1.0?

CSL Development
1

All,

I think we ought to set a rough deadline and to do list to finally
declare CSL 1.0.

My suggestion of what need to do:

  1. split schema into csl-core.rnc, csl-types.rnc, and csl-variables.
    Should make maintenance easier?

Issues to resolve:

  1. Dan’s latest thing on terms and initialization

  2. David Kaplan’s request to allow more complex sort rules:

http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?thread_name=1211795114.17660.49.camel%40piura&forum_name=xbiblio-devel

  1. add back grouping of bib lists

  2. go through the type and variables lists and make sure we have it all right

Anything else?

It’d be nice if we could settle this by end-of-July, and do 1.0 by
end-of-August?

Bruce

2

Hi Bruce–

Now that bibo is ready, can we try to add some types before publishing
CSL 1.0? For example, we only have “motion-picture” and “song” for
media types. Assuming that “motion-picture”=“film” and “song”=“audio-
recording” (the latter name may be more appropriate) can we add
"broadcast" and “video-recording”? As far as I know, currently media
types are not mapped in any CSL styles because these types are not
set, and there have been some requests to make that happen.

Thanks,
Elena

3

Sure Elena; feel free to suggest additions.

Bruce

4

Hi Bruce–

Now that bibo is ready, can we try to add some types before
publishing
CSL 1.0? For example, we only have “motion-picture” and “song” for
media types. Assuming that “motion-picture”=“film” and “song”=“audio-
recording” (the latter name may be more appropriate) can we add
“broadcast” and “video-recording”? As far as I know, currently media
types are not mapped in any CSL styles because these types are not
set, and there have been some requests to make that happen.

Sure Elena; feel free to suggest additions.

Ok, thanks! I can make the following changes if there are no objections:

  1. add “broadcast” and “video_recording” types

  2. Rename:

song > audio_recording
motion_picture > film
note > short_description
genre > type

Here is a related discussion from bibliontology, for context:On Jul 25, 2008, at 5:26 PM, Bruce D’Arcus wrote:

On Thu, Jul 24, 2008 at 3:09 PM, Elena Razlogova > <@Elena_Razlogova> wrote:

On Jul 24, 2008, at 6:57 PM, Bruce D’Arcus wrote:

On Thu, Jul 24, 2008 at 5:28 PM, Elena Razlogova >>> <@Elena_Razlogova> wrote:

Is there an attribute in bibo that can describe a type of chapter
or
article, as in the example below:

David Clemens, letter to the editor, Wall Street Journal, April 21,
2000.

Valerie Polakow, afterword to Lives on the Edge: Single Mothers and
Their Children in the Other America (Chicago: University of Chicago
Press, 1993).

Is there something like “type” to use for “letter to the editor”
and
“afterword”?

What about bibo:shortDescription?

That would work, thanks! Would that map to “note” variable in CSL?
(But then there is also a “note” type in bibliontology which is a bit
confusing).

Would it make sense to rename some CSL variables and types so it is
more obvious how bibo relates to CSL, especially since bibliontology
describes citations and bibliographic references and CSL is the style
language for those references?

Elena

Bruce

Elena

5

HI Elena,

Hi Bruce–

Now that bibo is ready, can we try to add some types before
publishing
CSL 1.0? For example, we only have “motion-picture” and “song” for
media types. Assuming that “motion-picture”=“film” and “song”=“audio-
recording” (the latter name may be more appropriate) can we add
“broadcast” and “video-recording”? As far as I know, currently media
types are not mapped in any CSL styles because these types are not
set, and there have been some requests to make that happen.

Sure Elena; feel free to suggest additions.

Ok, thanks! I can make the following changes if there are no objections:

  1. add “broadcast” and “video_recording” types

What’s the rationale that would say that’s needed in addition to
“motion_picture” (or “film”, “audio_visual” or whatever)?

  1. Rename:

song > audio_recording
motion_picture > film
note > short_description
genre > type

This would be a backward incompatible change that would require all
implementations and all styles to be updated. What would be the
advantage to doing so, and would they outweigh the practical problems
in making these changes?

Bruce

6

Sure Elena; feel free to suggest additions.

Ok, thanks! I can make the following changes if there are no
objections:

  1. add “broadcast” and “video_recording” types

What’s the rationale that would say that’s needed in addition to
“motion_picture” (or “film”, “audio_visual” or whatever)?

Broadcasts, films, and video recordings are all formatted differently
in pretty much any style which cannot happen if they are all
designated as the same type. Currently four Zotero item types are
mapped to motion_picture:

film:“motion_picture”,
videoRecording:“motion_picture”,
tvBroadcast:“motion_picture”,
radioBroadcast:“motion_picture”,

As a result, of 84 CSL styles in Zotero none can format media types–
there is not a single instance of “motion_picture” or “song” type in
any of them. Basically, with only two types, there is currently no
support for citing media in CSL. Shouldn’t this be changed for 1.0
release?

  1. Rename:

song > audio_recording
motion_picture > film
note > short_description

none of these are used in any of the 84 styles, in part because their
names are confusing

genre > type

this one is used a lot, but you yourself proposed to rename it at one
point.

I don’t feel strongly about most of these but my book is due in August
and it would help a lot if I could cite broadcasts–can I please add
the “broadcast” type?

E

7

Ok, thanks! I can make the following changes if there are no
objections:

  1. add “broadcast” and “video_recording” types

What’s the rationale that would say that’s needed in addition to
“motion_picture” (or “film”, “audio_visual” or whatever)?

Broadcasts, films, and video recordings are all formatted differently
in pretty much any style which cannot happen if they are all
designated as the same type.

I have no problem seeing that broadcasts are different, and therefore
that we need to add that type.

But in what way would a video recording be formatted differently than
a film? It seems likely to me there might be media information
included that would differ, but otherwise we’re dealing with variables
like title, distributor, issued date, etc. What else would be
different?

Also, there’s no “video*” type in the ontology, and there likely won’t
be. If we really want to rename, then we should probably use the more
generic “audio_visual.”

Currently four Zotero item types are
mapped to motion_picture:

film:“motion_picture”,
videoRecording:“motion_picture”,
tvBroadcast:“motion_picture”,
radioBroadcast:“motion_picture”,

As a result, of 84 CSL styles in Zotero none can format media types–
there is not a single instance of “motion_picture” or “song” type in
any of them. Basically, with only two types, there is currently no
support for citing media in CSL. Shouldn’t this be changed for 1.0
release?

Yes.

  1. Rename:

song > audio_recording
motion_picture > film
note > short_description

none of these are used in any of the 84 styles, in part because their
names are confusing

Well, they’re just names. Part of the issue here is documentation.

genre > type

this one is used a lot, but you yourself proposed to rename it at one
point.

Yeah, and I’m agnostic. I just don’t want to make
backward-incompatible changes unless everyone is on board implementing
them. If people want to make these changes, I’m fine with that.

I don’t feel strongly about most of these but my book is due in August
and it would help a lot if I could cite broadcasts–can I please add
the “broadcast” type?

Sure. Having been in that position, I know the last thing you want to
worry about is silly technical issues!

Bruce

8

Hi Bruce–

Thanks, I added the “broadcast” type.

But in what way would a video recording be formatted differently than
a film? It seems likely to me there might be media information
included that would differ, but otherwise we’re dealing with variables
like title, distributor, issued date, etc. What else would be
different?

DVD:
North by Northwest, DVD, directed by Alfred Hitchcock (1959; Burbank,
CA;
Warner Home Video, 2000)

Film:
North by Northwest, directed by Alfred Hitchock (Warner Brothers, 1959).

This is Chicago, other styles may have to put “[video recording]” in
the citation for DVD, etc.

Also, there’s no “video*” type in the ontology, and there likely won’t
be. If we really want to rename, then we should probably use the more
generic “audio_visual.”

right.

Elena