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