Re: <citation>? Plus Big Aside on DTD Versions

[cbbrowne acm org]

On 04 Jan 2002 21:22:25 EST, the world broke into rejoicing as
Alexander Kirillov <kirillov math sunysb edu>  said:
> I am not even sure what it is supposed to mean. According to official
> definition (http://www.docbook.org/tdg/en/html/citation.html),=20
> citation =97 An inline bibliographic reference to another published work
>
> Apparenlty here it is used for something else - like credits.
>
> I'd pull this out. This kind of info should go into "document history"
> which belongs to tilepage or a separate section, not in the main body of
> the document. But of course, you should ask Miguel, Canty, and Likin
> first.

The intent is for this to be used to tag the reference ID.

For instance, with BibTeX, you might set up a citation for some book
Knuth wrote in 1975.  You might do \cite{TAOCP1975}, which would make
sure that the book was included in the bibliography, and then insert
into the text something like:
  [25]
  [Knuth1975]
  [TAOCP1975]
Or something else, depending on which bibliography style you selected.

<CITE> would be used to tag the entry.  Indeed, if you have a
bibliography at the end, it would be slick to do something like the
following:

<PARA> And we could not go on without mentioning the Flubarnitz
Algorithm, as was first discussed in the algorithmic literature in
<CITE> <LINK LINKEND="KNUTH1975"> Knuth1975. </LINK> </CITE>

This would then set up a link to KNUTH1975 in the bibliography down at
the end.

Changing subjects, dramatically...

Everybody should be pretty careful, by the way, when trying to come up
with proper treatment of graphical elements; there are five different
versions of the DocBook DTD in reasonably active use (on my Debian
system, installing DocBook pulls in DTDs for versions 2.4.1, 3.0, 3.1,
4.0, and 4.1, and indicates that 5.0 is coming pretty soon).

Note that the GRAPHIC and INLINEGRAPHIC elements changed fairly
substantially between 3.0 and 4.0; there are probably distributions
that install the 3.0 DTD and others that install 4.0, and people that
have grown accustomed to the elements of 3.0/3.1 may be using somewhat
obsolete stuff.

Chances are that XML use of DocBook will mostly be with later
versions, so this ought not to be too persistent a problem.  Just be
careful...
--
(concatenate 'string "aa454" "@freenet.carleton.ca")
http://www3.sympatico.ca/cbbrowne/linux.html
if (argc > 1 && strcmp(argv[1], "-advice") == 0) {
  printf("Don't Panic!\n");
  exit(42);
}
(Arnold Robbins in the LJ of February '95, describing RCS)