[LINK] Copyright questions
jwhit at melbpc.org.au
Fri Mar 25 12:25:57 AEDT 2011
At 12:03 PM 25/03/2011, Tom Koltai wrote:
>that is usually sufficient for a
>(This was in fact the only style of citations for over five hundred
>years, until the advent of the ubiquitous google Dewey replacement.)
Not exactly true. Before electronic access and still today, there is
the field of publisher information or at least a source for the
document. You don't need Dewey for that at all. ISBN, yes, but that's
a very different coding system.
As for reasons, why is it only academic purposes? That implies
referencing is limited to scholarship. We include a referencing
requirement in our professional development program so that there is
documentation of the ideas (you didn't just make it up), support of
arguments or counter-arguments, and credit to the originator. Those
aren't academic reasons, but are good professional practice.
Am I good at it? I'm awful at it. Still, it's good professional
discipline and makes people think deeper about things instead of
working only on the surface, particularly if a company's long-term
existence relies on what is being presented. Synthesis of ideas is
good. Originality and initiative is good. Blowing smoke isn't good.
Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
jwhit at janwhitaker.com
Our truest response to the irrationality of the world is to paint or
sing or write, for only in such response do we find truth.
~Madeline L'Engle, writer
_ __________________ _
More information about the Link