Hello,
I just saw some odd notations used for pages in references from a
report:
343-58
321-4
193-205
etc.
So all “irrelevant” digits from the end-page are not printed.
Should we add this as an option to CSL?
Johan—
http://www.johankool.nl/
One problem is the algorithms for shortening aren’t necessarily
simple, or consistent. Consider:
http://biglist.com/lists/xsl-list/archives/200408/msg01063.html
We could just have a shorten-range attribute somehow on the number
element, and then maybe allow different named algorithsm to be chosen
in a global option?
Bruce
I just saw some odd notations used for pages in references from a
report:343-58
321-4
193-205
etc.So all “irrelevant” digits from the end-page are not printed.
Should we add this as an option to CSL?
One problem is the algorithms for shortening aren’t necessarily
simple, or consistent. Consider:http://biglist.com/lists/xsl-list/archives/200408/msg01063.html
Ugh… Why do things always have to be so complicated in the world of
citations!?
We could just have a shorten-range attribute somehow on the number
element, and then maybe allow different named algorithsm to be chosen
in a global option?
Yeah, that sounds best.Op 3 jun 2008, om 15:54 heeft Bruce D’Arcus het volgende geschreven:
On Tue, Jun 3, 2008 at 9:30 AM, Johan Kool <@Johan_Kool2> > wrote:
Worth noting that I got that algorithm working in XSLT 2.0 with the
help of David Carlisle:
http://biglist.com/lists/xsl-list/archives/200408/msg01054.html
it ought to be easy to port that code to other languages.
Bruce