This arises out of the long-running biblio work that Kevin, Laurent and I have been doing:
The proposal (dating back to the Dublin meeting) is to add more dense markup to the example which is found here:
The current listBibl is confusing, because:
1. It suggests that <bibl> is usually used when the content is less rigorously marked up; this is in contrast to what the Guidelines explicitly say above, where <bibl> is (as we argued) shown to be useful in situations such as born-digital documents where the order of elements is what is important, not the density of markup.
2. It suggests that a <listBibl> that combines fully-marked-up <biblStruct>s with loosely-marked-up <bibl>s would be somehow worthwhile. It would actually be bad practice, because only parts of the information in it could be recovered mechanically in any useful detail. If, as the Guidelines already claim, "the listBibl element is most appropriate for a more formal bibliography", then we should not be providing an example (the first example of it, in fact) which is relatively useless for formal work.
This is also an opportunity to demonstrate, and explain in the subsequent paragraph, how full tagging can be done within <bibl>.
In addition, the subsequent example in the text is identical to the original with the exception that it is wrapped in a <list> instead of a <listBibl>, with the claim that this might be done when such elements are “presented informally”. If we leave this subsequent example unchanged, it exemplifies the way that <bibl>s may have sparser markup, by contrast with this example.
So we would change this:
<bibl xml:id="NELSON88">Ted Nelson: <title>Literary Machines</title>
(privately published, 1987)</bibl>
<title>Glen Baxter His Life: the years of struggle</title>
London: Thames and Hudson, 1988.
</author>: <title level="u">Literary Machines</title>
(privately published, <date when="1987">1987</date>)</bibl>
<title level="m">Glen Baxter His Life: the years of
struggle</title> <pubPlace>London</pubPlace>: <publisher>Thames and Hudson</publisher>, <date when="1988">1988</date>.
and add the following explanation after the example:
"This example also demonstrates the way that bibliographical markup of authors, titles, dates etc. can be handled differently in <biblStruct>s and <bibl>s. In the two <bibl> items, the key information is marked up, but it is presented in an order which makes it suitable for direct rendering, with interpolated punctuation."