On Wednesday, September 21, 2016 at 9:36:06 AM UTC, Martin R wrote: > > well, for preprints clearly there is of course the arXiv number and for > sciences without a good database, there is doi. > > concerning readability, there is a well known justification for using > sequential numbers >

## Advertising

we talk about readability of the source code, too. IMHO one should not name variables and functions just using sequential numbers :-) Having said this, I again would argue for an option to have aliases. E.g. say there is a popular Arxiv preprint cited 10 times in the source, which then becomes a publication. It is really unnecessary to change all these 10 citations? > > > I'm not making this up, I used this to organise the references for > www.findstat.org, and I'm very happy with the result. > > Martin > > Am Mittwoch, 21. September 2016 11:10:00 UTC+2 schrieb Dima Pasechnik: >> >> >> >> On Wednesday, September 21, 2016 at 8:46:13 AM UTC, David Roe wrote: >>> >>> Preprints won't have MR numbers. I also find MR numbers less readable. >>> >> and not all the CS-related publications make it into MR database, either. >> >> >>> >>> We could just append letters ("a" then "b," etc) if there are collisions. >>> >> >> I wonder whether it is possible to create aliases for references, i.e. >> make [Bla]_ and [Foo]_ both refer to [Foo]. >> This would allow less changes in the source. >> >> >> >> >>> David >>> >>> On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 4:38 AM, 'Martin R' via sage-devel < >>> sage-...@googlegroups.com> wrote: >>> >>>> Why not use the MR number as reference format? >>>> >>>> Martin >>>> >>>> >>>> Am Mittwoch, 21. September 2016 01:03:27 UTC+2 schrieb John H Palmieri: >>>>> >>>>> As discussed in another thread [1]_ on sage-devel recently, I propose >>>>> changing our policy toward references: >>>>> >>>>> - all references should be put into a master bibliography file, and >>>>> - all references should be, insofar as possible, in a standard form: >>>>> for a work by a single author "Author" published in YEAR: [AutYEAR]. For >>>>> a >>>>> work published by "Author" and "Coauthor" in YEAR: [ACYEAR]. The year >>>>> should be four digits. >>>>> >>>>> The main point is the first item is to avoid conflicting >>>>> cross-references, and it also seems to make sense to list all references >>>>> in >>>>> one place. (The goal behind the second item is just consistency.) >>>>> >>>>> This is implemented at https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/21454. >>>>> >>>>> Any comments? >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> John >>>>> >>>>> REFERENCES: >>>>> >>>>> .. [1] >>>>> https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sage-devel/-_kszKLhICw/SjLMs4rXCAAJ >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>>> Groups "sage-devel" group. >>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send >>>> an email to sage-devel+...@googlegroups.com. >>>> To post to this group, send email to sage-...@googlegroups.com. >>>> Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel. >>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >>>> >>> >>> -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sage-devel" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.