Bruce, could you enlighten us about the current status of
options/attributes? Is this still under revision, or have you already made
up your mind? The particular questions I had in mind:
a) will there be global options (applying to both citation and
bibliography)?
b) will cs:option be removed and replaced by attributes?
c) how will the options/attributes be defined in the locales?
Rintze
Bruce, could you enlighten us about the current status of
options/attributes? Is this still under revision, or have you already made
up your mind?
I’ve made up my mind that our earlier choice was a bad design choice
(XML attributes ARE parameter key-values, so it’s silly to invent a
non-standard way to encode these), and that we should fix it now.
The particular questions I had in mind:
a) will there be global options (applying to both citation and
bibliography)?
If they’re appropriate, sure. Do you have any particular ideas in mind?
b) will cs:option be removed and replaced by attributes?
Yes.
c) how will the options/attributes be defined in the locales?
We chatted about this earlier, but I don’t recall the details. What
parameters would be appropriate for the locales?
Bruce
The particular questions I had in mind:
a) will there be global options (applying to both citation and
bibliography)?If they’re appropriate, sure. Do you have any particular ideas in mind?
With the date-order options gone, I think it would just be
“punctuation-in-quote” for now.
b) will cs:option be removed and replaced by attributes?
Yes.
c) how will the options/attributes be defined in the locales?
We chatted about this earlier, but I don’t recall the details. What
parameters would be appropriate for the locales?
Rintze
The particular questions I had in mind:
a) will there be global options (applying to both citation and
bibliography)?If they’re appropriate, sure. Do you have any particular ideas in mind?
With the date-order options gone, I think it would just be
“punctuation-in-quote” for now.
And maybe the page-range-collapse thing we’ve discussed recently?
b) will cs:option be removed and replaced by attributes?
Yes.
c) how will the options/attributes be defined in the locales?
We chatted about this earlier, but I don’t recall the details. What
parameters would be appropriate for the locales?Again, “punctuation-in-quote”. So perhaps:
n.d. --- would do the trick (the citation and bibliography-options in the style will be included as attributes in the cs:citation and cs:bibliography elements, right?)?
Yes. Feel free to add this if you have time.
Bruce
The particular questions I had in mind:
a) will there be global options (applying to both citation and
bibliography)?If they’re appropriate, sure. Do you have any particular ideas in mind?
With the date-order options gone, I think it would just be
“punctuation-in-quote” for now.And maybe the page-range-collapse thing we’ve discussed recently?
Yes, just saw that one when looking through the open tickets. So that makes
two.
b) will cs:option be removed and replaced by attributes?
Yes.
c) how will the options/attributes be defined in the locales?
We chatted about this earlier, but I don’t recall the details. What
parameters would be appropriate for the locales?Again, “punctuation-in-quote”. So perhaps:
n.d. --- would do the trick (the citation and bibliography-options in the stylewill
be included as attributes in the cs:citation and cs:bibliography
elements,
right?)?Yes. Feel free to add this if you have time.
I hope to add locale-validation this weekend.
Rintze
(warning: very long post, for a very small change)
I just thought this over, and I think we should more clearly separate
localized (“punctuation-in-quote”) from non-localized options
(“page-ranging”). Frank implemented the latter as a localized option (I
missed this in reviewing the patch,
XBib download | SourceForge.net), but I don’t think
that’s correct.
For non-localized global options, I think there is consensus to attach these
as attributes to the style’s root cs:style element. But for localized global
options, I previously proposed to use a cs:style element in the locale. I
now recognize this would be confusing, as people might think they are
allowed to specify the same option in the root style element of the style.
This is undesirable, because it would allow double declaration, e.g.:On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 10:32 PM, Bruce D’Arcus <@Bruce_D_Arcus1> wrote:
We chatted about this earlier, but I don’t recall the details. What
parameters would be appropriate for the locales?Again, “punctuation-in-quote”. So perhaps:
n.d. --- would do the trick (the citation and bibliography-options in the stylewill
be included as attributes in the cs:citation and cs:bibliography
elements,
right?)?Yes. Feel free to add this if you have time.
To reduce this confusion, I’d like to propose the following format for
localized global options:
We could also use “global-options” instead of “options”, so we can easily
extend support for localized options, e.g.:
Thoughts?
Rintze
We chatted about this earlier, but I don’t recall the details. What
parameters would be appropriate for the locales?Again, “punctuation-in-quote”. So perhaps:
n.d. --- would do the trick (the citation and bibliography-options in the style will be included as attributes in the cs:citation and cs:bibliography elements, right?)?Yes. Feel free to add this if you have time.
(warning: very long post, for a very small change)
I just thought this over, and I think we should more clearly separate
localized (“punctuation-in-quote”) from non-localized options
(“page-ranging”). Frank implemented the latter as a localized option (I
missed this in reviewing the patch,
XBib download | SourceForge.net), but I don’t think
that’s correct.For non-localized global options, I think there is consensus to attach these
as attributes to the style’s root cs:style element. But for localized global
options, I previously proposed to use a cs:style element in the locale. I
now recognize this would be confusing, as people might think they are
allowed to specify the same option in the root style element of the style.
This is undesirable, because it would allow double declaration, e.g.:
To reduce this confusion, I’d like to propose the following format for
localized global options:
We could also use “global-options” instead of “options”, so we can easily
extend support for localized options, e.g.:
Thoughts?
Looks good to me.