[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [docbook-apps] Biblioentry markup standards -- identifying the type of entry
Richard Hamilton <hamilton@xmlpress.net> writes: > Iâm posting this to the DocBook mailing list, but double posting do > DocBook-apps because the discussion started on that list. > > Background: Iâve been using bibliomixed for XML Press publications. I > would like to move to using biblioentry, so I can cover more than one > output style. We primarily use the Chicago Manual of Style as our > guide, but I would like to be able to easily use other styles. The bibliography stuff is a bit of a mess. It was originally cribbed from the Majour[1] standard in the very early 90âs, I believe, on the assumption that reuse was better than reinvention. Iâm not sure what happened to Majour after that. > My objective is to create (over time) customizations that would take a > biblioentry in a consistent format and generate output that conforms > to Chicago, APA, and other styles. Iâm going to repeat myself and say that I think adopting a mechanism for generating them that reuses BibTeX or the open citation work I pointed to before or something else is better than one-offing it. Thereâs *A LOT* of variation in how citations are published. > This first issue Iâve uncovered is the question of how to identify > what kind of entry an instance is (e.g., book, article, etc.). > > I can find no standard method for doing that in DocBook, including the > Publisherâs schema.. I think your best bet is: <biblioentry> <citetitle pubwork="book">DocBook: The Definitive Guide</citetitle> > Certain types can be guessed at by looking at biblioset (if itâs used) > or the pubwork attribute on citetitle (if citetitle is used rather > than title). I think the title in a bibliography entry is more semantically a title citation than a title, so thatâs my preference anyway. (In DocBook, a <title> is usually the the title of a thing, and thatâs not what is going on in a bibliography.) > complexity. And citetitle seems not to be the best choice for > expressing a title in this context (especially if you want to separate > out a subtitle). Yeah, thatâs a fair point. Maybe Iâm just wrong about citetitle. > So, am I missing something here, or is there no standard method for > defining the type of a biblioentry? Apparently not. > If there isnât an established method, does anyone have any ideas on > how best to do this? Add pubwork to biblioentry? Be seeing you, norm [1] https://www.abebooks.com/MAJOUR-DTD-Article-Headers-Modular-Application/3384898287/bd -- Norman Tovey-Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com> https://nwalsh.com/ > I wonder if other dogs think poodles are members of a weird religious > cult.--Rita Rudner
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]