# collapsing by first author

**URL:** <https://discourse.citationstyles.org/t/collapsing-by-first-author/526>\
**Category:** CSL Development\
**Created:** [January 9, 2009, 4:37pm UTC](https://discourse.citationstyles.org/t/collapsing-by-first-author/526 "2009-01-09T16:37:42Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 20\
**Page:** 1

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Bruce\_D\_Arcus1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/4bbf92/32.png) [@Bruce\_D\_Arcus1](https://discourse.citationstyles.org/u/Bruce_D_Arcus1)\
**Post date:** [January 9, 2009, 4:37pm UTC](https://discourse.citationstyles.org/t/collapsing-by-first-author/526/1 "2009-01-09T16:37:42Z")

</div>

OK, another PITA case we need to consider:

[http://forums.zotero.org/discussion/5290/collapse-year-suffix/](http://forums.zotero.org/discussion/5290/collapse-year-suffix/)

Here, grouping for subsequent year-suffix generation happens not by  
the totality of the authors, but only by first author. E.g., you get:

Doe, J, M. Marshall and D Smith (2000) …  
Doe, J, N. Nash and D Small (2000) …

A citation like (Doe et al 2000a, b).

The easy solution on first look is just to add a new option; something like:

Thoughts?

Bruce

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Frank\_Bennett](https://yyz1.discourse-cdn.com/flex029/user_avatar/discourse.citationstyles.org/frank_bennett/32/198_2.png) [@Frank\_Bennett](https://discourse.citationstyles.org/u/Frank_Bennett)\
**Post date:** [January 9, 2009, 10:31pm UTC](https://discourse.citationstyles.org/t/collapsing-by-first-author/526/2 "2009-01-09T22:31:06Z")

</div>

> OK, another PITA case we need to consider:
> 
> [http://forums.zotero.org/discussion/5290/collapse-year-suffix/](http://forums.zotero.org/discussion/5290/collapse-year-suffix/)
> 
> Here, grouping for subsequent year-suffix generation happens not by  
> the totality of the authors, but only by first author. E.g., you get:
> 
> Doe, J, M. Marshall and D Smith (2000) …  
> Doe, J, N. Nash and D Small (2000) …
> 
> A citation like (Doe et al 2000a, b).
> 
> The easy solution on first look is just to add a new option; something like:
> 
> Thoughts?

A general solution for controlling the collapsing of cites would be  
welcome. For footnotes, the Bluebook gives this example of a first  
(full-form) citation:

Harlan F. Stone, The Equitable Rights and Liabilities of Strangers to  
a Contract (pts. 1 & 2), 18 Colum. L. Rev. 291 (1918), 19 Colum. L.  
Rev. 177 (1919).

Handling this would require awareness of the special relationship  
between the two discrete sources, but it would be nice to have  
flexible infrastructure ready to go when hierarchical relations come  
on stream. Not sure what the CSL would look like, but there are lots  
of these halfway-house short forms in Bluebook for neighbouring cites.  
This is just one of the hardest examples.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Bruce\_D\_Arcus1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/4bbf92/32.png) [@Bruce\_D\_Arcus1](https://discourse.citationstyles.org/u/Bruce_D_Arcus1)\
**Post date:** [January 10, 2009, 5:38pm UTC](https://discourse.citationstyles.org/t/collapsing-by-first-author/526/3 "2009-01-10T17:38:48Z")

</div>

> > OK, another PITA case we need to consider:
> > 
> > [http://forums.zotero.org/discussion/5290/collapse-year-suffix/](http://forums.zotero.org/discussion/5290/collapse-year-suffix/)
> > 
> > Here, grouping for subsequent year-suffix generation happens not by  
> > the totality of the authors, but only by first author. E.g., you get:
> > 
> > Doe, J, M. Marshall and D Smith (2000) …  
> > Doe, J, N. Nash and D Small (2000) …
> > 
> > A citation like (Doe et al 2000a, b).
> > 
> > The easy solution on first look is just to add a new option; something like:
> > 
> > Thoughts?
> 
> A general solution for controlling the collapsing of cites would be  
> welcome.

Well, the collapsing here is a really a separate issue. The more  
important point for this example is sorting and grouping of the  
reference list (upon which suffixes are generated) is based not on the  
entire author string, but only the first author. Granted, though,  
collapsing then depends on this sort of processing.

> For footnotes, the Bluebook gives this example of a first  
> (full-form) citation:
> 
> Harlan F. Stone, The Equitable Rights and Liabilities of Strangers to  
> a Contract (pts. 1 & 2), 18 Colum. L. Rev. 291 (1918), 19 Colum. L.  
> Rev. 177 (1919).
> 
> Handling this would require awareness of the special relationship  
> between the two discrete sources, but it would be nice to have  
> flexible infrastructure ready to go when hierarchical relations come  
> on stream. Not sure what the CSL would look like, but there are lots  
> of these halfway-house short forms in Bluebook for neighbouring cites.  
> This is just one of the hardest examples.

Am not following this example.

Bruce

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Frank\_Bennett](https://yyz1.discourse-cdn.com/flex029/user_avatar/discourse.citationstyles.org/frank_bennett/32/198_2.png) [@Frank\_Bennett](https://discourse.citationstyles.org/u/Frank_Bennett)\
**Post date:** [January 11, 2009, 1:10am UTC](https://discourse.citationstyles.org/t/collapsing-by-first-author/526/4 "2009-01-11T01:10:07Z")

</div>

[snip]

> > A general solution for controlling the collapsing of cites would be  
> > welcome.
> 
> Well, the collapsing here is a really a separate issue. The more  
> important point for this example is sorting and grouping of the  
> reference list (upon which suffixes are generated) is based not on the  
> entire author string, but only the first author. Granted, though,  
> collapsing then depends on this sort of processing.  
> [snip]
> 
> > Harlan F. Stone, The Equitable Rights and Liabilities of Strangers to  
> > a Contract (pts. 1 & 2), 18 Colum. L. Rev. 291 (1918), 19 Colum. L.  
> > Rev. 177 (1919).
> > 
> > Handling this would require awareness of the special relationship  
> > between the two discrete sources, but it would be nice to have  
> > flexible infrastructure ready to go when hierarchical relations come  
> > on stream. Not sure what the CSL would look like, but there are lots  
> > of these halfway-house short forms in Bluebook for neighbouring cites.  
> > This is just one of the hardest examples.
> 
> Am not following this example.

Ah, I gotcha. I was thinking footnotes, because I’m unfamiliar with  
key-to-bib styles. I jumped to the conclusion that this was about  
merging key references in the document proper.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Simon\_Kornblith](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ce7236/32.png) [@Simon\_Kornblith](https://discourse.citationstyles.org/u/Simon_Kornblith)\
**Post date:** [January 11, 2009, 10:38am UTC](https://discourse.citationstyles.org/t/collapsing-by-first-author/526/5 "2009-01-11T10:38:33Z")

</div>

Sounds like the best solution to me.

Simon

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Bruce\_D\_Arcus1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/4bbf92/32.png) [@Bruce\_D\_Arcus1](https://discourse.citationstyles.org/u/Bruce_D_Arcus1)\
**Post date:** [January 11, 2009, 5:19pm UTC](https://discourse.citationstyles.org/t/collapsing-by-first-author/526/6 "2009-01-11T17:19:23Z")

</div>

OK, I added this as a bibliography option (didn’t seem necessary for  
citation). Feel free to implement as time/resources permit.

## Sorting and grouping by author assumes by default that the string

includes the entire list

## of authors. This option allows you to instead use first author only.

group-by =  
element cs:option {  
attribute name { “group-by” },  
attribute value { “first-author” }  
}

Bruce

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Andrea\_Rossato1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/e47774/32.png) [@Andrea\_Rossato1](https://discourse.citationstyles.org/u/Andrea_Rossato1)\
**Post date:** [January 22, 2009, 5:57pm UTC](https://discourse.citationstyles.org/t/collapsing-by-first-author/526/7 "2009-01-22T17:57:33Z")

</div>

Sorry for this dumb question but it is not clear to me what this  
option is suppose to do: could you please give me a small example of  
usage (with the expected output)?

TIA

Andrea

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Bruce\_D\_Arcus1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/4bbf92/32.png) [@Bruce\_D\_Arcus1](https://discourse.citationstyles.org/u/Bruce_D_Arcus1)\
**Post date:** [January 22, 2009, 6:05pm UTC](https://discourse.citationstyles.org/t/collapsing-by-first-author/526/8 "2009-01-22T18:05:23Z")

</div>

If you have two references:

1. Doe, Jane and Steve Smith (1999)
2. Doe, Jane and Sam Jones (1999)

You might typically sort and group those as two separate “authors”; so  
in a bib list:

1. Doe, Jane and Sam Jones (1999)
2. Doe, Jane and Steve Smith (1999)

With this option, by contrast, you’d have:

1. Doe, Jane and Sam Jones (1999a)
2. Doe, Jane and Steve Smith (1999b)

Do you see what’s happening? You’re only sorting and grouping by the  
first author. Thus there is two in the group, and you add the  
year-suffix to both.

Bruce

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Andrea\_Rossato1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/e47774/32.png) [@Andrea\_Rossato1](https://discourse.citationstyles.org/u/Andrea_Rossato1)\
**Post date:** [January 22, 2009, 6:19pm UTC](https://discourse.citationstyles.org/t/collapsing-by-first-author/526/9 "2009-01-22T18:19:10Z")

</div>

Thank you.

This seems to be the easy part, though. What I do not entirely grasp  
is the interaction (if there is any) of this option with citation  
disambiguation rules (this is why I’d like to see an example of this  
option in action in a style). I suppose disambiguation with names and  
give names must be turned of, right?

Thanks again.

Andrea

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Bruce\_D\_Arcus1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/4bbf92/32.png) [@Bruce\_D\_Arcus1](https://discourse.citationstyles.org/u/Bruce_D_Arcus1)\
**Post date:** [January 22, 2009, 6:25pm UTC](https://discourse.citationstyles.org/t/collapsing-by-first-author/526/10 "2009-01-22T18:25:04Z")

</div>

See if the examples provided here clarify:

[http://forums.zotero.org/discussion/5290/collapse-year-suffix/](http://forums.zotero.org/discussion/5290/collapse-year-suffix/)

Bruce

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Frank\_Bennett](https://yyz1.discourse-cdn.com/flex029/user_avatar/discourse.citationstyles.org/frank_bennett/32/198_2.png) [@Frank\_Bennett](https://discourse.citationstyles.org/u/Frank_Bennett)\
**Post date:** [April 13, 2009, 5:23am UTC](https://discourse.citationstyles.org/t/collapsing-by-first-author/526/11 "2009-04-13T05:23:55Z")

</div>

> > This seems to be the easy part, though. What I do not entirely grasp  
> > is the interaction (if there is any) of this option with citation  
> > disambiguation rules (this is why I’d like to see an example of this  
> > option in action in a style). I suppose disambiguation with names and  
> > give names must be turned of, right?
> 
> See if the examples provided here clarify:
> 
> [http://forums.zotero.org/discussion/5290/collapse-year-suffix/](http://forums.zotero.org/discussion/5290/collapse-year-suffix/)

I’ve been looking ahead at the remaining items that I need to  
implement, and like Andrea I’m puzzled by the group-by option. I’ve  
read through this thread and the linked discussion, and it seems to me  
that it’s just not needed. The original Zotero forum poster said,

… i want this:  
Multi Citations  
B. Baur et al. 2000a; B. Baur, et al. 2000b

That’s standard disambiguation working, with only year-suffix turned  
on and with no collapsing enabled. The bibliography will probably  
provide a longer list of authors, but disambiguation is based on the  
citation keys, and these are ambiguous, so they get suffixes, and the  
suffixes will turn up in the bibliography as well. The poster’s  
actual problem, if you look back at his example, was just that his  
style had et-al-use-first set to 2 instead of 1.

I probably didn’t help this thread by diving in with a non-sequitur  
outburst of distraction about some next-generation Bluebook support  
arcana that I must have been jonesing about that day. The best way of  
making amends, I think, is to step forward now and suggest that  
group-by be deleted from the schema, since it seems to be a no-op.

Frank

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Frank\_Bennett](https://yyz1.discourse-cdn.com/flex029/user_avatar/discourse.citationstyles.org/frank_bennett/32/198_2.png) [@Frank\_Bennett](https://discourse.citationstyles.org/u/Frank_Bennett)\
**Post date:** [April 13, 2009, 11:32am UTC](https://discourse.citationstyles.org/t/collapsing-by-first-author/526/12 "2009-04-13T11:32:42Z")

</div>

> > > This seems to be the easy part, though. What I do not entirely grasp  
> > > is the interaction (if there is any) of this option with citation  
> > > disambiguation rules (this is why I’d like to see an example of this  
> > > option in action in a style). I suppose disambiguation with names and  
> > > give names must be turned of, right?
> > 
> > See if the examples provided here clarify:
> > 
> > [http://forums.zotero.org/discussion/5290/collapse-year-suffix/](http://forums.zotero.org/discussion/5290/collapse-year-suffix/)
> 
> I’ve been looking ahead at the remaining items that I need to  
> implement, and like Andrea I’m puzzled by the group-by option. I’ve  
> read through this thread and the linked discussion, and it seems to me  
> that it’s just not needed. The original Zotero forum poster said,
> 
> … i want this:  
> Multi Citations  
> B. Baur et al. 2000a; B. Baur, et al. 2000b
> 
> That’s standard disambiguation working, with only year-suffix turned  
> on and with no collapsing enabled. The bibliography will probably  
> provide a longer list of authors, but disambiguation is based on the  
> citation keys, and these are ambiguous, so they get suffixes, and the  
> suffixes will turn up in the bibliography as well. The poster’s  
> actual problem, if you look back at his example, was just that his  
> style had et-al-use-first set to 2 instead of 1.
> 
> I probably didn’t help this thread by diving in with a non-sequitur  
> outburst of distraction about some next-generation Bluebook support  
> arcana that I must have been jonesing about that day. The best way of  
> making amends, I think, is to step forward now and suggest that  
> group-by be deleted from the schema, since it seems to be a no-op.
> 
> Frank

One addendum to this. The poster did request _initial_ citations with  
multiple authors, which assign year-suffixes based on the first  
author. However, subsequent references were to include only the first  
author; the solution therefore would be just be to assure that the CSL  
processor uses the subsequent form for clash checking – that would be  
enough to handle this. Since subsequent forms typically remove  
information, they are the most likely to require disambiguation, so  
that should probably be the normal practice anyway. So again, I’m  
pretty sure this can be resolved without resort to a special option in  
CSL.

Frank

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Bruce\_D\_Arcus1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/4bbf92/32.png) [@Bruce\_D\_Arcus1](https://discourse.citationstyles.org/u/Bruce_D_Arcus1)\
**Post date:** [April 13, 2009, 1:04pm UTC](https://discourse.citationstyles.org/t/collapsing-by-first-author/526/13 "2009-04-13T13:04:19Z")

</div>

…

> I probably didn’t help this thread by diving in with a non-sequitur  
> outburst of distraction about some next-generation Bluebook support  
> arcana that I must have been jonesing about that day. The best way of  
> making amends, I think, is to step forward now and suggest that  
> group-by be deleted from the schema, since it seems to be a no-op.

I was obviously pretty sure that I was understanding the problem  
correctly when I added that option. While I could well have been wrong  
and it’s as simple as you suggest (which would be nice actually), I’m  
rather overwhelmed with other work ATM.

Any chance you could write a test that illustrates your point, using  
the specific example provided by that poster?

If it passes (e.g. generates the output the poster expects), then that  
proves your point, and we can remove it.

Bruce

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Frank\_Bennett](https://yyz1.discourse-cdn.com/flex029/user_avatar/discourse.citationstyles.org/frank_bennett/32/198_2.png) [@Frank\_Bennett](https://discourse.citationstyles.org/u/Frank_Bennett)\
**Post date:** [April 14, 2009, 3:42pm UTC](https://discourse.citationstyles.org/t/collapsing-by-first-author/526/14 "2009-04-14T15:42:45Z")

</div>

> …
> 
> > I probably didn’t help this thread by diving in with a non-sequitur  
> > outburst of distraction about some next-generation Bluebook support  
> > arcana that I must have been jonesing about that day. The best way of  
> > making amends, I think, is to step forward now and suggest that  
> > group-by be deleted from the schema, since it seems to be a no-op.
> 
> I was obviously pretty sure that I was understanding the problem  
> correctly when I added that option. While I could well have been wrong  
> and it’s as simple as you suggest (which would be nice actually), I’m  
> rather overwhelmed with other work ATM.
> 
> Any chance you could write a test that illustrates your point, using  
> the specific example provided by that poster?
> 
> If it passes (e.g. generates the output the poster expects), then that  
> proves your point, and we can remove it.

Here it is:

[XBib download | SourceForge.net](http://xbiblio.svn.sourceforge.net/viewvc/xbiblio/citeproc-js/branches/fbennett/std/humans/disambiguate_BasedOnEtAlSubsequent.txt?revision=919&view=markup)

Frank

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Frank\_Bennett](https://yyz1.discourse-cdn.com/flex029/user_avatar/discourse.citationstyles.org/frank_bennett/32/198_2.png) [@Frank\_Bennett](https://discourse.citationstyles.org/u/Frank_Bennett)\
**Post date:** [April 14, 2009, 3:43pm UTC](https://discourse.citationstyles.org/t/collapsing-by-first-author/526/15 "2009-04-14T15:43:08Z")

</div>

> …
> 
> > I probably didn’t help this thread by diving in with a non-sequitur  
> > outburst of distraction about some next-generation Bluebook support  
> > arcana that I must have been jonesing about that day. The best way of  
> > making amends, I think, is to step forward now and suggest that  
> > group-by be deleted from the schema, since it seems to be a no-op.
> 
> I was obviously pretty sure that I was understanding the problem  
> correctly when I added that option. While I could well have been wrong  
> and it’s as simple as you suggest (which would be nice actually), I’m  
> rather overwhelmed with other work ATM.
> 
> Any chance you could write a test that illustrates your point, using  
> the specific example provided by that poster?
> 
> If it passes (e.g. generates the output the poster expects), then that  
> proves your point, and we can remove it.

Here it is:

[XBib download | SourceForge.net](http://xbiblio.svn.sourceforge.net/viewvc/xbiblio/citeproc-js/branches/fbennett/std/humans/disambiguate_BasedOnEtAlSubsequent.txt?revision=919&view=markup)

Frank

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Bruce\_D\_Arcus1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/4bbf92/32.png) [@Bruce\_D\_Arcus1](https://discourse.citationstyles.org/u/Bruce_D_Arcus1)\
**Post date:** [April 15, 2009, 12:18am UTC](https://discourse.citationstyles.org/t/collapsing-by-first-author/526/16 "2009-04-15T00:18:30Z")

</div>

I’ll try to look at this soon, but in the meantime, I’m not sure the  
"page-range" key makes sense, given that it precludes non-contiguous  
values.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Frank\_Bennett](https://yyz1.discourse-cdn.com/flex029/user_avatar/discourse.citationstyles.org/frank_bennett/32/198_2.png) [@Frank\_Bennett](https://discourse.citationstyles.org/u/Frank_Bennett)\
**Post date:** [April 15, 2009, 2:28am UTC](https://discourse.citationstyles.org/t/collapsing-by-first-author/526/17 "2009-04-15T02:28:44Z")

</div>

> I’ll try to look at this soon, but in the meantime, I’m not sure the  
> “page-range” key makes sense, given that it precludes non-contiguous  
> values.

I agree. I was wondering what would happen with a newspaper article  
printed on page 1 that continues on page 12 …

For collapsing year-suffixes and citation-numbers, I’m working on an  
object that knows how to collapse with its neighbors. Maybe something  
like that would be useful for page numbers as well. If we get to a  
point where citation pinpoints are extracted directly from web pages  
(rather than being hand-written), the ability to re-format a list of  
numbers and number ranges dumped into the processor would come in  
handy.

Frank

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Bruce\_D\_Arcus1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/4bbf92/32.png) [@Bruce\_D\_Arcus1](https://discourse.citationstyles.org/u/Bruce_D_Arcus1)\
**Post date:** [April 15, 2009, 6:57pm UTC](https://discourse.citationstyles.org/t/collapsing-by-first-author/526/18 "2009-04-15T18:57:31Z")

</div>

…

> > Any chance you could write a test that illustrates your point, using  
> > the specific example provided by that poster?
> > 
> > If it passes (e.g. generates the output the poster expects), then that  
> > proves your point, and we can remove it.
> 
> Here it is:
> 
> [XBib download | SourceForge.net](http://xbiblio.svn.sourceforge.net/viewvc/xbiblio/citeproc-js/branches/fbennett/std/humans/disambiguate_BasedOnEtAlSubsequent.txt?revision=919&view=markup)

I’m a little lost (and pretty busy). Does this …

a) reflect the exact use case in that forum thread

b) pass with your code

c) show conclusively that we should remove the “group-by” attribute?

If it does, feel to remove the attribute yourself if you’re  
comfortable doing so.

Bruce

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Bruce\_D\_Arcus1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/4bbf92/32.png) [@Bruce\_D\_Arcus1](https://discourse.citationstyles.org/u/Bruce_D_Arcus1)\
**Post date:** [April 15, 2009, 7:41pm UTC](https://discourse.citationstyles.org/t/collapsing-by-first-author/526/19 "2009-04-15T19:41:19Z")

</div>

…

> > Any chance you could write a test that illustrates your point, using  
> > the specific example provided by that poster?
> > 
> > If it passes (e.g. generates the output the poster expects), then that  
> > proves your point, and we can remove it.
> 
> Here it is:
> 
> [XBib download | SourceForge.net](http://xbiblio.svn.sourceforge.net/viewvc/xbiblio/citeproc-js/branches/fbennett/std/humans/disambiguate_BasedOnEtAlSubsequent.txt?revision=919&view=markup)

I’m a little lost (and pretty busy). Does this …

a) reflect the exact use case in that forum thread

b) pass with your code, and thus …

c) show conclusively that we should remove the “group-by” attribute?

If it does, feel to remove the attribute yourself if you’re  
comfortable doing so.

Bruce

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Frank\_Bennett](https://yyz1.discourse-cdn.com/flex029/user_avatar/discourse.citationstyles.org/frank_bennett/32/198_2.png) [@Frank\_Bennett](https://discourse.citationstyles.org/u/Frank_Bennett)\
**Post date:** [April 17, 2009, 1:51am UTC](https://discourse.citationstyles.org/t/collapsing-by-first-author/526/20 "2009-04-17T01:51:17Z")

</div>

> …
> 
> > > Any chance you could write a test that illustrates your point, using  
> > > the specific example provided by that poster?
> > > 
> > > If it passes (e.g. generates the output the poster expects), then that  
> > > proves your point, and we can remove it.
> > 
> > Here it is:
> > 
> > [XBib download | SourceForge.net](http://xbiblio.svn.sourceforge.net/viewvc/xbiblio/citeproc-js/branches/fbennett/std/humans/disambiguate_BasedOnEtAlSubsequent.txt?revision=919&view=markup)
> 
> I’m a little lost (and pretty busy). Does this …
> 
> a) reflect the exact use case in that forum thread
> 
> b) pass with your code, and thus …
> 
> c) show conclusively that we should remove the “group-by” attribute?
> 
> If it does, feel to remove the attribute yourself if you’re  
> comfortable doing so.

Thanks, I’ve gone ahead and committed this change.

Frank