Bruce D'Arcus

I'll take a look at details when I get a chance (it's a long message ;-)), but general note: the challenge with this stuff always is how we simultaneously design...

Actually, to pull out one suggestion, something like the below is indeed a possibility: > If there is value in keeping "documents" and "events" with completely > distinct fields, then...

We should resolve this now. But to pull back, some propositions: 1. an academic conference is an event; so is a hearing, a speech, a performance 2. events can have...

For conferences, we need a way to distinguish three titles, and potentially associate contributors with each of these levels: 1. paper 2. session 3. conference Right? So: 1. paper (`title`)...

I'm pretty skeptical about that "institution" field proposal. It seems to me that Elena's description is in fact pointing to a related issue that Frank raised awhile back, which is...

To document an example prominent from my own dissertation work: I cited a lot of government documents such as memos and reports, from U.S. agencies like the FBI, the Department...

The working paper example elena posted is essentially an informally published document from an institution. Similar examples I've come across would be press releases, say. The problem here is really...

Yes, it's uncontroversial. CSL "number" is a document number, and so it's entirely appropriate.

> I'd also like to add the option of inserting the item key into the label, so that people can more easily pull that out of the data as well....

Program could be confusing. http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/program On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 9:51 AM, Rintze M. Zelle [email protected] wrote: > Preferred CSL item type name? "program", "computer_program", "software"? I > think...