On Wed, Apr 05, 2006 at 10:27:40AM -0400, Bruce D'Arcus wrote:
>
> On Apr 5, 2006, at 10:19 AM, Matthias Steffens wrote:
>
>
> OK, fair enough. But we need to design the system to enable what I'm
> arguing for as ideal I think. The fallback can well be that for some
> users with poor data sources, their citation uris are rather dumb uris
> like:
>
> person:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:smith99
should it be a little more extensive here? so for instnace: I am
extremely disorganized, and in the absence of a satisfactory
bibliogrpahic solution have dealt with various bibs in the last few
years. On one paper I use one bib, for another project I may have a
wholly different one. So shouldthe uri be:
person:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:SOME_HASH_HERE:smith99
>
> But we need to start getting with the network here, so that it'll even
> be possible for a user to be reading a book they want to cite, add a
> citation by typing in the isbn in the citation id field, and OOoBib
> will grab that relevant record from the Library of Congress server.
> Likewise for DOIs.
>
> E.g., I would hope that in five years, users NEVER have to create their
> own (bad) citation data.
do I EVER look forward to that!
>
> I should also add that using uris for association is likely what will
> be the outcome of the metadata work at the ODF TC. It provides a
> standard and general mechanism to link content and metadata.
>
> How's that?
do you guys have some docs on this emerging standard?
matt
--------------------------
.''`. Matt Price
: :' : Debian User
`. `'` & hemi-geek
`-
--------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
