Citation same-year letter not working. OK in biblio

brazuca

Something weird hapenning. In-text citations are not showing with the correct letter, but the bibliography shows fine.

Not sure if it's code or the CSL engine. Any help? Here is the output (note the double "b", which is wrong:

(UN DESA, 2011a)
(UN DESA, 2011b)
(UN DESA, 2011b) <<<<WRONG

UN DESA (2011a), “World Economic Situation and Prospects 2011: Update as of mid-2011,” WESP, United Nations, mayo.
--- (2011b), “Monthly Briefing: World Economic Situation and Prospects,” Monthly Briefing, No. 30, United Nations, abril.
--- (2011c), World Economic Situation and Prospects 2011 (E.11.II.C.2), United Nations, enero. <<<<CORRECT


Here is the style: http://codepad.org/Fikn3pha


PS: the style works fine in the Reference Test Pane. Just not in Word.

adamsmith

It's probably worth to take a look at the field codes in the Word file to see if there's anything you can make sense of (I believe you toggle field codes with F9 or ctrl+F9 in Word). This doesn't sound like a citation style issue, esp. because your style validates.

Simon

This may be obvious, but have you tried clicking the Refresh button in the Zotero toolbar in Word? If that doesn't work, try closing and reopening Firefox and then clicking the Refresh button.

brazuca

The field codes don't reveal anything:
ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM {"citationID":"1t8sumh33k","citationItems":[{"uri":["http://zotero.org/groups/43781/items/7C36IJJD"]}]}}
ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM {"citationID":"5cptuhnii","citationItems":[{"uri":["http://zotero.org/groups/43781/items/GNJCHRIU"]}]}}
ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM {"citationID":"22em0sbdse","citationItems":[{"uri":["http://zotero.org/groups/43781/items/WXPNVTNU"]}]}}

All three have different references, and as I said, it works fine in the test pane in FF. Something borked with the Word Integration plugin?

brazuca

By the way, I'm running FF 5, and Word 2007. Any compatibility issues?

adamsmith

Huh, strange. Can you replicate that with just those three citations in a fresh Word document?
If so, export the citations as a Zotero RDF and put them as a public gist to gist.github.com so Simon and Frank can see if they can replicate that.

Out of curiosity - what happens if you change the citation style?

brazuca

I can replicate it in a fresh word doc.

I don't have access to gist from work (blocked, for my safety, aparently). Here it is in dropbox:
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/258390/Exported%20Items.rdf

The same error happens in Chicago (author-date). Not in AMA (which uses footnotes).
edit: it happens in all author-date styles.

adamsmith

OK, bump this if you don't get a reply by the end of the week - this is beyond my paygrade, but usually Frank and/or Simon are quick with these type of things.

fbennett

I can confirm there is a glitch. It seems that the suffixes are correctly assigned if the items are entered in bibliography order, but not if the last item added is in the middle of the sequence.

I'll get to the bottom of this. Please bear with for a bit.

(Edit [1]: This may be a side-effect of previewing. In a straight test of a broken insertion sequence outside of Zotero without previewing, the suffixes come out correct.)

(Edit [2]: Aha. The test framework is a little flakey on this, but it does show the cause of the problem. Happily it has nothing to do with previewing. The result of the third insertion is this:..[0] (UN DESA 2011b)
..[1] (UN DESA 2011c)
>>[2] (UN DESA 2011a)This shows the correct suffixes at positions [1] and [2], but that's a lie produced by a weakness in the test framework: the two dots before those entries indicate that they were not updated automatically when item [2] was inserted. So the actual values immediately after insertion would actually be like this:..[0] (UN DESA 2011a)
..[1] (UN DESA 2011b)
>>[2] (UN DESA 2011a)... which is what we see in the word processor. If I work out why those two entries are not updating, everything should come right.)

fbennett

Okay, I've applied a fix that definitely eliminates this problem, and made a processor release (version 1.0.202). When the new processor version makes its way into Zotero, this will clear up.

Thanks for the report -- this was an important fix.