# Institutional authors

**URL:** <https://discourse.citationstyles.org/t/institutional-authors/856>\
**Category:** CSL Development\
**Created:** [June 3, 2010, 9:58pm UTC](https://discourse.citationstyles.org/t/institutional-authors/856 "2010-06-03T21:58:41Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 5\
**Page:** 1

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![panyasan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/8c91f0/32.png) [@panyasan](https://discourse.citationstyles.org/u/panyasan)\
**Post date:** [June 3, 2010, 9:58pm UTC](https://discourse.citationstyles.org/t/institutional-authors/856/1 "2010-06-03T21:58:41Z")

</div>

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](http://xbiblio-devel.2463403.n2.nabble.com/Institutional-authors-tp5137146p5137146.html)  
Sent from the xbiblio-devel mailing list archive at [Nabble.com](http://Nabble.com).

---

<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:** [June 3, 2010, 10:26pm UTC](https://discourse.citationstyles.org/t/institutional-authors/856/2 "2010-06-03T22:26:14Z")

</div>

> 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.

---

<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:** [June 3, 2010, 11:13pm UTC](https://discourse.citationstyles.org/t/institutional-authors/856/3 "2010-06-03T23:13:32Z")

</div>

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

---

<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:** [June 3, 2010, 11:21pm UTC](https://discourse.citationstyles.org/t/institutional-authors/856/4 "2010-06-03T23:21:06Z")

</div>

> > > 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.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Jerome\_Ron](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/43a26b/32.png) [@Jerome\_Ron](https://discourse.citationstyles.org/u/Jerome_Ron)\
**Post date:** [June 4, 2010, 1:03pm UTC](https://discourse.citationstyles.org/t/institutional-authors/856/5 "2010-06-04T13:03:33Z")

</div>

> > 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.