I have Endnote X3 and Office 2008. I’ve written a custom Word .dotx template for APA6 format. It avoids “Normal” paragraph format and bases everything on an alternate base paragraph style called “Paragraph0”. In fact, in order to be able to detect the use of Normal, I’ve redefined it to use Apple Casual and to be colored blue.
Endnote X3 apparently uses styling based on Normal for the inserted bibliography, which is therefore formatted incorrectly. I have defined a “ReferencesEntry” style based on my Paragraph0 that, when I apply it to the inserted bibliography, puts it into the correct format.
I’m wondering what the best way is to handle this: should I redefine Normal? Is there some way to cause Endnote to use a user-written style for the bibliography? I tried to alter Endnote’s .dot template under Application Support, but that didn’t seem to help.
If X4 will be more compatible with Word templates & themes, I guess I can just keep on with restyling the bibliography from time to time.
The only reason for my not wanting to redefine Normal is that as part of my debugging of my Word template, I wanted anything using or based on Normal to show clearly, since that would indicate a gap in coverage. If I redefine Normal, then it and Word styles based on it will look the same as all my other Word styles, which could potentially interfere with maintenance & extension of the Word template.
Incidentally, it is almost possible to fix the bibliography format via the layout pane, which can do font, spacing, and so on. The only thing missing from that is color. I need Text1, but Endnote uses Normal’s color, which I’ve set to System Blue.
There are two functions of Word styles: to make things look a certain way, and to tag chunks of a manuscript as being of such-and-such a type. Even though the layout pane will (almost) make the insertion look right, it will not identify it as “ReferencesEntry” style. So a fully compatible solution would be for inserted bibliographic material to use its own Word styles, like EndNoteBibEntry and EndNoteBibTitle, by default based on Normal, but which could be redefined as desired. (Or so it seems to me FYIW.)
I agree, and some of the very early versions of Endnote used the “Reference” style, but that feature was lost somewhere along the way, probably because most users aren’t so sophisticated in their use of Word template features. It would be worth asking for this in the suggestions forum, and on the support suggestions page at endnote.com. I would second the request! (but then there would probably need to be another option to override any layout settings).
The Word 2010 (paragraph) style used for the inserted Endnote X5 bibliography is called “References WR”. However, if I customise this style (e.g. hanging paragraph), the inserted references are still not formatted accordingly (e.g. without hanging paragraph).
Is there a way to force Endnote X5 to use “round” quotation marks?
The EndNote output style’s “Layout” option offers several settings for a hanging indent, including “None”. (see image based on X4). To change the layout setting, go to the EndNote toolbar, select EDIT, OUTPUT STYLES, EDIT name of the style you’re using. Then locate and click “Layout”.) Close the style which will save the changes a file copy so adjust both EndNote and MS Word to use the modified style.
“Round” quotation marks could be added to an EndNote bibliography template by either copying and pasting the marks made to an MS Word doc into the template, or through the “character map” feature for Windows. (Mac also has a similar character-based feature.)
Glad it worked. BTW, the bibiography line spacing setting might be what you’re looking for - it’s accessed through the EndNote tab in the MS Word ribbon (see attached). Click on the tiny arrow to the lower-right of “Bibliography” which will cause the pop-up dialog box to appear. Click the “Layout” tab and the line spacing option is on the lower section. After setting the desired spacing, click OK to close and save the setting.
I cannot match the format exactly to my intended word format (here I have to use pt. instead of double line spacing) but it looks much better and is much easier to work with.
