Subject: Re: [jats-list] citation "year" with suffix|
From: Bruce Rosenblum <bruce@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2013 11:43:21 -0500
Thanks Jeff, that's good to know. If we were using mixed-citation (as Bruce suggested), then leaving the suffix outside of <year> would make sense, but as we're trying to use element-citation for everything, using @iso-8601-date does seem like an appropriate solution.
On 25 February 2013 15:56, Beck, Jeff (NIH/NLM/NCBI) [E] <beck@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Hi Alf, > > This looks like appropriate markup for the citation to me. The > @iso-8601-date attribute was intended across the elements it's used on to > be a processable date format. It is certainly most useful on the > date-level elements, but this is a great example of why it is needed on > <year>. > > Whether your processors use the attribute or just strip the non-numeric > characters from <year> to do any citation lookups (like everyone has had > to do until this attribute was added) will be up to you. > > Jeff > > > On 2/25/13 10:28 AM, "Alf Eaton" <eaton.alf@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >>When marking up reference lists that use "Author, Year" format for >>inline citations - so the year has an alphanumeric suffix if more than >>one cited article has the same author surname and year - would this be >>appropriate markup for the citation?: >> >>==== >><ref id="ref-2"> >> <element-citation publication-type="journal"> >> <person-group person-group-type="author"> >> <name> >> <surname>Wedel</surname> >> <given-names>MJ</given-names> >> </name> >> </person-group> >> <article-title>What pneumaticity tells us about >>prosauropods</article-title> >> <volume>1</volume> >> <year iso-8601-date="2007">2007b</year> >> <fpage>1</fpage> >> </element-citation> >></ref> >>==== >> >>There are two examples in >>http://jats.nlm.nih.gov/publishing/tag-library/1.0/?elem=year that use >>@iso-8601-date on <year>, but they both just repeat the information in >>the text content; I'm assuming this attribute was intended for cases >>where the text contains something other than the 4-digit year? >> >>Thanks, >>Alf