Hi,
the “author” field has “family” and “given”, but what about insitutional
authors (for example, “World Bank” or “United Nations”)?
Thanks,
Christian–
View this message in context: http://xbiblio-devel.2463403.n2.nabble.com/Institutional-authors-tp5137146p5137146.html
Sent from the xbiblio-devel mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Hi,
the “author” field has “family” and “given”, but what about insitutional
authors (for example, “World Bank” or “United Nations”)?
This is one we should settle. In citeproc-js, either of two
conventions are accepted: (1) a “literal” sub-field (instead of
“family” and “given”; or (2) placing a value in the “family” sub-field
only, and leaving the “given” value nil.
It seems to me that one or the other of those should be specified, but not both.
FWIW, my preference is for, in addition to the family/given stuff, a
single “name” key/property, which by definition is an unparsed name;
typically most appropriate for institutional authors names.
It’s consistent, and more direct (“literal” is rather technical language).
Bruce
Hi,
the “author” field has “family” and “given”, but what about insitutional
authors (for example, “World Bank” or “United Nations”)?This is one we should settle. In citeproc-js, either of two
conventions are accepted: (1) a “literal” sub-field (instead of
“family” and “given”; or (2) placing a value in the “family” sub-field
only, and leaving the “given” value nil.It seems to me that one or the other of those should be specified, but not both.
FWIW, my preference is for, in addition to the family/given stuff, a
single “name” key/property, which by definition is an unparsed name;
typically most appropriate for institutional authors names.It’s consistent, and more direct (“literal” is rather technical language).
Would be happy with that, too. In the citeproc-js manual, I could
indicate that all three methods are recognized, but (if the CSL spec
goes with it) that “name” is preferred, and the other methods are
deprecated. Adjusting the processor code would be trivial to do.
FWIW, my preference is for, in addition to the family/given stuff, a
single “name” key/property, which by definition is an unparsed name;
typically most appropriate for institutional authors names.It’s consistent, and more direct (“literal” is rather technical
language).Would be happy with that, too. In the citeproc-js manual, I could
indicate that all three methods are recognized, but (if the CSL spec
goes with it) that “name” is preferred, and the other methods are
deprecated. Adjusting the processor code would be trivial to do.
1+
That’s exactly what I do in my database schema as well. I have a “fullname” field which captures the “literal” string and if the author name is NOT defined as an institution, it is also parsed into “firstname”, “lastname” and “initial” fields.
Ron.