LaTeX Journeys

There are some really nice templates out there for Latex... I need to look at xLingPaper and then take a look at what I want to do and if I want to create a look-alike template in LaTeX. All things considered XLingPaper still pulls data nicely from FLEx. But I haven't used FLEx in a bit.

I really like CharisSIL and Linux Libertine. ACM two-column format really looks nice, in Libertine, but I haven't checked the linguistic symbols with it recently.

I'm a big Chicago (autor-date) fan...

https://abidsikder.com/blog/chicago-style-citation-and-bibliography-in-latex.html
https://ctan.math.washington.edu/tex-archive/macros/latex/contrib/biblatex-contrib/biblatex-chicago/doc/biblatex-chicago.pdf
https://www.overleaf.com/latex/examples/the-chicago-citation-style-with-biblatex/pdqqrmwtdqpc
https://tex.stackexchange.com/questions/6275/how-can-i-create-a-chicago-manual-of-style-formatted-document-in-latex
https://www.overleaf.com/latex/examples/bibliography-chicago-author-date-doi-suppressed/drrhkmbbmtbx

https://www.overleaf.com/latex/examples/bgu-endnotes-chicago-history-dept-template/hqycfypwjbwy

The taylor & Francis Interact template is really nice
https://www.overleaf.com/latex/templates/taylor-and-francis-latex-template-for-authors-interact-layout-plus-chicago-reference-style/jfkyqxkxqhrs

https://eddelbuettel.github.io/rticles-gallery/tf_demo.pdf
https://www.overleaf.com/latex/templates/taylor-and-francis-latex-template-for-authors-interact-layout-plus-chicago-reference-style/jfkyqxkxqhrs.pdf

Collection aboutness in OLAC

Defining aboutness of a collection is a challenge. From a philosophical point of view, this is even harder for collections in anthropological linguistics. These kinds of collections are not assembled for the sake of their "about-ness" but rather for the sake of their "is-ness". A collection in a museum might be about 19th century trains but such collections rarely contain the trains themselves. So, does this mean that linguistic collections are really about the people groups the speech is representing? and then the of-ness is the speech? Then linguists come along and write about the grammar of the language, and that is about the language? Often original stories will have an aboutness meaning which is never recorded in metadata. This needs to change.

This thought needs to be explored with MARC 655 $x and $v sub-fields. see: https://www.loc.gov/marc/bibliographic/bd655.html
https://www.loc.gov/marc/bibliographic/bd650.html

see email: https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/#sent/FMfcgzGsmrDLzSSBqXVPfKphwmdGhcZC

Zotero Pains… The “pre-print”

The massive pre-print industry has influenced Zotero to make their a specific category for pre-print. This is a cognitive fallacy which only exacerbates the citation and reference chaos.

Pre-prints are manuscripts.... There are hand-written manuscripts, there are typescript manuscripts and there are computer generated manuscripts... Zotero already has manuscripts as a category... no need to add a new category.

To make matters worse, Zotero imports PDFs when it can find open access versions of them. The problem is that it imports them to the article/publication type when they are pre-prints rather than to the pre-print item type. This make authority version management in Zotero nightmare. Classic case (try importing) : https://doi.org/10.1177/0964663914565848

I am still hopeful that Zotero staff will find a clean and easy way to automatically link pre-prints to their authority version records within Zotero.