Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Show entries that are not within a group (within a separate group) #7871

Open
ThiloteE opened this issue Jul 4, 2021 · 6 comments
Open

Show entries that are not within a group (within a separate group) #7871

ThiloteE opened this issue Jul 4, 2021 · 6 comments
Labels

Comments

@ThiloteE
Copy link
Member

ThiloteE commented Jul 4, 2021

JabRef 5.3--2021-07-02--eed637a
Windows 10 10.0 amd64
Java 16.0.1
JavaFX 16+8

The Problem:

In a large database with many entries and many groups, it is hard to find entries that are duplicates and/or not attached to a specific project and or group. I am frustrated when i have to go through all the entries by hand as this takes a long time.
This becomes increasingly important if one deletes a group (for whatever reason).

Describe the solution you'd like
Show entries that are not within a group in a separate group AND/OR add a function to "delete group with all entries that are within this group".

Additional context

Here the video why this is important. I also find that the duplicate manager is a powerful tool, but can be quite the hassle to work with.

2021-07-04.18-51-24-1.mp4
@ThiloteE
Copy link
Member Author

non-group entries shown without group colour

One can see a non-group item when using the ALL ENTRIES group and checking the group colour. No colour means: The entry is not assigned to a group.

Entries that have a group entry in the bib file, but that very group has not been created in JabRef yet, will show up, as if they do not belong to a group (no colour).

Tested with:
JabRef 5.4--2021-08-15--96061b7
Windows 10 10.0 amd64
Java 16.0.2
JavaFX 16+8

@ThiloteE
Copy link
Member Author

Workaround:

Use RegEx:
grafik
Explanation:

author != .+ returns entries with empty or no author field.

https://docs.jabref.org/finding-sorting-and-cleaning-entries/search#searching-for-entries-with-an-empty-or-missing-field

Also I personally liked to include readstatus, because I have some groups that do not have a group field, they get grouped by field readstatus, but I can imagine some people would not include readstatus.

Maybe the workaround can be adapted internally to create a standard group for entries that are not yet within a group.

@AEgit
Copy link

AEgit commented Sep 1, 2022

Note, that this is very similar to the problem described in #4237

@LoayGhreeb
Copy link
Collaborator

@ThiloteE, @koppor, could you check if the issue should be closed after we added the "invert groups" toggle (#11510, #9073)?

If you want to view all entries that don't belong to any group, set the groups view mode to "union" and select all groups (Ctrl + A) in the groups pane. Exclude the "all entries" group from the selection, then enable the invert toggle. This will show all entries that don’t belong to any group.

@ThiloteE
Copy link
Member Author

I do have groups based on free search expressions that show in the groups pane, but are technically "not a group", as they do not have a groups field in biblatex source. Toggling the "invert" button while having this group selected will NOT show only entries without groups.

Example:
image

We have users that have thousands of groups in the groups pane. Those users will have a tough time finding and excluding those groups based on free search expression.

From a user point of view, having a separate toggle or a special group or adding an option in the "add groups" window is still a high value addition to JabRef.

@ThiloteE
Copy link
Member Author

BUT, maybe the floating mode will solve this issue.

@github-project-automation github-project-automation bot moved this to Normal priority in Priorization Nov 13, 2024
@calixtus calixtus moved this from Normal priority to Low priority in Priorization Nov 13, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
Status: Low priority
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants