[open-bibliography] comprehensive bibliographic database of "open" resources?

[Ross Singer]

On Tue, Aug 17, 2010 at 1:42 PM, Peter Murray-Rust <pm286 at cam.ac.uk> wrote:

>
> Reading lists are only part of the use of bibliography. I suspect most
> papers are not on any reading list, so reading lists will only tocuh a
> minute fraction of the material. For example we are indexing 10,000 articles
> from Acta Crystallographica and I doubt a single one is on any reading list.
> Yest they are critical for data-driven science.
>
>
Sorry, I didn't mean to imply that reading list management could be a
comprehensive way to accumulate all published materials.  What I wanted my
point to be (and obviously didn't make) was that the curation of these
bibliographies falls into the workflows of scholars.  Similarly, Mendeley
does this sort of functionality simply by /reading/ the articles (
http://www.mendeley.com/bibliography-maker-database-generator/), which fits
much better into my Last.fm analogy.

Mendeley's approach has its own share of problems/limitations, some of which
could be reduced by pushing its functionality to the link resolver (e.g.
Umlaut), although, that also would present new and different
problems/limitations.

I don't think any single method will provide a way to accumulate all
published resources, but the more that are in the general workflow of the
scholar the better (and more data that can come directly from the
publishers, the better).

-Ross.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.okfn.org/pipermail/open-bibliography/attachments/20100817/30ce442d/attachment-0001.html>