ntg-context - mailing list for ConTeXt users
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Rik Kabel <context@rik.users.panix.com>
To: mailing list for ConTeXt users <ntg-context@ntg.nl>
Subject: Re: combined / compressed / collapsed page and numbered citation references in bibliographies
Date: Sat, 12 Aug 2017 23:05:48 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <33e1751d-2899-b70f-fad5-1683cbf8c069@rik.users.panix.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170812203022.03b8ad21@zoo.hsd1.co.comcast.net>


[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1632 bytes --]

On 2017-08-12 22:30, Alan Braslau wrote:
> On Sat, 12 Aug 2017 20:32:17 -0400
> Rik Kabel <context@rik.users.panix.com> wrote:
>
>> I noticed that in bibliographies, page indexing combines runs of two
>> or more pages (pp. 150­–151), as does page number compression in
>> registers, while it takes three or more numbered citations to cause a
>> similar collapse (per the MKIV-Publications manual, page 38, I do not
>> have an example) for citation number references.
>>
>> Is there a way to change such compression minimums so that they can
>> be made consistent?
> What seems more logical to you?
> pp 150,151 or pp 150-151 - of course pp 150-152 makes perfect sense.
> [2,3] or [2-3] - of course [2-4] also makes sense.
>
> I prefer the first choices. ConTeXt registers do the second, and I do
> not know what led to that choice and if Hans would like to change it
> (or even make this a parameter).
>
> Alan

I am looking for consistency.

For page references, the bibliography subsystem gives:

  * pp. 1–2
  * pp. 1–3
  * p. 1 and p. 3

and numeric citations apparently produce:

  * [1,2]
  * [1–3]
  * [1,3]

while the index registers give:

  * 1–2
  * 1–3
  * 1, 3

Why is the ‘and’ needed in the bibliography page reference? One could 
also ask why the ‘p.’ and ‘pp.’, but in the more verbose setting of a 
bibliography, I can live with them.

As for the choice of two or more over three or more for compression, I 
can see arguments for each. A default and the ability to change it seems 
best, especially for bibliographic entries where publishers have 
overriding standards.

-- 
Rik

-- 
Rik


[-- Attachment #1.2: Type: text/html, Size: 2496 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 492 bytes --]

___________________________________________________________________________________
If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the Wiki!

maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
webpage  : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://context.aanhet.net
archive  : https://bitbucket.org/phg/context-mirror/commits/
wiki     : http://contextgarden.net
___________________________________________________________________________________

      reply	other threads:[~2017-08-13  3:05 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-08-13  0:32 Rik Kabel
2017-08-13  2:30 ` Alan Braslau
2017-08-13  3:05   ` Rik Kabel [this message]

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=33e1751d-2899-b70f-fad5-1683cbf8c069@rik.users.panix.com \
    --to=context@rik.users.panix.com \
    --cc=ntg-context@ntg.nl \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).