Hey,
I’m working in academia and have been using LogSeq for ~1 year now. I really like it and much prefer it to all the other stuff out there. I think in theory the workflow with Zotero is ideal. You can gather your literature, annotate specific passages and easily find what you read a year ago without having to reread 10 papers.
However, several issues are becoming more and more of a bother for me.
- When importing papers from Zotero, the search takes about 15 -30 seconds (which is just a lot more than it needs to be).
- The Logseq pdf viewer is still quite buggy and really doesn’t compete with native viewers. (I still use it because I like the annotation feature, but I feel like it’s slowing me down a lot) I reported a bug report here
- For some reason the authors are not rendered correctly so that I end up with something like this:
authors:: (“Alexei Baevski”, “Arun Babu”, “Wei-Ning Hsu”, “Michael Auli”) even though all of the authors are in double brackets.
I looked into the zotero better notes Plugin and I think it does look quite nice, I just don’t know if maintaining the zotero notes being synced with Logseq is going to get annoying after a while. Also for some reason none of the links in the Markdown files that I export from Zotero work. But that seems to be an issues for multiple people here. I’m just unsure if it’s more feasable to have all the pdfs annotated directly in Zotero indipendent of Logseq or if having it all come together in Logseq makes more sense. I guess there are arguments for both, but the idea behind Logseq very much is gathering it all in one place to be able to interconnect your notes. I’d be happy to hear what other peoples thoughts are in that regard. Anyway, sorry for that brain dump, hopefully someone found something useful in it somewhere.
I’m excited to see what the database update in Logseq will bring in terms of latency. The community here makes me optimistic that it’s worthwhile sticking around.