Re: [NTG-context] combined / compressed / collapsed page and numbered citation references in bibliographies

On 2017-08-12 22:30, Alan Braslau wrote:

On Sat, 12 Aug 2017 20:32:17 -0400 Rik Kabel wrote:

...

I noticed that in bibliographies, page indexing combines runs of two or more pages (pp. 150­–151), as does page number compression in registers, while it takes three or more numbered citations to cause a similar collapse (per the MKIV-Publications manual, page 38, I do not have an example) for citation number references.

Is there a way to change such compression minimums so that they can be made consistent? What seems more logical to you? pp 150,151 or pp 150-151 - of course pp 150-152 makes perfect sense. [2,3] or [2-3] - of course [2-4] also makes sense.

I prefer the first choices. ConTeXt registers do the second, and I do not know what led to that choice and if Hans would like to change it (or even make this a parameter).

Alan

I am looking for consistency. For page references, the bibliography subsystem gives: * pp. 1–2 * pp. 1–3 * p. 1 and p. 3 and numeric citations apparently produce: * [1,2] * [1–3] * [1,3] while the index registers give: * 1–2 * 1–3 * 1, 3 Why is the ‘and’ needed in the bibliography page reference? One could also ask why the ‘p.’ and ‘pp.’, but in the more verbose setting of a bibliography, I can live with them. As for the choice of two or more over three or more for compression, I can see arguments for each. A default and the ability to change it seems best, especially for bibliographic entries where publishers have overriding standards. -- Rik -- Rik