rules.md#C2's no-name-reading clause says: "A part the parse consumes wholly as suffixes raises no report about reading a word of it as a name, whether it is the part after a suffix comma (C1) or a part beyond the second." But the part after a suffix comma reports each word the credential run absorbed:
| Input |
Reports |
John Smith, PhD van der Berg |
suffix-or-name ×3: "'van' follows a credential, so it reads as part of the suffix run; it may be a name word" (likewise 'der', 'Berg') |
John Smith, Jr. Berg |
suffix-or-name on 'Berg' |
The fields are read wholly as suffixes, as C2 says. Only the report half disagrees. The report is #602's absorbed-word report on the credential run, which since #613 _comma.decide reads when it binds the part. The rule text and the code have disagreed since then, and no test pins either side. #636's review found it.
Question: which is right?
- (a) The report stays, because a word behind a credential in a part the comma made postnominal is a genuine fork, the same one it reports in
John Smith PhD Jones. C2's sentence is then narrowed to the forks it means (a particle chained onto a name word, an acronym taken into the name).
- (b) The report goes, because the comma already said the part is postnominal.
rules.md#C2's no-name-reading clause says: "A part the parse consumes wholly as suffixes raises no report about reading a word of it as a name, whether it is the part after a suffix comma (C1) or a part beyond the second." But the part after a suffix comma reports each word the credential run absorbed:
John Smith, PhD van der Bergsuffix-or-name×3: "'van' follows a credential, so it reads as part of the suffix run; it may be a name word" (likewise 'der', 'Berg')John Smith, Jr. Bergsuffix-or-nameon 'Berg'The fields are read wholly as suffixes, as C2 says. Only the report half disagrees. The report is #602's absorbed-word report on the credential run, which since #613
_comma.decidereads when it binds the part. The rule text and the code have disagreed since then, and no test pins either side. #636's review found it.Question: which is right?
John Smith PhD Jones. C2's sentence is then narrowed to the forks it means (a particle chained onto a name word, an acronym taken into the name).