# Get similar style for book and article in biblatex bibliography

I am puzzled why I do not get the same style for entries of books and articles in the bibliography in the following MWE:

% !TeX program=lualatex
\documentclass{scrartcl}

\usepackage{fontspec}

\usepackage[style=numeric,url=false]{biblatex}
\AtEveryBibitem{\clearfield{month}}

\usepackage[main=ngerman,english]{babel}

\usepackage{filecontents}

\begin{filecontents}{\jobname.bib}
@Article{atkins1980,
author  = {Atkins, M},
title   = {Atlas of continuous cooling transformation diagrams for engineering steels},
journal = {American Society for Metals},
year    = {1980},
pages   = {260},
}
@Book{aaronson2010,
title     = {Mechanisms of Diffusional Phase Transformations in Metals and Alloys},
publisher = {{CRC} Press},
year      = {2010},
author    = {Hubert Aaronson and Masato Enomoto and Jong Lee},
month     = {may},
doi       = {10.1201/b15829},
}
@Article{kolmogorov1937,
author  = {Kolmogorov, Andrei Nikolaevich},
title   = {On the statistical theory of the crystallization of metals},
journal = {Bull. Acad. Sci. USSR, Math. Ser},
year    = {1937},
volume  = {1},
pages   = {355--359},
}
\end{filecontents}

\begin{document}
\cite{atkins1980,aaronson2010,kolmogorov1937}
\printbibliography

\end{document}


Edit: As @moewe explained, there's a good reason for the enquoted upface vs. non-enquoted italic titles, though it makes for an inconsistent look of the bibliography and it's not the style I was recommended to use (which was what I aimed for in the original question). Upon a quick browse of some textbooks from my field, I have not found the enquoted title style for books a lot, let alone in German books. Taking all this into account, I'd like to apply the following minor changes to the default:

• The title of sources that belong to a container should not be in quotes
• The year should be consistently in parentheses
• The first names should be abbreviated
• : instead of '.' between author and title

What do I need to specify as package options and what do I have to adjust by hand in the bibtex entries?

• Could you be more specific as to which aspects you would like to see done equally between the two entrytypes? (title emphasis etc). The two cannot be literally be equal, for their parts differ by necessity (eg. journaltitle, volume, number). – gusbrs Mar 1 '18 at 11:25
• While the differences may seem arbitrary to you, there is a method in the madness so to speak. If you hold a book or bound copy of a journal you will find that the titles marked in the bibliography with italics can be read on the cover or spine without even opening the book. The titles in quotation marks can only be found after opening the book or journal in the table of contents or in the article itself. I suspect this all comes from a time where people would go to libraries and obtain physical copies of the works they cite. ... – moewe Mar 1 '18 at 11:46
• ... It makes sense to mark up the title you have to look for in the bookshelves and library catalogues differently from the titles you have to look for within a book. I am not particularly fond of the MLA style, but their concept of 'containers' is pretty much a extension of this idea owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/resource/747/01. – moewe Mar 1 '18 at 11:47
• The main point to take away from this discussion is that bibliographic styles are highly conventional, in the sense that they follow typographic stylistic conventions which were often conceived of a long time ago. (Aside: Nowadays, a lot of journals have completely abolished all italics in bib entries, and they often don't put quotation marks around titles either.) An enormous advantage of biblatex (and bibtex) is that authors rarely need concern themselves with the particulars of typographic conventions -- they can (and should) gladly leave these niceties to journal and book publishers. – Mico Mar 1 '18 at 11:56
• Please consider asking only one question per question in the future. The four things you would like to change can easily be separated into four questions (you will find that almost all of them have been answered already on this site). See tex.meta.stackexchange.com/q/7425/35864 for why it is a good idea not too ask to many things in one question. – moewe Mar 1 '18 at 13:14

The code should be almost self-explanatory.

\documentclass{scrartcl}
\usepackage[main=ngerman,english]{babel}
\usepackage{csquotes}
\usepackage[style=numeric,url=false,giveninits=true]{biblatex}
\AtEveryBibitem{\clearfield{month}}

\DeclareFieldFormat
[article,inbook,incollection,inproceedings,patent,thesis,unpublished]
{title}{#1\isdot}

\DeclareFieldFormat{date}{\mkbibparens{#1}}
\DeclareFieldFormat[article,periodical]{date}{#1}

\usepackage{filecontents}
\begin{filecontents}{\jobname.bib}
@Article{atkins1980,
author  = {Atkins, M.},
title   = {Atlas of continuous cooling transformation diagrams for engineering steels},
journal = {American Society for Metals},
year    = {1980},
pages   = {260},
}
@Book{aaronson2010,
title     = {Mechanisms of Diffusional Phase Transformations in Metals and Alloys},
publisher = {{CRC} Press},
year      = {2010},
author    = {Hubert Aaronson and Masato Enomoto and Jong Lee},
month     = {may},
doi       = {10.1201/b15829},
}
@Article{kolmogorov1937,
author  = {Kolmogorov, Andrei Nikolaevich},
title   = {On the statistical theory of the crystallization of metals},
journal = {Bull. Acad. Sci. USSR, Math. Ser},
year    = {1937},
volume  = {1},
pages   = {355--359},
}
\end{filecontents}

\begin{document}
\cite{atkins1980,aaronson2010,kolmogorov1937}
\printbibliography
\end{document}