[uf-discuss] Citation format straw proposal on the wiki

[Ross Singer]

On 3/28/06, Bruce D'Arcus <bdarcus.lists at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I have to disagree on the usefulness of the OpenURL stuff in this context.


Can you explain this?  w/r/t HTML, I find OpenURL the /most/ useful in this
context, with this context being web content and OpenURL being a means to
link a citation to an appropriate copy/service.

In fact, I think if you use the 80/20 rule, your majority of users would be
/much/ happier finding fulltext for a given citation than the ability to
effectively load it into their citation manager.

And I think this is where this discussion begins lose sight.  The number of
citations that are used for locating the citation in question over the
number of citations that actually make it into a bibliography are gigantic.

And, ultimately, these are not incompatible, but I think the more valuable
'win' is the ability to find the item in question, not just cite it.

Because, quite frankly, the very purpose of the bibliographic citation
format is to enable retrieval of the cited item easily and quickly.  I would
think that the ability to retrieve the item /from/ the citation
/automatically/ would be the rational goal of any bibliographic management
initiative.

-Ross.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://microformats.org/discuss/mail/microformats-discuss/attachments/20060328/68c142dd/attachment.htm