This is a major deficit with the product: it is critical that numbering remains synced across different reference libraries, otherwise this causes references to break and versioning issues when working on the PDFs. When a product is marketed to sync information between libraries, it should do so, including reference numbering.
Please fix this ASAP; our company has purchased multiple liscences of Enote but we may be forced to go with another software if this cannot be corrected.
I fully agree. This will also solve the issue of working with two or more libraries on different computers. indeed, formatting a document with a snyced library located on a second computer will sometimes results in replacing the reference of the first library with the record number of the reference from the second library, especially when Endnote can not solve the conflict. I already experienced this and had to go through all my references again to be sure that they correspond to my citations. It can be even worse when you add references directly form the second library. These references would never have the same record number resulting in having always to work with the traveling library and format the document twice with each library.
I also agree. This is makes the shared library a lot less useful. References that I have in my library show up in a traveling library when someone else syncs the shared library with the document. Makes me think that Endnote does not actually have anyone that uses the product themselves.
This is a major issue that needs a different approach for syncing databases.
(Geek note: I used to be a database programmer and have written extensive syncing code myself. One way out of the dilemma (if coders are lisening here) would be to make Endnote use random UUIDs as (virtually globally) unique record numbers. That way, any record number collisions when syncing and merging databases would be avoided. Just my 2 cents… but the current system is a mess, sorry.)