[Humanist] 28.588 shared bibliographic databases?

Humanist Discussion Group willard.mccarty at mccarty.org.uk
Wed Dec 24 07:31:40 CET 2014


                 Humanist Discussion Group, Vol. 28, No. 588.
            Department of Digital Humanities, King's College London
                       www.digitalhumanities.org/humanist
                Submit to: humanist at lists.digitalhumanities.org

  [1]   From:    "Allen B. Riddell" <abr at ariddell.org>                     (81)
        Subject: Re: [Humanist] 28.587 shared bibliographic databases?

  [2]   From:    "Dr. Will Tuladhar-Douglas" <will at tending.to>              (7)
        Subject: Re:  28.587 shared bibliographic databases?


--[1]------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Date: Tue, 23 Dec 2014 11:02:47 -0500
        From: "Allen B. Riddell" <abr at ariddell.org>
        Subject: Re: [Humanist] 28.587 shared bibliographic databases?
        In-Reply-To: <20141223063829.EE4DFAE3 at digitalhumanities.org>


Dear Dr. Tuladhar-Douglas,

I would recommend setting up a Django instance with a model matching the
fields for a Bibtex entry. Indeed, it looks like someone has done work
in this direction: https://bitbucket.org/grochmal/django-biblio.

Best wishes,

-ar

p.s. I'm somewhat confused about your comment that Zotero is neither open
source nor free. The Zotero source code is available under an AGPLv3
license at https://github.com/zotero with the most recent commit being
from 4 days ago.

On 12/23, Humanist Discussion Group wrote:
>                  Humanist Discussion Group, Vol. 28, No. 587.
>             Department of Digital Humanities, King's College London
>                        www.digitalhumanities.org/humanist
>                 Submit to: humanist at lists.digitalhumanities.org
> 
> 
> 
>         Date: Tue, 23 Dec 2014 06:33:03 +0000
>         From: Willard McCarty <willard.mccarty at mccarty.org.uk>
>         Subject: recommendations for shared bibliographic databases?
> 
> [It seems that Humanist 28.582 was unkindly truncated by software. It 
> asked if there had been any responses to the following, quoting it, but 
> the quoted bit did not appear. Here it is. A response, if you have one, 
> would be most appreciated. --WM]
> 
> >                  Humanist Discussion Group, Vol. 28, No. 530.
> >             Department of Digital Humanities, King's College London
> >                        www.digitalhumanities.org/humanist
> >                 Submit to: humanist at lists.digitalhumanities.org
> >
> >         Date: Tue, 2 Dec 2014 11:25:29 +0000
> >         From: "Dr. Will Tuladhar-Douglas" <will at tending.to>
> >         Subject: recommendations for shared bibliographic database, FOSS
> >
> > Gentlefolk,
> >
> > I'm writing to ask the list for advice in choosing a server/client bundle
> > that would allow a research team to share bibliographic information. I
> > suspect this is a question that surfaces periodically. We have a small
> > workgroup (< 20) but members might need to access the database from almost
> > anywhere, and publications will be in a variety of languages and scripts.
> >
> > Minimally, it needs to be free and open-source, multi-user,
> > Unicode-friendly, run the server on Linux or OSX, and allow for the input,
> > editing and retrieval of bibliographic information in BiBTeX and EndNote
> > formats through a web interface. Ideally it would be possible to load many
> > records at once, at least through the backend; have the capacity to attach
> > PDFs and notes; integrate with interesting front-ends like Moodle; be
> > relatively easy to set up; and use a standard back-end like PostgreSQL or
> > MySQL.
> >
> > Zotero is neither open-source nor free, and while I am sure we could have a
> > long discussion, let's not ;-).
> >
> > So far, I've found
> >
> > Basilic (http://artis.imag.fr/Software/Basilic/
> > http://artis.imag.fr/Software/Basilic/ ) -- looks a bit old.
> > Refbase (http://www.refbase.net/index.php/Web_Reference_Database
> > http://www.refbase.net/index.php/Web_Reference_Database )
> > Wikindx (http://wikindx.sourceforge.net  http://wikindx.sourceforge.net/ )
> >
> > Is there a standard? Do folks have good or bad experiences with use,
> > administration or support of any of these?
> >
> > I'll summarise and post responses.
> >
> > Many thanks.
> >
> > Be well,
> >
> > —WBTD.
> >
> > - - -- --- ----- -------- -------------
> > Will Tuladhar Douglas
> > Senior Lecturer, Environments and Religions
> > University of Aberdeen
> > http://tending.to/garden  http://tending.to/garden




--[2]------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Date: Tue, 23 Dec 2014 16:49:35 +0000
        From: "Dr. Will Tuladhar-Douglas" <will at tending.to>
        Subject: Re:  28.587 shared bibliographic databases?
        In-Reply-To: <20141223160247.GA7937 at cadlag>


Alan,

> p.s. I'm somewhat confused about your comment that Zotero is neither open
> source nor free. The Zotero source code is available under an AGPLv3
> license at https://github.com/zotero with the most recent commit being
> from 4 days ago.

You're right, and I should have been more precise in my language. So far as I can work out, the Zotero project does release the code for the dataserver as part of the Git repository but offers no documentation or support on how to actually run the server as a private instance. Hence while the project is technically open source, including the server, it's effectively an open-source client with a freemium server. There are threads in the wiki about trying to build and run the dataserver (and lots of failed attempts!); quite clearly that's not an option the Zotero developers support.






More information about the Humanist mailing list