search

gbif / doc-georeferencing-best-practices

This publication provides guidelines to the best practice for georeferencing. Though it is targeted specifically at biological occurrence data, the concepts and methods presented here can be applied in other disciplines where spatial interpretation of location is of interest.
https://doi.org/10.15468/doc-gg7h-s853
Other
3 stars 1 forks source link

References #2

Closed ArthurChapman closed 3 years ago

ArthurChapman commented 5 years ago

  1. Need to check in text references for consistency with respect to comma (Smith, 2017) versus (Smith 2017) - does GBIF have a policy?

  2. Need to check all references for consistency of date. Wieczorek, J.R. (2015) .... or Wieczorek, J.R. 2015. ....

kcopas commented 5 years ago
  1. (Smith 2017)
  2. Wieczorek JR (2015)

Fewer marks/less ink wherever possible, e.g. Wieczorek JR, Zermoglio P & Chapman A (2015)

Call it Harvard minimalist.

tucotuco commented 5 years ago

Thanks Kyle. Is this already documented somewhere? Or should it be in the forthcoming Documentation Cookbook that will reside at https://github.org/gbif/docs-cookbook? Or maybe on https://www.gbif.org/article/3wHK3RUNHdCY2TMGYMcPsO/digital-documentation where there are already structural and naming conventions?

On Wed, Mar 27, 2019 at 9:27 AM Kyle Copas notifications@github.com wrote:

  1. (Smith 2017)
  2. Wieczorek JR (2015)

Fewer marks/less ink wherever possible, e.g. Wieczorek JR, Zermoglio P & Chapman A (2015)

— You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/gbif/doc-georeferencing-best-practices/issues/2#issuecomment-477129053, or mute the thread https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAcP64Y2Oec7pHrGOIFyPLQoPbCVu8O1ks5va2OwgaJpZM4cNqdJ .

kcopas commented 5 years ago

No, not (well?) documented—long-standing practice prob. missing from out-of-date internal style guide, which should provide foundation for all this.

Digital documentation page is out of phase with latest developments. Relevant repos are digital-documentation (where style guide should/will go) and document-template (for cloning).

Moving house, so not much hope of cleaning up any of this systematically this week…sorry.

tucotuco commented 5 years ago

Rather than digital-documention, which isn't a GitHub repo, do you mean https://github.com/gbif/doc-documentation-guidelines?

Good luck with the move!

On Wed, Mar 27, 2019 at 10:23 AM Kyle Copas notifications@github.com wrote:

No, not (well?) documented—long-standing practice prob. missing from out-of-date internal style guide, which should provide foundation for all this.

Digital documentation page is out of phase with latest developments. Relevant repos are digital-documentation (where style guide should/will go) and document-template (for cloning).

Moving house, so not much hope of cleaning up any of this systematically this week…sorry.

On Wed, 27 Mar 2019 at 13.47, John Wieczorek notifications@github.com wrote:

Thanks Kyle. Is this already documented somewhere? Or should it be in the forthcoming Documentation Cookbook that will reside at https://github.org/gbif/docs-cookbook? Or maybe on

https://www.gbif.org/article/3wHK3RUNHdCY2TMGYMcPsO/digital-documentation where there are already structural and naming conventions?

On Wed, Mar 27, 2019 at 9:27 AM Kyle Copas notifications@github.com wrote:

  1. (Smith 2017)
  2. Wieczorek JR (2015)

Fewer marks/less ink wherever possible, e.g. Wieczorek JR, Zermoglio P & Chapman A (2015)

— You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <

https://github.com/gbif/doc-georeferencing-best-practices/issues/2#issuecomment-477129053

, or mute the thread <

https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAcP64Y2Oec7pHrGOIFyPLQoPbCVu8O1ks5va2OwgaJpZM4cNqdJ

.

— You are receiving this because you commented.

Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub < https://github.com/gbif/doc-georeferencing-best-practices/issues/2#issuecomment-477136732 , or mute the thread < https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ALzkZCA9dU-hUOmA5R281AbItfZA7mvAks5va2hIgaJpZM4cNqdJ

.

--

Kyle Copas Lyngbyvej 323 DK-2820 Gentofte (+45) 28 75 14 75 | skype kylecopas

— You are receiving this because you commented. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/gbif/doc-georeferencing-best-practices/issues/2#issuecomment-477151524, or mute the thread https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAcP6xAhEh2qegYBm4KflhMP7oJEFIpQks5va3C_gaJpZM4cNqdJ .

MattBlissett commented 4 years ago

I first commented on the Glossary issue, but this belongs here instead.

There are two main options for references / bibliography. The first (default) way is very minimal -- it's just a normal unordered list with some links.

The second way, using BibTeX, generates the citations from a BibTeX database automatically, so the author doesn't control commas, dots, brackets and so on.

Default way

The built-in AsciiDoctor way to do this is to make the references section into a bibliography by adding the [bibliography] line before the section header:

[bibliography]
== References

Then define an anchor for each reference, e.g. 

- [[[asprs14,ASPRS 2014]]]. _ASPRS Positional Accuracy Standards…

The bit before the comma is the identifier, the optional bit after is how it is displayed.

And then change the text to use these anchors:

your **<<georeference>>** when using maps of this type <<asprs14>>.

The result is

your georeference when using maps of this type [ASPRS 2014].

in the prose and

[ASPRS 2014]. ASPRS Positional Accuracy Standards…

in the bibliography. It looks like this only supports the "square brackets" style, unless the processor is overridden in code.

BibTeX plugin way

The alternative is to use a bibliography management file.

  1. Create a references.bib file in BibTeX format.
@article{ASPRS1990,
  author={{ASPRS Professional Practicing Division}},
  title={ASPRS Accuracy Standards for Large-Scale Maps},
  journal={Photogrammetric Engineering and Remote Sensing},
  year={1990},
  month={July},
  volume={56},
  number={7},
  pages={1068-1070},
  url={http://www.asprs.org/a/society/committees/standards/1990_jul_1068-1070.pdf},
  accessed={13 Dec 2019}
}

(I've not used BibTeX format before, so I've tried to make that a full example. It's probably worth using a tool that can manage these files, the format is a bit clunky.)

  1. Include cite:[] and citenp:[] (no parentheses) macros in the prose:
the **<<accuracy>>** added by the digitizing process (see citenp:[ASPRS1990]).
  1. Set up the BibTeX plugin in index.en.adoc
:bibtex-file: references.bib
:bibtex-style: gbif // Literally a thousand to choose from, yet not one showed DOIs, URLs and access dates.
:bibtex-order: alphabetical

The result is

the digitizing process (see ASPRS Professional Practicing Division (1990)).

And

ASPRS Professional Practicing Division (1990) ASPRS Accuracy Standards for Large-Scale Maps. Photogrammetric Engineering and Remote Sensing 56: 1068–1070. http://www.asprs.org/a/society/committees/standards/1990_jul_1068-1070.pdf (accessed 13 December 2019)

I've made a pull request #6 with the start of the second method, in case you/Kyle prefer that one.