3

In german computer science it is quite common to use citations like [HoBo12] or [HoBo12, pp.1-4] for say, Hoy, Jane; Boy, John 2010: The great story. The rules for composing this label depend on the amount of authors and their order. Seemingly, this is defined in DIN5015-2 and ISO690, but the wikipedia page only talks about the bibliography and not about the in text references. Weirdly, there is a Zotero style named DIN1505-2 which kind of does that, but still seems to have a few bugs or the official definition (which I can't find talking about this topic) thinks that weird things are nice e.g. [HoBo12, pp.1-2, WVDE13, p.2] (notice that a ; would be nicer).

I think this style is quite nice and would like to use it for an English text. Therefore I would like to choose an accepted style from an english speaking nation.

Question: Are there any other styles in that form (maybe even defined in a Zotero CSL-format)? I still think it looks a bit big with the additional page information. Something like this would be perfect [HoBo12:1-2; WVDE13:2]. Is this an offical style?

  • Depends on where you're publishing. And if it doesn't exist, shouldn't be hard to modify the CSL format you already have. – Thomas Oct 11 '13 at 13:33
  • It's for a book & internal documents, thus I can do what I want, but being able to argue that it is an accepted style might be benefical. Changing the CSL was done in 5 minutes, that is not really an issue. Just compared to the APA CSL the DIN5015-2 CSL quality is low. – Franz Kafka Oct 11 '13 at 14:42
  • Very interesting, I did not know that such a standard existed. Do you have perchance a link to a description this abbreviation standard? Unfortunately ISO standard are not cheap to obtain. – Federico Poloni Oct 12 '13 at 17:33
1

I can't recall ever seeing such a format being used, particularly in the context of books (as opposed to papers). Part of this is, I think, a desire to be clear. For instance, what does [WVDE13:2] mean? Does it refer to the second chapter, or to page 2? Or does it refer to a specific work? Without the clarification of "p.", it's relatively ambiguous from a first glance. As a reader of a book, that can get very annoying over extended periods of time.

Given that, you are free to use any style that your publisher allows; if it's something relatively unorthodox, then you should explain that somewhere (perhaps a comment prefacing the bibliography would suffice).

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.