At 2021-08-02T18:23:01-0400, Peter Schaffter wrote: > On Mon, Aug 02, 2021, Tadziu Hoffmann wrote: > > > > > There are no should therefores or guesswork when it comes to > > > formatting bibliographies. Where edition goes and how it's > > > formatted is fixed by the style: [...] > > > > If you're submitting a paper to a journal you obviously have to > > follow the journal style (usually the editors will take care of > > that), but for in-house documents I'm not required to use either > > of those styles and can define my own, in which case I do have a > > choice on how to format the bibliography. > > Indeed, but the subject under discussion is making refer(1) > conformant to various acknowledged styles, not in-house usage.
Technically, I came to my question from more of a data normalization perspective; I hadn't even hit the rendering/style problem yet. If I have multiple editions of a work (I'm a CS guy, of course I do), then I need a way to populate my database with distinct entries for each one. Having to do so in the %T field instantly set alarm bells ringing. (Well, _kind of_ normalization, because the text db format for refer(1) won't even get you 1NF, let alone farther, but I'm speaking broadly.) Regards, Branden
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
