Just downloaded the trial today and am impressed with the app thus far.
I am co-writing a script with someone who uses Word. Our agreed upon collaboration method revolves around exchanging docs and using the track changes feature.
Anyway, is there a straightforward method (or workaround) that would enable me to use Scrivener while he uses word?
To be more specific, I’m hoping the following scenario is possible:
-I write draft A: Each scene is its own file in a scenes folder. The title of each index card reflects the title of the scene.
-I compile draft A (as an RTF or Docx) with “Titles” and “Synopsis” enabled in the formatting section so as to retain the scene titles and the synopsis in the RTF or Word file.
-My partner receives my compiled file and opens it in word. He makes changes, adds comments, etc. and sends it back to me.
-I am able to open and/or import the document in Scrivener and see his changes reflected in Scrivener in a similar fashion to if I had opened the document in word.
-I am able to relate with his changes (accept, etc.) and make changes of my own in Scrivener that will show up as trackable changes when I send the document back to him.
**Also, it would be great to have image files embedded here and there throughout the exchanged document.
Possible? I realize if he used Scrivener instead of Word that would be ideal, but its not going to happen at this time. Any insight is much appreciated.
Scrivener doesn’t have any facility for tracking changes like Word or Nisus. You would need to find a work-round, perhaps pasting new text in a different colour. Or perhaps you could use inline comments.
You can insert images into a text document in Scrivener.
I might sound a little harsh about Scrivener, but it is still just a (great) drafting tool for creative writing especially if you need collaboration with another writer or editor. However it’s a decent replacement for a word processor for the NaNoWriMo crowd, Hobbyists and many Self-Publishers.
If you like Scrivener and want to use it for your project, you should ask your co-writer to try it aswell. If both of you use it, you can just exchange the Scrivener project (just zip and mail it). Once you guys have finished the drafting stages you can still decide to edit and finish your text in Word.
Scrivener can do way more than accommodate the NaNoWriMo and Hobbyist crowd. You just have to figure out a way to work the way Scrivener works, and not the way Word works. It’ll never be Word, or a page-layout program. That’s a good thing.
I edit a 128-160-page literary magazine (seven issues a year) entirely in Scrivener, from managing submissions to putting together and editing each issue, including back-and-forth editing with a wide array of authors. I require their editorial responses in the form of marginal comments; text they wish deleted they underscore or strike-through. Text they wish to add they use a contrasting color or bold-face. I add their changes to the master document, and export in Word/RTF to the art department and InDesign. For many years I did my end in Word, and compared with the streamlining possible in Scrivener, it was a nightmare.
I simple provide the draft with “markers” between scriv documents (###, ***, @@@), then send the “word-ites” an rtf which they open, edit with “track changes” and return as a doc/docx. Nisus, Pages, OO, google is then used to review their edits, after which I import the file and split back to the original structure (you can even use “import and split” to make this process a little faster).
Yes I wind up with 2 copies of everything, but that let’s me see my “draft 1” their “draft 1 ed” side by side.
I’ve used a process similar to Jaysen’s - importing the edited document back into Scriv. Doing this even imports your collaborator’s comments.This worked well and I liked being able to see the original and revised versions side by side.
I have a situation similar to the Poster: I have a client who writes non-fiction books who could really use Scrivener’s help in improving the book’s structure, reducing redundancy, and streamlining the bibliography and citation portion of his writing process. But he also sends out chapters of his book (as separate Word docs) to friends and colleagues to make edits, using Track Changes. But, when I tried reimporting a word doc with the track changes still unreviewed, all the special formatting goes away.
I am concerned with how Scrivener handles version tracking in a collaborative setting. I would like to be able to use the compare and snapshot functionality between these two versions. Is that possible?
According to the work arounds provided by several of you here (and I will point out Jaysen’s, thank you) is that when he receives the chapter file back, he is required to review and approve the changes in word, then save and reimport that back into Scrivener, and find the original chapter listing and delete it from the project? Please correct me if I am wrong.
While this is reasonable for myself and my 30 something friends, please keep in mind that my client is in his 70’s, and most of his co-authors are not tech-savvy (putting it mildly). So they are unlikely to add special characters or strikethroughs, because it too difficult to learn. And he isn’t going to bother with the extra steps, since his current workflow is good enough for him (he has written several books this way, so I can’t argue with him-- or should I say, I can’t WIN an argument with him).
I understand if this is what it is, but may I suggest a feature? When you import, offer an “import as snapshot” with a dropdown box or dialogue box that allows you to specify what the snapshot is ascribed to. That would be awesome.
I’m working on the second draft of my next book. (Actually, I’m worrying about this issue instead of working on the second draft, but that’s always the way, isn’t it?) When it’s done (soon) I need to get the text out of Scriv and into a Word-compatible (probably rtf) file. My editor says she wants one long file to work on.
I, on the other hand, want to get her finished document back into Scriv so that I can polish and then compile to epub/Kindle for a first round of early reader releases, before generating the finished book (ebook - all formats, plus POD if I can work out how).
So, working with Jaysen’s suggestion, I compile to an rtf file, marking chapter breaks with a specified symbol sequence, and send that off. I move that version in to a new folder in the binder. When the edited version comes back, I “import and split” into a new draft. I can then compare versions and polish as required.
That seems to make sense to me. Where are the hidden pitfalls?
The automated split is only one level deep.
Make sure your “editors” know that those markers are important.
You wind up with lots of copies of the same thing.
Thanks Jaysen. I suppose “lots” depends on how many times the copy goes backwards and forwards. I’m only planning on once for the whole thing… mainly 'cos I’m paying!
Yes, you can do that. I note you have yourself tagged as multi-platform, so you’ll need to use the Mac for this for now. In the Snapshot inspector view, click on the snapshot you wish to compare with the current version, and click the Compare version right above the list. This will show addition and subtractions in the lower pane (you can tweak how precisely it does that with the option menu beside the compare button).
You can also do this in the main editor. Very handy to split the view and drag & drop the older snapshot into the second split’s header view. If you hold down Option when dragging it, it will load in comparison mode.
So the main thing with collaboration is to make sure the other parties know that you can track changes on your end automatically. There is no need to use that mode in Word while they work unless they want to for their own needs, and to use margin comments for anything they have to say.
Another pitfall with the import & split, unless you copy and paste each imported section into the place where it came from, is that you’ll lose any meta-data and linking you’ve done. That may not be something you do, but you’d be limited in adopting these features if you did want them, knowing that you’d have to do a lot more to retain them later on.
Depends on the individual you are working with, but if they don’t mind working in sections (and your draft isn’t split up into a zillion pieces), the File/Sync/with External Folder feature can save you lots of time here. This will just dump out the contents of the Draft into individual RTF files. Any files they modify will be automatically detected and placed back into the draft where they came from (thus dodging the meta-data problem above), with snapshots created for you. Since modification dates are used to determine if something is changed, this method works over a variety of transfer methods. Zipping up the sync folder and e-mailing it is one such way. Sharing a sync folder with them on Dropbox or similar is another even easier way.
Thanks AmberV. If my editor were a little more technically inclined some of your suggestions might be appropriate, but she has specifically asked me to deliver the draft as one long file. She will edit that in Word (no tracked changes) and send back to me as one lump. You could say she’s a traditionalist… (but I’m not about to complain - she’s worked with some of NZ and Australia’s top authors). I’m not using internal links or metadata, so I have no problem there. With some of the other editors I’ve worked with, the file sync/Dropbox approach would work really well. Must remember that when I’m on the next project…
Since you are paying her, one would think you’d have some influence over her deliverables…
But anyway… I’ve found that I don’t actually care how much a new draft differs from the original, I just care how it differs from the ultimate goal. When someone sends me a marked up draft in Word, I tend to just accept all the changes and take further edits from that point. YMMV, of course, but everything becomes much easier if you don’t need a detailed history.
Dear AmberV,
this sync with external folder looks promising to me, but I need more advice. My supervisor will not accept to open single section of my chapters as separate files because one wants to be able to scroll back and forth to make comments on the whole enchilada. Is there a way to exploit the sync to external folder feature combining it with the Word Master document logic, so that I send the chapter master document in word .rtf to my supervisor, with all the section as separate files which I would gather from the sync folder, then he’ll comment and correct the master, and then I will have the corrections automatically synced with my Scrivener, to approve or dismiss via the snapshot comparison tool.
Anyone who tried this? Too cumbersome to be viable?
I am not familiar enough with the feature you are referring to to give you any advice. I played with masters a long time ago but that was Word 6 or something ancient and I’m sure whatever I discovered then is hardly applicable. You might wish to post your query to one of the general discussion boards where other users frequent.
You might wish to post your query to one of the general discussion boards where other users frequent.