milestones &
versioning

development history, research progress and documented releases of the german manual of style.

current version
v0.1
in progress

project foundation
research preparation

next version
v0.2

research exposé
target: december 2026

latest changes

changelog

A concise record of documented project updates and revisions.

view changelog
project development / 2026–2028 planning horizon

development timeline

research documentation

Each development version records its status and intended outcome. Expand tasks / work packages to review the steps between one version and the next. Planned versions are not published releases.

version 01 / 10v0.1october 2026

project foundation

The conceptual groundwork: from the first ideas to a clearly defined, open scientific initiative.

expected outcome

Project foundation, GMS/GCS architecture and the initial public research platform.

research journal
in progressdocumented groundwork
tasks / work packages 04
  1. 01Document the original brainstorming phase (2024–2026) as a retrospective account, without inventing exact dates.
  2. 02Record the October 2026 consultation with the MBA lecturer, including the challenge of institutional recognition.
  3. 03Define GMS as the umbrella initiative and GCS as the first citation module with three modes and an annotation layer.
  4. 04Document domain registration, the first public platform and the initial community participation concept.

Current project documentation; not a published GCS citation standard.

version 02 / 10v0.2target: december 2026

research exposé

Define what the MBA research will examine, how it will be investigated and what institutional adoption means.

expected outcome

Completed research exposé and an agreed scientific study framework.

research journal
nextresearch foundation
tasks / work packages 05
  1. 01Define the research problem, objectives, questions and potential contribution.
  2. 02Establish the DACH scope: Germany, Austria and the German-speaking academic community in Switzerland.
  3. 03Draft the theoretical framework, comparative criteria and expected evidence requirements.
  4. 04Design the mixed-methods approach, sampling, ethics, time plan and limitations.
  5. 05Complete and discuss the exposé with academic supervision.

Target date is a planning assumption, not a confirmed release.

version 03 / 10v0.32027 · planned

literature & citation review

Review the established approaches before defining GCS rules.

expected outcome

Structured state of research and a comparative matrix of existing citation systems.

research journal
plannedtheoretical analysis
tasks / work packages 04
  1. 01Carry out a systematic, documented literature review.
  2. 02Review APA, Chicago, IEEE, MLA, ISO 690 and relevant German-speaking citation conventions.
  3. 03Compare strengths, weaknesses and trade-offs using an explicit assessment framework.
  4. 04Identify research gaps and requirements for a shared citation architecture.

Findings and decisions will be documented in the Research Journal.

version 04 / 10v0.42027 · planned

gcs concept development

Specify a common scholarly rule base while preserving discipline-appropriate citation displays.

expected outcome

A traceable draft of the GCS framework and its three citation modes.

research journal
plannedconcept development
tasks / work packages 04
  1. 01Develop common source metadata, reference logic and quality requirements.
  2. 02Model the author–year, footnote and numerical display modes.
  3. 03Define an independent annotation mechanism and its boundaries.
  4. 04Document rule decisions, alternatives and source-based justifications.

Draft only; no claim of formal standard recognition.

version 05 / 10v0.52027 · planned

research methodology

Prepare the quantitative and qualitative research elements.

expected outcome

Pretested survey and interview instruments with an approved data collection plan.

research journal
plannedempirical preparation
tasks / work packages 05
  1. 01Construct and pilot the questionnaire for students and lecturers.
  2. 02Prepare the structured expert interview guide.
  3. 03Develop sampling, recruiting and data-protection procedures.
  4. 04Operationalise key acceptance and citation-quality criteria.
  5. 05Clarify informed consent, institutional requirements and study limitations.

No personal interview data will be disclosed through the public journal.

version 06 / 10v0.62027–2028 · planned

empirical field research

Investigate practical citation needs, perceived benefits and institutional constraints.

expected outcome

Completed and quality-checked empirical data collection.

research journal
planneddata collection
tasks / work packages 04
  1. 01Conduct a survey among learners and lecturers in the German-speaking academic community.
  2. 02Interview experts from universities, libraries, publishing and standardisation contexts.
  3. 03Record data acquisition and deviations from the study protocol.
  4. 04Safeguard participation records, consent and restricted research data.

Publication subject to ethical approval and privacy protection.

version 07 / 10v0.72027–2028 · planned

research analysis

Evaluate observations without assuming that GCS is inherently superior.

expected outcome

Integrated research findings and a critical assessment of GCS acceptance potential.

research journal
plannedevaluation
tasks / work packages 04
  1. 01Analyse quantitative survey results using methods appropriate to sample and scales.
  2. 02Code and interpret the expert interviews using a transparent qualitative framework.
  3. 03Identify adoption drivers, institutional barriers and potential country-level differences.
  4. 04Integrate the findings and revisit the GCS concept critically.

Empirical claims only after collection and analysis.

version 08 / 10v0.82027–2028 · planned

thesis development

Bring theoretical analysis and empirical evidence into one academic work.

expected outcome

Complete MBA thesis manuscript covering the theory, method, results and discussion.

research journal
plannedacademic writing
tasks / work packages 04
  1. 01Integrate theoretical and empirical chapters with a coherent argument.
  2. 02Discuss the benefits, risks and limitations of the proposed standard.
  3. 03Formulate recommendations for practical implementation and institutional adoption.
  4. 04Prepare a complete thesis draft for academic review.

Any public material will be separated from the confidential draft.

version 09 / 10v0.92027–2028 · planned

academic review & completion

Conclude the academic examination process before presenting the resulting standard as research-based.

expected outcome

Submitted MBA thesis and, where required, completed defence.

research journal
plannedreview & completion
tasks / work packages 05
  1. 01Incorporate permissible academic feedback and review the full manuscript.
  2. 02Carry out bibliographic, methodological and formal quality checks.
  3. 03Submit the final MBA thesis according to the university requirements.
  4. 04Prepare for and complete a defence if required.
  5. 05Clarify publication and reuse rights for the thesis and associated research material.

Submission or examination approval is not yet confirmed.

version 10 / 10v1.0 betaafter thesis completion · target

research-based beta release

Translate the research into a versioned, openly accessible beta for independent evaluation.

expected outcome

First openly documented research-informed GCS beta specification.

research journal
plannedopen beta
tasks / work packages 04
  1. 01Publish eligible research findings, methodology and documented limitations.
  2. 02Consolidate a provisional GCS rule specification based on the research findings.
  3. 03Release versioned documentation and an openly accessible beta reference.
  4. 04Prepare external academic review, technical integrations and university pilots.

A beta release is not DIN/ISO recognition or an institution-wide mandate.

community / ideas & perspectives

have an idea for what comes next?

Is there a citation problem GMS should investigate, a research perspective that is missing, or a practical challenge worth exploring? Community perspectives can help shape the questions behind GMS while scientific decisions remain evidence-based.

Share an idea