Upgrade StorageCitation 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.
This is an old discussion that has not been active in a long time. Before commenting here, you should strongly consider starting a new discussion instead. If you think the content of this discussion is still relevant, you can link to it from your new discussion.
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.
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?
http://pap.fossworkflowguides.com/#zotero
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.
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?
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.
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.
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.