Re: [dev-biblio] xslt, citeproc-writer
I disagree Bruce, about not storing rendered content in the XML. I think it needs to be stored in a rendered form. If you don't then it will make it very hard to write things like OpenDocument to HTML transforms in random languages as you would need to run citeproc to format citations and bibliographies. Related to this is an interoperability question. It is important not to focus only on interop with OOo2, after all with a free software package it is easy to get users to upgrade. Consider the interop problems with MS Word. Have you considered an approach where citations are stored as rendered text (or footnote/endnotes) in place with a link of some kind back to the bibliographic database with the citation details stored as an item in the database. That is you would have a (1) Work, with (2) particular expression (is that what you call it) with (3) a citation by page or line number or whatever . That is three items in the database - and only one simple link in the documnet text. Seems to me that this would fit very well with your RDF approach, Bruce. And an approach like this might mean that you could build a solution that could wodk with OpenXML docs as well. On 6/28/06, Bruce D'Arcus [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: bib project questions ... Re: David Wilson's idea that citeproc give pre-rendered citation and bibliography chunks (first/subsequent, etc.) and save it in the XML, described here: http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Citeproc_Writer_Interaction I've thought about this some, and agree with the first part, but not that the rendered content should be saved in the XML. I think perhaps we can modify the bibliographic class to store that pre-formatted content (or create a new ReferenceList class?), so that it's just stored in memory, rather than saved? I've updated the wiki to reflect this. So process is something like: Citation passes list of ids to ReferenceList ReferenceList requests formatted citation and bib chunks from citeproc Citation requests formatted citation from ReferenceList Bibliography = ReferenceList to ODF I think this is how MS is doing it in Word 2007. Right now citeproc is XSLT 2.0. It'd be nice if we could just use it more-or-less as is. Svante has suggested it's likely OOo might switch to using Saxon (and thus get XSLT 2.0 for free) in the next major release. How feasible would it be to this? Could we implement essentially real-time citation processing using XSLT? It's hard enough to get good C++ programmers, and I'd rather not have them waste time reimplementing citeproc in that language when it already works quite well. Bruce - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Peter (pt) Sefton Toowoomba 4350 Queensland, Australia Phone: +61 4 1032 6955 Web: http://ptsefton.com Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [dev-biblio] xslt, citeproc-writer
Hey Peter, On Jun 27, 2006, at 11:09 PM, pt wrote: I disagree Bruce, about not storing rendered content in the XML. I think it needs to be stored in a rendered form. If you don't then it will make it very hard to write things like OpenDocument to HTML transforms in random languages as you would need to run citeproc to format citations and bibliographies. Maybe I wasn't clear, but the citation always gets included in the content file; there's no other way to display it after all. And that can be easily transformed to HTML or OXML. What David was suggesting (if I understood right) was that the bibliographic source file (bibliography.xml or whatever) would, beyond the raw metadata, also include pre-rendered chunks for all potential citation rendering options for a given style, plus the bibliographic entry. My problem with that is it results in redundant and unnecessary content, and pollutes the source file. Related to this is an interoperability question. It is important not to focus only on interop with OOo2, after all with a free software package it is easy to get users to upgrade. Consider the interop problems with MS Word. Given what I say above, do you still see any interop problems? Have you considered an approach where citations are stored as rendered text (or footnote/endnotes) in place with a link of some kind back to the bibliographic database with the citation details stored as an item in the database. That's exactly what the new ODF approach (and the MS OXML approach) does ;-) That is you would have a (1) Work, with (2) particular expression (is that what you call it) with (3) a citation by page or line number or whatever . That is three items in the database - and only one simple link in the documnet text. Seems to me that this would fit very well with your RDF approach, Bruce. And an approach like this might mean that you could build a solution that could wodk with OpenXML docs as well. Am not quite following this bit. The plan is: 1) content.xml holds the new citation fields, which are: a) link to a source record, and b) rendered citation 2) the source metadata gets stored in a dedicated file within the wrapper; maybe bibliography/source.xml 1b gets generated from 2. This is exactly how MS is doing it, coincidentally, in OXML. What David was thinking about was funky citation styles (well, many of them, in fact; APA, Chicago, etc.) that distinguish first and subsequent citations. The way citeproc works now is, IT has to figure out this sort of positional information, and then inserts the right formatted version in the output. The alternative, then, is to just have citeproc be rather dumb about it, and create the two representations for each citation, and have the new citation support figured out which to use. Bruce - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [dev-biblio] xslt, citeproc-writer
Thanks for the propmt response Bruce. 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. (I'm assuming the rendered text will go inside the cite 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. 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. 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. To work with .doc files one would have to ship the database separately like you do with EndNote now, but it could be embedded in the file where OpenDocument 3 support is available. On 6/28/06, Bruce D'Arcus [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hey Peter, On Jun 27, 2006, at 11:09 PM, pt wrote: I disagree Bruce, about not storing rendered content in the XML. I think it needs to be stored in a rendered form. If you don't then it will make it very hard to write things like OpenDocument to HTML transforms in random languages as you would need to run citeproc to format citations and bibliographies. Maybe I wasn't clear, but the citation always gets included in the content file; there's no other way to display it after all. And that can be easily transformed to HTML or OXML. What David was suggesting (if I understood right) was that the bibliographic source file (bibliography.xml or whatever) would, beyond the raw metadata, also include pre-rendered chunks for all potential citation rendering options for a given style, plus the bibliographic entry. My problem with that is it results in redundant and unnecessary content, and pollutes the source file. Related to this is an interoperability question. It is important not to focus only on interop with OOo2, after all with a free software package it is easy to get users to upgrade. Consider the interop problems with MS Word. Given what I say above, do you still see any interop problems? Have you considered an approach where citations are stored as rendered text (or footnote/endnotes) in place with a link of some kind back to the bibliographic database with the citation details stored as an item in the database. That's exactly what the new ODF approach (and the MS OXML approach) does ;-) That is you would have a (1) Work, with (2) particular expression (is that what you call it) with (3) a citation by page or line number or whatever . That is three items in the database - and only one simple link in the documnet text. Seems to me that this would fit very well with your RDF approach, Bruce. And an approach like this might mean that you could build a solution that could wodk with OpenXML docs as well. Am not quite following this bit. The plan is: 1) content.xml holds the new citation fields, which are: a) link to a source record, and b) rendered citation 2) the source metadata gets stored in a dedicated file within the wrapper; maybe bibliography/source.xml 1b gets generated from 2. This is exactly how MS is doing it, coincidentally, in OXML. What David was thinking about was funky citation styles (well, many of them, in fact; APA, Chicago, etc.) that distinguish first and subsequent citations. The way citeproc works now is, IT has to figure out this sort of positional information, and then inserts the right formatted version in the output. The alternative, then, is to just have citeproc be rather dumb about it, and create the two representations for each citation, and have the new citation support figured out which to use. Bruce - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Peter (pt) Sefton Toowoomba 4350 Queensland, Australia Phone: +61 4 1032 6955 Web: http://ptsefton.com Email:
