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

[Frank Bennett <biercenator-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3559 bytes --]

This has been a problem for the note styles forever. MLZ is starting to 
attract users in the legal domain, and I have had occasional reports of 
exactly this problem. Several users have suggested just removing terminal 
punctuation from the style altogether, but I've been reluctant to go the 
"big hammer" route in that way.

I finally moved on a solution that involves changes in MLZ and citeproc-js 
alone, without changes in the styles themselves. In a given document, the 
user is given the option of suppressing terminal punctuation on all 
citations. If selected, the option takes effect for all citation clusters 
(regardless of context), without possibility of override, but affects only 
note styles (class="note"). If the global option is *not* selected, 
terminal punctuation can be suppressed on individual citations. This seems 
to be satisfactory (the MLZ community is small, but there are active users 
in the pool and I haven't had any complaints).

The behaviour is MLZ is driven by manual user adjustments to the document 
and citation settings; it's not automagic because citeproc-js (running in 
MLZ at least) doesn't have access to enough of the document context. I 
suspect that it would hard to automate completely, though.

Frank Bennett


On Wednesday, October 1, 2014 9:14:14 AM UTC+9, Bruce D'Arcus wrote:
>
> On Saturday, September 27, 2014 12:20:07 AM UTC-4, John MacFarlane wrote:
>>
>> +++ hgv [Sep 26 14 14:43 ]: 
>> >A larger solution might be in giving up the ability of pandoc-citeproc 
>> to 
>> >produce either inline citations or note citations. I understand how 
>> useful 
>> >this is, but if it doesn't actually work for one side of it (notes), I 
>> >don't see the value. Of course, I only work with Chicago 
>> note-bibliography, 
>> >which is where my bias comes from. But it seems to be designed primarily 
>> >for those who work with Chicago author-date (and other inline styles), 
>> not 
>> >really those who use both extensively. But as I'm sure this would entail 
>> a 
>> >fair amount of work to just get back to where it is now, I understand 
>> the 
>> >downsides. 
>>
>> 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. 
>>
>> If this question could be answered, perhaps progress could be made. 
>>
>
> John (or anyone else interested in this issue) - have you checked how 
> citeproc-js (Zotero and such) deals with this? 
>
> This has been a known issue since the foundation of CSL (I distinctly 
> remember talking in terms of a distinction between "footnoted citations" 
> and "citations in footnotes" a long time ago), so I have to believe it's 
> been solved, even if I don't remember how. 
>

-- 
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/d62aab34-b6d9-4aa9-a961-0534e601987b%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 4340 bytes --]