The client lets me enter the bibliographic data for a source I’m reading. The form defaults to showing me all the other notes I’ve created for this source…as if I were writing my notes on a piece of paper.

I can enter notes about the book, with a field for the page the note refers to and a field for my comments

I can tag each source, author and note with multiple tags. It shows me a list of tags I’ve used for this book or project.

The app lets me create a project (e.g., “Article on Pitchers”) and associate a set of sources with that project. The tags I create while working on that project stay associated with it.

Projects can apply to a single article or a cluster of chapters.

I can slice, dice and cluster all those notes at will.

When I put a note into my article, it preps a footnote entry for me suitable for pasting into my article.

It can turn bibliographic entries into text formatted and marked up according to the style I specify.

If I use a note when writing an article in my word processor, I can easily (not sure how) let Notetella know that I’ve used it so I don’t use the same quote twice inadvertently. (This is probably the only feature that couldn’t be implemented as a straightforward database app.)

Web

Why should I have to enter all that data myself? If anyone else has created a bibliographic entry for my source, the Web piece shows it to me.

It also shows me everyone else’s notes on that book.

I can search by book, author, tag, Noteteller (i.e., other participants in the system).

I can leave comments on other people notes.

Every Noteteller gets her own page at the site, as at Delicious.com.

Notetellers can declare particular books or projects to be private, although public is better

I can upload/download notes and projects from my client.