From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.text.pandoc/10807 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Denis Maier Newsgroups: gmane.text.pandoc Subject: Ibid. ambiguity Date: Tue, 2 Sep 2014 08:07:48 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <5f1ba639-7d7c-49e1-b48f-5f7cba72f1dd@googlegroups.com> Reply-To: pandoc-discuss-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_Part_1342_1218508734.1409670468490" X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1409670478 5920 80.91.229.3 (2 Sep 2014 15:07:58 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 2 Sep 2014 15:07:58 +0000 (UTC) To: pandoc-discuss-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org Original-X-From: pandoc-discuss+bncBCQOJL5Q2QMRBRF2S6QAKGQEXS2DG5Y-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org Tue Sep 02 17:07:51 2014 Return-path: Envelope-to: gtp-pandoc-discuss@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from mail-qa0-f62.google.com ([209.85.216.62]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1XOpgT-0003f8-Vf for gtp-pandoc-discuss@m.gmane.org; Tue, 02 Sep 2014 17:07:50 +0200 Original-Received: by mail-qa0-f62.google.com with SMTP id x12sf557098qac.27 for ; Tue, 02 Sep 2014 08:07:49 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlegroups.com; s=20120806; h=date:from:to:message-id:subject:mime-version:x-original-sender :reply-to:precedence:mailing-list:list-id:list-post:list-help :list-archive:sender:list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe:content-type; bh=WxrQwbcapo7gQnLu7uBGVUkeqT4RmP1wFN3NEAJ2sBE=; b=Dz1HxebSHZipd1zpzGPX9o/6WiLCUb7d2iC7QZEKaHLZJM73dx/8A5v2Yj9ei5ha5a GtRZEuQNCWseic0VEskZfLmhdGL2l0nHC0+NzT+3lP1D94ppQHgGWvnMmQj0rBbLhxH9 87Mqn5CqGdNb3rutZQI51B1O2ucFlsEen7d+T/YQWTEH+jw7ap3C4twYzNDLOrpdOqu5 Ed0/IEAPNK3+0W0zeOIF5w4ep4psS3LJ4/jQW1RVHRwSh9gV9Iza/N+KK4L22F5ZqN3w tDtiHYXFCEHK+eN7MfVX8yzPFEFJJcjIlfLfn1c36Z9/vhhQxB/dKduW975KH//P4KpZ toaw== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=date:from:to:message-id:subject:mime-version:x-original-sender :reply-to:precedence:mailing-list:list-id:list-post:list-help :list-archive:sender:list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe:content-type; bh=WxrQwbcapo7gQnLu7uBGVUkeqT4RmP1wFN3NEAJ2sBE=; b=fa0gAXdLX4TEilfl7hgRi/60GKCT0W7jYbjhULwfgZWR+ateuW5oXezcIxAH7ry2Hu EdRr8EPLEAr1Xg9JSSIM/njqOCCnkLYtKMxmzIU4i0UEU4fGRbYSwp/ChzvHDM/fu5ku EqDSuPt25wGpwF33fyYJIBNhZhklAA72/ADnxmb5BfoV4tYoqKQk2PYw5IVdQlbNXYLy bMkgOBKVzn1x4GghVO0Rdoa9b6vpmGLi5h+1Koiys2WbI3PdKRxK94CKWhzN717Kay3f gVtYxU1vNyLQTNQ8baxGkhAO5xdXI6+F2pBUAAW06KU6KJLzlMG8w8zHdS0MuhHuWCCw +9mg== X-Received: by 10.140.18.161 with SMTP id 30mr14354qgf.31.1409670469224; Tue, 02 Sep 2014 08:07:49 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: pandoc-discuss-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org Original-Received: by 10.140.107.70 with SMTP id g64ls1783412qgf.85.gmail; Tue, 02 Sep 2014 08:07:48 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 10.140.18.161 with SMTP id 30mr14353qgf.31.1409670468809; Tue, 02 Sep 2014 08:07:48 -0700 (PDT) X-Original-Sender: maier.de-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org Precedence: list Mailing-list: list pandoc-discuss-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org; contact pandoc-discuss+owners-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org List-ID: X-Google-Group-Id: 1007024079513 List-Post: , List-Help: , List-Archive: , List-Unsubscribe: , Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.text.pandoc:10807 Archived-At: ------=_Part_1342_1218508734.1409670468490 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 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. ------=_Part_1342_1218508734.1409670468490 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hey there,

I have recently posted= a problem on github concerning pandoc-citeproc (https://github.com/jgm/pan= doc-citeproc/issues/79) and I am just wondering if anybody else has run int= o 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 us= ing "chicago-fullnote-bibliography") pandoc-citeproc produces ambiguous or = wrong results. Consider this example:
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
= ---
references:
- id: a
  = title: test
  author:
  - family: familyname
    given: givenname
&nb= sp; type: article-journal
  issued:<= /font>
     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 pr= int the normal citation instead since after sentence 2 we have another foot= note. (A similar example in LibreOffice with Zotero works just fine. Is it = possible that pandoc-citeproc does not take "near-note" into account?)

The sa= me also applies for author-date styles that use "Ibid." if we enter a manua= l citation from a classical source like the bible between two identical sou= rces:

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
---
references:
- id: a
  title: test
  author:
  - family: familyname
  &n= bsp; given: givenname
  type: articl= e-journal
  issued:
     year: 2014
...

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

=3D=3D> 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 so= urces (like the bible, the talmud, the quran, other religious texts, texts = from Greek and Roman antiquity) are often obscure, and can hardly be automa= ted. So it is often more convenient to enter the reference manually. But th= is conflicts of course with automatically generated references.
<= br>
In BibLaTeX there is a command "\mancite" th= at prevents the wrong "ibid.". Perhaps it might be feasible to implement so= mething like this in pandoc-citeproc? If I am converting to LaTeX I could o= f 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.<= /font>

Be= st,
Denis

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &= quot;pandoc-discuss" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e= mail to pand= oc-discuss+unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org.
To post to this group, send email to pandoc-discuss-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@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.co= m.
For more options, visit http= s://groups.google.com/d/optout.
------=_Part_1342_1218508734.1409670468490--