QIL is a scheme for labelling arbitrary segments of
narrative when writing-up deductive reasoning such as ‘proof arguments’. I have
been using this locally for my own work as there appear to be no published recommendations
in this area. Depending on their background, other writers may find this
presentation useful.
Narrative is, by its very nature, sequential. When one part
needs to reference another part, either forwards or backwards, then we take it
for granted that there will be an associated reference point: some identifier
or label that will allow us to find the target text.
Chapters and sections are obvious examples of this. For
instance: “see Ch. 12, and Sec. 12.1” (actual abbreviations dependent upon your
style guide). The separating space would usually be a non-breaking space in order to prevent the number being separated
onto a different line. Both of these cases would usually have alternative
textual titles, too, although the chapter name and section heading would be
less used for frequent intra-document references.
We also take it for granted that individual non-narrative items,
such as Tables, Figures, Plates, etc., can be referenced directly. Their numbering
usually runs consecutively throughout a document, beginning with number 1, and
separately from each other.[1] For
instance: “see Figure 12”.
The goals of this scheme were:
- Visually identifiable way of labelling and referencing arbitrary narrative sentences or paragraphs
- Associating certain semantics with the labels by using distinct introducers
- Ensuring that the scheme is useable in both documents created via a word-processor and in online blog posts or other Web pages
- Ensuring that their usage in electronic documents and online makes effective use of the corresponding hyperlink support
While headings could be used to label paragraphs, it would
break the flow of the surrounding narrative, and so it may not be justified
simply to create a label for future reference.
Although not part of the QIL scheme, I have used the
following convention for headings when collecting together information from
large-scale cluster research. It allows two neighbouring heading levels to
specify a person followed by the sources relating to them, or a source followed
by personae mentioned in that source.
.
Person-based (Person →
Sources)
A number of sources provide
enough direct and non-conflicting evidence to create a coherent snapshot of a
person with some of their lineage or history. This will usually reference
multiple sources, which would be described under secondary headings.
Source-based (Source →
Personae)
A given source provides
references to one or more individuals (or ‘personae’) whose identities and
relationships to references in other sources has yet to be determined. Those
distinct personae would be described under secondary headings.
However, I also needed to be able to create much lower-level
labels for deductive logic. Having identifiable labels at this level may also
help keep software visualisations in-step with the written argument, but this
is an area which has yet to be explored to its full potential
Mathematics is a subject that includes an array of concepts that may
need to be labelled and referenced, including equations, lemmas, and axioms.
The most familiar one to the layperson will be equations, and I will briefly
examine how these are handled in order to find a precedent for QIL.
When manipulating equations, such as when deriving a
mathematical proof, references to prior equations will be essential. For
instance: “Rearranging Eq. (1.2) and substituting Eqs. (2.1) and (2.2) gives…”.
Note that the equations are typically numbered using the enclosing section
number plus some sequential equation number within that section. Note also that
associated references are usually preceded by the abbreviation “Eq.” or “Eqs.”.[2]
E =
mc2 (3.2)
Any scheme that applies to segments of narrative must be as
simple as this, and embrace the basic requirements of relative numbering and
the distinguishing of references from associated labels.
The QIL scheme began in Microsoft Word using the following
format:
L(n.n.n): Label
L(n.n.n) Reference to label
The last integer (’.n’) was relative to the active heading-2
level numbering (the preceding ‘n.n’). The introducer, “L”, was then supplemented
with a couple of other letters to provide some essential semantics, as follows:
- Q(n.n.n): A query regarding anomalous evidence, conflicts, etc., that requires subsequent explanation or resolution
- I(n.n.n): An inference made from evidence and/or other inferences that may be used subsequently
- L(n.n.n): A general label for anything that may be cited later
Generating these is quite easy in Word because there are
corresponding field codes: the invisible directives that can be embedded within
your text. For instance, in order to generate “Q(2.3.7):” at a location within a
heading-2 level of “2.3”, you could do the following:
- Type the “Q(“
- Ctrl+F9 to open a pair of field-code braces
- Right-click and select ‘Edit Field…’
- Select ‘StyleRef’, with the options of ‘Heading 2’ level and ‘Insert paragraph number’
- Type the “.”
- Ctrl+F9 again
- Select ‘Seq’. Change the field code to “SEQ Q”, “SEQ I”, etc., as appropriate
- Type the final “):”
Yes, this sounds excessive but there are easier ways.
The SEQ field code takes an arbitrary identifier so you can
support separate sequences running concurrently: “Q”, “I”, and “L” in this
scheme. They each start from 1, and continue until reset with a code such as
“SEQ Q \r1”; hence, you would need one of these if switching to a new section. Although
basing it on heading-1 level would be workable, and dependent upon your written
style, the alternative of simply using global numbering, as in “Q(23):”, may be
easier to generate but harder to find the corresponding label in your
narrative.
If we go to the ‘Word Options’ and temporarily turn on the
option to see these field codes (usually under ‘Advanced > Show document
content > Show field codes instead of their values’), then we would see:
Q({ STYLEREF "Heading
2" \n }.{ SEQ Q }):
An easier way to generate these labels is to use
copy-and-paste; any of them can be copied to a different section, selected with
the mouse, and right-click ‘Update Field’ in order to create an entirely new
one. However, my recommended method is
to use the Word ‘Building Blocks’ feature, formerly called ‘AutoText’.
Select examples of each of the three labels (one at a time),
type Alt+F3, and save them as named Building Blocks (e.g. QLab, ILab, LLab).
You could also save copies of the corresponding ‘reset’ cases (e.g. QLabR,
ILabR, LLabR). You can summon these at any time by typing their name followed
by F3. The beauty of this scheme is that these definitions are stored in a Word
file called ‘Building Blocks.dotx’, and so will be available in future
documents.
Also, showing the underlying field codes — should you ever need
them — can be done more easily using Alt+F9 to toggle their display.
Before we can generate a reference to one of these labels,
we need to bookmark its textual location. Select the label with the mouse, but
not the trailing “:”. Using ‘Bookmark’ in the ‘Links’ area of the ‘Insert’ tab,
type in a name for the bookmark, and select ‘Add’. We then have a named
location (rather than just a label) that we can reference later.
To generate a reference to it, select ‘Cross-reference’ in
the same ‘Links’ area, select ‘Bookmark’ and ‘Bookmark text’ in the two drop-down
lists, leave ‘Insert as hyperlink’ unchecked (for now), and chose a named
bookmark. This will generate a copy of the corresponding bookmarked text (e.g.
Q(2.3.7)) rather than the bookmark name, which is merely a local symbolic name.
Looking again at the invisible field codes would reveal something similar to:
Example reference is { REF Q_2_3_7
\h }.
It is tempting to just use a name such as “Q_2_3_7”, as I
have been doing in this article, but the inevitable moving around of sections
will require labels to be re-generated (done by Ctrl+A to select everything in
the document, and F9 to update all of its fields), and that would cause the
symbolic name to get out of step with the actual text. A better scheme is to adopt
functional names: ones that describes the associated query, inference, or
whatever. Note that there are limitations on these names: basically 1–40
characters, beginning with a letter or underscore, and containing no
punctuation or whitespace.
What we have here is a workable scheme for printed
documents; we now need to look at it in the context of electronic documents and
blogs (or other Web pages).
Word has two mechanisms for hyperlinking its bookmarks, and
they are subtly different, although their terminology sounds too similar to the
casual user:
- Select ‘Cross-reference’ in the ‘Links’ area of the ‘Insert’ tab. Select ‘Bookmark’ and ‘Bookmark text’ from the two drop-down lists, and ensure that ‘Insert as hyperlink’ is checked. I’ll refer to these as “Bookmark hyperlinks”.
- Select ‘Hyperlink’ from the same ‘Links’ area. Select ‘Place in This Document’ on the left, and select the required bookmark from the main tree panel. I’ll refer to these as “URL Hyperlinks”.
Comparing these mechanisms using the above
bookmark-reference example gives the following respective field codes.
Example reference is { REF Q_2_3_7
\h }.
Example reference is { HYPERLINK
\1 “Q_2_3_7” }.
Now these both hyperlink to the same bookmark, but their capabilities
are not the same.
- When you insert a bookmark hyperlink then it nicely substitutes the bookmarked text — the QIL label in our case — as opposed to some symbolic bookmark name that is more relevant to the author than to the reader. When you insert a URL hyperlink then you only get the bookmark name. Although you can change the ‘Text to display’, you may need a good memory to recall the bookmarked label. Also, any such display text is fixed, and will not be kept in-step if you move sections around, since the display text is not part of the field code. Clearly this Word feature has not been thought out very well.
- A bookmark hyperlink looks like normal text until you hover over it, whereas a URL hyperlink is underlined and rendered in blue like normal Web hyperlinks. If you hover over either then they nicely show you the underlying bookmark name and the instruction ‘Ctrl+Click to follow link’.
- Most importantly, when saving the document as “Web Page, Filtered” — required for blogs and other HTML versions — then bookmark hyperlinks are discarded, but URL hyperlinks are not!
At first, I thought that neither of these did what I needed,
and that my scheme was therefore doomed without major change.
I’d previously written about using bookmarks in blogs at Using
Bookmarks with Blogger, although I had to update that article following the
findings of this more recent one.
The HTML equivalent of a bookmark is called an “anchor”, and
is represented by the <a> element. Given an example sentence of:
L(4.1.3): This resolves the query
at Q(1.2.6).
the HTML version we would hope for would be similar to:
<a
name=”L_4_1_3”>L(4.1.3)</a>: This resolves the query at <a
href=”#Q_1_2_6”>Q(1.2.6)</a>.
Where “L_4_1_3” and “Q_1_2_6” are simply the bookmark names
that I had chosen.
In Using
Microsoft Word with Blogger, I recommended saving Word documents as
“Web Page, Filtered”, and not just “Web Page”, when using them to generate new
blog posts. This is because it filters out the excessively verbose and
complicated HTML that Word generates by default, and is necessary for the
correct operation of feedburner (notifying people of new blog-posts).
The first thing I noticed was that the displayed document,
following the new saved-as format, is not what is saved to disk; it appears to
be using the full Word HTML version, which is why it all looks fine. The disk
version will not have any representation of bookmark
hyperlinks. Also, the anchor points stop after the first parenthesis,
showing ‘<a name=”L_4_1_3”>L(</a>4.1.3)’ rather than the correct
form in the example above. This appears to be a bug in Word 2007/2010 where the
presence of the field codes representing those numbers clashes with the bookmarking,
but it is not a showstopper because at least the anchor begins at the correct
text location.
Given the flexibility that Word is endowed with, I was
rather surprised by the hiccups and limitations when trying to implement this
scheme. Although I mentioned some of the issues on a Word forum, I never
expected any changes because — based on previous experience — you would be told
‘that’s the way it is’, ‘it works as intended’, and ‘we don’t recommend what
you’re trying to achieve’. I can’t abide that sort of reaction from the fringes (the actual developers would
probably be interested), but I wasn’t going to give up that easily either.
With the two types of Word hyperlink, one was much easier to
use while the other was the one that was represented in the HTML. What I found
was an unexpected hybrid that was not that onerous, and which seems to work in
both 2007 and 2010 versions:
- Generate a bookmark hyperlink for your chosen bookmark name
- This deposits the bookmarked text (the QIL label) rather than the name, as required
- If you’ve already forgotten the bookmark name in the preceding seconds, just hover over it
- Select the deposited reference with the mouse and convert it to a URL hyperlink to the same bookmark
The interesting thing about this is that it still looks like
the normal bookmark hyperlink (not
underlined, and not coloured blue) but it really is a URL hyperlink and so works when saving as “Web Page, Filtered” in
order to generate your blog page (see Using
Microsoft Word with Blogger). The display text gets correctly
updated in this case (unlike the manually inserted display-text mentioned
earlier) since any text selected at the time the URL hyperlink is inserted becomes its display text, and in this
scenario that contained the necessary field codes.
This scheme isn’t as complicated as it sounds, but some
hoops had had to be jumped through. Using macros or add-ins could make it much
more streamline.
[1] Joe Schall, "Effective Technical Writing in the Information
Age: Textual References to Figures and Tables", John A. Dutton e-Education Institute -
Pennsylvania State University
(https://www.e-education.psu.edu/styleforstudents/c4_p11.html : accessed 28 Nov 2016).
[2] Drs. Nathan Champagne, Scott Gold, Steve Jones, Terry McConathy,
and Ramu Ramachandran, “Guidelines for Equations, Units, and Mathematical
Notation: An addendum to the Thesis/Dissertation Guidelines provided by the
Graduate School...”, College of
Engineering & Science [COES] - Louisiana Tech University (http://www.latech.edu/graduate_school/thesis_dissertations/coes_equation_guidelines.pdf
: undated but parts last updated 23 Feb 2006, accessed 28 Nov 2016).
No comments:
Post a Comment