This is the mail archive of the
docbook@lists.oasis-open.org
mailing list for the DocBook project.
Re: Bibliography: citing journal articles
- To: docbook at lists dot oasis-open dot org
- Subject: Re: DOCBOOK: Bibliography: citing journal articles
- From: Terry Allen <tallen at sonic dot net>
- Date: Sun, 26 Sep 1999 09:27:21 -0700
- Reply-To: docbook at lists dot oasis-open dot org
Robin asked:
| Could someone with a 10-year memory of DocBook do their
| best to rehearse the origins of the "bibliography"
| model in the DocBook DTD? Like: "it was based on NNNNNN".
Yes, it was real simple, then we added in Majour (revised
where it made sense), and nobody used it for ages. When
I started to work on the bibliography for my book on
Islamic architecture
http://www.sonic.net/~tallen/palmtree/ayyfront.htm
I found handfuls of problems, which I think by now we
have fixed or have plans to fix. If anyone's interested
in the Docbook source for the online HTML I'd be happy to
post it.
| The TEI encoding for bibliographic reference is
| (likewise) somewhat difficult to use in the general case
| because the TEI encoding perspective is (first and
| foremost):
|
| Having OCR'd this paper-print book with its formatted
| bibliographic citations (in-text citations and bibliographic
| reference list citations), *how* can I insert markup
| between the characters so as to "tag" the formatted
| bibliographic reference?
|
| This isn't meant as a fundamental criticism of TEI, which has
| legitimate concerns, but a general observation that a
| bibliographic model designed for one goal often does not
| work well for the general case *IF* the design caved in to
| SGML's penchant to privilege the "raw" character stream.
I gave up on raw and went with cooked (bibliomixed).
| I am hopeful that with the rise of transform sub-languages,
| SGML/XML applications designers will become more willing
| to step back from this in order to model the information
| structure of re-usable objects like bibliographic
| references. When done at the more abstract level, it
| should be possible to give better support to a number
| of different bibliographic perspectives that can emerge
| from the same data model (descriptive bibliography,
| enumerative bibliography, analytic bibliography, etc.).
| BiBTeX (rip-off of Reid's Scribe) made a good beginning
| philosophically, I think, but the model is very
| under-developed.
I wonder if bibliographic references aren't, over many
citations, as complex as the entries in the OED: they
look consistent but require local variations because
publication information comes in many variations. But
then I'm not a bibliographer.
regards, Terry