Sitemap | EndNote
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Do you mean 
Reply
New User
Posts: 2
Registered: 2 weeks ago
0

Chicago 17th (in X9)

Hi,

 

How can I fix an error in footnotes? I have Edited Books with several editors but the footnote and bibliography are not showing 'eds.' just 'ed.'.

 

Thanks

HLeggatt

Mentor
Posts: 8,194
Registered: ‎04-10-2008
0

Re: Chicago 17th (in X9)

When you edit the original, do you "save as" to a new name, and switch to that newly named file in word?  You can't save to the original name, if it is a installed output style, as then you have two (one in the programme folder, and one in the user folder) and endnote still uses the installed version.  

(long time Endnote user)
New User
Posts: 2
Registered: 2 weeks ago
0

Re: Chicago 17th (in X9)

Sorry, I don't think I worded my question very well. What I am trying to understand is why, despite the Chicago style hasving both Ed and Eds in the style it doesn't automatically use Eds when there is more than one author. The footnote and biblio still use the singular.

Also, in the following style for a Book Section, there is no option for a book with several editors (style just has "Editor"- how can I change this to allow for multiple editors?


Mentor
Posts: 8,194
Registered: ‎04-10-2008
0

Re: Chicago 17th (in X9)

[ Edited ]

In most of the Chicago templates I see the text as Edited by and not a sigular or plural option (the field is called Editor, whether there is one or many). This is true in Book sections and Book, and  I only see Ed vs Eds in Edited Book where it is correctly used in my two editor and one editor examples in my library in the preview (so bibliography template).   The caret character between the two options is what makes the decision between single plural (I am not sure the accent grave is required).  Remember that the editors, like authors need to be one per line followed by a carriage return in the records, as well.  

 

Editor, `ed.`^`eds.` Title|. Edited by Series Editor|. Edition ed|. Number of Volumes vols.| Vol. Volume|, Series Title|, vol. Series Volume|. Place Published|: Publisher|, Year|. Reprint, Reprint Edition|.

 

However in the footnotes there are instances where the ed.^eds. is not present when it should be. (book and book section are two examples) where the footnote has only the singular option and is different from the "Edited by" used in the footnotes, so yes, there are errors in how these have been built.   

(long time Endnote user)