summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/macros/latex/contrib/biblatex-ms/doc/examples/91-sorting-schemes-ms.tex
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
Diffstat (limited to 'macros/latex/contrib/biblatex-ms/doc/examples/91-sorting-schemes-ms.tex')
-rw-r--r--macros/latex/contrib/biblatex-ms/doc/examples/91-sorting-schemes-ms.tex18
1 files changed, 18 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/macros/latex/contrib/biblatex-ms/doc/examples/91-sorting-schemes-ms.tex b/macros/latex/contrib/biblatex-ms/doc/examples/91-sorting-schemes-ms.tex
new file mode 100644
index 0000000000..39498d475a
--- /dev/null
+++ b/macros/latex/contrib/biblatex-ms/doc/examples/91-sorting-schemes-ms.tex
@@ -0,0 +1,18 @@
+\documentclass[a4paper]{article}
+\usepackage{fontspec}
+\usepackage[american]{babel}
+\usepackage{csquotes}
+\usepackage[style=authoryear,sortcites,sorting=ynt,backend=biber]{biblatex-ms}
+\usepackage{hyperref}
+\addbibresource{biblatex-examples.bib}
+\begin{document}
+% This demonstrates that the sorting of citations can be difference to the
+% bibliography. However, this is not always advisable in case of multiple
+% citations in the same year for the same author list. This is because
+% extradate (the "a", "b" etc. in "Smith 2010a" and "Smith 2010b" etc.)
+% depends on the sorting order and if the sorting order is different
+% between citations and bibliography, this can cause confusion.
+Filler text \parencite{wassenberg,cicero,companion,angenendt}.
+\newrefcontext[sorting=nyt]
+\printbibliography
+\end{document}