6.0444 R: More on OnLine Bibliograpies (1/25)
Elaine Brennan (EDITORS@BROWNVM.BITNET)
Thu, 21 Jan 1993 15:22:00 EST
Humanist Discussion Group, Vol. 6, No. 0444. Thursday, 21 Jan 1993.
Date: Wed, 13 Jan 1993 16:42:29 +0200 (EET)
Subject: WHY DON'T WE...
>From: "Peter Graham, Rutgers U., (908) 932-2741" <GRAHAM@ZODIAC.BITNET>
>Subject: Re: 6.0427 Rs: Bibliograpies online? (1/67)
>Rather than creating a bibliography list, with all the potential problems
>and ambiguities Judy Koren mentioned, it might be preferable to do something
>librarians have talked about from time to time: use the existing
>bibliographic utilities, and provide fields which allow annotation according
>to use of the bib. record. I.e. bring quality indicators to the bib.
>records. Pages of illustration.
Also an interesting idea, but does it answer the problem Michel brought up?
What "existing bibliographic utilities" are you talking about? If
you mean library catalogs, what does it give me that I don't already
have? I can already search a library catalog for works by so-and-so;
but not, usually, for articles, nor can I answer questions such as
"who's interested in such-and-such right now?" Or do you mean the
bibliographic-reference-managers, e.g. Procite, Papyrus, etc.:
but they're for a PC. What do all of us accessing the Internet from
a VAX, IBM, Unix workstation etc. do?
Sorry, I guess I sound dumb, but I don't really understand what's
being talked about here. Could Peter be more specific?
Judy Koren, Haifa.