Last modified: 2010-11-12 by antónio martins
Keywords: bibliography |
Links: FOTW homepage | search | disclaimer and copyright | write us | mirrors
Having (accidentally) taken the editing of these pages in Jan. 1998 from Guiseppe’s original bib.html (Oct.1998 version still on line here and localy mirrored here — 53 entries!), I “interpreted” and developed his system as follows:
António Martins, 20 Aug 1999 and (updated) 22 Jun 2001 and 27 May 2002
|(cons. only non-BIB pages)|
Well, the idea is that any new information about each entry will be
added to the BIB pages thus centralizing all we know about a given
source. This is not only practical for those researching sourcewise
(instead of just bumping into a bibliographical reference every now and
then on the pages), but also prevents unbalanced, partial and repeated
bibliographic references from being added when a source is quoted in
more than one intance (often case).
António Martins, 17 Jan 2000
I’d like to insist on the need to have all relevant sources
listed and linked at our BIB pages, and I let you know that, as of
1999.07.30, only 310 out of 3250 pages at FOTW-ws had links to
António Martins, 20 Aug 1999
The [xxx99zz] codes (xxx as author or author complex, 99 as
year, plus zz as an optional untier when both the previous are the same)
are simply supposed to be unique identifiers of each bibliographic entry
— they could be serial numbers or random strings etc. The present
system was inherited by me from the previous editor (and was utlimately
devised by Giuseppe, I believe) and I found unwise to change it to
anything else (back then we had 40 entries,
now we have 3000…). At any rate, the codes should, or at least could,
be transparent to the typical user.
António Martins, 13 Nov 2001
It was reccomended that the supposedly cryptical references of the
type [abc99] should not be shown on the pages. About this I have
a remind and a warning: First that I never said that the [abc99]
should be added to the page instead of the title and/or author
name and/or date, but along with it. And second that if we refer
to the entries without the [abc99] (which is unique) we will (in my
humble opinion) have problems, namely in what concerns old targets and
relinks to the new location… But I dont insist in this or that way
of presenting the links to BIB — I’ll just be happy if the
links are done at all.
António Martins, 20 Aug 1999 and (updated) 27 May 2002
Authorship trigraphs (of which we have currently 2044, used in 4263 codes) are the most important part of the unique ID code of each of our BIB entries. As the name implies, it’s made of three letters (from the usual 26-letter modern latin alphabet) typically taken from the author name(s) or periodical’s title. There are two main types of these thrigraphs, plus a number (4) of “provisional” types:
Author name trigraphs, which may refer either to a single (1a.) author or to a “complex” (1b.) of several (see note bellow); the year indication is always present, even if unknown date ("XX" in lieu of the usual two digits). Right now we have 1521 individual author trigraphs and 209 collective author trigraphs.
Note: Author name trigraphs refering to a group of authors will always refer to the same group, nor minus nor plus anyone. Ex.: Funny Flags from Fanfaronia (1998, by J.Doe, J.Dee and Th. Butler) and More funny Fanfaronian Flags (1999, also by J.Doe, J.Dee and Th. Butler), may be coded [ddb98] and [ddb99], but Yet more Funny Flags (2002, by J.Doe and J.Dee only) or Guide to Fanfaronian Flags (2002, by J.Doe, J.Dee and S. O. Else) cannot share the trigraph [ddb] because the group of authors is not the same.
Provisional trigraph types are those used in entries which ideally once will be changed to author name trigraphs — these refer to entries whose authorship is unknown. We have four types of these:
When the author name(s) is(are) not known the trigraphs are improvised on whim, usually based on the title and/or publisher (usually I tend to prioritize combinations starting with less used letters, to balance the size of the individual BIB pages, hence so many "Q"‑pages… ;-)
Provisional types 3 and 4 (several authors) may never be changed to a type 1 trigraph, as many times an entry consists of independently written articles with little or no compilation work to be credited for, and in a series of such entries (type 6) the author may vary from a number to the following.
And a final word: this system being based on the concept of authorship make it dependent on the “enforcement” of that notion in a case-to-case basis: Authorship is not a straightforward concept in many situations, so your mileage may vary. I can only say that, as editor, I rely on the information passed on by contributors, and I actually got to see very few of those 4263 entries.
António Martins, 19 Aug 2002
A new kind of trigraphs was added: along with letter-letter-letter, we have now letter-digit-letter also. These codes should be used for entries with more than one main author and for author unknown.
This frees namespace for single-author codes (which are potentially of much more frequent use), meeting the needs of many BIB contributors. Current entries with more than one main author or with author unknown coded in the usual letter-letter-letter way (341 entries using 283 unique trigraphs) will be renamed to letter-digit-letter whenever necessary.
Some of these codes were already created. I have been using them in the following fashion:
As usual, issued codes will never be reissued and a link to the new entry will be maintained as long as necessary. Example: A new entry is found; its author is Hermann Zapf and the “logical” trigraph "zpf" is already taken by entry [zpf85]: Friederike Zaisberger and Nikolaus Pfeiffer. This should be renamed to something like [z2p85] and new entry coded with the "zpf" trigraph. If the new entry was published in 1985 (or 1885, 1785 etc.), then it should be coded as [zpf85a] (or something like that); the old [zpf85] should always link to [z2p85].
The exception will still be articles from vexillological sources of unknown authorship, which will keep on being coded with the source’s trigraph.
António Martins, 06 Feb 2005
If your page says «I saw this flag on an article about the presidential elections in Perdunistan in my local newspaper», it is not of interest for BIB, but
If the quote says only «In an article on Banderas», the only thing to do is link it to bib-ban.html#ban; the same if the quote is more detailed «In an article on Banderas, number 66, pages 4-5». But if the quote is more complete, say «On the article “Les armoiries et le drapeau du Territoire de Krasnodar”, issued on Le cabinet des drapeaux communique…, number 9/97 of 1997.04.19», it may be linked to the periodical, bib-caa.html#cdd, but also a specific bib entry for the article should be used: bib-cba.html#cdd97.
António Martins, 20 Aug 1999 and (updated) 22 Jun 2001
What to do when you have to edit (or re-edit) a contribution
including a bibliography entry not yet listed at our BIB pages?
Simple: just send me the relevant info and propose the code
yourself (make sure that it is not in current use); in most cases
I will accept it (only not if two editors propose at the same time
the same code for different entries!), add the reference to the
page and upload it to Rob in a week. And that’s all!
António Martins, 20 Aug 1999
Every time an editor find in his pages vex sources not linked to the BIB pages, (s)he is supposed to check the BIB pages and link the source reference to the appropriate location at the BIB pages. If the info at the BIB pages is incomplete (comparing to what is on the edited post), the editor should drop me a line for update of the BIB pages.
If the refered source is missing from the BIB pages, the editor is supposed to drop me a line saying something like this:
> Hi, Antonio! I just found this on my page se-jamt.html:You may want to use a better english, and you may drop "Hi, Antonio!" and "Regards," if you had a rough day at the office. ;-)
> «Eivind Torp: "Jämtlandsflaggan - ett uttryck for regional
> identitet?", in _Fran falttog till folkfest: Nordiska flaggor,
> fanor och symboler_ Uddevalla: Lacko Institut, 1993»
> I linked it to [tor93]. Also, on the same page:
> «Hallvard Tratteberg: "The Coat of Arms of Norway", American-
> Scandinavian Review, Vol 52, No. 2, 1964, pp. 134-146»
> I linked it to [trt64]. Please confirm. Regards,
Please note that the editor is supposed to propose the […] codes in order to reduce the delay in activating the link, I’ll refuse it only in the seldom case when the same code was proposed for a different entry after the BIB pages were updated (i.e., in a month time).
Please note that the proposed new codes should follow the current use, with the same three letters for the same author and with diffrent three letters for new authors (that’s why Tratteberg above is [trt] and not [tra] — the later stands for the already listed Tracchia).
António Martins, 17 Oct 1999
Ideally, each entry would be complete with the following:
Many of the entries, however, are very incomplete, and I
set up a hidden page listing all "?"s of the database, at
b!miss.html, so that they can be
easily chased away.
António Martins, 20 Aug 1999 (upadted) 27 May 2002
Anything below this line was not added by the editor of this page.