[request] Auto-numbering / auto-adjusting link citations

net-carver · 2010-07-02 22:37:41

All

The gist has been updated.

It has slightly simpler textile markup but allows more flexibility within the citation footnote text (like using glyphs like ©, ™ and ® along with ~~block markup~~ bold, emphasis etc.) Additionally, it now outputs a proper ordered list of citation links rather than simple paragraphs as before.

Here’s an example…

Scientists say[Proof of the small moon hypothesis.|Copyright(c) Laurent Laveder]:http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap080801.html the moon is quite small. But I, for one, don't believe them.  Others claim it to be made of cheese[Proof of a cheese moon.]:http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0104361. If this proves true I suspect we are in for troubled times[After all, things do go wrong]:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apollo_13#The_oxygen_tank_incident as people argue over their "share" of the moon's cheese. In the end, its limited size[Proof of the small moon hypothesis.|Copyright(c) Laurent Laveder]:http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap080801.html may prove problematic.

Which renders close to this (I’m simulating the result in forum textile here)…

Scientists say¹ the moon is quite small. But I, for one, don’t believe them. Others claim it to be made of cheese². If this proves true I suspect we are in for troubled times³ as people argue over their “share” of the moon’s cheese. In the end, its limited size⁴ may prove problematic.

^ Proof of the small moon hypothesis. Copyright© Laurent Laveder

^ Proof of a cheese moon.

^ After all, things do go wrong

^ Proof of the small moon hypothesis. Copyright© Laurent Laveder

Except that the citation list items have “^” links back to their point of reference too.

Edited to correct mistake about block markup.

net-carver · 2010-07-03 09:07:09

Destry

you wrote:

Recent research on this old issue strongly suggests that embedding links in text, no matter how well it’s done, impacts a person’s ability to process, remember, and learn the primary text they are reading (compared to print copy). The links are just too distracting …

Why not totally do away with the citation links from the body text to the citation list at the foot of the page? Even the little hypertext superscripts present the same click vs no-click decision the author was talking about in that article. They even have a much decreased target area for the click to improve the reader’s hand-eye coordination that much more.

As a thought; perhaps simply having a list of outgoing links at the foot of the page would provide the reader with enough opportunity to further any interest in the sources used when writing the article.

So this would be the result…

Scientists say the moon is quite small. But I, for one, don’t believe them. Others claim it to be made of cheese. If this proves true I suspect we are in for troubled times as people argue over their “share” of the moon’s cheese. In the end, its limited size may prove problematic.

^ Proof of the small moon hypothesis. Copyright© Laurent Laveder

^ Proof of a cheese moon.

^ After all, things do go wrong

The ‘^’ marks could still take the reader back into your article’s body to give them an indication of where you used the ideas/data from that source.

Destry · 2010-07-09 08:59:30

(I’m subscribed to this thread, but not getting notifications. Huh!)

Steve,

I agree with you on the point we shouldn’t need the links on the number to hop down to the bottom. Clicking little links like that is a huge blow to usability too.

However, I think we do need the numbers to appear to show context to the reference – that’s imperative. Otherwise it puts the burdon on the reader to backtrack in copy and try and make the association without help. Not good. It frustrate people who care enough.

Btw, what are those up-arrows in the bottom list? Are they links back to the reference? (Sorry, I’ve not had a chance yet to try this out. Crazy busy.) If so, it’s an interesting idea, but I’d argue their value for the same reasons you are about the links inline. And they are also too small for practical links from a usability standpoint. (And they look odd.) I would say drop those arrow marks/links too (if that’s what they are), and just leave the externa link.

In this new light of not including anchor links, however, maybe a better way to go is to put the inline numbers at the end of the sentence in which the reference is made, and change the number notation style to something like this…

Scientists say the moon is quite small. [1] But I, for one, don’t believe them. Others claim it to be made of cheese. [2] If this proves true I suspect we are in for troubled times as people argue over their “share” of the moon’s cheese. In the end, its limited size may prove problematic. [3]
.

Proof of the small moon hypothesis. Copyright© Laurent Laveder

Proof of a cheese moon.

After all, things do go wrong

…except [n] is tight on the ending period and a superscript (which I can’t seem to do here in the forum). This is how Wikipedia does it, but no link.

Thinking about it more, maybe it’s better to have an option to turn the inline reference link on or off as desired per website, and with ability to style it as an designer might want (e.g., larger font, glyph, or what have you).

Bloke · 2010-07-09 09:21:23

Destry wrote:

In this new light of not including anchor links, however, maybe a better way to go is to put the inline numbers at the end of the sentence in which the reference is made

The great thing about Steve’s solution is that the position of the links is up to you: if you want them at the end, put the citation markup at the end.

Thinking about it more, maybe it’s better to have an option to turn the inline reference link on or off as desired per website, and with ability to style it as an designer might want (e.g., larger font, glyph, or what have you).

I thought about this too and batted some ideas around with Steve. How about a compromise? What if the little superscript number wasn’t necessarily rendered as a superscript number but just a number in square brackets with a class assigned to the whole thing. Designers could then superscript it, make it smaller or turn the darn things off in CSS?

Last edited by Bloke (2010-07-09 09:23:10)

Destry · 2010-07-09 09:32:28

Sounds perfect, guys!

Bloke · 2010-07-09 09:48:37

btw, Destry, Wikipedia adds the caret in the references to backlink to the place where it was referenced (and some of them aren’t linked for some reason).

I think it has value to jump back to where something was quoted, although I admit the fact the carets are full size is a bit odd to look at in this Textile version.

Perhaps again the backlink caret links could be given a class so you can format them or shut them off as desired?

EDIT: the other thing it does which is quite nice is that when you click a reference in the main body, the reference itself is highlighted in the list so you can more easily spot it; the background is altered slightly. Nice touch but I dunno how it’s done — javascript I guess. Outside the scope of the citation system in Textile, but with good enough hooks in the markup would be open to customisation for those who are inclined.

Last edited by Bloke (2010-07-09 09:54:25)

net-carver · 2010-07-09 16:57:37

maniqui wrote:

May it be the right time to share with you those crazy ideas living in the back of my head about an utopian new version of Textile?

Hi Julián. Why not start a new thread about that? Stef & I are working on some other changes so it might well be an opportune moment to start talking about your dreams.

Destry

As Stef mentioned, the backlink carets are similar to how wikipedia does theirs and could be totally removed from the output if not needed by a simple style rule. I quite like your idea of showing the reference number in the body of the article but not having it as a hyperlink. That’s much more like paper publications.

If we were to have an option to control the link generation from the body text to the correct entry in the list of references what do you imagine that might look like? Would it be some form of declaration at the start of the article, or a slight change to the format to allow textile to know which one to generate?

All

Any other comments on any of this?

Destry · 2011-03-08 18:55:54

I don’t understand why, but notifications from this forum are hit or miss for me.

It would appear I lost the opportunity to give this cool thing a fly. Steve’s “gist” links all don’t work. Anyone happen to safe-keep it somewhere? Bloke?

net-carver · 2011-03-08 19:20:21

Destry,

the gists are dead because the code has already been adopted into textile 2.2. Try auto-numbered notes for a live demo.

Destry · 2011-03-08 20:39:21

Thank you, Steve! And textile 2.2 is now supported in 4.0.3? #lazyweb

Textpattern CMS

Textpattern CMS support forum

#13 2010-07-02 22:37:41

Re: [request] Auto-numbering / auto-adjusting link citations

#14 2010-07-03 09:07:09

Re: [request] Auto-numbering / auto-adjusting link citations

#15 2010-07-09 08:59:30

Re: [request] Auto-numbering / auto-adjusting link citations

#16 2010-07-09 09:21:23

Re: [request] Auto-numbering / auto-adjusting link citations

#17 2010-07-09 09:32:28

Re: [request] Auto-numbering / auto-adjusting link citations

#18 2010-07-09 09:48:37

Re: [request] Auto-numbering / auto-adjusting link citations

#19 2010-07-09 16:57:37

Re: [request] Auto-numbering / auto-adjusting link citations

#20 2011-03-08 18:55:54

Re: [request] Auto-numbering / auto-adjusting link citations

#21 2011-03-08 19:20:21

Re: [request] Auto-numbering / auto-adjusting link citations

#22 2011-03-08 20:39:21

Re: [request] Auto-numbering / auto-adjusting link citations

Board footer