[seqfan] Re: Listing articles under links

Charles Greathouse charles.greathouse at case.edu
Sat Feb 15 23:10:31 CET 2014


The trouble is that right now that distinction isn't made, so if the change
was made many -- maybe even most! -- would become definitionally invalid.

I actually think that this is probably the right way to go, that the
distinction between a peer-reviewed paper vs. some resource is a valuable
one, but this would take a great deal of effort to get right.

Charles Greathouse
Analyst/Programmer
Case Western Reserve University


On Sat, Feb 15, 2014 at 8:33 AM, M. F. Hasler <oeis at hasler.fr> wrote:

> Dear SeqFans,
>
> I do agree that a reference needs not to be there twice.
> However, IMHO, one should be allowed to add references with links in the
> REFERENCES section.
> I there there would be much more "added value"/information/sense in
> distinguishing:
>
> REFERENCES = articles published in books or journals (typically: with
> editorial board and/or reviewing process)
> vs
> LINKS = links to web pages, blogs, pictures, supporting files...
> (typically, self-publication)
>
> rather than
>
> REFS = refs w/o link
> vs
> LINKS = anything with links
>
> Nowadays, almost any serious scientific publication has a DOI and thus a
> link ; any book has an ISBN and thus a link.
> So the REFERENCES field will tend to collect only "outdated" references of
> the 1900's,
> and become much less significant than it should be.
> So once again I'd be strongly in favour of allowing (and encouraging, but
> not requiring) links in the REFERENCES field, and put any "serious"
> reference rather there than into LINKS.
>
> Maximilian
>
>
> On Sat, Feb 15, 2014 at 7:03 AM, Susanne Wienand
> <susanne.wienand at gmail.com>wrote:
>
> > Dear seqfans,
> >
> > I was convinced to rather delete a reference after 'translating' it to a
> > link. Even if the link is broken some day, it still contains the
> > information of the reference and can be 're-translated' to a reference
> > before being deleted.
> >
> > Regards
> > Susanne
> >
> >
> > 2013-08-10 9:09 GMT+02:00 Susanne Wienand <susanne.wienand at gmail.com>:
> >
> > > Dear seqfans,
> > >
> > > thank you for your answers.
> > > So I just would add such papers under links. Then the information about
> > > the paper is still under references if the link should be deleted some
> > day
> > > because of being broken.
> > >
> > > Regards
> > > Susanne
> > >
> > >
> > > 2013/8/9 Charles Greathouse <charles.greathouse at case.edu>
> > >
> > >> Exactly. Replacing a bare reference with a link which has the same
> > >> information (plus the URL) is beneficial.
> > >>
> > >> Charles Greathouse
> > >> Analyst/Programmer
> > >> Case Western Reserve University
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> On Fri, Aug 9, 2013 at 4:50 AM, Richard J. Mathar <
> > mathar at mpia-hd.mpg.de
> > >> >wrote:
> > >>
> > >> > Concerning
> > >> http://list.seqfan.eu/pipermail/seqfan/2013-August/011548.html:
> > >> >
> > >> > The format is to add another URL in the the same line of
> > >> > the OEIS link section of a sequence:
> > >> >
> > >> > A. Uthor1, A. Uthor2, <a href="http://dx.whatever...">About almost
> > >> > everything</a>, Orig. J. All Seq. 42 (2011) Lxi-Lxii; <a href="
> > >> > http://myome.page/AAE.pdf">[Alternative link]</a>
> > >> >
> > >> > The added value of free access outweighs the disadvantage of links
> > that
> > >> > break later on.
> > >> >
> > >> > Richard Mathar
> > >> >
> > >> > _______________________________________________
> > >> >
> > >> > Seqfan Mailing list - http://list.seqfan.eu/
> > >> >
> > >>
> > >> _______________________________________________
> > >>
> > >> Seqfan Mailing list - http://list.seqfan.eu/
> > >>
> > >
> > >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> >
> > Seqfan Mailing list - http://list.seqfan.eu/
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
>
> Seqfan Mailing list - http://list.seqfan.eu/
>


More information about the SeqFan mailing list