 |
 |
Thanks for the suggestion, Kyle. Where would you suggest I go to look up the titles? Jonathan - I know that different journals have different citation styles, hence my question. Phrased another way, it would be "Do we need to use CSL to apply periodization rules to journal name abbreviations so that depending on the journal you're submitting to, the CSL style the user selects would specify display as Anal. Biochem. or Anal Biochem?" That's not a [huge] problem to do, but I actually can't find any journals which do in fact require the absence of periods in the journal name abbreviation, so I'm just wondering if it's even worth the effort to support that kind of output or if we could just output the abbreviation as a string with the periods included. Does the question make more sense now? William Gunn +1 646 755 9862 http://synthesis.williamgunn.org/about/ Support free access to scientific journal articles arising from taxpayer-funded research: http://wh.gov/6TH On Thu, Oct 11, 2012 at 1:01 PM, Kyle Banerjee <[log in to unmask]> wrote: >> As far as I'm aware, citations in published papers should always be >> proper case, but are there any cases where a journal should be cited >> without periods in the abbreviated form? I'm aware of the edge cases >> like PLOS, JAMA, BMJ, but what I'm wondering is if anyone knows of any >> instances where a journal which is normally abbreviated as Anal. >> Biochem. would instead be formatted as Anal Biochem (without periods) >> in the references list/bibliography for a paper? >> > > You could figure this out programatically by looking up the titles. JAMA, > PLOS, and BMJ are not abbreviations. Even though they were abbreviations at > one time, they are now the proper names of those publications. > > kyle