides direct access to the Zotero database through a local web server.No automatic creation of back-links from Zotero.Would also work with JabRef and other reference managers Loose coupling with Zotero, if Zotero is down everything still works.Simple, automatically updated export to files has already been implemented in BetterBibtex.csl-jason file and logseq opens these files for citing Loose integration through files: zotero writes a.Options for integrating Logseq with Zotero and other reference managers: The next question is how to integrate Zotero and Logseq for a workflow that uses Zotero for collecting and managing references, and Logseq for annotating documents. Has anyone done an in-depth comparison between Zotero and Logseq PDF annotation? Are there any downsides of Logseq? How to transfer data from Zotero to Logseq? While Zotero now has a solid annotation feature, I think it makes sense to annotate in Logseq instead, as this allows to seamlessly include the annotation in other documents, which would not be possible in Zotero. and 2.) and Logseq is superior for annotation and information assembly (3. Zotero is superior for collecting and managing references (1. The first big question is where to switch from Zotero to Logseq in the workflow. How to split workflow between Zotero and Logseq? For many fields, Word (or LaTeX) will remain the default option for a long time.Scientific Writing with Markdown | Jaan Tollander de Balsch), formatting requirements (footnotes, references, templates, typesetting) go beyond capabilities of basic Markdown While there are some attempts for scientific writing in Markdown (see e.g. ![]() Many constraints exist to fit into existing workflows (Templates from publishers, coworkers not used to other formats, need Word collaboration features etc.).Currently most people are using Word and LaTeX.Candidates for outlining are Logseq and Word.docx file with the reference information stored in field codes (for Zotero bibliographies), or as \cite fields (for BibTeX). Need an easy way to copy and paste outlines into Word, including images and references. While Logseq is an amazing outliner, export is not perfect. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |