1

I am developing new software and I want to have a list of resources for the web pages that I have used to develop this software. Example of my-resources.txt:

- https://tutorialxyz.com/xxxx
- https://domainxyz.com/xxxx
- ...

Do you use bibliography for this type of file or do you use another name?

In Spanish we use webgrafía, maybe in English it could be webgraphy?

I found this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Webography

UPDATE 2019/03/17

I asked to other software developers, in this case, one of them is from UK and the other one is from USA. They tell that they usually use "webography" but sometimes they saw "webliography" too.

I hope have explained this properly :S.

Thanks!.

  • 1
    Please, I have a plea: I am developing new software, no a. – Lambie Mar 16 '19 at 17:41
  • I concur with @Lambie on this one. Software is a mass (uncountable) noun. Either say "developing new software", or if you want to be clear that it's one bit of software, say "developing a new piece of software", or "a new software programme". – SamBC Mar 16 '19 at 19:04
  • 1
    or a new software application, or a new app [mostly for mobile phones] – Lambie Mar 16 '19 at 19:10
  • 1
    @fred2: I wouldn't be surprised if it were something that's just completely inconsistent. I remember people trying to drum in the difference between disc and disk, but I doubt it stuck. Not that it matters as much anymore... – SamBC Mar 17 '19 at 14:28
  • 1
    @SamBC. Which reminds me of my one piece of South African English. The later 'non-floppy 3.5 inch floppy disks' were called 'stiffy disks' in South Africa. People I worked with sent me "stiffies" through the post. :-0 – fred2 Mar 17 '19 at 20:39
1

In English, a bibliography is a bibliography, regardless of the media referred to.

Depending on what you're doing, you may need to be careful to use it correctly. If it is a list of things you've used, or suggest that people read, that is a bibliography. In some parts of academia, this is distinguished from a reference list, which is a list of things referred to in the text.

The coinage of webography is still new, and mostly used when talking about such lists, rather than as the heading or title for the list. It is not a word that everyone would generally recognise. In your case, I would use bibliography, or just not use any name and say "list of web resources that were useful during development" or such.

| improve this answer | |
  • It's also not uncommon to have a list titled Further Reading, which may or may not be distinguished from a Reference List (and/or Bibliography? Not sure on that specific point). – FumbleFingers Reinstate Monica Mar 16 '19 at 16:58
0

For what it's worth, I develop software too.

I have never heard the word 'webography' before, but I suppose it is appropriate if you are only including URLs of websites. It means, in essence, 'bibliography of websites'. However, it is such a new word that some people may not know what it is.

To my mind, if you are storing it as a plain text file, there is nothing wrong with calling it 'my-resources.txt', or what about the traditional 'readme.txt'?

I think it is an uncommon enough item that you can, to an extent, make up your own rules.

| improve this answer | |
  • Hi! I don't user readme because I already have a readme and I don't want to reference 20-30 links in the same file. I prefer another file for that task. Thanks for your answer :-). – mrroot5 Mar 17 '19 at 20:00
0

I would avoid the neologism "webgraphy" and simply call such a list a "list of resources", "list of links to resources", "list of resource URLs" or the like. It could be called a "Bibliography of online resources".

There is the precedant of "Discology" for a list of recorded music, but I don't think "webgraphy" is well enough established for use. In fact, I am thinking that I should propose the deletion of the linked Wikipedia article.

| improve this answer | |
-1

These experts (how to cite software) use:

Software downloaded from the web: [bolding mine in this citation]

ProductName. Version. ReleaseDate. Publisher. Location. DOIorURL. DownloadDate.

OGSA-DAI REST. 4.2.1. December 2012. OGSA-DAI Project. http://sourceforge.net/projects/ogsa-dai. 27/04/2012.

UltimateFFT. 2.4. December 2012. Fred Bloggs, EPCC, The University of Edinburgh, UK. http://www.epcc.ed.ac.uk/ultimate-fft. 27/04/2012.

C implementation of Wu's color quantizer. 2. 1991. Xiaolin Wu, Department of Electrical & Computer Engineering, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario. http://www.ece.mcmaster.ca/~xwu/cq.c. 27/04/2012.

Software checked-out from a public repository:

ProductName. Publisher. URL. CheckoutDate. RepositorySpecificCheckoutInformation.

OGSA-DAI REST. OGSA-DAI Project. http://sourceforge.net/projects/ogsa-dai. 27/04/2012. Check-out: ogsa-dai/branck/ogsadai4.1/, revision 1657.

Software provided by a researcher:

ProductName. Author. Location. ContactDetails. ReceivedDate.
BestFFTroutine ever file. Fred Bloggs, EPCC, The University of Edinburgh, UK. Fred.bloggs@epcc.ed.ac.uk. 27/04/2012.

There is a lot of useful information on the subject of citations, etc. on that site. The entry I cited seems relevant to your endeavors.

Webografia links to webography on Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Webography.

| improve this answer | |
  • For the life of me, I cannot imagine how this is inaccurate. – Lambie Mar 16 '19 at 19:09
  • 1
    The fact that it doesn't actually answer the question? They're asking what the list should be called, not how to format it. – SamBC Mar 16 '19 at 19:12
  • Of course, one can use references, but he is only citing software so bibliography is not right here. "Reference Software". – Lambie Mar 16 '19 at 19:43
  • Dictionaries vary as to whether the works in a bibliography must be books, and the example URLs he gives indicate that he's referring to tutorials, which would certainly be texts. – SamBC Mar 16 '19 at 19:51

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.