Importing HTML files… possible?

Scrivener 3.1.1 on macOS 13.4.

I have a huge (40,000 html (+ simple images and CSS) files) offline encyclopedia with simple links - a kind of ‘local Wiki’.

I can successfully import its contents into Scrivener. But - because they’re ‘media files’ - it all goes into ‘Research’.

Is there any way I can import such a large hierarchy of html files into a Scrivener Draft, please; so that I can use its links in one document?

I’ve searched here on this forum and experimented with a handful of online and app-based html to text (ideally .rtf) conversion utilities. But without success. Nothing seems to convert the links.

Anyone any ideas, please?


If you have DEVONthink, you can use its file export facility to create a DOCX or RTF file that will import to Scrivener. Or Use Word to open, then “save as” DOCX or RTF. Or other word processor.

I didn’t look at any special Scrivener options as I figured you covered all that.

1 Like

Please update Scrivener. Version 3.1.1 is nearly five years out of date. The current version is 3.3.1.

(Unless that was a typo, in which case you can ignore this comment.)

1 Like

Yikes. Typo. Sorry. Thanks, @kewms :slight_smile:

Any ideas on the HTML issue, please?

Yes, I use DTP all the time :slight_smile:

So I’d import the HTML files etc into DTP and export everything as rtf’s?

Would that also take care of the hyperlinks?

I don’t use Word. Pages?


What do you ultimately want to do with the text?

And where do the links point? Do they point to identifiable files on your disk, or to locations that are understood only by whatever you were using to maintain that beast?

1 Like

A beast it is, @kewms; thanks :slight_smile:

I could continue to use it by continually opening everything in TextEdit.

But with Scrivener (3.3.1 :slight_smile: )'s linking functionality, I like the idea of having a single document that I can open once and see everything A - Z in what is now its index.html at top level with A.html, B.html, C.html (etc: this is a simplification: the hierarchy is actually several levels deep) also in Scrivener.

The links now are to (folders, structures and) files assuming the current directory on my hard disk as relative.

Dunno. sorry. Try it.

1 Like

Are these “file://” links, or something else?

The issue – and I’ve found this with other programs as well – is that if the links do import, they’ll point to the original files. They won’t re-direct to point to the component files in the destination project.

Further complicating matters, a Scrivener internal link points to a long alphanumeric string identifying the location in a project. That is, it’s not something you can easily redirect with a text editor, for instance.

1 Like

Thanks for your continued help and suggestions, @kewms.

I wish they were ‘file:///’ … I think, I do :slight_smile: .

They’re actually hrefs:


I suspect that may be true here.

No, it certainly isn’t with some 36,000+ files.

I had hoped that Scrivener would work its miracle in the same way as it does with nearly everything else. In fact, when I first tried it, everything went into Research, as I say - apparently without error.

So I wonder whether there’s a way to build even a single Note which can link to Research?

Your help appreciated. But this looks difficult, doesn’t it?

This borders on using Scrivener as a web browser, it sounds like. Often, exporting to various ebook formats will lose the HTTP links anyway.

1 Like

You can certainly create an internal link from any Scrivener text document to any other document in the Binder, including those in the Research folder.

1 Like

Yes; that was one of the things that first attracted me to Scrivener.

But at a minimum there are 80,000 + links between files.

I am beginning to doubt that I could realistically map all of those.

Still a big fan. Thanks :slight_smile: !

That’s exactly what it’s like, isn’t it, @ShawnDriscoll :slight_smile: .

I won’t be too disappointed to find it really isn’t feasible, after all.

Thanks for everyone’s input.

Sometimes we have to tell people that Scrivener isn’t really designed to accomplish the task that they are trying to do. This is one of those times. True Wiki software exists.

This is also the sort of thing that Tinderbox claims to be good at. I haven’t personally tried it for this kind of task, but their forum is full of helpful people.

1 Like

Thanks again, @kewms; I’m completely OK with that :slight_smile:

Scrivener does so very much else.

I have looked at Tinderbox. It’s nearly $300; but maybe something similar.

Much appreciated…