search

grambank / pygrambank

Apache License 2.0
4 stars 1 forks source link

support for `via` clause in citations (closes #71) #76

Closed johenglisch closed 2 years ago

johenglisch commented 2 years ago

This allows for stuff like B 2021 via A 2022 in sources (sourcelookup will only try to look up A 2022).

Question is: What should we do about the data sheets where the via clauses have been moved out to one of the comment fields (can't remember which rn). Should we just leave them be or should we reintegrate the via thing into the Sources column? (intuitively this shouldn't be hard to do -- feels very grep'able).

HedvigS commented 2 years ago

@xrotwang right now that's sort of what's happening, we're asking people to put the ref that they read in the Source column and adding info about what source that ref was referencing in the comment.

Since this is a behaviour that our coders already do because it is commonly taught as a part of academic writing, I thought we should make it into the source field itself.

@johenglisch don't worry about the old instances, it's okay.

johenglisch commented 2 years ago

we're asking people to put the ref that they read in the Source column and adding info about what source that ref was referencing in the comment. […] I thought we should make it into the source field itself.

Okay, sorry for still being confused… Which of the two do we want to do? Do we keep the practice of putting the referenced citation into the comment, or do we want to change the practice to putting the ‘second-hand’ citation into the Source column?

Personally, the more I think about it the more I'd opt for the former – i.e. have all information in Source be checked properly, rather than ignoring parts of it (based on the assumption/hope that nobody will cite a linguist from a culture where ‘via’ is a valid name…).

johenglisch commented 2 years ago

Issue https://github.com/grambank/pygrambank/issues/71 has been closed, so I'm gonna close this as well.