On Sat, 22 Jan 2005 12:45 am, Bruce D'Arcus wrote:
> On Jan 21, 2005, at 6:30 AM, Johan Kool wrote:
> > Why don't you use both?
> >
> > CSL schema to set the default group, and a way to override this by the
> > user if he sets the group attribute on a citation.
Would this be for cases like this - I have a journal article which has 
considerable detail about a legal case including the full text of the law and 
trail transcript etc.
It would be normally formated in the citation (footnote or intext) and 
bibliography as a journal article. But because of its special nature I would 
like it treated as if it was a direct reference to a 'Legal Case'  ? 

This selection as you describe seems simple enough to do. The problem I see is 
that the bibliographic reference would not have the  legal case details to 
display. 

3 options to deal with this -
1.  The user opens the bibliographic edit panel which shows that the record is 
an 'Article' the user forces it to type 'legal case' adds the necessary legal 
information. User sets the type back to Article but the legal fields remain 
there to be used. (Or the legal fields are part of the optional fields that 
the user can add to any reference. In this case no need to change the type). 
These seems the best option to me. 

2. The user creates an new reference based on the article but of the type 
'legal case'. You might have it list twice in the bibliography in different 
categories.

3. The user just changes to record type to Legal Case. Although this would 
produce a incorrect bibliographic entry of the type examiners might pick on.



> So, here's what I had earlier in CSL:
>
>      <bibliography author-as-sort-order="first-author">
>        <group>
>  <heading>Legal Documents</heading>
>  <reftype name="legal case" inherit-from="article"/>
>  <reftype name="bill" inherit-from="article"/>
>        </group>
>
> I'm getting rid of inheritance I think, because it will add complexity
> with unclear benefit.
>
> Then citations could be optionally <citation><biblioref linkend="doe99"
> group="legal"/></citation>?
>
> Of course, that attribute isn't supported in DocBook, but you get the
> idea.
>
> How would you envision a GUI?
Each Citproc style-sheet would support a certain list of document types. The 
style-sheet lists these in an information section. The when the user selects 
the style-sheet the interface reads the list to populate the list of document 
options.



>
> Bruce
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to