final version?

OK, I’m getting close to feeling I’m done with the CSL mods I want to
make (e.g. calling it 1.0).

Please let me know if you have any suggestions. Below is an example.
It’s about 30% or so more compact, with more features.

There are a couple issues to clear up, though:

  1. cs:locator-config is a little inconsistent with the other config
    elements (because it configures a caption, rather that a full
    replacement). [shrug]

  2. I have added cs:contributor to handle things like translators. But
    as I’ve looked into this, it can get a little tricky. For example, say
    you have an edited collected of someone’s original writings; like the
    Walter Benjamin book I just ordered. In that case, Benjamin is the
    primary creator, and the editors then are secondary contributors. E.g
    the hierarchy is somewhat conditional. Indeed, one might say editors
    are always secondary, but they serve as if they were primary in the
    absence of a proper author. Am not really sure how to deal with this
    one. One option is to just list some rules that implementers ought to
    follow; e.g. a hierarchy of contributorship.

I might also need to allow chained alterate-sortkeys: creator -->
contributor --> title.

<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?> <?oxygen RNGSchema="file:/Users/darcusb/projects/citeproc/schemas/ citationstyle.rnc" type="compact"?>

American Psychological Association

Bruce D’Arcus


Style for the American Psychological

<use-et_al min-authors=“6” use-first=“6” position=“first”/>
<use-et_al min-authors=“6” use-first=“1” position=“subsequent”/>

<use-et_al min-authors=“4” use-first=“3”/>


Primary Sources

Published Sources

Unpublished Sources

Secondary Sources

comments.html (8.04 KB)

Hi David,

I have looked up my Chicago based style guide regarding the handling
of editors. I have notice that these book are not good at providing a
set of principles or rules or rather that rules are somewhat arbitrary
and have exceptions. Anyway some relevant examples it discuses -

… an edited or translated work in which the author’s name is
mentioned in the tile. Here the author’s name as the first item is
omitted, although tit might properly be inserted even through it is
not on the title page -

  1. The works of Shakespear, ed Alexander Pope (London: printed for
    Jacob Tonson in the Stand, 1725), 6:20

Although the foregoing arrangement , which gives the editor’s name
following the title, is most commonly used for this kind of work, in a
paper dealing with the work of Pope it would be permissable to give
his name first, followed by ed.:

  1. Alexander Pope, ed. The works of Shakespear (London: printed for
    Jacob Tonson in the Stand, 1725), 6:20

Now these are Chicago ‘rules’ so they might not apply to APA.

Some styles do have these brain-dead details that were obviously
designed for people who manually create their references. I can’t help
but feel these are corner cases. Note that the first rule above is a
suggestion, rather than a requirement.

But these question remains how to deal with it in CSL? If this record
has been downloaded from the library and you do nothing to it ‘William
Shakespeare’ would appear as author. And you would not want to remove
William Shakespeare’ as author form you DB entry.

Correct. I wouldn’t feel bad if it rendered like this though.

It seems to me that you need some flags or settings with either, or
both, the document version of the database reference, or for
individual citations, like ‘Suppress Author’, ‘Place Editor as first
element’. I think you have expressed the desire to dispense with such
flags if possible.

Yes, just because I hate needless complexity, where the experience for
the 99% of standard cases get more complex to accommodate edge cases.

My goal is to get as far as we can get without relying on that, and
then only add it if it becomes a practical problem. These details would
probably be independent of CSL anyway.

Some options that do not use flags.

Allow the user to to modify the render-as field of Author for the
document version of the reference. This would generally just be copied
from the database Author field. If the user deletes the text so the
entry is blank. Have rule if render-as is blank do not insert the

However ‘Place Editor as first element’ seems to be a genuine user
selection for how they reference is formatted so I do not see how you
can escape the use of a user set flag.

Maybe. But I did explain there are options to avoid that. One is:

So if there is no author, it first looks for a contributor (like
editor). If that’s not there, it uses the title. That’s currently how
formatting of periodical articles is configured. If there is no
"author" it uses the periodical title instead (“New York Times”, say).

The other option is just an informal (but documented) rule in the