Joho the Blog » [2b2k] Bibliography commons wanted

[2b2k] Bibliography commons wanted

I typed all the way through to the end of the last chapter of Too Big to Know last night, although since I haven’t read that chapter yet, there is a better than even chance that I will have to rewrite it substantially, so don’t jinx me by congratulating me, you bastahds.

In any case, it got me to thinking about how to handle the bibliography. The bibliography of Everything Is Miscellaneous is on LibraryThing.com (although, in truth, I never got around to completing it). Much as I love LibraryThing, it’s not designed for journal articles, and I’d rather put my biblio on a non-commercial site. (Sorry, Tim! Love you!)

Ideally, I’d like a site that is an open commons, maintained by an institution that has some legs. It should present my biblio in standard readable and re-citable forms, but should also treat it as data in a database so that it can be refactored. I’d love for it to have LibraryThing’s social functionality. And in a perfect world, it’d let me enter just some key data, look it up, and fill in the rest in perfectly formatted form. (Again, LibraryThing does cool stuff in this area, for books.)

Anybody know of anything like this? Is there a bibliography commons? (If not, I’ll probably just put a spreadsheet into the Harvard open access commons, if they’ll let me. Or maybe I’ll use H2O)


[Later that day:] Some responses from the comments and to my tweeting of this topic:

6 Responses to “[2b2k] Bibliography commons wanted”

  1. hi david,

    you may want to check out zotero commons: http://www.zotero.org/support/commons

    great project in general. the bibliography plug-in is best of breed.

    best

    c

  2. I’ve been looking for something similar. Mendeley, CiteULike, and Connotea all have the sharing function, but I feel the same way about getting locked into a commercial platform.

    Zotero is probably the best fit. The groups feature allow for sharing, exporting data is relatively seamless, and and Firefox interface isn’t bad once you’re used to it.

    BibTeX fits the openness requirement but it can’t handle many different types of material.

    I agree–a bibliography commons would be cool! Berkman project?

  3. ^ Didn’t know about Zotero commons. Nice!

  4. Hi David: I know that principles are not tools, but you’ll be interested in the draft Principles for Open Bibliographic Data from the Open Knowledge Foundation, just released yesterday for public comments.

    http://openbiblio.net/2010/10/15/principles-for-open-bibliographic-data/

    @Joey: Connotea is from the Nature Publishing Group, a for-profit corporation. But Connotea itself is floss under the GPL. I wouldn’t classify it as a commercial platform.

  5. You might want to check out http://www.bibdex.com

    One thing I like about it is the “description” feature for the tags/keywords I create. By using these keywords I can create a bibliography for one topic as I can on most biblio sites, but it also lets you write a nice overview in this description field. Here’s mine for STS http://www.bibdex.com/group/personal-30/page/view/STS

  6. [...] Joho the Blog » [2b2k] Bibliography commons wanted "[…]Ideally, I’d like a site that is an open commons, maintained by an institution that has some legs. It should present my biblio in standard readable and re-citable forms, but should also treat it as data in a database so that it can be refactored. I’d love for it to have LibraryThing’s social functionality. And in a perfect world, it’d let me enter just some key data, look it up, and fill in the rest in perfectly formatted form. (Again, LibraryThing does cool stuff in this area, for books.)[…]" (tags: reference bibliographie citation database outilssociaux librarything opendata) [...]

Leave a Reply


Web Joho only

Comments (RSS).  RSS icon