ebouna

It appears this is nontheless an issue with `biblatex`: Is it not possible to modify `@unpublished` in a way that `extradate` ignores `@unpublished`'s data fields when there is no information...

Thank you very much. The fact (cf. @moewew's remark) that `extradate` letters are superfluous for all `entries` with `shorthand` is something I have not realized so far. But yes, you...

On the other hand, is it then perhaps feasible to construct an entry type that has an `author`-like entry field and maybe a `date`-like one, but that is nevertheless discarded...

I think I found the solution, viz. how to switch off `extradate` letters for shorthands. I had to modify `\DeclareExtradateContext` by inserting `\field{shorthand}`. I do not completely understand why this...

Note also that removing ``` \DeclareExtradateContext{% \field{shorthand} \field{labelname} \field{labeltitle} } ``` reveals what seems to be a **bug**. Compare the erroneous alphabetical order of `extradate` letters in the marked cased...

> Well, deleting the entire extradatacontext will always result in strange things as at least the default is needed. I think here it appears you misunderstand me. By removing ```...

> Here "2013a" is used twice for different works This and similar irregularities is precisely the unexpected behaviour I have been observing, too.

> "2013a" for two different works since they will usually (always?) be by a different list of authors? The problem is not only about having twice "2013a". The real or...

Thanks a lot for this additional comment and your explanation as well as thanks, @plk, for the other useful pieces of information.