I think the answer might be to remove the sorting from the CLS process. I will
explain -
I have been looking at my style guide again. They suggest an example with
several levels of Grouping and sorting: For example -
==================
Primary Sources
Published Sources
cited works sorted by name, date
Unpublished Sources
cited works sorted by name, date
Secondary Sources
cited works sorted by name, date
=========================
The style guide says about sorting (by name or date) ‘use what is most
useful”.
In any of these groups the user should be able to select the sort order name,
date / date, name etc. And as Martha suggested there could be an arbitrary
number and levels of headings, and sorting options. (Published / Un-published
could be sorted based on record content tests ie ' If Publisher Name exists
then work is a member of 'Published'. If NOT 'Published' then work is a
member of 'Unpublished'.)
Also I have suggested before we need a mechanism to allow to manually
over-ride the sorting order As Martha has said fully automatic systems drive
you crazy.
For setting up the bibliography table I suggest we have a GUI that allows the
user to set Heading Groups and table sorting options and “pre-sorting rules”.
For pre-sorting to operate each bibliographic record would have a name-sort
field which the sort-pre-processing would convert the name to the sort-name.
There would be a bib table Preview panel to check the operation of each user
intervention.
An example of special sorting rules for names: how to sort ‘Mujahid Usamah Bin
Ladin’ ; Bin Ladin is the family name but ‘Bin’ should always ignored in
sorting arabic names, and the name would be grouped in the ‘L’s.)” or the
generally known all 'Mc' or 'Mc ' are replaced with 'Mac'. Also you may want
to Anglicise the names by replace all the umlauts or accents with the
standard unaccented character. There would be a standard set of pre-sort
rules but the user could add extra rules. These could be rules to fix Chinese
– English transliteration problems ie change all 'Mao Tse Tung' to 'Mao
Zedung'. To fix the situation where the rules do not seem to work, force the
sorting order - For record ID 34334453 sort-name ='smith, d. h."
So how would this interact with the CiteProc formatting engine ? The
Bibliographic Table GUI would send a list of citation ID's to CiteProc, and
CiteProc would return the formatted citation strings to the selected style.
The sort order does not matter at this point. Through the GUI process the
pre-sort rules populate the sort-name fields and the Headings are defined.
When the user has finished the bib table setup and pressed the OK button to
generate the table. The GUI process could return to Citeproc the sorted list
of citation Ids along with the Headings. ie
Bib Heading level1='Primary Sources', CiteIds=1234, 13445, 234234, 234234,
234234
Bib Heading level2='Published Sources' CiteIds= 45234,23423,2344,3566,576567,
Bib Heading level2='Unpublished Sources' CiteIds=
576567,56758,3245,123,234,4223,8645
Bib Heading level1='Secondary Sources' CiteIds= 463456923, 238492, 2348974,
088776
This should be easier to work with.
Regarding Heading groups. I think that user defined groups can be just
assigned to the cited works in a document. If a user then assigns both
'Primary Sources' and 'Secondary Source' to work then it will appear in both
lists. There group names could be carried over from a user Bibliographic
databases but need to customisable for each document, as what is a 'Primary
Sources' for one document could be a 'Secondary Source' for an other.
How does this sound ?
David
On Thursday 24 November 2005 5:14 am, Bruce D'Arcus wrote:
> OK, here's the outline of the current draft, where I'm trying to
> incorporate Johan's earlier comments with my interest in solving the
> grouping issue. Comments inline:
>
> <content>
> <names and-as="and"/>
> <dates>
> <!-- for now, keep the existing approach -->
> <months>
> <month></month>
> </months>
> </dates>
> <locators>
> <!-- make all of these more compact and consistent; still could remove
> all the wrappers here (locators, terms, etc.), but am not sure about
> that -->
> <locator type="page" renderas-single="p" renderas-multiple="pp"/>
> </locators>
> <terms>
> <genres>
> <genre type="letter" renderas="letter"/>
> </genres>
> <media>
> <medium type="CD" renderas="CD"/>
> </media>
> </terms>
> <!-- move the prefix and suffix elements to attributes per previous
> discussion; it has limitations, but is more compact; easier to port to
> OpenDocument -->
> <citation delimiter=";" prefix="(" suffix=")">
> <multiple-authors />
> <layout>
> <creator></creator>
> </layout>
> </citation>
> <bibliography>
> <groups>
> <!-- the new grouping structure; logic is as follows:
>
> we have two options to group by: creator and named group (perhaps year
> ought to be another?)
>
> the first is automatic, and the second would typically require manually
> assigning a group
> in the bib metadata record; in this case, though, one can add reftype
> elements to
> automatically assign the groups
>
> if there is no "by" attribute, this essentially becomes the default
> group
>
> I need feedback on this. What do people think?
> -->
> <group by="named group" group-name="legal">
> <heading type="text">Legal Documents</heading>
> <reftype name="legal case"/>
> <reftype name="bill"/>
> </group>
> <group>
> <heading type="text">References</heading>
> </group>
> </groups>
> <layout>
> <reftype name="book">
> <!-- add ability to modify title casing -->
> <title capitalize="title case"/>
> </reftype>
> </layout>
> </bibliography>
> </content>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
-------------------
David N. Wilson
Co-Project Lead for the Bibliographic
OpenOffice Project
http://bibliographic.openoffice.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
