Citation Style Language

CSL 1.0.2 and 1.1 Development Window Open

I think there’s a short-term and a long-term dimension to this.


What you say makes sense, in part because it’s been close to a decade since we’ve had a release. So some people might have reasonably concluded development was at a standstill.

So going out of our way to update them would seem wise.

I’ve started a short summary to include in that material here, if @bwiernik and @Denis_Maier could help full this out a bit, particularly for 1.0.2.

The Tweet should obviously come from the CSL account.

Do you have contact info on those people? I don’t AFAIK.

I’ll fill that out now


No. I was hoping @Rintze_Zelle would be willing to dig out the ones he has (i.e. where people contacted him/ and I’m willing to do some quick searches, but I have no ambition to be comprehensive.

I’ve added a list of the terms, variables, etc. added in 1.0.2.

1 Like

Thanks for putting this together. The 1.0.2 preview looks ready to me? Can I/should I start “promoting” that (Twitter, Zotero forums)? If so, what’s the best format? Put on our blog or turn into a “Comments only” Word document?

Yes please.

I don’t have a strong opinion, but maybe link to a blog post on the csl site?

Unless we don’t really want that archived.

Could do a blog post announcement, but with a link to some document with a list of changes?

I think the google doc might give people a nice way to engage, so I’m leaning towards that (plus blog announcement) unless there are objections. Happy to set all that up.


Fine by me.

But I’d like us to settle on a firm, fairly short, deadline for any comments; ideally a week from today, or at most two weeks.

I’d get everything up by tonight. Then how about Sunday July 26 12pm ET as the comment deadline for 1.0.2?

That works for me.

We can then tag the release the following day, hopefully.


BTW, as I’ve been thinking about this, I had in mind there might be some delay between when development on a release finishes (when we tag the schemas), when the documentation and such is updated to reflect that, and when we formally announce.

To me they’re separate questions, that can happen on different time-frames.

Granted, we have been updating the spec as we’ve worked, so I don’t expect the lag to be large.

1 Like

Google doc here

Blog Post just went up here

Tweet and Zotero forums post to follow shortly. I hope everyone is OK with the text. I listed the three of you in alphabetical order of last names.

1 Like


“Blessed” reads a little weird to me. Perhaps “officially-supported”?

Yeah, I took that straight from the google doc. Is it “official,” “canonical,” “formally specified” or “officially supported”? (I’m not sure “supported” is the right term?)

Let’s just go with “official”

This being because pandoc has had an unofficial CSL YAML format for some time now

The “blessed” was my wording, but I was in a hurry, and I think I was looking for a not-too-assertive word, given pandoc’s implementation.

But I think with recent changes in the json schema, that’s less an issue.

“Official” is probably better.

1 Like

Let’s just go with “official”

OK, I just pushed that

Is there a timeline for branching/tagging 1.0.1 in the “styles” and “locales” repos and allowing 1.0.2 styles into their “master” branches? We should provide a time window to allow downstream clients to switch from “master” to a “1.0.1” branch if they’re not ready to move to 1.0.2.

No, I think we were deferring to you and Sebastian on that.

But I agree.

1 Like

Just a reminder that window for comments on 1.0.2 closely this Sunday night.

We made some adjustments based on comments already, but plan is to tag 1.0.2 on Monday if nothing else pops up.