Rintze has pointed out that we have a citation-label item in the
schema, which is apparently intended to provide BibTeX keys. If there
are no objections, the processor can build these automatically, using
one of the common key generation patterns, like:
Family name of first author or editor, plus year issued, plus a
year-suffix style disambiguation string if needed.
If family name is unavailable, use the short form of the "references"
term (this term needs cleaning up, thanks to yours truly – more on
that in a following post). If year is unavailable, use “0000” as a
placeholder. This would allow implementation of an AMS style, which
is conspicuously missing from the repository.
If there is strong demand for more flexibility further down the road,
then either Zotero can add a field to override the auto-generated
value, or some configuration scheme can be implemented
(http://jabref.sourceforge.net/help/LabelPatterns.php). But for now,
a simple key is no problem to introduce, if there are no objections.
Frank
Nope; that’s the idea behind it.
Bruce
Rintze has pointed out that we have a citation-label item in the
schema, which is apparently intended to provide BibTeX keys. If there
are no objections, the processor can build these automatically, using
one of the common key generation patterns, like:
Family name of first author or editor, plus year issued, plus a
year-suffix style disambiguation string if needed.
If family name is unavailable, use the short form of the “references”
term (this term needs cleaning up, thanks to yours truly – more on
that in a following post). If year is unavailable, use “0000” as a
placeholder. This would allow implementation of an AMS style, which
is conspicuously missing from the repository.
If there is strong demand for more flexibility further down the road,
then either Zotero can add a field to override the auto-generated
value, or some configuration scheme can be implemented
(Page Redirection). But for now,
a simple key is no problem to introduce, if there are no objections.
Nope; that’s the idea behind it.
Excellent. It’s implemented now.
Frank
If there is strong demand for more flexibility further down the road,
then either Zotero can add a field to override the auto-generated
value
Is the method of generating the citation-label field value part of the
spec? Mendeley
implements the scheme described for auto-generating Bibtex keys but it
also allows the user
to manually edit them afterwards. In which case I take it the correct
behavior when generating the citation
would be to use that value rather than ignoring it and re-running the
auto-generator?
One thing to note with auto-generation is that the same document/item
should always have the same citation key.
This means that if you have multiple papers by the same author in the
same year and you disambiguate them using some
scheme you need to make sure that each paper always has the same
disambiguating suffix regardless of which order
the citations are fed to the processor.
Regards,
Robert.2009/9/10 Frank Bennett <@Frank_Bennett>:
If there is strong demand for more flexibility further down the road,
then either Zotero can add a field to override the auto-generated
value
Is the method of generating the citation-label field value part of the
spec?
No, but:
a) it should be, and …
b) we might want to add a parameter to allow different algorithms?
Mendeley implements the scheme described for auto-generating Bibtex keys but it
also allows the user
to manually edit them afterwards. In which case I take it the correct
behavior when generating the citation
would be to use that value rather than ignoring it and re-running the
auto-generator?
Yes, except …
If we include the b option above, that might suggest preferring the
auto-generated key if that parameter is present?
One thing to note with auto-generation is that the same document/item
should always have the same citation key.
This means that if you have multiple papers by the same author in the
same year and you disambiguate them using some
scheme you need to make sure that each paper always has the same
disambiguating suffix regardless of which order
the citations are fed to the processor.
Am not following you here.
Bruce
If there is strong demand for more flexibility further down the road,
then either Zotero can add a field to override the auto-generated
value
Is the method of generating the citation-label field value part of the
spec? Mendeley
implements the scheme described for auto-generating Bibtex keys but it
also allows the user
to manually edit them afterwards.
Interesting. Edit in the document or the data store?
In which case I take it the correct
behavior when generating the citation
would be to use that value rather than ignoring it and re-running the
auto-generator?
One thing to note with auto-generation is that the same document/item
should always have the same citation key.
This means that if you have multiple papers by the same author in the
same year and you disambiguate them using some
scheme you need to make sure that each paper always has the same
disambiguating suffix regardless of which order
the citations are fed to the processor.
Of course. It’s the same case as disambiguation of author-date cites.
No, but:
a) it should be, and …
b) we might want to add a parameter to allow different algorithms?
I suspect auto-generation alone might be insufficient for users who
want to work with their Bibtex libraries which were
generated outside of Zotero/Mendeley etc. though - because presumably
they will want to preserve their
existing Bibtex keys in whatever (quite possibly custom and
inconsistent) style they had used
before.
Interesting. Edit in the document or the data store?
Edit in the data store. It is filled in automatically when required
(usually the first time that the item is exported to Bibtex) if it was
previously empty.
Regards,
Robert.2009/9/10 Frank Bennett <@Frank_Bennett>:
There is a use case that’s behind my suggestion:
There are styles that actually specify the key algorithm, and it’s not
typically going to be what users have pre-entered. I vaguely recall
examples like [SmJoMi2003]. Note the funky author name thing.
Bruce
No, but:
a) it should be, and …
b) we might want to add a parameter to allow different algorithms?
I suspect auto-generation alone might be insufficient for users who
want to work with their Bibtex libraries which were
generated outside of Zotero/Mendeley etc. though - because presumably
they will want to preserve their
existing Bibtex keys in whatever (quite possibly custom and
inconsistent) style they had used
before.
There is a use case that’s behind my suggestion:
There are styles that actually specify the key algorithm, and it’s not
typically going to be what users have pre-entered. I vaguely recall
examples like [SmJoMi2003]. Note the funky author name thing.
For full coverage, we could make the key configurable (see jabref link
in my first post in this thread), and offer an override field.
Extending Bruce’s suggestion above, priority would be default, or
field if present, or configured key if specified.
But for the moment, throwing this out there to attract attention is
enough. Some LaTeX users may want to have a word in the discussion
before things are finalized.