Citation Style: Journal of Pollination Ecology

I have developed a style for the Open Access Journal 'Journal of Pollination Ecology'. I have posted the style here for others to use.
  • Simon - great!
    I would upload these to the Zotero repository if that's OK (technically, you gave your OK when you put in the CC license, but just making sure).
    A couple of small things:
    -the style doesn't validate: you have some stray dashes in the access macro.
    - Per convention, id and link should not include the .csl file extension
    - future coders will greatly appreciate if you include a link to the styleguide, marked with rel="documentation" in the info section.

    Let me know if you want to make these changes yourself or if you'd like me to do that before I upload the style, and, of course, thanks for contributing.
  • All issues fixed. I am happy to have this style and the 'Urban Habitats' style put into the repository. I posted here because that was what the wiki said casual contributors should do.
  • thanks, it's up
  • Adam,

    The editor of the journal asked me to make one correction, which I have on my webpage (default to long journal names rather than short). Can you please upload the corrected version?
  • done.
    Btw. - if you have any choice in the xml editor of your choice, the repository default for tab-indenting is two spaces. It's one click for me, so I don't mind, just thought I'd mention it.
  • Thanks Adam.

    I do have a choice in editor. I use to use XMLCopyEditor but it has now stopped working and I can't identify why.

    As I reused an existing CSL Style (ensuring I correctly attributed the original authors) and tried to conform to their formatting I am surprised by your comment. I think the issue is with tabs versus spaces. I only inserted spaces. Looking at the file with another text editor (rather than gEdit) shows where I have inserted spaces instead of tabs.

    What is the best XML editor for CSL files? Something that is also good at validation?
  • the tabs length is likely done automatically by the editor -
    I like emacs with xml mode, but it takes some getting used to. emacs has excellent validation.
    Notepad++ is a great editor, but doesn't validate RNG schemas as far as I know.
  • Notepad++ was my choice editor on Windows but it does not work on Linux very well despite supposedly working with Wine.

    Emacs huh. Brave man. This program has a steep learning curve and not very intuitive in my opinion. A lot of people swear by it (and probably swear at it). Thanks, I'll keep looking for a replacement XML Editor -- I did the rounds a few months ago and will try again.
  • emacs really isn't so bad - they've built in some concessions to normal people (e.g. you can turn on ctrl+x/c/v cut/copy/paste) and a lot of stuff you pick up - and the various modes are really nifty - I use emacs for R, LaTeX, Xml, and git...

    I'd actually prefer if gedit could do all of that, but while I love it as a plain text editor, it's advanced functions just aren't that great.
  • I just finished the rounds again and XML Mind Editor and Serna XML Editor are OK, but both have various license restrictions that get up my nose. So I will reluctantly reconsider emacs and see how I go.
Sign In or Register to comment.