I suggest updating citations for the sources of direct quotations. It looks like most citations of this sort use a footnote. However, there is one exception, which uses a bracketed reference. The 4.2. Identifying and Avoiding Slang > Productize entry contains a direct quote followed by: [wiktionary].
For sources that the style guide quotes directly, I suggest shifting away from footnotes, as that format is less useful for readers of online content. Ideally, footnoted references should be replaced with in-line citations that readers can follow at their point of need within the text. Additionally, it would be helpful to provide some basic information about the source (such as the title) along with the URL. This practice gives important context for the source’s reliability, even if readers don’t actually access the URL. Developing more robust citations also helps model expectations around appropriate source use for anyone using the style guide as a resource.
Suggested fix: Since we’re not publishing formal academic prose, I don’t think we need to adhere to something like the Chicago Manual of Style for citations. I also think it’s okay if the citations in the style guide differ from those in RHT content, since the guide has a different context, audience, and purpose. Following the IBM style guide, we could update the citation format in the style guide to include work titles and embedded links:
Original: Always use a hyphen if clarity would suffer otherwise. For example, "He recovered his health" versus "He re-covered the leaky roof." [1]
...content excluded...
[1] www.apstylebook.com
Update: Always use a hyphen if clarity would suffer otherwise. For example, "He recovered his health" versus "He re-covered the leaky roof" (The Associated Press Stylebook).
As mentioned previously, there is one citation that doesn’t align with the other citations of quoted content: The 4.2. Identifying and Avoiding Slang > Productize entry. If it's decided to keep using footnotes, then this citation would need to be updated for consistency. Or, if we were to update our citation style for direct quotes, it could look something like this:
Original: Not a word. Find another way to say "modify something to become suitable as a commercial product". [wiktionary]
Update: Not a word. Find another way to say "modify something to become suitable as a commercial product" (“Productize”, Wiktionary).
If this is a change worth making, I’d be happy to help update footnotes or other citations into a friendlier format for web-based content.
I suggest updating citations for the sources of direct quotations. It looks like most citations of this sort use a footnote. However, there is one exception, which uses a bracketed reference. The 4.2. Identifying and Avoiding Slang > Productize entry contains a direct quote followed by: [wiktionary].
For sources that the style guide quotes directly, I suggest shifting away from footnotes, as that format is less useful for readers of online content. Ideally, footnoted references should be replaced with in-line citations that readers can follow at their point of need within the text. Additionally, it would be helpful to provide some basic information about the source (such as the title) along with the URL. This practice gives important context for the source’s reliability, even if readers don’t actually access the URL. Developing more robust citations also helps model expectations around appropriate source use for anyone using the style guide as a resource.
Suggested fix: Since we’re not publishing formal academic prose, I don’t think we need to adhere to something like the Chicago Manual of Style for citations. I also think it’s okay if the citations in the style guide differ from those in RHT content, since the guide has a different context, audience, and purpose. Following the IBM style guide, we could update the citation format in the style guide to include work titles and embedded links:
Original: Always use a hyphen if clarity would suffer otherwise. For example, "He recovered his health" versus "He re-covered the leaky roof." [1]
...content excluded...
[1] www.apstylebook.com
Update: Always use a hyphen if clarity would suffer otherwise. For example, "He recovered his health" versus "He re-covered the leaky roof" (The Associated Press Stylebook).
As mentioned previously, there is one citation that doesn’t align with the other citations of quoted content: The 4.2. Identifying and Avoiding Slang > Productize entry. If it's decided to keep using footnotes, then this citation would need to be updated for consistency. Or, if we were to update our citation style for direct quotes, it could look something like this:
Original: Not a word. Find another way to say "modify something to become suitable as a commercial product". [wiktionary]
Update: Not a word. Find another way to say "modify something to become suitable as a commercial product" (“Productize”, Wiktionary).
If this is a change worth making, I’d be happy to help update footnotes or other citations into a friendlier format for web-based content.