Option-Tab creates dashed bullet points

I’ve switched back to using Scrivener for my current book, but I’ve been finding it frustrating because unlike Ulysses or Word, it doesn’t automatically turn * and - into bulletpoints.

And it annoys me that I have to use the mouse!

I discovered, this, thanks to perplexity:

  • Use the Option + Tab (⌥Tab) shortcut to create a dashed bullet list. This is a macOS feature that works in Scrivener and other native Mac applications.

Fifteen years of using Mac … and I never knew this.

2 Likes

Sounds like you want to use Markdown rather than RichText. While I don’t use Markdown, apparently Scrivener will support people who do. Check out section 21 in the Scrivener User Manual.

1 Like

I’d like to use Scrivener for my book and other long complex projects but I end up with a mess when I try to compile.

Scrivener can be a mess. I have started and gave up on Scrivener multiple times. Last week I decided to give one final go. It will either work or get deleted from my Mac.

@Clarke_Ching

I, too, hate using the mouse…

Once you’ve got used to opt-tab it’s annoying to find that it doesn’t work in some programs (e.g. Tinderbox, where it’s used for something else and you can’t override it.) It makes Apple’s bullet / list system bearable.

For those who aren’t aware, Scrivener has other shortcuts which are really useful for list manipulation. E.g. start your list off with opt-tab, then

  • cmd-opt-left/right to cycle through the available bullet / number options. This will change the bullet / number for all items at that level and it will persist until you change. Sublists can have their own format, which you change the same way.
  • cmd-ctl-left/right to outdent/indent the bullet level.
  • cmd-ctl-up/down to move the item up and down the list.

This is really convenient – and it’s very annoying to use other programs (RTF or Markdown) which don’t have this feature. IA Writer, for example, lets you switch between number and bullet, but not the type of number or bullet. I think Markdown-mode in Emacs may be the closest I’ve found to it.

BTW, The last two shortcuts also work on ordinary paragraphs (and on documents in the binder if the cursor is in the binder).

Other shortcuts you may find helpful:

  • cmd-opt-ctl-left/right - move the first line indent left or right.
  • you can also increase/decrease the hanging indent, but you’ll have to set your own shortcut to that.

Finally, Scrivener has some text navigation features which you normally only find in heavy duty text editors – for example, Edit > Select > Sentence / Sentence with spaces / Paragraph.

There are several more on the same menu. For example: if you want to change all your italicised words throughout a document, select the first instance in italics, Edit > Select > Select similar formatting, hit cmd-i, cmd-b and you’ve turned all the italics into bold.

There are no shortcuts for any of these by default, but it’s easy enough to create your own in the normal way.

I have a Keyboard Maestro with them all on opt-s, so it’s opt-s-s for select sentence, for example.
HTH.

1 Like

Scrivener’s compile system takes a bit of getting used to, but at heart there’s a systematic logic to it. if you want to do something out of the ordinar, though, it can get quite complex – it’s powerful and flexiblte enough that there are inevitably a lot of options.

The other thing people get hung up on is that although it will take you a long way, there are some things the comple system can’t do: it’s not a fully fledged page layout program and doesn’t try to be, for exampe. If you have complex layout needs, you’re better ofd compiling the text to something that can be read in a dedicated page layout program.

Is there a particular problem you’re having with it?

It is kind of you to ask. I don’t know if I can explain this well. I’m preparing a professional development workshop on AI. I have three sessions. I was trying to use Scrivener because the outlining feature and binder are outstanding for creating the flow of a project like this or any long article. But when I try to compile, I either end up with just headings or no text or some heading and some text, but not a complete manuscript. I know this is my problem, not Scrivener’s. I currently have my book in Scrivener and Ulysses. I’ll finish the book in Scrivener and cross the bridge on how to compile it when the second draft is finished. That said, I like to use it for multi-session workshops and larger, more complex projects, but for the life of me, I can’t get compile to work for me.

Below is a screenshot of what I was attempting. I gave up because I could not get a compiled document that I could use as my presentation notes. I went to Pages to do the work.

OK – judging from your screenshot, you’ve chosen to compile only one session out of the entire manuscript (dropdown on the top right), and you only have one Section Type represented, called ‘Section’. It also looks like you have selected a Section Layout, but you’ve chosen one which only produces a page break and a title, with no text.

The basic process to change that to a chapter heading + text is this:

First Click on Assign Section Layouts then in the new dialogue, click on the section type on the left – judging by your screenshot it will be called ‘Section’

In the right hand panel, scroll through the dummy layouts to find the Section Layout that looks closest to what you want. In your screenshot you’ve chosen one that has a page break before each section, and which only has the title – I think you’ve chosen Part Title Page, but obviously can’t be sure without seeing the project.

But if you look through the list of layouts, you’ll see other possibilities, where both the chapter title and the text are shown. Here I’m highlighting one (called Chapter) which does that:

There are other likely candidates – try ‘Section Title’ for example.

If any of the Section Layouts in that list meets your needs, select it, press OK, and you’re done.

Most of the time, you can find a default layout that is good enough – which is why I’d say that the basic compile process is actually quite easy and logical: tell the compile what you want each Section Type to look like by choose a Section Layout from the list.

But if you can’t find one that’s exactly right – for example you want the heading to use arabic or roman numerals, rather than ‘one’, then you click on the one that looks nearest, then click on the pencil icon to duplicate the format and edit it.

This will bring up the advanced configuration dialogue where you can configure the layout to meet your needs – change the font, the wording of heading, add Notes and Synopsis and other meta data and a host of other things. (In fact, all the default compile formats are created using this dialogue.)

That’s where the complexity (and the power and flexibility) of Scrivener comes in – if you want something beyond the defaults, there are so many options… If you do need to make any changes, I’ll do my best to help.

That’s a very basic run-through – I hope it helps…

1 Like

First and foremost, thank you for taking the time out of your busy schedule to provide such a helpful response. Your explanation clarifies several things. I’ll also rewatch the Scrivener compile videos to gain a better understanding of the process.

My usual goal is to create a simple document with a title and all the headings and subheadings in the correct order. The text should be placed beneath each heading, allowing me to export the document as a Word or PDF file. However, I’m encountering some confusion in the terminology used in the project settings, binder, and inspector for parts, chapters, sections, headings, and subheadings. While I don’t believe I’m particularly dense, Scrivener’s terminology can sometimes make me feel that way! :joy:

Thank you once again for your kindness and generosity. Your assistance is truly appreciated and remarkable!

1 Like

If you ever want to do a Zoom walk through, I can help you set up your compile.

I’m not sure if I’ve ever mentioned it before but I took a Udemy course on Scrivener some years ago, and it was really well done: Full Course on How to Use Scrivener 3 for Mac

This one on formatting was also great: Save Time by Automating Formatting.

You’re very welcome!

You’re absolutely right, the terminology (sections, chapters etc) can get confusing – in particular, ‘Section’ seems to be used for two different purposes.

Firstly, ‘section’ in its general sense refers to an individual unit, or line, in the Binder. So it can be a folder, or a file, as long as it has its own entry in the Binder. Every unit in the binder has a Section Type, where you tell Scrivener what the purpose of that unit will be.

So, for example, in a novel, you could identify some units as Chapters, some as Scenes, some as a Prologue and so on – and you do this by giving all the scenes the same Section Type. In your example, the Section Type is actually called “Section”, which is confusing…

You can use the Section Type in the Editor, for example by setting up a dynamic search only documents with “Section Type = Scene”.

But it’s mainly used when you come to compile, because then you tell the compiler that you want units of Section Type “This” to all have the same format, while units of Section Type “That” all have a different format – i.e. you assign each Section Type to a specific Section Layout.

That’s essentially it: when you’re writing you identify the different type of elements you’re producing (Section Type), and in the compiler you identify what those different types will look like (Section Layout).

It looks more complicated than it is, because – as you said – some Project Templates use the word “section” both in the category “Section Type” and as a specific example: “Section Type = Section”…

But the truth is the names of the Section Types themselves are irrelevant – you could call them “Bob”, “Ted” and “Alice” if you want, as long as you use the same value for the same type of unit.

To make this a bit clearer, let’s take the example from your post. Here I’m changing the default Section Type “Section” to “Slide” in Project > Project Settings > Section Types:

It now looks like this in the Outliner:

Now in the compile main dialogue, you have this:

The assign section layouts panel:

As you can see, I’ve used the advanced options dialog I mentioned in the last post to to change the name of the Section Layout to “SLIDE LAYOUT”.

You’re still compiling the same project to the same output format – all we’ve done is make the names a little more meaningful to show how they are used in the editor and compilation.

(NB: You don’t have to change the names at all. Basically: the names of the values of Section Type and Section Layout are just labels – concentrate on what they do and what they look like, rather than the name.)

This use of Section Types and Section Layouts is actualy the source of much of Scrivener’s power – it means you can use exactly the same project for radically different output formats – to an Ebook, to a camera ready paperback and to a manuscript for submission to publishers for example – just by assigning different Section Layouts to the existing Section Types.

HTH.

@iPersuade @brookter

I apologize for my delayed response to your kind offer and your help. I’m deeply humbled and grateful for your kindness.

I’ve watched several videos on compiling, but I’m still finding compile to be confusing and cumbersome. I’m torn about what to do. In principle, there are several benefits I see in using Scrivener for longer, more complex writing projects. In no particular order:

  • I can bulk export projects in different formats.
  • There is no subscription.
  • The Binder and outlining features are excellent.
  • I like the ability to open a research document next to the editor pane.

The downsides of Scrivener for me are:

  • Compiling is confusing.
  • The iPad app (I use the iPad for a lot of my writing) makes working on complex documents with multiple levels difficult because there is no equivalent to the Scrivenerings feature on the mobile app.
  • Using Dropbox for syncing is cumbersome.

Based on the above, I’ve decided to keep my book project in Ulysses and use a combination of OmniOutliner and Pages for all other writing. Once the book project is finished, I plan to cancel my Ulysses subscription.

I’ve gone back and forth between using a word processor and markdown editors for my writing. I like writing in markdown for the smaller file sizes, fast sync, portability, and “future-proofing.” However, I don’t like the proprietary markdown used by Ulysses because not all markdown syntax and Ulysses features export to regular markdown files. I also don’t like the idea of all of my writing being in a single database. If the database is corrupted, my work is lost if, for whatever reason, my backups fail. At least with a word processor, I can theoretically only have individual files corrupted. I recognize there are caveats to all of this. That acknowledged, I’ve concluded that my most efficient workflow is to use Ulysses for the book, Pages for writing, and OmniOutliner for outlining complex writing projects.

However, in the spirit of the MPU forum, I reserve the right to be convinced otherwise and to change my mind :rofl:.

Seriously, if you think I’m wrong about this, I am absolutely willing to be convinced otherwise.

Thanks again for your gracious kind offers of help. I appreciate it more than I can adequately express.

@Bmosbacker you summed up my feeling about Scrivener almost exactly. When I was trialing it, my compile needs were very simple and I got it working mostly how I wanted (a few page breaks were in less than ideal locations), but I always felt like I was working with one hand tied behind my back. Scrivener’s marketing presents compiling as a feature/benefit, but to me it was the one thing that I never saw any benefit to and eventually moved on to other tools to avoid it.

1 Like

Some thoughts… none of them are intended to persuade you (@Bmosbacker) to use Scrivener—just in the interest of an enjoyable conversation on a tech topic we are all drawn to. Also, some of this you and I’ve written before. Forgive what may be a bit repetitive, it’s for the benefit of those on thread.

Here is what I did to solve most of my Scrivener compile woes. I accepted the fact that Scrivener is a battleship, not a corvette. Every time I was eager to use it, it was the last minute and I couldn’t get the compile set up right. So, here is what I did. I took a project with a long lead time, and I painstakingly worked through creating both project templates and compile formats. I tested, debugged, etc. Through that process, I set up several reliable—for me—compile set ups. I also have a set of useful—again for my—project templates.

At the end of the process, I felt and still feel like I get the compile process now in ways I didn’t when I was just trying to tweak arbitrary settings. In fact, now I have an easier time and can more efficiently solve my own compile problems. Also, it enables me to use Scivener more like a corvette than a battleship. Not entirely.

I say that not to be annoying but to be encouraging. I think Scrivener is powerful and flexible, but it took me a ton of work to get there. In fact, I tried Scrivener out some years before this whole process and just scrapped it as too complicated. Now I use it all the time.

Now to your specific issues. I’m a huge fan of Scrivenings mode. The rough equivalent on the iPad version is not that much of an equivalent. I use it, but you can’t edit in that mode, which is a big drawback for me. My sole workaround is to use the iPad version just as a workhorse to get text into Scrivener when I’m away from my Mac. I treat Mac Scrivener as the mother ship. I’ve never once tried to compile on the iPad, but I would like to have a compile set up that I could use for “quick and dirty” compiles on the go. I have found as I’ve used the iPad version more, that it’s pretty capable. It does more than it seems like it can. I worked in an entire section of a book yesterday: drafted some parts, moved around folders and texts in the binder, made annotations, took notes. Honestly, I wished it had feature parity with the Mac version. I’ve suggested that in the Scrivener forums and have taken quite a beating over it.

Dropbox sync has been painless for me, but I know people find it annoying. There no way (currently) to avoid that medicine.

As I said, if you — or anyone in our forum — wants to see if you can get past these Scrivener frustrations ever wants to do a zoom to go over the compile process, I’m happy to share what I know and what’s worked for me. I’m not trying to be a Scrivener cheerleader or evangelist. But if you or anyone is inclined to use Scrivener and are hitting a wall, I’m happy to help.

1 Like

That’s very interesting! And helpful.

I stopped using the compile mode a long time ago, and purchased vellum.app instead. It wasn’t cheap, but it saved me a huge amount of time, and therefore money.

Not suggesting that’s the way to go for anyone! I just use scrivener for its text editing, binder, and scrivenings. I also sometimes use Ulysses but there is something so comforting and beautiful about using scrivener … it just makes me happy.

1 Like

This is helpful and encouraging. I’m hesitant to take you up on your offer of a Zoom call because I know how busy an attorney is, and I also know that for you, “time is money.” But if you are willing, I believe it would be helpful to me. It may help me make a final decision as to whether Scrivener is the right tool for me once and for all. Perhaps if I show you how I typically put together presentations and articles (in addition to a rather lengthy book), you can give me advice on how to use Scrivener.

If you are still open to the Zoom call, let’s message privately to set up a time.

I happen to have some flexible time next week as I’ll be traveling. I’m delivering several presentations on the place of AI in education, but my schedule is not full.

Thanks for the kind offer!

I’d love to get to that point! :slightly_smiling_face: