Ross Singer:
1) There's obviously a group that wants this data to be used with
bibliographic management software
2) There's a group that wants these citations to be able to link to
fulltext/print/etc. for any person's library
3) There's a group (I think?) that wants to be able to display
Hello folks; please don't shoot, I'm new here. I've noticed on the wiki that
there's a relatively long discussion about citation formats, tending to focus
on creating microformats for full academic citations. From my point of view,
this seems to go against the start as simple as possible
Breton Slivka:
Lead by example. If you can get some use out of authoring your own
xhtml semantics, do it!
OK, let's have a go:
http://www.youneedtoreadthis.com/book/view/0596102356
I don't consider the authorgroup and the metadata to be part of
the uformat, they're just presentational - for
Fred Stutzman:
Well, indeed, but wouldn't defining a new standard just contribute another
to this list?
I am neither suggesting we do or we don't accept BibTeX, and am neither
suggesting we use or we don't use another namespace. I'm just saying, get
something working and build from that. The
Tantek ?elik:
http://microformats.org/wiki/process
Second, the folks working on the citation microformat to date have done *a
lot* of work along the lines of the process which I recommend you read to
understand the current state of progress:
http://microformats.org/wiki/citation-examples
Bruce D'Arcus:
But if you follow the BibTeX way strictly (where all properties are
single values) you will end up with an hCite tha is liimited, and
akward to extend. Every time someone needs to represent a different
kind of resource, they'll have to go through some complicated
community
