Discussion: Bibliographic citations

Question

Discussion: Bibliographic citations

Opened this issue 6 years ago · 5 comments

We need to decide which citation formats we're going to support (e.g. Chicago Manual of Style, MLA, BibTeX, RIS) and how and where (in the workflow) we're going to carry out the transformations (e.g. using CSL tools).

Answer 1 · 2018-06-27T18:16:59.000Z

Should the data model include data for the generated citation? If so, what values should be provided?

I would imagine:
(description of EMPlaces)
(authorship of EMPlaces data)
(publisher of EMPlaces data)
Permanent URI for place
Date of inclusion/update in data?

Is more (or less) needed?

Answer 2 · 2018-07-06T15:44:27.000Z

In the simplest context (i.e. just citing the place record as such) we can get by with rather little. The Chicago Manual of Style gives this as an example (and they note that 'last modified' is preferable to 'accessed' if this information is available from the online resource):

Yale University. “About Yale: Yale Facts.” Accessed May 1, 2017. https://www.yale.edu/about-yale/yale-facts.

In our context, this becomes, perhaps:

Early Modern Places. "Opele." Accessed May 1, 2017. https://emplaces.info/12345/.

So already we need to get a part of this data from Timbuctoo. But we want to do this right and include our contributors as well in (at least) the case of a Sources page where we want to allow someone to cite a specific contribution such as one particular name attestation. This data will need to come from Timbuctoo as well. And we haven't yet decided if we will offer e.g. ARKs in which case these should be cited instead of the permanent URLs.

But to keep things simple for the first iteration, so that we have something to show, let's do it as above for the main place record, thus:

Title of the resource ('Early Modern Places')
Preferred name of the record (e.g. Opele)
Today's date (so we don't need to query Timbuctoo)
Permanent URL

Citations on Sources pages will require more work.

Answer 3 · 2018-07-09T17:38:09.000Z

So, something like:

Opole: City of Opole, record last modified 2018-07-09, http://emplaces.data.example.org/Opole_P

That is:

em:preferredName
rdfs:label
dcterms:modified (to be added to the data)
em:canonicalURI

Where em:canonicalURI is assigned by whatever long-term strategy for stable URIs we eventually settle on.

In writing this, I'm wondering if we should use dcterms:title instead of rdfs:label? They seem to serve a similar purpose. The advantage of using rdfs:label is that it is automatically recognized by a wider range of software.