Hello,
I am considering purchasing one the bibliography software recommended to match with mellel.
My questions:
- Which one is better?
- I notice from Mellel guide that the technique utilized for citations is not containing the way used to be when bibliography is based on footnotes or endnotes.
Is this way is excluded when wishing to create a bibliographical list from a research?
TIA
Raymond
Bookend or Sente
Moderators: Eyal Redler, redlers, Ori Redler
-
- New to all this
- Posts: 1
- Joined: Sat Nov 11, 2006 10:03 pm
- Location: Scotland
Sente has a lovely UI and seems quite good for the sciences. However:
1. The integration between Mellel and Bookends is better, and better in ways that are useful.
2. The support for Bookends is staggering. I think every problem I have had has been fixed in less than 2 hours.
3. For the humanities, especially if you want to put full citation information in footnotes (e.g. with Chicago A), Bookends is the only choice. The Sente guys have not managed to put this in.
(I also found Sente's licensing scheme somewhat intrusive.)
YMMV,
David.
1. The integration between Mellel and Bookends is better, and better in ways that are useful.
2. The support for Bookends is staggering. I think every problem I have had has been fixed in less than 2 hours.
3. For the humanities, especially if you want to put full citation information in footnotes (e.g. with Chicago A), Bookends is the only choice. The Sente guys have not managed to put this in.
(I also found Sente's licensing scheme somewhat intrusive.)
YMMV,
David.
kga1978 wrote:Bookends..... An absolutely outstanding application, and the integration is very good. Sente is nicer to look at, but I think BE is the better program.
And yes, the support from the BE developer is just out of this world!
Ohhh, and there's always EndNote.....
Our labgroup has standardized on EndNote (ie I got a free copy and was ordered to use it). After writing my first paper with this group, I purchased Bookends myself.
Regards
from Ottawa
Harvey