Ibid: Comments vs. Non-Zotero Citations
"Zotero shouldn't use 'Ibid' when there are intervening non-Zotero footnotes"
This opens a new issue:
If every footnote is recognized as a citation, then it breaks the ibid.-connection to a previous cited work. That is a problem, because not every footnote contains a reference (it can be only a comment). Example:
1. Georgi Kapriev, “The Modern Study of Byzantine Philosophy,” Bulletin de philosophie Médiévale, no. 48 (2006): 8.
2. Ibid: 89.
Then a comment is added between and the result is:
1. Georgi Kapriev, “The Modern Study of Byzantine Philosophy,” Bulletin de philosophie Médiévale, no. 48 (2006): 8.
2. Blablabla comment.
3. Georgi Kapriev, “The Modern Study of Byzantine Philosophy,” Bulletin de philosophie Médiévale, no. 48 (2006): 89.
But it should be:
1. Georgi Kapriev, “The Modern Study of Byzantine Philosophy,” Bulletin de philosophie Médiévale, no. 48 (2006): 8.
2. Blablabla comment.
3. Ibid: 89.
So, the question is: how to distinguish between comments and manually added (non-zotero) citations, in order to have the "Ibid." after a comment and a full note after a non-zotero citation?
This opens a new issue:
If every footnote is recognized as a citation, then it breaks the ibid.-connection to a previous cited work. That is a problem, because not every footnote contains a reference (it can be only a comment). Example:
1. Georgi Kapriev, “The Modern Study of Byzantine Philosophy,” Bulletin de philosophie Médiévale, no. 48 (2006): 8.
2. Ibid: 89.
Then a comment is added between and the result is:
1. Georgi Kapriev, “The Modern Study of Byzantine Philosophy,” Bulletin de philosophie Médiévale, no. 48 (2006): 8.
2. Blablabla comment.
3. Georgi Kapriev, “The Modern Study of Byzantine Philosophy,” Bulletin de philosophie Médiévale, no. 48 (2006): 89.
But it should be:
1. Georgi Kapriev, “The Modern Study of Byzantine Philosophy,” Bulletin de philosophie Médiévale, no. 48 (2006): 8.
2. Blablabla comment.
3. Ibid: 89.
So, the question is: how to distinguish between comments and manually added (non-zotero) citations, in order to have the "Ibid." after a comment and a full note after a non-zotero citation?
I know Simon and Frank have said this is the case, but I couldn't find it anywhere in the specs
http://citationstyles.org/downloads/specification.html#choose
I don't understand - is there a solution for this issue at this moment? If yes - what are the options?
That's why you'd have to manually edit, which is what Frank refers to.
PS. At this point I am looking for a fast solution (improvisation...), because I have a deadline in less than 4 weeks for a 300 pages thesis. So I would appreciate any good idea how to solve the issue soon.
@michopop & adamsmith (and anyone else listening in), if you can confirm that skipping comment footnotes for purposes of ibid is always the right thing to do, I can introduce that behavior in the next processor release.
Sorry for not catching that earlier. It was late, plus [insert convincing excuse here].
(Edit: The CSL specification also seems to call for that behavior, so I'll go ahead and fix it, barring any objections or words of caution.)
And with that, Frank coming online is my sign that it's time for me to sign off for the night.
CMoS says:
"The abbreviation ibid. (from ibidem, “in the same place”) usually refers to a single work cited in the note immediately preceding." (14.29)
and they clearly count comments as notes (i.e. "substantive notes" (14.34)
That would suggest that the current status quo is correct.
@michopop: you can just keep doing what you're doing in Zotero. For your final production, I can provide you with a private variant of the client that behaves as you describe. Meanwhile, could you confirm with your institution or your supervisor that skipping comment notes for the purposes of ibid back-references is their firm convention? Many thanks for raising this, by the way; every iteration of these doubts and niggles makes Zotero a bit stronger.
Thank you a lot for the answer and the enthusiasm to solve the issue. I was sure that this is the standard, but after adamsmiths' comment, I would still prefer to ask once more before I confirm you that this is really the case. I will write again as soon as I have the answer.
There is still another Question that is connected to this one:
Within a combined reference/comment footnote I a combination of Zotero and manually added non-Zotero references, such as:
"Zotero-ref" ... "comment" ... "non-Zotero-ref" ... "comment" ... "the same Zotero-ref from the beginning"
I get the following result:
"Zotero-ref" ... "comment" ... "non-Zotero-ref" ... "comment" ... "ibid."
In this case the "ibid." refers to the first Zotero-refference, i.e. ignores the non-zotero content.
Is there a way to solve this problem, i.e. to make it possible for Zotero to recognize the non-Zotero item as a reference, and to give the full reference and not an "ibid."? (for ex. through a special character formating or something similar)