Based on the feedback below, I've removed the BibTeX vocabulary from
HTML5. The primary use case -- enabling drag-and-drop in a manner that the
target document could automatically add a reference to the source document
-- can still be done between cooperating sources, it's just no longer a
On Wed, 10 Jun 2009, Julian Reschke wrote:
Ian Hickson wrote:
So far based on my experience with the Workers, Storage, Web Sockets,
and Server-sent Events sections, I'm not convinced that the advantage
of getting more review is real. Those sections in particular got more
review while
On 11.06.2009, at 00:44, Jonas Sicking wrote:
On Wed, Jun 10, 2009 at 3:12 AM, Julian
Reschkejulian.resc...@gmx.de wrote:
Ian Hickson wrote:
...
So far based on my experience with the Workers, Storage, Web
Sockets, and
Server-sent Events sections, I'm not convinced that the advantage
2009/6/3 Bruce D'Arcus bdar...@gmail.com:
Newspaper articles are cited a LOT; they're all over the place on
wikipedia. And this doesn't even get into patents, or hearing
transcripts, or legal opinions, or films. We need to be able to
represent all of these, and bibtex is of little help here.
On Thu, Jun 11, 2009 at 5:02 AM, David Gerarddger...@gmail.com wrote:
2009/6/3 Bruce D'Arcus bdar...@gmail.com:
Newspaper articles are cited a LOT; they're all over the place on
wikipedia. And this doesn't even get into patents, or hearing
transcripts, or legal opinions, or films. We need to
On Wed, 20 May 2009, Bruce D'Arcus wrote:
Re: the recent microdata work and the subsequent effort to include
BibTeX in the spec, I summarized my argument against this on my blog:
http://community.muohio.edu/blogs/darcusb/archives/2009/05/20/on-the-inclusion-of-bibtex-in-html5
| 1. BibTeX
Ian Hickson wrote:
...
So far based on my experience with the Workers, Storage, Web Sockets, and
Server-sent Events sections, I'm not convinced that the advantage of
getting more review is real. Those sections in particular got more review
while in the HTML5 spec proper than they have since.
Am cc-ing he Zoteor dev list just for posterity ...
On Wed, Jun 10, 2009 at 5:44 AM, Ian Hicksoni...@hixie.ch wrote:
On Wed, 20 May 2009, Bruce D'Arcus wrote:
Re: the recent microdata work and the subsequent effort to include
BibTeX in the spec, I summarized my argument against this on my
| 1. BibTeX is designed for the sciences, that typically only cite
| Â Â secondary academic literature. It is thus inadequate for, nor widely
| Â Â used, in many fields outside of the sciences: the humanities and law
| Â Â being quite obvious examples. For this reason, BibTeX cannot by
On Tue, Jun 2, 2009 at 12:05 PM, James Graham jgra...@opera.com wrote:
Bruce D'Arcus wrote:
So exactly what is the process by which this gets resolved? Is there one?
Hixie will respond to substantive emails sent to this list at some point.
However there are some hundreds of outstanding
So exactly what is the process by which this gets resolved? Is there one?
On Sun, May 24, 2009 at 10:17 AM, Bruce D'Arcus bdar...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, May 23, 2009 at 5:35 PM, Ian Hickson i...@hixie.ch wrote:
...
I agree that BibTeX is suboptimal. But what should we use instead?
As
Bruce D'Arcus wrote:
So exactly what is the process by which this gets resolved? Is there one?
Hixie will respond to substantive emails sent to this list at some
point. However there are some hundreds of outstanding emails (see [1])
so the responses can take a while. If you have a pressing
On Sat, May 23, 2009 at 5:35 PM, Ian Hickson i...@hixie.ch wrote:
...
I agree that BibTeX is suboptimal. But what should we use instead?
As I've suggested:
1) use Dublin Core.
This gives you the basic critical properties: literals for titles and
dates, and relations for versions,
If markup for a publication identifier in a reference is required, can this
identifier be an URN-encoded? The NID will tell what kind of an identifier
it is.
I have used q cite=urn:ISBN:whatever myself, perhaps not quite in line
with the definition of the Q element but, since the cite attribute
On Sun, May 24, 2009 at 12:35 PM, Kristof Zelechovski
giecr...@stegny.2a.pl wrote:
If markup for a publication identifier in a reference is required, can this
identifier be an URN-encoded? The NID will tell what kind of an identifier
it is.
I have used q cite=urn:ISBN:whatever myself,
Sorry, for my intrusion on this list. I realize that it's cheeky to
come to a list only to rant about a specific detail, but I feel that
more support for Bruce's position is needed. Just a bit about my
background: I don't have any technical training or expertise in
software or programming.
On Sat, 23 May 2009, Simon Spiegel wrote:
Sorry, for my intrusion on this list. I realize that it's cheeky to come
to a list only to rant about a specific detail, but I feel that more
support for Bruce's position is needed. Just a bit about my background:
I don't have any technical
On Sat, May 23, 2009 at 5:35 PM, Ian Hickson i...@hixie.ch wrote:
...
I agree that BibTeX is suboptimal. But what should we use instead?
(The biblatex vocabulary seems unnecessarily incompatible with BibTeX's,
and the latter appears to have more deployed support, which was one of the
On 23.05.2009, at 23:35, Ian Hickson wrote:
On Sat, 23 May 2009, Simon Spiegel wrote:
I agree that BibTeX is suboptimal. But what should we use instead?
(The biblatex vocabulary seems unnecessarily incompatible with
BibTeX's,
and the latter appears to have more deployed support, which
Just to put a fine point on this ...
On Thu, May 21, 2009 at 12:11 PM, Bruce D'Arcus bdar...@gmail.com wrote:
...
Or consider the user or developer who can't figure out how to
represent their data in bibtex-in-html5 because its designers simply
didn't consider it. In that case, people go
On May 20, 2009, at 19:24, Bruce D'Arcus wrote:
Re: the recent microdata work and the subsequent effort to include
BibTeX in the spec, I summarized my argument against this on my blog:
http://community.muohio.edu/blogs/darcusb/archives/2009/05/20/on-the-inclusion-of-bibtex-in-html5
Quoting
Hi Henri,
On Thu, May 21, 2009 at 4:00 AM, Henri Sivonen hsivo...@iki.fi wrote:
On May 20, 2009, at 19:24, Bruce D'Arcus wrote:
Re: the recent microdata work and the subsequent effort to include
BibTeX in the spec, I summarized my argument against this on my blog:
Oops; two quick things ...
On Thu, May 21, 2009 at 8:02 AM, Bruce D'Arcus bdar...@gmail.com wrote:
Citation and bibliographic formatting conventions do include
information that suggests type; it's not that it requires a human
reader to decipher.
I meant it's JUST that ...
Here's the
On May 21, 2009, at 15:02, Bruce D'Arcus wrote:
Except the assumption that BIbTeX is widely used is overdrawn once you
get out of the technology and sciences sectors.
OK.
This doesn't mean that BibTeX is a bad basis. The set of types and
fields is
limited, though.
It's limited, and it's
On Thu, May 21, 2009 at 9:51 AM, Henri Sivonen hsivo...@iki.fi wrote:
On May 21, 2009, at 15:02, Bruce D'Arcus wrote:
Except the assumption that BIbTeX is widely used is overdrawn once you
get out of the technology and sciences sectors.
OK.
This doesn't mean that BibTeX is a bad basis. The
Both FOAF and vCard have unstructured personal name properties
(foaf:name and v:fn) that address this.
But vCard required both N and FN, so if you only have FN, you can't get an N
without a lot of dictionary-based domain knowledge and special rules. (Or
you can make a GIGO N...)
Hmm ...
Re: the recent microdata work and the subsequent effort to include
BibTeX in the spec, I summarized my argument against this on my blog:
http://community.muohio.edu/blogs/darcusb/archives/2009/05/20/on-the-inclusion-of-bibtex-in-html5
I think it's fair to say that the Zotero project [1] agrees
27 matches
Mail list logo
