John Benjamins edited volume style(s)?

  • edited March 6, 2020
    I wish you'd come back on these quicker, as I have to open a new Pull Request every time.

    Anyway, test outputs:

    webpage/blog (has the comma):

    Dockray, Heather. 2018. Lesbian couple paints house rainbow to troll homophobic neighbors. Mashable Blog (blog), 9 January 2018, <> (1 September 2018).

    article-journal (has a dot before the DOI):

    Campbell, John L. & Pedersen, Ove K. 2007. The varieties of capitalism and hybrid success. Comparative Political Studies 40(3): 307-32.

  • edited March 6, 2020
    Sorry about that. I just wanted to find time to sit down and study this to make sure all the details were right. But I'll reply faster if that helps you, didn't realize it was harder for you!


    Bobaljik, Jonathan D. & Wurmbrand, Susi. 2002. Notes on agreement in Itelmen. Linguistic Discovery 1(1)<>;
    Liberman, Mark. 2006. Uptalk is not HRT. Language Log, 28 March 2006, <>; (30 March 2006).

    As you can see, there's not spacing at all between the end of the journal volume and the beginning of the URL.

    If I understand the new changes correctly, that is because you attached the . spacing element to the DOI explicitly (as in your correct example), but a non-DOI URL doesn't have that. Can it just be added there too? If it's that simple, this will be done.

    Would it just be changing this line:
    <text variable="URL" prefix="&lt;" suffix="&gt;"/>
    To this?
    <text variable="URL" prefix=". &lt;" suffix="&gt;"/>
  • edited March 6, 2020
    (I know enough to poke around and make some changes for personal styles, but I'm not confident especially with changes this complicated so I really appreciate your help with this.)

    Actually, I think that was one step backward. There must be a distinction between journal articles (not "electronic source", no accessed date), and electronic sources (blogs, etc., with accessed date).

    For journal articles the spacer is supposed to be: ,
    For electronic sources: .

    So now you've added the single , back to everything, but it actually needs to vary based on that distinction.

    I thought the previous version was close, but now I see a problem:

    If you have a blog entry with a DOI (yes, unusual!), that will produce for example:
    Liberman, Mark. 2006. Uptalk is not HRT. Language Log, 28 March 2006, .
    That in itself isn't a practical/likely problem (it looks like something isn't setup right for the DOI there because it's lacking the angle brackets too). But what is a problem is that the delimiter is doubled in effect:
    , .

    If we go back to the previous version, and try my suggested change above, changing:
    <text variable="URL" prefix="&lt;" suffix="&gt;"/>
    <text variable="URL" prefix=". &lt;" suffix="&gt;"/>
    Then it does exactly the same thing: for non-DOI URLs it doubles that delimiter as , .

    Where is that delimiter coming from? I'm trying to trace that back in the code now myself, but I'm not seeing it. We need to replace that original comma with an alternating dot in the right context.

    (Again, sorry this style is so idiosyncratic. I wouldn't have designed it this way...)
  • Oh, minor correction: to add the angle brackets back onto the DOI it should be:
    <text variable="DOI" prefix=". &lt;"; suffix="&gt;"/>

    (Assuming we're using that variant of the code.)
  • (Just to say that testing for accessed date won't work. The expectation would be that anything that has a URL in Zotero has an accessed date, even if it's not displayed in a citation. )
    In the end, I stand by what I said earlier: this is an odd inconsistency in the style guide, so if this is too much trouble just uploading the current version would be acceptable, and the editors could fix commas if they wish.
    I'm not quite sure what "uploading" you're referring to. The style is already uploaded and available in its current iteration.
  • OK, if it's not possible to test for accessed date, then I'm not sure it's possible to precisely follow their guidelines. Let's just simplify it:

    Use the dot so that journal articles are correct, and in the much rarer event of citing a webpage (etc.) with access date, it can be fixed manually.

    Let's go back to the previous version before the quirks trying to fix this were introduced:

    From there, all that needs to change is the comma preceding the URL should always be a dot. If that can be fixed, let's consider this done.
  • edited June 23, 2021
    I'm returning to this after a break in the project during the pandemic. There is one change that should be made to the version in the repository. (I would do it myself but I'm not certain I wouldn't mess something up with the pull request.)

    <text macro="access" prefix=", "/>
    <text macro="access" prefix=". "/>

    This still produces a minor error according to the style guidelines but only for (rare) electronic sources, and this means that journal articles (which are much more frequently used) are correct. An electronic source comes out as:
    Liberman, Mark. 2006. Uptalk is not HRT. Language Log. 28 March 2006, <> (30 March 2006).
    And that's just fine. The period in "Language Log. 28 March 2006" should be a comma, but that's the same punctuation used elsewhere in the style as a period for journal articles. It's too much trouble to fix, and the editors can always make slight adjustments to electronic sources if needed, without creating problems for the much more frequent journal articles.

    Thank you!

    Update: one additional, final change (I've doubled checked everything now). This isn't specified in the style, but I assume DOI URLs should have angle brackets just like regular URLs. Change the following:
    <text variable="DOI" prefix=""/>
    <text variable="DOI" prefix="&lt;" suffix="&gt;"/>
    That should be all!
Sign In or Register to comment.