From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.comp.tex.context/98808 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Rik Kabel Newsgroups: gmane.comp.tex.context Subject: Re: combined / compressed / collapsed page and numbered citation references in bibliographies Date: Sat, 12 Aug 2017 23:05:48 -0400 Message-ID: <33e1751d-2899-b70f-fad5-1683cbf8c069@rik.users.panix.com> References: <89559774-31d0-1047-427d-6f93bd32b3a7@rik.users.panix.com> <20170812203022.03b8ad21@zoo.hsd1.co.comcast.net> Reply-To: mailing list for ConTeXt users NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============7938617049697399035==" X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1502593589 19448 195.159.176.226 (13 Aug 2017 03:06:29 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 13 Aug 2017 03:06:29 +0000 (UTC) User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.2.1 To: mailing list for ConTeXt users Original-X-From: ntg-context-bounces@ntg.nl Sun Aug 13 05:06:25 2017 Return-path: Envelope-to: gctc-ntg-context-518@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from zapf.boekplan.nl ([5.39.185.232] helo=zapf.ntg.nl) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1dgjEM-0004c4-MJ for gctc-ntg-context-518@m.gmane.org; Sun, 13 Aug 2017 05:06:22 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by zapf.ntg.nl (Postfix) with ESMTP id C193A87EB3; Sun, 13 Aug 2017 05:06:06 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at zapf.boekplan.nl Original-Received: from zapf.ntg.nl ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (zapf.ntg.nl [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id i8ceE8wLKtLb; Sun, 13 Aug 2017 05:06:04 +0200 (CEST) Original-Received: from zapf.ntg.nl (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by zapf.ntg.nl (Postfix) with ESMTP id 75DC687EB4; Sun, 13 Aug 2017 05:06:04 +0200 (CEST) Original-Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by zapf.ntg.nl (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6A08787EB1 for ; Sun, 13 Aug 2017 05:06:03 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at zapf.boekplan.nl Original-Received: from zapf.ntg.nl ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (zapf.ntg.nl [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id D9JzeIHUHeHS for ; Sun, 13 Aug 2017 05:06:02 +0200 (CEST) Original-Received: from mailbackend.panix.com (mailbackend.panix.com [166.84.1.89]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by zapf.ntg.nl (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 90BC587EB0 for ; Sun, 13 Aug 2017 05:05:51 +0200 (CEST) Original-Received: from [192.168.201.10] (cpe-24-194-22-135.nycap.res.rr.com [24.194.22.135]) by mailbackend.panix.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 1363B1A5F7 for ; Sat, 12 Aug 2017 23:05:50 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: <20170812203022.03b8ad21@zoo.hsd1.co.comcast.net> Content-Language: en-US X-BeenThere: ntg-context@ntg.nl X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.16 Precedence: list List-Id: mailing list for ConTeXt users List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: ntg-context-bounces@ntg.nl Original-Sender: "ntg-context" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.comp.tex.context:98808 Archived-At: This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --===============7938617049697399035== Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------69C454926000D4CBF9020593" Content-Language: en-US This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------69C454926000D4CBF9020593 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit On 2017-08-12 22:30, Alan Braslau wrote: > On Sat, 12 Aug 2017 20:32:17 -0400 > Rik Kabel 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 --------------69C454926000D4CBF9020593 Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
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

--------------69C454926000D4CBF9020593-- --===============7938617049697399035== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-Disposition: inline X19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19f X19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX18KSWYgeW91ciBxdWVzdGlvbiBpcyBvZiBpbnRlcmVz dCB0byBvdGhlcnMgYXMgd2VsbCwgcGxlYXNlIGFkZCBhbiBlbnRyeSB0byB0aGUgV2lraSEKCm1h aWxsaXN0IDogbnRnLWNvbnRleHRAbnRnLm5sIC8gaHR0cDovL3d3dy5udGcubmwvbWFpbG1hbi9s aXN0aW5mby9udGctY29udGV4dAp3ZWJwYWdlICA6IGh0dHA6Ly93d3cucHJhZ21hLWFkZS5ubCAv IGh0dHA6Ly9jb250ZXh0LmFhbmhldC5uZXQKYXJjaGl2ZSAgOiBodHRwczovL2JpdGJ1Y2tldC5v cmcvcGhnL2NvbnRleHQtbWlycm9yL2NvbW1pdHMvCndpa2kgICAgIDogaHR0cDovL2NvbnRleHRn YXJkZW4ubmV0Cl9fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19f X19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19f --===============7938617049697399035==--