Comments on: RefDB, RefBase, and news from the Z39.50 World http://www.garyfeng.com/wordpress/2005/05/27/refdb-and-refbase/ 如 影 随 行 Sat, 05 Jul 2008 09:05:34 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=1.5.1.2 by: gary http://www.garyfeng.com/wordpress/2005/05/27/refdb-and-refbase/#comment-763 Tue, 31 May 2005 01:37:26 +0000 http://www.garyfeng.com/wordpress/2005/05/27/refdb-and-refbase/#comment-763 I agree with Bruce -- I'd rather see CiteULike as an "application layer" on top of an open-source bibilographic database, such as RefBase or RefDB. I think the project can move forward much faster if Richard Cameron would consider open source the CiteULike code. Several months back I had a discussion with Richard, where I suggested having a distributed system rather than a single server. Richard had some legitimate concerns over fragmantation of the social interactions that is the core of CiteULike. He had a point. On the other hand, Richard has promised to work on a backend API to allow batch importing and exporting reference entries and other functions. If a search API is in the working, then SRU might eventually be partially supported. Going back to Bruce's point, though, I don't think of CiteULike as a searchable bibilographic database. It's main attaction is to discover people sharing the same interests with you and then find articles from their readings that you would not normally think of looking for. I am ok with it if it's not integrated with a word processor. -- gary I agree with Bruce — I’d rather see CiteULike as an “application layer” on top of an open-source bibilographic database, such as RefBase or RefDB. I think the project can move forward much faster if Richard Cameron would consider open source the CiteULike code. Several months back I had a discussion with Richard, where I suggested having a distributed system rather than a single server. Richard had some legitimate concerns over fragmantation of the social interactions that is the core of CiteULike. He had a point.

On the other hand, Richard has promised to work on a backend API to allow batch importing and exporting reference entries and other functions. If a search API is in the working, then SRU might eventually be partially supported.

Going back to Bruce’s point, though, I don’t think of CiteULike as a searchable bibilographic database. It’s main attaction is to discover people sharing the same interests with you and then find articles from their readings that you would not normally think of looking for. I am ok with it if it’s not integrated with a word processor.

– gary

]]> by: Bruce http://www.garyfeng.com/wordpress/2005/05/27/refdb-and-refbase/#comment-728 Sun, 29 May 2005 23:25:24 +0000 http://www.garyfeng.com/wordpress/2005/05/27/refdb-and-refbase/#comment-728 FWIW, I wasn't necessarily advocating RefBase against RefDB and/or CiteUlike. What I was advocating was the sort of standards support that the RefBase project has been adding. I'm not seeing this in CiteULike, and I won;'t use the service until it does better on this count. I'm writing some citation processing software and am co-project lead for the OpenOffice bibliographic project, but I'm not going to write custom code to support CiteUlike when there's SRU. FWIW, I wasn’t necessarily advocating RefBase against RefDB and/or CiteUlike. What I was advocating was the sort of standards support that the RefBase project has been adding. I’m not seeing this in CiteULike, and I won;’t use the service until it does better on this count. I’m writing some citation processing software and am co-project lead for the OpenOffice bibliographic project, but I’m not going to write custom code to support CiteUlike when there’s SRU.

]]>