2009/1/12 Alan G Isaac <ais...@american.edu>: > This would really involve the following. > Create a searchable database of citations > and an interface for adding to it. > Unique keys would be generated by your > algorithm of choice when an entry is added. > Authors would be asked to use only references > in the database. > > Desirable for a book. Desirable for documentation?
In documentation, you want the reference to appear in the docstring itself. Our docstrings double as the content of a book, which is why it may be easier to extract the bibliography from the docstrings, rather than populating the docstrings from a central bibliography. > Numerical keys will clearly *not* be consistent. > The same key will refer to different citations > on different pages, and key width will not be > uniform. We automatically renumber the citations to take care of this. > In additional, numerical keys are > not informative when encountered by the reader. > I would prefer [last1.last2-2009-sja]_ where > sja is "standard journal abbreviation" and > last names are ASCII (e.g., ø -> o). I agree. > But to answer your question, bibstuff includes > biblabel.py, which can produce keys for a bibtex > database (styled as you like). The problem of > setting up the data base remains. We can add an interface to the documentation editor, where a person pastes the BiBTeX reference, and it returns the appropriate key to use in the docs. Mabe you can think of a more intuitive interface, even. As long as we have a consistent way of generating keys, I'd gladly use them. Regards Stéfan _______________________________________________ Numpy-discussion mailing list Numpy-discussion@scipy.org http://projects.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
