Style Request Kunstgeschichte / Kunstwissenschaft (German)

2»
  • edited January 16, 2016
    Did you forget to share the version with comma?

    It is in line 201, right?
    Strangely this time I found the line right away. I gues that is why my name is blitzgneisserin :)
  • No, but I only included the comma in the in-text citation and forgot to copy it to the bibliography as well. The changes are submitted and should soon get accepted, cf. https://github.com/citation-style-language/styles/pull/1865 where you see the status live.
  • I think there is another problem: If there is a translated (and edited) book, zotero leaves out the translator (and editor) (none of the fields "autor", "translator" and "editor" is empty), at least in the footnote.
    But the interesting thing is that zotero does not leave out the translator resp. editor when using the style "Kritische Ausgabe" (on which "ZfK" is based).
    Btw: We need to fix this in "Infoclio German" (and "Journal für Kunstgeschichte") too.
  • Well, I think I fixed this:
    http://simona.bplaced.net/zotero/zeitschrift-fur-kunstgeschichte.csl
    Does this work?
    I am just not sure whether to put "ed. and transl. by" before or behind the collection. At the moment it is before.
    It was not quite easy for me though.
  • edited October 1, 2018
    @zuphilip I'm in the process of converting a document to docx format via pandoc, using 'zeitschrift-fur-kunstgeschichte.csl' for citations and the bibliography. So far it's working great.

    There's one quibble I have: When, say, a book has an "author", the respective family name will be printed first in the actual bibliography entry, followed by the given name. (This is as desired.)
    When, instead, the field "editor" is defined, their name will be printed in the order first name, last name.

    (Of course, the order should always be first name, last name in the actual citation in the text, which it is.)

    I find that a little bit inconsistent. Can I ask: Is this behavior intentional or a bug?

    PS: Thank you for implementing the style in the first place!
  • Looks right to me here (and in the style):

    Hancké, Bob et al. (Hg.), Beyond varieties of capitalism : Conflict, contradiction, and complementarities in the European economy, Oxford and New York 2007.


    Are you sure your input data are correctly formatted?
  • I copied & pasted the example from a GitHub commit (https://github.com/citation-style-language/styles/pull/1861) for the style:

    {
    "id": "http://zotero.org/users/96641/items/M75GBNTU",
    "type": "book",
    "title": "Geschichte, Bild, Museum. Zur Darstellung von Geschichte im Museum",
    "collection-title": "Museum der Museen",
    "collection-number": "1",
    "publisher": "Verlag",
    "publisher-place": "Köln",
    "event-place": "Köln",
    "editor": [
    {
    "family": "Fehr",
    "given": "Michael"
    },
    {
    "family": "Grohé",
    "given": "Stefan"
    }
    ],
    "issued": {
    "date-parts": [
    [
    "1989"
    ]
    ]
    }
    },

    which prints as (in both the citation and the bibliography) as

    Michael Fehr, Stefan Grohé, Geschichte, Bild, Museum. Zur Darstellung von Geschichte im Museum (Museum der Museen, 1), Köln 1989.

    (Granted, at this point I cannot rule that the behavior is an artifact of the conversion process via Pandoc...)
  • Yeah, that definitely looks like a conversion issue of some sort. It also doesn't label them as editors. What's your workflow exactly?
  • My actual goal is to convert an art history book written in LaTeX, which utilizes a biblatex style that adds non-standard fields, to docx.

    Pandoc can handle csl bibliography style files (and only those!) in general, so I figured the best workflow would be this:
    1. Convert the .bib file to .json via 'pandoc-citeproc' (https://github.com/jgm/pandoc-citeproc)
    2. Edit manually the non-standard entries typical for art historians (such as exhibition catalogues) so that they can be interpreted by 'zeitschrift-fur-kunstgeschichte.csl'
    3. Convert the .tex document to .docx via 'pandoc', utilizing the .json bibliography, which is possible in general in pandoc.

    Apparently the bug is in pandoc-citeproc then...
  • I'd certainly start by looking at step 1, yes. Can you see the JSON output?
  • I don't think step 1 is the suspect here, because for testing purposes I copied the above example directly into the json version of the test bibliography, and added a citation command to the tex file retroactively. So I suppose the JSON code as such is fine.

    The problem should be in step 3 then.
  • Hmm... I tried a different, yet similar CSL style file, namely 'acta-philosophica'. It also features citations with first name, last name; and bib entries with last name, first name.

    Here, pandoc's output is absolutely as intended. I'm wondering if the "error" when using 'zeitschrift-fur-kunstgeschichte' -- only in pandoc, not in word processors -- still might have something to do with its code...?

    Could somebody point out where the order of names is handled in the code? I have played around a bit and noticed that the bibliography entries list first names first if I remove 'name-as-sort-order="first"' in the 'author-bibliography' macro in 'zeitschrift-fur-kunstgeschichte.csl'; and when removing 'name-as-sort-order="all"' in the 'author-sort' macro in 'acta-philosophica.csl'. But it didn't get me any further in solving my problem.
  • It's set with name-as-sort-order="first" https://github.com/citation-style-language/styles/blob/master/zeitschrift-fur-kunstgeschichte.csl#L71

    Which is then applied to editors via substitute in line 76.

    The conditional wrap around that line isn't very common in CSL styles (though perfectly "legal" CSL), so that might trigger a citeproc-pandoc bug? Try taking it out if you don't care about that style's particular Encyclopedia behavior?

  • Thank you for the explanation.

    The style's encyclopedia behavior is the very reason I'm using it in the first place...

    You are right: If I play around and delete lines 74, 75, 77, 78, the bibliography entry for an edited book looks "correct". But then, not surprisingly, "entry-encyclopedia" entries are distorted.

    You write that the "conditional wrap around that line isn't very common in CSL styles" - can I ask if there's a more 'traditional' way to achieve the same thing? (Not asking for code, just the general approach.) If so, I might try to adapt the style accordingly.
  • Creating a separate author macro for encyclopedias and just switching between those two with
    if type="entry-encylopeda"
    else

    in the bibliography should definitely work in pandoc.

    I don't know if that's more standard as a way of achieving this, but it's definitely more standard code and I'd be surprised if it'd fail in pandoc.
  • I'd like to ask one more thing about 'zeitschrift-fur-kunstgeschichte.csl'.

    With type="book", I find that the fields volume and number-of-volumes are not parsed, and I'm not sure if it is intentional.

    For instance, the entry
    {
    "author": [
    {
    "family": "Boucher",
    "given": "Bruce"
    }
    ],
    "id": "Boucher1991",
    "issued": {
    "date-parts": [
    [
    1991
    ]
    ]
    },
    "number-of-volumes": "2",
    "publisher-place": "New Haven; London",
    "title": "The sculpture of jacopo sansovino",
    "type": "book"
    }

    is printed as
    Boucher, Bruce, The sculpture of jacopo sansovino, New Haven; London 1991.

    In contrast, I'd like the entry to be
    Boucher, Bruce, The sculpture of jacopo sansovino, 2 Bde., New Haven; London 1991.

    In the style file, for instance the field number-of-volumes shows up in the macro name="volume" for all entry types that are not journal articles: https://github.com/citation-style-language/styles/blob/e836c2d1e293acf4bce5892869d11b9e55f38d38/zeitschrift-fur-kunstgeschichte.csl#L111
    The macro is then called on line 182 for citations and line 291 for the bibliography: https://github.com/citation-style-language/styles/blob/e836c2d1e293acf4bce5892869d11b9e55f38d38/zeitschrift-fur-kunstgeschichte.csl#L291

    Am I wrong in thinking that these two calls should lead to volume/number of volumes being printed?

    Any help would be much appreciated.
  • It may well be that the style conceptually should print volume/number-of-volumes for books, but at least the way it's coded those are only printed for items with container-title -- check the conditional starting in l. 163 and l. 272
Sign In or Register to comment.