W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > whatwg@whatwg.org > May 2009

[whatwg] on bibtex-in-html5

From: Bruce D'Arcus <bdarcus@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 23 May 2009 17:52:26 -0400
Message-ID: <fbb7c5df0905231452n19711609w5a2e8f29ca20f205@mail.gmail.com>
On Sat, May 23, 2009 at 5:35 PM, Ian Hickson <ian at hixie.ch> wrote:


> I agree that BibTeX is suboptimal. But what should we use instead?
> (The biblatex vocabulary seems unnecessarily incompatible with BibTeX's,
> and the latter appears to have more deployed support, which was one of the
> primary concerns that led to its vocabulary being picked.)

I think if you really insist on including a bibliographic vocabulary
in the HTML 5 spec (which as I've said, I don't really agree with,
precisely because this is hard stuff), then you need to
reassess/clarify the requirements a bit.

For example, what do you mean by "unnecessarily incompatible with
BibTeX"? If you simply mean it's a superset, and that therefore going
from biblatex to bibtex cannot be totally lossless, then that's
unavoidable, and I think a requirement that needs changing.

Or is there some other aspect of "incompatibility" you're seeing?

Received on Saturday, 23 May 2009 14:52:26 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wednesday, 22 January 2020 16:59:12 UTC