Upgrade StorageImplementation of the Chicago Manual of Style, 18th edition
After six months of development and testing, I am delighted to announce a major update to the Citation Style Language (CSL) styles for the Chicago Manual of Style, available via the Zotero Style Repository. This rewrite is based on a close section-by-section reading of the 18th edition, significantly expanding the styles’ ability to process the information that CSL can collect. The styles can now produce sensible results for nearly every section of the Manual.
For full technical details, see the notes on changes by section available via GitHub.
Variants from previous editions that the 18th edition still allows have been grouped into “classic” legacy variants (not an official Chicago term).
Suppose that you wish to know how to cite a review correctly: Chicago has written a post on the difficulties that this type of citation presents. By searching the CMOS website, you can learn that the Manual covers this topic especially in 14.100 and 14.101. Searching for 14.100 in the Test Items Library will show several examples encoded from this section. In Zotero for desktop, it is also possible to add a Rights column to the display and sort by this to see the examples in the order of the Manual's categories, allowing you to see all the relevant examples from 14.100–102 together. This is especially valuable for citations that rely heavily on the Extra field.
For full technical details, see the notes on changes by section available via GitHub.
Main updates from the 17th to 18th edition
See Chicago’s What’s New in the 18th Edition page for a list of changes. Key differences for citations include:- Author limits: Up to six authors now appear in bibliographies, and up to two in notes or in-text citations accompanied by bibliographies. Notes-only styles differ from notes with bibliographies to accommodate a larger number of authors.
- Shortened notes: Subsequent citations of the same work are now shortened to author–title notes by default; other options include author-only, title-only, and “Ibid.”
- Journal dates: Months or seasons now appear in fewer circumstances, and not at all if there is a volume and issue, meaning that Chicago's critique of Zotero's date display is no longer a problem. The styles also now support ahead-of-print articles, supplements, special issues, and preprints.
- Books: The place of publication is no longer required, and page ranges are optional for book chapters. Use one of the "classic" variants available on the repository to retain these features.
- Bibliographies: Chicago no longer recommends the use of 3-em dashes, preferring to repeat the author’s name. The "classic" variants retain this feature.
Expanded variant coverage
The new CSL styles implement more than thirty official Chicago variants. There are four basic systems: in addition to the notes and bibliography and author–date systems, the Manual allows shortened author–title notes and notes without a bibliography. It also gives authors and editors leeway in many smaller details, such as the presentation of references without URLs.Variants from previous editions that the 18th edition still allows have been grouped into “classic” legacy variants (not an official Chicago term).
Working with the new styles
The styles are designed to match the examples in Chicago’s Citation Quick Guide and the full chapter 14 examples (freely searchable without a subscription). You can explore the variables that each citation type uses through the Zotero Test Items Library. Search for a CMOS section number to see examples encoded from it.Suppose that you wish to know how to cite a review correctly: Chicago has written a post on the difficulties that this type of citation presents. By searching the CMOS website, you can learn that the Manual covers this topic especially in 14.100 and 14.101. Searching for 14.100 in the Test Items Library will show several examples encoded from this section. In Zotero for desktop, it is also possible to add a Rights column to the display and sort by this to see the examples in the order of the Manual's categories, allowing you to see all the relevant examples from 14.100–102 together. This is especially valuable for citations that rely heavily on the Extra field.
New fields in future Zotero updates
These styles aim to support the full CSL specification. Although Zotero does not yet expose all CSL variables as fields in its interface, this implementation ensures that as new fields are added, Chicago styles will be able to take full advantage of them. For now, you can enter any CSL variable manually via the Extra field. As Zotero adds additional fields, these styles will immediately be able to do something useful with them.Supporting CSL development
CSL is a volunteer-run, open-source project separate from Zotero. If the Chicago styles support your work, you might consider:- sponsoring the CSL styles repository on GitHub;
- giving to the Bodleian Libraries, University of Oxford, without which none of my work would be possible;
- taking out a Zotero storage subscription, which sustains the development of the citation manager we all love.
I may be mistaken, but I think this misreads CMOS 18 slightly. According to 14.30 and 14.31, books published before 1900 should be place only (no publisher), while books published after 1900 should be publisher only (no place). Right now, Zotero is just omitting place from all books, regardless of publication date.
Thank you for having spent so much time and energy for the scientific/academic community in your free time!
My apologies if I missed this, but is there an option to include "ibid. in subsequent citations" with the classic variants? Right now, I only find a Chicago 18th ed. style with ibid. for the styles without classic variants. I (and I imagine others) would appreciate having "ibid." as an option with the classic variants styles, too (without having to edit the code ourselves). Thank you!
My thanks again to you and @dunning for taking on this monumental task. I rely on Zotero and therefore on your all's hard work. Cheers!
Can you please explain how to edit the fields used in references?
I am about to submit an article, and found out that some fields that I am using for 'library management', like (Location in Archive and Rights) are displayed in the references. This happens also for Books and Journal Articles (which do not have usually require Location in Archive and Rights). I tried to install earlier styles, but they seem to have been updated to include these fields as well.
Previously, an archival reference did not appear with journal articles and books, but this did not allow users to meet Chicago's requirements and was not consistent with other CSL styles. The Chicago Manual calls for citing database references for sources consulted online: in the 17th edition, see the examples in sections 14.161 (books) and 14.175 (journal articles). Unfortunately there is no way in CSL/Zotero to distinguish between database and archival references.
In any case, I think I would be among many others who would really appreciate it if you could create a Chicago style variant with ibid. and classic variations. Thank you very much for your work!
I was hoping to adapt this style to my faculty’s requirements using the CSL Visual Editor (https://editor.citationstyles.org/visualEditor/), but I noticed that the style hasn’t yet been added to the CSL GitHub repository or made available in the editor’s search.
I tried manually uploading the style via the Visual Editor, but it hangs indefinitely—likely due to new CSL features or complexity. Is there any plan to submit CMOS18 to the CSL repository so it becomes accessible via the Visual Editor?
Many thanks in advance!
There aren't any new features in the style that should cause problems -- how long did you let it hang?
I also tried breaking the style into smaller chunks and pasting those into the Code Editor. However, when switching to the Visual Editor, it seems to reject the incomplete code and defaults back to APA—likely because the CSL is not fully formed.
Appreciate any further suggestions or workarounds!
I've got a manuscript to submit to Journal of Law, Medicine, and Ethics. Their style guide says this:
ZOTERO
If you're using Zotero, the Chicago Manual of Style 18th edition (full note) should be
available by August 1. If you are submitting before August 1, use the format Chicago
Manual of Style 17th edition (full note). Please ensure Zotero has produced numbers
in your article text that correspond to numbered footnotes or endnotes before
submitting, as it is easy to accidentally produce an unnumbered bibliography or author-date citations instead.
From that paragraph, I believe that they are using Chicago 18 "notes and bibliography" system, rather than Chicago 18 "author-date" system.
Question: there are 30 results in the Zotero Style Repository style search for chicago 18 -- but none of them is labeled "(full note)." Do you have any idea what they might mean? I will also ask the journal.
Thanks!
Kate
First, many footnotes in my MS now carry the phrase "unpublished manuscript". Is there any way to remove this phrase? Examples include
ASG, Notai Antichi 944/VI, unpublished manuscript (docs. 19, 21, and 25, Pera, 20 August 1478 through 26 August 1479)
BAV, Reg. Lat. 548, unpublished manuscript, 143r
In both cases, readers already know what abbreviations I'm using, and already know that these are unpublished manuscripts. But my footnotes now contain about 400 instances of the phrase. Is there any way to eliminate this?
For the second, subsequent citations after the first now carry more than author's last name and short title - the translator and publisher are now showing up in subsequent citations. The problem seems to occur only if there is an editor or translator alongside an author (the citations for which there is only an author seem to be fine). For example:
First, an example of correct subsequent citation (even though no italics appear here, all are correct in the notes themselves):
Balletto, Liber, 329–30 (she is listed as editor, but there is no author or translator, and the subsequent citations look fine)
Examples of incorrect subsequent citations:
Doukas, Decline and Fall, trans. Magoulias (Wayne State University Press, 1975), 200–201.
The first citation correctly looks like this: Doukas, Decline and Fall of Byzantium to the Ottoman Turks: An Annotated Translation of Historia Turco-Byzantina, trans. Harry J. Magoulias (Wayne State University Press, 1975), 212
and
“Prima serie,” ed. Belgrano (Tipogr. del R. Istituto de’ Sordo-Muti, 1877), 259–72
The first citation slightly incorrectly looks like this: “Prima serie di documenti riguardanti la colonia di Pera,” in Atti della Società ligure di storia patria, ed. Luigi Tommaso Belgrano, 13 (fasc. II) (Tipogr. del R. Istituto de’ Sordo-Muti, 1877), 179
If there's only an editor or translator, they should appear first, whether in the first or subsequent citations. And there appears to be a glitch in subsequent citations which carry an editor or translator alongside an author. Publisher and year are incorrectly retained in subsequent citations, and editor or translator are often incorrectly retained as well.
I'm sorry for the long post. Any guidance you might have would be greatly appreciated!
2. Normally you will only see author–title subsequent citations, but the style will add extra details to disambiguate shortened notes. I would guess that you are citing more than one edition of Doukas, Decline and Fall; or perhaps you are simply citing two instances of a duplicated item in your library, in which case merging them should fix the problem.
3. There are some circumstances in which editors should appear in notes after the part of the title for which they are responsible, especially in multivolume works; see for example CMOS 14.24–26. In your case Atti della Società ligure di storia patria looks to me like a journal rather than a book section.
For the second, I'm definitely using only one version of Doukas's Decline and Fall, and the problem is widespread enough to just revert to a previous version. For the third, Atti della Società ligure di storia patria is indeed a hard thing to deal with. The problem with treating it as a journal is that it also functions as a series for monographs, so I've elected to treat a particular volume as an edited volume when there are multiple authors, and as a monograph when appropriate. Yet another reason for me to revert to a previous version. But I really appreciate your help!
But it is. IT IS!!! I love you Zotero people. So very much!!
BUT -- it only gives 3 authors and notes-no bib requires the first 6. Per 13.23.
(I tried to output all notes-bib styles as Bibliography as well as Notes and cannot get more than 3 authors. )
That additional comment was to clarify that there is no style in the set that puts out 6 authors. Including the (notes without bibliography) style, which requires the first 6 authors.
In a note that cites a book with more than two authors or editors (in previous editions it was more than three), list only the first author or editor, followed by “et al.” (Latin for “and others”). In the bibliography, list up to six authors; if there are more than six, list only the first three, followed by “et al.” (In a work with no bibliography, list up to six authors in the first, full citation in a note—as in a bibliography entry.)