Re: Footnote with citations and multiple paragraphs using pandoc-citeproc

[Jesse Rosenthal <jrosenthal-4GNroTWusrE@public.gmane.org>]

John MacFarlane <jgm-TVLZxgkOlNX2fBVCVOL8/A@public.gmane.org> writes:
> The question is this:  in footnote styles, how SHOULD a citation that
> appears inside a note be formatted?  Clearly not as a footnote, but
> unfortunately beyond that the style won't give us guidance.  Should
> it be a separate sentence?  In parentheses?  In brackets?  These are
> all stylistic variations, but the style can't help us here because
> it's a note style.

Flipping through books from a number of presses with footnote styles on
my desk, the following seems to be the rule:

 1. A footnote containing only the citation should be identical to an
    @-citation. I.e, in a footnote style:

        foo.[^1]

        [^1]: [@dickens:dorrit, p. 15]

        ==

        foo [@dickens:dorrit, p. 15]

 2. A footnote containing the citation mixed in with other text should
    be separated from that text by a period. So

        foo. [^1]

        [^1]: "Blah blah blah" [@dickens:dorrit, p. 15].

        ==

        foo. [^1]

        [^1]: "Blah blah blah." Charles Dickens, _Little Dorrit_,
              ed. Stephen Wall and Helen Small (New York: Penguin,
              1998), 15.

    (or whatever) depending on the style.

  3. Anything else should be integrated into the text without 
     being set off by a period.

I would propose the following heuristic for distinguishing between (2) and
(3): if the citation is followed by a period, it should be set off by a
period, as in (2); if it isn't punctuation is left to the author.