Closed ghost closed 8 years ago
I'm considering this.
My hesitation is what makes most sense for biblatex-sbl
biblatex-sbl
(current option)biblatex-sbl
, but strip the preamble out into a .cls
or (more likely) a .sty
file.biblatex-sbl
, but hence dependent on biblatex-sbl
.sty
file.A related question is how much do I put into the .sty
file?
xelatex
or lualatex
, or alternatively increases the complexity by creating options to enable Greek and Hebrew.I think .sty
files or modules would offer more flexible options to be incorporated into or called from one's particular .cls
. To give an example, biblical languages is a must in many cases except for systematic theology. In this case an .sty
for biblical languages makes sense. In the preamble of the .sty
you would place the information about xelatex
. Whatever extra we do here must be left as optional.
Or, make the best of two worlds. Build a .cls
with everything out of the box for beginners, and separate .sty
modules for those who use their own .cls
The idea of using the git wiki is good. Many universities have their own guidelines for page format, and could post them here as a repository
My university uses the Student Supplement as is (thus my interest).
SBTS — a local seminary — uses Turabian as primary, SBL for abbreviations and for specific issues that Turabian doesn't address. I'm not sure how much benefit this package would be for them. Would almost need to start with Turabian or Chicago and work from there. Their journal citations, for example, are:
Dozeman, Thomas B. “Inner-Biblical Interpretation of Yahweh’s Gracious and Compassionate Character.” Journal of Biblical Literature 108, no. 2 (1989): 207– 23.
It wouldn't be terribly hard to modify the sbl-paper
on a case-by-case basis for unique uses.
An included .sty
or .cls
file would be easiest, I think. But you could perhaps make it separate from biblatex-sbl
and even allow for one's own biblatex style, but again, the occasions when someone would need sbl-paper
without biblatex-sbl
seem rare.
Greek/Heb support is a must. Could be a separate file, though, if needed.
Clark! I visited your Git and it looks great, nice to know you're maintaining Fischer's. In fact, I produced the same stuff basically. Check out my template, under construction as well. I am following the head titles for my university, this is basically the only difference. [https://www.dropbox.com/s/av953su72xqjh5i/autemplate.pdf?dl=0]
Thanks @Nhapsie ! Is your's intended for a thesis/dissertation or some school-specific stuff?
I just uploaded some corrections. Yes, it's intended for thesis, but also for other uses like teaching in the near future
Check out the latest dev branch for sbl-paper.sty
. sbl-paper.tex
now shows how to use the package. Greek and Hebrew are also supported.
Note: There is an incompatibility between the bidi
package and biblatex
that means that it is not possible to track footnote citations separately from body citations. This is probably not a show stopper bug. It will potentially appear if you are using idem or ibid and interspersing \parencite
and \autocite
citations.
I see, thanks for the info. We don't use \parencite
in our seminary just one system of tracking, but for others this is good to know. The inclusion of new example for single volume dictionary in 6.3.6.2 of biblatex-sbl-test.pdf
looks great.
The latest dev branc has good addition to sbl-paper.tex
. Just one thing: omit "when a word processor such as Microsoft Word..."
fixed in v0.7
Thanks for putting together the sample paper!
Any way this can become a separate package as a .cls?