Thanks for the propmt response Bruce.
What I'm suggesting for consideration is that you take this example from
http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Bibliographic_Project%27s_Developer_Page#New_Citation_Coding
<cite:biblioref cite:key="Veer1996a">
<cite:detail cite:units="pages" cite:begin="23" cite:end="24"/>
</cite:biblioref>
And change it to something like this:
<cite:biblioref cite:key="Veer1996a-citation1">
</cite:biblioref>
Where there the page-range details are stored in the bibliographic database
as a new item that relates to the key 'Veer1996a' - so each page-range would
have its own record in the db.
(I'm assuming the rendered text will go inside the cite element?)
I'm still of the opinion that you would be better off building an
bibliographic database with the simplest possible hooks into the file
format; this could be implemented using a cross reference field or some
other field that exists already in OpenDocument.
What if the OOo bibliographic tool had its own web server? Then the inline
text would look like:
<a href="http://localhost:1234/cite-key/Veer1996a/1/";>(Veer 1996a pp.
23-24)</a>
Where the database would have a record for 'Veer1996a' and a record for each
page-range cited.
Citeproc could change the rendered citation inside the <a> element
dynamically as has been proposed elsewhere.
I am suggesting these ideas because I think they would allow an integrated
tool in OOo to also inter operate with Word documents, HTML documents and
and so in the kinds of real environments we see at our university where we
have Windows, Mac and Linux users running different versions of Word and OOo
and LaTeX. To work with .doc files one would have to ship the database
separately like you do with EndNote now, but it could be embedded in the
file where OpenDocument 3 support is available.
On 6/28/06, Bruce D'Arcus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hey Peter,
On Jun 27, 2006, at 11:09 PM, pt wrote:
> I disagree Bruce, about not storing rendered content in the XML. I
> think it
> needs to be stored in a rendered form.
>
> If you don't then it will make it very hard to write things like
> OpenDocument to HTML transforms in random languages as you would need
> to run
> citeproc to format citations and bibliographies.
Maybe I wasn't clear, but the citation always gets included in the
content file; there's no other way to display it after all. And that
can be easily transformed to HTML or OXML.
What David was suggesting (if I understood right) was that the
bibliographic source file (bibliography.xml or whatever) would, beyond
the raw metadata, also include pre-rendered chunks for all potential
citation rendering options for a given style, plus the bibliographic
entry.
My problem with that is it results in redundant and unnecessary
content, and pollutes the source file.
> Related to this is an interoperability question. It is important not to
> focus only on interop with OOo2, after all with a free software
> package it
> is easy to get users to upgrade. Consider the interop problems with MS
> Word.
Given what I say above, do you still see any interop problems?
> Have you considered an approach where citations are stored as rendered
> text
> (or footnote/endnotes) in place with a link of some kind back to the
> bibliographic database with the citation details stored as an item in
> the
> database.
That's exactly what the new ODF approach (and the MS OXML approach)
does ;-)
> That is you would have a (1) Work, with (2) particular expression
> (is that what you call it) with (3) a citation by page or line number
> or
> whatever . That is three items in the database - and only one simple
> link in
> the documnet text. Seems to me that this would fit very well with your
> RDF
> approach, Bruce. And an approach like this might mean that you could
> build a
> solution that could wodk with OpenXML docs as well.
Am not quite following this bit. The plan is:
1) content.xml holds the new citation fields, which are:
a) link to a source record, and
b) rendered citation
2) the source metadata gets stored in a dedicated file within the
wrapper; maybe bibliography/source.xml
1b gets generated from 2. This is exactly how MS is doing it,
coincidentally, in OXML.
What David was thinking about was funky citation styles (well, many of
them, in fact; APA, Chicago, etc.) that distinguish first and
subsequent citations. The way citeproc works now is, IT has to figure
out this sort of positional information, and then inserts the right
formatted version in the output.
The alternative, then, is to just have citeproc be rather dumb about
it, and create the two representations for each citation, and have the
new citation support figured out which to use.
Bruce
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
Peter (pt) Sefton
Toowoomba 4350
Queensland, Australia
Phone: +61 4 1032 6955
Web: http://ptsefton.com
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
