Bs26 bib intake instructions

[stumbo]

Add the Interlisp Bibliography Intake Document to the website as a markdown file.

The document can be found via a reference at the top of the bibliography index page. We currently have a line of text stating the bibliography is created from Zotero. Another line of text has been added stating that information on adding a new entries can be found at and referencing the intake document.

The intake document resides in the bibliography subdirectory content/en/history/bibliography/intake

Additional changes were made to the github actions that drive creating the complete bibliography index. The hashing scheme needed to be updated to capture changes to the bibliography directory and not just the Zotero dataset.

The updated index page with link to the intake guide is currently running on the staging site.

---

As discussed in the 2026-07-15 Interlisp external meeting, I used the formal intake guide and not the quickie guide. Suggestions on changing the content are welcome. My quick scan of the quickie guide leaves me to believe that this one is more appropriate because it actually references the Google Form for suggesting new entries.

[pamoroso]

On rereading the quickie intake guide I think the formal guide is more appropriate.

[masinter]

@mhafizazh look at this

[pamoroso]

@hjellinek and @Eleanor-Young may also want to have a look at this.

[hjellinek]

"Information on submitting new entries can be found at Interlisp Bibliography Submission"

Please change this to:

"The Interlisp Bibliography Intake Guide explains how to recommend new bibliography items."

and link the second through fifth words to the page of that name. Don't forget the period at the end of the sentence.

[stumbo]

"Information on submitting new entries can be found at Interlisp Bibliography Submission"

Please change this to:

"The Interlisp Bibliography Intake Guide explains how to recommend new bibliography items."

and link the second through fifth words to the page of that name. Don't forget the period at the end of the sentence.

It took butterfingers a couple tries to get it typed correctly, but we managed to untangle my fingers long enough. Thanks for improving the sentence.

[pamoroso]

At commit d0af40e, at the History page of the staging site the Bibliography entry is missing altogether from the left sidebar.

[stumbo]

At commit d0af40e, at the History page of the staging site the Bibliography entry is missing altogether from the left sidebar.

This is fixed by removing the toc_hide entry I had added to _index.md. A misguided attempt to clean up a warning message.

[stumbo]

Two questions to consider:

• Do we want the Intake guide within the Bibliography directory? This is the current arrangement. The benefit is that all bibliography content is wrapped within a single directory. The minus is that we have a directory that is a mix of bibliographic entries and (currently) one document describing how to maintain the bibliography. To a large degree it is lost in there.
• Secondly, the left pane lists various documents within the website, in this particular case the History pages. Docsy defaults to showing just 100 entries per subdirectory. Currently our bibliography has over 400 entries.
  • Do we want all the entries displayed in the left pane?
  • Should the displayed entries be ordered alphabetically by title?
  • Should entries be just documents and not bibliography entries? If so, the only subelement would be the intake guide.

We should address the location of the intake guide as part of this PR, the other issue on what goes in the left pane can be handled in a separate PR.

[pamoroso]

I think the Bibliography directory is fine for the intake guide, and it would be better not to display the bibliography entries in the left pane. It's useful to discusse these issues in the next external meeting of July 22.

After commit 63ea761 the Bibliography is still missing from the staging site.

[Eleanor-Young]

I think ideally it would be best to have the intake guide not in the same directory as actual bibliography items, but it's not anything catastrophic, of course. Depending on whether we think it would be making things too messy, having it somewhere still under bibliography, but not in the same chain of directories as the items themselves would be nice. Something like bibliography/intake for the guide, then bibliography/items for the items themselves, for instance, if that wouldn't break too many things (or, if it does, if those things wouldn't be too hard to un-break).