Re: tasks overview wishlist: Canonical citing reference
Le Mon, Oct 26, 2009 at 04:12:18PM +0100, Andreas Tille a écrit :
> On Mon, Oct 26, 2009 at 11:55:32PM +0900, Charles Plessy wrote:
> > Nevertheless, if there are good reasons to not store monolithic BibTeX
> > references and use another format or approach, I would be very interested to
> > hear them.
>
> Having BibTeX in the YAML format is probably OK. My question on QA was
> rather whether it iis a good idea to use the whole BibTeX record and
> simply store this as field value of a potential publication field. That
> does not really come handy if you want to do SQL queries about
> publications because your querying application would need a BibTeX parser.
Dear all,
I am starting to collect bibliographic information for the packages in the
Debian Med subversion repository as a background task (1 or 2 packages per
day). The references are broken up in a half-dozen of YAML mappings (think
hashes in Perl, or Field in Debian control files in the paragraph format). In
most cases the package contains one work that was published in one article, and
it is therefore easy to document “The” reference.
This of course break if there is more than one reference to take into account,
and it would also be more difficult to support on the other side: in
particular, the Blends web sentinels (‘tasks files’) are designed to show one
reference only.
Given that packages that would need more than one reference are anyway the
exception to the rule, I am considering to overcome the difficulty by simply
not supporting it, or providing a link to an upstream page listing the
references if available.
What is your opinion on this?
Have a nice day,
--
Charles Plessy
Debian Med packaging team,
http://www.debian.org/devel/debian-med
Tsurumi, Kanagawa, Japan
Reply to: