Ibid. ambiguity

Ibid. ambiguity

[Denis Maier]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2983 bytes --]

Hey there,

I have recently posted a problem on github concerning pandoc-citeproc 
(https://github.com/jgm/pandoc-citeproc/issues/79) and I am just wondering 
if anybody else has run into that kind of problems, or if anyone has an 
idea how this can be solved.

The problem is that when using a citation style that supports "Ibid." (I am 
using "chicago-fullnote-bibliography") pandoc-citeproc produces ambiguous 
or wrong results. Consider this example:

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
---
references:
- id: a
  title: test
  author:
  - family: familyname
    given: givenname
  type: article-journal
  issued:
     year: 2014
...

Sentence 1. [@a]
Sentence 2.^[Many examples can be found in the Babylonian Talmud.]
Sentence 3. [@a]
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

After Sentence 3 the source is rendered as "Ibid.". It should print the 
normal citation instead since after sentence 2 we have another footnote. (A 
similar example in LibreOffice with Zotero works just fine. Is it possible 
that pandoc-citeproc does not take "near-note" into account?)

The same also applies for author-date styles that use "Ibid." if we enter a 
manual citation from a classical source like the bible between two 
identical sources:

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
---
references:
- id: a
  title: test
  author:
  - family: familyname
    given: givenname
  type: article-journal
  issued:
     year: 2014
...

Sentence [@a]. Sentence (see Exodus 1:1). Sentence 3 [@a].
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

==> Sentence (familyname, test). Sentence (see Exodus 1:1). Sentence 3 
(ibid.).

Looking at this more generally, the problem is that certain sources can not 
easily be rendered automatically. The rules for citing classical sources 
(like the bible, the talmud, the quran, other religious texts, texts from 
Greek and Roman antiquity) are often obscure, and can hardly be automated. 
So it is often more convenient to enter the reference manually. But this 
conflicts of course with automatically generated references.

In BibLaTeX there is a command "\mancite" that prevents the wrong "ibid.". 
Perhaps it might be feasible to implement something like this in 
pandoc-citeproc? If I am converting to LaTeX I could of course enter 
\mancite as a raw tex command. However, I'd prefer to be as independent of 
any particular output format as possible so suggestions that work also when 
going from markdown to odt or docx are highly appreciated.

Best,
Denis

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "pandoc-discuss" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to pandoc-discuss+unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFF+G/Ez6ZCGd0@public.gmane.org
To post to this group, send email to pandoc-discuss-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFF+G/Ez6ZCGd0@public.gmane.org
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/pandoc-discuss/5f1ba639-7d7c-49e1-b48f-5f7cba72f1dd%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 5220 bytes --]

Re: Ibid. ambiguity

[John MacFarlane]

Thanks for the bug report on github, which I saw.  I will try to
fix this when I can, but probably not in the very near future.
I am still trying to get on top of some of the old citeproc-hs
code.  There are still quite a few problems with disambiguation
in footnote styles, and this is related.  It will be solved in time.

+++ Denis Maier [Sep 02 14 08:07 ]:
>   Hey there,
>   I have recently posted a problem on github concerning pandoc-citeproc
>   (https://github.com/jgm/pandoc-citeproc/issues/79) and I am just
>   wondering if anybody else has run into that kind of problems, or if
>   anyone has an idea how this can be solved.
>   The problem is that when using a citation style that supports "Ibid."
>   (I am using "chicago-fullnote-bibliography") pandoc-citeproc produces
>   ambiguous or wrong results. Consider this example:
>   ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>   ---
>   references:
>   - id: a
>     title: test
>     author:
>     - family: familyname
>       given: givenname
>     type: article-journal
>     issued:
>        year: 2014
>   ...
>   Sentence 1. [@a]
>   Sentence 2.^[Many examples can be found in the Babylonian Talmud.]
>   Sentence 3. [@a]
>   ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>   After Sentence 3 the source is rendered as "Ibid.". It should print the
>   normal citation instead since after sentence 2 we have another
>   footnote. (A similar example in LibreOffice with Zotero works just
>   fine. Is it possible that pandoc-citeproc does not take "near-note"
>   into account?)
>   The same also applies for author-date styles that use "Ibid." if we
>   enter a manual citation from a classical source like the bible between
>   two identical sources:
>   ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>   ---
>   references:
>   - id: a
>     title: test
>     author:
>     - family: familyname
>       given: givenname
>     type: article-journal
>     issued:
>        year: 2014
>   ...
>   Sentence [@a]. Sentence (see Exodus 1:1). Sentence 3 [@a].
>   ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>   ==> Sentence (familyname, test). Sentence (see Exodus 1:1). Sentence 3
>   (ibid.).
>   Looking at this more generally, the problem is that certain sources can
>   not easily be rendered automatically. The rules for citing classical
>   sources (like the bible, the talmud, the quran, other religious texts,
>   texts from Greek and Roman antiquity) are often obscure, and can hardly
>   be automated. So it is often more convenient to enter the reference
>   manually. But this conflicts of course with automatically generated
>   references.
>   In BibLaTeX there is a command "\mancite" that prevents the wrong
>   "ibid.". Perhaps it might be feasible to implement something like this
>   in pandoc-citeproc? If I am converting to LaTeX I could of course enter
>   \mancite as a raw tex command. However, I'd prefer to be as independent
>   of any particular output format as possible so suggestions that work
>   also when going from markdown to odt or docx are highly appreciated.
>   Best,
>   Denis
>
>   --
>   You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>   Groups "pandoc-discuss" group.
>   To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
>   an email to [1]pandoc-discuss+unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFF+G/Ez6ZCGd0@public.gmane.org
>   To post to this group, send email to
>   [2]pandoc-discuss-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFF+G/Ez6ZCGd0@public.gmane.org
>   To view this discussion on the web visit
>   [3]https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/pandoc-discuss/5f1ba639-7d7c-49e1-
>   b48f-5f7cba72f1dd%40googlegroups.com.
>   For more options, visit [4]https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>
>References
>
>   1. mailto:pandoc-discuss+unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org
>   2. mailto:pandoc-discuss-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org
>   3. https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/pandoc-discuss/5f1ba639-7d7c-49e1-b48f-5f7cba72f1dd-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer
>   4. https://groups.google.com/d/optout

Re: Ibid. ambiguity

[Denis Maier]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 10344 bytes --]

Are there any news on this?

I have found a solution that works quite ok. I use a fake reference that I 
cite between two real references.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
---
references:
- id: a
  title: test
  author:
  - family: familyname
    given: givenname
  type: article-journal
  issued:
     year: 2014
- id: mancite
  title: !mancite!
...

Sentence 1. [@a]
Sentence 2.^[Some text in a footnote. @mancite]
Sentence 3. [@a]
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Then I use the following workflow:
1. Run pandoc on this file, create a new markdown file with resolved 
citations.
2. Use sed to get rid of the mancite-citations and the 
mancite-reference-entry in the bilbiography.
3. Run pandoc on this final file to create a pdf, docx, etc.

This works, but it is not elegant. One problem is that the sed replacement 
rules only apply to a given citation style.

Does anyone know a better solution? Perhaps a pandoc filter so that I don't 
need sed to clean up the file (one tool less involved)? 

And, is there a way to suppress certain entries in the bibliography?


Am Dienstag, 2. September 2014 19:48:49 UTC+2 schrieb John MacFarlane:
>
> Thanks for the bug report on github, which I saw.  I will try to 
> fix this when I can, but probably not in the very near future. 
> I am still trying to get on top of some of the old citeproc-hs 
> code.  There are still quite a few problems with disambiguation 
> in footnote styles, and this is related.  It will be solved in time. 
>
> +++ Denis Maier [Sep 02 14 08:07 ]: 
> >   Hey there, 
> >   I have recently posted a problem on github concerning pandoc-citeproc 
> >   (https://github.com/jgm/pandoc-citeproc/issues/79) and I am just 
> >   wondering if anybody else has run into that kind of problems, or if 
> >   anyone has an idea how this can be solved. 
> >   The problem is that when using a citation style that supports "Ibid." 
> >   (I am using "chicago-fullnote-bibliography") pandoc-citeproc produces 
> >   ambiguous or wrong results. Consider this example: 
> >   ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 
> >   --- 
> >   references: 
> >   - id: a 
> >     title: test 
> >     author: 
> >     - family: familyname 
> >       given: givenname 
> >     type: article-journal 
> >     issued: 
> >        year: 2014 
> >   ... 
> >   Sentence 1. [@a] 
> >   Sentence 2.^[Many examples can be found in the Babylonian Talmud.] 
> >   Sentence 3. [@a] 
> >   ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 
> >   After Sentence 3 the source is rendered as "Ibid.". It should print 
> the 
> >   normal citation instead since after sentence 2 we have another 
> >   footnote. (A similar example in LibreOffice with Zotero works just 
> >   fine. Is it possible that pandoc-citeproc does not take "near-note" 
> >   into account?) 
> >   The same also applies for author-date styles that use "Ibid." if we 
> >   enter a manual citation from a classical source like the bible between 
> >   two identical sources: 
> >   ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 
> >   --- 
> >   references: 
> >   - id: a 
> >     title: test 
> >     author: 
> >     - family: familyname 
> >       given: givenname 
> >     type: article-journal 
> >     issued: 
> >        year: 2014 
> >   ... 
> >   Sentence [@a]. Sentence (see Exodus 1:1). Sentence 3 [@a]. 
> >   ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 
> >   ==> Sentence (familyname, test). Sentence (see Exodus 1:1). Sentence 3 
> >   (ibid.). 
> >   Looking at this more generally, the problem is that certain sources 
> can 
> >   not easily be rendered automatically. The rules for citing classical 
> >   sources (like the bible, the talmud, the quran, other religious texts, 
> >   texts from Greek and Roman antiquity) are often obscure, and can 
> hardly 
> >   be automated. So it is often more convenient to enter the reference 
> >   manually. But this conflicts of course with automatically generated 
> >   references. 
> >   In BibLaTeX there is a command "\mancite" that prevents the wrong 
> >   "ibid.". Perhaps it might be feasible to implement something like this 
> >   in pandoc-citeproc? If I am converting to LaTeX I could of course 
> enter 
> >   \mancite as a raw tex command. However, I'd prefer to be as 
> independent 
> >   of any particular output format as possible so suggestions that work 
> >   also when going from markdown to odt or docx are highly appreciated. 
> >   Best, 
> >   Denis 
> > 
> >   -- 
> >   You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google 
> >   Groups "pandoc-discuss" group. 
> >   To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send 
> >   an email to [1]pandoc-discus...-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFF+G/Ez6ZCGd0@public.gmane.org 
> >   To post to this group, send email to 
> >   [2]pandoc-...-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFF+G/Ez6ZCGd0@public.gmane.org 
> >   To view this discussion on the web visit 
> >   [3]
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/pandoc-discuss/5f1ba639-7d7c-49e1- 
> >   b48f-5f7cba72f1dd%40googlegroups.com. 
> >   For more options, visit [4]https://groups.google.com/d/optout. 
> > 
> >References 
> > 
> >   1. mailto:pandoc-discuss+unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org 
> >   2. mailto:pandoc-...-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org 
> >   3. 
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/pandoc-discuss/5f1ba639-7d7c-49e1-b48f-5f7cba72f1dd-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer
>  
> >   4. https://groups.google.com/d/optout 


Am Dienstag, 2. September 2014 19:48:49 UTC+2 schrieb John MacFarlane:
>
> Thanks for the bug report on github, which I saw.  I will try to 
> fix this when I can, but probably not in the very near future. 
> I am still trying to get on top of some of the old citeproc-hs 
> code.  There are still quite a few problems with disambiguation 
> in footnote styles, and this is related.  It will be solved in time. 
>
> +++ Denis Maier [Sep 02 14 08:07 ]: 
> >   Hey there, 
> >   I have recently posted a problem on github concerning pandoc-citeproc 
> >   (https://github.com/jgm/pandoc-citeproc/issues/79) and I am just 
> >   wondering if anybody else has run into that kind of problems, or if 
> >   anyone has an idea how this can be solved. 
> >   The problem is that when using a citation style that supports "Ibid." 
> >   (I am using "chicago-fullnote-bibliography") pandoc-citeproc produces 
> >   ambiguous or wrong results. Consider this example: 
> >   ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 
> >   --- 
> >   references: 
> >   - id: a 
> >     title: test 
> >     author: 
> >     - family: familyname 
> >       given: givenname 
> >     type: article-journal 
> >     issued: 
> >        year: 2014 
> >   ... 
> >   Sentence 1. [@a] 
> >   Sentence 2.^[Many examples can be found in the Babylonian Talmud.] 
> >   Sentence 3. [@a] 
> >   ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 
> >   After Sentence 3 the source is rendered as "Ibid.". It should print 
> the 
> >   normal citation instead since after sentence 2 we have another 
> >   footnote. (A similar example in LibreOffice with Zotero works just 
> >   fine. Is it possible that pandoc-citeproc does not take "near-note" 
> >   into account?) 
> >   The same also applies for author-date styles that use "Ibid." if we 
> >   enter a manual citation from a classical source like the bible between 
> >   two identical sources: 
> >   ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 
> >   --- 
> >   references: 
> >   - id: a 
> >     title: test 
> >     author: 
> >     - family: familyname 
> >       given: givenname 
> >     type: article-journal 
> >     issued: 
> >        year: 2014 
> >   ... 
> >   Sentence [@a]. Sentence (see Exodus 1:1). Sentence 3 [@a]. 
> >   ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 
> >   ==> Sentence (familyname, test). Sentence (see Exodus 1:1). Sentence 3 
> >   (ibid.). 
> >   Looking at this more generally, the problem is that certain sources 
> can 
> >   not easily be rendered automatically. The rules for citing classical 
> >   sources (like the bible, the talmud, the quran, other religious texts, 
> >   texts from Greek and Roman antiquity) are often obscure, and can 
> hardly 
> >   be automated. So it is often more convenient to enter the reference 
> >   manually. But this conflicts of course with automatically generated 
> >   references. 
> >   In BibLaTeX there is a command "\mancite" that prevents the wrong 
> >   "ibid.". Perhaps it might be feasible to implement something like this 
> >   in pandoc-citeproc? If I am converting to LaTeX I could of course 
> enter 
> >   \mancite as a raw tex command. However, I'd prefer to be as 
> independent 
> >   of any particular output format as possible so suggestions that work 
> >   also when going from markdown to odt or docx are highly appreciated. 
> >   Best, 
> >   Denis 
> > 
> >   -- 
> >   You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google 
> >   Groups "pandoc-discuss" group. 
> >   To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send 
> >   an email to [1]pandoc-discus...-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org <javascript:>. 
> >   To post to this group, send email to 
> >   [2]pandoc-...-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org <javascript:>. 
> >   To view this discussion on the web visit 
> >   [3]
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/pandoc-discuss/5f1ba639-7d7c-49e1- 
> >   b48f-5f7cba72f1dd%40googlegroups.com. 
> >   For more options, visit [4]https://groups.google.com/d/optout. 
> > 
> >References 
> > 
> >   1. mailto:pandoc-discuss+unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org <javascript:> 
> >   2. mailto:pandoc-...-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org <javascript:> 
> >   3. 
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/pandoc-discuss/5f1ba639-7d7c-49e1-b48f-5f7cba72f1dd-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer 
> >   4. https://groups.google.com/d/optout 
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "pandoc-discuss" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to pandoc-discuss+unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFF+G/Ez6ZCGd0@public.gmane.org
To post to this group, send email to pandoc-discuss-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFF+G/Ez6ZCGd0@public.gmane.org
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/pandoc-discuss/2e01906a-5449-44cc-834c-3e87ef3c30a2%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[-- Attachment #1.2: Type: text/html, Size: 17231 bytes --]