Re: use of BibTex

Hi Simon, Markel,

Thank you for both your responses. More below:


On 3.7.2012 11:38, Simon Harper wrote:
> Hi everyone,
>
> thanks for raising this Shadi,
>
> It's my opinion that we should have @article for the note, being part of
> the RDWG Symposium Series, each year represented by a volume and each
> Note represented by a separate issue.

It seems to me that "series" in @incollections is more semantically 
correct for representing an instance within a series of notes. It is 
also complemented by "booktitle" to reference the proceedings:

@proceedings {
  title = {W3C/WAI Symposium on Website Accessibility Metrics},
  ...
}

@inproceedings {
  title = {Measuring Accessibility ...},
  booktitle = {W3C/WAI Symposium on Website Accessibility Metrics},
  ...
}

@incollection {
  title = {Research Report on Web Accessibility Metrics},
  booktitle = {W3C/WAI Symposium on Website Accessibility Metrics},
  series = {W3C/WAI Research and Development Working Group (RDWG) Notes},
  ...
}


> I think we should have @inproceedings or @incollection for the papers
> within a specific symposium - probably @inproceedings.

Agree. More further below...


> Cheers
>
> Si.
>
> I'll be on Annual Leave (without Email Access) 19 July - 31 July, 2012.
>
> PS I check my email at 08:00 and 17:00 GMT. If you require a faster
> response please include the word 'fast' in the subject line.
>
> =======================
> Simon Harper
> http://simon.harper.name/about/card/
>
> University of Manchester (UK)
> Web Ergonomics Lab - Information Management Group
> http://wel.cs.manchester.ac.uk
>
>
> On 03/07/2012 10:25, Markel Vigo wrote:
>> Hi Shadi, all,
>>
>>> Currently we use the BibTex entry @article for the Research Report
>>> and @inproceedings for the individual papers contributed to us. These
>>> two are currently not directly related from the BibTex information.
>>> Would it be a good idea to change @article to @incollection? It could
>>> make the Research Report an independent part of the Proceedings.
>>> Also the "series" field could be used instead of the "journal" to
>>> indicate that this Research Report is one in a series of hopefully many.
>> Ummmh...I'm not sure what's best.
>>
>> According to Wikipedia [1],
>>
>> @incollection is  "A part of a book having its own title".
>> Required fields: author, title, booktitle, publisher, year
>> Optional fields: editor, volume/number, series, type, chapter, pages,
>> address, edition, month, note, key
>>
>> while
>>
>> @article is "an article from a journal or magazine"
>> Required fields: author, title, journal, year
>> Optional fields: volume, number, pages, month, note, key
>>
>> I think that @article or @incollection will make the research report
>> independent anyways. If we want to convey that the current report
>> belongs to a series of reports both "series" in @incollection and
>> "volume" and "number" in article have this connotation for me. While

I read these semantics differently but I don't know BibTex usage.


>> I'm quite ambivalent about all this, perhaps we should focus more on
>> whether we want "A part of a book having its own title" or "an article
>> from a journal or magazine".

It seems to be that BibTex is generally focused on printed material 
rather than online material. We will need to decide how we want to 
interpret "book", "journal", and such in any case.

Note that @incollection has the "type" field too, which we can use to 
denote the report as "Research Report".

By the way, anybody know when/where URL can be used? Everywhere?

Thanks,
   Shadi


>> regards,
>>
>> [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BibTeX
>>
>> Markel Vigo
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> University of Manchester (UK)
>> Web Ergonomics Lab - Information Management Group
>>
>> PS: I check my email at 9AM and 5PM BST. If you require a faster
>> response please include the word [fast!] in the subject line
>>
>

-- 
Shadi Abou-Zahra - http://www.w3.org/People/shadi/
Activity Lead, W3C/WAI International Program Office
Evaluation and Repair Tools Working Group (ERT WG)
Research and Development Working Group (RDWG)

Received on Tuesday, 3 July 2012 10:14:15 UTC