> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- > Von: Alan Braslau <braslau.l...@comcast.net> > Gesendet: Mittwoch, 30. Juni 2021 23:50 > An: Maier, Denis Christian (UB) <denis.ma...@unibe.ch> > Cc: ntg-context@ntg.nl > Betreff: Re: [NTG-context] Different authorconversion for citation > alternatives > and bibliographic entries > [...] > > > > So what would be needed to make add real support for it? > > First of all, come to a consensus on a clear style guide to base this on, so > as not > to run after ambiguous and perhaps contradictory specifications. This would be > distinct from the APA (author-year) model as well as from the minimalist APS > (numbered) style. Could this perhaps be the Chicago style? (does that have a > footnote specification?)
Chicago is certainly not a bad choice for this. It's probably one of the most complete footnote specifications out there. (I knows multiple variants though, so you need to settle for one or support both.) One thing to be aware of is that Chicago is utterly complex. Other styles like MHRA are a bit simpler. This complexity might be an advantage and a disadvantage at the same time. It may be hard to get this completely right. The already mentioned biblatex-chicago package shows how much is involved. OTOH, if you get this right that should cover almost everything that might come up in note based styles. Denis ___________________________________________________________________________________ If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the Wiki! maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context webpage : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://context.aanhet.net archive : https://bitbucket.org/phg/context-mirror/commits/ wiki : http://contextgarden.net ___________________________________________________________________________________
