Bookmarked files in the inspector, images linked to the disk, project bookmarks and hyperlinks pointing to the files, may need to be repaired after migrating to a new system. When switching between platforms this can be complicated further by how paths are printed in a fundamentally different fashion. When opening a project that contains links to the file system, those links may break unless the path to the item in Scrivener is identical to its location on the hard drive. It contains valuable tips for mitigating the risks associated with allowing a third-party program detailed access to the project's internal files. Important: If you are planning to share a project between computers using a cloud-sync service you should read our article on Using Scrivener with Cloud-Sync Services. scrivx file inside the entire folder is your project. To transfer projects between computers, always make sure to copy the entire project folder from Windows, not just the. This file is an index to the other parts of the project, and it is the file that you will want to double-click on in order to open the project on Windows. scriv folder where you will find the "binder file": a file with a Scrivener icon and a ".scrivx" extension. On Windows, you will need to navigate into the. On Mac, all you will need to do to open a project from your Finder is double-click on that. This file-that-is-actually-a-folder is called a "package file". It is actually a folder on both systems, but the Mac's operating system hides the internal contents of the folder to keep them safe. One important thing to note is that on the Mac a Scrivener project will appear to be a file with a ".scriv" extension, while on Windows, it will appear to be a folder with a ".scriv" extension, as pictured below: You will be able to use the same source file across Mac and Windows devices (so long as you are not doing so simultaneously - the project should only be opened on a single device at any given time.) There will never be a need to convert or export your project if all you wish to do is work on another computer. The Scrivener project format is fully cross-platform compatible. You will also need to have Scrivener 3 installed on both your Mac and Windows computers. If you drag notes from a Scapple board into a Scrivener binder (or better yet, a freeform corkboard), you'll find it does a good job of bringing your rough work into the program for continued refinement.Note: To work cross-platform, you will need a separate Scrivener licence for each platform. It is worth noting that integration with Scrivener does already exist. Thus this request will almost certainly never come to fruition. In short, embedding Scapple into Scrivener would either require one or both programs to compromise their design goals, or offer such a loose interpretation of "integration" that they might as well just remain separate programs, where each can have full menu and shortcut services. This would be a trivial construct to create in Scapple, but it would be a "shape" that makes no sense at all to an outline based program. Scapple on the other hand requires no connections of notes to other notes, and can allow connections that do not produce a logical sequence, like a ring of notes linked end to end which occasionally tangentially link outside of the ring. What does dragging a note up and to the left mean, in terms of where that note should end up in Scrivener's outline? This is one of the things that sets Scapple apart from the more familiar "mindmapping" software, which does use a hierarchy arrangement that can be expressed as an outline. Scapple on the other hand has no concept at all of linear order or nesting. Scrivener is founded upon a rigid outline model, where every item in the binder must have one (and only one) parent item and those items fall in a linear order. Even more important, there is a fundamental disconnect between the information models these two programs use.Where would these go in Scrivener's user interface? They would either greatly bloat the number of menu items, or the Scapple component itself would have to be stripped so bare of any advanced features that it would lose nearly everything that makes it what it is, turning it into something more like what already exists in Scrivener: the freeform corkboard mode. Consider all of the menu commands in Scapple, and all of the keyboard shortcuts. Embedding one program into another (not to mention one that is already quite feature-heavy) greatly increases the complexity of that program.There are many reasons why this idea sounds great on the surface, but the underlying problem behind this idea is twofold:
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |