Re: [jats-list] citation "year" with suffix

Subject: Re: [jats-list] citation "year" with suffix
From: Nikos Markantonatos <nikos@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2013 13:40:32 +0200
I disagree completely with the logic which treats <mixed-citation> as a last resort. In fact, I would go as far as saying that a properly encoded <mixed-citation> obsoletes the use of <element-citation> entirely.

In my view, <mixed-citation> lets you have all the power of encoding all elements of interest inside the citation while it lets all other information used mostly for proper citation rendering (spacing, punctuation, unmarked text, comments, etc) remain as text. It is an intuitive format which lets you mark only those elements that are important for you. Clearly, the more elements you markup, the better, but this is no different when using <element-citation>.

I understand that some article XMLs may decide to leave all text inside a <mixed-citation> as plain text, but you have to understand that this is also an option when you migrate legacy content with no markup whatsoever within citation entries. However, in such a case, <element-citation> would not provide a better solution either. One could just as easily embed the entire text inside a <comment> element and be done with it. I fail to see how <element-citation> would encourage someone to encode citations more properly. I do see how one may have the tendency to mistag elements just to get through the restrictions of <element-citation>.

In my organization, we have exclusively used <mixed-citation> for the encoding of several million fulltext articles. This translates to tens of millions of citations. We have seen in practice that the <mixed-citation> element lends itself both for archival quality encoding and accurate, trouble-free rendering of all citation styles encountered out there.

Best regards,
Nikos Markantonatos
Atypon


On 02/25/2013 09:47 PM, Kaveh Bazargan wrote:
OK, Bruce.

But my problem with mixed citation is that you can put the mixed
citation tag before and after and put any junk in between. I feel this
should not be allowed to be called XML. It has zero structure. So
perhaps some tag abuse is better than pure prose!

The answer would be to encourage people to use mixed citation at the
last possible resort, and then with some thought... ;-)



--
Confidentiality Notice: This email and any attachments are for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and contain information that may be confidential and/or legally privileged. If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender by reply email and delete the message. Any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of this communication by someone other than the intended recipient is prohibited.


Current Thread