Rick, Changing the conversation a little I would be interested to know your opinion of this book, as I'm sure would others. Many were disappointed with "The Definitive Guide to SQLite".
Sunday, July 19, 2009, 11:56:05 AM, you wrote: RR> Okay. We're talking two different things here. RR> One states "academic papers" and you state "technical documents". RR> This is a "book", not an "academic paper or technical document". RR> I'm all for Names and Dates. I'm quite familiar with (Williams and Jones RR> 1981) and other such references. They appear in most of the books I possess. RR> However, bracketed references such as [SMI01] do not. First time in my 50 RR> years I've come across this. RR> Are we assuming that everyone who buys this book attended University? RR> Another thing I'm familiar with are TAGS in documents. These looked like RR> TAGS to me. I immediately assumed the TAGS weren't replaced with the actual RR> material. RR> Anyway, I think enough has been said on this. One should never ASSUME that a RR> convention is understood by ALL readers. Apparently, it is not. RR> Best regards, RR> Rich RR> #>>-----Original Message----- #>>From: sqlite-users-boun...@sqlite.org #>>[mailto:sqlite-users-boun...@sqlite.org] On Behalf Of Rich Shepard #>>Sent: Saturday, July 18, 2009 8:00 PM #>>To: General Discussion of SQLite Database #>>Subject: Re: [sqlite] The SQL Guide to SQLite #>> #>>On Sat, 18 Jul 2009, Rick Ratchford wrote: #>> #>>> All I know is that this is a book. I have a vast library of #>>technical #>>> books and this is the ONLY one that uses this convention. #>>Even my copy #>>> of "A New Kind of Science" by Wolfram doesn't use this #>>convention. :-b #>> #>> There are many conventions for citations in books, #>>reports, articles, and other documents that cite original #>>sources. When I was in academia, the ecological literature #>>(books, papers, etc.) used a (name date) format; e.g., (Smith #>>1962), or (Williams and Jones 1981), or (Foobar et al. 1954). #>>The bibliography or reference section (and there is a #>>difference between those #>>two) was arranged in alphabetic order. Many other technical #>>books (including #>>mine) use a numeric citation, e.g., [20], and the #>>bibliography is numeric rather than alphabetic. Still other #>>technical documents use the author abreviation plus two-digit #>>year system which is what you apparently encountered; e.g., #>>[ORA92] or [SMI01]. They are all common. #>> #>> Personally, I like the author/year system because it's #>>explicit and easy to comprehend without requiring looking at #>>the references section. #>>Regardless, it's up to the publisher, country, or the #>>practice of a particular discipline which one is used. #>> #>> It's unfortunate that you had such difficulty figuring out #>>the citation system. #>> #>>Rich #>> #>>-- #>>Richard B. Shepard, Ph.D. | Integrity #>> Credibility #>>Applied Ecosystem Services, Inc. | Innovation #>><http://www.appl-ecosys.com> Voice: 503-667-4517 #>>Fax: 503-667-8863 #>>_______________________________________________ #>>sqlite-users mailing list #>>sqlite-users@sqlite.org #>>http://sqlite.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users #>> #>> RR> _______________________________________________ RR> sqlite-users mailing list RR> sqlite-users@sqlite.org RR> http://sqlite.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users -- Best regards, Neville Franks, http://www.surfulater.com http://blog.surfulater.com _______________________________________________ sqlite-users mailing list sqlite-users@sqlite.org http://sqlite.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users
