# "page" vs. "page"

**URL:** <https://discourse.citationstyles.org/t/page-vs-page/402>\
**Category:** CSL Development\
**Created:** [January 5, 2008, 8:25pm UTC](https://discourse.citationstyles.org/t/page-vs-page/402 "2008-01-05T20:25:38Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 2\
**Page:** 1

<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:** [January 5, 2008, 8:25pm UTC](https://discourse.citationstyles.org/t/page-vs-page/402/1 "2008-01-05T20:25:38Z")

</div>

I’ve long been bothered/confused by the use of the “page” variable to  
describe the page range for articles, book sections, and so forth, and  
also “page” as a locater for a cited location in an item.

Would there by any opposition to fixing this? I suppose the simple  
option is to just change the “page” variable to “pages” and make  
explicit in the schema annotation that this refers to begin and end  
pages for an item?

Bruce

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Simon\_Kornblith](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ce7236/32.png) [@Simon\_Kornblith](https://discourse.citationstyles.org/u/Simon_Kornblith)\
**Post date:** [January 6, 2008, 11:28pm UTC](https://discourse.citationstyles.org/t/page-vs-page/402/2 "2008-01-06T23:28:44Z")

</div>

There’s some possible confusion here, I agree, but the reason both the  
variable and locator are called “page” is that both correspond with  
the “page” term in locales.xml. If you have a strong preference for  
using different names, though, that’s fine too.

Simon