On 18 Jul 2026, at 09:21, Jean-Pierre Delange via ntg-context <[email protected]> wrote: > > Dear all, > > I have substantially reorganised and rewritten the ConTeXt Garden wiki on > bibliographies and citations > (https://wiki.contextgarden.net/References_notes_and_floats/Bibliography_and_citations).
As Hans says: impressive. > I would especially appreciate review of the following technical points: > > - the descriptions of method=local, method=global, and method=dataset; > - the use of repeat=yes with chapter bibliographies and a final bibliography; > - the examples using several datasets and dataset::key; > - the distinction between citation and list namespaces; > - the examples involving \usecitation and manually written editorial notes; > - the minimal custom specification example. I've not used bibliographies enough to be able to comment, sorry, but hopefully someone else will. > I would also appreciate your opinion on the overall structure of the material. > > The page has become quite substantial and now serves several purposes at > once: an introduction for beginners, a conceptual reference for intermediate > users, and a guide to advanced project-based workflows. > > Would it be preferable to keep this as one comprehensive page, or to divide > it into several linked pages? It *is* a large page and sub-dividing might help. The last major revision of the Wiki adopted a structured technical authoring system called Diátaxis.[1] <https://diataxis.fr/> and there is concise summary here: <https://danielsieger.com/blog/2023/04/24/framework-for-better-documentation.html> You can see a skeleton overview page here so there is a template Wiki page available but I'm not sure how you get it. <https://wiki.contextgarden.net/Document_structure_and_headlines> But this is just a recommendation of a technique if you are already thinking of splitting it up, not a request to do so. > One possible division would be: > > 1. Bibliography and citations; > 2. Multiple bibliographies; > 3. Bibliographies in structured editorial projects. > > The main page would retain the Quickstart, data formats, the general > bibliography workflow, and citation syntax, while the two longer advanced > sections would become separate pages. > > Would you please indicate whether this division would improve readability and > maintenance, or whether the current single-page structure is preferable. > > The current version is intentionally detailed, but the structure is > progressive and the table of contents allows readers to stop after the level > they need. > > Best//JP > [1] Full disclosure: Daniele Procida, the inventor of Diátaxis, is an acquaintance but we haven't communicated for a few years now. Regards, -- Bruce Horrocks Hampshire, UK ___________________________________________________________________________________ If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the Wiki! maillist : [email protected] / https://mailman.ntg.nl/mailman3/lists/ntg-context.ntg.nl webpage : https://www.pragma-ade.nl / https://context.aanhet.net (mirror) archive : https://github.com/contextgarden/context wiki : https://wiki.contextgarden.net ___________________________________________________________________________________
