I've added an example for a journal article to the wiki:
http://microformats.org/wiki/citation-brainstorming#Citing_a_journal_article -mike 2007/3/29, Michael McCracken <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
(note - I originally sent this to uf-dev accidentally. My impression is that more hcite people are on uf-discuss. Correct me if I'm wrong and we can move this to uf-dev. Thanks!) We need to deal with bibliographic details for things like chapters in a book, articles in a journal or magazine, and issues in a series. For designing a format, the main problem is that there are duplicate items that need to be scoped - for instance, both the article and the journal have a title. The point has been made in a few places that many existing bibliographic formats handle this by just adding fields at the top level - for example in the common usage of bibtex, a chapter of a book is a record of type "inbook", and the "title" field represents the book title, while the chapter title is recorded in the "chapter" field. For example: @inbook{TAOCP4b, title = {The Art of Computer Programming: Graph and Network Algorithms}, chapter = {Expander Graphs}, ... } While it's certainly possible to continue this scheme of adding field names whenever a publication type can be contained by another type with clashing fields, other formats have adopted an approach that avoids this field name multiplication, at the cost of a little extra complexity in nesting. For example, an article in a journal, represented in MODS XML (from http://www.scripps.edu/~cdputnam/software/bibutils/mods_intro.html ): <mods ID="C003"> <titleInfo> <title>Different base/base mismatches are corrected with different efficiencies by the methyl-directed DNA mismatch-repair system of E. coli</title> </titleInfo> ... <relatedItem type="host"> <titleInfo> <title>Cell</title> </titleInfo> ... </relatedItem> </mods> In this way, when a journal has a title, you just use the 'title' field, and you don't need to remember the difference between 'booktitle', 'chapter', 'journal', etc... There's also the advantage that you can support more types of references without changing the format to add new field names. I am proposing that we treat these cases in hCite in a way similar to MODS instead of the way BibTeX does it. Here's what I propose for hCite: I propose a 'container' class name that would be attached to a nested hCite instance to note when the nested hCite represents the containing item for the root hCite. The journal example above would then look something like this: <span class="hcite"> <span class="title">Different base/base mismatches are corrected with different efficiencies by the methyl-directed DNA mismatch-repair system of E. coli </span> ... <span class="hcite container"> <span class="title">Cell</span> ... </span> </span> Comments? FWIW, I have code in BibDesk that interprets this nesting scheme to translate into BibTeX, and it works pretty well. *note - Yes, it is also useful to know the type of the container so we can tell if we're looking at a book or a journal, but that's a separate discussion we'll have to have soon enough. For now lets focus on the nesting issue. Thanks, -mike -- Michael McCracken UCSD CSE PhD Candidate research: http://www.cse.ucsd.edu/~mmccrack/ misc: http://michael-mccracken.net/wp/
-- Michael McCracken UCSD CSE PhD Candidate research: http://www.cse.ucsd.edu/~mmccrack/ misc: http://michael-mccracken.net/wp/ _______________________________________________ microformats-discuss mailing list microformats-discuss@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss