On 5/24/2021 22:12, Alan Braslau wrote:
On Mon, 24 May 2021 17:53:49 -0400
Rik Kabel <cont...@rik.users.panix.com> wrote:
This is intended. Or rather, it is a side-effect of the intended
behavior.
If you add an editor ("editor={Baz, Bar}") you will get something
like:
Foo, B. (1983). Title of the paper. In B. Baz (Ed.), /Booktitle/.
Author.
And if you then add a publisher ("publisher={Paymefirst}") you will
get:
Foo, B. (1983). Title of the paper. In B. Bar (Ed.), Booktitle.
Paymefirst.
The APA presumes that you have both an editor and a publisher for
pieces contained in other works. It calls for the use of the author
as publisher if no publisher is present. It is silent about what to
do if you have no editor.
It looks like a missing editor field should be caught. What should the
rule be?
Actually, @inproceedings should not be used without an editor - makes
no sense. If the author of the paper happens to be the editor, then the
.bib data file should define this with an editor= field.
We can change the behavior if a clear case can be made as to what
fallback would make sense. Keep in mind the dictum: "garbage in/garbage
out"...
Alan
For the case of works within works (inproceedings, inbook, incollection,
perhaps conference) I would think that the simplest solution is to
simply drop it, so that in the example above one would simply get:
Foo, B. (1983). Title of the paper. In /Booktitle/. Paymefirst.
Although I do think that, at least for inproceedings, lack of an editor
should at least be flagged. A simple compilation of works may have no
named editor, of I see no reason to require it for inbook or
incollection. Cheap publishers regularly put out such collections of
out-of-copyright works.
The implicit assumption that a work with no documented publisher is a
self-published work is not especially to my liking -- publishers may
have good reason to not identify themselves (think of the publishers of
the works of Spinoza and, in part, Voltaire) -- but I understand that
the APA thinks it important. Of course, if you cannot document the
publisher for an entry, you can explicitly list it as unknown or /sine
nomine/, as appropriate, to avoid the infelicity of having the author's
name just stuck in there.
--
Rik
___________________________________________________________________________________
If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the
Wiki!
maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
webpage : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://context.aanhet.net
archive : https://bitbucket.org/phg/context-mirror/commits/
wiki : http://contextgarden.net
___________________________________________________________________________________
