In earlier versions of Scrivener (ie 1) the individual document files were held as individual RTF files within the:
documents/scrivener/ProjectName.scriv/files/data folder.
Now, however, the contents of the data folder are a further set of folders without any contents with names such as the following example: 00B4FA64-D705-4810-B3FB-C566AF858F74 When I click on the folder I get a ‘no files in this folder’ message, despite the data folder apparently holding 328 files and 150 folders and taking up 2.1Meg of disk space.
I am ‘synching with an external folder’ so I still have access to the RTF files as a last line of defence if Scrivener goes belly up but has the beta’s new format done away with the RTF file approach, or is it something my computer decided to take upon itself to do?
The individual RTF files can be found inside the numbered folders.
Each Binder item is assigned a folder with a unique ID. All of the files associated with that item will be in that folder: the text, but also footnotes, comments, and so on. If the folder is empty, that means that it’s assigned to a Binder item that doesn’t yet have any content associated with it.
To demonstrate this, create a new blank project. Add one item to the Binder, and put a few lines of dummy text in the document. Close Scrivener, and you’ll be able to inspect the structure and see what I mean.
Does Windows Explorer allow you to expand all the folders in a tree at once? That would let you see which folders are empty and which have files in them.
Thanks Katherine. Windows Explorer won’t let you, But a bit of searching and I found the following instructions (included if anyone else has the same question)
WARNING DON"T DO THIS IN THE ACTUAL DIRECTORY AS IT WRITES A FILE INSIDE A SCRIVENER FOLDER
INSTRUCTIONS
Select folder
Press Shift, right-click mouse, and select “Open Window Powershell window here”
Type tree /f > tree.txt and press Enter
It creates tree.txt within the folder"
The output comes out looking like the following:
Folder PATH listing for volume Windows
Volume serial number is CCE0-5D94
C:.
│ docs.checksum
│ tree.txt
│
├───00B4FA64-D705-4810-B3FB-C566AF858F74
├───00D78C34-591C-4B77-8149-CB18AC21A56C
├───00FF9555-7124-4D3A-BD4D-D6A3AF521A5F
│ content.rtf
│ content.styles
│ synopsis.txt
│
├───011B8E09-E1E7-4233-9353-9B1CF9441B5F
│ content.rtf
│ content.styles
│
├───028505A3-FF19-4E28-8D9B-17C6FF562175
│ content.rtf
│ content.styles
│ synopsis.txt
It seems to me you could find a better way to compile to give you a better method of moving on. I personally, am not worried, but if you want a post scrivener backup plan, why not export to some format that makes sense for you? For example, .docx or odt, html, pdf or text? As part of my process, I export to text and include keywords, notes, special fields, synopsis as well as the main text. This helps me post to web pages that need things like keywords and a synopsis of the article.