On Jun 28, 2006, at 12:24 AM, pt wrote:
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.
OK, I see. But I'm not clear on what that buys us.
(I'm assuming the rendered text will go inside the cite element?)
The cite:citation-body 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.
We'll probably revisit the cite:key attribute to ensure we have a
generic attribute for this linking. That attribute content will most
likely be a uri, rather than the dumb string in the example on the
wiki.
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.
Intuitively I don't think that's very practical. Say I have 50
citations to a single source in a book; does it really make sense to
have 50 database entries? For what benefit? That, in fact, goes against
the grain of all existing citation systems I am aware of, so would seem
to introduce more interoperability headaches?
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.
Each format is going to have it's own approach to encoding the
citations, but that's a trivial detail as I see it. If we say a
citation should be a uri, then you could encode a full citation like
this if you wanted:
urn:isbn:2354-1235#page=23?suppress=author
But given ODF is a fairly nicely-designed XML format, we may as well
have it encoded as clean XML. Besides, the new citation support is
already approved (has been for about 18 months).
Or maybe I'm just missing something (feel free to correct); about time
for bed!
Bruce
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
