Multiple citations and Ibid.

[florestan]

I would like to use "Ibid." for repeated citation in my footnotes, but have run into this problem when having multiple citations in one group.

If the citation markers in footnote 1 looks like this:
{Author1@50; Author2@51; Author3@52}

And footnote 2 is this:
{Author2@55}


The result is:
Footnote 1 (which is fine): Author1 (2009), 50; Author2 (2008), 51; Author3 (2010), 52.
Footnote 2 (here's the problem): Ibid., 55.

The reader has no chance to figure out which reference the "Ibid." points to. Perhaps "Ibid." should be oppressed by default when it follows a group of citations? This way "Ibid." only appears when there is no ambiguity to which reference it belongs.

[Jon]

I'll make a note of this, thanks.

Jon
Sonny Software

[mariagwyn]

Sorry to resurrect an old post.

Is there a way to suppress the "ibid" in the second citation of the scenario described above? I have an identical situation, and my dissertation director doesn't like the ambiguous ibid. I didn't see any way to manually indicate "no ibid," except of course manually typing the citation, which is, of course, just to obvious.

Thanks,
Maria

[Jon]

This issue is on my to-do list, but it hasn't been addressed yet. For now I think you'll have to adjust the citation in the text after the scan.

Jon
Sonny Software

[Jon]

This issue will be taken care of in the next update. If a citation is in a group, ibid. will not be applied to the next single citation, even if it was the last one in the preceding group.

Jon
Sonny Software

[mariagwyn]

Excellent. This will be very helpful. Any idea when the update will come out? I have a dissertation due in two weeks....

[Jon]

Hm, I thought this was included in 11.0.9 (but it's not in the release notes). Please download 11.0.9 again and see if it works as it should.

Jon
Sonny Software

[rorayburn]

Not sure this is fixed yet. Multiple citations still produce IBID in the following footnote (at least if the final citation above is the same as the next note).

[Jon]

Under certain circumstances this could happen when scanning a Mellel document. I've fixed this for the next update.

Jon
Sonny Software