Bug? subsequent-author-substitute - label remains in bibliography
In the bibliography one can set the option
subsequent-author-substitute="----"
to replace the names of the author(s) with a string (e.g. "----") if more than one book of the same author(s) is in the bibliography.
IMHO this should work in the way that the contents of the <names> tag is replaced by the replacement string.
However, if there is a <label> in the <names> block, e.g.
<names variable="editor" suffix=": " font-style="italic">
<name name-as-sort-order="all" sort-separator=", " delimiter=" / "/>
<label form="short" prefix=" (" suffix=")"/>
</names>
then the label does not get replaced. It stays in the bibliography but looses all the formatting of the <names> tag.
To me that looks like a bug.
subsequent-author-substitute="----"
to replace the names of the author(s) with a string (e.g. "----") if more than one book of the same author(s) is in the bibliography.
IMHO this should work in the way that the contents of the <names> tag is replaced by the replacement string.
However, if there is a <label> in the <names> block, e.g.
<names variable="editor" suffix=": " font-style="italic">
<name name-as-sort-order="all" sort-separator=", " delimiter=" / "/>
<label form="short" prefix=" (" suffix=")"/>
</names>
then the label does not get replaced. It stays in the bibliography but looses all the formatting of the <names> tag.
To me that looks like a bug.
The fact that it does lose the formatting on the label is a bug -- but inheriting the formatting is rather tricky to do, IIRC, so I'm not sure how keen fbennett is going to be to fix this given that the workaround (simply also setting the formatting attribute on the label) is simple.
But even if we leave this question open, the current behavior is inconsistent:
formatting is applied for child labels in cs:names in regular cases
formatting is removed for child labels cs:names when subsequent-author-substitute kicks in.
One of these is clearly incorrect. I'd argue the second one. Do you disagree?
Meanwhile, I seem to be getting different results on different systems. An earlier version of the processor was behaving as you describe; but a newer installation is applying the formatting to the label in all cases (the behaviour that you favour). Not sure what the deal is, I'll post again when I've had time to look into it in more detail.
(We also have an open ticket to https://github.com/citation-style-language/documentation/pull/34, which seems to suggest adding a similar exception as we have for cs:layout to cs:group.)
So per the 1.0.1 spec, formatting attributes on cs:names should not affect affixes on the same element.
In general, I think it makes sense that any formatting set on a parent element affects all the output of a child element. So formatting on cs:names should probably cover the affixes on a child cs:label. I'm not sure we ever discussed how formatting should affect delimiters (I couldn't quickly dig up any discussion, at least).
I'd also say we should include group and other delimiters since those would commonly substitute affixes. Also <b>text</b>, <b>text</b> is just wrong. Less convinced on this latter point, though.