# Some terms that would be useful

**URL:** <https://discourse.citationstyles.org/t/some-terms-that-would-be-useful/340>\
**Category:** CSL Development\
**Created:** [November 3, 2007, 10:41pm UTC](https://discourse.citationstyles.org/t/some-terms-that-would-be-useful/340 "2007-11-03T22:41:45Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 2\
**Page:** 1

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Julian\_Onions](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/958977/32.png) [@Julian\_Onions](https://discourse.citationstyles.org/u/Julian_Onions)\
**Post date:** [November 3, 2007, 10:41pm UTC](https://discourse.citationstyles.org/t/some-terms-that-would-be-useful/340/1 "2007-11-03T22:41:45Z")

</div>

Some term comments.

Not sure if it can be done currently, but at least one variant of Harvard  
format wants page numbers always with the p prefix (so not pps if there is a  
range). Currently I dispense with the  
  
and just use a prefix p - if might be useful to have an option to force  
singular on things like this (assuming it isn’t already). Similarly for  
editor “eds” - some just want “ed” no matter how many editors.

Oh - Quick question, not sure if its an issue, but one example I looked at  
had 4 authors and 6 editors, and the rules weren’t clear if the et. al. rule  
kicked in at the same number. It might be that some weird format wants 2  
authors before the et al, but 4 editors before et. al. Probably too weird to  
worry about though.

Another couple of terms that I haven’t seen around are  
ed - for edition - as in 3rd ed – this one is perhaps marginal as you can  
include it in the database. You get into trouble with things like an edition  
variable of 3 and needing to format it as “3rd ed.” perhaps.   
or some such might be worth thinking about?  
Vol - for volume - as in Vol. 3 - might be similar rules to edition.

e.g. from AMA style including both these:  
Johannsen EC, Madoff LC. Infections of the liver and biliary system. In:  
Mandell GL, Bennett JC, Dolin R, eds. Mandell, Douglas, and Bennett’s:  
Principles and Practice of Infectious Disease. Vol 1. 6th ed. Philadelphia,  
PA: Elsevier; 2005:951-952.

Anon and n.d. I think I mentioned before.

Available at: is required in the APSA format for URLs

If you really want to go to town, there are a load of terms in  
[http://www.leeds.ac.uk/library/training/referencing/harvard.htm](http://www.leeds.ac.uk/library/training/referencing/harvard.htm)  
that are explicit. I admit I ignored most of them.  
Available from World Wide Web: [manuscript] CD-ROM [performance viewed…]  
[video for television transmission] etc etc.

Julian.

---

<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:** [November 4, 2007, 9:46pm UTC](https://discourse.citationstyles.org/t/some-terms-that-would-be-useful/340/2 "2007-11-04T21:46:15Z")

</div>

For p. vs pp.:

(I think that should work; I haven’t checked to see if it validates.)

For ed vs. eds, there is a “verb-short” form.

Simon