On Sunday 15 January 2006 4:48 am, Bruce D'Arcus wrote: > On Jan 14, 2006, at 12:42 PM, Robby Stephenson wrote: > >> There are pros and cons to each approach (one of the strengths of 1 is > >> that it could lead to compatibility between Word and Writer, because > >> CSL would certainly be used in both), and I have no strong opinion. > > > > One issue I see with 1) is what happens when a custom (not installed by > > default) XSL file is referenced in the ODF (from your online > > repository, > > for example). If the ODF file is opened somewhere else, the CSL file > > would > > be orphaned in a sense. Somehow there'd have to be a way to reference > > its > > location elsewhere. > > That "XSL" is a typo; right? > > I think it makes sense that CSL files always be embedded in the file > wrapper, for the same reason I think the bibliographic metadata ought > to always be embedded: to keep documents portable and self-contained. > I agree. Currently theReference Table formating details are embeded in the document. So if you open any document you can add a citation and update (re-generate) the reference table with the pre-defined format.
To do this with Citeproc we need to have the CSL file in the file wrapper. I have an produced a draft example manifest file for the save file - http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Bibliographic_Document_XML_Format#manifest.xml where I have included the CSL file. > E.g. the online repository (if it ever happens) would store styles, but > users would download them. > > Bruce > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > 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]
