search

thouis / numpy-trac-migration

numpy Trac to github issues migration
2 stars 3 forks source link

Citation example in HOWTO_DOCUMENT.txt slightly inconsistent w/ IEEE Standard (migrated from Trac #1524) #3076

Closed thouis closed 11 years ago

thouis commented 11 years ago

Original ticket http://projects.scipy.org/numpy/ticket/1524 Reported 2010-06-27 by trac user dgoldsmith, assigned to unknown.

Here's the example in HOWTO_DOCUMENT.txt:

O. McNoleg, "The integration of GIS, remote sensing, expert systems and adaptive co-kriging for environmental habitat modelling of the Highland Haggis using object-oriented, fuzzy-logic and neural-network techniques," Computers & Geosciences, vol. 22, pp. 585-588, 1996.

Here's the spec in http://standards.ieee.org/guides/style/2009_Style_Manual.pdf:

19.3 Articles in periodicals Articles listed shall include the following information in the order shown: a) Last name of author or authors and first name or initials, or name of organization [Our example is in the wrong order] b) Title of article in quotation marks c) Title of periodical in full and set in italics [ours isn't italicized] d) Volume, number, and, if available, part e) First and last pages of article f) Date of issue

[Their] Example: [B1] Boggs, S. A., and Fujimoto, N., “Techniques and instrumentation for measurement of transients in gas-insulated switchgear,” IEEE Transactions on Electrical Installation, vol. ET-19, no. 2, pp. 87–92, Apr. 1984.

thouis commented 11 years ago

Attachment in Trac by trac user dgoldsmith, 2010-06-28: HOWTO_DOCUMENT3.patch

thouis commented 11 years ago

Comment in Trac by trac user dgoldsmith, 2010-06-28

thouis commented 11 years ago

Comment in Trac by atmention:charris, 2010-07-31

Shouldn't the author format be the same in both the document and rendered section? And the emphasis in the rendered example doesn't seem right in a text file even if it renders correctly on a web page. Maybe a bit of explanation will help.

thouis commented 11 years ago

Comment in Trac by atmention:rgommers, 2010-11-26

I think that (a) what we currently have looks better, and (b) even if it didn't it would not be worth the effort to change this.

There are many ways of citing articles, what we use is quite standard. And IEEE < APS/Nature/Science/ArXiv in my book. Also, readability in a terminal is important like Charles says.

I think this ticket should be closed, leave as-is.

thouis commented 11 years ago

Comment in Trac by atmention:rgommers, 2011-03-29

Left as-is. Docstandard is updated, we'll not waste time changing this all over the place.