Separate Dates for Book and Section

suecsi
One thing I have to deal with is collections of essays/file papers. I can do Book Section and then Editors - which is fine for quite a few of my course books - and I can cope with manually going through the biography if necessary, removing the words (ed), but what I do need are two dates.

For example, my current book from the OU was written in 2006 by the Course Team. It consists of a set of different file papers written at different times.

Example below:
Energy Users Research Association (1983) ‘The economics of insulation’, In The Course Team (ed.), T862 File Papers, Wakefield, The Open University

Should be:-
Energy Users Research Association (1983) ‘The economics of insulation’, In The Course Team (2006), T862 File Papers, Wakefield, The Open University

I would have though a 'Section Date' and 'Book Date' should be fairly easy to implement?

The OU style works absolutely fine, its just another date field is needed.
  • mark
    I'd say that the event of republishing the original 1983 paper effectively changes its date to 2006. What you really have is two different version of the paper - the original 1983 one, and the 2006 republished one. In many cases (anthologies, readers), page numbers will have changed so you can't really refer to the paper using its original year. Having a 'section date' that differs from the 'book date' would be confusing and potentially misleading.

    What is needed, then, is a way to indicate the original publication date. This is apparently still in the pipeline.
  • suecsi
    Good point - though my reader actually reprints the papers in their original format so that you can see the original page numbers. The OU asks us to quote both dates - the original one and the one of the anthology. In the citation it would be (Smith, 1983) and in the bibliography it would be Smith (1983) 'Name of Paper' reprinted in The Open University (2006), T862 Course Reader, Milton Keynes.

    Original publication date would work though. I'd be happy to modify the XML in the citation format to drop this in as an extra field, and the 'Date' can remain as the publication date of the reader itself.
  • bdarcus
    Original publication date would work though. I'd be happy to modify the XML in the citation format to drop this in as an extra field, and the 'Date' can remain as the publication date of the reader itself.
    That's not a very good solution; to rely on non-standard data encoding and citation styling.

    I'd suggest for the time being manually adding these data when you're done with the manuscript, and wait on the proper solution (search for 'hierarchical model' and you'll see the discussion).
Sign In or Register to comment.