citation-irc-notes-2006-04-09

(Difference between revisions)

Jump to: navigation, search
m (comments)
m (comment)
Line 13: Line 13:
**** Your point that a citation is a reference to an outside source is right Tantek, but that doesn't mean that the description of self should be ANY different than that of an extraneous document, save for the fact that we call it a "citation." I think this may well have been why Ed bruoght up the idea of an hDC, where we end up thinking of hCite as more-or-less a sort of wrapper for other microformats (hCard, hCal, etc.). -Bruce
**** Your point that a citation is a reference to an outside source is right Tantek, but that doesn't mean that the description of self should be ANY different than that of an extraneous document, save for the fact that we call it a "citation." I think this may well have been why Ed bruoght up the idea of an hDC, where we end up thinking of hCite as more-or-less a sort of wrapper for other microformats (hCard, hCal, etc.). -Bruce
***** But we are not talking about "should be ANY different".  We are talking about "should be SAME".  My point is that it should NOT be a *requirement* for *citations* per se.  The recognition that people will want to cite works is a good one, and thus when working on any "description" type format for a work describing itself, *that* work should look to the citation microformat and be sure to specify a transform, i.e. how to create a citation from a description. The easiest thing *might* be to simply embed a citation, but that is up to the description format, not up to the citation format, and thus should NOT be a requirement for the citation format.  My guess is that most description formats will be a superset of what a general purpose citation has in it.
***** But we are not talking about "should be ANY different".  We are talking about "should be SAME".  My point is that it should NOT be a *requirement* for *citations* per se.  The recognition that people will want to cite works is a good one, and thus when working on any "description" type format for a work describing itself, *that* work should look to the citation microformat and be sure to specify a transform, i.e. how to create a citation from a description. The easiest thing *might* be to simply embed a citation, but that is up to the description format, not up to the citation format, and thus should NOT be a requirement for the citation format.  My guess is that most description formats will be a superset of what a general purpose citation has in it.
 +
****** Consider the example of an article that contains within the page something along the lines of "Please cite this article as: The Title Of An Article. Smith J. Journal Title (1987). 46:1; 23-35.". That's both a citation and a description of the current page, and it should be marked up as such. --AlfEaton
* In addition, naming a document "-recommendation" at this point is quite premature, especially when there is much work to be done in both doing the work and cleaning up of [[citation-examples]], [[citation-formats]], and [[citation-brainstorming]]. If this is meant to be a record of notes or a summary of a discussion, then it should be a notes page, e.g. see for example [[geo-bof-2005-06-30]].  Thanks,  -Tantek
* In addition, naming a document "-recommendation" at this point is quite premature, especially when there is much work to be done in both doing the work and cleaning up of [[citation-examples]], [[citation-formats]], and [[citation-brainstorming]]. If this is meant to be a record of notes or a summary of a discussion, then it should be a notes page, e.g. see for example [[geo-bof-2005-06-30]].  Thanks,  -Tantek
** I will write-up the notes for the irc-meeting shortly and post them to the appropriate place. In the mean-time the general consenus was that we have closed on the exploration phase of the citation microformat. We have solid goals and are moving to implementation. Admittably the citation pages need some serious clean-up, but there is no need to halt progress in the development/itteration phase for those who are helping to move forward the format. -[http://suda.co.uk/ brian]
** I will write-up the notes for the irc-meeting shortly and post them to the appropriate place. In the mean-time the general consenus was that we have closed on the exploration phase of the citation microformat. We have solid goals and are moving to implementation. Admittably the citation pages need some serious clean-up, but there is no need to halt progress in the development/itteration phase for those who are helping to move forward the format. -[http://suda.co.uk/ brian]

Revision as of 19:46, 10 April 2006

Contents

Summary

A citation microformat needs to cover four uses:

  1. full, bibliographic citations, eg "The Title Of An Article. Smith J. Journal Title (1987). 46:1; 23-35." This is the main citation microformat and should contain all the information necessary to locate the item and create a text citation in all the common formats (MLA, APA, etc).
  2. minimal, inline citations in text, eg (Smith, 1987). These generally link to an item in the bibliography using a fragment identifier.
  3. full, inline citations in text, eg following a blockquote.
  4. description of the current item/page, including title, creator, date etc.

Current problems


Straw Proposals

These straw thoughts/proposals should be on the citation-brainstorming page, not here, along with some citation (so to speak ;) of the proposer. -Tantek

Microformat for inline citations

<cite>
<a href="#ref-1">1</a>
</cite>
<cite>
<a href="#ref-1">Smith, 2002</a>
</cite>


Microformat for a generic bibliography citation

<li class="citation" id="ref-1">
<span class="title">
 <a class="url" href="http://dx.doi.org/[DOI]">[item title]</a>
</span>
<span class="creator vcard">
 <span class="n">
  <span class="family-name">[surname]</span>, 
  <abbr title="[given-name]" class="given-name">[initial]</abbr>
 </span>
</span>
<span class="creator vcard">
 <span class="n">
  <span class="family-name">[surname]</span>, 
  <abbr title="[given-name]" class="given-name">[initial]</abbr>
 </span>
</span>
<abbr class="date-published" title="YYYY-MM-DDTHH:MM:SS+ZZ:ZZ">[year]</abbr>
</li>


Note: for an full inline citation, the
<li class="citation" id=""></li>
would be replaced by
<cite></cite>
and there would not be a link to a local fragment.


Note: for a self citation, the
<li class="citation" id=""></li>
would be replaced by
<span|div class="citation self"></span|div>


Additional elements for a journal article citation

class="citation article"
<span class="container">
 <span class="title">
  <a class="url" href="http://dx.doi.org/[doi]">[journal title]</a>
 </span>
 <abbr class="date-published" title="YYYY-MM-DDTHH:MM:SS+ZZ:ZZ">[year]</abbr>
 <span class="volume">[volume no.]</span>
 <span class="issue">[issue no.]</span>
 <abbr class="uri" title="urn:issn/[issn]"/>
</span>

<span class="pages">[start-page]-[end-page]</span>
<abbr class="uri" title="info:pmid/[PMID]"/>

Additional elements for a book citation

class="citation book"
<span class="container">
 <span class="title">
  <a class="url" href="http://dx.doi.org/[doi]">[book title]</a>
 </span>
 <span class="subtitle">[book subtitle]</span>
 <span class="publisher vcard">[publisher]</span>
 <span class="editor vcard">[editor]</span>
 <abbr class="date-published" title="YYYY-MM-DDTHH:MM:SS+ZZ:ZZ">[year]</abbr>
 <abbr class="uri" title="urn:isbn/[isbn]"/>
</span>

<span class="pages">[start-page]-[end-page]</span>

BDarcus: this looks good. I wonder, though, about two issues.

1. why not just title and abbreviatedTitle instead of title and subtitle?

2. date-published with books in particular is a can of worms. My book, for example, has a copyright date of 2006 (which is what one would include in the citation) but an actual publication date sometime in late-2005. The specificity of date-published is thus misleading. What we're really talking about is a copyright date. I wonder if the above might not be better with two classes: date and copyright? So then these classes of dates: date, copyright, issued (more generic than published). That slso fits dc and qualified dc.

citation-irc-notes-2006-04-09 was last modified: Wednesday, December 31st, 1969

Views