#223 Add a description element to subject

v5.0
closed-rejected
Norman Walsh
DocBook (176)
5
2007-08-13
2007-02-23
Vito Piserchia
No

As per definition of subjectset:
"A document can be described using terms from more than one controlled vocabulary. In order to do this, you should use the Scheme attribute to distinguish between controlled vocabularies."

The PACS (Physics and Astronomy Classification Scheme) is a vocabulary of terms used in scholarly publications. It's a table of key values and corresponding descriptions. To properly tag descriptions, subjectterm needs inline math markup (like the term elements have) or eventually subject could have e.g. a subjectdescription element with inline markup.

regards

Discussion

  • Robert Stayton
    Robert Stayton
    2007-04-18

    Logged In: YES
    user_id=193218
    Originator: NO

    The DocBook Technical Committee was not clear on what you need. The subject and subjectterm elements are intended to record only the key words that identify the subject matter, not a description of the key words. Ithere is a standard set of descriptions in the PACS, then setting the scheme="PACS" on the subjectset would indicate what descriptions are to be associated with the terms in that set. Is it your intention to output the descriptions?

    Since the subjectterm element is for key words, it would seem that what you are asking for is a new element, subjectdescription, in order to contain an arbitrarily long or complex description, similar to the way a variablelist associates a listitem description with one or more terms. Is that correct?

     
  • Vito Piserchia
    Vito Piserchia
    2007-04-19

    Logged In: YES
    user_id=1681618
    Originator: YES

    Thanks for the clarification Bob :)

    Yes, I would output the descriptions of these key words...

    Becouse "the subject and subjectterm elements are intended to record only the key words",
    yes i'm asking for a new element and my proposal is a <tag>db:subjectdescription</tag>
    at the same level of the corresponding <tag>db:subjectterm</tag> one.
    These descriptions need an inline and an mathematical markup (see for example code 67.40.Jg in [1] )

    Regards
    -v

    [1] PACS 2006,http://www.aip.org/pacs/pacs06/pacs06.pdf

     
  • Norman Walsh
    Norman Walsh
    2007-04-25

    Logged In: YES
    user_id=81663
    Originator: NO

    I'm still confused. It seems to me that if 67.40.Jg is the subject term in PACS that means "Ions in liquid <superscript>4</subscript>He", then all you want in the instance documents is the subject term, "67.40.Jg" which is already possible.

    I wouldn't expect the description to accompany the term in every instance document because it would be tedious to do and prone to error (as authors would surely start using abbreviations and the semantics would drift).

     
  • Vito Piserchia
    Vito Piserchia
    2007-05-22

    Logged In: YES
    user_id=1681618
    Originator: YES

    Thanks Mr Walsh for the response,
    I apologize for the very late reply.

    We are using db as the authoring format for scientific reviews,
    and unfortunately some reviews (using the PACS scheme) slightly redefine the description of keywords (nothing esotherical, but for example substitute the word alpha with the corresponding unicode value)
    and sometimes i end up with some math where it should not.

    If Docbook permit a description, we'll can reach a double effect

    1- an author could specify the new description for the key word;
    2- we could use this description to update this information in a database-like system.

    regards
    -v

     
  • Norman Walsh
    Norman Walsh
    2007-05-23

    Logged In: YES
    user_id=81663
    Originator: NO

    The flip side of your suggestion is that any author would have the freedom to amend the description of the term. The point of using a controlled vocabulary is to prevent such semantic drift.

     
  • Robert Stayton
    Robert Stayton
    2007-08-13

    • status: open --> closed-rejected
     
  • Robert Stayton
    Robert Stayton
    2007-08-13

    Logged In: YES
    user_id=193218
    Originator: NO

    The Technical Committee discussed this item at length. Adding any punctuation requires adding TEXT to the mix for the element. The Committee felt that adding TEXT solely for punctuation was not appropriate, and that any punctuation would best be generated by a stylesheet operating on the well-defined children in the affiliation element.