W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-xg-prov@w3.org > September 2010

Re: permanence of mendeley's urls

From: Yolanda Gil <gil@isi.edu>
Date: Fri, 3 Sep 2010 09:43:02 -0700
Cc: pmissier@acm.org, Simon Miles <drsimonmiles@gmail.com>, public-xg-prov@w3.org
Message-Id: <48EC6E65-290E-4ED9-A9DB-23B30E7A40E7@isi.edu>
To: Daniel Garijo <dgarijov@gmail.com>
Daniel:

Thanks for taking this on.  It should be very easy, as long as there  
is a way to export the entries and tags into Bibtex.  We can follow up  
with Christian off-line, we have a deadline next week but after that  
we'll make it happen.

Thanks!

Yolanda


Yolanda Gil, USC/ISI
+1-310-448-8794





On Sep 3, 2010, at 9:30 AM, Daniel Garijo wrote:

> Hi all,
> We haven't discussed this in the meeting at the end, but I'd like to  
> know if we can manage the current Mendeley's tags with BibBase. I  
> find the tags very useful, and it would be a shame to lose them if  
> we change the tool.
> Best,
> Daniel
>
> 2010/9/3 Yolanda Gil <gil@isi.edu>
> Paolo:
>
> Sounds good.  BibBase just won honorable mention in the Open Track  
> of the Linked Data Triplification Challenge :)  So we would be  
> really using Semantic Web technology then!
>
> Yolanda
>
>
>
> On Sep 3, 2010, at 3:53 AM, Paolo Missier wrote:
>
> Simon,
>  I completely agree that having non-unique references to papers in  
> the Mendeley corpus wont' help anyone. I think DOIs should be used  
> as the authoritative reference whenever possible, and "any" link to  
> the Mendeley entry for the paper should  be added as a convenience  
> to provide quick access to the PDF, if that's associated with the  
> entry, and to a reference.  But if this is to be used by authors who  
> use the references in their papers, then I think a bibtex entry  
> would be important -- and that doesn't seem to be available.
>
> A while ago Yolanda proposed to use BibBase (http:// 
> www.bibbase.org/) as a way to publish our collection as a whole on a  
> Web site, and I think it is an excellent idea as it can be done  
> using the bibtex file that Mendeley generates behind the scenes,  
> exposing all its entries for each paper (I have happily used to  
> publish my own publications)
>  maybe something we can briefly touch upon in the call?
>
> Cheers, -Paolo
>
>
> On 03/09/2010 11:42, Simon Miles wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I've been working on the citation links for the state of the art
> discussed last week, and have a few comments about linking to Mendeley
> from the Wiki, as it may affect how we cite in any report we put on
> the Wiki.
>
> We said in the telecon that the reason for linking to the articles in
> Mendeley (rather than DOI, for example) was to allow people to know
> about and use our Mendeley collection.  However, if you click on the
> Mendeley paper links, the pages you reach don't have any mention of
> our collection, so I'm afraid this won't work.  For example, try
> clicking on the links in the News Aggregator state of the art - a
> Mendeley page on the paper is reached, but no mention that the paper
> is in our collection.
>
> Also, there are multiple URLs per paper, depending on how you find the
> article: you get one if you find it through browsing our collection,
> another if you find it through browsing Mendeley's own categorisation,
> and a third if you search on the paper title, with apparently no way
> to translate one to another.  I believe the third kind is used in the
> News Aggregator state of the art, which is fine except that, as Daniel
> said, not all articles in our collection are found on searching, so I
> can't use it consistently for my scenario's state of the art.
>
> Maybe I'm just missing something in my use of Mendeley, but I suggest
> that linking to the papers on Mendeley from the Wiki may be too much
> trouble for too little gain.
>
> Thanks,
> Simon
>
>
>
>
Received on Friday, 3 September 2010 16:44:26 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 3 September 2010 16:44:27 GMT