# new pages

**URL:** <https://discourse.citationstyles.org/t/new-pages/31>\
**Category:** CSL Development\
**Created:** [December 23, 2004, 4:10pm UTC](https://discourse.citationstyles.org/t/new-pages/31 "2004-12-23T16:10:15Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 4\
**Page:** 1

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Bruce\_D\_Arcus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/f9ae1b/32.png) [@Bruce\_D\_Arcus](https://discourse.citationstyles.org/u/Bruce_D_Arcus)\
**Post date:** [December 23, 2004, 4:10pm UTC](https://discourse.citationstyles.org/t/new-pages/31/1 "2004-12-23T16:10:15Z")

</div>

FYI:

> **[Citation Style Language](https://citationstyles.org/)**
>
> CitationStyles.org, home of the Citation Style Language (CSL), a popular open XML-based language to describe the formatting of citations and bibliographies.

Bruce

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Johan\_Kool](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/43a26b/32.png) [@Johan\_Kool](https://discourse.citationstyles.org/u/Johan_Kool)\
**Post date:** [December 23, 2004, 4:35pm UTC](https://discourse.citationstyles.org/t/new-pages/31/2 "2004-12-23T16:35:03Z")

</div>

Hello!

There are a few things a bit unclear about the aim of this project. I  
understand that having a cite processor build with xslt is very useful.  
But how is it going to be used when done?

To have a DocBook as a source is nice, it’s xml and such and very rich.  
But this richness also makes that it is a lot of work to create decent  
output. If I look at the DSSSL stylesheet it is clear to me that it  
isn’t very trivial to write something that converts a DocBook file into  
something else. Will this project get incorporated in the DSSSL  
stylesheet somehow?

Another option would be to have the same output format as the input.  
Then a DocBook gets first to be processed by citeproc and then by DSSSL.  
Same for WordML files: it gets feed to citeproc as XML, citeproc writes  
out a new file which is in turn “written” to the screen/printer by Word.

Right now citeproc creates its own html, rtf etc., but since it likely  
never be able to fully render WordML or DocBook wouldn’t it be better to  
output a file in the same format, but with the citations all resolved  
and having the right form in the WordML or DocBook lingo?

Since this project is using DocBook NG I suppose that the original  
DocBook doesn’t have what it takes for what is wanted? Isn’t it a bit  
dangerous to rely on something that might or might not get into version 5?

Have any of you btw worked with the XMLmind DocBook Editor? It works  
really nice. Unfortunately is doesn’t swallow the biblioref tag… :-/  
Or have you been able to get it to do so?

Bye,

Johan

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Bruce\_D\_Arcus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/f9ae1b/32.png) [@Bruce\_D\_Arcus](https://discourse.citationstyles.org/u/Bruce_D_Arcus)\
**Post date:** [December 23, 2004, 5:05pm UTC](https://discourse.citationstyles.org/t/new-pages/31/3 "2004-12-23T17:05:55Z")

</div>

> Right now citeproc creates its own html, rtf etc., but since it likely  
> never be able to fully render WordML or DocBook wouldn’t it be better  
> to output a file in the same format, but with the citations all  
> resolved and having the right form in the WordML or DocBook lingo?

See the files in the xsl/document directory. They model how citeproc  
would be incorporated. So, I have every intention that one be able to  
add them to standard DocBook/TEI/etc. stylesheets. Norm Walsh and  
company are planning to refactor their stylesheets for XSLT 2.0 anyway.

Forget about DSSSL 😉

> Since this project is using DocBook NG I suppose that the original  
> DocBook doesn’t have what it takes for what is wanted? Isn’t it a bit  
> dangerous to rely on something that might or might not get into  
> version 5?

No. I’m confident v5 will look almost exactly like NG. I talk to Norm  
Walsh a fair bit.

Biblioref support is included in v4.4, BTW. I just don’t want to deal  
with legacy stuff right now, and it’s easier to handle documents that  
are namespaced (pre-NG are not).

Also, I find it easier to write my own stylesheets than to customize  
big stylesheet projects like DocBook.

> Have any of you btw worked with the XMLmind DocBook Editor? It works  
> really nice. Unfortunately is doesn’t swallow the biblioref tag… :-/  
> Or have you been able to get it to do so?

No, I use emacs nxml mode for writing, and oXygen for XSLT stuff.

Bruce

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Bruce\_D\_Arcus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/f9ae1b/32.png) [@Bruce\_D\_Arcus](https://discourse.citationstyles.org/u/Bruce_D_Arcus)\
**Post date:** [December 23, 2004, 5:14pm UTC](https://discourse.citationstyles.org/t/new-pages/31/4 "2004-12-23T17:14:56Z")

</div>

Oh, on this: XSLT has a mechanism to override default stylesheets. So,  
that’s basically what template like this would do:

\<xsl:template match=“db:citation”\>  
\<xsl:call-template name=“bib:format-citation”\>  
\<xsl:with-param name=“output-format” select=“latex”/\>  
\</xsl:call-template\>  
\</xsl:template\>

In that case, it would replace the default citation rendering code with  
CiteProc.

IMHO, it’s pretty elegant.

Bruce