[uf-discuss] Citation: next steps?
michael.mccracken at gmail.com
Tue Aug 29 17:19:14 PDT 2006
Bruce, do you have a canonical example that gets at exactly what you
mean by monolithic and flat vs. modular and relational? I think I used
to understand what you meant by those, but I want to be sure. Please
bear with me on this, I know I asked you a similar question a while
back, but I think that what you're asking for is actually not as
complicated as it may sound.
Do you just mean the ability to mark up a relation between two citation items?
For instance, if BibTeX had a convention of things like this:
Would you consider that relational? That kind of thing fulfills what I
think you want, but I'd like to know if you're talking about something
ISTR that you've also described BibTeX's model as flat because author
names in BibTeX are somewhat underspecified, but since a citation
microformat will use hCard, that's not an issue here, right?
On 8/29/06, Bruce D'Arcus <bdarcus.lists at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 8/29/06, Tantek Çelik <tantek at cs.stanford.edu> wrote:
> > This is a good summary to date and deserving of being captured on the
> > citation-brainstorming page.
> I agree. I think the fundmental last hump to get over is the choice
> between a largely monolithic and flat BibTeX-like approach, and a more
> modular and relational DC-like approach. The choice is crtiical
> because it has significant implications to the flexibility of hCite.
> On the nesting example, though, this would be the more typical case
> (chapter in a book, rather than vice versa), and one could forego
> <div class="hcite">
> <div class=chapter">
> <span class="title">Chapter Title</span>
> <div class="isPartOf">
> <span class="title">Book Title</span>
> To me typing is nice, but not critical, paricularly if the rest of the
> data is sound.
> microformats-discuss mailing list
> microformats-discuss at microformats.org
UCSD CSE PhD Candidate
More information about the microformats-discuss