Sonny Software

I just noticed that the latest version of the MLA Style Guide (8th edition) says that the current recommendation is to omit the http:// prefix in URLS:

When giving a URL, copy it in full from your Web browser, but omit http:// or https://.

Is there any way to tell Bookends to pass on the URL to the bibliography in this form?

That's a bad recommendation in my opinion. But regardless, the answer is no.

Jon
Sonny Software

Thanks for the reply. I also have my doubts about this guideline, as there are other Internet protocols that could be referenced (such as gopher:// or ftp://) in addition to http://.

There is more information about this guideline on the MLA website, where it is pointed out that it is mainly intended with printed works in mind. The overall idea is to keep the works cited uncluttered by lengthy URLS, which I think is not such a bad idea.

Here's the link: https://style.mla.org/urls-some-practical-advice/

If you really want to cite URLs without the protocol here's how you can do it:

1. Global Change -> Move Field (move the URL to another field, e.g. User1).
2. Global Change -> Find and Replace -> find "http://" in User1 and replace with nothing (or find "https://").
3. In the format tell Bookends to use User1 as the source for the URL.

Jon
Sonny Software

Very much appreciated! I renamed User20 as "Tidy URL" and followed your instructions to strip out the prefix.

Just one question: is there any way to move this new field into the "Main" editing window from "Additional Fields"?

No. But you could transfer it to any of the 4 User fields in the main tab (if you're not using BibTeX, User1 is unassigned).

Jon
Sonny Software

That's not a problem, thanks for your guidance.

I have to grudgingly admit that the works cited looks much cleaner without the http:// prefixes!

True, but it would also look better without any URL at all.

Form over function in my opinion (not that it counts).

Jon
Sonny Software

Not had the delight of needing to use MLA so far (transitioned through my university's bastardisation of something, followed by Harvard and now APA6) but it does seem that many are less enamoured with the latest version of MLA. Just one reference caught my eye recently (older article) https://www.chronicle.com/article/Why-I ... MLA/237761

D

I agree with many of the points in that article. I was also amazed to discover that place of publication is no longer considered relevant information in preparing a bibliography.

My impression is that the new style guide hoped to take into account the almost infinite types of media that could be cited in a scholarly article these days (TV show episodes, Tweets, etc.), and to provide common-sense guidelines on how to reference almost anything. The problem is that it's possible for different people to apply their version of common sense to a problem in organizing a bibliography and all come up with different solutions. The old authoritarian MLA Style had the advantage of imposing a standard way of doing things on researchers.