I am using oscola-biblatex for my thesis. OSCOLA allows for repeated citations in a short format with a cross-reference to the full citation. This is typically handled really well by oscola-biblatex. However, it does not seem to work for entries of the sub-type comdoc
. Consider the following MWE:
\documentclass[10pt,a4paper]{article}
\usepackage[style=oscola,backend=biber]{biblatex}
\begin{filecontents}{test.bib}
@report{com13,
title = {Action Plan on consumer access to justice
and the settlement of disputes in the internal
market},
type = {Communication},
number = {COM (96) 13 final},
institution = {Commission},
entrysubtype = {comdoc}
}
@report{autumnperf,
title = {2008 Autumn Performance Report},
institution = {Department for Children, Schools
and Families},
series = {Cm},
number = {7507},
date = {2008},
}
\end{filecontents}
\addbibresource{test.bib}
\begin{document}
Here is some text with a first reference to the `comdoc'
document.\footcite{com13}
And here a reference to a general report.\footcite{autumnperf}
The repeated citation to the `comdoc' document will output the full
citation.\footcite{com13}
Whereas the repeated citation to anything else works as
expected.\footcite{autumnperf}
\printbibliography
\end{document}
The repeated citation for the general report works as expected (with a cross-reference to fn. 2). The repeated citation for the comdoc
entrysubtype produces the full citation again. According to the oscola-biblatex manual, p. 72:
Subsequent references will use simply the com number, as oscola requires.
How can I troubleshoot this so repeated citations only output the number
field if the entrysubtype
is comdoc
? Is it a problem with oscola's driver, and if so, could I patch it through xpatch? Any help is greatly appreciated!
biblatex
and Biber until github.com/PaulStanley/oscola-biblatex/pull/8 is resolved.