Re: [niso-sts] How to reference sections from another standard

Subject: Re: [niso-sts] How to reference sections from another standard
From: "Dorothée Stadler doro@xxxxxxxxxxx" <niso-sts-list-service@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 12 Apr 2018 13:53:22 -0000
Thank you Gerrit for this very detailed answer, it gave me a lot of food for
thought in terms of how to manage our IDs and then resolve them properly, so
that is definitely a topic to address asap!

My question was actually much more basic:
If inside the text of the standard I want to make a reference to a section in
another standard (letbs assume for now I have resolved my ID issues), how do
I concretely do this?
<std> is tough to use because itbs quite restricted where I can use it.. I
am using a lot of <named-content> inside which I donbt see how I can add

For references to whole standards inside the text, we have decided to use
<xref> to point directly at the entry inside the Normative references /
Bibliography where we can then manage all the other IDs, title etc. In our
case, I donbt find it efficient to have to have bhiddenb reference lists
to each and every element from another standard we might be referring to to
which to point to like DIN are doing.

If I have the text: bPlease refer to Standard ABC, Section 5b, would it be
incorrect to mark it up as:
<p>Please refer to <xref ref-type=bbibrb rid=b1234b>Standard
ABC</xref>, <ext-link ext-link-type=bguidb Xlink:href=bInternal GUID for
sectionb>Section 5></ext-link>

I guess what I am missing is which tags to use.. and if I am using <ext-link>
in the right way here or not.

I saw you made a note saying: donbt use ext-link within std. std is a
domain-specific replacement for ext-link.
Why not? Itbs allowed when looking at the NISO STS..? Or is this more a
recommendation that one should do it in a more structured way as you described

Thanks a lot,
Kind Regards

DorothC)e Stadler

Rathenower Str. 38
10559 Berlin
Tel: +49 1525 840 85 93

> On 11. Apr 2018, at 21:01, Imsieke, Gerrit, le-tex gerrit.imsieke@xxxxxxxxx
<niso-sts-list-service@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Hi Doro,
> In ISO STS, such a link would be encoded as <sts sts-id="{URN}">, where
{URN} is a RFC 5141 URN. Example:
> <std std-id="iso:std:iso:3745:ed-3:en:clause:A" type="dated"><std-ref>ISO
3745:2012</std-ref>, Annex A</std>
> See for instructions how to form URNs
for these deep links.
> Unfortunately, RFC 5141 is only defined for certain originators (the part
after the second colon), namely "iso", "iso-iec", "iso-cie", "iso-astm",
"iso-ieee", "iec".
> Although you can, at least for internal use, extend it to allow an
originator string that identifies other organizations, this flies in the face
of the bUb in URN since it is not guaranteed that any two users of these
privatized schemes will use the same identifier for the same organization.
> In addition, many organizations use their own internal document identifiers
for which there is no place in these URNs anyway.
> Other users might want to use DOIs for identifying published standards, in
order to be able to utilize this established permanent linking facility.
> NISO STS addresses this request for multiple links by allowing multiple
std-ids on the std element, grouped in an std-id-group
> However, NISO STS does not assume a particular linking scheme in these
identifiers. The suggestions in
e.html are 'doi', 'urn', and 'internal-pub-id'.
> DIN/Beuth are using their established internal document identifiers for
linking. Example:
> <std><std-id std-id-link-type="internal-pub-id"
std-id-type="dated">d1ca7c3f#sub-a</std-id><std-ref>ISO 3745:2012</std-ref>,
Annex A</std>
> It is up to the rendering system to create a proper, user-actionable link
then (for example, an HTML link that points to Beuthbs online platform).
> In principle, they could have enhanced this link by DOIs, like this:
> <std><std-id-group>
>  <std-id std-id-link-type="doi"
>  <std-id std-id-link-type="internal-pub-id" std-id-type="dated">
> d1ca7c3f#sub-a</std-id>
> </std-id-group><std-ref>ISO 3745:2012</std-ref>, Annex A</std>
> There are two issues with this. One is related to DOIs, the other is related
to redundancy.
> In the example above, the DOI is augmented by a fragment identifier. This
may or may not be forwarded from the DOI resolver to the publisher, and since
fragment identifiers are resolved by the client (browser), it is not
guaranteed that the publisherbs Web server will serve the document in its
entirety so that your client can navigate to #sub-a, nor is it guaranteed that
the rendered document uses the same ID scheme.
> Of course this is hypothetical: If a standards publisher creates DOIs with
fragment identifiers, they should make sure to take the user to the deep link
if such a fragment identfier is contained in the DOI.
> And I think crossrefbs resolver will append the fragment identifier to the
resolved publisher URL, so this should work in practice.
> A while ago, Bruce Rosenblum checked with someone from Crossref whether
theybd recommend such a fragment identifier approach, and they did not.
> The alternative is to register distinct DOIs that will resolve to a URL that
directly points to document fragments on the publisherbs platform. But this
is prohibitively costly. And still, youbd have to operate a local cache of
all deep-linking DOIs because you probably donbt want to query the central
CrossRef server in order to resolve them, or you donbt want to send the
users through CrossRef for following a link that could also point directly
from your platform to your platform.
> The other issue is redundancy. Quite often, a link to a certain entity
occurs multiple times in a document. You donbt want to supply IDs for all
the different naming schemes at every single link location. So it is probably
wise to just use identifiers in a single internal scheme.
> In order to decrease this redundancy, Beuth has maintained, in the document
metadata, a centralized list of all references with their internal IDs and
with their XML formal public identifiers. From within the document, they just
referred to that central, per-document multi-ID storage with an xref-like
mechanism. This is admittedly an additional level if indirection, but it
avoids dangerous redundancy where errors may be introduced by copying and
pasting during document editing.
> So Ibd recommend to avoid this redundancy in NISO STS, too. DIN/Beuth are
currently mimicking their old centralization approach by creating a ref-list
in the document frontmatter and storing all the std-id-groups there, only
referring to them from the text by something like <xref ref-type="bibr"
rid="nla-nat-1">EN ISO 3745:2012</xref>.
> The centralized ref-lists are stored like this, in a NISO STS compliant
> b&
> </std-meta>
> <notes notes-type="bibl" specific-use="centralized-citations">
>  <ref-list content-type="invisible-citation-list">
>    <ref id="nla-nat-1">
>      <std><std-id-group>
>          <std-id std-id-link-type="internal-pub-id"
>          <std-id std-id-link-type="fpi" std-id-type="dated">+//ISO
9070/RA::A00007::GE::DIN German Institute for
Standardization::Regulations//DOCUMENT EN ISO 3745:2012-03-00//DE</std-id>
>        </std-id-group></std>
>    </ref>
>    <ref id="nla-nat-2">
> b&
> My recommendation is to roll your own (publisher-internal) ID scheme that
you use for deep links. This can be URLs like the URLs, but with your
own host name in it. One prerequisite of this ID scheme is that it should be
easy to recognize the ID for the whole document when you see a deep link ID.
Another recommendation is that fragment identifiers in this private ID scheme
should correspond to XML IDs in the documents.
> Finally, when you have adoptions like DIN EN ISO 3745, you should assign a
distinct document ID to each shell (ISO, CEN, DIN) / language (de, en, b&)
combination. For example, d1ca7c3f#sub-a points to Annex A in the compound
German-language DIN EN ISO document while d53f90ba#sub-a points to Annex A
either in the compound German DIN EN ISO document or in the German EN ISO
document, and d1d1d9e3#sub-a points to Annex A either in DIN EN ISO 3745 or in
the German translations of EN ISO 3745 or ISO 3745.
> In these examples, 'd1ca7c3f' is the doc ID of the German-language edition
of DIN EN ISO 3745:2012, 'd53f90ba' corresponds to EN ISO 3745:2012 (in
German), and 'd1d1d9e3' is for ISO 3745:2012 (German translation).
> You donbt need to use cryptic IDs like that, you can create your own URLs
with fragment identifiers, or languages encoded by name/value pairs in the
query strings.
> You only need to run your own resolver when rendering the standards to HTML
or PDF, or when exporting the XML for someone else with their own naming
scheme. The resolver should be able to collate the internal IDs with the ISO
URNs of adopted standards so youbre on the same page with someone who has
also created a nationalized version of a certain ISO standard. So both of you
can tell: This is the German-language version of the same EN adoption of
iso:std:iso:3745:ed-3 that the Finnish guy refers to in their naming scheme.
> Such a resolver is typically implemented in Java or XQuery, and it will use
some kind of database.
> Btw, donbt use ext-link within std. std is a domain-specific replacement
for ext-link.
> Gerrit
> On 11/04/2018 12:07, DorothC)e Stadler doro@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
>> Hello,
>> I am wondering how to correctly reference a specific section from another
standard. Our national standards have IDs on all sections and elements.
>> Say, for example, I want to make a reference to Section 5 in Standard
ABC:2017 from my standard, how to best to this?
>> Should I put the standard reference inside <std> and then use <ext-link> to
hold the reference to the section?
>> <std>Standard ABC <ext-link xlink:href=bSection_IDb>Section
>> Is there a way to identify that the <ext-link> is a reference to an element
inside another standard (as opposed to other <ext-link> elements in the
standard that would point to URLs for example)?
>> Or is there a better way of doing this?
>> Is it OK to put just the ID of the section inside the @xlink:href?
>> Thanks for your help in this!
>> Greetings from Berlin,
>> DorothC)e
>> ---------------------------------------------
>> DorothC)e Stadler
>> Rathenower Str. 38
>> 10559 Berlin
>> Tel: +49 1525 840 85 93
>> doro@xxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:doro@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>> You are subscribed as gerrit.imsieke@xxxxxxxxx to NISO STS Discussion by
Mulberry Technologies, Inc. <>
>> EasyUnsubscribe <-sts-list/225679> (by email <>)
> --
> Gerrit Imsieke
> GeschC$ftsfC<hrer / Managing Director
> le-tex publishing services GmbH
> Weissenfelser Str. 84, 04229 Leipzig, Germany
> Phone +49 341 355356 110, Fax +49 341 355356 510
> gerrit.imsieke@xxxxxxxxx,
> Registergericht / Commercial Register: Amtsgericht Leipzig
> Registernummer / Registration Number: HRB 24930
> GeschC$ftsfC<hrer / Managing Directors:
> Gerrit Imsieke, Svea Jelonek, Thomas Schmidt

Current Thread