Order of entries in the Bibliography section?
I've noticed entries do not follow any definite order. Print publications are more or less sorted by year, but other sections are seemingly listed at random. I propose the following: * Inside each section, sort lexicographically by year and author, for instance online mentions would get like this [Burnap02] [Curran02] [Siek02b] [Casad03] [Lischner03] [Stein04] * Add this policy in the "How to update this page" section. If people are happy with this, I volunteer to do the changes. Joaquín M López Muñoz Telefónica, Investigación y Desarrollo
Joaquín Mª López Muñoz <joaquin@tid.es> writes:
I've noticed entries do not follow any definite order. Print publications are more or less sorted by year, but other sections are seemingly listed
at random.
I propose the following:
* Inside each section, sort lexicographically by year and author, for instance online mentions would get like this
[Burnap02] [Curran02] [Siek02b] [Casad03] [Lischner03] [Stein04]
I think it will be easier for people to find things if it's sorted by author and year instead. [Burnap02] [Casad03] [Curran02] [Lischner03] [Siek02b] [Stein04] I guess if you leave a blank line between years it might help. -- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting http://www.boost-consulting.com
David Abrahams ha escrito:
Joaquín Mª López Muñoz <joaquin@tid.es> writes:
I've noticed entries do not follow any definite order. Print publications are more or less sorted by year, but other sections are seemingly listed
at random.
I propose the following:
* Inside each section, sort lexicographically by year and author, for instance online mentions would get like this
[Burnap02] [Curran02] [Siek02b] [Casad03] [Lischner03] [Stein04]
I think it will be easier for people to find things if it's sorted by author and year instead.
Well, my rationale is that older entries tend to get obsolete, so the reader can concentrate on the fresher entries at the end of each section. But I can apply whatever policy we agree to adhere to.
[Burnap02] [Casad03] [Curran02] [Lischner03] [Siek02b] [Stein04]
I guess if you leave a blank line between years it might help.
?? Isn't this last suggestion contradictory with having the entries sorted first by author? Joaquín M López Muñoz Telefónica, Investigación y Desarrollo
Joaquín Mª López Muñoz <joaquin@tid.es> writes:
David Abrahams ha escrito:
Joaquín Mª López Muñoz <joaquin@tid.es> writes:
I've noticed entries do not follow any definite order. Print publications are more or less sorted by year, but other sections are seemingly listed
at random.
I propose the following:
* Inside each section, sort lexicographically by year and author, for instance online mentions would get like this
[Burnap02] [Curran02] [Siek02b] [Casad03] [Lischner03] [Stein04]
I think it will be easier for people to find things if it's sorted by author and year instead.
Well, my rationale is that older entries tend to get obsolete, so the reader can concentrate on the fresher entries at the end of each section. But I can apply whatever policy we agree to adhere to.
[Burnap02] [Casad03] [Curran02] [Lischner03] [Siek02b] [Stein04]
I guess if you leave a blank line between years it might help.
?? Isn't this last suggestion contradictory with having the entries sorted first by author?
Yes. If you want to sort by year first, the sorting scheme would become clearer with a blank line between years. -- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting http://www.boost-consulting.com
David Abrahams <dave <at> boost-consulting.com> writes: [...]
[Burnap02] [Casad03] [Curran02] [Lischner03] [Siek02b] [Stein04]
I guess if you leave a blank line between years it might help.
?? Isn't this last suggestion contradictory with having the entries sorted first by author?
Yes. If you want to sort by year first, the sorting scheme would become clearer with a blank line between years.
OK, I've sorted everything by year, then by author, having some blanks between years; the result can be viewed in http://boost-consulting.com/boost/more/bibliograpy.html (don't forget to do a fresh update to avoid cache hits from the browser.) If someone finds the alternative order (author,year) to be preferred, please say so: we're still on time to change this. Joaquín M López Muñoz Telefónica, Investigación y Desarrollo
I think it looks good. A related but slightly silly thing though is that the bibliography file itself is actually misspelled; 'bibliograpy.html'... Funny how I haven't noticed this earlier ;-) Perhaps this is a good time to correct this? (Even though the CVS history will be lost) // Fredrik Blomqvist Joaquin M Lopez Munoz wrote:
David Abrahams <dave <at> boost-consulting.com> writes:
[...]
[Burnap02] [Casad03] [Curran02] [Lischner03] [Siek02b] [Stein04]
I guess if you leave a blank line between years it might help.
?? Isn't this last suggestion contradictory with having the entries sorted first by author?
Yes. If you want to sort by year first, the sorting scheme would become clearer with a blank line between years.
OK, I've sorted everything by year, then by author, having some blanks between years; the result can be viewed in
http://boost-consulting.com/boost/more/bibliograpy.html
(don't forget to do a fresh update to avoid cache hits from the browser.)
If someone finds the alternative order (author,year) to be preferred, please say so: we're still on time to change this.
Joaquín M López Muñoz Telefónica, Investigación y Desarrollo
"Fredrik Blomqvist" <fredrik_blomqvist@home.se> writes:
I think it looks good.
A related but slightly silly thing though is that the bibliography file itself is actually misspelled; 'bibliograpy.html'... Funny how I haven't noticed this earlier ;-)
Perhaps this is a good time to correct this? (Even though the CVS history will be lost)
You can make a request of the SF admins to move the CVS file. -- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting http://www.boost-consulting.com
David Abrahams wrote:
"Fredrik Blomqvist" <fredrik_blomqvist-at-home.se> writes:
I think it looks good.
A related but slightly silly thing though is that the bibliography file itself is actually misspelled; 'bibliograpy.html'... Funny how I haven't noticed this earlier ;-)
Perhaps this is a good time to correct this? (Even though the CVS history will be lost)
You can make a request of the SF admins to move the CVS file. Ok, done this now.
// Fredrik Blomqvist
On 9/29/04 12:48 PM, "Joaquin M Lopez Munoz" <joaquin@tid.es> wrote: [SNIP]
OK, I've sorted everything by year, then by author, having some blanks between years; the result can be viewed in
Isn't there a missing "h" before the "y" in the file name?
(don't forget to do a fresh update to avoid cache hits from the browser.)
If someone finds the alternative order (author,year) to be preferred, please say so: we're still on time to change this.
You put "[Walker03]" in the wrong group. -- Daryle Walker Mac, Internet, and Video Game Junkie darylew AT hotmail DOT com
Daryle Walker wrote: [snip]
Isn't there a missing "h" before the "y" in the file name?
I've mailed the SF admin about this (to hopefully be able to keep CVS history). [snip]
You put "[Walker03]" in the wrong group. Fixed
// Fredrik Blomqvist
participants (3)
-
Daryle Walker -
David Abrahams -
Fredrik Blomqvist -
Joaquin M Lopez Munoz -
Joaquín Mª López Muñoz