JabRef
Merge some (or all) of the "new entry" related buttons
Is your suggestion for improvement related to a problem? Please describe. Currently, there are four different buttons, all related to adding a new entry. This is confusing for newcomers, especially as their functionality is in some cases heavily overlapping. Also, that helps to save some space on low resolutions.
CC https://github.com/JabRef/jabref/issues/8295#issuecomment-1126942821 and https://discourse.jabref.org/t/ui-priority-what-should-be-in-the-toolbar/3039/10 for that, which inspired me to create this issue.
Describe the solution you'd like Merge buttons, don't duplicate functionality there.
Additional context
The colors mark areas that (could) provide similar functions.
New article:
New entry:
Import by ID:
New entry from plain text:
Hello, @[claell] , our group are interested in your problem and would like to work on this issue. Can we have a try? ——SE 2022 group haha, SUSTech
I am thankful for your interest about working on JabRef.
Because of different workflows and users wants, larger UI changes need and should be discussed before implementation. They can trigger heated debate and follow up pull-requests.
JabRef maintainers have not yet discussed this particular issue themselves. Until this has been done, please check out other issues.
If you are pretty new to open source programming, have a look at issues with the tag "good first issues". If you are a student, the "candidates for university projects" page offers some issues of varying difficulty and scope and that have been estimated to be compatible with university courses as well and often bring a larger feature to JabRef. Of course, feel free to tackle one of the other "normal" issues around, if you feel you have the knowledge or the willingness to take them on. There are many around!
Because there are so many, prioritization would boost JabRef's development. For example, if you have decided to work on a issue related to "search", have a look at multiple issues with the label "search" and only afterwards decide on which one you want to work on. What should be avoided: Having a look at the newest issues and blindly choose an issue from the first page. Thank you! There might be important issues on the first page, but there might also be very important issues further down the list. Labels will help you a lot. Furthermore, bugs are actively prioritized by JabRef maintainers and getting rid of high priority ones feels extra nice!
Having said all that, at the end of the day, of course, you are the one free to choose what to work on and what feature you prefer JabRef to have. Such is the nature of open source software.
Thank you!
While I personally have had some discussion on this. Looking at my old proposal I found some things that definitely could be improved. In particular:
Import by ID (green colour), which automatically searches through various ID sources (e.g. DOI, ISBN, etc.) is not perfect. I heard, under certain circumstances it could be that it does not find IDs that could be found if users were to select them manually using the select entry type dialogue (also green colour). I assume because the algorithm under the hood is forced to operate within a hierarchy, if duplicate metadata is found. Either first come, first served, or some duplicate prevention mechanism kicks in. I don't know the exact code though, so I could be wrong, but if this is right, getting rid of the manual option as I proposed back then might be a bad idea. Also, there are some other things I don't like as much today as I did like it back then :D It was just a draft, not final.
Also, @claell I would be happy, if you also could provide a detailed draft UI. We need a sensible outline of how the future UI should or could look like :)
Regarding the ID import (green color), it probably needs to be investigated, whether the new field can be improved that it gives all the results that the old field gives.
I can look into providing a mockup. Unfortunately, I am rather busy, currently.
Side note: Reasoning for the first button: Quickly create an entry without having an extra dialog. The decision driver was to have as less modals as possible.
Discussion Result
- One modal. Title: "New entry" (base on the code of dialog "Select entry type"
- The entry dialog has three tabs
- First tab: "New entry based on type". (Reason: New comers are more knowledgable of BibTeX types and thus are not confused)
- Second tab: "New entry based on identifier" (Reason: For the power users, this tab is focused when opening the dialog again and again - see below "acress sessions")
- The tab "New entry based on identifier" contains a hint text below stating "You can also paste a DOI into the entry table to have JabRef creating the entry directly."
- Third tab: "New entry from text". (Reason: This is the functionality needed the least)
- Fourth tab: "New entry from BibTeX". Have a text field where BibTeX code can be pasted. The entry is created and then focused. In case of multiple entries, all of them are created, and the first one is focused in the table and the entry editor opens for that entry. In case of a parsing error, the error is displayed and the dialog kept open for the user to try to fix the BibTeX code.
- JabRef remembers the focused tab across JabRef sessions. That means: As user, I select the second tab. I create an entry. I save. I close JabRef. I reopen JabRef. I open the "New entry" dialog. The second tab is focused. Hint: Use JabRef's preferences.
- Modify key binding functionality for "New entry from plain text" (Ctrl+Shift+N. This opens the new entry dialog, switches to the tab "New entry from text" and focuses the text field
- If possible: Add key binding functionality for "New entry from identifier"
- Add
Library -> "New entry from identifier"with shortcut Ctrl+Alt+Shift+N (because Ctrl+Shift+I is "New InBook").
- Add
- Remove buttons "New article", "Import by ID", "New entry from plain text"
- Make the default size of the dialog wider (try to use 1000px)
Decision Drivers
- As less clicks as possible
- Less cluttered UI
- Be "easy" for both newcomers and professional users
Idea for refinement:
Offer an intelligent text box("Any to BibTeX"). It allows following "text types" and handles them intelligently:
- ID (E.g., DOI, ISBN, ...) is pasted --> Id Fetcher is used
- BibTeX (e.g.,
@article{...}is pasted --> BibEntry object directly created and added - Plain text reference pasted (e.g., Shotton, M. A. (1989). Computer addiction? A study of computer dependency. London, England: Taylor & Francis.) --> Plain Text reference to BibTex converter is used
- URL is pasted -- If ends with PDF, PDF is downloaded and parsed (described at https://github.com/koppor/jabref/issues/531) if other URL, fetchers are tried somehow (this is not yet implemented yet)
Nearly all functionality exists independently, it "just" needs to be wired