Using links and metatypes as siblings

[danad]

I'd like to request a feature dealing with links.

I'm trying to construct a format that lets me build a kind of annotated bibliography -- not for publication, but more for my own research, keeping track of important authors and issues and debates. Each entry has the full citation, ref type, list of keywords, and a 'See also:' which lists anything linked to this work.

Now, this works, I believe, as long as the work is a child and there is a parent to point to (I think that's the order). It doesn't work the other way around -- then format only outputs square brackets and its own name. I also get square brackets and own name if there are no works linked.

I guess what I'm asking for is a way to link "sibling" relationships instead of parent-child. Anything linked would always point to every one of those links when asked. It would greatly facilitate my following threads across my research. I could probably use groups, but I'm not sure I could get them to print out as a "See also:" section in a format.

I'm sure it's probably not straightforward to program, but I thought I'd ask and see if it's possible at all. Thanks!

[Jon]

Hi,

First, if you have a parent-child relationship you automatically have a child-parent relationship. The format using the appropriate metatype doesn't really care who is who. So if there was a parent-child of Book-Book Chapter with the corresponding metatype Book Chapter[Book], the format will output what is in the book whenever square brackets are used, and what is in the Book Chapter otherwise.

As for linking siblings...this is for what purpose? So you can view them in the LIst View together? If you explain on a practical level I'll have a better idea if it's something Bookends can do now.

Jon
Sonny Software

[danad]

OK, first off, I'm probably wrong in including metatypes, so ignore that bit.

I've created a custom format called 'Annotated Bibliography.' The format for journal articles (for example) goes like this:

Code: Select all

a. “t.” f v$, no. $i` `(d): p-.
y
`Keywords: `k
`See also:` [t] 

Then, for example, I have a series of journal articles which are commentaries and rebuttals. If I use this format from the "child", it gives me an output of:

Langdon, John. “Comment to Edwards and Hindle: Inland Water Transportation in Medieval England.” Journal of Historical Geography 19, no. 1 (1993): 12-14.
Journal Article
Keywords: transportation; medieval; England; rivers; rebuttal
See also: Edwards, J. F., and B. P. Hindle, The Transportation System of Medieval England and Wales

But if I try the same format with its "parent," I get:

Edwards, J. F., and Hindle, B. P. “The Transportation System of Medieval England and Wales.” Journal of Historical Geography 17, no. 2 (1991): 123-34.
Journal article
Keywords: transportation; medieval; England; rivers
See also: [The Transportation System of Medieval England and Wales]

In the second case, the [t] in the format doesn't get expanded and just ends up pointing to itself. What I'd like is for it to point to the first article, “Comment to Edwards and Hindle: Inland Water Transportation in Medieval England.”

Is that clearer? Am I just doing something wrong?

[Jon]

What ever is in [t] comes from the parent. To remember this, look at the metatype designation. For example, Book Chapter[Book] means that any formatting instructions outside of brackets will use data from the Book Chapter, and any inside will use data from the Book. It doesn't matter which reference is being formatted.

Jon
Sonny Software

[danad]

So, what do I need then to use then instead of [t] in order to get the information from "the other" entry, no matter whether "the other" is a parent or a child? As you can see from my samples above, example #1 is fine and useful, but example #2 is not.

[Jon]

You'd have to create two formats, one with [t] and one with just t. Probably more bother than it's worth. As you noted, you want a sibling-sibling relationship, which isn't what the metatypes are for. And even if they could be used, you'd not be able to have multiple "sees" in the same bibliographic entry. It's not elegant, but perhaps the best way to do what you want would be to enter sibling titles in a field, say Notes (just as an example), and output the Notes field after a "See also". You can have as many as you want, in that case. Of course this isn't very elegant.

Jon
Sonny Software

[danad]

I could, but as you say, not very elegant and extra work. Since I've got the links there anyway, I'd love to be able to use them in a reciprocal fashion and have it all done automatically (actually, when I first saw links, I thought that that's what they were for). I hope you let the idea percolate and perhaps find a way to build it in at some point.

[Jon]

Yeah, I'll keep it in mind. It might be possible that if you defined a relationship like Book Chapter : Book Chapter something could be worked out. But I don't know how useful a single link like that would be. You might come back and say you want all the chapters of a book as siblings, and when you cite one you want a "See also chapter 1, chapter 2, chapter 3..." (I know that's a lame example, but you get the drift). And that would be a *lot* different from the current parent : child link mechanism, and require a different interface and set of rules (i.e. would be a lot less likely to be implemented).

Jon
Sonny Software