I’ve hesitated somewhat whether I should post this here at all, since I'm asking attention for something more than just ‘features’. But the matter is too important not to be brought up.
Let me explain one thing first. One of the reasons why reference managing software has produced only moderate enthusiasm among scholars working with ancient or medieval texts is the lamentable fact that there hasn't been any useful solution which allows sufficient flexibility to deal with primary sources. In loosely using the word 'primary sources' I am very very broadly referring to a whole complex of sources which may cover:
(1) manuscripts (vellum, paper, etc.),
(2) facsimile editions of manuscripts,
(3a) diplomatic editions of manuscript texts and
(3b) critical editions of texts based on any number of manuscripts and
(4) translations, commonly based on any number of text editions.
(5) In other areas (anthropology, folklore), oral sources like audio recordings or interviews may count as primary sources.
Ideally, it would be a major leap forwards if there were a fully integrated database-meets-reference management program
(A) in which separate database entries exist, not only for (1) primary publications (editions and translations) and secondary sources, but also for (2) manuscripts and (3) texts; and
(B) in which these entries could all be linked together, if and when appropriate. E.g. a manuscript links to the texts which it contains, a text links to the manuscripts in which it is preserved, a critical edition links to the text as well as the manuscripts which it uses; etcetera. (See also my previous post about cross referencing more generally)
I’m well aware that this is not about requesting an added feature but pretty much an extension of Refbase's aims/functions (and one which would require a thorough overhaul). But since there’s been some talk n this forum of making more and better use of metadata (manuscripts and texts could certainly be looked at as such), I may just as well bring it up here.
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
I’ve hesitated somewhat whether I should post this here at all, since I'm asking attention for something more than just ‘features’. But the matter is too important not to be brought up.
Let me explain one thing first. One of the reasons why reference managing software has produced only moderate enthusiasm among scholars working with ancient or medieval texts is the lamentable fact that there hasn't been any useful solution which allows sufficient flexibility to deal with primary sources. In loosely using the word 'primary sources' I am very very broadly referring to a whole complex of sources which may cover:
(1) manuscripts (vellum, paper, etc.),
(2) facsimile editions of manuscripts,
(3a) diplomatic editions of manuscript texts and
(3b) critical editions of texts based on any number of manuscripts and
(4) translations, commonly based on any number of text editions.
(5) In other areas (anthropology, folklore), oral sources like audio recordings or interviews may count as primary sources.
Ideally, it would be a major leap forwards if there were a fully integrated database-meets-reference management program
(A) in which separate database entries exist, not only for (1) primary publications (editions and translations) and secondary sources, but also for (2) manuscripts and (3) texts; and
(B) in which these entries could all be linked together, if and when appropriate. E.g. a manuscript links to the texts which it contains, a text links to the manuscripts in which it is preserved, a critical edition links to the text as well as the manuscripts which it uses; etcetera. (See also my previous post about cross referencing more generally)
I’m well aware that this is not about requesting an added feature but pretty much an extension of Refbase's aims/functions (and one which would require a thorough overhaul). But since there’s been some talk n this forum of making more and better use of metadata (manuscripts and texts could certainly be looked at as such), I may just as well bring it up here.