# The use of "info-classes"

**URL:** <https://discourse.citationstyles.org/t/the-use-of-info-classes/739>\
**Category:** CSL Development\
**Created:** [August 22, 2009, 7:33pm UTC](https://discourse.citationstyles.org/t/the-use-of-info-classes/739 "2009-08-22T19:33:42Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 7\
**Page:** 1

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Rintze\_Zelle](https://yyz1.discourse-cdn.com/flex029/user_avatar/discourse.citationstyles.org/rintze_zelle/32/175_2.png) [@Rintze\_Zelle](https://discourse.citationstyles.org/u/Rintze_Zelle)\
**Post date:** [August 22, 2009, 7:33pm UTC](https://discourse.citationstyles.org/t/the-use-of-info-classes/739/1 "2009-08-22T19:33:42Z")

</div>

Is it really useful to have the info-classes values (“author-date” |  
“numeric” | “label” | “note” | “in-text”) for the term attribute of  
cs:category (style metadata)? CSL doesn’t really support generation of  
labels, and the note/in-text values are redundant as they are already set in  
the class attribute of cs:style. I can also imagine that style repositories  
can categorize styles based on their output (e.g., styles that generate  
in-text citations without alphabetic characters can be classed as numeric  
styles).

The underlying question is whether it makes sense to scrap info-classes  
entirely.

Rintze

---

<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:** [August 22, 2009, 7:57pm UTC](https://discourse.citationstyles.org/t/the-use-of-info-classes/739/2 "2009-08-22T19:57:13Z")

</div>

> Is it really useful to have the info-classes values (“author-date” |  
> “numeric” | “label” | “note” | “in-text”) for the term attribute of  
> cs:category (style metadata)? CSL doesn’t really support generation of  
> labels,

“label” is a synonym for “citekey”

> and the note/in-text values are redundant as they are already set in  
> the class attribute of cs:style.

Yeah, better would be “author” and “author-date” for the in-text.

> I can also imagine that style repositories  
> can categorize styles based on their output (e.g., styles that generate  
> in-text citations without alphabetic characters can be classed as numeric  
> styles).
> 
> The underlying question is whether it makes sense to scrap info-classes  
> entirely.

Well, there’s also a question I raised earlier, which is whether this  
be its own element.

Bruce

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Rintze\_Zelle](https://yyz1.discourse-cdn.com/flex029/user_avatar/discourse.citationstyles.org/rintze_zelle/32/175_2.png) [@Rintze\_Zelle](https://discourse.citationstyles.org/u/Rintze_Zelle)\
**Post date:** [August 22, 2009, 8:16pm UTC](https://discourse.citationstyles.org/t/the-use-of-info-classes/739/3 "2009-08-22T20:16:09Z")

</div>

> > Is it really useful to have the info-classes values (“author-date” |  
> > “numeric” | “label” | “note” | “in-text”) for the term attribute of  
> > cs:category (style metadata)? CSL doesn’t really support generation of  
> > labels,
> 
> “label” is a synonym for “citekey”

And labels/citekeys would be supplied via the “citation-label” variable,  
right?

> and the note/in-text values are redundant as they are already set in
> 
> > the class attribute of cs:style.
> 
> Yeah, better would be “author” and “author-date” for the in-text.

Can’t we just drop the “in-text”? How many styles do you know that only use  
the author for the in-text citation?

> > I can also imagine that style repositories  
> > can categorize styles based on their output (e.g., styles that generate  
> > in-text citations without alphabetic characters can be classed as numeric  
> > styles).
> > 
> > The underlying question is whether it makes sense to scrap info-classes  
> > entirely.
> 
> Well, there’s also a question I raised earlier, which is whether this  
> be its own element.

Do you have a link to that discussion? (couldn’t find the thread)

Also, are there any use cases for the label and scheme attributes of  
cs:category? I found this discussion:  
[http://74.125.77.132/search?q=cache:-IfBxrC68OQJ:plasmasturm.org/log/452/+atom+scheme+term&cd=7&hl=en&ct=clnk&client=firefox-a](http://74.125.77.132/search?q=cache:-IfBxrC68OQJ:plasmasturm.org/log/452/+atom+scheme+term&cd=7&hl=en&ct=clnk&client=firefox-a)  
and given the fact that the categories list is fixed, it doesn’t seem very  
useful to me to be able to specify these other attributes.

Rintze

---

<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:** [August 22, 2009, 8:56pm UTC](https://discourse.citationstyles.org/t/the-use-of-info-classes/739/4 "2009-08-22T20:56:02Z")

</div>

> > > Is it really useful to have the info-classes values (“author-date” |  
> > > “numeric” | “label” | “note” | “in-text”) for the term attribute of  
> > > cs:category (style metadata)? CSL doesn’t really support generation of  
> > > labels,
> > 
> > “label” is a synonym for “citekey”
> 
> And labels/citekeys would be supplied via the “citation-label” variable,  
> right?

Right.

> > > and the note/in-text values are redundant as they are already set in  
> > > the class attribute of cs:style.
> > 
> > Yeah, better would be “author” and “author-date” for the in-text.
> 
> Can’t we just drop the “in-text”?

Yes.

> How many styles do you know that only use  
> the author for the in-text citation?

One really big one: MLA.

> > > I can also imagine that style repositories  
> > > can categorize styles based on their output (e.g., styles that generate  
> > > in-text citations without alphabetic characters can be classed as  
> > > numeric  
> > > styles).
> > > 
> > > The underlying question is whether it makes sense to scrap info-classes  
> > > entirely.
> > 
> > Well, there’s also a question I raised earlier, which is whether this  
> > be its own element.
> 
> Do you have a link to that discussion? (couldn’t find the thread)

No. I was just asking people to review the info section, and  
suggesting that “field” and “type” or “class” could be split off from  
category.

> Also, are there any use cases for the label and scheme attributes of  
> cs:category? I found this discussion:  
> [http://74.125.77.132/search?q=cache:-IfBxrC68OQJ:plasmasturm.org/log/452/+atom+scheme+term&cd=7&hl=en&ct=clnk&client=firefox-a](http://74.125.77.132/search?q=cache:-IfBxrC68OQJ:plasmasturm.org/log/452/+atom+scheme+term&cd=7&hl=en&ct=clnk&client=firefox-a)  
> and given the fact that the categories list is fixed, it doesn’t seem very  
> useful to me to be able to specify these other attributes.

It’s useful to define separate controlled lists. If we don’t need  
that, we don’t need this attribute.

Bruce

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Rintze\_Zelle](https://yyz1.discourse-cdn.com/flex029/user_avatar/discourse.citationstyles.org/rintze_zelle/32/175_2.png) [@Rintze\_Zelle](https://discourse.citationstyles.org/u/Rintze_Zelle)\
**Post date:** [August 22, 2009, 9:01pm UTC](https://discourse.citationstyles.org/t/the-use-of-info-classes/739/5 "2009-08-22T21:01:27Z")

</div>

the category-values listed in the CSL schema, right? Which doesn’t seem  
particularly useful.

Rintze

---

<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:** [August 22, 2009, 9:04pm UTC](https://discourse.citationstyles.org/t/the-use-of-info-classes/739/6 "2009-08-22T21:04:39Z")

</div>

If that’s the case (and I’m not sure it is), there’s no technical  
reason (w/RNG) it needs to be so. We could have a pattern that says a  
category with a schema uri may have any value.

Bruce

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Rintze\_Zelle](https://yyz1.discourse-cdn.com/flex029/user_avatar/discourse.citationstyles.org/rintze_zelle/32/175_2.png) [@Rintze\_Zelle](https://discourse.citationstyles.org/u/Rintze_Zelle)\
**Post date:** [August 23, 2009, 6:05am UTC](https://discourse.citationstyles.org/t/the-use-of-info-classes/739/7 "2009-08-23T06:05:59Z")

</div>

Maybe I’m not correctly understanding line 139:  
[https://sourceforge.net/apps/trac/xbiblio/browser/csl/schema/trunk/csl.rnc?rev=1164#L137](https://sourceforge.net/apps/trac/xbiblio/browser/csl/schema/trunk/csl.rnc?rev=1164#L137)  
It seems to me that would actually forbid extension of the terms-list,  
right?

Niggle: the Atom spec uses the “scheme” attribute, not “schema”. This is  
incorrect in the CSL schema annotations.

Rintze