On Jun 19, 2006, at 8:44 PM, David Wilson wrote:
If location-units are an either a separate list (possibly user
extensible) or
at least gathered in one place in the code.
Right now, the list is controlled in the schema, which I think
important for future interoperability.
It terms of program maintenance if would be nicer to add
LP record=A/B side: Track#
Aside: I doubt there'd be need for this use case. The track info
belongs to the bibliographic record; not the citation.
to the types of locations than to just add in at 'the right place' in
the CSL
code.
Am not following.
There are two separate issues:
1) the primary one I was getting at is whether it is really necessary
to parse numbers (begin/end) or whether better to just have a simple
"value" attribute.
2) whether the locators ought to be attributes of cite:biblioref, or
(as they are now) elements.
I'm thinking the answer to 2 is to keep it as is, but to change 1. This
is so in part for easier future interoperability with Open XML, and
also because it better matches how user input would work (we would have
a single field).
Bruce
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
