add new creator types

Replaces and updates https://github.com/citation-style-language/csl-evolution/issues/33

Some additional creator types we might consider adding.

This one should be added for book items and the like:

• narrator
  • as for an audiobook
  • similar level of contribution as illustrator

These should be added for media items. They finish out the media roles that currently exist in director, producer, executive-producer, and performer:

• writer
  • as in a screenwriter for media items
  • distinguished from author in that it has parity with director and producer, whereas author would be more analogous to a creator with responsibility for the whole work
• creator
  • often cited for media items
  • conceptually really similar to author or container-author I’d argue, but with a different label
  • I thought about whether we could just use author and set the localized labels to be “creator” and “created by”, but that would cause a lot of problems
• host
  • for a regular broadcast
  • more appropriate than director; perhaps is analogous to author, but author might better be conceived
• guest
  • for a broadcast

Basically, what I am realizing is that media creators are a rather different beast from other types of citations. We might create a new variable class variables.media-creator with processing rules similar to editortranslator. The same could be done with author and illustrator. That would address most, if not all, of the issues addressed by https://github.com/citation-style-language/csl-evolution/issues/7

There are a few other name labels that have been requested. I’m less sure on these:

• principal-investigator
  • for a grant
  • these are cited very often in grant applications, so some way to formally include them would be good
  • a grant would be cited as a report
  • might be best covered by adding a label element to names data
• co-investigator
  • same as principal-investigator above
• cartographer
  • unclear how necessary this is; geography and related fields don’t use this label (they just use author)
  • we’ve only seen it called for in the Vancouver style manual, but outside of public health, who in biomedical research is going to cite a map?

We might address these by adding a label element to names data (see ) and allowing for localized terms to appear in input data (see https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/issues/240)

[adam3smith]

But I’m also open to having PI has a primary contributor relation, if we have a “project” or “grant-funded project” sort of type.

I was wondering about the same thing. Adding PI without an item type that it’s really suitable for seems a bit weird. So maybe wait until 1.1 with this.

For an example of how those types of roles might be handled, if we adopted a label element in the names data model (see here), a user could add the contributorship roles as labels in their item data.

I think this is right and you two are actually saying the same thing here. You’d have to define someone’s role for citation purposes but could then add a custom label (which is basically a subtype). Since I don’t think we’ll be able to predict all those labels, I’d expect those to be free form, which means we’ll still want to make sure we capture all relevant roles in the CSL schema. PI is on the borderline here and I could go either way.

More broadly, I generally agree that trying to at CREDIT or similar roles into human readable citations is misguided and I don’t expect it to take off. They should be available via the PID (i.e. the DOI in most cases) rather than overburdening bibliographies, but some citation styles are doing weird things.

[bdarcus]

When people start citing MARC, they’re usually coming from a library cataloguing perspective, which has different priorities that those for scholarly citations.