> Yeah, this seems to me an important question: it fundamentally changes > the meaning of a "dependent style" to include > processing override behavior.
A comment on the ticket mentions that potentially there could be a lot of styles created which differ only in this attribute. Are there any other attributes which this could happen with? Regards, Rob. On 15 March 2012 19:14, Bruce D'Arcus <[email protected]> wrote: > On Wed, Mar 14, 2012 at 10:27 PM, Rintze Zelle <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Tickets: >> >> Allow dependent styles to define an overriding default-locale value >> https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/issues/91 >> My opinion: would like to implement proposal as is >> My question: whether any CSL-implementators have problems with this, since >> information in dependent styles will start to affect how the independent >> parent style is rendered > > Yeah, this seems to me an important question: it fundamentally changes > the meaning of a "dependent style" to include processing override > behavior. I can see the value of this particular case, but do we > really want to go down this path now? > >> Create new terms for commonly used text strings >> https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/issues/90 >> My opinion: would like to add terms for "supra" and "available-at". I'm not >> yet convinced that any of the other candidates are popular enough to warrant >> a term. >> My question: what happens if a CSL 1.0.1 processor encounters a CSL 1.0.1 >> style calling a new term and only has a CSL 1.0 locale file which doesn't >> define the term? (CSL 1.0.1 should be backward-compatible) Would it make >> sense to have a hardcoded list with default term values in each CSL >> processor for CSL 1.0.1 terms? > > I support this change, but think implementers should tell us how > they're going to respond. > >> Add "page-range-format" option for OSCOLA >> https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/issues/84 >> My opinion: would like to implement proposal as is, although I'm still >> undecided about the best name of the attribute value. It's a bit nitpicky, >> but I prefer "minimum-two" over "minimal-two" ( >> http://forum.wordreference.com/showthread.php?t=935755 ) > > I agree with you. > >> Add a test condition context="citation" / context="bibliography" >> https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/issues/80 >> (probably will mostly be used in complex styles, which are less likely to be >> ever edited with a style editor) >> My opinion: would like to implement proposal > > I never understood this issue, but think I do now: > > It is to allow authors to define single macros that can define > behavior across the citation/bibliography divide. > > Is that right? > > If yes, this is another subtly big issue. Right now, citation and bib > configuration are strictly separate. This would change that. > > Pro: allows less verbose styles > Con: changes the essential logic of CSL, and potentially (?) could > lead to really confusing styles > Question: do the pros really outweigh the cons? > > Bruce > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > This SF email is sponsosred by: > Try Windows Azure free for 90 days Click Here > http://p.sf.net/sfu/sfd2d-msazure > _______________________________________________ > xbiblio-devel mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/xbiblio-devel ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ This SF email is sponsosred by: Try Windows Azure free for 90 days Click Here http://p.sf.net/sfu/sfd2d-msazure _______________________________________________ xbiblio-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/xbiblio-devel
