> i'm not sure i understand how this would help. currently > there is a single list of paper names. for your use, these > names are random. changing to a list of authors, > years and a seperate sequence list per author sounds at best > no less complicated to me. for your use, i believe such a > list would still be random.
Many of the academics/researchers I work with use the author/year+ to help find papers in collections without having to open up the DB. It is typical, at least in the circles I run in, to refer to important papers by the author/date convention. Also, I know that some of the bibliographic tools support searching/naming papers using these types of keys. If you do not like it, then fine, but keep in mind that I am not only working on the iwp9 proceedings, but also working towards a complete list of all peer reviewed plan9 literature (and I am up to maybe a couple hundred citations already). Having consistent automatable generating rules could help simplify things... Anyway, that's my vision of the future... EBo --
