Upgrade StorageSecondary vs. Source Literature: Two Different Citing Styles within a Document
This is an old discussion that has not been active in a long time. Before commenting here, you should strongly consider starting a new discussion instead. If you think the content of this discussion is still relevant, you can link to it from your new discussion.
http://citationstyles.org/downloads/specification.html#locale
http://www.zotero.org/support/dev/citation_styles/style_editing_step-by-step
https://github.com/citation-style-language/locales/blob/master/locales-de-DE.xml
I got the point to some extent... But I don't understand how can I edit the locale file? Through the test pane? I tried so, but there isn't any locale file (similar to the one with the German example) there under the style I want to modify (There is only the beginning line: <style xmlns="http://purl.org/net/xbiblio/csl" class="note" xml:lang="en">, and when I change the "en" to "de" then I get the German citations below, but there is no exact language file that I can modify). Do simply I don't have any idea where can I modify the language settings (locale or whatever...) for my Style.
I looked in the manual: http://citationstyles.org/downloads/specification.html#locale, but I still don't understand where the language file should stay...
<style xmlns="http://purl.org/net/xbiblio/csl" class="note" xml:lang="la">
<style>
<locale xmlns="http://purl.org/net/xbiblio/csl" version="1.0" xml:lang="la">
<style-options punctuation-in-quote="false"/>
(...)
The test pane is only for... testing purpose!
After this line
<style xmlns="http://purl.org/net/xbiblio/csl" version="1.0" class="note" default-locale="de-DE"Add something like that (with terms corresponding to your needs - here "in" and "page"):
<locale xml:lang="de">
<terms>
<term name="in">in</term>
<term name="page" form="short">
<single>p.</single>
<multiple>pp.</multiple>
</term>
</terms>
</locale>
Now, the first line you sent me doesn't show me any result (SyntaxError - illegal XML character). The first line in the file is:
<style xmlns="http://purl.org/net/xbiblio/csl" class="note" xml:lang="de-DE">
Than I pasted the whole file from: https://github.com/citation-style-language/locales/blob/master/locales-de-DE.xml (the german locale)
then changed the name to la-LA (for latin) (the first two lines):
<style xmlns="http://purl.org/net/xbiblio/csl" class="note" xml:lang="la-LA">
<locale xmlns="http://purl.org/net/xbiblio/csl" version="1.0" xml:lang="la-LA">
but then the output is the english locale... simply all the modifications between:
<locale xmlns="http://purl.org/net/xbiblio/csl" version="1.0" xml:lang="la-LA"> and </locale> are not recognized.
1) In the test pane, find the line
<style xmlns="http://purl.org/net/xbiblio/csl" class="note" xml:lang="de-DE">2) After this line, there should be an "inflo" block:
<info>blah blah blah</info>3) After this block, you will add your abbreviations:
<locale xml:lang="de"><terms>
<term name="in">dans</term>
<term name="page" form="short">
<single>p.</single>
<multiple>pp.</multiple>
</term>
</terms>
</locale>
In my example above, I decide to use "dans" instead of "in" and "p." as the single page abbreviation and "pp." as the multiple page abbreviation.
Try... And don't forget that everything you're doing in the test pane won't be saved. To save and install a style, follow these guidelines
<style xmlns="http://purl.org/net/xbiblio/csl" class="note" xml:lang="la">
and after </info> your example:
<locale xml:lang="la">
<terms>
<term name="in">dans</term>
<term name="page" form="short">
<single>p.</single>
<multiple>pp.</multiple>
</term>
</terms>
</locale>
But the output stays the same (the english version with "in" and without p. and pp.).
It is interesting that when I write de-DE in the first line - I get the german version automatically without any written locale stuff in the file.
I don't know if this is important, but I am modifying the Chicago style (full note with bibliography, no ibid, dev).
I'm not completely sure but you should replace
<style xmlns="http://purl.org/net/xbiblio/csl" class="note" xml:lang="de-DE">by
<style xmlns="http://purl.org/net/xbiblio/csl" class="note"(on a single line)default-locale="de-DE">
Explanation: "default-locale" tells the processor which language file should be used. In this example, that's German from Germany: "locales-de-DE.xml"
Step 3 in my last post lets you change some terms for your style. The processor will use in priority these terms, and then the "locales-de-DE.xml" terms.
From the specs:
I assumed that you need minor abbreviations change and that you were relying on de-DE. Use "en" if you're writing in English ("en-US" or "en-GB")
@michopop: Rintze will correct me if i'm wrong but that's not so different here.
<terms>
<locale xml:lang="de">
<term name="in">dans</term>
<term name="page" form="short">
<single>p</single>
<multiple>pp</multiple>
</term>
</locale>
</terms>
"terms" is before "locale". MHRA is a good example as Rintze said: http://www.zotero.org/styles/mhra
PS. Is there a possibility to create a new locales-xx-XX.xml with the Latin abbreviation pack? How could I do something like this? (for example on the basis of the existing German one)
But is it really needed? Rintze (and others csl devs)?
My workaround for now is, to use the note-field as a marker:
<layout suffix=".">
<choose>
<if variable="note">
<-- printed sources -->
...
</if>
<else>
<-- literature -->
...
</else>
</choose>
</layout>
But as always, workarounds suck. Using one specific entry type for sources does not work either: Sources can be printed in book sections, books, articles, on websites, ... So: Will there be a source-checkbox?
glad that someone reacted to my veeery late comment in this thread.
So you added a new item type in Zotero that only your citation style can handle - correct? That doesn't sound like a solution for someone that is proud of just having programmed the first citation style. Obviously there won't be a How to for this. Could you direct me to any documentation that could help me figure out how to do stuff like that?
Thanks,
Pepe
Otherwise you'lll just have to be patient - this is tricky to do. I'm still comfortable with a separate item type instead of a toggle. I don't see any reason why full metadata couldn't be saved - and cited when required by a citation style - or could the be one citation style that would require the same source cited in two different ways depending on context?
A seperate item type for sources won't work, I'm afraid: Sources - like literature - can be published in any number of ways. There are sources in conference papers, on websites, in booksections, in books, in joural articles, ... That might not be true for "classical works" (no one has ever seen an edition of Homer's Ilad in a journal article, I guess); they are printed in nice separate volumes with an introduction and that's it. But if you're dealing with charters from some little outback place in the 10th century, things get more complex than that. Basically, it would mean to introduce a "source"-version of every item type related to scholarly publishing.
As I have said before: I used to use LitLink, liked it, but it didn't work out between us. But it had that checkbox I now so desperately miss: Everything worked just fine when handling sources and literature with that.
Footnotes:
Bentley, Old World Encounters (1993).
Hodder, Human-thing entanglement (2011).
Bibliography:
Jerry H. Bentley, Old World Encounters. Cross-Cultural Contacts and Exchanges in Pre-Modern Times. New York 1993.
Ian Hodder, Human-thing entanglement: towards an integrated archaeological perspective, in: Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute, N.S. 17, 2011, 154–177.
Here are some examples for sources and documents - I'm afraid all of them in German or Latin:
1. edition in journal:
Footnotes:
Raccolta di documenti. Ed. Barsocchini, nr. 636, 379.
Urkunden zur Begründung der rechtlichen Verhältnisse Lucerns. Ed. Segesser / Schneller, nr. 1, 155.
7 interessante Urkunden, nr. 1, 375. [these charters don't even have an editor]
Bibliography:
7 interessante Urkunden von 1138-1512, in: Der Geschichtsfreund. Mitteilungen des Historischen Vereins der Fünf Orte 1, 1844, 375-388.
Raccolta di documenti per servire alla storia ecclesiastica lucchese. Ed. Domenico Barsocchini, in: Memorie e documenti per servire all’istoria del Ducato di Lucca 5.2, 1837, 1–646.
Urkunden zur Begründung der rechtlichen Verhältnisse Lucerns bis zum Ausgange der Murbachischen Herrschaft. Ed. Philipp Anton von Segesser / Joseph Schneller, in: Der Geschichtsfreund. Mitteilungen des Historischen Vereins der Fünf Orte 1, 1844, S. 155-217
2. edition as book sections:
Footnotes:
Antapodosis. Ed. Becker, lib. V, cap. 6, 133.
Ordinarius. Ed. Lohse, 412.
Bibliography:
Antapodosis. Ed. Joseph Becker, in: MGH SS rer. Germ. 41. Hannover 1915, 1–158. [This one is part of a series of editions - so just the name of the series and the number is given if the edition does not cover the whole volume]
Der Ordinarius von 1453. Ed. Tillmann Lohse, in: Tillmann Lohse, Die Dauer der Stiftung. Eine diachronisch vergleichende Geschichte des weltlichen Kollegiatstifts St. Simon und Judas in Goslar. (StiftungsGeschichten, Bd. 7) Berlin 2012, 383-468.
3. edition in book sections:
Footnotes:
Drei fahrende Florentiner. Ed. Israel, 104.
Bibliography:
Drei fahrende Florentiner und ein heiliger Bozner. Treviso, um 1350. Ed. Uwe Israel, Migration und Konflikt in italienischen Städten (1350–1500), in: Michael Borgolte u. a. (Hrsg.), Das europäische Mittelalter im Geflecht der Welt. Integrative und desintegrative Effekte von Migrationen. Berlin 2012, 103–119, 104-107.
4. edition as a book:
Footnotes:
Otto v. Freising, Chronik. Ed. Lammers / Schmidt, lib. I, cap. 7, 72.
Ottonis Chronica. Ed. Hofmeister, lib. I, cap. 7, 46.
Bibliography:
Otto Bischof von Freising, Chronik oder Die Geschichte der zwei Staaten. Ottonis Episcopi Frisingensis Chronica sive historia de duabus civitatibus. Ed. Walther Lammers, Übers. v. Adolf Schmidt. (Ausgewählte Quellen zur deutschen Geschichte des Mittelalters, Bd. 16.) Darmstadt 62011.
Ottonis Episcopi Frisingensis Chronica sive historia de duabus civitatibus. Ed. Adolf Hofmeister. (MGH SS rer. Germ. 45.) Hannover 1912, online: http://www.mgh.de/dmgh/resolving/MGH_SS_rer._Germ._45_S._II (Zugriff am 11.04.2011).
[Same series of editions as earlier, but now there's just one edition in the volume - so I have to give the title of the edition and indicate series and number in series in brackets]
The editors may be a little tricky - we don't have them for journal articles in Zotero and it would probably be hard to get them to print after the title in Zotero, but otherwise I don't really see how that wouldn't be possible already.
Max Weber, Die „Objektivität“ sozialwissenschaftlicher und sozialpolitischer Erkenntnis, in: Max Weber, Gesammelte Aufsätze zur Wissenschaftslehre. Hrsg. v. Johannes Winckelmann. Tübingen 71988, 146–214.
Winckelmann being the editor of Weber's works.
I know that most of that is posslible already, I wrote a CSL-style that does most of what I need (besides the works-editor-issue, I need reprints, but that is another issue and seems to be on the way). But sources in Journals need a source-editor and sources in book sections need a source-editor and a collection editor (see above, point 3.). Plus it's not really helpful to have a CSL-style that you need to change your whole library for: If I'd pass on this style, everybody using it would have to empty all the note-fields and write something in the note-fields of sources. Right now, I have well over 200 source-items in my library and I'm only just starting. So that can be a pain to do.
The distinction between a source editor and a collection editor already exists in CSL as editor (source editor) and editorial-director (collection editor). Adding these to more item types and including them in citation styles would not be a huge change.
Frank seems less worried about this, but to me it seems like a primary source toggle is both a huge amount of work to implement at all levels and in many ways a bit of a hack, so I'm not very happy with that option. If there are other ways to achieve the same result I'd much prefer those.
The distinciton between works and sources would work as well: a book section with an author, a book author (identical with the author - but I can't check for that, right?) and a collection editor would be a work in the works of the author. A book with an author and a collection editor would be the works of the author.
It also occured to me, that I'd need two different kinds of editor-entries anyway: How else could I make the distinction between Israel and Borgolte in my example under 3. (one being the source editor, the other being the collection editor)?
As for me, I'd be very happy with including CLS's distinction of editors in Zotero. You would have to allow entries for both sorts of editors for all the item types related to scholarly publishing. What would be the time frame for such a change? (Hard to say, I guess. But: A month? A year? Five years? Next release?)
Thanks so much for your patience!
While including the fields (together with many other additions to fields and item types) in the next version is a stated goal of Zotero, the time-frame is my personal judgment, based on past experience and no inside knowledge of Zotero's release plans.