Re: [jats-list] @content-type on elements for bibliographic citations?

[Bruce Rosenblum <bruce@xxxxxxxxx>]

Hi Kevin,

With respect to one specific item in your questions, I believe it's 
generally more flexible to use mixed-citation when tagging 
non-journal references rather than element-citation because you can 
run into cases where element citation just doesn't work well for some 
more unusual non-journal (e.g. book, book chapter, conference papers, 
or gray literature) references. You might want to look at my JATS-con 
paper and presentation from 2011 
(http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK62602/) for more information 
about tagging references in general.

Best regards,

Bruce

At 07:12 PM 8/5/2012, Kevin Hawkins wrote:
> As I become familiar with JATS, one thing that has struck me is that 
> the content model of <element-citation> is remarkably flat.  There 
> is no grouping of information within the citation -- for example, of 
> data relating to an article versus information related to the 
> journal it appears in, or of data related to a chapter versus 
> information related to the book it appears in, or of data related to 
> a series in which a book or journal issue appears.
>
> Would anyone be willing to share a tagged examples of one or more of these:
>
> a) A citation to a particular page or pages within a journal article 
> (where you an <fpage>/<lpage> pair for the cited pages and another 
> pair for the page range of the whole journal article)
>
> b) A citation for a chapter within an anthology (where you one 
> <person-group>/<collab> for the author and one 
> <person-group>/<collab> for the editor of the anthology)
>
> c) A citation for a special issue of a journal that is part of a 
> monographic series (where you have a <volume> for the journal's 
> numbering and another <volume> for the series numbering)
>
> While I realize that in each case you could simply have more than 
> one of the elements I list above within the <element-citation> (or 
> <mixed-citation>), I'm wondering whether anyone tries to distinguish 
> these with, say, @content-type, and if so, whether they have a 
> controlled vocabulary for values of @content-type.  That is, how do 
> you distinguish the components of such complex citations in a way 
> that the citation could be processed by a machine?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Kevin

-------------------------------------------------------------------
This email message and any attachments are confidential. If you are 
not the intended recipient, please immediately reply to the sender or 
call 617-932-1932 and delete the message from your email system. Thank you.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Bruce D. Rosenblum
Inera Inc.
19 Flett Road
Belmont, MA 02478
617-932-1932 (office)
bruce@xxxxxxxxx