Re: reorganizing from earlier versions

["Herbert Rubin" <hrubin>]

I agree with ibid, but I think orbis is a different matter --won't you end
up with oodles of irrelevant responses?


----- Original Message -----
From: "Mervyn E. Bennun" <mebennun>
To: "Multiple recipients of list NOTABENE" <notabene>
Sent: Sunday, January 05, 2003 12:29 PM
Subject: Re: reorganizing from earlier versions


> I repeat a comment I have made before. Why have more than
> one each of Ibid and Orbis databases? Someone tried to
> explain this to me, and I was not convinced.
>
> Part of the whole beauty of NB is the way unexpected or
> forgotten connections can be made when one makes a search.
> I've profited from this. On the other hand, if a reference
> is utterly irrelevant it probably won't be thrown up by a
> search and so won't waste your effort.
> ________________
> Mervyn E. Bennun,
> 29 Marmion Road,
> Oranjezicht,
> Cape Town 8001,
> SOUTH AFRICA.
> mebennun
> Tel/Fax (preferred) +27 (0)21 461 5535
> Mobile (seldom carried) 082 738 9863
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Jeff Cox" <jeffcox>
> To: "Multiple recipients of list NOTABENE"
> <notabene>
> Sent: Monday, 30 December, 2002 07:53
> Subject: reorganizing from earlier versions
>
>
> > Now that I have the (so far) admirable 6.1 up and running,
> I am getting
> > around to converting a number of different Ibidem
> databases, some of them
> > still in NBDOS.  It has been my practice over many years
> to create separate
> > Ibidem databases for different projects, including three
> different book
> > projects.  Now I would like to follow the advice of the
> HELP file, and
> > create one master database with all my entries.  What is
> the best way to do
> > this?  Create a new database, and append each of the old
> ones (although
> > old, they are now in 6.1)?  Is there some way to mark the
> old databases so
> > that they can be identified as subsets of the new master
> database--some way
> > other than inserting manually a new keyword in each entry?
> >
> > I assume one cost of this transition is that the old
> record numbers will
> > disappear as the new entries are renumbered (the numbering
> at least appears
> > to have survived conversion), ending any links I might
> have with citations
> > in converted text documents.  For instance, I used to
> integrate Ibidem and
> > Orbis in NBDOS by putting a footnote Ibidem citation at
> the beginning of a
> > file when I was taking notes on a book or article for
> which I  had a Ibidem
> > entry, and copy and paste the citation from the expanded
> note into the text
> > of the document--an early manual version of the "generate
> orbis note form"
> > feature.  This allowed me to use subsequent short form
> entries in the note
> > document, and also to cut and paste text with citations
> between note-taking
> > documents that each had the same Ibidem generated
> formatting at the top. I
> > have several hundred files like that, all neatly converted
> from DOS or
> > 5.1.  I assume I could redo each of these note files with
> the new master
> > database if I want to maintain links between my different
> note files and
> > the new Ibidem master database but I'm not sure it's worth
> it.  Perhaps
> > that would be necessary even if the record numbers were
> preserved, since
> > the formatting codes have changed.  I could also generate
> a new "orbis note
> > form" from the new master Ibidem database for each note
> file, and paste it
> > in. Sounds like a lot of work to update the note files,
> though. Etc.
> >
> > Any additional disadvantages that I have not anticipated?
> >
> > Any short cuts or other advice welcome, with thanks in
> advance.
> >
> > Jeff Cox
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>