Unable to duplicate 6.4.10.2 in sbl-examples

[folofjc]

I cannot figure out what I am doing wrong. Here is my MWE:

\documentclass[letterpaper,12pt]{book}
\usepackage{polyglossia}
\setmainlanguage[variant=us]{english}
\usepackage[english=american]{csquotes} 

\begin{filecontents}[overwrite]{customstyles.dbx}
  \DeclareDatamodelEntrytypes{tdict}
\end{filecontents}

\usepackage[style=sbl,fullbibrefs=true,sblfootnotes=false]{biblatex}

\begin{filecontents}[overwrite]{temp.bib}

@mvcommentary{NIB,
   title       = {The New Interpreter's Bible},
   subtitle    = {A Commentary in Twelve Volumes},
   shorttitle  = {NIB},
   shorthand   = {NIB},
   editor      = {Leander E. Keck},
   publisher   = {Abingdon Press},
   address     = {Nashville},
   date        = {1994/2004},
}

@incommentary{NIB:Rom,
   crossref    = {NIB},
   xref        = {NIB},
   author      = {N. T. Wright},
   title       = {The Letter to the Romans},
   subtitle    = {Introduction, Commantary, and Reflections},
   volume      = {10},
   date        = {2002},
   pages       = {393-770},
}

\end{filecontents}

\addbibresource{temp.bib}

usepackage{xparse}
   
\begin{document}

\null\vfill
Test.\footcite[400]{NIB:Rom}

\clearpage
\printbibliography%
\end{document}

My style guide does not put the name of book in this case, which is why I do not have a booktitle in the incommentary. But everything else is basically the same. What am I doing wrong? The bib is correct, but the footnote is definitely not. Even if I take out the shorthand/shortitle it makes no difference. I cannot get the footnote correct.

[dcpurton]

Well, you aren't doing anything wrong :)

I assume you're after:

N. T. Wright, “The Letter to the Romans: Introduction, Commentary, and Reflections,” NIB 10:400.

But the style gives:

N. T. Wright, NIB 10:400.

Why is this?

Well, buried in the Student Supplement for The SBL Handbook of Style, Second Edition, §1.3.3.2 we find this:

1.3.3.2. Multivolume Commentaries for the Entire Bible by Multiple Authors. To save space, multivolume commentaries often combine treatments of multiple biblical books into a single volume. A different author usually writes the commentary on each biblical book. In this case, treat each author’s commentary like a chapter in a book written by several authors (SBLHS 6.2.23). Multivolume commentaries cited in a footnote should use the abbreviated title listed in SBLHS 8.4.1–2. The author of the section should still be cited. The bibliographical entry may provide the complete title and publication information of the larger work or use the abbreviated title, as in the final example below.

1. Patrick D. Miller, NIB 6:577.

Miller, Patrick D. “The Book of Jeremiah: Introduction, Commentary, and Reflections.” Pages 553–926 in Introduction to Prophetic Literature, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Baruch, Letter of Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel. Vol. 6 of New Interpreter’s Bible. Edited by Leander E. Keck. Nashville: Abingdon, 2001.

Miller, Patrick D. “The Book of Jeremiah: Introduction, Commentary, and Reflections.” NIB
6:553–926.

So they give an example, which leaves the title out. Obviously this is completely inconsistent with their comment that:

In this case, treat each author’s commentary like a chapter in a book written by several authors (SBLHS 6.2.23).

I went with the example, naïvely thinking that SBL bothers to edit their publications.

Interestingly, I notice that for version 2, I've opted to ignore their example. The new version of the style gives:

1. Patrick D. Miller, “The Book of Jeremiah: Introduction, Commentary, and Reflections,” NIB 6:557

2. Miller, “Book of Jeremiah,” 6:557

As this does make much more sense to me.

What's the fix?

The correct behaviour is the same as the @inreference entry type.

The new version still uses @incommentary but includes a source map that maps @incommentary to @inreference when the entry contains an xref field.

\DeclareStyleSourcemap{
  \maps{
    % incommentary with an xref uses inreference driver
    \map[overwrite]{
      \step[fieldsource=xref, final]
      \step[typesource=incommentary, typetarget=inreference]
    }
  }
}

So for your example, you could either add a similar source map or change your entry type:

I think this gives the output you want:

\documentclass{article}
\begin{filecontents}[overwrite]{temp.bib}
@mvcommentary{NIB,
   title       = {The New Interpreter's Bible},
   subtitle    = {A Commentary in Twelve Volumes},
   shorttitle  = {NIB},
   shorthand   = {NIB},
   editor      = {Leander E. Keck},
   publisher   = {Abingdon Press},
   address     = {Nashville},
   date        = {1994/2004},
}
@incommentary{NIB:Rom,
   crossref    = {NIB},
   xref        = {NIB},
   author      = {N. T. Wright},
   title       = {The Letter to the Romans},
   subtitle    = {Introduction, Commantary, and Reflections},
   volume      = {10},
   date        = {2002},
   pages       = {393-770},
}
\end{filecontents}
\usepackage[style=sbl,fullbibrefs=true,sblfootnotes=false]{biblatex}
\addbibresource{temp.bib}
\DeclareSourcemap{
  \maps{
    % incommentary with an xref uses inreference driver
    \map[overwrite]{
      \step[fieldsource=xref, final]
      \step[typesource=incommentary, typetarget=inreference]
    }
  }
}
\begin{document}
\null\vfill
Test.\footcite[400]{NIB:Rom}
\printbibliography
\end{document}

[folofjc]

Great, thanks! So in your sbl-example file, did you include this source map? Because your example file looks like this result, and not like the student supplement (which means it looks like your v2, and not what I was getting with v1). How was the example file different? Did I miss the source map?

[dcpurton]

Great, thanks! So in your sbl-example file, did you include this source map? Because your example file looks like this result, and not like the student supplement (which means it looks like your v2, and not what I was getting with v1). How was the example file different? Did I miss the source map?

Ooo. Which file? biblatex-sbl-examples.pdf in the release version (which appears in MikTeX and TeXLive) has:

1. Patrick D. Miller, NIB 6:577.

But I wonder if I should just change this behaviour and include the source map in the current version?

What do you think?

[folofjc]

Ah, you're right. I was looking at the second line, thinking that was also a footnote, but it was a short bib. Sorry!

Yeah, I think the example file is inconsistent with 6.2.12 and 6.2.22, which are the closest things to something like NIB. I would put the source map in there I think. Thanks again!