cs-text in csl.rnc

Oops, meant for the list …---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Bruce D’Arcus
Date: Mon, Aug 4, 2008 at 9:45 PM
Subject: Re: cs-text in csl.rnc
To: Stephan Tolksdorf

On Mon, Aug 4, 2008 at 5:35 PM, Stephan Tolksdorf wrote:

I forgot to reply to this point. See lines 412 - 427 of the SVN version of
csl.rnc. If you rearrange the indentation you get

( (( (attribute variable { list { variables+ } } & delimiter)
> attribute macro { token }
> attribute point-locator { cs-terms.locator }
),
attribute form { “short” | “long” }?
)

( ##…

which makes it obvious that the attribute “form” can be used together with
"macro" or “point-locator”. Or am I missing something?

No, I missed that.

I’m trying to search through the list archives to confirm some of
this, but the search interface isn’t being that helpful …

WRT to the macro, I’m not 100% certain, but I recall this enables one
to pass the option to the macro. I think Simon proposed this on the
list at some point, and implemented it. It can be convenient in cases
where, for example, you have a macro that deals with locators, It
might use the long form by default (e.g. the bibliography), but the
short form in the citation.

I’m frankly drawing a blank on how form would be relevant to a point
locator. Does anyone else know, or is this in fact a bug in the
schema?

Bruce

which makes it obvious that the attribute “form” can be used together with
"macro" or “point-locator”. Or am I missing something?

No, I missed that.

I’m trying to search through the list archives to confirm some of
this, but the search interface isn’t being that helpful …

WRT to the macro, I’m not 100% certain, but I recall this enables one
to pass the option to the macro. I think Simon proposed this on the
list at some point, and implemented it. It can be convenient in cases
where, for example, you have a macro that deals with locators, It
might use the long form by default (e.g. the bibliography), but the
short form in the citation.

I’m frankly drawing a blank on how form would be relevant to a point
locator. Does anyone else know, or is this in fact a bug in the
schema?

The form attribute is indeed parsed by citeproc-hs for both <text

and but are not used.

Actually I don’t know what is supposed to do. I
seem not to be able to parse the comment:

A descriptor that locates sub-item content within a cited resource. Used

in some styles to indicate specific page numbers for excerpted

content, for example.

Any help?

Andrea

Actually I don’t know what is supposed to do. I
seem not to be able to parse the comment:

A descriptor that locates sub-item content within a cited resource. Used

in some styles to indicate specific page numbers for excerpted

content, for example.

Any help?

A long thread about this:

http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/message.php?msg_id=47C6AA89.2020105%40gmail.com

I don’t have time ATM to remind myself of the take-home point WRT to
this thread, but will try to get back to it later.

Bruce

If I get the thread right has the same meaning of
, but the second is for the bibliography and
the first for citations.

I was not able to understand why it was deemed necessary, though.
Judging from the zotero style collection it was not (it is not used as
far as my grep goes).

Andrea