[uf-discuss] Citation Microformat: LazyWeb for BibTeXperts

Bruce D'Arcus bdarcus.lists at gmail.com
Fri Oct 6 06:17:30 PDT 2006

On 10/6/06, Brian Suda <brian.suda at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 10/6/06, Joe Andrieu <joe at andrieu.net> wrote:

> > I'm assuming that means it isn't included in what you've done so far.
> --- correct. From the examples online[1] most (if any) did not have a
> dateAccessed. [well one did CiteProc_XHTML_Output[2], which doesn't
> fall into the 80/20]. I'm not against exploring dateAccessed, there
> might be ways to extract an access date without actually declaring it
> explicitly.

Run this search on Google:

    site:wikipedia.org "accessed on"

It's not very precise (it probably misses some stuff), but I get over
6,800 hits; from one site! Fair to say it's pretty "real world."

> If you are looking for the DATETIME that you "viewed" the
> article, then that could be added by the transforming application
> (this might be a bad idea?) and/or use the timestamp that is sent in
> HTTP Headers (Last-Modified date - again, maybe a bad idea?)

All an access date does it authenticate a URL; it says "the URL was
valid on this date." URLs change, so citations REQUIRE access dates. I
have never seen an exception to this rule. Whether we call it
"dtvalid" or "dtaccessed" doesn't matter that much.

BTW, worth looking at Zotero, which has just gone live:


They'll be supporting hCite once it's done.


More information about the microformats-discuss mailing list