It literally says in your excerpt "if there are more than six, list only the first three, followed by “et al.”" in the bibliography and says that notes without bibliography should follow the bibliography rules for et al
Et Al after three authors for works with more than 6 is implied by "as in the bibliography" in 13.23 -- you're welcome to ask CMOS about this, they do answer emails, but I promise you adunning's interpretation is what the Manual intends. It would make no sense to list more authors in notes than in a bibliography, not would the Manual establish a third different et al rule.
Huh. We read that very differently! I just queried a scholarly editors group about how to read that. I'll let you know. (I may end up writing CMoS for clarification)
Adam, the scholarly editors group is equally divided on how to read that. I've submitted the question to the Chicago Q&A. I'll report back when and if they respond.
@rudyleon Thanks for following up on that. The Chicago editors typically respond to queries within a month. The styles follow official guidance as closely as the software allows; I’m happy to make adjustments if my interpretation is inaccurate.
I've recently been using CMOS styles to write a paper, for which I use Zettlr for the Markdown and Zotero (via BetterBibTeX) to handle the referencing. One can then export the markdown file via Zettlr's internal pandoc to generate a new format; I generally send it to Word, since that is what is requested. Zettlr allows you to use the Zotero style files to do the rendering.
I recently swapped from 17 to 18 and noticed that with the change to 18 (and the reverse-engineering of 17 mentioned in these fora), that some of the forms of referencing have stopped working, whereas they worked perfectly in the previous version (of 17).
Specifically, the text used to indicate a chapter in a ref (i.e., "chap.") no longer appears to work, whereas "part", "figure", "Table", etc all seem to.
I find this to be so in most of the styles I've tried: notes; notes-bibliography; shortened-notes-bibliography; etc.
Example: the reference written in markdown in Zettlr as
[@kocs19io, chap. 7]
would when exported render, correctly, under the older CMOS 17 style as
(Kocs 2019, chap. 7)
However, under CMOS 18 and the revised 17, it now renders as
So, I am wondering: is the new CMOS deprecating the "chap." designator, or is there possibly a typo/bug in the style files that handle the "chapter" referencing?
I ask because using, e.g., Harvard Cite Them Right style, does insert the "chap." text in the Matlock citation above.
The idea here is to meet the requirement in Chicago (CMOS 14.143–54), and many other styles, for complex locators that do not require a label. I wonder however whether the numeric detection is too likely to create undesirable results.
Upgrade Storage
pandocto generate a new format; I generally send it to Word, since that is what is requested. Zettlr allows you to use the Zotero style files to do the rendering.I recently swapped from 17 to 18 and noticed that with the change to 18 (and the reverse-engineering of 17 mentioned in these fora), that some of the forms of referencing have stopped working, whereas they worked perfectly in the previous version (of 17).
Specifically, the text used to indicate a chapter in a ref (i.e., "chap.") no longer appears to work, whereas "part", "figure", "Table", etc all seem to.
I find this to be so in most of the styles I've tried: notes; notes-bibliography; shortened-notes-bibliography; etc.
Example: the reference written in markdown in Zettlr as
[@kocs19io, chap. 7]
would when exported render, correctly, under the older CMOS 17 style as
(Kocs 2019, chap. 7)
However, under CMOS 18 and the revised 17, it now renders as
(Kocs 2019, 7).
Whereas, something like
[@matlock10si, chap. 1; @matlock24lbla, part III]
renders as
(Matlock 2010, 1; 2024, pt. III).
So, I am wondering: is the new CMOS deprecating the "chap." designator, or is there possibly a typo/bug in the style files that handle the "chapter" referencing?
I ask because using, e.g., Harvard Cite Them Right style, does insert the "chap." text in the Matlock citation above.
Anyone else notice this behaviour?
<else-if locator="chapter line verse" match="any"/>from the CSL file?Tried it in
shortened-notes-bibliographyand it worked!I just commented out the line.
https://github.com/jgm/citeproc/issues/166
The idea here is to meet the requirement in Chicago (CMOS 14.143–54), and many other styles, for complex locators that do not require a label. I wonder however whether the numeric detection is too likely to create undesirable results.