Articles in Electronic Journals

Nov 16, 2009 at 6:21 PM

Hi there, sorry me again.

I need to reference an Electronic journal in the following order:

- Author

- Year of Publication (in round brackets)

- title of article (in quotation marks)

- title of journal (in italics)

- Volume, issue, page numbers

- name of collection (in italics)

- [Online]

- Available at: URL

- (Acessed date)

an example of this style would be:

Bright,M. (1985) 'The poetry of art', Journal of the history of ideas, 46 (2), pp. 259-277 JSTOR [Online]. Available at: http://uk.jstor.org/ (Accessed: 16 June 2005).

any help would be much appreciated.

I have tried to modify the .xsl file:

<source type="JournalArticle">
        <b:ImportantField>b:Author/b:Author/b:NameList</b:ImportantField>
        <b:ImportantField>b:Title</b:ImportantField>
        <b:ImportantField>b:JournalName</b:ImportantField>
        <b:ImportantField>b:Month</b:ImportantField>
        <b:ImportantField>b:Year</b:ImportantField>
        <b:ImportantField>b:Volume</b:ImportantField>
        <b:ImportantField>b:Issue</b:ImportantField>
        <b:ImportantField>b:Pages</b:ImportantField>
        <b:ImportantField>b:URL</b:ImportantField>
        <b:ImportantField>b:DayAccessed</b:ImportantField>
        <b:ImportantField>b:MonthAccessed</b:ImportantField>
        <b:ImportantField>b:YearAccessed</b:ImportantField>
 </source>
however these input fields do not come up in the source manager.

Coordinator
Nov 16, 2009 at 9:22 PM

There is a difference between the fields that show up in the source manager and the important fields. The fields that show up are the same for all styles. The ones that are important, are style dependant.

When Microsoft defined the open xml specification, they allowed all fields for all types of sources. It is a 'flat' format. Basically, they allowed for adding a 'station' field to a 'book' (pointless). The people who created Word decided that that was too much freedom for the end-user and picked a subset of fields which they support for each type. A good idea, but unfortunately their 'picking' was miserable. You would expect that in the 21st century, they would have added at least the 'electronic fields' to each type of entry or provided extra types of sources for them.

Anyway, you can decide yourself which fields to attach to which source.

The lazy solution: switch between source types

In the source manager, when you change the type of a source, different fields will become available. You can switch to a type of sources which has the fields you want, and fill them in. Then, when you switch back to the type you want, the data will be kept although it looks like the fields are gone.

The good solution: edit bibform.xml

The above works if you only have one or two entries. If you have dozens of entries, it becomes a stupid thing to do.

The order and availability of the elements for a given source type in the source manager is defined in a file called bibform.xml. Normally, this file can be found in

C:\Program Files\Microsoft Office\Office12\1033\Bibliography

where the 1033 could be a different number for you. It represents the localization of your copy of Word (1033 = US English).

If you open the file you will notice a huge bunch of xml code. Its format is pretty simple and straightforward. For each type, there is an entry in the form:

<Source type="JournalArticle" display="Journal Article">
  <!-- all definitions -->
</Source>

The children of a source element are the different fields that will be available in the source manager for that type. For example:

<Tag>
    <Label>Journal Name</Label>
    <DataTag>b:JournalName</DataTag>
    <Sample>Example: Adventure Works Monthly</Sample>
</Tag>

What you can do is copy paste the electronic fields from other source types inside the Source element for JournalArticle. You would want to add the following code inside the Source element:

<Tag>
  <Label>Year Accessed</Label>
  <DataTag>b:YearAccessed</DataTag>
  <Sample>Example: 2006</Sample>
</Tag>
<Tag>
  <Label>Month Accessed</Label>
  <DataTag>b:MonthAccessed</DataTag>
  <Sample>Example: January</Sample>
</Tag>
<Tag>
  <Label>Day Accessed</Label>
  <DataTag>b:DayAccessed</DataTag>
  <Sample>Example: 1</Sample>
</Tag>
<Tag>
  <Label>URL</Label>
  <DataTag>b:URL</DataTag>
  <Sample>Example: http://www.adatum.com</Sample>
</Tag>
<Tag>
  <Label>Medium</Label>
  <DataTag>b:Medium</DataTag>
  <Sample>Example: Document</Sample>
</Tag>

If you save the file and try to edit a Journal Article source, all fields should now be available. Note that you might want to select "Show all fields" depending on how you defined your important fields.

I added the "Medium" field as an extra to your requirements. It depends on where you want to display the word "online" in your format. If you do it near the URL, then you won't need a field for it. However, if you do it for example directly after the title and in before the journal name, you might want to put the word "online" in the "Medium" field and display that field. BibWord is not capable (yet) of showing a string based on the fact if a field is available without actually displaying the field.

Coordinator
Nov 16, 2009 at 9:28 PM

To add to the above. The format does not provide a field for the name of the electronic database (jstor) where you retrieved the article from. You can use one of the other electronic fields to store that information in. For example, you could use "b:InternetSiteTitle".

By default, the entry in bibform.xml would look like:

<Tag>
  <Label>Name of Web Site</Label>
  <DataTag>b:InternetSiteTitle</DataTag>
  <TitlePriority>3</TitlePriority>
  <Sample>Example: A. Datum Corporation Web site</Sample>
</Tag>

Of course, you would want to adjust the label to read something like "Database Name" and your sample to be "Example: JStor" to make it clear what the intention of the field is:

<Tag>
  <Label>Database Name</Label>
  <DataTag>b:InternetSiteTitle</DataTag>
  <TitlePriority>3</TitlePriority>
  <Sample>Example: JStor</Sample>
</Tag>

(The TitlePriority is not of importance in this case. You can omit it if you don't want it)

Nov 16, 2009 at 10:56 PM

It works a treat. had to fiddle around with the bibliography style within HavardExeter.xsl but managed to get it. below is an example of one of the citations:

Manning, T., Parker, R. and Pogson, G. (2006) 'A revised model of team roles and some research findings', Industrial and Commercial Training, vol. 38, no. 6, pp. 287-296 [Online].Available at: http://www.emeraldinsight.com/Insight/viewContentItem.do?contentType=Article&contentId=1571719 (Accessed: 9 November 2009).

Once again thankyou.

 

Feb 24, 2010 at 7:49 AM

CrazyRabb1t,

Would you mind sharing your updated code?  I have a 20-page paper due in 11 hours and my APA is not up to spec - no DOI, no issue number.  I'm hoping I could adapt yours - maybe?

 

Feb 24, 2010 at 10:03 AM
That's fine.

Sent from my iPhone

On 24 Feb 2010, at 08:49, "jmthach" <notifications@codeplex.com> wrote:

From: jmthach

CrazyRabb1t,

Would you mind sharing your updated code? I have a 20-page paper due in 11 hours and my APA is not up to spec - no DOI, no issue number. I'm hoping I could adapt yours - maybe?