From what I can see, the only *significant* style difference that you
seek is the use of \letterspace and \sc for names (authors or editors).
The use of old numbers is trivial as they will be used if specified for
the rest of the document.
How else does your university's standard differ from the APA?
All of the details of the layout are programmable using setups.
By the way, the APA sort order is: authors(or editors), year,
title (and possibly journal, volume, number, page).
Alan
On Mon, 19 Jan 2015 19:44:56 +0100
Hans Hagen
On 1/17/2015 7:23 AM, Jörg Weger wrote:
Hi Alan
What I am trying to achieve is the following (of which typesetting the author’s name is only a detail): setting up an environment that I can use for all papers and works that I have to write during my academic studies. With the basic layout I am almost done. The main remaining problem is to get the bibliographic information details in the publications list into the right order for every possible type of publication according to the standards demanded by my university department which differ from APA style.
You ask what I am looking for:
It would be great to be able at the same time to format every detail of information while defining said order.
Defining that order could be done by giving a kind of “maximum case” with the exact order of the desired variables and the punctuation and blanks between them for every particular type of publication cited. Out of that “maximum case” the underlying mechanism would ignore everything not needed in the particular case of a certain publication.
In the case of publication type “book” it could be something like:
\setpublicationstyleforlist [type:book] [{invertedauthor1}{/}{invertedauthor2}{/}{invertedauthor3}{et al.}{ (}{year}{): }{title}{. }{address}{: }{publisher}{.}]
... that not good enough: fields can be absent, there is no way to distinguish authors from titles and so ...
the new mechanism we're making tries to cover a lot of aspects and it's not that trivial to also keep the interface simple then
anyway, what we're talking of (currently) is:
- datasets, where data comes from bib files, lua tables xml files or whatever gets interfaced
- optional typing, which means that one can tell what fields represents what kind of data
- fallback sets i.e a sequence that will be checked when a field is requested
- virtual fields (think of numbers and author year combinations)
- control via settings (the et-al thing as well as fences and punctuation)
- rendering driven by setups so that users have full control (if they want) over what comes out
- a bunch of helper macros (checking, spacing etc)
- a collection of methods that can be applied to fields when they are called up
- calling up citations by tag but also by a query
- control over lists
- automatic generation of registers
- passing along extra data entered in the source
- and more
we don't know how many users will define renderings themselves but in principle it should not be too hard to copy existing setups and mess with them
there is quite some tracing available because it can go wrong in many places (depending on the quality of the data)
attached are two simple examples of how users can define things
Hans
----------------------------------------------------------------- Hans Hagen | PRAGMA ADE Ridderstraat 27 | 8061 GH Hasselt | The Netherlands tel: 038 477 53 69 | voip: 087 875 68 74 | www.pragma-ade.com | www.pragma-pod.nl -----------------------------------------------------------------
-- Alan Braslau CEA DSM-IRAMIS-SPEC CNRS URA 2464 Orme des Merisiers 91191 Gif-sur-Yvette cedex FRANCE tel: +33 1 69 08 73 15 fax: +33 1 69 08 87 86 mailto:alan.braslau@cea.fr