biblatex-chicago 16th (6jul12)

git-svn-id: svn://tug.org/texlive/trunk@27002 c570f23f-e606-0410-a88d-b1316a301751

1 files changed, 3486 insertions, 2097 deletions

diff --git a/Master/texmf-dist/doc/latex/biblatex-chicago/biblatex-chicago.tex b/Master/texmf-dist/doc/latex/biblatex-chicago/biblatex-chicago.tex
index b5cbe1b1cf2..26cf64ae13d 100644
--- a/Master/texmf-dist/doc/latex/biblatex-chicago/biblatex-chicago.tex
+++ b/Master/texmf-dist/doc/latex/biblatex-chicago/biblatex-chicago.tex
@@ -1,7 +1,7 @@
 %
 % This file documents the biblatex-chicago package, which allows users
 % of the biblatex package to format references according to the
-% Chicago Manual of Style, 15th edition.
+% Chicago Manual of Style, 16th edition.
 %
 \documentclass[a4paper]{article}
 \usepackage[T1]{fontenc}
@@ -56,7 +56,7 @@
   Style files for biblatex
 
 \vspace{.3\baselineskip}
-\sffamily\normalsize\bfseries David Fussner\qquad Version 0.9.8d (beta) \\
+\sffamily\normalsize\bfseries David Fussner\qquad Version 0.9.9 (beta) \\
 \href{mailto:djf027@googlemail.com}{djf027@googlemail.com}\\ \today
 
 \end{center} 
@@ -73,20 +73,26 @@
 \textbf{Please be advised that this package is beta software.  Philipp
   Lehman's \textsf{biblatex} package has now reached a stable state,
   and is unlikely to require wholesale changes to styles written for
-  it.  With the recent release of the \emph{Chicago Manual of Style's}
-  16th edition, however, it is possible that future releases of
-  \textsf{biblatex-chicago} implementing that new specification may
-  require significant alterations.  I intend to maintain the current
-  15th-edition files in a more or less stable state after this
-  release, but that is not to say that all development will cease.
-  \mylittlespace\\ I have tried to implement as much of the
-  \emph{Manual's} specification as possible, though undoubtedly some
-  gaps remain.  One user has recently argued that I should attempt to
-  include legal citations, so in the long term it may be that I return
-  to this issue.  In the meantime, if it seems like this package could
-  be of use to you, yet it doesn't do something you need/want it to
-  do, please feel free to let me know, and of course any suggestions
-  for solving problems more elegantly or accurately would be most
+  it, aside from those necessary for the upcoming switch to
+  \textsf{Biber} as the required backend rather than an optional one.
+  This release of \textsf{biblatex-chicago} implements, for the first
+  time, the 16th edition of the \emph{Chicago Manual of Style}, but I
+  shall continue to maintain the 15th-edition files for those who need
+  or want them, a situation I anticipate being rather more common with
+  the author-date style than with notes \&\ bibliography.  I shall
+  also continue to maintain the 15th-edition documentation, which you
+  can find in \textsf{biblatex-chicago15.pdf}.  I have summarized the
+  changes between the two in section~\ref{sec:history} below,
+  especially the ones
+  that may require alterations to your .bib files.\mylittlespace\\
+  I have tried to implement as much of the \emph{Manual's}
+  specification as possible, though undoubtedly some gaps remain.  One
+  user has recently argued that I should attempt to include legal
+  citations, so in the long term it may be that I return to this
+  issue.  In the meantime, if it seems like this package could be of
+  use to you, yet it doesn't do something you need/want it to do,
+  please feel free to let me know, and of course any suggestions for
+  solving problems more elegantly or accurately would be most
   welcome.}
 
 \mylittlespace\textbf{Important Note:} If you have used
@@ -159,11 +165,11 @@ release.
     following:
   \item \mycolor{\textsf{Biber}} --- the next-generation
     \textsc{Bib}\TeX\ replacement, called \textsf{Biber}, which is
-    available from SourceForge.  You need version 0.9.6 to work with
-    \textsf{biblatex-chicago} and \textsf{biblatex} 1.7, and it is
-    required for users who are either using the author-date style or
-    processing a .bib file in Unicode.  See
-    \textsf{cms-dates-sample.pdf} for more details.
+    available from SourceForge.  You should use the latest version,
+    0.9.8, to work with \textsf{biblatex-chicago} and
+    \textsf{biblatex} 1.7, and it is required for users who are either
+    using the author-date style or processing a .bib file in Unicode.
+    See \textsf{cms-dates-sample.pdf} for more details.
   \end{itemize}
 \item The line:
   \begin{quote}
@@ -174,11 +180,14 @@ release.
   \begin{quote}
     \cmd{usepackage[authordate,backend=biber]\{biblatex-chicago\}}
   \end{quote}
-  to load the author-date style.  Any other options you usually pass
-  to \textsf{biblatex} can be given to \textsf{biblatex-chicago}
-  instead, but loading it this way sets up a number of other
-  parameters automatically.  You can also load the package via the
-  usual \cmd{usepackage\{biblatex\}}, adding
+  to load the author-date style.  (You can use
+  \mycolor{\texttt{notes15}} or \mycolor{\texttt{authordate15}} to
+  load the 15th-edition styles.  Please see
+  \mycolor{\textsf{biblatex-chicago15.pdf}} for the details.)  Any
+  other options you usually pass to \textsf{biblatex} can be given to
+  \textsf{biblatex-chicago} instead, but loading it this way sets up a
+  number of other parameters automatically.  You can also load the
+  package via the usual \cmd{usepackage\{biblatex\}}, adding either
   \texttt{style=chicago-notes} or \texttt{style=chicago-authordate},
   but this is mainly for those who wish to set much of the low-level
   formatting of their document themselves.  Please see
@@ -209,17 +218,21 @@ release.
   \textsf{cms-french.lbx}, \textsf{cms-german.lbx}, and
   \textsf{cms-ngerman.lbx} files from \textsf{biblatex-chicago},
   installed either in a system-wide \TeX\ directory, or in the working
-  directory where you keep your *.tex files.  With
-  \colmarginpar{\textsf{New!}} this release the .zip file from CTAN
-  contains several subdirectories to help keep the growing number of
-  files organized, so the files listed above can be found in the
+  directory where you keep your *.tex files.  (To use the 15th-edition
+  styles, you'll also require \textsf{\mycolor{chicago-notes15.bbx}},
+  \textsf{\mycolor{chicago-notes15.cbx}},
+  \textsf{\mycolor{chicago-authordate15.bbx}}, and
+  \textsf{\mycolor{chicago-authordate15.cbx}}.)  The .zip file from
+  CTAN contains several subdirectories to help keep the growing number
+  of files organized, so the files listed above can be found in the
   \texttt{latex/} subdirectory, itself further divided into the
   \texttt{bbx/}, \texttt{cbx/}, and \texttt{lbx/} subdirectories.  If
-  you install in a system-wide directory, I recommend creating
+  you install in a system-wide directory, I suggest using the standard
+  layout and creating
   \texttt{<TEXMFLOCAL>/tex/latex/biblatex-contrib/biblatex-chicago},
   where\ \texttt{<TEXMFLOCAL>} is the root of your local \TeX\
   installation --- for example, and depending on your system and
-  preferences, \texttt{/usr/share/texmf-local},
+  preferences, \texttt{/usr/share/texmf\-local},
   \texttt{/usr/local/share/texmf}, or \texttt{C:\textbackslash{}Local
     TeX Files\textbackslash}.  Then you can copy the contents of the
   \texttt{latex/} directory there, subdirectories and all.  (If you
@@ -228,11 +241,6 @@ release.
   choose to place them anywhere in the \texttt{texmf} tree, you'll
   need to update the file name database to make sure \TeX\ can find
   them.
-\item If you are using the Xe\LaTeX\ engine and are encountering
-  difficulties, please upgrade to the latest version of
-  \textsf{csquotes}, which incorporates chan\-ges that should address
-  formatting bugs that many users have encountered.  Please see
-  section~\ref{sec:otherpacks} below for the details.
 \item Philipp Lehman's very clear and detailed documentation of the
   \textsf{biblatex} system, available in his package as
   \textsf{biblatex.pdf}.  Here he explains why you might want to use
@@ -264,16 +272,15 @@ release.
   please pay particular attention to the sections on Obsolete and
   Deprecated Features, starting on page~\pageref{deprec:obsol}.  You
   will find the seven previous files in the \texttt{doc/} subdirectory
-  \colmarginpar{\textsf{New!}} once you've extracted
-  \textsf{biblatex-chicago.zip}.  If you wish to place them in a
-  system-wide directory, I would recommend
+  once you've extracted \textsf{biblatex-chicago.zip}.  If you wish to
+  place them in a system-wide directory, I would recommend
   \texttt{<TEXMFLOCAL>/doc/latex/biblatex-contrib/biblatex-chicago},
-  remembering of course to update the file name database afterward.
-  (Let me reiterate, also, that if you currently have quoted material
-  in your .bib file, and are using \cmd{enquote} or the standard
-  \LaTeX\ mechanisms there, then the simplest procedure is always to
-  use \cmd{mkbibquote} instead in order to ensure that punctuation
-  works out right.)
+  all the while remembering, of course, to update the file name
+  database afterward.  (Let me reiterate, also, that if you currently
+  have quoted material in your .bib file, and are using \cmd{enquote}
+  or the standard \LaTeX\ mechanisms there, then the simplest
+  procedure is always to use \cmd{mkbibquote} instead in order to
+  ensure that punctuation works out right.)
 \item Access to a copy of \emph{The Chicago Manual of Style} itself,
   which naturally contains incomparably more information than I can
   hope to present here.  It should always be your first port of call
@@ -283,7 +290,7 @@ release.
 \subsection{License}
 \label{sec:lppl}
 
-Copyright © 2008--2011 David Fussner.  This package is
+Copyright © 2008--2012 David Fussner.  This package is
 author-maintained.  This work may be copied, distributed and/or
 modified under the conditions of the \LaTeX\ Project Public License,
 either version 1.3 of this license or (at your option) any later
@@ -295,8 +302,6 @@ either expressed or implied, including, but not limited to, the
 implied warranties of merchantability and fitness for a particular
 purpose.
 
-\enlargethispage{-\baselineskip}
-
 \subsection{Acknowledgements}
 \label{sec:acknowl}
 
@@ -311,21 +316,22 @@ for formatting the footnote marks, and that for printing the
 separating rule only after a run-on note, I've adapted from the
 \textsf{footmisc} package by Robin Fairbairns, and I've borrowed ideas
 for the \texttt{shorthandibid} option from Dominik Waßenhoven's
-\textsf{biblatex-dw} package.  There may be other \LaTeX\ code I've
-appropriated and forgotten, in which case please remind me.  Finally,
-Charles Schaum and Joseph Reagle Jr.\ were both extremely generous
-with their help and advice during the development of this package, and
-have both continued indefatigably to test it and suggest needed
-improvements.  They were particularly instrumental in encouraging the
-greatest possible degree of compatibility with other \textsf{biblatex}
-styles.  Indeed, if the task of adapting .bib files for use with the
-Chicago style seems onerous now, you should have tried it before they
-got their hands on it.
+\textsf{biblatex-dw} package.  Kazuo Teramoto and Gildas Hamel both
+sent patches to improve the package, and there may be other \LaTeX\
+code I've appropriated and forgotten, in which case please remind me.
+Finally, Charles Schaum and Joseph Reagle Jr.\ were both extremely
+generous with their help and advice during the development of this
+package, and have both continued indefatigably to test it and suggest
+needed improvements.  They were particularly instrumental in
+encouraging the greatest possible degree of compatibility with other
+\textsf{biblatex} styles.  Indeed, if the task of adapting .bib files
+for use with the Chicago style seems onerous now, you should have
+tried it before they got their hands on it.
 
 \section{Detailed Introduction}
 \label{sec:Intro}
 
-The \emph{Chicago Manual of Style}, implemented here in its 15th
+The \emph{Chicago Manual of Style}, implemented here in its 16th
 edition, has long, in America at least, been one of the most
 influential style guides for writers and publishers.  While one's
 choices are now perhaps more extensive than ever, the \emph{Manual} at
@@ -336,23 +342,24 @@ number of different kinds of source material, then your choice (or
 your publisher's choice) of the \emph{Manual} as a style guide seems
 set to be a happy one.
 
+%\enlargethispage{-\baselineskip}
+
 \mylittlespace These very strengths, however, also make the style
-difficult to use.  Admittedly, the \emph{Manual} does leave room for
-\enquote{inventive solutions} to particular problems (17.2), and it
-also emphasizes consistency within a work, as opposed to rigid
-adherence to the specification, at least when writer and publisher
-agree (17.18).  Sometimes a publisher demands such adherence, however,
-and anyone who has attempted to produce it may well come away with the
-impression that the specification itself is somewhat idiosyncratic in
-its complexity, and I can't help but agree.  In the notes \&\
-bibliography style, the numerous differences in punctuation (and
-strings identifying translators, editors, and the like) between
-footnotes and bibliographies and the sometimes unusual location of
-page numbers; in both styles the distinction between \enquote{journal}
-and \enquote{magazine,} and the formatting differences between (e.g.)
-a work from antiquity and one from the Renaissance, all of these tend
-to overburden the writer who wants to comply with the standard.  Many
-of these complexities, in truth, make the specification very nearly
+difficult to use.  Admittedly, the \emph{Manual} emphasizes
+consistency within a work, as opposed to rigid adherence to the
+specification, at least when writer and publisher agree (14.70).
+Sometimes a publisher demands such adherence, however, and anyone who
+has attempted to produce it may well come away with the impression
+that the specification itself is somewhat idiosyncratic in its
+complexity, and I can't help but agree.  In the notes \&\ bibliography
+style, the numerous differences in punctuation (and strings
+identifying translators, editors, and the like) between footnotes and
+bibliographies and the sometimes unusual location of page numbers; in
+both styles the distinction between \enquote{journal} and
+\enquote{magazine,} and the formatting differences between (e.g.)  a
+work from antiquity and one from the Renaissance, all of these tend to
+overburden the writer who wants to comply with the standard.  Many of
+these complexities, in truth, make the specification very nearly
 impossible to implement straightforwardly in a system like
 \textsc{Bib}\TeX\ --- options multiply, each requiring a particular
 sort of formatting, until one almost reaches the point of believing
@@ -449,7 +456,7 @@ The complete list of entry types currently available in
 \textsf{biblatex-chicago-notes}, minus the odd \textsf{biblatex}
 alias, is as follows: \mycolor{\textbf{article}}, \textbf{artwork},
 \textbf{audio}, \textbf{book}, \textbf{bookinbook}, \textbf{booklet},
-\textbf{collection}, \textbf{customc}, \textbf{image},
+\textbf{collection}, \mycolor{\textbf{customc}}, \textbf{image},
 \textbf{inbook}, \textbf{incollection}, \textbf{inproceedings},
 \textbf{inreference}, \textbf{letter}, \textbf{manual},\textbf{misc},
 \textbf{music}, \textbf{online} (with its alias \textbf{www}),
@@ -471,19 +478,20 @@ very few fields when you use \textsf{biblatex-chicago-notes}, so it
 seemed to me better to gather information pertaining to fields in the
 next section.
 
-\mybigspace The \colmarginpar{\textbf{article}} \emph{Chicago Manual of
-  Style} (17.148) recognizes three different sorts of periodical
+\mybigspace The \colmarginpar{\textbf{article}} \emph{Chicago Manual
+  of Style} (14.170) recognizes three different sorts of periodical
 publication, \enquote{journals,} \enquote{magazines,} and
-\enquote{newspapers.} The first (17.150) includes \enquote{scholarly
+\enquote{newspapers.} The first (14.172) includes \enquote{scholarly
   or professional periodicals available mainly by subscription,} while
 the second refers to \enquote{weekly or monthly} publications that are
 \enquote{available either by subscription or in individual issues at
-  bookstores or newsstands.}  \enquote{Magazines} will tend to be
-\enquote{more accessible to general readers,} and typically won't have
-a volume number.  Indeed, by fiat I declare that should you need to
-refer to a journal that identifies its issues mainly by year, month,
-or week, then for the purposes of \textsf{biblatex-chicago-notes} such
-a publication is a \enquote{magazine,} and not a \enquote{journal.}
+  bookstores or newsstands or online.}  \enquote{Magazines} will tend
+to be \enquote{more accessible to general readers,} and typically
+won't have a volume number.  Indeed, by fiat I declare that should you
+need to refer to a journal that identifies its issues mainly by year,
+month, or week, then for the purposes of
+\textsf{biblatex-chicago-notes} such a publication is a
+\enquote{magazine,} and not a \enquote{journal.}
 
 \mylittlespace Now, for articles in \enquote{journals} you can simply
 use the traditional \textsc{Bib}\TeX\ --- and indeed \textsf{biblatex}
@@ -497,11 +505,11 @@ both \enquote{magazines} and \enquote{newspapers}) and a plain
 \textsf{article} are that the year isn't placed within parentheses,
 and that page numbers are set off by a comma rather than a colon.
 Otherwise, the two sorts of reference have much in common.  (For
-\textsf{article}, see \emph{Manual} 17.154--181; batson,
+\textsf{article}, see \emph{Manual} 14.175--198; batson,
 beattie:crime, friedman:learning, garaud:gatine, garrett, hlatky:hrt,
 kern, lewis, loften:hamlet, mcmillen:antebellum, warr:ellison,
 white:callimachus. For \textsf{entrysubtype} \texttt{magazine}, see
-17.166, 17.182--198; assocpress:gun, morgenson:market, reaves:rosen,
+14.181, 14.199--202; assocpress:gun, morgenson:market, reaves:rosen,
 rozner:liberation, stenger:privacy.)
 
 \mylittlespace It gets worse.  The \emph{Manual} treats reviews (of
@@ -539,7 +547,7 @@ to do what you want.  Here, however, if all you need is a
 \textsf{titleaddon}, then you want to switch to the \textsf{review}
 type, where you can simply use the \textsf{title} field instead.
 
-\mylittlespace No less than six more things need explication here.
+\mylittlespace No less than seven more things need explication here.
 First, since the \emph{Manual} specifies that much of what goes into a
 \textsf{titleaddon} field stays unformatted --- no italics, no
 quotation marks --- this plain style is the default for such text,
@@ -553,32 +561,36 @@ may contain both the title of an individual article and the name of
 the regular column, in which case the former should go, as usual, in a
 \textsf{title} field, and the latter in \textsf{titleaddon}.  As with
 reviews proper, if there is only the generic title, then you want the
-\textsf{review} entry type.  (See 17.188, 17.190, 17.193;
+\textsf{review} entry type.  (See 14.203, 14.205, 14.208;
 morgenson:market, reaves:rosen.)
 
-\mylittlespace Third, the \emph{Manual} suggests that, in the case of
-\enquote{unsigned newspaper articles or features \ldots the name of
-  the newspaper stands in place of the author} (17.192).  It doesn't
-always carry through on this in its own presentation of newspaper
-citations (see esp.\ 17.188), but I've implemented their
-recommendation nonetheless, which means that in an \textsf{article}
-entry, \textsf{entrysubtype} \texttt{magazine}, or in a
-\textsf{review} entry, \textsf{entrysubtype} \texttt{magazine}, and
-only in such entries, a missing \textsf{author} field results in the
-name of the periodical (in the \textsf{journaltitle} field) being used
-as the missing author.  If, for reasons of emphasis or merely because
-of personal preference, you wish to keep the \textsf{title} in initial
-position, then you need to define the \textsf{author} using,
-effectively, anything at all, then set \texttt{useauthor=false} in the
-\textsf{options} field.  (The \cmd{isdot} macro in the \textsf{author}
-field no longer works on its own under \textsf{biblatex 1.6} and
-later, so you may need to change your .bib files when you upgrade.)
-Note that if you choose to use the name of the newspaper as an author,
+\mylittlespace Third, the 16th edition of the \emph{Manual} has, I
+believe, subtly changed its recommendations in the case of
+\enquote{unsigned newspaper articles or features} (14.207).
+Unfortunately, these changes aren't entirely clear to me.  First, it
+suggests that such pieces are \enquote{best dealt with in text or
+  notes.}  If, however, \enquote{a bibliography entry should be
+  needed, the name of the newspaper stands in place of the author.}
+The examples it provides, therefore, suggest quite different
+treatments of the same material in notes and bibliography, and they
+don't at any point that I can see recommend a format for short notes.
+I've implemented these recommendations fairly literally, which means
+that in an \textsf{article} entry, \textsf{entrysubtype}
+\texttt{magazine}, or in a \textsf{review} entry,
+\textsf{entrysubtype} \texttt{magazine}, and \emph{only} in such
+entries, a missing \textsf{author} field results in the name of the
+periodical (in the \textsf{journaltitle} field) being used as the
+missing author, but \emph{only} in the bibliography and in short
+notes.  In long notes, the \textsf{title} will appear first, before
+the \textsf{journaltitle}.  Note that the use of the name of the
+newspaper as an author creates sorting issues in the bibliography,
+issues that will mostly be solved for you if you use \textsf{Biber} as
+the backend.  If you don't, or if the \textsf{journaltitle} begins
+with a definite or indefinite article with which you can't dispense,
 then you'll need a \textsf{sortkey} field to ensure that the
-bibliography entry is alphabetized by \textsf{journaltitle} rather
-than by \textsf{title}.  The provision of a \textsf{shortauthor} field
-is no longer necessary, as in its absence the package automatically
-takes it from \textsf{journaltitle}.  (See lakeforester:pushcarts.)
+bibliography entry is alphabetized correctly.  (See
+lakeforester:pushcarts and, for the sorting issue,
+\cmd{DeclareSortingScheme} in section~\ref{sec:formatopts} below.)
 
 %\enlargethispage{-\baselineskip}
 
@@ -619,20 +631,35 @@ information you need to include in an \textsf{article},
 it in the \textsf{note} field, but rather in \textsf{titleaddon} or
 perhaps \textsf{addendum} (brown:bremer).
 
-\mylittlespace Finally, and in the interests of completeness, it may be
-as well to suggest that if you wish to cite a television or radio
+\mylittlespace Sixth, if you wish to cite a television or radio
 broadcast, the \textsf{article} type, \textsf{entrysubtype}
 \texttt{magazine} is the place for it.  The name of the program would
 go in \textsf{journaltitle}, with the name of the episode in
-\textsf{title}.  The network's name now goes into the new
-\textsf{usera} field, replacing the formatting kludge I suggested in
-version 0.7.  Of course, if the piece you are citing has only a
-generic name (an interview, for example), then the \textsf{review}
-type would be the best place for it.  (8.196, 17.207; see
-bundy:macneil for an example of how this all might look in a .bib
-file.)
-
-\enlargethispage{\baselineskip}
+\textsf{title}, and the network's name in the \textsf{usera} field.
+Of course, if the piece you are citing has only a generic name (an
+interview, for example), then the \textsf{review} type would be the
+best place for it.  (8.185, 14.221; see bundy:macneil for an example
+of how this all might look in a .bib file.  Commercial recordings of
+such material would need one of the audiovisual entry types, probably
+\textsf{audio} or \textsf{video} [friends:leia], while recordings from
+archives fit best into \textsf{misc} entries with an
+\textsf{entrysubtype} [coolidge:speech, roosevelt:speech].)
+
+\mylittlespace Finally, the 16th edition of the \emph{Manual}
+(14.243--6) specifies that blogs and other, similar online material
+should be presented like \textsf{articles}, with \texttt{magazine}
+\textsf{entrysubtype} (ellis:blog).  The title of the specific entry
+goes in \textsf{title}, the general title of the blog goes in
+\textsf{journaltitle}, and the word \enquote{\texttt{blog}} in the
+\textsf{location} field (though you could just use special formatting
+in the \textsf{journaltitle} field itself, which may sometimes be
+necessary).  Comments on blogs, with generic titles like
+\enquote{comment on} or \enquote{reply to,} need a \textsf{review}
+entry with the same \textsf{entrysubtype}.  Such comments make
+particular use of the \textsf{eventdate} and of the \textsf{nameaddon}
+fields; please see the documentation of \textbf{review}, below.
+
+% \enlargethispage{-\baselineskip}
 
 \mylittlespace If you're still with me, allow me to recommend that you
 browse through \textsf{notes-test.bib} to get a feel for just how many
@@ -645,7 +672,7 @@ that I have found in my own research that the unusual and/or limit
 cases are really rather rare, and that the vast majority of sources
 won't require any knowledge of these onerous details.
 
-\mybigspace Arne \mymarginpar{\textbf{artwork}} Kjell Vikhagen has
+\mybigspace Arne \colmarginpar{\textbf{artwork}} Kjell Vikhagen has
 pointed out to me that none of the standard entry types were
 straightforwardly adaptable when referring to visual artworks.  The
 \emph{Manual} doesn't give any thorough specifications for such
@@ -654,16 +681,20 @@ include them in the bibliographical apparatus at all.  Still, it's
 easy to conceive of contexts in which a list of artworks studied might
 be desirable, and \textsf{biblatex} includes entry types for just this
 purpose, though the standard styles leave them undefined.  The two I
-have included in this release are \textsf{artwork} and \textsf{image},
-the former intended for paintings, sculptures, etchings, and the like,
-the latter for photographs.  The two entry types work in exactly the
-same way as far as constructing your .bib entry, and when printed the
-only difference will be that the titles of \textsf{artworks} are
-italicized, those of \textsf{images} placed within quotation marks.
-
-\mylittlespace As one might expect, the artist goes in \textsf{author}
-and the name of the work in \textsf{title}.  The \textsf{type} field
-is intended for the medium --- e.g., oil on canvas, charcoal on paper
+chose to include in previous releases were \textsf{artwork} and
+\textsf{image}, the former intended for paintings, sculptures,
+etchings, and the like, the latter for photographs.  The 16th edition
+of the \emph{Manual} has modified its specifications for presenting
+photographs so that they are the same as for works in all other media.
+The \textsf{image} type, therefore, is now merely a clone of the
+\textsf{artwork} type, maintained mainly to provide backward
+compatibility for users migrating from the old specification to the
+current one.
+
+\mylittlespace Constructing an entry is fairly straightforward.  As
+one might expect, the artist goes in \textsf{author} and the name of
+the work in \textsf{title}.  The \textsf{type} field is intended for
+the medium --- e.g., oil on canvas, charcoal on paper, albumen print
 --- and the \textsf{version} field might contain the state of an
 etching.  You can place the dimensions of the work in \textsf{note},
 and the current location in \textsf{organization},
@@ -672,48 +703,55 @@ generality.  The \textsf{type} field, as in several other entry types,
 uses \textsf{biblatex's} automatic capitalization routines, so if the
 first word only needs a capital letter at the beginning of a sentence,
 use lowercase in the .bib file and let \textsf{biblatex} handle it for
-you.  (See \emph{Manual} 12.33; leo:madonna, bedford:photo.)
+you.  (See \emph{Manual} 3.22, 8.193; leo:madonna, bedford:photo.)
 
-\mylittlespace As a final complication, the \emph{Manual} (8.206) says
+\mylittlespace As a final complication, the \emph{Manual} (8.193) says
 that \enquote{the names of works of antiquity \ldots\,are usually set
   in roman.}  If you should need to include such a work in the
 reference apparatus, you can either define an \textsf{entrysubtype}
 for an \textsf{artwork} entry --- anything will do --- or you could
 use the \textsf{misc} entry type with an \textsf{entrysubtype}.
 Fortunately, in this instance the other fields in a \textsf{misc}
-entry function pretty much as in \textsf{artwork} or \textsf{image}.
-
-\mybigspace For \mymarginpar{\textbf{audio}} this release of
-\textsf{biblatex-chicago}, following the request of Johan Nordstrom, I
-have included three new entry types, all undefined by the standard
-styles, designed to allow users to present audiovisual sources in
-accordance with the Chicago specifications.  The \emph{Manual's}
-presentation of such sources (17.263--273), though admirably brief,
-seems to me somewhat inconsistent.  I attempted to condense all the
-requirements into two new entry types, but ended up relying on three,
-the differences between which I shall attempt to delineate here.
-There are likely to be occasions when your choice of entry type is not
-obvious, but at the very least \textsf{biblatex-chicago} should help
-you maintain consistency.
+entry function pretty much as in \textsf{artwork}.
+
+\mybigspace Following \colmarginpar{\textbf{audio}} the request of
+Johan Nordstrom, I have included three entry types, all undefined by
+the standard styles, designed to allow users to present audiovisual
+sources in accordance with the Chicago specifications.  The
+\emph{Manual's} presentation of such sources (14.274--280), though
+admirably brief, seems to me somewhat inconsistent; the proliferation
+of online sources has made the task yet more complex.  For the 15th
+edition I attempted to condense all the requirements into two new
+entry types, but ended up relying on three.  For the 16th edition, in
+particular, I also need to include the \textbf{online} and even the
+\textbf{misc} entry types, which see, under the audiovisual rubric.  I
+shall attempt to delineate the main differences here, and though there
+are likely to be occasions when your choice of entry type is not
+obvious, at the very least \textsf{biblatex-chicago} should help you
+maintain consistency.
 
 \mylittlespace The \textbf{music} type is intended for all musical
 recordings that do not have a video component.  This means, for
 example, digital media (whether on CD or hard drive), vinyl records,
-and tapes.  The \textbf{video} type includes (nearly) all visual
-media, whether it be films, TV shows, tapes and DVDs of the preceding
-or of any sort of performance (including music), or online multimedia.
-Finally, the \textbf{audio} type, our current concern, fills gaps in
-the two others, and presents its sources in a more \enquote{book-like}
-manner.  Published musical scores need this type --- unpublished ones
-would use \textsf{misc} with an \textsf{entrysubtype} (shapey:partita)
---- as do such favorite educational formats as the slideshow and the
-filmstrip (greek:filmstrip, schubert:muellerin, verdi:corsaro).  The
-\emph{Manual} (17.269--270) sometimes uses a similar format for audio
-books and even for films (twain:audio, weed:flatiron), though
-elsewhere these sorts of material are presented as \textsf{music} and
-\textsf{video}, respectively.  It would appear to depend on which
-sorts of publication facts you wish to present --- cf.\ \emph{Manual}
-17.269.
+and tapes.  The \textbf{video} type includes most visual media,
+whether it be films, TV shows, tapes and DVDs of the preceding or of
+any sort of performance (including music), or online multimedia.  The
+\emph{Manual's} treatment (14.280) of the latter suggests that online
+video excerpts, short pieces, and interviews should generally use the
+\textbf{online} type (harwood:biden, horowitz:youtube, pollan:plant).
+The \textbf{audio} type, our current concern, fills gaps in the
+others, and presents its sources in a more \enquote{book-like} manner.
+Published musical scores need this type --- unpublished ones would use
+\textsf{misc} with an \textsf{entrysubtype} (shapey:partita) --- as do
+such favorite educational formats as the slideshow and the filmstrip
+(greek:filmstrip, schubert:muellerin, verdi:corsaro).  The
+\emph{Manual} (14.277--280) sometimes uses a similar format for audio
+books (twain:audio), though, depending on the sorts of publication
+facts you wish to present, this sort of material may fall under
+\textsf{music} (auden:reading).  Dated audio recordings that are part
+of an archive, online or no, may best be presented in a \textbf{misc}
+entry with an \textsf{entrysubtype} (coolidge:speech,
+roosevelt:speech).
 
 %\enlargethispage{-\baselineskip}
 
@@ -729,28 +767,24 @@ for both books and collections, so while there will normally be an
 \textsf{booktitle} and/or a \textsf{maintitle} --- see
 schubert:muellerin for an entry that uses all three in citing one song
 from a cycle.  If the medium in question needs specifying, the
-\textsf{type} field is the place for it.  (It is characteristic of
-this entry type that such information is placed after the publisher
-information, whereas in the other audiovisual types their order is
-reversed.)  Finally, the \textsf{titleaddon} field can specify
-functions for which \textsf{biblatex-chicago} provides no automated
-handling, e.g., a librettist (verdi:corsaro).
+\textsf{type} field is the place for it.  Finally, the
+\textsf{titleaddon} field can specify functions for which
+\textsf{biblatex-chicago} provides no automated handling, e.g., a
+librettist (verdi:corsaro).
 
 \mybigspace This \mymarginpar{\textbf{bookinbook}} type provides the
 means of referring to parts of books that are considered, in other
 contexts, themselves to be books, rather than chapters, essays, or
-articles.  (Older versions of \textsf{biblatex-chicago} used
-\textbf{customb} for this purpose, but this is now obsolete.)  Such an
-entry can have a \textsf{title} and a \textsf{maintitle}, but it can
-also contain a \textsf{booktitle}, all three of which will be
-italicized when printed.  In general usage it is, therefore, rather
-like the traditional \textsf{inbook} type, only with its
-\textsf{title} in italics rather than in quotation marks.  (See
-\emph{Manual} 17.72, 17.89, 17.93; bernard:boris, euripides:orestes,
-plato:republic:gr.)
+articles.  Such an entry can have a \textsf{title} and a
+\textsf{maintitle}, but it can also contain a \textsf{booktitle}, all
+three of which will be italicized when printed.  In general usage it
+is, therefore, rather like the traditional \textsf{inbook} type, only
+with its \textsf{title} in italics rather than in quotation marks.
+(See \emph{Manual} 14.114, 14.127, 14.130; bernard:boris,
+euripides:orestes, plato:republic:gr.)
 
 \mylittlespace \textbf{NB}: The Euripides play receives slightly
-different presentations in 17.89 and 17.93.  Although the
+different presentations in 14.127 and 14.130.  Although the
 specification is very detailed, it doesn't eliminate all choice or
 variation.  Using a system like \textsc{Bib}\TeX\ should help to
 maintain consistency.  
@@ -758,7 +792,7 @@ maintain consistency.
 \mybigspace This \mymarginpar{\textbf{booklet}} is the first of two
 entry types --- the other being \textsf{manual}, on which see below
 --- which are traditional in \textsc{Bib}\TeX\ styles, but which the
-\emph{Manual} (17.241) suggests may well be treated basically as
+\emph{Manual} (14.249) suggests may well be treated basically as
 books.  In the interests of backward compatibility,
 \textsf{biblatex-chicago-notes} will so format such an entry, which
 uses the \textsf{howpublished} field instead of a standard
@@ -772,37 +806,40 @@ obsolete, and any such entries in your .bib file will trigger an
 error.  Please use the standard \textsf{biblatex} \textbf{letter} type
 instead.
 
-%\enlargethispage{-\baselineskip}
+\enlargethispage{\baselineskip}
 
 \mybigspace This \mymarginpar{\textbf{customb}} entry type is now
 obsolete, and any such entries in your .bib file will trigger an
 error.  Please use the standard \textsf{biblatex} \textbf{bookinbook}
 type instead.
 
-\mybigspace This \mymarginpar{\textbf{customc}} entry type has
-undergone a metamorphosis with this release, as I previously warned
-both here and in the RELEASE file.  Rather than being a (deprecated)
-alias of the standard \textsf{biblatex} \textbf{suppbook}, it now
-allows you to include alphabetized cross-references to other, separate
-entries in the bibliography, particularly to other names or
-pseudonyms, as recommended by the \emph{Manual}.  (This is different
-from the usual \textsf{crossref}, \textsf{xref}, and \textsf{userf}
-mechanisms, all primarily designed to include cross-references to
-other works.  Cf.\ 17.39--40).  The lecarre:cornwell entry, for
-example, would allow your readers to find the more-commonly-used
-pseudonym \enquote{John Le Carré} even if they were, for some reason,
-looking under his real name \enquote{David John Moore Cornwell.}
-
-\mylittlespace In such a case, you would need merely to place the
-author's real name in the \textsf{author} field, and the pseudonym(s),
-under which his or her works are presented in the bibliography, in the
-\textsf{title} field.  To make sure the cross-reference also appears
-in the bibliography, you can either manually include the entry key in
-a \cmd{nocite} command, or you can put that entry key in the
+\mybigspace This \colmarginpar{\textbf{customc}} entry type allows you
+to include alphabetized cross-references to other, separate entries in
+the bibliography, particularly to other names or pseudonyms, as
+recommended by the \emph{Manual}.  (This is different from the usual
+\textsf{crossref}, \textsf{xref}, and \textsf{userf} mechanisms, all
+primarily designed to include cross-references to other works.  Cf.\
+14.84,86).  The lecarre:cornwell entry, for example, would allow your
+readers to find the more-commonly-used pseudonym \enquote{John Le
+  Carré} even if they were, for some reason, looking under his real
+name \enquote{David John Moore Cornwell.}\ As I read the
+specification, these cross-references are particularly encouraged,
+bordering on required, when \enquote{a bibliography includes two or
+  more works published by the same author but under different
+  pseudonyms.}\ The following entries in \textsf{notes-test.bib} show
+one way of addressing this: crea\-sey:ashe:blast,
+crea\-sey:york:death, crea\-sey:mor\-ton:hide, ashe:crea\-sey,
+york:crea\-sey and mor\-ton:crea\-sey.
+
+\mylittlespace In these latter cases, you would need merely to place
+the pseudonym in the \textsf{author} field, and the author's real
+name, under which his or her works are presented in the bibliography,
+in the \textsf{title} field.  To make sure the cross-reference also
+appears in the bibliography, you can either manually include the entry
+key in a \cmd{nocite} command, or you can put that entry key in the
 \textbf{userc} field in the main .bib entry, in which case
 \textsf{biblatex-chicago} will print the expanded abbreviation if and
-only if you cite the main entry.  (Cf.\ lecarre:cornwell,
-lecarre:quest; \textsf{userc}, below.)
+only if you cite the main entry.  (Cf.\ \textsf{userc}, below.)
 
 \mylittlespace Under ordinary circumstances, \textsf{biblatex-chicago}
 will connect the two parts of the cross-reference with the word
@@ -811,13 +848,17 @@ will connect the two parts of the cross-reference with the word
 differently, you can put the connecting word(s) into the
 \textsf{nameaddon} field.
 
-\mybigspace This \mymarginpar{\textbf{image}} entry type, left
-undefined in the standard styles, is in \textsf{biblatex-chicago}
-intended for referring to photographs.  Excluding the possible use of
-the \textsf{entrysubtype} field, which in an \textsf{image} entry
-would be ignored, this type is a clone of \textsf{artwork}, so you
-should consult the latter's documentation above to see how to
-construct your .bib entry.  (See \emph{Manual} 12.33; bedford:photo.)
+\mybigspace This \colmarginpar{\textbf{image}} entry type, left
+undefined in the standard styles, was in previous releases of
+\textsf{biblatex-chicago} intended for referring to photographs, but
+the 16th edition of the \emph{Manual} has changed its specifications
+for such works, which are now treated the same as works in all other
+media.  This means that this entry type is now a clone of the
+\textsf{artwork} type, which see.  I retain it here as a convenience
+for users migrating from the old to the new specification.  (See 3.22,
+8.193; bedford:photo.)
+
+\enlargethispage{\baselineskip}
 
 \mybigspace These \mymarginpar{\textbf{inbook}\\\textbf{incollection}}
 two standard \textsf{biblatex} types have very nearly identical
@@ -837,7 +878,7 @@ bibliography when you cite multiple pieces from the same
 \textsf{collection}.  These abbreviations are activated when you use
 the \textsf{crossref} or \textsf{xref} field in \textsf{incollection}
 entries, and not in \textsf{inbook} entries, mainly because the
-\emph{Manual} (17.70) here specifies a \enquote{multiauthor book.}
+\emph{Manual} (14.113) here specifies a \enquote{multiauthor book.}
 (For more on this mechanism see \textbf{crossref}, below, and note
 that it is also active in \textsf{letter} and \textsf{inproceedings}
 entries.  There is, of course, nothing to prevent you from using the
@@ -846,7 +887,7 @@ but you'll have to use \textsf{incollection} instead of
 \textsf{inbook}.)  If the part of a book to which you are referring
 has had a separate publishing history as a book in its own right, then
 you may wish to use the \textsf{bookinbook} type, instead, on which
-see above.  (See \emph{Manual} 17.68--72; \textsf{inbook}:
+see above.  (See \emph{Manual} 14.111--114; \textsf{inbook}:
 ashbrook:brain, phibbs:diary, will:cohere; \textsf{incollection}:
 centinel:letters, contrib:contrib, sirosh:visualcortex; ellet:galena,
 keating:dearborn, and lippincott:chicago [and the \textsf{collection}
@@ -870,21 +911,21 @@ pretty much as in standard \textsf{biblatex}.  Indeed, the main
 differences between it and \textsf{incollection} are the lack of an
 \textsf{edition} field and the possibility that an
 \textsf{organization} may be cited alongside the \textsf{publisher},
-even though the \emph{Manual} doesn't specify its use (17.71).  Please
-note, also, that the \textsf{crossref} and \textsf{xref} mechanism for
-shortening citations of multiple pieces from the same
+even though the \emph{Manual} doesn't specify its use (14.226).
+Please note, also, that the \textsf{crossref} and \textsf{xref}
+mechanism for shortening citations of multiple pieces from the same
 \textsf{proceedings} is operative here, just as it is in
 \textsf{incollection} entries.  See \textbf{crossref}, below, for more
 details.
 
-\enlargethispage{-\baselineskip}
+% \enlargethispage{-\baselineskip}
 
 \mybigspace This \mymarginpar{\textbf{inreference}} entry type is
 aliased to \textsf{incollection} in the standard styles, but the
 \emph{Manual} has particular requirements, so if you are citing
 \enquote{[w]ell-known reference books, such as major dictionaries and
   encyclopedias,} then this type should simplify the task of
-conforming to the specifications (17.238--239).  The main thing to
+conforming to the specifications (14.247--248).  The main thing to
 keep in mind is that I have designed this entry type for
 \enquote{alphabetically arranged} works, which you shouldn't cite by
 page, but rather by the name(s) of the article(s).  Because of the
@@ -945,33 +986,32 @@ correct alphabetization.)
 
 \mylittlespace Speaking of the \textsf{author}, this field holds the
 author of the specific entry (in \textsf{lista}), not the author of
-the \textsf{title} as a whole.  This name will be printed in
-parentheses after the entry's name (grove:sibelius).  If you wish to
-refer to a reference work by author or indeed by editor, having either
-appear at the head of the note (long or short) or bibliography entry,
-then you'll need to use a \textsf{book} entry instead (cf.\
-schellinger:novel), where the \textsf{lista} mechanism will also work
-in the bibliography, but which in every other way will be treated as a
-normal book, often a good choice for unfamiliar or non-standard
-reference works.
+the \textsf{title} as a whole.  This name will be printed after the
+entry's name (grove:sibelius).  If you wish to refer to a reference
+work by author or indeed by editor, having either appear at the head
+of the note (long or short) or bibliography entry, then you'll need to
+use a \textsf{book} entry instead (cf.\ schellinger:novel), where the
+\textsf{lista} mechanism will also work in the bibliography, but which
+in every other way will be treated as a normal book, often a good
+choice for unfamiliar or non-standard reference works.
 
 \mylittlespace Finally, all of these rules apply to online reference
 works, as well, for which you need to provide not only a \textsf{url}
 but also, always, a \textsf{urldate}, as these sources are in constant
 flux (wikiped:bibtex, grove:sibelius).
 
-\mybigspace This \mymarginpar{\textbf{letter}} is the entry type to
+\mybigspace This \colmarginpar{\textbf{letter}} is the entry type to
 use for citing letters, memoranda, or similar texts, but \emph{only}
 when they appear in a published collection.  (Unpublished material of
 this nature needs a \textsf{misc} entry, for which see below.)
 Depending on what sort of information you need to present in a
 citation, you may simply be able to get away with a standard
 \textsf{book} entry, which may then be cited by page number (see
-\emph{Manual} 17.31, 17.42; meredith:letters, adorno:benj).  If,
+\emph{Manual} 14.78, 14.88; meredith:letters, adorno:benj).  If,
 however, for whatever reason, you need to give full details of a
 specific letter, then you'll need to use the \textsf{letter} entry
 type, which attempts to simplify for you the \emph{Manual}'s rather
-complicated rules for formatting such references.  (See 17.76--78;
+complicated rules for formatting such references.  (See 14.117;
 jackson:paulina:letter, white:ross:memo, white:russ [a completely
 fictitious entry to show the \textsf{xref} mechanism], white:total [a
 \textsf{book} entry, for the bibliography]).
@@ -979,14 +1019,19 @@ fictitious entry to show the \textsf{xref} mechanism], white:total [a
 \mylittlespace To start, the name of the letter writer goes in the
 \textsf{author} field, while the \textsf{title} field contains both
 the name of the writer and that of the recipient, in the form
-\texttt{Author to Recipient}.  The \textsf{titleaddon} field contains
-the type of correspondence involved.  If it's a letter, this field may
-be left blank, but if it's a memorandum or report or the like, then
-this is the place to specify that fact.  Also, because the
+\texttt{Author to Recipient}.  The \textsf{titleaddon} field contains,
+optionally, the type of correspondence involved.  If it's a letter,
+the type needn't be given, but if it's a memorandum or report or the
+like, then this is the place to specify that fact.  Also, because the
 \textsf{origdate} field only accepts numbers, if you want to use the
-abbreviation \enquote{n.d.} (or \cmd{bibstring\{nodate\}}) for undated
-letters, then this is where you should put it.  Most importantly, the
-date of the letter itself goes in the \textsf{origdate} field
+abbreviation \enquote{n.d.}  (or \cmd{bibstring\{nodate\}}) for
+undated letters, then this is where you should put it.  If you need to
+specify where a letter was written, then you can also use this field,
+and, if both are present, remember to separate the location from the
+type with a comma, like so: \texttt{memorandum, London}.
+Alternatively, you can put the place of writing into the
+\mycolor{\textsf{origlocation}} field.  Most importantly, the date of
+the letter itself goes in the \textsf{origdate} field
 (\texttt{year-month-day}), which now allows a full date specification,
 while the publishing date of the whole collection goes in the
 \textsf{date} field, instead of in the obsolete \textsf{origyear}.  As
@@ -996,7 +1041,7 @@ noticed here that the presentation of the \textsf{origdate} in this
 sort of reference is different from the date format required elsewhere
 by the \emph{Manual}.  This appears to result from some recent changes
 to the specification, and it may be that we could get away with
-choosing one or the other format for all occurrences [6.46], but for
+choosing one or the other format for all occurrences [6.45], but for
 the moment I hope this mixed solution will suffice.)  Another
 difficulty arises when producing the short footnote form, which
 requires you to provide a \textsf{shorttitle} field of the form
@@ -1019,7 +1064,7 @@ should mention here that \textsf{letter} is one of the entry types in
 which a \textsf{crossref} or an \textsf{xref} field automatically
 results in special shortened forms in notes and bibliography if more
 than one piece from a single collection is cited.  (The other entry
-types are \textsf{incollection} and \textsf{inproceedings}; see 17.70
+types are \textsf{incollection} and \textsf{inproceedings}; see 14.113
 for the \emph{Manual}'s specification.)  This ordinarily won't be an
 issue for \textsf{letter} entries in the bibliography, as individual
 letters aren't included there, but it is operative in notes, where you
@@ -1028,7 +1073,7 @@ can disable it simply by not using a \textsf{crossref} or an
 recommend a way of keeping the individual letters from turning up in
 the bibliography, involving the use of the \textsf{keywords} field.
 
-\enlargethispage{\baselineskip}
+% \enlargethispage{\baselineskip}
 
 \mybigspace This \mymarginpar{\textbf{manual}} is the second of two
 traditional \textsc{Bib}\TeX\ entry types that the \emph{Manual}
@@ -1037,15 +1082,16 @@ with this latter, I have retained it in
 \textsf{biblatex-chicago-notes} for backward compatibility, its main
 peculiarity being that, in the absence of a named author, the
 \textsf{organization} producing the manual will be printed both as
-author and as publisher.  In such a case, you'll need a
-\textsf{sortkey} field to aid \textsf{biblatex's} alphabetization
-routines, but you no longer need to provide a \textsf{shortauthor}
-field, as the style will automatically use \textsf{organization} in
-the absence of anything else.  Of course, if you were to use a
-\textsf{book} entry for such a reference, then you would need to
-define both \textsf{author} and \textsf{publisher} using the name you
-here might have put in \textsf{organization}.  (See 17:47;
-chicago:manual, dyna:browser, natrecoff:camera.)
+author and as publisher.  If you are using \textsf{Biber} you no
+longer need a \textsf{sortkey} field to aid \textsf{biblatex's}
+alphabetization routines, as the style takes care of this for you
+(cf.\ section~\ref{sec:formatopts}, below).  You also don't need to
+provide a \textsf{shortauthor} field, as the style will automatically
+use \textsf{organization} in the absence of anything else.  Of course,
+if you were to use a \textsf{book} entry for such a reference, then
+you would need to define both \textsf{author} and \textsf{publisher}
+using the name you here might have put in \textsf{organization}.  (See
+14.92; chicago:manual, dyna:browser, natrecoff:camera.)
 
 \mybigspace As \colmarginpar{\textbf{misc}} its name suggests, the
 \textsf{misc} entry type was designed as a hold-all for citations that
@@ -1066,18 +1112,20 @@ possible.)
 \textsf{misc} type provides a means for citing unpublished letters,
 memoranda, private contracts, wills, interviews, and the like, making
 it something of an unpublished analogue to the \textsf{letter},
-\textsf{article}, and \textsf{review} entry types (which see).
-Typically, such an entry will cite part of an archive, and equally
-typically the text cited won't have a specific title, but only a
-generic one, whereas an \textsf{unpublished} entry will ordinarily
-have a specific author and title, and won't come from a named archive.
-The \textsf{misc} type with an \textsf{entrysubtype} defined is the
-least formatted of all those specified by the \emph{Manual}, so titles
-are in plain text, and any location details take no parentheses in
-full footnotes.  (It is quite possible, though somewhat unusual, for
-archival material to have a specific title, rather than a generic one.
-In these cases, you will need to enclose the title inside a
-\cmd{mkbibquote} command manually.  Cf.\ shapey:partita.)
+\textsf{article}, and \textsf{review} entry types (which see).  It
+also works well for presenting online audio pieces, particularly dated
+ones, like speeches.  Typically, such an entry will cite part of an
+archive, and equally typically the text cited won't have a specific
+title, but only a generic one, whereas an \textsf{unpublished} entry
+will ordinarily have a specific author and title, and won't come from
+a named archive.  The \textsf{misc} type with an \textsf{entrysubtype}
+defined is the least formatted of all those specified by the
+\emph{Manual}, so titles are in plain text, and any location details
+take no parentheses in full footnotes.  (It is quite possible, though
+somewhat unusual, for archival material to have a specific title,
+rather than a generic one.  In these cases, you will need to enclose
+the title inside a \cmd{mkbibquote} command manually.  Cf.\
+coolidge:speech, roosevelt:speech, shapey:partita.)
 
 \mylittlespace If you are wondering what to put in
 \textsf{entrysubtype}, the answer is, currently, anything at all.  You
@@ -1089,28 +1137,30 @@ with \emph{where} the date is presented but, rather, with \emph{how}
 it is presented.  As I now understand the specification, it draws a
 distinction between archival material that is \enquote{letter-like}
 (letters, memoranda, reports, telegrams) and that which isn't
-(interviews, wills, contracts, or even personal communications you've
-received and which you wish to cite).  This may not always be the
-easiest distinction to draw, and in previous releases of
-\textsf{biblatex-chicago} I have been ignoring it, but once you've
-decided to classify it one way or the other you put the date in the
-\textsf{origdate} field for letters, etc., and into the \textsf{date}
-field for the others.
+(interviews, wills, contracts, speeches, or even personal
+communications you've received and which you wish to cite).  This may
+not always be the easiest distinction to draw, and in previous
+releases of \textsf{biblatex-chicago} I have been ignoring it, but
+once you've decided to classify it one way or the other you put the
+date in the \textsf{origdate} field for letters, etc., and into the
+\textsf{date} field for the others.
 
 \mylittlespace In effect, whether it's a \textsf{letter} entry or a
 \enquote{letter-like} \textsf{misc} entry (with
 \textsf{entrysubtype}), it is by using the \textsf{origdate} field
-that you identify when it was written.  Other sorts of \textsf{misc}
-entry (with \textsf{entrysubtype}) use the \textsf{date} field.  This
-maintains consistency of usage across entry types and also, I hope,
-improves compliance when using the \textsf{misc} type for citing
-archival material.  Remember, however, that without an
-\textsf{entrysubtype} the entry will be treated as traditional
-\textsf{misc}, and the title italicized.  In addition, defining
-\textsf{entrysubtype} activates the automatic capitalization mechanism
-in the \textsf{title} field of \textsf{misc} entries, on which see
-\textbf{\textbackslash autocap} below.  (See 17.205-206, 17.220,
-17.222-232; creel:house, dinkel:agassiz, spock:interview.)
+that you identify when it was written, and the \textsf{origlocation},
+if needed, identifies where it was written.  Other sorts of
+\textsf{misc} entry (with \textsf{entrysubtype}) use the \textsf{date}
+field (but still the \textsf{origlocation}).  This maintains
+consistency of usage across entry types and also, I hope, improves
+compliance when using the \textsf{misc} type for citing archival
+material.  Remember, however, that without an \textsf{entrysubtype}
+the entry will be treated as traditional \textsf{misc}, and the title
+italicized.  In addition, defining \textsf{entrysubtype} activates the
+automatic capitalization mechanism in the \textsf{title} field of
+\textsf{misc} entries, on which see \textbf{\textbackslash autocap}
+below.  (See 14.219-220, 14.231, 14.232-242; creel:house,
+dinkel:agassiz, spock:interview.)
 
 \mylittlespace As in \textsf{letter} entries, the titles of
 unpublished letters are of the form \texttt{Author to Recipient}, and
@@ -1120,7 +1170,7 @@ including the abbreviation \enquote{\texttt{n.d.}}\ (or
 \textsf{organization}, \textsf{institution}, and \textsf{location}
 fields (in ascending order of generality) allow the specification of
 which manuscript collection now holds the letter, though the
-\emph{Manual} specifies (17.228) that well-known depositories don't
+\emph{Manual} specifies (14.238) that well-known depositories don't
 usually need a city, state or country specified.  (The traditional
 \textsf{misc} fields are all still available, also.)  Both the long
 and short note forms can use the same \textsf{title}, but in both
@@ -1135,7 +1185,7 @@ the citation command.  (The standard \textsf{biblatex} command
 %\vspace{\baselineskip}
 
 \mylittlespace As with \textsf{letter} entries, the \emph{Manual}
-(17.223) suggests that bibliography entries contain only the name of
+(14.233) suggests that bibliography entries contain only the name of
 the manuscript collection, unless only one item from that collection
 is cited.  The \textsf{crossref} field can be used, as well as the
 \textsf{keywords} mechanism (or \texttt{skipbib} option) for
@@ -1153,26 +1203,33 @@ capitalized unless they follow a period --- the automatic
 capitalization routines (with the \textsf{title} field starting with a
 lowercase letter [see dinkel:agassiz, spock:interview, and
 \textbf{\textbackslash autocap}]) will ensure correctness.  In all
-this class of archived material, the \emph{Manual} (17.222) quite
+this class of archived material, the \emph{Manual} (14.232) quite
 specifically requires more consistency within your own work than
 conformity to some external standard, so it is the former which you
 should pursue.  I hope that \textsf{biblatex-chicago-notes} proves
 helpful in this regard.
 
-\mybigspace This \mymarginpar{\textbf{music}} is one of three new
-audiovisual entry types, and is intended primarily to aid in the
-presentation of musical recordings that do not have a video component,
-though it can also include audio books (auden:reading).  A DVD or VHS
-of an opera or other performance, by contrast, should use the
-\textbf{video} type instead (handel:messiah).  Because
-\textsf{biblatex} --- and \textsc{Bib}\TeX\ before it --- were
-designed primarily for citing book-like objects, some choices needed
-to be made in assigning the various roles found on the back of a CD to
-the fields in a typical .bib entry.  I have also implemented several
-new bibstrings to help in identifying these roles within entries.  If
-you can think of a simpler way to distribute the roles, please let me
-know, so that I can consider making changes before anyone gets used to
-the current equivalences.
+\mybigspace The \colmarginpar{\textbf{music}} 16th edition of the
+\emph{Manual} has revised its recommendations more for this type than
+for any other, so the notes which follow present several large changes
+that you'll need to make to your .bib files.  The good news is that
+some, though by no means all, of those changes involve considerable
+simplifications.  \textsf{Music} is one of three audiovisual entry
+types, and is intended primarily to aid in the presentation of musical
+recordings that do not have a video component, though it can also
+include audio books (auden:reading).  A DVD or VHS of an opera or
+other performance, by contrast, should use the \textbf{video} type
+instead, while an online music video will probably need an
+\textbf{online} entry.  (Cf.\ \textsf{online} and \textsf{video};
+handel:messiah, horowitz:youtube.)  Because \textsf{biblatex} --- and
+\textsc{Bib}\TeX\ before it --- were designed primarily for citing
+book-like objects, some choices needed to be made in assigning the
+various roles found on the back of a CD to the fields in a typical
+.bib entry.  I have also implemented several bibstrings to help in
+identifying these roles within entries.  If you can think of a simpler
+way to distribute the roles, please let me know, so that I can
+consider making changes before anyone gets used to the current
+equivalences.
 
 \mylittlespace These equivalences, in summary form, are:
 
@@ -1200,72 +1257,105 @@ the current equivalences.
   song title, in which latter case the album title would go into
   \textsf{booktitle}.  The \textsf{maintitle} might be necessary for
   something like a box set of \emph{Complete Symphonies}.
-\item[series, number:] These two are closely associated, and are
-  intended for presenting the catalog information provided by the
-  music publisher, especially in the case when a publisher oversees
-  more than one label.  In nytrumpet:art, for example, the
-  \textsf{series} field holds the label (\texttt{Vox/Turnabout} and
-  the \textsf{number} field the catalog number (\texttt{PVT 7183}).
-  You can certainly put all of this information into one of the above
-  fields, but separating it may help make the .bib entry more
-  readable.
-\item[howpublished/pubstate, date, publisher:] The \emph{Manual}
-  (17.268) follows the rather specialized requirements for presenting
-  publishing information for musical recordings.  The normal symbol
-  for musical copyright is\ \texttt{\textcircledP} (Unicode point
-  u+2117, SOUND RECORDING COPYRIGHT), but other copyrights
-  \texttt{\textcopyright} are often also asserted.  The
-  \textsf{howpublished} field is the place for these symbols, and it
-  may also have to hold a year designation if the
-  \texttt{\textcircledP} and the \texttt{\textcopyright} apply to
-  different years, as sometimes happens.  (The \textsf{pubstate} field
-  in this entry type is a synonym for \textsf{howpublished}.  Please
-  use only one of them per entry, and note that the usual mechanism
-  for automatically printing \cmd{bibstring\{reprint\}} is turned off
-  in \textsf{music} entries.)  The \textsf{date} field holds the year
-  either of all the symbols or of whichever symbol appears last in
-  \textsf{howpublished}, and the \textsf{publisher} field is
-  self-explanatory.  (See nytrumpet:art.)
-\item[type:] As in all the audiovisual entry types, the \textsf{type}
+\item[\mycolor{publisher, series, number}:] These three
+  closely-associated fields are intended for presenting the catalog
+  information provided by the music publisher.  The 16th edition
+  generally only requires the \textsf{series} and \textsf{number}
+  fields (nytrumpet:art), which hold the record label and catalog
+  number, respectively.  Alternatively, \textsf{publisher} would
+  function as a synonym for \textsf{series} (holiday:fool), but there
+  may be cases when you need or want to specify a publisher in
+  addition to a label, as was the general requirement in the 15th
+  edition.  (This might happen, for example, when a single publisher
+  oversees more than one label.)  You can certainly put all of this
+  information into one of the above fields, but separating it may help
+  make the .bib entry more readable.
+\item[\mycolor{howpublished/pubstate}:] The 16th edition of the
+  \emph{Manual} (14.276) has rather helpfully eliminated any reference
+  to the specialized symbols (\texttt{\textcircledP} \&\
+  \texttt{\textcopyright}) found in the 15th edition for presenting
+  publishing information for musical recordings.  This means that the
+  \textsf{howpublished} field is now obsolete, and you can remove it
+  from \textsf{music} entries in your .bib files.  The
+  \textsf{pubstate} field, therefore, can revert to its standard use for
+  identifying reprints.  In \textsf{music} entries, putting
+  \texttt{reprint} here will transform the \textsf{origdate} from a
+  recording date for an entire album into an original release date for
+  that album, notice of which will be printed towards the end of a
+  note or bibliography entry.
+\item[\mycolor{date, eventdate, origdate}:] As though to compensate
+  for the simplification I've just mentioned, the \textsf{Manual} now
+  states that \enquote{citations without a date are generally
+    unacceptable} (14.276).  Finding a date may take some research,
+  but they will basically fall into two types, i.e., the date(s) of
+  the recording or the copyright / publishing date(s).  Recording
+  dates go either in \textsf{origdate} (for complete albums) or
+  \textsf{eventdate} (for individual tracks).  The copyright or
+  publishing dates go either in the \textsf{date} field (which applies
+  to the current medium you are citing) or in the \textsf{origdate}
+  field (which refers to the original release date).  You may have
+  noticed that the \textsf{origdate} has two slightly different uses
+  --- you can tell \textsf{biblatex-chicago} which sort you intend by
+  using the string \texttt{reprint} in the \textsf{pubstate} field,
+  which transforms the \textsf{origdate} from a recording date into an
+  original release date.  The style will automatically prepend the
+  bibstring \texttt{recorded} to the \textsf{eventdate} or, in the
+  absence of this \textsf{pubstate} mechanism, to the
+  \textsf{origdate}, or even to both, but you can modify what is
+  printed there using the new \mycolor{\textsf{userd}} field, which
+  acts as a sort of date type modifier.  In \textsf{music} entries,
+  \textsf{userd} will be prepended to an \textsf{eventdate} if there
+  is one, barring that to the \textsf{origdate}, and to a possible
+  \textsf{urldate} absent those two, the latter behavior being the
+  standard across most other entry types.  (See floyd:atom,
+  nytrumpet:art.)
+ \item[type:] As in all the audiovisual entry types, the \textsf{type}
   field holds the medium of the recording, e.g., vinyl, 33 rpm,
   8-track tape, cassette, compact disc, mp3, ogg vorbis.
 \end{description}}
 
-I should also note here that I have implemented the standard
-\textsf{biblatex} \textsf{eventdate} field, in case you need it to
-identify a particular recording session or concert.  It will be
-printed just after the \textsf{title}.  The entries in
-\textsf{notes-test.bib} should at least give you a good idea of how
-this all works, and that file also contains an example of an audio
-book presented in a \textsf{music} entry.  If you browse the examples
-in the \emph{Manual} you will see some variation from the formatting
-choices I have made for \textsf{biblatex-chicago}, but it wasn't
-always clear to me that these variations were rules as opposed to
-suggestions, so I've ignored some of them in the code.  Arguments as
-to why I'm wrong will, of course, be entertained.  (Cf. 17.268;
-auden:reading, beethoven:sonata29, bernstein:shostakovich,
-nytrumpet:art.)
-
-\mybigspace The \mymarginpar{\textbf{online}} \emph{Manual}'s
-instructions (17.142--147, 17.198, 17.234--237) for citing online
-materials are slightly different from those suggested by standard
-\textsf{biblatex}.  Indeed, this is a case where complete backward
-compatibility with other \textsf{biblatex} styles may be impossible,
-because as a general rule the \emph{Manual} considers relevant not
-only where a source is found, but also the nature of that source,
-e.g., if it's an online edition of a book (james:ambassadors), then it
-calls for a \textsf{book} entry.  Even if you cite an
-\enquote{intrinsically online} source, if that source is structured
-more or less like a conventional printed periodical, then you'll
-probably want to use \textsf{article} or \textsf{review} instead of
-\textsf{online} (stenger:privacy, which cites \emph{CNN.com} ---
-\emph{Yahoo!\ News} is another example that would be treated in such a
-way).  If the \enquote{standard facts of publication} are missing,
-then the \textsf{online} type is usually the best choice
-(evanston:library, powell:email).  Some online materials will, no
-doubt, make it difficult to choose an entry type, but so long as all
-locating information is present, then perhaps that is enough to
-fulfill the specification, or at least so I'd like to hope.
+The entries in \textsf{notes-test.bib} should at least give you a good
+idea of how this all works, and that file also contains an example of
+an audio book presented in a \textsf{music} entry.  If you browse the
+examples in the \emph{Manual} you will see some variations in the
+formatting choices there, from which I have made selections for
+\textsf{biblatex-chicago}.  It wasn't always clear to me that these
+variations were rules as opposed to possibilities, so I've ignored
+some of them in the code.  Arguments as to why I'm wrong will, of
+course, be entertained.  (Cf. 14.276--77; \textsf{eventdate},
+\textsf{origdate}, \textsf{userd}; auden:reading, beethoven:sonata29,
+bernstein:shostakovich, floyd:atom, holiday:fool, nytrumpet:art,
+rubinstein:chopin.)
+
+\mybigspace The \colmarginpar{\textbf{online}} \emph{Manual}'s
+scattered instructions (14.4--13, 14.166--169, 14.184--185, 14.200,
+14.223, 14.243--246) for citing online materials are slightly
+different from those suggested by standard \textsf{biblatex}.  Indeed,
+this is a case where complete backward compatibility with other
+\textsf{biblatex} styles may be impossible, because as a general rule
+the \emph{Manual} considers relevant not only where a source is found,
+but also the nature of that source, e.g., if it's an online edition of
+a book (james:ambassadors), then it calls for a \textsf{book} entry.
+Even if you cite an intrinsically online source, if that source is
+structured more or less like a conventional printed periodical, then
+you'll probably want to use \textsf{article} or \textsf{review}
+instead of \textsf{online} (stenger:privacy, which cites
+\emph{CNN.com}).  The 16th edition's suggestions for blogs lend
+themselves well to the \textsf{article} type, too, while comments
+become, logically, \textsf{reviews} (14.243--6; ellis:blog,
+ac:comment).  Otherwise, for online documents not \enquote{formally
+  published,} the \textsf{online} type is usually the best choice
+(evanston:library, powell:email).  Online videos, in particular short
+pieces or those that present excerpts of some longer event or work,
+and also online interviews, usually require this type, too.  (See
+harwood:biden, horowitz:youtube, pollan:plant, but cp.\ weed:flatiron,
+a complete film, which requires a \textsf{video} entry.  Online audio
+pieces, particularly dated ones from an archive, work best as
+\textsf{misc} entries with an \textsf{entrysubtype}: coolidge:speech,
+roosevelt:speech.)  Some online materials will, no doubt, make it
+difficult to choose an entry type, but so long as all locating
+information is present, then perhaps that is enough to fulfill the
+specification, or at least so I'd like to hope.
 
 \mylittlespace Constructing an \textsf{online} .bib file entry is much
 the same as in \textsf{biblatex}.  The \textsf{title} field would
@@ -1274,12 +1364,15 @@ hold the title or owner of the whole site.  If there is no specific
 title for a page, but only a generic one (powell:email), then such a
 title should go in \textsf{titleaddon}, not forgetting to begin that
 field with a lowercase letter so that capitalization will work out
-correctly.
+correctly.  It is worth remarking here, too, that the 16th edition of
+the \emph{Manual} (14.7--8) prefers, if they're available, revision
+dates to access dates when documenting online material.  See
+\textsf{urldate} and \textsf{userd}, below.
 
 %\enlargethispage{\baselineskip}
 
-\mybigspace The \mymarginpar{\textbf{patent}} \emph{Manual} is very
-brief on this subject (17.219), but very clear about which information
+\mybigspace The \colmarginpar{\textbf{patent}} \emph{Manual} is very
+brief on this subject (14.230), but very clear about which information
 it wants you to present, so such entries may not work well with other
 \textsf{biblatex} styles.  The important date, as far as Chicago is
 concerned, is the filing date.  If a patent has been filed but not yet
@@ -1297,7 +1390,13 @@ with the dates.)  The patent number goes in the \textsf{number} field,
 and you should use the standard \textsf{biblatex} bibstrings in the
 \textsf{type} field.  Though it isn't mentioned by the \emph{Manual},
 \textsf{biblatex-chicago-notes} will print the \textsf{holder} after
-the \textsf{author}, if you provide one.  See petroff:impurity.
+the \textsf{author}, if you provide one.  Finally, the 16th edition of
+the \emph{Manual} has removed the quotation marks from around
+\textsf{patent} titles, and also capitalized them sentence-style, both
+of which seem to be the generally-accepted conventions.  The former
+requires no intervention from you, but the latter may mean revision of
+the \textsf{title} field to provide the lowercase letters manually.
+See petroff:impurity.
 
 
 \mybigspace This \mymarginpar{\textbf{periodical}} is the standard
@@ -1311,7 +1410,7 @@ citing is a \enquote{newspaper} or \enquote{magazine} instead of a
 \enquote{journal.}  Also, remember that the \textsf{note} field is the
 place for identifying strings like \enquote{special issue,} with its
 initial lowercase letter to activate the automatic capitalization
-routines.  (See \emph{Manual} 17.170; good:wholeissue.)
+routines.  (See \emph{Manual} 14.187; good:wholeissue.)
 
 \mybigspace This \mymarginpar{\textbf{reference}} entry type is
 aliased to \textsf{collection} by the standard \textsf{biblatex}
@@ -1330,7 +1429,7 @@ in the bibliography as well.)
 \mybigspace This \mymarginpar{\textbf{report}} entry type is a
 \textsf{biblatex} generalization of the traditional \textsc{Bib}\TeX\
 type \textsf{techreport}.  Instructions for such entries are rather
-thin on the ground in the \emph{Manual} (17.241), so I have followed
+thin on the ground in the \emph{Manual} (14.249), so I have followed
 the generic advice about formatting it like a book, and hope that the
 results conform to the specification.  Its main peculiarities are the
 \textsf{institution} field in place of a \textsf{publisher}, the
@@ -1344,7 +1443,7 @@ Technical Report Number of a technical report.  As in standard
 report type in \textsf{note} and the \textsf{institution} in
 \textsf{publisher}.  (See herwign:office.)
 
-%\enlargethispage{\baselineskip}
+\enlargethispage{\baselineskip}
 
 \mybigspace The \colmarginpar{\textbf{review}} \textsf{review} entry
 type was added to \textsf{biblatex 0.7}, and it certainly eases the
@@ -1355,17 +1454,17 @@ for reviews published in periodicals, and if you've already read the
 \textsf{article} instructions above --- if you haven't, I recommend
 doing so now --- you'll know that \textsf{review} serves as well for
 citing other sorts of material with generic titles, like letters to
-the editor, obituaries, interviews, and the like.  The primary rule is
-that any piece that has only a generic title, like \enquote{review of
-  \ldots,} \enquote{interview with \ldots,} or \enquote{obituary of
-  \ldots,} calls for the \textsf{review} type.  Any piece that also
-has a specific title, e.g., \enquote{\enquote{Lost in
+the editor, obituaries, interviews, online comments and the like.  The
+primary rule is that any piece that has only a generic title, like
+\enquote{review of \ldots,} \enquote{interview with \ldots,} or
+\enquote{obituary of \ldots,} calls for the \textsf{review} type.  Any
+piece that also has a specific title, e.g., \enquote{\enquote{Lost in
     \textsc{Bib}\TeX,} an interview with \ldots,} requires an
 \textsf{article} entry.  (This assumes the text is found in a
 periodical of some sort.  Were it found in a book, then the
 \textsf{incollection} type would serve your needs, and you could use
 \textsf{title} and \textsf{titleaddon} there.  While we're on the
-topic of exceptions, the \emph{Manual} includes an example --- 17.207
+topic of exceptions, the \emph{Manual} includes an example --- 14.221
 --- where the \enquote{Interview} part of the title is considered a
 subtitle rather than a titleaddon, said part therefore being included
 inside the quotation marks and capitalized accordingly.  Not having
@@ -1381,39 +1480,56 @@ for which are the same as for an \textsf{article} entry.  If it is a
 \textsf{title} and the other fields work just as as they do in an
 \textsf{article} entry with the same \textsf{entrysubtype}, including
 the substitution of the \textsf{journaltitle} for the \textsf{author}
-if the latter is missing. (See 17.185, 17.188--194, 17.199--203,
-17.207; barcott:review, bundy:macneil, Clemens:letter, gourmet:052006,
-kozinn:review, nyt:obittrevor, nyt:trevorobit, unsigned:ranke,
-wallraff:word.)  If, on the other hand, the piece comes from a
-\enquote{journal,} then you don't need an \textsf{entrysubtype}.  The
-generic title goes in \textsf{title}, and the remaining fields work
-just as they do in a plain \textsf{article} entry.  (See 17.201;
-ratliff:review.)
-
-\mylittlespace The onerous details are the same as I described them in
-the \textbf{article} section above, but I'll repeat some of them
-briefly here.  If anything in the \textsf{title} needs formatting, you
-need to provide those instructions yourself, as the default is
-completely plain.  In the short note form you no longer need to
-provide a formatted \textsf{shortauthor} field for when a
-\textsf{journatitle} replaces an absent \textsf{author}, as the
-package automatically prints the former there in the absence of
-anything else (gourmet:052006, nyt:trevorobit).  If you wish to keep
-the title at the head of an entry, then you'll need to define
-\textsf{author} somehow and place \texttt{useauthor=false} in the
-\textsf{options} field (as in nyt:obittrevor, by contrast with
-nyt:trevorobit.  Please note that the \cmd{isdot} macro alone in the
-\textsf{author} field no longer works in \textsf{biblatex} 1.6 and
-later, so you may need to check your .bib files when you upgrade.)  As
-in \textsf{misc} entries with an \textsf{entrysubtype}, words like
-\enquote{interview,} \enquote{review,} and \enquote{letter} only need
-capitalization after a full stop, i.e., ordinarily in a bibliography
-and not a note, so \textsf{biblatex-chicago-notes} automatically deals
-with this problem itself if you start the \textsf{title} field with a
-lowercase letter.  The file \textsf{notes-test.bib} and the
-documentation of \cmd{autocap} will provide guidance here.
+if the latter is missing. (See 14.202--203, 14.205, 14.208,
+14.214--217, 14.221; barcott:review, bundy:macneil, Clemens:letter,
+gourmet:052006, kozinn:review, nyt:obittrevor, nyt:trevorobit,
+unsigned:ranke, wallraff:word.)  If, on the other hand, the piece
+comes from a \enquote{journal,} then you don't need an
+\textsf{entrysubtype}.  The generic title goes in \textsf{title}, and
+the remaining fields work just as they do in a plain \textsf{article}
+entry.  (See 14.215; ratliff:review.)
+
+\mylittlespace Most of the onerous details are the same as I described
+them in the \textbf{article} section above, but I'll repeat some of
+them briefly here.  If anything in the \textsf{title} needs
+formatting, you need to provide those instructions yourself, as the
+default is completely plain.  \textsf{Author}-less reviews are treated
+just like similar newspaper articles --- in short notes and in the
+bibliography the \textsf{journaltitle} replaces the author and heads
+the entry, while in long notes the \textsf{title} comes first.  The
+sorting of such entries is an issue, solved if you use \textsf{Biber}
+as your backend, and otherwise requiring manual intervention with a
+\textsf{sortkey} or the like (14.217; gourmet:052006, nyt:trevorobit,
+unsigned:ranke, and see \cmd{DeclareSortingScheme} in
+section~\ref{sec:formatopts}, below.).  As in \textsf{misc} entries
+with an \textsf{entrysubtype}, words like \enquote{interview,}
+\enquote{review,} and \enquote{letter} only need capitalization after
+a full stop, i.e., ordinarily in a bibliography and not a note, so
+\textsf{biblatex-chicago-notes} automatically deals with this problem
+itself if you start the \textsf{title} field with a lowercase letter.
+The file \textsf{notes-test.bib} and the documentation of
+\cmd{autocap} will provide guidance here.
+
+\mylittlespace One detail of the \textsf{review} type is new, and
+responds to the needs of the 16th edition of the \emph{Manual}.  As I
+mentioned above, blogs are best treated as \textsf{articles} with
+\texttt{magazine} \textsf{entrysubtype}, whereas comments on those
+blogs --- or on any similar sort of online content --- need the
+\textsf{review} type with the same \textsf{entrysubtype}.  What they
+will frequently also need is a date of some sort closely associated
+with the comment (14.246; ac:comment), so I have now included the
+\mycolor{\textsf{eventdate}} in \textsf{review} entries for just this
+purpose.  It will be printed just after the \textsf{author} and before
+the \textsf{title}.  If you need a timestamp in addition, then the
+\textsf{nameaddon} field is the place for it, but you'll have to
+provide your own parentheses, in order to preserve the possibility of
+providing pseudonyms in square brackets that is the standard function
+of this field in all other entry types, and possibly in the the
+\textsf{review} type as well.
 
-\mybigspace This \mymarginpar{\textbf{suppbook}} is the entry type to
+\enlargethispage{-\baselineskip}
+
+\mybigspace This \colmarginpar{\textbf{suppbook}} is the entry type to
 use if the main focus of a reference is supplemental material in a
 book or in a collection, e.g., an introduction, afterword, or forward,
 either by the same or a different author.  In previous releases of
@@ -1438,17 +1554,24 @@ depending on the context.  Examples might be \enquote{\texttt{preface
 that unless you use a \cmd{bibstring} command in the \textsf{type}
 field, the resultant entry will not be portable across languages.)
 
-\mylittlespace The other rules for constructing your .bib entry remain
-the same.  The \textsf{author} field refers to the author of the
+\mylittlespace There are a few other rules for constructing your .bib
+entry.  The \textsf{author} field refers to the author of the
 introduction or afterword, while \textsf{bookauthor} refers to the
-author of the main text of the work, if the two differ.  If the focus
-of the reference is the main text of the book, but you want to mention
-the name of the writer of an introduction or afterword for
-bibliographical completeness, then the normal \textsf{biblatex} rules
-apply, and you can just put their name in the appropriate field of a
-\textsf{book} entry, that is, in the \textsf{foreword},
-\textsf{afterword}, or \textsf{introduction} field.  (See
-\emph{Manual} 17.74--75; polakow:afterw, prose:intro).
+author of the main text of the work, if the two differ.  For the 16th
+edition, the \emph{Manual} requires the inclusion of the page range of
+the part in question, though \emph{only} in the bibliography.  I have
+followed this advice literally, so the \textsf{pages} field of a
+\textsf{suppbook} entry won't automatically appear in a long note.  If
+you wish to include those pages in a note, then you'll need to repeat
+them in the \textsf{postnote} field of the citation command.
+
+\mylittlespace Finally, if the focus of the reference is the main text
+of the book, but you want to mention the name of the writer of an
+introduction or afterword for bibliographical completeness, then the
+normal \textsf{biblatex} rules apply, and you can just put their name
+in the appropriate field of a \textsf{book} entry, that is, in the
+\textsf{foreword}, \textsf{afterword}, or \textsf{introduction} field.
+(See \emph{Manual} 14.116; polakow:afterw, prose:intro).
 
 \mybigspace This \mymarginpar{\textbf{suppcollection}} fulfills a
 function analogous to \textsf{suppbook}.  Indeed, I believe the
@@ -1456,7 +1579,7 @@ function analogous to \textsf{suppbook}.  Indeed, I believe the
 both types of work, so this entry type is an alias to
 \textsf{suppbook}, which see.
 
-\mybigspace This \mymarginpar{\textbf{suppperiodical}} type, new to
+\mybigspace This \mymarginpar{\textbf{suppperiodical}} type, new in
 \textsf{biblatex} 0.8, is intended to allow reference to
 generically-titled works in periodicals, such as regular columns or
 letters to the editor.  Previous releases of
@@ -1477,7 +1600,7 @@ an\ \cmd{autocap} command in the somewhat contradictory
 ordinarily be capitalized except at the beginning of a sentence
 (nass:address).
 
-\mybigspace This \mymarginpar{\textbf{video}} is the last of the new
+\mybigspace This \colmarginpar{\textbf{video}} is the last of the three
 audiovisual entry types, and as its name suggests it is intended for
 citing visual media, be it films of any sort or TV shows, broadcast,
 on the Net, on VHS, DVD, or Blu-ray.  As with the \textsf{music} type
@@ -1507,29 +1630,40 @@ by \textsf{biblatex}.  Here are the main correspondences:
   identify performers, as they usually don't need further specifying
   and this role prevents \textsf{biblatex} from falling back on the
   default \texttt{editor} bibstring.
-\item[title, titleaddon, booktitle, maintitle:] As with the other
-  audiovisual types, \textsf{video} serves as an analogue both to
-  books and to collections, so the \textsf{title} may be of a whole
-  film DVD or of a TV series, or it may identify one episode in a
-  series or one scene in a film.  In the latter cases, the title of
-  the whole would go in \textsf{booktitle}.  The \textsf{titleaddon}
-  field may be useful for specifying the season and/or episode number
-  of a TV series, or for any other information that needs to come
-  between the \textsf{title} and the \textsf{booktitle}
-  (cleese:holygrail, episode:tv, handel:messiah).  As in the
-  \textsf{music} type, \textsf{maintitle} may be necessary for a boxed
-  set or something similar.
-\item[date, origdate:] The publication details of this sort of
-  material are usually straightforward, at least compared with the
-  \textsf{music} type, but there will be occasions when you need two
-  dates.  When citing an episode of a long-running TV series you may
-  need both a date for the episode and a date range for the whole run,
-  and when citing a film on DVD you may want to present both the
-  original release date and the date of release on DVD.  In both
-  cases, the \textsf{origdate} field holds the year of the original
-  showing or transmission, while the \textsf{date} field holds either
-  the years for an entire run of a TV show or the year of publication
-  of the DVD (or other medium).  Cf. episode:tv, hitchcock:nbynw.
+\item[title, titleaddon, booktitle, \mycolor{booktitleaddon},
+  maintitle:] As with the other audiovisual types, \textsf{video}
+  serves as an analogue both to books and to collections, so the
+  \textsf{title} may be of a whole film DVD or of a TV series, or it
+  may identify one episode in a series or one scene in a film.  In the
+  latter cases, the title of the whole would go in \textsf{booktitle}.
+  The \mycolor{\textsf{booktitleaddon}} field, in a change from the
+  15th edition, may be useful for specifying the season and/or episode
+  number of a TV series, while the \textsf{titleaddon} is for for any
+  information that needs to come between the \textsf{title} and the
+  \textsf{booktitle} (cleese:holygrail, friends:leia, handel:messiah).
+  As in the \textsf{music} type, \textsf{maintitle} may be necessary
+  for a boxed set or something similar.
+\item[\mycolor{date, eventdate, origdate}:] As with \textsf{music}
+  entries, in order to follow the specifications of the 16th edition
+  of the \emph{Manual}, I have had to provide three separate date
+  fields for citing \textsf{video} sources, but their uses differ
+  somewhat between the two types.  In both, the \textsf{date} will
+  generally provide the publishing or copyright date of the medium you
+  are referencing.  The \textsf{eventdate} will most commonly present
+  either the broadcast date of a particular TV program, or the
+  recording/performance date of, for example, an opera on DVD.  The
+  style will automatically prepend the bibstring \texttt{broadcast} to
+  such a date, though you can use the new field
+  \mycolor{\textsf{userd}} to change the string printed there.
+  (Absent an \textsf{eventdate}, the \textsf{userd} field in
+  \textsf{video} entries will revert to modifying the
+  \textsf{urldate}, the standard behavior in all but these and
+  \textsf{music} entries.)  The \textsf{origdate} has more or less the
+  same function, and appears in the same places, as it does in
+  standard book-like entries, providing the date of first release of a
+  film, though there isn't any \texttt{reprint} string associated with
+  it in this entry type.  Cf.\ friends:leia, handel:messiah,
+  hitchcock:nbynw.
 \item[type:] As in all the audiovisual entry types, the \textsf{type}
   field holds the medium of the \textsf{title}, e.g., 8 mm, VHS, DVD,
   Blu-ray, MPEG.
@@ -1537,8 +1671,7 @@ by \textsf{biblatex}.  Here are the main correspondences:
 
 As with the \textsf{music} type, entries in \textsf{notes-test.bib}
 should at least give you a good idea of how all this works.  (Cf.\
-17.270, 273; cleese:holygrail, episode:tv, handel:messiah,
-hitchcock:nbynw, loc:city.)
+14.279--80; loc:city, weed:flatiron.)
 
 \subsection{Entry Fields}
 \label{sec:entryfields}
@@ -1561,7 +1694,8 @@ filing and issue dates.  In any entry type, if your data begins with a
 word that would ordinarily only be capitalized at the beginning of a
 sentence, then simply ensure that that word is in lowercase, and the
 style will take care of the rest.  Cf.\ \textsf{note}. (See
-\emph{Manual} 17.145, 17.123; davenport:attention, natrecoff:camera.)
+\emph{Manual} 14.119, 14.166--168; davenport:attention,
+natrecoff:camera.)
 
 \mybigspace In most \mymarginpar{\textbf{afterword}} circumstances,
 this field will function as it does in standard \textsf{biblatex},
@@ -1582,8 +1716,8 @@ afterword, foreword, or introduction the main focus of a citation.  If
 it's an afterword at issue, simply define \textsf{afterword} any way
 you please, leave \textsf{foreword} and \textsf{introduction}
 undefined, and \textsf{biblatex-chicago-notes} will do the rest. Cf.\
-\textsf{foreword} and \textsf{introduction}. (See \emph{Manual} 17.46,
-17.74; polakow:afterw.)
+\textsf{foreword} and \textsf{introduction}. (See \emph{Manual} 14.91,
+14.116; polakow:afterw.)
 
 \mybigspace At \mymarginpar{\textbf{annotation}} \label{sec:annote}
 the request of Emil Salim, \textsf{biblatex-chicago-notes} has, as of
@@ -1591,7 +1725,7 @@ version 0.9, added a package option (see \texttt{annotation} below,
 section \ref{sec:useropts}) to allow you to produce annotated
 bibliographies.  The formatting of such a bibliography is currently
 fairly basic, though it conforms with the \emph{Manual's} minimal
-guidelines (16.77).  The default in \textsf{chicago-notes.cbx} is to
+guidelines (14.59).  The default in \textsf{chicago-notes.cbx} is to
 define \cmd{DeclareFieldFormat\{an\-notation\}} using
 \cmd{par}\cmd{nobreak} \cmd{vskip} \cmd{bibitemsep}, though you can
 alter it by re-declaring the format in your preamble.  The
@@ -1616,20 +1750,23 @@ implemented this field in a completely standard \textsc{Bib}\TeX\
 fashion.  Remember that corporate or organizational authors need to
 have an extra set of curly braces around them (e.g.,
 \texttt{\{\{Associated Press\}\}}\,) to prevent \textsc{Bib}\TeX\ from
-treating one part of the name as a surname (17.47, 17.197;
+treating one part of the name as a surname (14.92, 14.212;
 assocpress:gun, chicago:manual).  If there is no \textsf{author}, then
 \textsf{biblatex-chicago-notes} will look, in sequence, for an
 \textsf{editor}, \textsf{translator}, or \textsf{compiler} (actually
 \textsf{namec}, currently) and use that name (or those names) instead,
-followed by the appropriate identifying string (esp.\ 17.41, also
-17.28--29, 17.88, 17.95, 17.172; boxer:china, brown:bremer,
+followed by the appropriate identifying string (esp.\ 14.87, also
+14.76, 14.126, 14.132, 14.189; boxer:china, brown:bremer,
 harley:cartography, schellinger:novel, sechzer:women, silver:ga\-wain,
 soltes:georgia).  Please note that when a \textsf{namec} appears at
-the head of an entry, you'll need to assist \textsf{biblatex}'s
-sorting algorithms by providing a \textsf{sortkey} field to ensure
-correct alphabetization in the bibliography.  Also, a
-\textsf{shortauthor} entry is necessary to provide a name at the head
-of the short note form.
+the head of an entry, and you're not using \textsf{Biber}, you'll need
+to assist \textsf{biblatex}'s sorting algorithms by providing a
+\textsf{sortkey} field to ensure correct alphabetization in the
+bibliography.  (See \cmd{DeclareSortingScheme} in
+section~\ref{sec:formatopts}, below.)  A \textsf{shortauthor} entry is
+no longer necessary to provide a \textsf{namec} at the head of the
+short note form --- \textsf{biblatex-chicago} now takes care of this
+automatically.
 
 \mylittlespace In the rare cases when this substitution mechanism
 isn't appropriate, you have two options: either you can
@@ -1653,13 +1790,20 @@ package begins its search at \textsf{translator} and continues on to
 \textsf{options}.  The result will be that the compilers' names will
 appear at the head of the entry.  If you want to skip over parts of
 the chain, you must turn off \emph{all} of the parts up to the one you
-wish printed.
+wish printed.  (Another peculiarity of the system, if you're using
+\textsf{Biber}, is that setting the Chicago-specific
+\texttt{usecompiler} option to \texttt{false} doesn't remove
+\textsf{namec} from the sorting list, whereas the other standard
+\textsf{biblatex} toggles \emph{do} remove their names from the
+sorting list, so in the chaucer:alt case you need the \textsf{sortkey}
+field.  See \cmd{DeclareSortingScheme} in
+section~\ref{sec:formatopts}, below.)
 
 \mylittlespace This system of toggles, then, can turn off
 \textsf{biblatex-chicago-notes}'s mechanism for finding a name to
 place at the head of an entry, but it also very usefully adds the
 possibility of citing a work with an \textsf{author} by its editor,
-compiler or translator instead (17.45; eliot:pound), something that
+compiler or translator instead (14.90; eliot:pound), something that
 wasn't possible before.  For full details of how this works, see the
 \textsf{editortype} documentation below.  (Of course, in
 \textsf{collection} and \textsf{proceedings} entry types, an
@@ -1672,7 +1816,7 @@ further details.)
 
 \mylittlespace \textbf{NB}: The \emph{Manual} provides specific
 instructions for formatting the names of both anonymous and
-pseudonymous authors (17.32--39).  In the former case, if no author is
+pseudonymous authors (14.79--84).  In the former case, if no author is
 known or guessed at, then it may simply be omitted
 (virginia:plantation).  The use of \enquote{Anonymous} as the name is
 \enquote{generally to be avoided,} but may in some cases be useful
@@ -1691,9 +1835,10 @@ mark indicating doubt.  As long as you have the right string in the
 \textsf{authortype} field, \textsf{biblatex-chicago-notes} will also
 do the right thing automatically in the short note form.
 
-\mylittlespace The \textsf{nameaddon} field furnishes the means to
-cope with the case of pseudonymous authorship.  If the author's real
-name isn't known, simply put \texttt{pseud.} (or
+\mylittlespace In \textsf{nameaddon} most entry types (except
+\textsf{customc} and \textsf{review}, which see), this field furnishes
+the means to cope with the case of pseudonymous authorship.  If the
+author's real name isn't known, simply put \texttt{pseud.} (or
 \cmd{bibstring\{pseudonym\}}) in that field (centinel:letters).  If
 you wish to give a pseudonymous author's real name, simply include it
 there, formatted as you wish it to appear, as the contents of this
@@ -1704,9 +1849,12 @@ in the form \texttt{Firstname Lastname, pseud.}\ (creasey:ashe:blast,
 creasey:morton:hide, creasey:york:death).  This latter method will
 allow you to keep all references to one author's work under different
 pseudonyms grouped together in the bibliography, as recommended by the
-\emph{Manual}.
+\emph{Manual}, though it is now recommended that, whichever system you
+employ, you include a cross-reference from one name to the other in
+the bibliography.  You can do this using a \textsf{customc} entry
+(ashe:creasey, morton:creasey, york:creasey).
 
-%\enlargethispage{-\baselineskip}
+\enlargethispage{\baselineskip}
 
 \mybigspace In \mymarginpar{\textbf{authortype}}
 \textsf{biblatex-chicago}, this field serves a function very much in
@@ -1726,15 +1874,15 @@ yourself doesn't work right, hence this mechanism.)  The macros test
 for these \emph{exact} strings, so check your typing if you don't see
 the brackets.  Assuming the strings are correct,
 \textsf{biblatex-chicago-notes} will also automatically do the right
-thing in the short note form.  Cf.\ \textsf{author}.  (See 17.33--34;
+thing in the short note form.  Cf.\ \textsf{author}.  (See 14.80--81;
 cook:sotweed, horsley:prosodies.)
 
 \mybigspace For \mymarginpar{\textbf{bookauthor}} the most part, as in
 \textsf{biblatex}, a \textsf{bookauthor} is the author of a
 \textsf{booktitle}, so that, for example, if one chapter in a book has
 different authorship from the book as a whole, you can include that
-fact in a reference (17.75; will:cohere).  Keep in mind, however, that
-the entry type for introductions, forewords and afterwords
+fact in a reference (will:cohere).  Keep in mind, however, that the
+entry type for introductions, forewords and afterwords
 (\textsf{suppbook}) uses \textsf{bookauthor} as the author of
 \textsf{title} (polakow:afterw, prose:intro).
 
@@ -1760,7 +1908,7 @@ specification, which may be confusing if they don't produce the
 strings you expect.  Second, remember that \textsf{bookpagination}
 applies only to the \textsf{pages} field --- if you need to format a
 citation's \textsf{postnote} field, then you must use
-\textsf{pagination}, which see (15.45--46, 17.128--138).
+\textsf{pagination}, which see (10.43--44, 14.154--163).
 
 \mybigspace The \mymarginpar{\textbf{booksubtitle}} subtitle for a
 \textsf{booktitle}.  See the next entry for further information.
@@ -1828,7 +1976,7 @@ just define an empty \textsf{subtitle} field to prevent it inheriting
 the unwanted subtitle from prairie:state.
 
 \mylittlespace Turning now more narrowly to
-\textsf{biblatex-chicago-notes}, the \emph{Manual} (17.70) specifies
+\textsf{biblatex-chicago-notes}, the \emph{Manual} (14.113) specifies
 that if you cite several contributions to the same collection, all
 (including the collection itself) may be listed separately in the
 bibliography, which the package does automatically, using the default
@@ -1869,30 +2017,29 @@ entry type gets you what you want.
 
 % \enlargethispage{\baselineskip}
 
-\mylittlespace A published collection of letters requires a somewhat
-different treatment (17.78).  If you cite more than one letter from
+\mylittlespace A published collection of letters requires somewhat
+different treatment (14.117).  If you cite more than one letter from
 the same collection, then the \emph{Manual} specifies that only the
 collection itself should appear in the bibliography.  In footnotes,
-you can use the \textsf{letter} entry type, documented above, for
-each individual letter, while the collection as a whole may well
-require a \textsf{book} entry.  I have, after some consideration,
-implemented the system of shortened references in \textsf{letter}
-entries, even though the \emph{Manual} doesn't explicitly require it.
-As with \textsf{incollection} and \textsf{inproceedings}, mere use of
-a \textsf{crossref} or \textsf{xref} field will activate this
-mechanism, while avoidance of said fields will disable it.  (See
-white:ross:memo, white:russ, and white:total, for examples of the
-\textsf{xref} field in action in this way, and please note that the
-second of these entries is entirely fictitious, provided merely for
-the sake of example.)  How then to keep the individual letters from
-appearing in the bibliography?  The simplest mechanism is one provided
-by \textsf{biblatex}, which involves the \textsf{keywords} field.
-Choose a keyword for any entry you wish excluded from the bibliography
---- I've chosen \texttt{original}, for reasons that will become
-clearer later --- then in the optional argument to the
-\cmd{printbibliography} command in your document include, e.g.,
-\texttt{notkeyword=original}.  (Cf.\ \textbf{keywords} and
-\textbf{userf}.)
+you can use the \textsf{letter} entry type, documented above, for each
+individual letter, while the collection as a whole may well require a
+\textsf{book} entry.  I have, after some consideration, implemented
+the system of shortened references in \textsf{letter} entries, even
+though the \emph{Manual} doesn't explicitly require it.  As with
+\textsf{incollection} and \textsf{inproceedings}, mere use of a
+\textsf{crossref} or \textsf{xref} field will activate this mechanism,
+while avoidance of said fields will disable it.  (See white:ross:memo,
+white:russ, and white:total, for examples of the \textsf{xref} field
+in action in this way, and please note that the second of these
+entries is entirely fictitious, provided merely for the sake of
+example.)  How then to keep the individual letters from appearing in
+the bibliography?  The simplest mechanism is one provided by
+\textsf{biblatex}, which involves the \textsf{keywords} field.  Choose
+a keyword for any entry you wish excluded from the bibliography ---
+I've chosen \texttt{original}, for reasons that will become clearer
+later --- then in the optional argument to the \cmd{printbibliography}
+command in your document include, e.g., \texttt{notkeyword=original}.
+(Cf.\ \textbf{keywords} and \textbf{userf}.)
 
 \mylittlespace If you look closely at the .bib entries for
 white:ross:memo and white:russ, you'll see that, despite using
@@ -1951,11 +2098,12 @@ of the notes \&\ bibliography style.)
 \textsf{biblatex} 0.9, is obsolete, and will be ignored if you use it
 in your .bib files.  Use \textsf{date} instead.
 
-\mybigspace Standard \mymarginpar{\textbf{doi}} \textsf{biblatex}
-field.  The Digital Object Identifier of the work, which the
-\emph{Manual} suggests you can use \enquote{in place of page numbers
-  or other locators} (17.181; friedman:learn\-ing).  Cf.\
-\textsf{url}.
+\mybigspace Standard \colmarginpar{\textbf{doi}} \textsf{biblatex}
+field, providing the Digital Object Identifier of the work.  The 16th
+edition of the \emph{Manual} specifies that, given their relative
+permanence compared to URLs, \enquote{authors should include DOIs
+  rather than URLs for sources that make them readily available}
+(14.6).  (14.184; friedman:learn\-ing).  Cf.\ \textsf{url}.
 
 \mybigspace Standard \mymarginpar{\textbf{edition}} \textsf{biblatex}
 field.  If you enter a plain cardinal number, \textsf{biblatex} will
@@ -1974,8 +2122,8 @@ citations (emerson:nature).
 \textsf{biblatex-chicago-notes}, I introduced the \textsf{userd} field
 to hold this non-numeric information, as \textsf{biblatex} only
 accepted an integer in the \textsf{edition} field, but this changed in
-version 0.8.  The \textsf{userd} field is now obsolete, and will be
-silently ignored.
+version 0.8.  The \textsf{userd} field now has an entirely different
+function --- please see its documentation below.
 
 \mybigspace As \mymarginpar{\textbf{editor}} far as possible, I have
 implemented this field as \textsf{biblatex}'s standard styles do, but
@@ -2079,7 +2227,7 @@ usual mechanisms remain in place, that is, if the \textsf{editor}
 exactly matches a \textsf{translator} and/or a \textsf{namec}, or
 alternatively if \textsf{namea} exactly matches a \textsf{nameb}
 and/or a \textsf{namec}, then \textsf{biblatex} will print the
-appropriate strings.  The \emph{Manual} specifically (17.41)
+appropriate strings.  The \emph{Manual} specifically (14.87)
 recommends not using these identifying strings in the short note form,
 and \textsf{biblatex-chicago-notes} follows their recommendation.  If
 you nevertheless need to provide such a string, you'll have to do it
@@ -2142,7 +2290,7 @@ edition, then you shouldn't use the \textsf{entrysubtype} toggle.
 Also, and the specification is reasonably clear about this, works from
 the Renaissance and later, even if cited by the traditional divisions,
 have short notes formatted normally, and therefore don't need an
-\textsf{entrysubtype} field.  (See \emph{Manual} 17.250--262;
+\textsf{entrysubtype} field.  (See \emph{Manual} 14.256--268;
 aristotle:metaphy:gr, plato:republic:gr; euripides:orestes is an
 example of a translation cited by page number in a modern edition.)
 
@@ -2162,11 +2310,38 @@ new \textsf{artwork} entry type in order to refer to a work from
 antiquity whose title you do not wish to be italicized.  Please see
 the documentation of \textsf{artwork} above for the details.
 
-\mybigspace This \mymarginpar{\textbf{eventdate}} is a standard
-\textsf{biblatex} field, added recently to the \textbf{music} entry
-type in case users need it to identify a particular recording session
-or concert.  See the documentation of that type above.  The field will
-currently be ignored in any other sort of entry.
+\mybigspace Kazuo
+\colmarginpar{\textbf{eprint}\\\textbf{eprintclass}\\\textbf{eprinttype}}
+Teramoto suggested adding \textsf{biblatex's} excellent
+\textsf{eprint} handling to \textsf{biblatex-chicago}, and he sent me
+a patch implementing it.  With minor alterations, I have applied it to
+this release, so these three fields now work more or less as they do
+in standard \textsf{biblatex}.  They may prove helpful in providing
+more abbreviated references to online content than conventional URLs,
+though I can find no specific reference to them in the \emph{Manual}.
+
+\mybigspace This \colmarginpar{\textbf{eventdate}} is a standard
+\textsf{biblatex} field.  In the 15th edition it was barely used, but
+in order to comply with changes in the 16th edition of the
+\emph{Manual} it can now play a significant role in \textsf{music},
+\textsf{review}, and \textsf{video} entries.  In \textsf{music}
+entries, it identifies the recording or performance date of a
+particular song (rather than of a whole disc, for which you would use
+\textsf{origdate}), whereas in \textsf{video} entries it identifies
+either the original broadcast date of a particular episode of a TV
+series or the date of a filmed musical performance.  In both these
+cases \textsf{biblatex-chicago} will automatically prepend a bibstring
+--- \texttt{recorded} and \texttt{aired}, respectively --- to the
+date, but you can change this string using the new \textsf{userd}
+field, something you'll definitely want to do for filmed musical
+performances (friends:leia, handel:messiah, holiday:fool).
+
+\mylittlespace The field's use in \textsf{review} entries is somewhat
+different.  There, it helps to identify a particular comment within an
+online thread.  There isn't a particular string associated with it,
+but you can further specify a comment by placing a time\-stamp in
+parentheses in the \textsf{nameaddon} field, in case the date alone
+isn't enough (ac:comment).
 
 \mybigspace As \mymarginpar{\textbf{foreword}} with the
 \textsf{afterword} field above, \textsf{foreword} will in general
@@ -2189,8 +2364,7 @@ parentheses, just after the author(s).
 \textsf{biblatex} field, mainly applicable in the \textsf{booklet}
 entry type, where it replaces the \textsf{publisher}.  I have also
 retained it in the \textsf{misc} and \textsf{unpublished} entry types,
-for historical reasons, and either it or \textsf{pubstate} can be used
-in \textsf{music} entries to clarify publication details.
+for historical reasons.
 
 \mybigspace Standard \mymarginpar{\textbf{institution}}
 \textsf{biblatex} field.  In the \textsf{thesis} entry type, it will
@@ -2264,19 +2438,19 @@ See \textsf{biblatex.pdf} (3.10.4) for thorough documentation.  In
 \textsf{biblatex-chicago}, the field can provide a convenient means to
 exclude certain entries from making their way into a bibliography.  We
 have already seen (\textbf{letter}, above) how the \emph{Manual}
-(17.78) requires, in the case of published collections of letters,
+(14.117) requires, in the case of published collections of letters,
 that when more than one letter from the same collected is cited, the
 bibliography should contain only a reference to the collection as a
 whole (white:ross:memo, white:russ, white:total).  Similarly, when
 citing both an original text and its translation (see \textbf{userf},
-below), the \emph{Manual} (17.66) suggests including the original at
+below), the \emph{Manual} (14.109) suggests including the original at
 the end of the translation's bibliography entry, a procedure which
 requires that the original not also be printed as a separate
 bibliography entry (furet:passing:eng, furet:passing:fr,
 aristotle:metaphy:trans, aristotle:metaphy:gr).  Finally, citations of
 well-known reference works (like the \emph{Encyclopaedia Britannica},
 for example), need only be presented in notes, and not in the
-bibliography (17.238--239; ency:britannica, wikiped:bibtex; see
+bibliography (14.247--248; ency:britannica, wikiped:bibtex; see
 \textsf{inreference}, above). In all these cases, I have suggested the
 inclusion of \texttt{original} in the \textsf{keywords} field, along
 with a \texttt{notkeyword=original} in the optional argument to the
@@ -2295,7 +2469,7 @@ however, when the \emph{Manual} does specify this data, and that is
 when the title of a work is given in translation, even though no
 translation of the work has been published, something that might
 happen when a title is in a language deemed to be unparseable by a
-majority of your expected readership (17.65--67, 17.166, 17.177;
+majority of your expected readership (14.108, 14.110, 14.194;
 pirumova, rozner:liberation).  In such a case, you should provide the
 language(s) involved using this field, connecting multiple languages
 using the keyword \texttt{and}.  (I have retained \textsf{biblatex's}
@@ -2330,42 +2504,43 @@ the whole list will be prefixed by the appropriate string
 \textsf{Biblatex-chicago-notes} will only print such a field in a
 \textsf{book} or an \textsf{inreference} entry, and you should look at
 the documentation of these entry types for further details.  (See
-\emph{Manual} 17.238--239; ency:britannica, grove:sibelius,
+\emph{Manual} 14.247--248; ency:britannica, grove:sibelius,
 times:guide, wikiped:bibtex.)
 
-\mybigspace This \mymarginpar{\textbf{location}} is
+\mybigspace This \colmarginpar{\textbf{location}} is
 \textsf{biblatex}'s version of the usual \textsc{Bib}\TeX\ field
 \textsf{address}, though the latter is accepted as an alias if that
 simplifies the modification of older .bib files.  According to the
-\emph{Manual} (17.99), a citation usually need only provide the first
+\emph{Manual} (14.135), a citation usually need only provide the first
 city listed on any title page, though a list of cities separated by
 the keyword \enquote{\texttt{and}} will be formatted appropriately.
 If the place of publication is unknown, you can use
-\cmd{autocap\{n\}.p.}\ instead (17.102), though in many or even most
-cases this isn't strictly necessary (17.32--34; virginia:plantation).
-For all cities, you should use the common English version of the name,
-if such exists (17.101).
+\cmd{autocap\{n\}.p.}\ instead (14.138).  For all cities, you should
+use the common English version of the name, if such exists (14.137).
 
 %\enlargethispage{\baselineskip}
 
-\mylittlespace Two more details need explanation here.  In
+\mylittlespace Three more details need explanation here.  In
 \textsf{article}, \textsf{periodical}, and \textsf{review} entries,
 there is usually no need for a \textsf{location} field, but
 \enquote{if a journal might be confused with another with a similar
   title, or if it might not be known to the users of a bibliography,}
 then this field can present the place or institution where it is
-published (17.174, 17.196; lakeforester:pushcarts, kimluu:diethyl, and
-garrett).  Less predictably, it is here that \emph{Manual} indicates
-that a particular book is a reprint edition (17.123), so in such a
-case you can use the \textsf{biblatex-chicago} macro \cmd{reprint},
-followed by a comma, space, and the location (aristotle:metaphy:gr,
-schweitzer:bach).  (You can also now, somewhat more simply, just put
-the string \texttt{reprint} into the \textsf{pubstate} field to
-achieve the same result.  See the \textsf{pubstate} documentation
-below.)  The \textsf{origdate} field may be used to give the original
-date of publication, and of course more complicated situations should
-usually be amenable to inclusion in the \textsf{note} field
-(emerson:nature).
+published (14.191, 14.203; lakeforester:pushcarts, kimluu:diethyl, and
+garrett).  For blogs cited using \textsf{article} entries, this is a
+good place to identify the nature of the source --- i.e., the word
+\enquote{blog} --- letting the style automatically provide the
+parentheses (14.246; ellis:blog).  Less predictably, it is here that
+\emph{Manual} indicates that a particular book is a reprint edition
+(14.119), so in such a case you can use the \textsf{biblatex-chicago}
+macro \cmd{reprint}, followed by a comma, space, and the location
+(aristotle:metaphy:gr, schweitzer:bach).  (You can also now, somewhat
+more simply, just put the string \texttt{reprint} into the
+\textsf{pubstate} field to achieve the same result.  See the
+\textsf{pubstate} documentation below.)  The \textsf{origdate} field
+may be used to give the original date of publication, and of course
+more complicated situations should usually be amenable to inclusion in
+the \textsf{note} field (emerson:nature).
 
 \mybigspace The \mymarginpar{\textbf{mainsubtitle}} subtitle for a
 \textsf{maintitle} --- see next entry.
@@ -2405,8 +2580,8 @@ macros \cmd{partedit}, \cmd{parttrans}, \cmd{parteditandtrans},
 \cmd{partedittransand\-comp}, for which see
 section~\ref{sec:formatcommands}.
 
-\mybigspace This \mymarginpar{\textbf{nameaddon}} field is provided by
-\textsf{biblatex}, though not used by the standard styles.  In
+\mybigspace This \colmarginpar{\textbf{nameaddon}} field is provided
+by \textsf{biblatex}, though not used by the standard styles.  In
 \textsf{biblatex-chicago}, it allows you, in most entry types, to
 specify that an author's name is a pseudo\-nym, or to provide either
 the real name or the pseudonym itself, if the other is being provided
@@ -2417,12 +2592,22 @@ creasey:ashe:blast, creasey:morton:hide, creasey:york:death, and
 le\-carre:quest); \cmd{bibstring\{pseudonym\}} does the work for you.
 See under \textbf{author} above for the full details.
 
-\mylittlespace In the \textsf{customc} entry type, on the other hand,
-which is used to create alphabetized cross-references to other
-bibliography entries, the \textsf{nameaddon} field allows you to
-change the default string linking the two parts of the
-cross-reference.  The code automatically tests for a known bibstring,
-which it will italicize.  Otherwise, it prints the string as is.
+\mylittlespace In \textsf{review} entries, I have removed the
+automatic provision of square brackets from the field, allowing it to
+be used in at least two ways.  First, if you provide your own square
+brackets, then it can have its standard function, as above.  Second,
+and new to the 16th edition of the \emph{Manual}, you can further
+specify comments to blogs and other online content using a timestamp
+(in parentheses) that supplements the \textsf{eventdate}, particularly
+when the latter is too coarse a specification to identify a comment
+unambiguously.  Cf.\ ac:comment.
+
+\mylittlespace In the \textsf{customc} entry type, finally, which is
+used to create alphabetized cross-references to other bibliography
+entries, the \textsf{nameaddon} field allows you to change the default
+string linking the two parts of the cross-reference.  The code
+automatically tests for a known bibstring, which it will italicize.
+Otherwise, it prints the string as is.
 
 \mybigspace Like \mymarginpar{\textbf{nameb}} \textsf{namea}, above,
 this is a field left undefined by the standard \textsf{biblatex}
@@ -2441,7 +2626,7 @@ with \textsf{namea} if they are identical.  See under the
 \cmd{parteditandcomp}, \cmd{parttransandcomp}, and
 \cmd{partedittransandcomp} in section~\ref{sec:formatcommands}.
 
-\mybigspace The \mymarginpar{\textbf{namec}} \emph{Manual} (17.41)
+\mybigspace The \mymarginpar{\textbf{namec}} \emph{Manual} (14.87)
 specifies that works without an author may be listed under an editor,
 translator, or compiler, assuming that one is available, and it also
 specifies the strings to be used with the name(s) of compiler(s).  All
@@ -2451,7 +2636,7 @@ reference, so I have added that possibility to the many that
 \textsf{biblatex} already provides, such as the \textsf{editor},
 \textsf{translator}, \textsf{commentator}, \textsf{annotator}, and
 \textsf{redactor}, along with writers of an \textsf{introduction},
-\textsf{foreword}, or \textsf{afterword}.  Since \textsf{biblatex.bst}
+\textsf{foreword}, or \textsf{afterword}.  Since \textsf{biblatex}
 doesn't offer a \textsf{compiler} field, I have adopted for this
 purpose the otherwise unused field \textsf{namec}.  It is important to
 understand that, despite the analogous name, this field does not
@@ -2493,10 +2678,12 @@ change from the previous behavior, these algorithms also now test for
 \textsf{editor} and \textsf{translator}, respectively, giving the
 package the greatest likelihood of finding a name to place at the head
 of an entry.  Please remember, however, that if this name is supplied
-by any of the non-standard fields \textsf{name[a-c]}, then you will
-need to provide a \textsf{sortkey} to assist with alphabetization in
-the bibliography, and also a \textsf{shortauthor} for the short note
-form.
+by any of the non-standard fields \textsf{name[a-c]}, and you're not
+using \textsf{Biber}, then you will need to provide a \textsf{sortkey}
+to assist with alphabetization in the bibliography (cf.\
+\cmd{DeclareSortingScheme} in section~\ref{sec:formatopts}, below.)  A
+\textsf{shortauthor} is no longer necessary for the short note form,
+as the style will provide it automatically.
 
 \mybigspace As \mymarginpar{\textbf{note}} in standard
 \textsf{biblatex}, this field allows you to provide bibliographic data
@@ -2528,20 +2715,17 @@ even a reference to \enquote{2nd ser.,} for example, while the
 \textsf{series} field in such an entry will contain the name of the
 series, rather than a number.  This field is also the place for the
 patent number in a \textsf{patent} entry.  Cf.\ \textsf{issue} and
-\textsf{series}.  (See \emph{Manual} 17.90--95 and boxer:china,
-palmatary:pottery, wauchope:ceramics; 17.163 and beattie:crime,
-conley:fifthgrade, friedman:learning, garrett, gibbard, hlatky:hrt,
-mcmillen:antebellum, rozner:liberation, warr:ellison.)
+\textsf{series}.  (See \emph{Manual} 14.128--132 and boxer:china,
+palmatary:pottery, wauchope:ceramics; 14.180--181 and beattie:crime,
+conley:fifthgrade, friedman:learn\-ing, garrett, gibbard, hlatky:hrt,
+mcmillen:antebellum, rozner:liberation, warr:el\-lison.)
 
 \mylittlespace \textbf{NB}: This may be an opportune place to point
-out that the \emph{Manual} (17.129) prefers arabic to roman numerals
+out that the \emph{Manual} (14.154) prefers arabic to roman numerals
 in most circumstances (chapters, volumes, series numbers, etc.), even
 when such numbers might be roman in the work cited.  The obvious
 exception is page numbers, in which roman numerals indicate that the
 citation came from the front matter, and should therefore be retained.
-Another possible exception is in references to works \enquote{with
-  many and complex divisions,} in which \enquote{a mixture of roman
-  and arabic} may be \enquote{easier to disentangle.}
 
 \mybigspace A \mymarginpar{\textbf{options}} standard
 \textsf{biblatex} field, for setting certain options on a per-entry
@@ -2560,29 +2744,43 @@ organization sponsoring a conference in a \textsf{proceedings} or
 \textsf{inproceedings} entry, and I have retained this as a
 possibility, though the \emph{Manual} is silent on the matter.
 
-\mybigspace This \mymarginpar{\textbf{origdate}} is a new
-\textsf{biblatex} field, replacing the obsolete \textsf{origyear}, and
-allowing more than one full specification for those references which
-need to provide more than one date.  As with the analogous
-\textsf{date} field, you provide the date (or range of dates) in
-\textsc{iso}8601 format, i.e., \texttt{yyyy-mm-dd}.  In most entry
-types, you would use \textsf{origdate} to provide the date of first
-publication of a work, most usually needed only in the case of reprint
-editions, but also recommended by the \emph{Manual} for electronic
-editions of older works (17.123, 17.146--7; aristotle:metaphy:gr,
-emerson:nature, james:ambassadors, schweitzer:bach).  In the
-\textsf{letter} and \textsf{misc} (with \textsf{entrysubtype}) entry
-types, the \textsf{origdate} identifies when a letter (or similar) was
-written.  In such \textsf{misc} entries, some
-\enquote{non-letter-like} materials (like interviews) need the
-\textsf{date} field for this purpose, while in \textsf{letter} entries
-the \textsf{date} applies to the publication of the whole collection.
-If such a published collection were itself a reprint, improvisation in
-the \textsf{location} field might be able to rescue the situation.
-(See jackson:paulina:letter, white:ross:memo, white:russ, and
-white:total for how \textsf{letter} entries usually work; creel:house
-shows the field in action in a \textsf{misc} entry, while
-spock:interview uses \textsf{date}.)
+\mybigspace This \colmarginpar{\textbf{origdate}} \textsf{biblatex}
+field allows you to provide more than one full date specification for
+those references which need it.  As with the analogous \textsf{date}
+field, you provide the date (or range of dates) in \textsc{iso}8601
+format, i.e., \texttt{yyyy-mm-dd}.  In most entry types, you would use
+\textsf{origdate} to provide the date of first publication of a work,
+most usually needed only in the case of reprint editions, but also
+recommended by the \emph{Manual} for electronic editions of older
+works (14.119, 14.166, 14.169; aristotle:metaphy:gr, emerson:nature,
+james:ambassadors, schweitzer:bach).  In the \textsf{letter} and
+\textsf{misc} (with \textsf{entrysubtype}) entry types, the
+\textsf{origdate} identifies when a letter (or similar) was written.
+In such \textsf{misc} entries, some \enquote{non-letter-like}
+materials (like interviews) need the \textsf{date} field for this
+purpose, while in \textsf{letter} entries the \textsf{date} applies to
+the publication of the whole collection.  If such a published
+collection were itself a reprint, improvisation in the
+\textsf{location} field might be able to rescue the situation.  (See
+jackson:paulina:letter, white:ross:memo, white:russ, and white:total
+for how \textsf{letter} entries usually work; creel:house shows the
+field in action in a \textsf{misc} entry, while spock:interview uses
+\textsf{date}.)
+
+\mylittlespace In \textsf{music} entries, you can use the
+\textsf{origdate} in two separate but related ways.  First, it can
+identify the recording date of an entire disc, rather than of one
+track on that disc, which would go in \textsf{eventdate}.  (Compare
+holiday:fool with nytrumpet:art.)  The style will automatically
+prepend the bibstring \texttt{recorded} to the date, but you can
+change it with the new \textsf{userd} field.  Be aware, however, that
+if an entry also has an \textsf{eventdate}, then \textsf{userd} will
+apply to that, instead, and you'll be forced to accept the default
+string.  Second, the \textsf{origdate} can provide the original
+release date of an album.  For this to happen, you need to put the
+string \texttt{reprint} in the \textsf{pubstate} field, which is a
+standard mechanism across many other entry types for identifying a
+reprinted work.  (See floyd:atom.)
 
 \mylittlespace Because the \textsf{origdate} field only accepts
 numbers, some improvisation may be needed if you wish to include
@@ -2591,29 +2789,30 @@ numbers, some improvisation may be needed if you wish to include
 \textsf{titleaddon}, but in other entry types you may need to use the
 \textsf{location} field.
 
+\enlargethispage{\baselineskip}
+
 \mybigspace In \mymarginpar{\textbf{origlanguage}} keeping with the
 \emph{Manual}'s specifications, I have fairly thoroughly redefined
 \textsf{biblatex}'s facilities for treating translations.  The
-\textsf{origtitle} and \textsf{origlocation} fields aren't used, while
-the \textsf{language} and \textsf{origdate} fields have been
-press-ganged for other duties.  The \textsf{origlanguage} field, for
-its part, retains a dual role in presenting translations in a
-bibliography.  The details of the \emph{Manual}'s suggested treatment
-when both a translation and an original are cited may be found below
-under \textbf{userf}.  Here, however, I simply note that the
-introductory string used to connect the translation's citation with
-the original's is \enquote{Originally published as,} which I suggest
-may well be inaccurate in a great many cases, as for instance when
-citing a work from classical antiquity, which will most certainly not
-\enquote{originally} have been published in the Loeb Classical
-Library.  Although not, strictly speaking, authorized by the
-\emph{Manual}, I have provided another way to introduce the original
-text, using the \textsf{origlanguage} field, which must be provided
-\emph{in the entry for the translation, not the original text}
-(aristotle:metaphy:trans).  If you put one of the standard
-\textsf{biblatex} bibstrings there (enumerated below), then the entry
-will work properly across multiple languages.  Otherwise, just put the
-name of the language there, localized as necessary, and
+\textsf{origtitle} field isn't used, while the \textsf{language} and
+\textsf{origdate} fields have been press-ganged for other duties.  The
+\textsf{origlanguage} field, for its part, retains a dual role in
+presenting translations in a bibliography.  The details of the
+\emph{Manual}'s suggested treatment when both a translation and an
+original are cited may be found below under \textbf{userf}.  Here,
+however, I simply note that the introductory string used to connect
+the translation's citation with the original's is \enquote{Originally
+  published as,} which I suggest may well be inaccurate in a great
+many cases, as for instance when citing a work from classical
+antiquity, which will most certainly not \enquote{originally} have
+been published in the Loeb Classical Library.  Although not, strictly
+speaking, authorized by the \emph{Manual}, I have provided another way
+to introduce the original text, using the \textsf{origlanguage} field,
+which must be provided \emph{in the entry for the translation, not the
+  original text} (aristotle:metaphy:trans).  If you put one of the
+standard \textsf{biblatex} bibstrings there (enumerated below), then
+the entry will work properly across multiple languages.  Otherwise,
+just put the name of the language there, localized as necessary, and
 \textsf{biblatex-chicago} will eschew \enquote{Originally published
   as} in favor of, e.g., \enquote{Greek edition:} or \enquote{French
   edition:}.  This has no effect in notes, where only the work cited
@@ -2642,22 +2841,41 @@ writing, be one of \texttt{american}, \texttt{brazilian},
 
 %\enlargethispage{-\baselineskip}
 
-\mybigspace NB: \mymarginpar{\textbf{origlocation}} This field is now
-obsolete, and has, as announced previously, been replaced by
-\textsf{lista}, which see.  Please update your .bib files accordingly.
-
-\mybigspace This \mymarginpar{\textbf{origyear}} field is, as of
-\textsf{biblatex} 0.9, obsolete.  It is ignored if it appears in a
-.bib file.
+\mybigspace The \colmarginpar{\textbf{origlocation}} 16th edition of
+the \emph{Manual} has somewhat clarified issues pertaining to the
+documentation of reprint editions and their corresponding originals
+(14.166).  Starting with this release of \textsf{biblatex-chicago},
+you can provide both an \textsf{origlocation} and an
+\textsf{origpublisher} to go along with the \textsf{origdate}, should
+you so wish, and all of this information will be printed in long notes
+and bibliography.  You can now also use this field in a
+\textsf{letter} or \textsf{misc} (with \textsf{entrysubtype}) entry to
+give the place where a published or unpublished letter was written
+(14.117).  (Jonathan Robinson has suggested that the
+\textsf{origlocation} may in some circumstances actually be necessary
+for disambiguation, his example being early printed editions of the
+same material printed in the same year but in different cities.  The
+new functionality should make this simple to achieve.  Cf.\
+\textsf{origdate}, \textsf{origpublisher} and \textsf{pubstate};
+schweitzer:bach.)
+
+\mybigspace As \colmarginpar{\textbf{origpublisher}} with the
+\textsf{origlocation} field just above, the 16th edition of the
+\emph{Manual} has clarified issues pertaining to reprint editions and
+their corresponding originals (14.166).  You can now provide an
+\textsf{origpublisher} and/or an \textsf{origlocation} in addition to
+the \textsf{origdate}, and all will be presented in long notes and
+bibliography.  (Cf.\ \textsf{origdate}, \textsf{origlocation}, and
+\textsf{pubstate}; schweitzer:bach.)
 
 \mybigspace This \mymarginpar{\textbf{pages}} is the standard
 \textsf{biblatex} field for providing page references.  In many
 \textsf{article} and \textsf{review} entries you'll find this contains
 something other than a page number, e.g. a section name or edition
-specification (17.188, 17.191, 17.202; kozinn:review, nyt:obittrevor,
+specification (14.203, 14.209; kozinn:review, nyt:obittrevor,
 nyt:trevorobit).  Of course, the same may be true of almost any sort
 of entry, though perhaps with less frequency.  Curious readers may
-wish to look at brown:bremer (17.172) for an example of a
+wish to look at brown:bremer (14.189) for an example of a
 \textsf{pages} field used to facilitate reference to a two-part
 journal article.  Cf.\ \textsf{number} for more information on the
 \emph{Manual}'s preferences regarding the formatting of numerals;
@@ -2680,7 +2898,7 @@ just mentioned the two fields are equivalent.
 field, which identifies physical parts of a single logical volume in
 \textsf{book}-like entries, not in periodicals.  It has the same
 purpose in \textsf{biblatex-chicago-notes}, but because the
-\emph{Manual} (17.88) calls such a thing a \enquote{book} and not a
+\emph{Manual} (14.126) calls such a thing a \enquote{book} and not a
 \enquote{part,} the string printed in notes and bibliography will, at
 least in English, be \enquote{\texttt{bk.}\hspace{-2pt}}\ instead of
 the plain dot between volume number and part number
@@ -2691,38 +2909,35 @@ association with a \textsf{volume} number, so if you need to identify
 field, (which in this case would be \textsf{number}
 [palmatary:pottery]).  Cf.\ \textsf{volume}.
 
-\mybigspace Standard \mymarginpar{\textbf{publisher}}
+\mybigspace Standard \colmarginpar{\textbf{publisher}}
 \textsf{biblatex} field.  Remember that \enquote{\texttt{and}} is a
 keyword for connecting multiple publishers, so if a publisher's name
 contains \enquote{and,} then you should either use the ampersand (\&)
 or enclose the whole name in additional braces.  (See \emph{Manual}
-17.103--114; aristotle:metaphy:gr, cohen:schiff, creasey:ashe:blast,
+14.139--148; aristotle:metaphy:gr, cohen:schiff, creasey:ashe:blast,
 dunn:revolutions.)
 
 \mylittlespace There are, as one might expect, a couple of further
-subtleties involved here.  Ordinarily, two publishers will be
-separated by a forward slash in both notes and bibliography, but if a
-company issues \enquote{certain books through a special publishing
-  division or under a special imprint,} then the two names will be
-separated by a comma, which you will need to provide in the
-\textsf{publisher} field.  The \emph{Manual}'s example (17.112) is
-\enquote{\texttt{Ohio University Press, Swallow Press},} which would
-cause \textsf{biblatex-chicago-notes} no problems.  If a book has two
-co-publishers, \enquote{usually in different countries,} (17.113) then
-the simplest thing to do is to choose one, probably the nearest one
-geographically.  If you feel it necessary to include both, then
-levistrauss:savage demonstrates one way of doing so, using a
-combination of the \textsf{publisher} and \textsf{location} fields.
-Finally, if the publisher is unknown, then the \emph{Manual}
-recommends (17.109) simply using the place (if known) and the date.
-If for some reason you need to indicate the absence of a publisher,
-the abbreviation given by the \emph{Manual} is \texttt{n.p.}, though
-this can also stand for \enquote{no place.}  Some style guides
-apparently suggest using \texttt{s.n.}\,(= \emph{sine nomine}) to
-specify the lack of a publisher, but the \emph{Manual} doesn't mention
-this.
-
-\mybigspace Due \mymarginpar{\textbf{pubstate}} to specific
+subtleties involved here.  Two publishers will be separated by a
+forward slash in both notes and bibliography, and you no longer, in
+the 16th edition, need to provide hand formatting if a company issues
+\enquote{certain books through a special publishing division or under
+  a special imprint,} as these, too, should be separated by a forward
+slash.  If a book has two co-publishers, \enquote{usually in different
+  countries,} (14.147) then the simplest thing to do is to choose one,
+probably the nearest one geographically.  If you feel it necessary to
+include both, then levistrauss:savage demonstrates one way of doing
+so, using a combination of the \textsf{publisher} and
+\textsf{location} fields.  Finally, if the publisher is unknown, then
+the \emph{Manual} recommends (14.143) simply using the place (if
+known) and the date.  If for some reason you need to indicate the
+absence of a publisher, the abbreviation given by the \emph{Manual} is
+\texttt{n.p.}, though this can also stand for \enquote{no place.}
+Some style guides apparently suggest using \texttt{s.n.}\,(=
+\emph{sine nomine}) to specify the lack of a publisher, but the
+\emph{Manual} doesn't mention this.
+
+\mybigspace Due \colmarginpar{\textbf{pubstate}} to specific
 requirements in the author-date style, I have implemented this field
 there as a way of providing accurate citations of reprinted books.  As
 the functionality seemed useful, I have also included some of it in
@@ -2735,16 +2950,20 @@ database for the author-date style, you can simply put the string
 \texttt{reprint} into the \textsf{pubstate} field, and the package
 will take care of everything for you.  Both of these methods will now
 work just fine, but please choose only one per entry, otherwise the
-string will be printed twice.  Please note, also, that this automatic
-mechanism has been disabled in \textsf{music} and \textsf{video}
-entries, as it isn't appropriate to those sorts of material.  In the
-latter, \textsf{pubstate} will be silently ignored, whereas in the
-former, for compatibility with the author-date style, the field
-functions as a synonym for \textsf{howpublished}, and will be printed
-verbatim.  Currently, if you put anything besides \texttt{reprint} in
-the \textsf{pubstate} field of anything except \textsf{music} entries,
-it too will silently be ignored, but this may change in future
-releases.
+string will be printed twice.
+
+\mylittlespace There are a couple of exceptions to this basic
+functionality.  In \textsf{video} entries, no bibstring will be
+printed, as it's not appropriate there, so in effect the
+\textsf{pubstate} field will be ignored.  In \textsf{music} entries,
+the mechanism transforms the \textsf{origdate} from a recording date
+for an album into the original release date for that album.  Whereas a
+recording date will be printed in the middle of the note or
+bibliography entry, the original release date will be printed near the
+end, preceded by the appropriate string.  (Cf.\ 14.276; floyd:atom.)
+Please remember that, currently, if you put anything besides
+\texttt{reprint} in the \textsf{pubstate} field it will silently be
+ignored, but this may change in future releases.
 
 \mybigspace I \mymarginpar{\textbf{redactor}} have implemented this
 field just as \textsf{biblatex}'s standard styles do, even though the
@@ -2759,7 +2978,7 @@ purposes.  Cf.\ \textsf{annotator} and \textsf{commentator}.
 included a means of providing the original publication details of an
 essay or a chapter that you are citing from a subsequent reprint,
 e.g., a \emph{Collected Essays} volume.  In such a case, at least
-according to the \emph{Manual} (17.73), such details needn't be
+according to the \emph{Manual} (14.115), such details needn't be
 provided in notes, only in the bibliography, and then only if these
 details are \enquote{of particular interest.}  The data would follow
 an introductory phrase like \enquote{originally published as,} making
@@ -2803,48 +3022,45 @@ auto-detection mechanism in place; see the discussion of
 \cmd{bibstring} below for details.)  In whatever entry type, these
 bibstrings produce the required abbreviation, which thankfully is the
 same in both notes and bibliography.  (For books and similar entries,
-see \emph{Manual} 17.90--95; boxer:china, browning:aurora,
+see \emph{Manual} 14.128--132; boxer:china, browning:aurora,
 palmatary:pottery, plato:republic:gr, wauchope:ceramics; for
-periodicals, see 17.178; garaud:gatine, sewall:letter.)  Cf.\
+periodicals, see 14.195; garaud:gatine, sewall:letter.)  Cf.\
 \textsf{number} for more information on the \emph{Manual}'s
 preferences regarding the formatting of numerals.
 
-\mybigspace This \mymarginpar{\textbf{shortauthor}} is a standard
+\mybigspace This \colmarginpar{\textbf{shortauthor}} is a standard
 \textsf{biblatex} field, but \textsf{biblatex-chicago-notes} makes
 considerably grea\-ter use of it than the standard styles.  For the
 purposes of the Chicago style, the field provides the name to be used
 in the short form of a footnote.  In the vast majority of cases, you
 don't need to specify it, because the \textsf{biblatex} system selects
 the author's last name from the \textsf{author} field and uses it in
-such a reference, but in a few cases this default behavior won't work.
-In books without an author and listed under an editor,
-\textsf{biblatex} does the right thing and uses the surname of the
-editor in a short note (zukowsky:chicago), but if the work is listed
-under a compiler (or any of the non-standard names
-\textsf{name[a-c]}), you need to provide that person's name in
-\textsf{shortauthor}, and also remember to provide a \textsf{sortkey}
-to make sure the work will be alphabetized correctly in the
-bibliography.  (The current version of \textsf{biblatex} will now
-automatically alphabetize by \textsf{translator} if that is the name
-given at the head of an entry.)  You no longer, however, need to
-provide one in an author-less \textsf{article} or \textsf{review}
-entry (\textsf{entrysubtype} \texttt{magazine}), where you allow
-\textsf{biblatex-chicago-notes} to use the \textsf{journaltitle} as
-the author, nor in author-less \textsf{manual} entries, where the
-\textsf{organization} will be so used.  The style now automatically
+such a reference, and if there is no \textsf{author} it will search
+\textsf{namea}, \textsf{editor}, \textsf{nameb}, \textsf{translator},
+and \textsf{namec}, in that order.  (In the case of the non-standard
+names \textsf{name[a-c]}, you will need to provide a \textsf{sortkey}
+if you aren't using \textsf{Biber}.  Cf.\ \cmd{DeclareSortingScheme}
+and \cmd{DeclareLabelname} in section~\ref{sec:formatopts}, below.)
+In an author-less \textsf{article} or \textsf{review} entry
+(\textsf{entrysubtype} \texttt{magazine}), where
+\textsf{biblatex-chicago-notes} will use the \textsf{journaltitle} as
+the author, or in author-less \textsf{manual} entries, where the
+\textsf{organization} will be so used, the style automatically
 provides the same substitution in the short note form, though you'll
 still need to help the alphabetization routines by providing a
 \textsf{sortkey} field in such cases (dyna:browser, gourmet:052006,
 lakeforester:pushcarts, nyt:trevorobit).
 
 \mylittlespace As mentioned under \textsf{editortype}, the
-\emph{Manual} (17.41) recommends against providing the identifying
+\emph{Manual} (14.87) recommends against providing the identifying
 string (e.g., ed.\ or trans.)\ in the short note form, and
 \textsf{biblatex-chicago-notes} follows their recommendation.  If you
 need to provide these strings in such a citation, then you'll have to
 do so by hand in the \textsf{shortauthor} field, or in the
 \textsf{shorteditor} field, whichever you are using.
 
+\enlargethispage{\baselineskip}
+
 \mybigspace Like \mymarginpar{\textbf{shorteditor}}
 \textsf{shortauthor}, a field to provide a name for a short footnote,
 in this case for, e.g., a \textsf{collection} entry that typically
@@ -2854,71 +3070,109 @@ most situations, but if you have set \texttt{useauthor=false} (and not
 only \textsf{shorteditor} will be recognized.  Cf.\
 \textsf{editortype}, above.
 
-\mybigspace This \mymarginpar{\textbf{shorthand}} is
+\mybigspace This \colmarginpar{\textbf{shorthand}} is
 \textsf{biblatex}'s mechanism for using abbreviations in place of the
-usual short note form, and I've left it effectively unmodified in
-\textsf{biblatex-chicago-notes}, apart from a few formatting tweaks.
-Any entry which contains such a field will produce a normal first
-note, either long or short according to your package options,
+usual short note form, and in previous releases I left it effectively
+unmodified in \textsf{biblatex-chicago-notes}, apart from a few
+formatting tweaks.  For this release, at the request of Kenneth Pearce
+and following some hints in the \emph{Manual}, I have made the system
+considerably more flexible, which I hope might be useful for those
+with specialized formatting needs.  In the default configuration, any
+entry which contains a \textsf{shorthand} field will produce a normal
+first note, either long or short according to your package options,
 informing the reader that the work will hereafter be cited by this
 abbreviation.  As in \textsf{biblatex}, the \cmd{printshorthands}
 command will produce a formatted list of abbreviations for reference
 purposes, a list which the \emph{Manual} suggests should be placed
 either in the front matter (when using footnotes) or before the
-endnotes, in case these are used.  (See 16.39--40, and also
-\textsf{biblatex.pdf} for more information.)
+endnotes, in case these are used.
+
+\mylittlespace For this release, I have provided three new options to
+alter these defaults.  First, there is a new citation command,
+\mycolor{\cmd{shorthandcite}}, which will print the \textsf{shorthand}
+even at the first citation.  I have only provided the most general
+form of this command, so you'll need to put it inside parentheses or
+in a \cmd{footnote} command yourself.  Next, I have included two new
+\texttt{bibenvironments} for use with the \texttt{env} option to the
+\cmd{printshorthands} command: \mycolor{\texttt{losnotes}} is designed
+to allow a list of shorthands to appear inside footnotes, while
+\mycolor{\texttt{losendnotes}} does the same for endnotes.  Their main
+effect is to change the font size, and in the latter case to clear up
+some spurious punctuation and white space that I see on my system when
+using endnotes.  (You'll probably also want to use the option
+\texttt{heading=none} in order to get rid of the [oversized] default,
+providing your own within the \cmd{footnote} command.)  Finally, I
+have provided a new package option, \mycolor{\texttt{shorthandfull}},
+which prints entries in the list of shorthands which contain full
+bibliographical information, effectively allowing you to eschew the
+bibliography in favor of a fortified shorthand list.  (See 13.65,
+14.54--55, and also \textsf{biblatex.pdf} for more information.)
 
 \mylittlespace As I mentioned above under \textbf{crossref}, extra
 care is needed when using shorthands with cross-references, and I
 would avoid them in all parent entries, at least in the current state
 of \textsf{biblatex-chicago-notes}.
 
-\mybigspace When \mymarginpar{\textbf{shorthandintro}} you include a
+\mybigspace When \colmarginpar{\textbf{shorthandintro}} you include a
 \textsf{shorthand} in an entry, it will ordinarily appear the first
-time you cite the work, at the end of a long note, prefaced by the
-phrase \enquote{Henceforth cited as.}  With this standard
-\textsf{biblatex} field, you can change that phrase to suit your
-needs.  Please note, first, that you need to include the shorthand in
-this field as you intend it to appear and, second, that you still need
-the \textsf{shorthand} field present in order to ensure the
-appropriate presentation of the shorthand in later citations and in
-the list of shorthands.
-
-\mybigspace A \colmarginpar{\textbf{shorttitle}} standard
+time you cite the work, at the end of a long note, surrounded by
+parentheses and prefaced by the phrase \enquote{hereafter cited as.}
+With this standard \textsf{biblatex} field, you can change that
+formatting and that phrase to suit your needs.  Please note, first,
+that you need to include the shorthand in this field as you intend it
+to appear and, second, that you still need the \textsf{shorthand}
+field present in order to ensure the appropriate presentation of that
+shorthand in later citations and in the list of shorthands.  Finally,
+I've tried to allow for as many different styles of notification as
+possible, so by default the only punctuation that will appear between
+the rest of the citation and the \textsf{shorthandintro} is a space.
+If you are not enclosing the whole phrase in parentheses, you may need
+to provide additional punctuation in the field itself, e.g.,
+\texttt{\{\textbackslash addperiod\textbackslash space Cited
+  as\ldots\}}.
+
+\mybigspace A \mymarginpar{\textbf{shorttitle}} standard
 \textsf{biblatex} field, primarily used to provide an abbreviated
 title for short notes.  In \textsf{biblatex-chicago-notes}, you need
 to take particular care with \textsf{letter} entries, where, as
 explained above, the \emph{Manual} requires a special format
-(\enquote{\texttt{to Recipient}}).  (See 17.76--78;
+(\enquote{\texttt{to Recipient}}).  (See 14.117;
 jackson:paulina:letter, white:ross:memo, white:russ.)  Some
 \textsf{misc} entries (with an \textsf{entrysubtype}) also need
 special attention.  (See creel:house, where the full \textsf{title} is
 used as the \textsf{shortauthor} + \textsf{shorttitle} by using
 \cmd{headlesscite} commands.  Placing \cmd{isdot} into the
-\textsf{shortauthor} field no longer works in \textsf{biblatex} 1.6
-and later, so be sure to check your .bib files when you upgrade.)
-Remember, also, that the generic titles in \textsf{review} and
-\textsf{misc} entries may not want capitalization in all contexts, so,
-as with the \textsf{title} field, if you begin a \textsf{shorttitle}
-with a lowercase letter the style will do the right thing
-(barcott:review, bundy:macneil, Clemens:letter, kozinn:review,
-ratliff:review, unsigned:ranke).
+\textsf{shortauthor} field no longer works in \textsf{biblatex} 1.6,
+so be sure to check your .bib files when you upgrade.)  Remember,
+also, that the generic titles in \textsf{review} and \textsf{misc}
+entries may not want capitalization in all contexts, so, as with the
+\textsf{title} field, if you begin a \textsf{shorttitle} with a
+lowercase letter the style will do the right thing (barcott:review,
+bundy:macneil, Clemens:letter, kozinn:review, ratliff:review,
+unsigned:ranke).
 
 %\enlargethispage{\baselineskip}
 
-\mybigspace A \mymarginpar{\textbf{sortkey}} standard
+\mybigspace A \colmarginpar{\textbf{sortkey}} standard
 \textsf{biblatex} field, designed to allow you to specify how you want
 an entry alphabetized in a bibliography.  In general, if an entry
 doesn't turn up where you expect or want it, this field should provide
-the solution.  More particularly, entries without an \textsf{author}
-or an \textsf{editor}, or with a corporate author beginning with the
-definite or indefinite article, will usually require your assistance
-in this way (chaucer:alt, cotton:manufacture, gourmet:052006,
-lakeforester:pushcarts, nyt:obittrevor, nyt:trevorobit, silver:gawain,
-unsigned:ranke, virginia:plantation).  Lehman also provides
+the solution.  Entries with a corporate author can now omit the
+definite or indefinite article, which should help (14.85;
+cotton:manufacture, nytrumpet:art).  If you use \textsf{Biber} as your
+backend, \textsf{biblatex-chicago} also now includes the three
+supplemental name fields (\textsf{name[a-c]}) in the sorting
+algorithm, so once again you should find that this field is needed
+less than before.  Still, many entries without a name field of any
+sort, particularly those with a definite or indefinite article
+beginning the \textsf{title}, may require assistance (chaucer:alt,
+dyna:browser, gourmet:052006, greek:filmstrip, grove:sibelius,
+lakeforester:pushcarts, nyt:trevorobit, silver:ga\-wain,
+un\-signed:ran\-ke, vir\-gin\-ia:plan\-tation).  Lehman also provides
 \textbf{sortname}, \textbf{sorttitle}, and \textbf{sortyear} for more
-fine-grained control.  Please consult \textsf{biblatex.pdf} for the
-details.
+fine-grained control.  Please consult \textsf{biblatex.pdf} and the
+remarks on \cmd{DeclareSortingScheme} in section~\ref{sec:formatopts},
+below.
 
 \mybigspace The \mymarginpar{\textbf{subtitle}} subtitle for a
 \textsf{title} --- see next entry.
@@ -2948,21 +3202,21 @@ are as follows:
 \item[\qquad Italics:] \textsf{booktitle}, \textsf{maintitle}, and
   \textsf{journaltitle} in all entry types; \textsf{title} of
   \textsf{artwork}, \textsf{book}, \textsf{bookinbook},
-  \textsf{booklet}, \textsf{collection}, \textsf{inbook},
-  \textsf{manual}, \textsf{misc} (with no \textsf{entrysubtype}),
-  \textsf{periodical}, \textsf{proceedings}, \textsf{report},
-  \textsf{suppbook}, and \textsf{suppcollection} entry types.
+  \textsf{booklet}, \textsf{collection}, \mycolor{\textsf{image}},
+  \textsf{inbook}, \textsf{manual}, \textsf{misc} (with no
+  \textsf{entrysubtype}), \textsf{periodical}, \textsf{proceedings},
+  \textsf{report}, \textsf{suppbook}, and \textsf{suppcollection}
+  entry types.
 \item[\qquad Quotation Marks:] \textsf{title} of \textsf{article},
-  \textsf{image}, \textsf{incollection}, \textsf{inproceedings},
-  \textsf{online}, \textsf{patent}, \textsf{periodical},
-  \textsf{thesis}, and \textsf{unpublished} entry types,
-  \textsf{issuetitle} in \textsf{article}, \textsf{periodical}, and
-  \textsf{review} entry types.
+  \textsf{incollection}, \textsf{inproceedings}, \textsf{online},
+  \textsf{periodical}, \textsf{thesis}, and \textsf{unpublished} entry
+  types, \textsf{issuetitle} in \textsf{article}, \textsf{periodical},
+  and \textsf{review} entry types.
 \item[\qquad Unformatted:] \textsf{booktitleaddon},
   \textsf{maintitleaddon}, and \textsf{titleaddon} in all entry types,
   \textsf{title} of \textsf{customc}, \textsf{letter}, \textsf{misc}
-  (with an \textsf{entrysubtype}), \textsf{review}, and
-  \textsf{suppperiodical} entry types.
+  (with an \textsf{entrysubtype}), \mycolor{\textsf{patent}},
+  \textsf{review}, and \textsf{suppperiodical} entry types.
 \item[\qquad Italics or Quotation Marks:] All of the audiovisual entry
   types --- \textsf{audio}, \textsf{music}, and \textsf{video} ---
   have to serve as analogues both to \textsf{book} and to
@@ -2976,7 +3230,7 @@ Now, the rules for which entry type to use for which sort of work tend
 to be fairly straightforward, but in cases of doubt you can consult
 section \ref{sec:entrytypes} above, the examples in
 \textsf{notes-test.bib}, or go to the \emph{Manual} itself,
-8.164--210.  Assuming, then, that you want to present a title within a
+8.154--195.  Assuming, then, that you want to present a title within a
 title, and you know what sort of formatting each of the two would, on
 its own, require, then the following rules apply:
 
@@ -2985,7 +3239,7 @@ its own, require, then the following rules apply:
   quotation marks and italicized, so in such cases all you need to do
   is provide the quotation marks using \cmd{mkbibquote}, which will
   take care of any following punctuation that needs to be brought
-  within the closing quotation mark(s) (17.58; donne:var,
+  within the closing quotation mark(s) (14.102; donne:var,
   mchugh:wake).
 \item Inside a quoted title, you should present another title as it
   would appear if it were on its own, so in such cases you'll need to
@@ -2993,7 +3247,7 @@ its own, require, then the following rules apply:
   another quoted title would take single quotes --- the
   \cmd{mkbibquote} command does this for you automatically, and also,
   I repeat, takes care of any following punctuation that needs to be
-  brought within the closing quotation mark(s).  (See 17.157; garrett,
+  brought within the closing quotation mark(s).  (See 14.177; garrett,
   loften:hamlet, murphy:silent, white:callimachus.)
 \item Inside a plain title (most likely in a \textsf{review} entry or
   a \textsf{titleaddon} field), you should present another title as it
@@ -3006,10 +3260,11 @@ The \emph{Manual} provides a few more rules, as well.  A word normally
 italicized in text should also be italicized in a quoted or plain-text
 title, but should be in roman (\enquote{reverse italics}) in an
 italicized title.  A quotation used as a (whole) title (with or
-without a subtitle) retains its quotation marks when it is quoted or
-plain, but loses them when it is italicized (17.60, 17.157; lewis).  A
-word or phrase in quotation marks, but that isn't a quotation, retains
-those marks in all title types (kimluu:diethyl).
+without a subtitle) retains its quotation marks in an italicized title
+\enquote{only if it appears that way in the source,} but always
+retains them when the surrounding title is quoted or plain (14.104,
+14.177; lewis).  A word or phrase in quotation marks, but that isn't a
+quotation, retains those marks in all title types (kimluu:diethyl).
 
 \mylittlespace Finally, please note that in all \textsf{review} (and
 \textsf{suppperiodical}) entries, and in \textsf{misc} entries with an
@@ -3102,16 +3357,12 @@ ross:thesis all demonstrate how the \textsf{type} field may sometimes
 be automatically set in such entries by using one of the standard
 entry-type aliases).
 
-\mylittlespace With the arrival of Lehman's remarkable
-punctuation-tracking code in \textsf{biblatex} 0.8, there can be
-almost no use for the \textsf{type} field as a switch for the
-\cmd{custpunct} macro, so I have been able to reuse it in order to
-generalize the functioning of the \textsf{suppbook} entry type, and of
-its alias \textsf{suppcollection}.  In such entries, you can now use
-the \textsf{type} field to specify what sort of supplemental material
-you are citing, e.g., \enquote{\texttt{preface to}} or
-\enquote{\texttt{postscript to}.}  Cf.\ \textsf{suppbook} above for the
-details.  (See \emph{Manual} 17.74--75; polakow:afterw, prose:intro).
+\mylittlespace In the \textsf{suppbook} entry type, and in its alias
+\textsf{suppcollection}, you can use the \textsf{type} field to
+specify what sort of supplemental material you are citing, e.g.,
+\enquote{\texttt{preface to}} or \enquote{\texttt{postscript to}.}
+Cf.\ \textsf{suppbook} above for the details.  (See \emph{Manual}
+14.116; polakow:afterw, prose:intro).
 
 \mylittlespace You can also use the \textsf{type} field in
 \textsf{artwork}, \textsf{audio}, \textsf{image}, \textsf{music}, and
@@ -3125,21 +3376,29 @@ do the right thing in citations.  Cf.\ \textsf{artwork},
 above, for all the details.  (See auden:reading, bedford:photo,
 cleese:holygrail, leo:madonna, nytrumpet:art.)
 
-%\enlargethispage{-\baselineskip}
+\enlargethispage{-\baselineskip}
 
-\mybigspace Standard \mymarginpar{\textbf{url}} \textsf{biblatex}
+\mybigspace A standard \colmarginpar{\textbf{url}} \textsf{biblatex}
 field, it holds the url of an online publication, though you can
-provide one for all entry types.  The required \LaTeX\ package
+provide one for all entry types.  The 16th edition of the
+\textsf{Manual} expresses a strong preference for DOIs over URLs if
+the former is available --- cf.\ \textsf{doi} above, and also
+\textsf{urldate} just below.  The required \LaTeX\ package
 \textsf{url} will ensure that your documents format such references
 properly, in the text and in the reference apparatus.
 
-\mybigspace Standard \mymarginpar{\textbf{urldate}} \textsf{biblatex}
-field, it identifies exactly when you accessed a given url.  This
-field would contain the whole date, in \textsc{iso}8601 format
-(evanston:library, grove:sibelius, hlatky:hrt, osborne:poison,
-sirosh:visualcortex, wikiped:bibtex).  Please note that the
-\textbf{urlday}, \textbf{urlmonth}, and \textbf{urlyear} fields are
-all now obsolete.
+\mybigspace A standard \colmarginpar{\textbf{urldate}} \textsf{biblatex}
+field, it identifies exactly when you accessed a given url, and is
+given in \textsc{iso}8601 format.  The 16th edition of the
+\emph{Manual} prefers DOIs to URLs; in the latter case it allows the
+use of access dates, particularly in contexts that require it, but
+prefers that you use revision dates, if these are available.  To
+enable you to specify which date is at stake, I have provided the
+\mycolor{\textbf{userd}} field, documented below.  If an entry doesn't
+have a \textsf{userd}, then the \textsf{urldate} will be treated, as
+before, as an access date (14.6--8, 14.184; evanston:library,
+grove:sibelius, hlatky:hrt, osborne:poison, sirosh:visualcortex,
+wikiped:bibtex).
 
 \mybigspace A \mymarginpar{\textbf{usera}} supplemental
 \textsf{biblatex} field which functions in \textsf{biblatex-chicago}
@@ -3149,30 +3408,7 @@ with \textsf{entrysubtype} \texttt{magazine}, the contents of this
 field will be placed, unformatted and between commas, after the
 \textsf{journaltitle} and before the date.  The main use is for
 identifying the broadcast network when you cite a radio or television
-program (bundy:macneil), though you may also want to use it to
-identify the section of a newspaper in which you've found a particular
-article (morgenson:market).  (See \emph{Manual} 17.190, 17.207.  As
-far as I can work out, newspaper section information may be placed
-either before the date [\textsf{usera}] or after it [\textsf{pages}].
-Cp. kozinn:review [17.202] and morgenson:market [17.190].  The choice
-would appear to be yours.)
-
-\mybigspace \textbf{NB:} \mymarginpar{\textbf{userb}} \textbf{this
-  field is now deprecated, mainly because it is very unlikely you will
-  have any further need for the \textbackslash custpunct macros.  I
-  leave the code, and the instructions for how to use it, in place,
-  because it's barely possible that a need for it might still arise.}
-A supplemental \textsf{biblatex} field, with a very specific use in
-\textsf{biblatex-chicago-notes}.  If the occasion does arise when you
-need to supply some context-sensitive punctuation yourself, then
-usually the \cmd{custpunct} command will then be needed, controlled in
-certain circumstances by a toggle in the \textsf{type} field.  If,
-however, you already need the \textsf{type} field for its regular
-usage in a \textsf{suppbook}, \textsf{manual}, \textsf{patent},
-\textsf{report}, or \textsf{thesis} entry, and if you need to control
-the \cmd{custpunct} with a toggle, then you'll have to use
-\cmd{custpunctb}, toggled by putting the exact string \texttt{plain}
-in \textsf{userb}.
+program (14.221; bundy:macneil).
 
 \mybigspace I \mymarginpar{\textbf{userc}} have now implemented this
 supplemental \textsf{biblatex} field as part of Chicago's name
@@ -3189,10 +3425,38 @@ inside your document, or you can place that entry key in the
 In the latter case, \textsf{biblatex-chicago} will call \cmd{nocite}
 for you, and this method should ensure that there will be at least one
 entry in the bibliography to which the cross-reference will point.
-(See 17.39--40; lecarre:cornwell, lecarre:quest.)
-
-\mybigspace NB: \mymarginpar{\textbf{userd}} this field is now
-obsolete.  If it appears in a .bib file it will be ignored.
+(See 14.84, 14.86; creasey:ashe:blast, creasey:morton:hide,
+creasey:york:death, lecarre:quest.)
+
+\mybigspace The \colmarginpar{\textbf{userd}} \textsf{userd} field,
+new in this release, acts as a sort of \enquote{\textsf{datetype}}
+field, allowing you in most entry types to identify whether a
+\textsf{urldate} is an access date or a revision date.  The general
+usage is fairly simple.  If this field is absent, then a
+\textsf{urldate} will be treated as an access date, as has long been
+the default in \textsf{biblatex} and in \textsf{biblatex-chicago}.  If
+you need to identify it in any other way, what you include in
+\textsf{userd} will be printed \emph{before} the \textsf{urldate}, so
+phrases like \enquote{\texttt{last modified}} or \enquote{\texttt{last
+    revised}} are what the field will typically contain (14.7--8;
+wikiped:bibtex).
+
+\mylittlespace Because of the rather specialized needs of some
+audio-visual references, this basic schema changes for \textsf{music}
+and \textsf{video} entries.  In \textsf{music} entries where an
+\textsf{eventdate} is present, \textsf{userd} will modify that date
+instead of any \textsf{urldate} that may also be present, and it will
+modify an \textsf{origdate} if it is present and there is no
+\textsf{eventdate}.  In \textsf{video} entries it will modify an
+\textsf{eventdate} if it is present, and in its absence the
+\textsf{urldate}.  Please see the documentation of the \textsf{music}
+and \textsf{video} entry types, and especially of the
+\textsf{eventdate}, \textsf{origdate}, and \textsf{urldate} fields,
+above (14.276--279; nytrumpet:art).
+
+\mylittlespace In all cases, you can start the \textsf{userd} field
+with a lowercase letter, and \textsf{biblatex} will take care of
+automatic contextual capitalization for you.
 
 \mybigspace Another \mymarginpar{\textbf{usere}} supplemental
 \textsf{biblatex} field, which \textsf{biblatex-chicago} uses
@@ -3206,14 +3470,14 @@ can translate the title and use that translation in your
 \textsf{title} and the translation in \textsf{usere}.  If you choose
 the latter, you may need to provide a \textsf{shorttitle} so that the
 short note form is also parseable.  Cf.\ \textbf{language}, above.
-(See 17.65--67, 17.166, 17.177; kern, weresz.)
+(See 14.108--110, 14.194; kern, weresz.)
 
 %\enlargethispage{\baselineskip}
 
 \mybigspace This \mymarginpar{\textbf{userf}} is the last of the
-supplemental fields which \textsf{biblatex} provides, used by
+supplemental fields which \textsf{biblatex} provides, and is used by
 \textsf{biblatex-chicago} for a very specific purpose.  When you cite
-both a translation and its original, the \emph{Manual} (17.66)
+both a translation and its original, the \emph{Manual} (14.109)
 recommends that, in the bibliography at least, you combine references
 to both texts in one entry, though the presentation in notes is pretty
 much up to you.  In order to follow this specification, I have
@@ -3260,20 +3524,11 @@ field.  It holds the volume of a \textsf{journaltitle} in
 volume of a multi-volume work in many other sorts of entry.  Cf.\
 \textsf{part}.
 
-\mybigspace Standard \mymarginpar{\textbf{volumes}} \textsf{biblatex}
+\mybigspace Standard \colmarginpar{\textbf{volumes}} \textsf{biblatex}
 field.  It holds the total number of volumes of a multi-volume work,
-and its use in an entry triggers particular behavior in short notes
-referring to such an entry, which notes will not print any punctuation
-between the title of the work and the volume+page reference given in
-the optional postnote field of the relevant \cmd{cite} command
-(17.134; meredith:letters).  If this behavior is inconvenient in a
-particular entry, you may need to provide a \textsf{shorttitle} field
-ending in an \cmd{addcomma}, though in such a case you'd need to
-ensure that the \cmd{cite} command's postnote field contained
-something, as otherwise the note would end, wrongly, with a comma.
-(The \emph{Manual} appears to be somewhat inconsistent on this
-question [cf.\ 16.47], so if this feature proves onerous in use I
-could remove it.)
+and in the 16th edition of the \emph{Manual} no longer triggers any
+odd changes to the punctuation of short notes (14.159;
+meredith:letters).
 
 \mybigspace A \mymarginpar{\textbf{xref}} modified \textsf{crossref}
 field provided by \textsf{biblatex}.  See \textbf{crossref}, above.
@@ -3286,7 +3541,7 @@ the \textsf{date} field it allows non-numeric input, so you can put
 of non-numerical date information.  If you can guess the date then you
 can include that guess in square brackets instead of, or after, the
 \enquote{n.d.}\ abbreviation.  Cf.\ bedford:photo, clark:mesopot,
-ross:leo, thesis:madonna.
+leo:madonna, ross:thesis.
 
 \subsection{Commands}
 \label{sec:commands}
@@ -3436,7 +3691,7 @@ instead of \cmd{enquote} or the usual \LaTeX\ mechanisms inside their
 .bib files.  For further details, please see the \cmd{mkbibquote}
 entry below.
 
-\enlargethispage{-\baselineskip}
+%\enlargethispage{-\baselineskip}
 
 \mylittlespace I have retained the code for the \cmd{custpunct}
 commands in \textsf{chicago-notes.cbx}, in case a particularly gnarly
@@ -3643,6 +3898,30 @@ prefer a longer citation where you might automatically find
 inside a \cmd{footnote} command manually.  (See also section
 \ref{sec:useropts}, below.)
 
+\mybigspace I \colmarginpar{\textbf{\textbackslash citeauthor}} have
+adapted this standard \textsf{biblatex} command only very slightly to
+bring it into line with \textsf{biblatex-chicago's} needs.  Its main
+usage will probably be for references to works from classical
+antiquity, when an \textsf{author's} name (abbreviated or not)
+sometimes suffices in the absence of a \textsf{title}, e.g.,
+Thuc.\ 2.40.2--3 (14.258).  You'll need to put it inside a
+\cmd{footnote} command manually.  (Cf.\ also \textsf{entrysubtype} in
+section~\ref{sec:entryfields}, above.)
+
+\mybigspace This \colmarginpar{\textbf{\textbackslash citejournal}}
+command provides an alternative short form when citing journal
+\textsf{articles}, giving the \textsf{journaltitle} and
+\textsf{volume} number instead of the article \textsf{title} after the
+\textsf{author's} name.  The \emph{Manual} suggests that this format
+might be helpful \enquote{in the absence of a full bibliography}
+(14.196).  It may also prove useful when you want to provide
+parenthetical references to newspaper articles within the text rather
+than in the bibliography, a style endorsed by the \emph{Manual}
+(14.206).  In such a case, an article's author, if there is one, could
+form part of the running text.  As usual with these general citation
+commands, if you want the reference to appear in a footnote you need
+to put it inside a \cmd{footnote} command manually.
+
 \mybigspace This \mymarginpar{\textbf{\textbackslash Citetitle}}
 simply prepends \cmd{bibsentence} to the usual \cmd{citetitle}
 command.  Some titles may need this for the automatic contextual
@@ -3691,7 +3970,7 @@ discussion of some of the needs this command might help address.
 \mybigspace I \mymarginpar{\textbf{\textbackslash
     headless-\\fullcite}} have provided this command in case you want
 to print a full citation without the author's name.  The \emph{Manual}
-(17.31, 17.42) suggests this for brevity's sake in cases where that
+(14.78, 14.88) suggests this for brevity's sake in cases where that
 name is already obvious enough from the title, and where repetition
 might seem awkward (creel:house, feydeau:farces, meredith:letters, and
 sewall:letter).  \textsf{Letter} entries --- and only such entries ---
@@ -3708,6 +3987,23 @@ want something else.  Again, I've provided only the most flexible form
 of the command, so you'll have to wrap it in a \cmd{footnote}
 manually.
 
+\mybigspace At \colmarginpar{\textbf{\textbackslash shorthandcite}}
+the request of Kenneth Pearce, I have included this command which
+always prints the \textsf{shorthand}, even at the first citation of a
+given work.  Again, I've only provided the most flexible form of the
+command, so you'll need to place it inside parentheses or wrap it in a
+\cmd{footnote} manually.
+
+\mybigspace This \colmarginpar{\textbf{\textbackslash surnamecite}}
+command is analogous to \cmd{headlesscite}, but whereas the latter
+allows you to omit an \textsf{author's} name when that name is obvious
+from the \textsf{title} of a work, \cmd{surnamecite} allows you to
+shorten a full note citation in contexts where the full name(s) of the
+\textsf{author} have already been provided in the text.  In short
+notes this falls back to the standard format, but in long notes it
+simply omits the given names of the \textsf{author} and provides only
+the surname, along with the full data of the entry.  (Cf.\ 14.52.)
+
 \mylittlespace If you look at \textsf{chicago-notes.cbx}, you'll see a
 number of other citation commands, but those are intended for internal
 use only, mainly in cross-references of various sorts.  Use at your
@@ -3762,18 +4058,18 @@ form for any reason.
 allows the package to determine whether two consecutive citations of
 the same source also cite the same page of that source.  In such a
 case, \texttt{Ibid} alone will be printed, without the page reference,
-following the specification (16.47).
+following the specification (14.29).
 
 \mylittlespace These \colmarginpar{\textsf{\texttt{maxbibnames\\=10\\
       minbibnames\\=7}}} two options are new, and control the number
 of names printed in the bibliography when that number exceeds 10.
-These numbers follow the recommendations of the \emph{Manual}
-(17.29--30), and they are different from those for use in notes.  With
-\textsf{biblatex} 1.6 and later you can no longer redefine
-\texttt{maxnames} and \texttt{minnames} in the \cmd{printbibliography}
-command at the bottom of your document, so \textsf{biblatex-chicago}
-now does this automatically for you, though of course you can change
-them in your document preamble.
+These numbers follow the recommendations of the \emph{Manual} (14.76),
+and they are different from those for use in notes.  With
+\textsf{biblatex} 1.6 you can no longer redefine \texttt{maxnames} and
+\texttt{minnames} in the \cmd{printbibliography} command at the bottom
+of your document, so \textsf{biblatex-chicago} now does this
+automatically for you, though of course you can change them in your
+document preamble.
 
 \mylittlespace This \mymarginpar{\texttt{pagetracker=\\true}} enables
 page tracking for the \cmd{iffirstonpage} and \cmd{ifsamepage}
@@ -3781,10 +4077,18 @@ commands for controlling, among other things, the printing of
 \enquote{Ibid.}  It tracks individual pages if \LaTeX\ is in oneside
 mode, or whole spreads in twoside mode.
 
-\mylittlespace This \colmarginpar{\texttt{sortcase=false}} turns off
+\mylittlespace This \mymarginpar{\texttt{sortcase=\\false}} turns off
 the sorting of uppercase and lowercase letters separately, a practice
 which the \emph{Manual} doesn't appear to recommend.
 
+\mylittlespace This \colmarginpar{\texttt{sorting=\\}\cmd{cms@choose}}
+new setting tests whether you are using \textsf{Biber} as your
+backend, and if so enables a custom \textsf{biblatex-chicago} sorting
+scheme for the bibliography (\texttt{cms}).  If you are using any
+other backend, it reverts to the \textsf{biblatex} default
+(\texttt{nty}).  Please see the discussion of
+\cmd{DeclareSortingScheme} just below.
+
 \mylittlespace This \mymarginpar{\texttt{usetranslator\\=true}}
 enables automatic use of the \textsf{translator} at the head of
 entries in the absence of an \textsf{author} or an \textsf{editor}.
@@ -3804,16 +4108,87 @@ bibliography items and between items in the list of shorthands
 them to your own needs and tastes.  It may be as well you know that
 the \emph{Manual} does state a preference for two of the formatting
 options I've implemented by default: the 3-em dash as a replacement
-for repeated names in the bibliography (16.103--106); and the
-formatting of note numbers, both in the main text and at the bottom of
-the page / end of the essay (superscript in the text, in-line in the
-notes; 16.25).  The code for this last formatting is also in
-\textsf{biblatex-chicago.sty}, and I've wrapped it in a test that
-disables it if you are using the \textsf{memoir} class, which I
+for repeated names in the bibliography (14.63--67, and just below);
+and the formatting of note numbers, both in the main text and at the
+bottom of the page / end of the essay (superscript in the text,
+in-line in the notes; 14.19).  The code for this last formatting is
+also in \textsf{biblatex-chicago.sty}, and I've wrapped it in a test
+that disables it if you are using the \textsf{memoir} class, which I
 believe has its own commands for defining these parameters.  You can
 also disable it by using the \texttt{footmarkoff} package option, on
 which see below.
 
+\mylittlespace Gildas Hamel pointed out that my default definition, in
+\textsf{biblatex-chicago.sty}, of \textsf{biblatex's}
+\cmd{bibnamedash} didn't work well with many fonts, leaving a line of
+three dashes separated by gaps.  He suggested an alternative, which
+I've adopted, with a minor tweak to make the dash thicker, though you
+can toy with all the parameters to find what looks right with your
+chosen font.  The default definition is:
+\cmd{renewcommand*\{\textbackslash bibnamedash\}\{\textbackslash
+  rule[.4ex]\{3em\}\{.6pt\}\}}.
+
+\mylittlespace With
+\colmarginpar{\texttt{losnotes} \&\\\texttt{losendnotes}} this release,
+and at the request of Kenneth Pearce, I have added two new
+\texttt{bibenvironments} to \textsf{chicago-notes.bbx}, for use with
+the \texttt{env} option to the \cmd{printshorthands} command.  The
+first, \texttt{losnotes}, is designed to allow a list of shorthands to
+appear inside footnotes, while \texttt{losendnotes} does the same for
+endnotes.  Their main effect is to change the font size, and in the
+latter case to clear up some spurious punctuation and white space that
+I see on my system when using endnotes.  (You'll probably also want to
+use the option \texttt{heading=none} in order to get rid of the
+[oversized] default, providing your own within the \cmd{footnote}
+command.)  Please see the documentation of \textsf{shorthand} in
+section~\ref{sec:entryfields} above for further options available to
+you for presenting and formatting the list of shorthands.
+
+\mylittlespace The \colmarginpar{\cmd{Declare-}\\\texttt{Labelname}}
+next-generation backend \textsf{Biber} offers enhanced functionality
+in many areas, two of which I've implemented in this release.
+\cmd{DeclareLabelname} allows you to add name fields for consideration
+when \textsf{biblatex} is attempting to find a shortened name for
+short notes.  This, for example, allows a compiler (=\textsf{namec})
+to appear at the head of short notes without any other intervention
+from the user, rather than requiring a \textsf{shortauthor} field as
+previous releases of \textsf{biblatex-chicago} did.  In point of fact,
+I have implemented this functionality in such a way as to make it
+available even to users of other backends, but this required reducing
+its flexibility considerably.  When \textsf{biblatex} reaches version
+2.0, \textsf{Biber} will become a requirement, so I recommend getting
+to know it sooner rather than later.
+
+\mylittlespace The
+\colmarginpar{\cmd{Declare-}\\\texttt{SortingScheme}} second
+\textsf{Biber} enhancement I have implemented allows you to include
+almost any field whatsoever in \textsf{biblatex's} sorting algorithms
+for the bibliography, so that a great many more entries will be sorted
+correctly automatically rather than requiring manual intervention in
+the form of a \textsf{sortkey} field or the like.  Code in
+\textsf{biblatex-chicago.sty} detects whether you are using
+\textsf{Biber}, and if and only if this is the case changes the
+sorting scheme to a custom one (\texttt{cms}), a Chicago-specific
+variant of the default \texttt{nty}.  (You can find its definition in
+\textsf{chicago-notes.cbx}.)  Users of all other backends will still
+be using \texttt{nty}.
+
+\mylittlespace The advantages of this scheme are, specifically, that
+any entry headed by one of the supplemental name fields
+(\textsf{name[a-c]}), a \textsf{manual} entry headed by an
+\textsf{organization}, or an \textsf{article} or \textsf{review} entry
+headed by a \textsf{journaltitle} will no longer need a
+\textsf{sortkey} set.  The main disadvantage should only occur very
+rarely, and appears because the supplemental name fields are treated
+differently from the standard name fields by \textsf{biblatex}.
+Ordinarily, you can set, for example, \texttt{useauthor=false} in the
+\textsf{options} field to remove the \textsf{author's} name from
+consideration for sorting purposes.  The Chicago-specific option
+\textsf{usecompiler=false}, however, doesn't remove \textsf{namec}
+from such consideration, so in an entry like chaucer:alt you \emph{do}
+need a \textsf{sortkey} or else it will be alphabetized by
+\textsf{namec} rather than by \textsf{title}.
+
 \subsubsection{{Pre-Set \textsf{chicago} Options}}
 \label{sec:chicpreset}
 
@@ -3833,7 +4208,15 @@ affected entries).
 whether any \textsf{doi} fields present in the .bib file will be
 printed in notes and bibliography.  It defaults to true, and can be
 set to false either in the preamble, for the whole document, or on a
-per-entry basis, in the \textsf{options} field.
+per-entry basis, in the \textsf{options} field.  In \textsf{online}
+entries, the \textsf{doi} field will always be printed.
+
+\mylittlespace This \colmarginpar{\texttt{eprint=true}} option controls
+whether any \textsf{eprint} fields present in the .bib file will be
+printed in notes and bibliography.  It defaults to true, and can be
+set to false either in the preamble, for the whole document, or on a
+per-entry basis, in the \textsf{options} field.  In \textsf{online}
+entries, the \textsf{eprint} field will always be printed.
 
 \mylittlespace This \mymarginpar{\texttt{isbn=true}} option controls
 whether any \textsf{isan}, \textsf{isbn}, \textsf{ismn},
@@ -3842,16 +4225,16 @@ whether any \textsf{isan}, \textsf{isbn}, \textsf{ismn},
 true, and can be set to false either in the preamble, for the whole
 document, or on a per-entry basis, in the \textsf{options} field.
 
-\mylittlespace Once \mymarginpar{\texttt{numbermonth=\\true}} again
-at the request of Scot Becker, I have included this option, which
+\mylittlespace Once \mymarginpar{\texttt{numbermonth=\\true}} again at
+the request of Scot Becker, I have included this option, which
 controls the printing of the \textsf{month} field in all the
 periodical-type entries when a \textsf{number} field is also present.
 Some bibliographic software, apparently, always includes the month of
 publication even when a \textsf{number} is present.  When all this
-information is available the \emph{Manual} (17.181) prints everything,
-so this option defaults to true, which means the field is printed, but
-it can be set to false either in the preamble, for the whole document,
-or on a per-entry basis in the \textsf{options} field.
+information is available the \emph{Manual} (14.180, 14.185) prints
+everything, so this option defaults to true, which means the field is
+printed, but it can be set to false either in the preamble, for the
+whole document, or on a per-entry basis in the \textsf{options} field.
 
 \mylittlespace This \mymarginpar{\texttt{url=true}} option controls
 whether any \textsf{url} fields present in the .bib file will be
@@ -3863,38 +4246,81 @@ printed in \textsf{online} entries, regardless of the state of this
 option.
 
 \mylittlespace This \mymarginpar{\texttt{includeall=\\true}} is the
-one option that rules the five preceding, either printing all the
+one option that rules the six preceding, either printing all the
 fields under consideration --- the default --- or excluding all of
 them.  It is set to \texttt{true} in \textsf{chicago-notes.cbx}, but
-you can change it either in the preamble for the whole document or in
-the \textsf{options} field of individual entries.  The rationale for
-all of these options is the availability of bibliographic managers
-that helpfully present as much data as possible, in every entry, some
-of which may not be felt to be entirely necessary.  Setting
-\texttt{includeall} to \texttt{true} probably works just fine for
-those compiling their .bib databases by hand, but others may find that
-some automatic pruning helps clear things up, at least to a first
-approximation.  Some per-entry work afterward may then polish up the
-details.
+you can change it either in the preamble for the whole document or,
+for specific fields, in the \textsf{options} field of individual
+entries.  The rationale for all of these options is the availability
+of bibliographic managers that helpfully present as much data as
+possible, in every entry, some of which may not be felt to be entirely
+necessary.  Setting \texttt{includeall} to \texttt{true} probably
+works just fine for those compiling their .bib databases by hand, but
+others may find that some automatic pruning helps clear things up, at
+least to a first approximation.  Some per-entry work afterward may
+then polish up the details.
+
+\mylittlespace At \colmarginpar{\texttt{addendum=\\true}} the request
+of Roger Hart, I have included this option, which controls the
+printing of the \textsf{addendum} field, but \emph{only} in long
+notes.  It defaults to true, and can be set to false either in the
+preamble, for the whole document, or on a per-entry basis, in the
+\textsf{options} field.
+
+\mylittlespace According \colmarginpar{\texttt{bookseries=\\true}} to
+the \emph{Manual} (14.128), the \textsf{series} field in book-like
+entries \enquote{may be omitted to save space (especially in a
+  footnote).}  This option allows you to control the printing of that
+field in long notes.  It defaults to true, and can be set to false
+either in the preamble, for the whole document, or on a per-entry
+basis, in the \textsf{options} field.  Several entry types don't use
+this field, so the option will have no effect in them, and it is also
+ignored in \textsf{article}, \textsf{misc}, \textsf{music},
+\textsf{periodical}, and \textsf{review} entries.
+
+\mylittlespace As \colmarginpar{\texttt{notefield=\\true}} with the
+previous two options, Roger Hart requested an option to control the
+printing of the \textsf{note} field in long notes.  It defaults to
+true, and can be set to false either in the preamble, for the whole
+document, or on a per-entry basis, in the \textsf{options} field.  The
+option will be ignored in \textsf{article}, \textsf{misc},
+\textsf{periodical}, and \textsf{review} fields.
+
+\mylittlespace This
+\colmarginpar{\vspace{-1\baselineskip}\texttt{completenotes}%
+  \\\vspace{\baselineskip}\texttt{=true}} is the one option that rules
+the three preceding, either printing all the fields under
+consideration --- the default --- or excluding all of them from long
+notes.  It is set to \texttt{true} in \textsf{chicago-notes.cbx}, but
+you can change it either in the preamble for the whole document or,
+for specific fields, in the \textsf{options} field of individual
+entries.
 
 \mylittlespace This \mymarginpar{\texttt{usecompiler=\\true}} option
 enables automatic use of the name of the compiler (in the
 \textsf{namec} field) at the head of an entry, usually in the absence
 of an \textsf{author}, \textsf{editor}, or \textsf{translator}, in
-accordance with the specification (\emph{Manual} 17.41).  It may also,
+accordance with the specification (\emph{Manual} 14.87).  It may also,
 like \texttt{useauthor}, \texttt{useeditor}, and
 \texttt{usetranslator}, be disabled on a per-entry basis by setting
 \texttt{usecompiler=false} in the \textsf{options} field.  Please
 remember that, because \textsf{namec} isn't a standard
-\textsf{biblatex} field, this name won't be part of its standard name
-algorithms, and that any entry headed by a \textsf{namec} will
-therefore need a \textsf{shortauthor} for short notes and a
-\textsf{sortkey} or the like in order to have it appear in the correct
-place in the bibliography.  (The exception to this is when you modify
-the \textsf{editor's} identifying string using the \textsf{editortype}
-field, which is the procedure I recommend if the entry-heading
-compiler is only a compiler, and not also, e.g., an editor or a
-translator.)
+\textsf{biblatex} field, it may take a little extra effort to get it
+to work smoothly.  The package should now automatically take care of
+finding a name for short notes, but it will alphabetize by this name
+in the bibliography only if you use \textsf{Biber}, failing which
+you'll need to provide a \textsf{sortkey} for this purpose.  (These
+rules don't apply when you modify the \textsf{editor's} identifying
+string using the \textsf{editortype} field, which is the procedure I
+recommend if the entry-heading compiler is only a compiler, and not
+also, e.g., an editor or a translator.)  Cf.\
+\cmd{DeclareSortingScheme} and \cmd{DeclareLabelname} in
+section~\ref{sec:formatopts}, above; also, chaucer:alt for an entry
+where, because none of the names provided appear at the head of the
+reference, you will need to provide a \textsf{sortkey} to stop
+\textsf{Biber} using the \textsf{namec} --- because it's not a
+standard name field, you can stop it being printed at the head of the
+entry, but you can't stop it turning up in the sorting algorithms.
 
 \subsubsection{Style Options -- Preamble}
 \label{sec:useropts}
@@ -3917,7 +4343,7 @@ please have a look at the documentation for the \textsf{annotation}
 field, on page~\pageref{sec:annote} above.
 
 \mylittlespace Although \mymarginpar{\texttt{footmarkoff}} the
-\emph{Manual} (16.25) recommends specific formatting for footnote (and
+\emph{Manual} (14.19) recommends specific formatting for footnote (and
 endnote) marks, i.e., superscript in the text and in-line in foot- or
 endnotes, Charles Schaum has brought it to my attention that not all
 publishers follow this practice, even when requiring Chicago style.  I
@@ -3933,10 +4359,10 @@ amount of other formatting, as well.  See section~\ref{sec:loading},
 below.
 
 \mylittlespace The \mymarginpar{\texttt{juniorcomma}} \emph{Manual}
-(6.49) states that \enquote{commas are no longer required around
-  \emph{Jr.}\ and \emph{Sr.},} so by default \textsf{biblatex-chicago}
-has followed standard \textsf{biblatex} in using a simple space in
-names like \enquote{John Doe Jr.}  Charles Schaum has pointed out that
+(6.47) states that \enquote{commas are not required around \emph{Jr.}\
+  and \emph{Sr.},} so by default \textsf{biblatex-chicago} has
+followed standard \textsf{biblatex} in using a simple space in names
+like \enquote{John Doe Jr.}  Charles Schaum has pointed out that
 traditional \textsc{Bib}\TeX\ practice was to include the comma, and
 since the \emph{Manual} has no objections to this, I have provided an
 option which allows you to turn this behavior back on, either for the
@@ -3973,11 +4399,11 @@ form.  For more fine-grained control of individual citations you'll
 probably want to use specialized citation commands, instead.  See
 section \ref{sec:citecommands}.
 
-\enlargethispage{\baselineskip}
+%\enlargethispage{\baselineskip}
 
 \mylittlespace This \mymarginpar{\texttt{short}} option means that
 your text will only use the short note form, even in the first
-citation of a particular work.  The \emph{Manual} (16.3) recommends
+citation of a particular work.  The \emph{Manual} (14.14) recommends
 this space-saving format only when you provide a \emph{full}
 bibliography, though even with such a bibliography you may feel it
 easier for your readers to present long first citations.  If you do
@@ -3986,12 +4412,22 @@ citation commands which allow you to present the full reference in
 specific cases (see section \ref{sec:citecommands}).  If your
 bibliography is not complete, then you should not use this option.
 
+\mylittlespace Kenneth Pearce \colmarginpar{\texttt{shorthandfull}}
+has suggested that, in some fields of study, a list of shorthands
+providing full bibliographical information may replace the
+bibliography itself.  This option prints this full information in the
+list of shorthands, though of course you should remember that any .bib
+entry not containing a \textsf{shorthand} field won't appear in such a
+list.  Please see the documentation of the \textsf{shorthand} field in
+section~\ref{sec:entryfields} above for information on further options
+available to you for presenting and formatting the list of shorthands.
+
 \mylittlespace Chris Sparks \mymarginpar{\texttt{shorthandibid}}
 pointed out that \textsf{biblatex-chicago-notes} would never use
 \emph{ibid.}\ in the case of entries containing a \textsf{shorthand}
 field, but rather that consecutive references to such an entry
 continued to provide the shorthand, instead.  The \emph{Manual} isn't,
-as far as I can tell, completely clear on this question.  In 17.252,
+as far as I can tell, completely clear on this question.  In 14.258,
 discussing references to works from classical antiquity, it states
 that \enquote{when abbreviations are used, these rather than
   \emph{ibid.}\ should be used in succeeding references to the same
@@ -4002,7 +4438,7 @@ of \emph{ibid.}\ instead of the shorthand in such circumstances,
 though the default behavior remains the same as it always has.
 
 \mylittlespace This \mymarginpar{\texttt{strict}} still-experimental
-option attempts to follow the \emph{Manual}'s recommendations (16.57)
+option attempts to follow the \emph{Manual}'s recommendations (14.36)
 for formatting footnotes on the page, using no rule between them and
 the main text unless there is a run-on note, in which case a short
 rule intervenes to emphasize this continuation.  I haven't tested this
@@ -4165,12 +4601,17 @@ the system.  Headings in \mycolor{green} \colmarginpar{\textsf{New in
     this release}} indicate material new to this release, or
 occasionally old material that has undergone significant revision.
 Numbers in parentheses refer to sections of the \emph{Chicago Manual
-  of Style}, 15th edition.  The file \textsf{dates-test.bib} contains
-many examples from the \emph{Manual} which, when processed using
-\textsf{biblatex-chicago-authordate}, should produce the same output
-as you see in the \emph{Manual} itself, or at least compliant output,
-where the specifications are vague or open to interpretation, a state
-of affairs which does sometimes occur.  I have provided
+  of Style}, 16th edition.  (As this latest edition now recommends
+\enquote{a uniform treatment for the main elements of citation in both
+  of its systems of documentation} [15.2], many of these references
+will in fact be to the chapter on the notes \&\ bibliography style,
+which chapter is, by design, considerably more detailed than that
+devoted to the author-date style.)  The file \textsf{dates-test.bib}
+contains many examples from the \emph{Manual} which, when processed
+using \textsf{biblatex-chicago-authordate}, should produce the same
+output as you see in the \emph{Manual} itself, or at least compliant
+output, where the specifications are vague or open to interpretation,
+a state of affairs which does sometimes occur.  I have provided
 \textsf{cms-dates-sample.pdf}, which shows how my system processes
 \textsf{dates-test.bib}, and I have also included the reference keys
 from the latter file below in parentheses.
@@ -4204,23 +4645,24 @@ very few fields when you use \textsf{biblatex-chicago-authordate}, so
 it seemed to me better to gather information pertaining to fields in
 the next section.
 
-\mybigspace The \mymarginpar{\textbf{article}} \emph{Chicago Manual of
-  Style} (17.148) recognizes three different sorts of periodical
+\mybigspace The \colmarginpar{\textbf{article}} \emph{Chicago Manual
+  of Style} (14.170) recognizes three different sorts of periodical
 publication, \enquote{journals,} \enquote{magazines,} and
-\enquote{newspapers.}  The first (17.150) includes \enquote{scholarly
+\enquote{newspapers.}  The first (14.172) includes \enquote{scholarly
   or professional periodicals available mainly by subscription,} while
 the second refers to \enquote{weekly or monthly} publications that are
 \enquote{available either by subscription or in individual issues at
   bookstores or newsstands.}  \enquote{Magazines} will tend to be
 \enquote{more accessible to general readers,} and typically won't have
-a volume number.
-
-\mylittlespace Now, for articles in \enquote{journals} you can simply
-use the traditional \textsc{Bib}\TeX\ --- and indeed \textsf{biblatex}
---- \textsf{article} entry type, which will work as expected and set
-off the page numbers with a colon in the list of references, as
-required by the \emph{Manual}.  If, however, you need to refer to a
-\enquote{magazine} or a \enquote{newspaper,} then you need to add an
+a volume number.  The following paragraphs detail how to construct
+your .bib entries for all these sorts of periodical publication.
+
+\mylittlespace For articles in \enquote{journals} you can simply use
+the traditional \textsc{Bib}\TeX\ --- and indeed \textsf{biblatex} ---
+\textsf{article} entry type, which will work as expected and set off
+the page numbers with a colon in the list of references, as required
+by the \emph{Manual}.  If, however, you wish to cite a
+\enquote{magazine} or a \enquote{newspaper}, then you need to add an
 \textsf{entrysubtype} field containing the exact string
 \texttt{magazine}.  The main formatting differences between a
 \texttt{magazine} (which includes both \enquote{magazines} and
@@ -4228,30 +4670,57 @@ required by the \emph{Manual}.  If, however, you need to refer to a
 specifications (month, day, season) aren't placed within parentheses,
 and that page numbers are set off by a comma rather than a colon.
 Otherwise, the two sorts of reference have much in common.  (For
-\textsf{article}, see \emph{Manual} 17.154--181; batson,
-beattie:crime, chu:panda, connell:chronic, conway:evolution,
+\textsf{article}, see \emph{Manual} 14.175--198, 15.9, 15.43--46;
+batson, beattie:crime, chu:panda, connell:chronic, conway:evolution,
 friedman:learning, garaud:gatine, garrett, hlatky:hrt, kern, lewis,
 loften:hamlet, loomis:structure, rozner:liberation,
-schneider:mittelpleistozaene, terborgh:preservation, wall:ra\-di\-o,
-warr:ellison, white:callimachus. With \textsf{entrysubtype}
-\texttt{magazine}, cf.\ 17.166, 17.182--198; assocpress:gun,
-lakeforester:pushcarts, morgenson:market, reaves:ro\-sen,
-stenger:privacy.)
+schneider:mittelpleistozaene, terborgh:pre\-ser\-vation,
+wall:ra\-di\-o, warr:ellison, white:callimachus. With
+\textsf{entrysubtype} \texttt{maga\-zine}, cf.\ 14.181, 14.199--202,
+15.47; assocpress:gun, lakeforester:pushcarts, mor\-genson:\-mar\-ket,
+reaves:ro\-sen, stenger:privacy.)
+
+\mylittlespace The \emph{Manual} now suggests that, no matter which
+citation style you are using, it is \enquote{usually sufficient to
+  cite newspaper and magazine articles entirely within the text}
+(15.47).  This involves giving the title of the journal and the full
+date of publication in a parenthetical reference, including any other
+information in the main text (14.206), thereby obviating the need to
+present such an entry in the list of references.  To utilize this
+method in the author-date style, in addition to a \texttt{magazine}
+\textsf{entrysubtype}, you'll need to place
+\mycolor{\texttt{cmsdate=full}} into the \textsf{options} field,
+including \texttt{skipbib} there as well to stop the entry printing in
+the list of references.  If the entry only contains a \textsf{date}
+and \textsf{journaltitle} that's enough, but if it's a fuller entry
+also containing an \textsf{author} then you'll also need
+\texttt{useauthor=false} in the \textsf{options} field.  Other surplus
+fields will be ignored.  (See osborne:poison.)
 
 \mylittlespace If you are familiar with the notes \&\ bibliography
 style, you'll know that the \emph{Manual} treats reviews (of books,
 plays, performances, etc.) as a sort of recognizable subset of
 \enquote{journals,} \enquote{magazines,} and \enquote{newspapers,}
 distinguished mainly by the way one formats the title of the review
-itself.  In the author-date style, however, since both a generic title
-like \enquote{review of \ldots} and a specific one (cf. gibbard;
-osborne:poison) are formatted in the same way (no quotation marks or
-italics, sentence-style capitalization), all you really need,
-conveniently, is the \textsf{article} type, with the
-\textsf{entrysubtype} toggle to distinguish the sort of periodical
-which contains the review.
+itself.  With the 16th edition's changes to the way titles are
+presented in the author-date style, users need to learn how to present
+this sort of material, which involves using an entry type
+(\textsf{review}) that wasn't necessary in the 15th edition.  The key
+rule is this: if a review has a separate, non-generic title (gibbard;
+osborne:poison) in addition to something that reads like
+\enquote{review of \ldots,} then you need an \textsf{article} entry,
+with or without the \texttt{magazine} \textsf{entrysubtype}, depending
+on the sort of publication containing the review.  If the only title
+is the generic \enquote{review of \ldots,} for example, then you'll
+need the \textsf{review} entry type, with or without this same
+\textsf{entrysubtype} toggle using \texttt{magazine}.  On
+\textsf{review} entries, see below.  (The curious reader will no doubt
+notice that the code for formatting any sort of review still exists in
+\textsf{article}, as it was initially designed for \textsf{biblatex
+  0.6}, but this new arrangement is somewhat simpler and therefore, I
+hope, better.)
 
-%\enlargethispage{-\baselineskip}
+\enlargethispage{\baselineskip}
 
 \mylittlespace In the case of a review with a specific as well as a
 generic title, the former goes in the \textsf{title} field, and the
@@ -4263,46 +4732,51 @@ the additional wrinkle that it can, if needed, replace the
 \textsf{title} entirely, and this in, effectively, any entry type,
 providing a fairly powerful, if somewhat complicated, tool for getting
 \textsc{Bib}\TeX\ to do what you want.  Here, however, if all you need
-is a generic title like \enquote{review of \ldots,} then you can
-simply use the \textsf{title} field for it, ignoring
-\textsf{titleaddon}.
+is a generic title like \enquote{review of \ldots,} then you want to
+switch to the \textsf{review} type, where you can simply use the
+\textsf{title} field for it.
 
 \mylittlespace No less than seven more things need explication under
-this heading.  First, since the \emph{Manual} specifies, for the
-author-date style, that what goes into the \textsf{title} or the
-\textsf{titleaddon} fields of \textsf{article} entries stays
-unformatted --- no italics, no quotation marks --- this plain style
-(with sentence-style capitalization, as usual) is the default for such
-text, which means that you'll have to format any titles within these
-fields yourself, e.g., with \cmd{mkbibemph\{\}}.  Second, the
-\emph{Manual} specifies a similar plain style for the titles of other
-sorts of material found in \enquote{magazines} and
-\enquote{newspapers,} e.g., obituaries, letters to the editor,
-interviews, the names of regular columns, and the like, though the
-names of regular columns, please note, need to be capitalized headline
-style.  References may contain both the title of an individual article
-and the name of the regular column, in which case the former should
-go, as usual, in a \textsf{title} field, and the latter in
-\textsf{titleaddon}.  (See 17.188, 17.190, 17.193; morgenson:market,
-reaves:rosen.)
-
-\mylittlespace Third, the \emph{Manual} suggests that, in the case of
-\enquote{unsigned newspaper articles or features \ldots the name of
-  the newspaper stands in place of the author} (17.192).  It doesn't
-always carry through on this in its own presentation of newspaper
-citations (see esp.\ 17.188), but I've implemented their
-recommendation nonetheless, which means that in an \textsf{article}
-entry, \textsf{entrysubtype} \texttt{magazine}, and only in such an
-entry, a missing \textsf{author} field results in the name of the
-periodical (in the \textsf{journaltitle} field) being used as the
-missing author.  Note that if you choose to use the name of the
-newspaper as an author, then you'll need to define the
-\textsf{sortkey} field to ensure that the reference list entry is
-alphabetized by \textsf{journaltitle} rather than by \textsf{title}.
-Also, if you want to abbreviate the \textsf{journaltitle} for use in
-citations, then the \textsf{shortauthor} field, somewhat surprisingly,
-is the place for it.  (See lakeforester:pushcarts, nyt:trevorobit,
-unsigned:ranke.)
+this heading.  First, since the \emph{Manual} specifies that what goes
+into the \textsf{titleaddon} field of \textsf{article} entries stays
+unformatted --- no italics, no quotation marks --- this plain style is
+the default for such text, which means that you'll have to format any
+titles within \textsf{titleaddon} yourself, e.g., with
+\cmd{mkbibemph\{\}}.  Second, the \emph{Manual} specifies a similar
+plain style for the titles of other sorts of material found in
+\enquote{magazines} and \enquote{newspapers,} e.g., obituaries,
+letters to the editor, interviews, the names of regular columns, and
+the like.  References may contain both the title of an individual
+article and the name of the regular column, in which case the former
+should go, as usual, in a \textsf{title} field, and the latter in
+\textsf{titleaddon}.  As with reviews proper, if there is only the
+generic title, then you want the \textsf{review} entry type.  (See
+14.203, 14.205, 14.208; morgenson:market, reaves:rosen.)
+
+\mylittlespace Third, the 16th edition of the \emph{Manual} suggests
+that \enquote{unsigned newspaper articles or features are best dealt
+  with in text \ldots} (14.207).  As with newspaper or magazine
+articles in general, you can place \mycolor{\texttt{cmsdate=full}} and
+\texttt{skipbib} into the \textsf{options} field to produce an
+augmented in-text citation whilst keeping this material out of the
+reference list.  If you do use the reference list, then the standard
+shorter citation will be sufficient, and in both cases the name of the
+periodical (in the \textsf{journaltitle} field) will be used in place
+of the missing author.  Just to clarify: in \textsf{article} or
+\textsf{review} entries, \textsf{entrysubtype} \texttt{magazine}, and
+only in such entries, a missing \textsf{author} field results in the
+name of the periodical (in the \textsf{journaltitle} field) being used
+as the missing author.  The new default sorting scheme in
+\textsf{biblatex-chicago-authordate} means that you no longer need the
+\textsf{sortkey} field to alphabetize by \textsf{journaltitle} instead
+of \textsf{title}, though you will still need one if you retain the
+definite or indefinite article at the beginning of the
+\textsf{journaltitle}.  Also, if you want to abbreviate the
+\textsf{journaltitle} for use in citations, but give the full name in
+the list of references, then the \textsf{shortauthor} field, somewhat
+surprisingly, is the place for it.  (See
+section~\ref{sec:authformopts}, below; lakeforester:pushcarts,
+nyt:trevorobit, unsigned:ranke.)
 
 %\enlargethispage{-\baselineskip}
 
@@ -4340,25 +4814,36 @@ television or radio broadcast, the \textsf{article} type,
 \textsf{entrysubtype} \texttt{magazine} is the place for it.  The name
 of the program would go in \textsf{journaltitle}, with the name of the
 episode in \textsf{title}.  The network's name goes into the
-\textsf{usera} field.  (8.196, 17.207; see bundy:macneil for an
-example of how this all might look in a .bib file.)
-
-\mylittlespace Finally, if you're planning to use the same .bib file
-for the author-date and for the notes \&\ bibliography style, you may
-need to look under the \textsf{article} and \textsf{review} entries in
-section~\ref{sec:entrytypes} above for the full instructions on their
-differences.  Any well-constructed \textsf{review} entry will work
-just fine under author-date, but if you only need the author-date
-style then you can avoid the complexity of learning another entry
-type.
+\textsf{usera} field.  (8.185, 14.221; see bundy:macneil for an
+example of how this all might look in a .bib file.  Commercial
+recordings of such material would need one of the audiovisual entry
+types, probably \textsf{audio} or \textsf{video} [friends:leia], while
+recordings from archives fit best into \textsf{misc} entries with an
+\textsf{entrysubtype} [coolidge:speech, roosevelt:speech].)
+
+\mylittlespace Finally, the 16th edition of the \emph{Manual}
+(14.243--6) specifies that blogs and other, similar online material
+should be presented like \textsf{articles}, with \texttt{magazine}
+\textsf{entrysubtype} (ellis:blog).  The title of the specific entry
+goes in \textsf{title}, the general title of the blog goes in
+\textsf{journaltitle}, and the word \enquote{\texttt{blog}} in the
+\textsf{location} field (though you could just use special formatting
+in the \textsf{journaltitle} field itself, which may sometimes be
+necessary).  Comments on blogs, with generic titles like
+\enquote{comment on} or \enquote{reply to,} need a \textsf{review}
+entry with the same \textsf{entrysubtype}.  Such comments make
+particular use of the \textsf{eventdate} and of the \textsf{nameaddon}
+fields; please see the documentation of \textbf{review}, below.
+
+\enlargethispage{\baselineskip}
 
 \mylittlespace If you're still with me, allow me to recommend that you
-browse through \textsf{dates-test.bib} to get a feel for just how many of
-the \emph{Manual}'s complexities the \textsf{article} and
-\textsf{periodical} types attempt to address.  It may be that in
-future releases of \textsf{biblatex-chicago} I'll be able to simplify
-these procedures somewhat, but if you are only using author-date at
-least you've avoided some of the worst of it.
+browse through \textsf{dates-test.bib} to get a feel for just how many
+of the \emph{Manual}'s complexities the \textsf{article},
+\textsf{periodical}, and \textsf{review} types attempt to address.  It
+may be that in future releases of \textsf{biblatex-chicago} I'll be
+able to simplify these procedures somewhat, but with any luck the vast
+majority of sources won't require knowledge of these onerous details.
 
 \mybigspace Arne \mymarginpar{\textbf{artwork}} Kjell Vikhagen has
 pointed out to me that none of the standard entry types were
@@ -4369,12 +4854,15 @@ include them in the reference apparatus at all.  Still, it's easy to
 conceive of contexts in which a list of artworks studied might be
 desirable, and \textsf{biblatex} includes entry types for just this
 purpose, though the standard styles leave them undefined.  The two I
-have adopted are \textsf{artwork} and \textsf{image}, the former
-intended for paintings, sculptures, etchings, and the like, the latter
-for photographs.  The two entry types work in exactly the same way as
-far as constructing your .bib entry, and when printed the only
-difference will be that the titles of \textsf{artworks} are
-italicized, those of \textsf{images} in plain text.
+chose to include in previous releases were \textsf{artwork} and
+\textsf{image}, the former intended for paintings, sculptures,
+etchings, and the like, the latter for photographs.  The 16th edition
+of the \emph{Manual} has modified its specifications for presenting
+photographs so that they are the same as for works in all other media.
+The \textsf{image} type, therefore, is now merely a clone of the
+\textsf{artwork} type, maintained mainly to provide backward
+compatibility for users migrating from the old specification to the
+current one.
 
 \mylittlespace As one might expect, the artist goes in \textsf{author}
 and the name of the work in \textsf{title}.  The \textsf{type} field
@@ -4387,9 +4875,9 @@ generality.  The \textsf{type} field, as in several other entry types,
 uses \textsf{biblatex's} automatic capitalization routines, so if the
 first word only needs a capital letter at the beginning of a sentence,
 use lowercase in the .bib file and let \textsf{biblatex} handle it for
-you.  (See \emph{Manual} 12.33; leo:madonna, bedford:photo.)
+you.  (See \emph{Manual} 3.22, 8.193; leo:madonna, bedford:photo.)
 
-\mylittlespace As a final complication, the \emph{Manual} (8.206) says
+\mylittlespace As a final complication, the \emph{Manual} (8.193) says
 that \enquote{the names of works of antiquity \ldots\,are usually set
   in roman.}  If you should need to include such a work in the
 reference apparatus, you can either define an \textsf{entrysubtype}
@@ -4399,43 +4887,60 @@ type with an \textsf{entrysubtype}.  Fortunately, in this instance the
 other fields in a \textsf{misc} entry function pretty much as in
 \textsf{artwork} or \textsf{image}.
 
-\mybigspace For \mymarginpar{\textbf{audio}} this release of
-\textsf{biblatex-chicago}, following the request of Johan Nordstrom, I
-have included three new entry types, all undefined by the standard
-styles, designed to allow users to present audiovisual sources in
-accordance with the Chicago specifications.  The \emph{Manual's}
-presentation of such sources (17.263--273), though admirably brief,
-seems to me somewhat inconsistent.  I attempted to condense all the
-requirements into two new entry types, but ended up relying on three,
-the differences between which I shall attempt to delineate here.
-There are likely to be occasions when your choice of entry type is not
-obvious, but at the very least \textsf{biblatex-chicago} should help
-you maintain consistency.  For users of the author-date style, it is
-as well to note here that the \emph{Manual} (17.265) suggests that
-\enquote{such materials are best mentioned in running text and grouped
-  in the reference list under a subhead,} a suggestion you may wish to
-follow, particularly if your audiovisual entries don't typically
-contain the information --- \textsf{author} and \textsf{date} ---
-needed to produce a parseable parenthetical citation.
+\mybigspace Following \colmarginpar{\textbf{audio}} the request of
+Johan Nordstrom, I have included three entry types, all undefined by
+the standard styles, designed to allow users to present audiovisual
+sources in accordance with the Chicago specifications.  The
+\emph{Manual's} presentation of such sources (14.263--273, 15.53),
+though admirably brief, seems to me somewhat inconsistent; the
+proliferation of online sources has made the task yet more complex.
+For the 15th edition I attempted to condense all the requirements into
+two new entry types, but ended up relying on three.  For the 16th
+edition, in particular, I also need to include the \textbf{online} and
+even the \textbf{misc} entry types, which see, under the audiovisual
+rubric.  I shall attempt to delineate the main differences here, and
+though there are likely to be occasions when your choice of entry type
+is not obvious, at the very least \textsf{biblatex-chicago} should
+help you maintain consistency.
+
+\mylittlespace For users of the author-date style, the 16th edition of
+the \emph{Manual} (15.53) \enquote{recommends a more comprehensive
+  approach to dating audiovisual materials than in previous editions,}
+meaning that nearly all such entries will have some sort of dating
+information and will therefore fit better stylistically with other
+references.  In particular, \enquote{the date of the original
+  recording should be privileged in the citation.}  Guidance for
+supplying dates for this class of material will be found below under
+the different entry types in use, though it will also be worthwhile to
+look at the documentation of \textsf{date}, \textsf{eventdate},
+\textsf{origdate}, and \textsf{urldate}, in
+section~\ref{sec:fields:authdate}, below.  The \emph{Manual} continues
+to suggest, also, that \enquote{it is often more appropriate to list
+  such materials in running text and group them in a separate section
+  or discography}.
 
 \mylittlespace The \textbf{music} type is intended for all musical
 recordings that do not have a video component.  This means, for
 example, digital media (whether on CD or hard drive), vinyl records,
-and tapes.  The \textbf{video} type includes (nearly) all visual
-media, whether it be films, TV shows, tapes and DVDs of the preceding
-or of any sort of performance (including music), or online multimedia.
-Finally, the \textbf{audio} type, our current concern, fills gaps in
-the two others, and presents its sources in a more \enquote{book-like}
-manner.  Published musical scores need this type --- unpublished ones
-would use \textsf{misc} with an \textsf{entrysubtype} (shapey:partita)
---- as do such favorite educational formats as the slideshow and the
-filmstrip (greek:filmstrip, schubert:muellerin, verdi:corsaro).  The
-\emph{Manual} (17.269--270) sometimes uses a similar format for audio
-books and even for films (twain:audio, weed:flatiron), though
-elsewhere these sorts of material are presented as \textsf{music} and
-\textsf{video}, respectively.  It would appear to depend on which
-sorts of publication facts you wish to present --- cf.\ \emph{Manual}
-17.269.
+and tapes.  The \textbf{video} type includes most visual media,
+whether it be films, TV shows, tapes and DVDs of the preceding or of
+any sort of performance (including music), or online multimedia.  The
+\emph{Manual's} treatment (14.280) of the latter suggests that online
+video excerpts, short pieces, and interviews should generally use the
+\textbf{online} type (harwood:biden, horowitz:youtube, pollan:plant).
+The \textbf{audio} type, our current concern, fills gaps in the
+others, and presents its sources in a more \enquote{book-like} manner.
+Published musical scores need this type --- unpublished ones would use
+\textsf{misc} with an \textsf{entrysubtype} (shapey:partita) --- as do
+such favorite educational formats as the slideshow and the filmstrip
+(greek:filmstrip, schubert:muellerin, verdi:corsaro).  The
+\emph{Manual} (14.277--280) sometimes uses a similar format for audio
+books (twain:audio), though, depending on the sorts of publication
+facts you wish to present, this sort of material may fall under
+\textsf{music} (auden:reading).  Dated audio recordings that are part
+of an archive, online or no, may best be presented in a \textbf{misc}
+entry with an \textsf{entrysubtype} (coolidge:speech,
+roosevelt:speech).
 
 \mylittlespace Once you've accepted the analogy of composer to
 \textsf{author}, constructing an \textsf{audio} entry should be fairly
@@ -4449,12 +4954,10 @@ for both books and collections, so while there will normally be an
 \textsf{booktitle} and/or a \textsf{maintitle} --- see
 schubert:muellerin for an entry that uses all three in citing one song
 from a cycle.  If the medium in question needs specifying, the
-\textsf{type} field is the place for it.  (It is characteristic of
-this entry type that such information is placed after the publisher
-information, whereas in the other audiovisual types their order is
-reversed.)  Finally, the \textsf{titleaddon} field can specify
-functions for which \textsf{biblatex-chicago} provides no automated
-handling, e.g., a librettist (verdi:corsaro).
+\textsf{type} field is the place for it.  Finally, the
+\textsf{titleaddon} field can specify functions for which
+\textsf{biblatex-chicago} provides no automated handling, e.g., a
+librettist (verdi:corsaro).
 
 \mybigspace This \mymarginpar{\textbf{bookinbook}} type provides the
 means of referring to parts of books that are considered, in other
@@ -4465,12 +4968,12 @@ an entry can have a \textsf{title} and a \textsf{maintitle}, but it
 can also contain a \textsf{booktitle}, all three of which will be
 italicized in the reference matter.  In general usage it is,
 therefore, rather like the traditional \textsf{inbook} type, only with
-its \textsf{title} in italics rather than in plain text.  (See
-\emph{Manual} 17.72, 17.89, 17.93; bernard:boris, euripides:orestes,
+its \textsf{title} in italics rather than in quotation marks.  (See
+\emph{Manual} 14.114, 14.127, 14.130; bernard:boris, euripides:orestes,
 plato:republic:gr.)
 
 \mylittlespace \textbf{NB}: The Euripides play receives slightly
-different presentations in 17.89 and 17.93.  Although the
+different presentations in 14.127 and 14.130.  Although the
 specification is very detailed, it doesn't eliminate all choice or
 variation.  Using a system like \textsc{Bib}\TeX\ should help to
 maintain consistency.
@@ -4478,7 +4981,7 @@ maintain consistency.
 \mybigspace This \mymarginpar{\textbf{booklet}} is the first of two
 entry types --- the other being \textsf{manual}, on which see below
 --- which are traditional in \textsc{Bib}\TeX\ styles, but which the
-\emph{Manual} (17.241) suggests may well be treated basically as
+\emph{Manual} (14.249) suggests may well be treated basically as
 books.  In the interests of backward compatibility,
 \textsf{biblatex-chicago-authordate} will so format such an entry,
 which uses the \textsf{howpublished} field instead of a standard
@@ -4499,45 +5002,54 @@ obsolete, and any such entries in your .bib file will trigger an
 error.  Please use the standard \textsf{biblatex} \textbf{bookinbook}
 type instead.
 
-\mybigspace This \mymarginpar{\textbf{customc}} entry type has
-undergone a metamorphosis with this release, as I previously warned
-both here and in the RELEASE file.  Rather than being a (deprecated)
-alias of the standard \textsf{biblatex} \textbf{suppbook}, it now
-allows you to include the expansions of abbreviations and shorthands
-\emph{inside} the list of references itself, as recommended by the
-\emph{Manual} (17.47), rather than in the list of shorthands.
-
-\mylittlespace In its simplest form, you need merely place the
-abbreviation of the (often institutional) author's name into the
-\textsf{author} field, and its expansion into the \textsf{title}
-field.  To make sure it appears in the list of references, you can
-either manually include the entry key in a \cmd{nocite} command, or
-you can put that entry key in the \textsf{userc} field in the main
-.bib entry, in which case \textsf{biblatex-chicago-authordate} will
-print the expanded abbreviation if and only if you cite the main
-entry.  (See abbrev:BSI, abbrev:ISO, bsi:abbreviation,
-iso:electrodoc.)  Under ordinary circumstances,
-\textsf{biblatex-chicago} will connect the abbreviation and its
-expansion with the word \enquote{\emph{See}} --- or its equivalent in
-the document's language --- in italics.  If you wish to present the
-cross-reference differently, you can put the connecting word(s) into
-the \textsf{nameaddon} field.
-
-\mylittlespace I haven't disabled in any way the mechanisms
-\textsf{biblatex} uses to produce the list of shorthands, so the
-\cmd{printshorthands} command will still print that list in your
-document.  Judicious use of \texttt{skiplos} in the \textsf{options}
-field will therefore enable simultaneous use of several methods of
-shorthand presentation, if that is useful.  It may be as well to
-mention here that the \emph{Manual} (17.39--40) offers other uses for
-this alphabetized cross-referencing system in reference lists, which
-may also prove helpful for the author-date style.  See the discussion
-of \textsf{customc} in section~\ref{sec:entrytypes} of the notes \&\
-bibliography docs, above.
+\mybigspace This \colmarginpar{\textbf{customc}} entry type allows you
+to include alphabetized cross-references to other, separate entries in
+the bibliography, particularly to other names or pseudonyms, as
+recommended by the \emph{Manual}.  (This is different from the usual
+\textsf{crossref}, \textsf{xref}, and \textsf{userf} mechanisms, all
+primarily designed to include cross-references to other works.  Cf.\
+14.84,86).  In the 15th edition's specification of the author-date
+style, it allowed you, in particular, to include the expansions of
+abbreviations and shorthands --- usually of corporate \textsf{authors}
+--- \emph{inside} the list of references itself, rather than in the
+list of shorthands.  The 16th edition of the \emph{Manual} (15.36),
+however, has a new specification for such corporate authors.  As in
+the old specification, the shorthand appears in citations and at the
+head of the entry in the list of references, but its expansion now
+appears within parentheses \emph{directly after} the shorthand, i.e.,
+\emph{within} the same entry.  This means you no longer need the
+\textsf{customc} entry for shorthands of this sort.  (See
+\textsf{shorthand}, below; bsi:abbreviation, iso:electrodoc.)
+
+\mylittlespace I should add immediately that, as I read the
+specification (14.84,86, 15.34), the alphabetized cross-references
+provided by \textsf{customc} are particularly encouraged, bordering on
+required, when a reference list \enquote{includes two or more works
+  published by the same author but under different pseudonyms.}  The
+following entries in \textsf{dates-test.bib} show one way of
+addressing this: crea\-sey:ashe:blast, crea\-sey:york:death,
+crea\-sey:mor\-ton:hide, ashe:crea\-sey, york:crea\-sey and
+mor\-ton:crea\-sey.  In these latter cases, you would need merely to
+place the pseudo\-nym in the \textsf{author} field, and the author's
+real name, under which his or her works are presented in the
+bibliography, in the \textsf{title} field.  To make sure the
+cross-reference also appears in the bibliography, you can either
+manually include the entry key in a \cmd{nocite} command, or you can
+put that entry key in the \textbf{userc} field in the main .bib entry,
+in which case \textsf{biblatex-chicago} will print the expanded
+abbreviation if and only if you cite the main entry.  (Cf.\
+\textsf{userc}, below.)
+
+\mylittlespace Under ordinary circumstances, \textsf{biblatex-chicago}
+will connect the two parts of the cross-reference with the word
+\enquote{\emph{See}} --- or its equivalent in the document's language
+--- in italics.  If you wish to present the cross-reference
+differently, you can put the connecting word(s) into the
+\textsf{nameaddon} field.
 
 \mylittlespace Finally, you may need to use this entry type if you
 wish to include a comment inside the parentheses of a citation, as
-specified by the \emph{Manual} (16.111).  If you have a
+specified by the \emph{Manual} (15.23).  If you have a
 \textsf{postnote}, then you can manually provide the punctuation and
 comment there, e.g., \cmd{autocite[4; the unrevised
   trans.]\{stendhal:parma\}}.  Without a \textsf{postnote}, you'll
@@ -4548,14 +5060,15 @@ just the text of the comment in the \textsf{title} field,
 text and the comment will do the trick, e.g.,
 \cmd{autocites\{chicago:manual\}\{chicago:comment\}}.
 
-\mybigspace This \mymarginpar{\textbf{image}} entry type, left
-undefined in the standard styles, is in
-\textsf{biblatex-chicago-authordate} intended for referring to
-photographs.  Excluding the possible use of the \textsf{entrysubtype}
-field, which in an \textsf{image} entry would be ignored, this type is
-a clone of \textsf{artwork}, so you should consult the latter's
-documentation above to see how to construct your .bib entry.  (See
-\emph{Manual} 12.33; bedford:photo.)
+\mybigspace This \colmarginpar{\textbf{image}} entry type, left
+undefined in the standard styles, was in previous releases of
+\textsf{biblatex-chicago} intended for referring to photographs, but
+the 16th edition of the \emph{Manual} has changed its specifications
+for such works, which are now treated the same as works in all other
+media.  This means that this entry type is now a clone of the
+\textsf{artwork} type, which see.  I retain it here as a convenience
+for users migrating from the old to the new specification.  (See 3.22,
+8.193; bedford:photo.)
 
 \mybigspace These \mymarginpar{\textbf{inbook}\\\textbf{incollection}}
 two standard \textsf{biblatex} types have very nearly identical
@@ -4565,30 +5078,34 @@ concerned, but I have retained both of them for compatibility.
   of a book which forms a self-contained unit with its own title,}
 while the second would hold \enquote{a contribution to a collection
   which forms a self-contained unit with a distinct author and its own
-  title.}  The \textsf{title} of both sorts will be in plain text, and
-in general you can use either type for most material falling into
-these categories.  There is, however, an important difference between
-them, as it is only in \textsf{incollection} entries that I implement
-the \emph{Manual's} recommendations for space-saving abbreviations in
-the list of references when you cite multiple pieces from the same
+  title.}  The \textsf{title} of both sorts will be placed within
+quotation marks, and in general you can use either type for most
+material falling into these categories.  There is, however, an
+important difference between them, as it is only in
+\textsf{incollection} entries that I implement the \emph{Manual's}
+recommendations for space-saving abbreviations in the list of
+references when you cite multiple pieces from the same
 \textsf{collection}.  These abbreviations are activated when you use
 the \textsf{crossref} or \textsf{xref} field in \textsf{incollection}
 entries, and not in \textsf{inbook} entries, mainly because the
-\emph{Manual} (17.70) here specifies a \enquote{multiauthor book.}
-(For more on this mechanism see \textbf{crossref}, below, and note
-that it is also active in \textsf{letter} and \textsf{inproceedings}
-entries.  There is, of course, nothing to prevent you from using the
-mechanism when referring to, e.g., chapters from a single-author book,
-but you'll have to use \textsf{incollection} instead of
-\textsf{inbook}.)  If the part of a book to which you are referring
-has had a separate publishing history as a book in its own right, then
-you may wish to use the \textsf{bookinbook} type, instead, on which
-see above.  (See \emph{Manual} 17.68--72; \textsf{inbook}:
-ashbrook:brain, phibbs:diary, will:cohere; \textsf{incollection}:
-centinel:letters, contrib:contrib, sirosh:visualcortex; ellet:galena,
-keating:dearborn, and lippincott:chicago [and the \textsf{collection}
-entry prairie:state] demonstrate the use of the \textsf{crossref}
-field with its attendant abbreviations in the list of references.)
+\emph{Manual} (14.113) specifies a \enquote{multiauthor book,} at
+least in the chapter devoted to the notes \&\ bibliography style.  The
+author-date chapter (15.37) is less clear, but the intent seems
+similar.  (For more on this mechanism see \textbf{crossref}, below,
+and note that it is also active in \textsf{letter} and
+\textsf{inproceedings} entries.  There is, of course, nothing to
+prevent you from using the mechanism when referring to, e.g., chapters
+from a single-author book, but you'll have to use
+\textsf{incollection} instead of \textsf{inbook}.)  If the part of a
+book to which you are referring has had a separate publishing history
+as a book in its own right, then you may wish to use the
+\textsf{bookinbook} type, instead, on which see above.  (See
+\emph{Manual} 14.111--114, 15.37; \textsf{inbook}: ashbrook:brain,
+phibbs:diary, will:cohere; \textsf{incollection}: centinel:letters,
+contrib:contrib, sirosh:visualcortex; ellet:galena, keating:dearborn,
+and lippincott:chicago [and the \textsf{collection} entry
+prairie:state] demonstrate the use of the \textsf{crossref} field with
+its attendant abbreviations in the list of references.)
 
 \mylittlespace \textbf{NB}: The \emph{Manual} suggests that, when
 referring to a chapter, one use either a chapter number or the
@@ -4601,9 +5118,9 @@ pretty much as in standard \textsf{biblatex}.  Indeed, the main
 differences between it and \textsf{incollection} are the lack of an
 \textsf{edition} field and the possibility that an
 \textsf{organization} may be cited alongside the \textsf{publisher},
-even though the \emph{Manual} doesn't specify its use (17.71).  Please
-note, also, that the \textsf{crossref} and \textsf{xref} mechanism for
-shortening citations of multiple pieces from the same
+even though the \emph{Manual} doesn't specify its use (14.226).
+Please note, also, that the \textsf{crossref} and \textsf{xref}
+mechanism for shortening citations of multiple pieces from the same
 \textsf{proceedings} is operative here, just as it is in
 \textsf{incollection} entries.  See \textbf{crossref}, below, for more
 details.
@@ -4614,7 +5131,7 @@ aliased to \textsf{incollection} in the standard styles, but the
 prompted a thoroughgoing revision.  Unfortunately, instructions for
 the author-date style are considerably less copious, so parts of what
 follows are my best guess at following the specification
-(17.238--239).
+(14.247--248).
 
 \mylittlespace One thing, at least, seems clear.  If your reference
 work can easily or conveniently be presented like a regular book, that
@@ -4674,24 +5191,19 @@ This name will be printed in parentheses after the entry's name
 \mylittlespace All of these rules apply to online reference works, as
 well, for which you need to provide not only a \textsf{url} but also,
 always, a \textsf{urldate}, as these sources are in constant flux
-(wikiped:bibtex, grove:sibelius).  For author-date, it may be
-convenient to duplicate the \textsf{urlyear} in the \textsf{year}, as
-this will help to present and categorize the material both in
-citations and in the list of references.  Please note, however, that
-the automatic provision of the \enquote{n.d.} abbreviation when a
-\textsf{year} is missing has been turned off for \textsf{inreference}
-entries, as for \textsf{misc} and \textsf{reference} entries.
-
-\mylittlespace Some of these presentational difficulties might make
-switching between the two Chicago styles rather more difficult,
-depending on the nature of your sources.  The advice I offer in
-section~\ref{sec:twostyles} below may be of assistance.
-
-\mybigspace This \colmarginpar{\textbf{letter}} entry type was designed
+(wikiped:bibtex, grove:sibelius).  The author-date style will
+automatically use this as the identifying date in citations and the
+list of references, assuming a more conventional \textsf{date} isn't
+available.  Please note, however, that the automatic provision of the
+\enquote{n.d.} abbreviation, in the absence of any sort of date
+whatsoever, has been turned off for \textsf{inreference} entries, as
+for \textsf{misc} and \textsf{reference} entries.
+
+\mybigspace This \mymarginpar{\textbf{letter}} entry type was designed
 to be used for citing letters, memoranda, or similar texts, but
 \emph{only} when they appear in a published collection.  (Unpublished
 material of this nature needs a \textsf{misc} entry, for which see
-below.)  The author-date specification (17.77), however, recommends
+below.)  The author-date specification (15.40), however, recommends
 against individual letters appearing in a list of references,
 suggesting instead that you put the whole published collection in a
 \textsf{book} entry and use a notice in the text to specify the letter
@@ -4733,15 +5245,13 @@ with this latter, I have retained it in
 \textsf{biblatex-chicago-authordate} for backward compatibility, its
 main peculiarity being that, in the absence of a named author, the
 \textsf{organization} producing the manual will be provided both as
-author and as publisher.  In such a case, you'll also need a
-\textsf{sortkey} field to aid \textsf{biblatex's} alphabetization
-routines.  (You can give a shortened form of the \textsf{organization}
-in the \textsf{shortauthor} field for text citations, if needed.)  Of
-course, if you were to use a \textsf{book} entry for such a reference,
-then you would need to define both \textsf{author} and
-\textsf{publisher} using the name you here might have put in
-\textsf{organization}.  (See 17:47; chicago:manual, dyna:browser,
-natrecoff:camera.)
+author and as publisher.  (You can give a shortened form of the
+\textsf{organization} in the \textsf{shortauthor} field for text
+citations, if needed.)  Of course, if you were to use a \textsf{book}
+entry for such a reference, then you would need to define both
+\textsf{author} and \textsf{publisher} using the name you here might
+have put in \textsf{organization}.  (See 14.92; chicago:manual,
+dyna:browser, natrecoff:camera.)
 
 \mybigspace As \colmarginpar{\textbf{misc}} its name suggests, the
 \textsf{misc} entry type was designed as a hold-all for citations that
@@ -4760,21 +5270,28 @@ traditional entry type as sparingly as possible.)
 \mylittlespace If you do provide an \textsf{entrysubtype} field, the
 \textsf{misc} type provides a means for citing unpublished letters,
 memoranda, private contracts, wills, interviews, and the like, making
-it something of an unpublished analogue to the \textsf{letter} and
-\textsf{article} entry types (which see).  Typically, such an entry
-will cite part of an archive, and equally typically the text cited
-won't have a specific title, but only a generic one, whereas an
-\textsf{unpublished} entry will ordinarily have a specific author and
-title, and won't come from a named archive.  As a rule, and as with
-the \textsf{letter} type, the \emph{Manual} (17.233) suggests that the
-list of references will usually contain only the name of the whole
-archived collection, with more specific information about individual
-items provided in the text, \enquote{outside the parentheses.}  If, on
-the other hand, \enquote{only one item from a collection has been
-  mentioned in text, the entry may begin with the writer's name (if
-  known).}  (See 17.205-206, 17.220, 17.222-232; house:papers cites a
-whole archive, while creel:house, dinkel:agassiz, and spock:interview
-cite individual pieces.)
+it something of an unpublished analogue to the \textsf{letter},
+\textsf{article}, and \textsf{review} entry types (which see).
+Typically, such an entry will cite part of an archive, and equally
+typically the text cited won't have a specific title, but only a
+generic one, whereas an \textsf{unpublished} entry will ordinarily
+have a specific author and title, and won't come from a named archive.
+The \textsf{misc} type with an \textsf{entrysubtype} defined is the
+least formatted of all those specified by the \emph{Manual}, so titles
+are in plain text by default.  It is quite possible, though somewhat
+unusual, for archival material to have a specific title, rather than a
+generic one.  In these cases, you will need to enclose the title
+inside a \cmd{mkbibquote} command manually.  Cf.\ coolidge:speech,
+roosevelt:speech, shapey:partita.  As a rule, and as with the
+\textsf{letter} type, the \emph{Manual} (15.49) suggests that the list
+of references will usually contain only the name of the whole archived
+collection, with more specific information about individual items
+provided in the text, outside the parentheses.  If, on the other hand,
+\enquote{only one item from a collection has been mentioned in text,
+  the entry may begin with the writer's name (if known).}  (See
+14.219-220, 14.231, 14.232-242; house:papers cites a whole archive,
+while creel:house, dinkel:agassiz, and spock:interview cite individual
+pieces.)
 
 \mylittlespace As far as constructing your .bib entry goes, you should
 first know that, like the \textsf{inreference} and \textsf{reference}
@@ -4801,15 +5318,16 @@ judicious use of the \textsf{options}, \textsf{date}, and
 \textsf{origdate} fields.)
 
 \mylittlespace As in \textsf{letter} entries, the titles of
-unpublished letters are of the form \texttt{Author to Recipient}, and
-further information can be given in the \textsf{titleaddon} field.
-Interviews or similar pieces will have a different sort of title, but
-all types will use the \textsf{note}, \textsf{organization},
-\textsf{institution}, and \textsf{location} fields (in ascending order
-of generality) to identify the archive, though the \emph{Manual}
-specifies (17.228) that well-known depositories don't usually need a
-city, state or country specified.  (The traditional \textsf{misc}
-fields are all still available, also.)
+unpublished letters are of the form \texttt{Author to Recipient},
+further information can be given in the \textsf{titleaddon} field,
+while the \textsf{origlocation} field can hold the place where the
+letter was written.  Interviews or similar pieces will have a
+different sort of title, but all types will use the \textsf{note},
+\textsf{organization}, \textsf{institution}, and \textsf{location}
+fields (in ascending order of generality) to identify the archive,
+though the \emph{Manual} specifies (14.238) that well-known
+depositories don't usually need a city, state or country specified.
+(The traditional \textsf{misc} fields are all still available, also.)
 
 \mylittlespace When your .bib entry refers to an entire archived
 collection, then you may wish to use the word
@@ -4819,31 +5337,36 @@ the in-text citations (house:papers).  Instead of any date, the
 citation will include the \textsf{title}, separated from the
 \textsf{author's} name by a space, e.g., (House Papers).  This same
 arrangement, happily, allows you easily to cite individual books of
-the Bible, and also certain other sacred texts (17.246--49; genesis).
+the Bible, and also certain other sacred texts (14.252--55; genesis).
 Please see under \textsf{entrysubtype} in
 section~\ref{sec:fields:authdate} below for all the details of the
 \texttt{classical} toggle.
 
 \mylittlespace In all this class of archived material, the
-\emph{Manual} (17.222) quite specifically requires more consistency
+\emph{Manual} (14.232) quite specifically requires more consistency
 within your own work than conformity to some external standard, so it
 is the former which you should pursue.  I hope that
 \textsf{biblatex-chicago} proves helpful in this regard.
 
-\mybigspace This \mymarginpar{\textbf{music}} is one of three new
-audiovisual entry types, and is intended primarily to aid in the
-presentation of musical recordings that do not have a video component,
-though it can also include audio books (auden:reading).  A DVD or VHS
-of an opera or other performance, by contrast, should use the
-\textbf{video} type instead (handel:messiah).  Because
-\textsf{biblatex} --- and \textsc{Bib}\TeX\ before it --- were
-designed primarily for citing book-like objects, some choices needed
-to be made in assigning the various roles found on the back of a CD to
-the fields in a typical .bib entry.  I have also implemented several
-new bibstrings to help in identifying these roles within entries.  If
-you can think of a simpler way to distribute the roles, please let me
-know, so that I can consider making changes before anyone gets used to
-the current equivalences.
+\mybigspace The \colmarginpar{\textbf{music}} 16th edition of the
+manual has revised its recommendations more for this type than for any
+other, so the notes which follow present several large changes that
+you'll need to make to your .bib files.  The good news is that some,
+though by no means all, of those changes involve considerable
+simplifications.  \textbf{Music} is one of three audiovisual entry
+types, and is intended primarily to aid in the presentation of musical
+recordings that do not have a video component, though it can also
+include audio books (auden:reading).  A DVD or VHS of an opera or
+other performance, by contrast, should use the \textbf{video} type
+instead (handel:messiah).  Because \textsf{biblatex} --- and
+\textsc{Bib}\TeX\ before it --- were designed primarily for citing
+book-like objects, some choices needed to be made in assigning the
+various roles found on the back of a CD to the fields in a typical
+.bib entry.  I have also implemented several bibstrings to help in
+identifying these roles within entries.  If you can think of a simpler
+way to distribute the roles, please let me know, so that I can
+consider making changes before anyone gets used to the current
+equivalences.
 
 \mylittlespace These equivalences, in summary form, are:
 
@@ -4871,120 +5394,155 @@ the current equivalences.
   song title, in which latter case the album title would go into
   \textsf{booktitle}.  The \textsf{maintitle} might be necessary for
   something like a box set of \emph{Complete Symphonies}.
-\item[series, number:] These two are closely associated, and are
-  intended for presenting the catalog information provided by the
-  music publisher, especially in the case when a publisher oversees
-  more than one label.  In nytrumpet:art, for example, the
-  \textsf{series} field holds the label (\texttt{Vox/Turnabout} and
-  the \textsf{number} field the catalog number (\texttt{PVT 7183}).
-  You can certainly put all of this information into one of the above
-  fields, but separating it may help make the .bib entry more
-  readable.
-\item[howpublished/pubstate:] The \emph{Manual} (17.268) follows the
-  rather specialized requirements for presenting publishing
-  information for musical recordings.  The normal symbol for musical
-  copyright is\ \texttt{\textcircledP} (Unicode point u+2117, SOUND
-  RECORDING COPYRIGHT), but other copyrights \texttt{\textcopyright}
-  are often also asserted.  The \textsf{howpublished} field is the
-  place for these symbols, and it may also have to hold a year
-  designation if the \texttt{\textcircledP} and the
-  \texttt{\textcopyright} apply to different years, as sometimes
-  happens.  In keeping with its general usage in the author-date
-  style, but also recognizing the peculiarities of this entry type, I
-  have made the \textsf{pubstate} field a synonym for
-  \textsf{howpublished}.  Please choose only one of them per entry,
-  and remember that the automatic presentation of reprints via the
-  \textsf{pubstate} field is disabled in \textsf{music} entries.  (See
+\item[\mycolor{publisher, series, number:}] These three closely-
+  associated fields are intended for presenting the catalog
+  information provided by the music publisher.  The 16th edition
+  generally only requires the \textsf{series} and \textsf{number}
+  fields (nytrumpet:art), which hold the record label and catalog
+  number, respectively.  Alternatively, \textsf{publisher} would
+  function as a synonym for \textsf{series} (holiday:fool), but there
+  may be cases when you need or want to specify a publisher in
+  addition to a label, as was the general requirement in the 15th
+  edition.  (This might happen, for example, when a single publisher
+  oversees more than one label.)  You can certainly put all of this
+  information into one of the above fields, but separating it may help
+  make the .bib entry more readable.
+\item[\mycolor{howpublished/pubstate:}] The 16th edition of the
+  \emph{Manual} (14.276, 15.53) has rather helpfully eliminated any
+  reference to the specialized symbols (\texttt{\textcircledP} \&\
+  \texttt{\textcopyright}) found in the 15th edition for presenting
+  publishing information for musical recordings.  This means that the
+  \textsf{howpublished} field is now obsolete, and you can remove it
+  from \textsf{music} entries in your .bib files.  The
+  \textsf{pubstate} field, therefore, can revert to its standard use
+  for identifying reprints.  In \textsf{music} entries, putting
+  \texttt{reprint} here will transform the \textsf{origdate} from a
+  recording date for an entire album into an original release date for
+  that album, notice of which will be printed towards the end of a
+  reference list entry, always assuming that the \textsf{origdate}
+  hasn't already appeared at the head of the entry and in citations.
+\item[\mycolor{date, eventdate, origdate:}] As though to compensate
+  for the simplification I've just mentioned, the \textsf{Manual} now
+  \enquote{recommends a more comprehensive approach to dating
+    audiovisual materials than in previous editions} (15.53).  Indeed,
+  \enquote{citations without a date are generally unacceptable}
+  (14.276), while if there is more than one date \enquote{the date of
+    the original recording should be privileged} (15.53).  Finding
+  these dates may take some research, but they will basically fall
+  into two types, i.e., the date of the recording or the copyright /
+  publishing date.  Recording dates go either in \textsf{origdate}
+  (for complete albums) or \textsf{eventdate} (for individual tracks).
+  The current copyright or publishing date goes in the \textsf{date}
+  field, while the original release date goes in \textsf{origdate}.
+  You may have noticed that the \textsf{origdate} has two slightly
+  different uses --- you can tell \textsf{biblatex-chicago} which sort
+  you intend by using the string \texttt{reprint} in the
+  \textsf{pubstate} field, which transforms the \textsf{origdate} from
+  a recording date into an original release date.  The style will
+  automatically use the \textsf{eventdate} or the \textsf{origdate} in
+  citations and at the head of the list of references, falling back on
+  a \textsf{date} or even a \textsf{urldate} in their absence.  It
+  will also prepend the bibstring \texttt{recorded} to any part of the
+  \textsf{eventdate} that doesn't appear at the head of the list of
+  references or, in the absence of the \textsf{pubstate} mechanism, to
+  the \textsf{origdate}, or indeed to both.  You can modify what is
+  printed here using the new \mycolor{\textsf{userd}} field, which
+  acts as a sort of date type modifier.  In \textsf{music} entries,
+  \textsf{userd} will be prepended to an \textsf{eventdate} if there
+  is one, barring that to the \textsf{origdate}, and to a possible
+  \textsf{urldate} absent those two, the latter behavior being the
+  standard across most other entry types.  (See holiday:fool,
   nytrumpet:art.)
-\item[date, publisher:] Ordinarily, you can use a combination of the
-  \textsf{date} and \textsf{origdate} fields, along with the
-  \texttt{cmsdate} entry option, to present the various dates of
-  publication and republication of a work.  This will mostly still
-  work in \textsf{music} entries, but, as I just pointed out, the
-  automatic presentation of reprints via the \textsf{pubstate} field
-  has been turned off, as it doesn't provide a good fit for the
-  materials at hand.  Instead, the \textsf{howpublished} or
-  \textsf{pubstate} field can be used manually to present the
-  publishing complexities, including year information that won't be
-  placed at the head of an entry.  Any year data you do wish placed
-  there needs to go in \textsf{date} or \textsf{origdate}, as usual.
-  Thankfully, the \textsf{publisher} field itself is self-explanatory.
 \item[type:] As in all the audiovisual entry types, the \textsf{type}
   field holds the medium of the recording, e.g., vinyl, 33 rpm,
   8-track tape, cassette, compact disc, mp3, ogg vorbis.
 \end{description}}
 
-I should also note here that I have implemented the standard
-\textsf{biblatex} \textbf{eventdate} field, in case you need
-it to identify a particular recording session or concert.  It will be
-printed just after the \textsf{title}.  The entries in
-\textsf{dates-test.bib} should at least give you a good idea of how
-this all works, and that file also contains an example of an audio
-book presented in a \textsf{music} entry.  If you browse the examples
-in the \emph{Manual} you will see that no author-date examples are
-given, so I have generally adopted the formatting decisions I made for
-the notes \&\ bibliography style.  Arguments as to why I'm wrong will,
-of course, be entertained.  (Cf. 17.268; auden:reading,
-beethoven:sonata29, bernstein:shostakovich, nytrumpet:art.)
-
-\mybigspace The \mymarginpar{\textbf{online}} \emph{Manual}'s
-instructions (17.142--147, 17.198, 17.234--237) for citing online
-materials are slightly different from those suggested by standard
-\textsf{biblatex}.  Indeed, this is a case where complete backward
-compatibility with other \textsf{biblatex} styles may be impossible,
-because as a general rule the \emph{Manual} considers relevant not
-only where a source is found, but also the nature of that source,
-e.g., if it's an online edition of a book (james:ambassadors), then it
-calls for a \textsf{book} entry.  Even if you cite an
-\enquote{intrinsically online} source, if that source is structured
-more or less like a conventional printed periodical, then you'll
-probably want to use \textsf{article} or \textsf{review} instead of
-\textsf{online} (stenger:privacy, which cites \emph{CNN.com} ---
-\emph{Yahoo!\ News} is another example that would be treated in such a
-way).  If the \enquote{standard facts of publication} are missing,
-then the \textsf{online} type is usually the best choice
-(evanston:library, powell:email).  Some online materials will, no
-doubt, make it difficult to choose an entry type, but so long as all
-locating information is present, then perhaps that is enough to
-fulfill the specification, or at least so I'd like to hope.
+The entries in \textsf{dates-test.bib} should at least give you a good
+idea of how this all works, and that file also contains an example of
+an audio book presented in a \textsf{music} entry.  If you browse the
+examples in the \emph{Manual} you will see some variations in the
+formatting choices there, from which I have made selections for
+\textsf{biblatex-chicago}.  It wasn't always clear to me that these
+variations were rules as opposed to possibilities, so I've ignored
+some of them in the code.  Arguments as to why I'm wrong will, of
+course, be entertained.  (Cf. 14.276--77, 15.53; \textsf{eventdate},
+\textsf{origdate}, \textsf{userd}; \cmd{DeclareLabelyear} in
+section~\ref{sec:authformopts} and \texttt{avdate} in
+section~\ref{sec:authpreset}; auden:reading, beethoven:sonata29,
+bernstein:shostakovich, floyd:atom, holiday:fool, nytrumpet:art,
+rubinstein:chopin.)
+
+\mybigspace The \colmarginpar{\textbf{online}} \emph{Manual}'s
+scattered instructions (14.4--13, 14.166--169, 14.184--185, 14.200,
+14.223, 14.243--246, 15.4, 15.9) for citing online materials are
+slightly different from those suggested by standard \textsf{biblatex}.
+Indeed, this is a case where complete backward compatibility with
+other \textsf{biblatex} styles may be impossible, because as a general
+rule the \emph{Manual} considers relevant not only where a source is
+found, but also the nature of that source, e.g., if it's an online
+edition of a book (james:ambassadors), then it calls for a
+\textsf{book} entry.  Even if you cite an intrinsically online source,
+if that source is structured more or less like a conventional printed
+periodical, then you'll probably want to use \textsf{article} or
+\textsf{review} instead of \textsf{online} (stenger:privacy, which
+cites \emph{CNN.com}).  The 16th edition's suggestions for blogs lend
+themselves well to the \textsf{article} type, too, while comments
+become, logically, \textsf{reviews} (14.243--6; ellis:blog,
+ac:comment).  Otherwise, for online documents not \enquote{formally
+  published,} the \textsf{online} type is usually the best choice
+(evanston:library, powell:email).  Online videos, in particular short
+pieces or those that present excerpts of some longer event or work,
+and also online interviews, usually require this type, too.  (See
+harwood:biden, horowitz:youtube, pollan:plant, but cp.\ weed:flatiron,
+a complete film, which requires a \textsf{video} entry.  Online audio
+pieces, particularly dated ones from an archive, work best as
+\textsf{misc} entries with an \textsf{entrysubtype}: coolidge:speech,
+roosevelt:speech.)  Some online materials will, no doubt, make it
+difficult to choose an entry type, but so long as all locating
+information is present, then perhaps that is enough to fulfill the
+specification, or at least so I'd like to hope.
 
 \mylittlespace Constructing an \textsf{online} .bib file entry is much
 the same as in \textsf{biblatex}.  The \textsf{title} field would
 contain the title of the page, the \textsf{organization} field could
 hold the title or owner of the whole site.  If there is no specific
-title for a page, but only a generic one (powell:email), then in the
-author-date style the \textsf{title} will serve just as well as
-\textsf{titleaddon}, which latter is required for the notes \&\
-bibliography style.
+title for a page, but only a generic one (powell:email), then such a
+title should go in \textsf{titleaddon}, not forgetting to begin that
+field with a lowercase letter so that capitalization will work out
+correctly.  It is worth remarking here, too, that the 16th edition of
+the \emph{Manual} (14.7--8) prefers, if they're available, revision
+dates to access dates when documenting online material.  See
+\textsf{urldate} and \textsf{userd}, below.
 
-\enlargethispage{\baselineskip}
+%\enlargethispage{\baselineskip}
 
-\mybigspace The \mymarginpar{\textbf{patent}} \emph{Manual} is very
-brief on the subject of patents (17.219), but very clear about which
+\mybigspace The \colmarginpar{\textbf{patent}} \emph{Manual} is very
+brief on the subject of patents (15.50), but very clear about which
 information it wants you to present, so such entries may not work well
-with other \textsf{biblatex} styles.  The important date, as far as
-Chicago is concerned, is the filing date.  If a patent has been filed
-but not yet granted, then you can place the filing date in either the
-\textsf{date} field or the \textsf{origdate} field, and
+with other \textsf{biblatex} styles.  In a change to previous
+practice, the 16th edition of Chicago's author-date style prefers the
+\emph{later} of the two possible dates to appear in citations and at
+the head of the entry in the list of references.  If a patent has been
+filed but not yet granted, then you can place the filing date in
+either the \textsf{date} field or the \textsf{origdate} field, and
 \textsf{biblatex-chicago-authordate} will automatically prepend the
 bibstring \texttt{patentfiled} to it.  If the patent has been granted,
 then you put the filing date in the \textsf{origdate} field, and you
 put the date it was issued in the \textsf{date} field, to which the
-bibstring \texttt{patentissued} will automatically be prepended.  In
-this entry type, and in no other, the \texttt{cmsdate=on} option is
-turned on by default, so that the filing date will be at the head of
-the entry in the list of references and in the citation, as well.  If
-you have more than one patent by the same author(s) filed in the same
-year, and if one or both of them have also been granted, then you'll
-need to reverse the dates (or put \texttt{switchdates} in the
-\textsf{options} field) so that \enquote{a,b,c} etc.\ can be appended
-to the year.  (If there is just the one, filing, date, please don't
-use the \texttt{switchdates} option.)  The patent number goes in the
-\textsf{number} field, and you should use the standard
-\textsf{biblatex} bibstrings in the \textsf{type} field.  Though it
-isn't mentioned by the \emph{Manual},
+bibstring \texttt{patentissued} will automatically be prepended, and
+it is this later date that will head the entry and appear in
+citations.  The patent number goes in the \textsf{number} field, and
+you should use the standard \textsf{biblatex} bibstrings in the
+\textsf{type} field.  Though it isn't mentioned by the \emph{Manual},
 \textsf{biblatex-chicago-authordate} will print the \textsf{holder}
-after the \textsf{author}, if you provide one.  See petroff:impurity.
+after the \textsf{author}, if you provide one.  Finally, the 16th
+edition of the \emph{Manual} capitalizes the \textsf{title}
+sentence-style, which seems to be the generally-accepted convention,
+across both Chicago styles.  As I've removed all of the automatic
+down-casing code from previous editions, you may need manually to
+revise the \textsf{title} field to provide the lowercase letters.  See
+petroff:impurity.
 
 \mybigspace This \mymarginpar{\textbf{periodical}} is the standard
 \textsf{biblatex} entry type for presenting an entire issue of a
@@ -4998,7 +5556,7 @@ citing is a \enquote{newspaper} or \enquote{magazine} instead of a
 place for identifying strings like \enquote{special issue,} with its
 initial lowercase letter to activate the automatic capitalization
 routines, though this isn't strictly necessary in the author-date
-style.  (See \emph{Manual} 17.170; good:wholeissue.)
+style.  (See \emph{Manual} 14.187; good:wholeissue.)
 
 \mybigspace This \mymarginpar{\textbf{reference}} entry type is
 aliased to \textsf{collection} by the standard \textsf{biblatex}
@@ -5015,7 +5573,7 @@ entry.  (Cf.\ \textsf{inreference}, above.)
 \mybigspace This \mymarginpar{\textbf{report}} entry type is a
 \textsf{biblatex} generalization of the traditional \textsc{Bib}\TeX\
 type \textsf{techreport}.  Instructions for such entries are rather
-thin on the ground in the \emph{Manual} (17.241), so I have followed
+thin on the ground in the \emph{Manual} (14.249), so I have followed
 the generic advice about formatting it like a book, and hope that the
 results conform to the specification.  Its main peculiarities are the
 \textsf{institution} field in place of a \textsf{publisher}, the
@@ -5029,18 +5587,108 @@ Technical Report Number of a technical report.  As in standard
 report type in \textsf{note} and the \textsf{institution} in
 \textsf{publisher}.  (See herwign:office.)
 
-\mybigspace As \mymarginpar{\textbf{review}} its name suggests, this
-entry type was designed for reviews published in periodicals, and if
-you've already read the \textsf{article} documentation above you'll
-know that I haven't yet found an example where you absolutely need to
-use it for the author-date style.  The code to process such an entry
-remains in \textsf{biblatex-chicago-authordate}, so if you are
-building a .bib file for use with both Chicago styles then any
-\textsf{review} entries in it will work fine in both, but otherwise
-the \textsf{article} type will suffice.  If you find I'm wrong about
-this, please let me know.  (Cf.\ barcott:review, bundy:macneil,
+\mybigspace The \colmarginpar{\textbf{review}} \textsf{review} entry
+type wasn't, strictly speaking, necessary for the 15th edition
+author-date specification.  With the major changes to the presentation
+of the title fields in the 16th edition, however, it has now become
+necessary for author-date users to familiarize themselves with it as a
+means of coping with the \emph{Manual}'s complicated requirements for
+citing periodicals of all sorts.  As its name suggests, this entry
+type was designed for reviews published in periodicals, and if you've
+already read the \textsf{article} instructions above --- if you
+haven't, I recommend doing so now --- you'll know that \textsf{review}
+serves as well for citing other sorts of material with generic titles,
+like letters to the editor, obituaries, interviews, online comments
+and the like.  The primary rule is that any piece that has only a
+generic title, like \enquote{review of \ldots,} \enquote{interview
+  with \ldots,} or \enquote{obituary of \ldots,} calls for the
+\textsf{review} type.  Any piece that also has a specific title, e.g.,
+\enquote{\enquote{Lost in \textsc{Bib}\TeX,} an interview with
+  \ldots,} requires an \textsf{article} entry.  (This assumes the text
+is found in a periodical of some sort.  Were it found in a book, then
+the \textsf{incollection} type would serve your needs, and you could
+use \textsf{title} and \textsf{titleaddon} there.  While we're on the
+topic of exceptions, the \emph{Manual} includes an example --- 14.221
+--- where the \enquote{Interview} part of the title is considered a
+subtitle rather than a titleaddon, said part therefore being included
+inside the quotation marks and capitalized accordingly.  Not having
+the journal in front of me I'm not sure what prompted that decision,
+but \textsf{biblatex-chicago} would obviously have no difficulty
+coping with such a situation.)
+
+\mylittlespace Once you've decided to use \textsf{review}, then you
+need to determine which sort of periodical you are citing, the rules
+for which are the same as for an \textsf{article} entry.  If it is a
+\enquote{magazine} or a \enquote{newspaper}, then you need an
+\textsf{entrysubtype} \texttt{magazine}.  The generic title goes in
+\textsf{title} and the other fields work just as as they do in an
+\textsf{article} entry with the same \textsf{entrysubtype}, including
+the substitution of the \textsf{journaltitle} for the \textsf{author}
+if the latter is missing. (See 14.202--203, 14.205, 14.208,
+14.214--217, 14.221, 15.47; barcott:review, bundy:macneil,
 Clemens:letter, gourmet:052006, kozinn:review, nyt:trevorobit,
-ratliff:review, unsigned:ranke, wallraff:word.)
+unsigned:ranke, wallraff:word.)  If, on the other hand, the piece
+comes from a \enquote{journal,} then you don't need an
+\textsf{entrysubtype}.  The generic title goes in \textsf{title}, and
+the remaining fields work just as they do in a plain \textsf{article}
+entry.  (See 14.215; ratliff:review.)
+
+\mylittlespace The \emph{Manual} now suggests that, no matter which
+citation style you are using, it is \enquote{usually sufficient to
+  cite newspaper and magazine articles entirely within the text}
+(15.47).  This involves giving the title of the journal and the full
+date of publication in a parenthetical reference, including any other
+information in the main text (14.206), thereby obviating the need to
+present such an entry in the list of references.  To utilize this
+method in the author-date style, in addition to a \texttt{magazine}
+\textsf{entrysubtype}, you'll need to place
+\mycolor{\texttt{cmsdate=full}} into the \textsf{options} field,
+including \texttt{skipbib} there as well to stop the entry printing in
+the list of references.  If the entry only contains a \textsf{date}
+and \textsf{journaltitle} that's enough, but if it's a fuller entry
+also containing an \textsf{author} then you'll also need
+\texttt{useauthor=false} in the \textsf{options} field.  Other surplus
+fields will be ignored.  (See osborne:poison.)
+
+\mylittlespace Most of the onerous details are the same as I described
+them in the \textbf{article} section above, but I'll repeat some of
+them briefly here.  If anything in the \textsf{title} needs
+formatting, you need to provide those instructions yourself, as the
+default is completely plain.  \textsf{Author}-less reviews are treated
+just like similar newspaper articles --- the \textsf{journaltitle}
+replaces the author in citations and heads the entry in the list of
+references.  The sorting of such entries isn't an issue, as it's
+solved by \textsf{Biber} (14.217; gourmet:052006, nyt:trevorobit,
+unsigned:ranke, and see \cmd{DeclareSortingScheme} in
+section~\ref{sec:authformopts}, below.).  As in \textsf{misc} entries
+with an \textsf{entrysubtype}, words like \enquote{interview,}
+\enquote{review,} and \enquote{letter} only need capitalization after
+a full stop, so you can start the \textsf{title} field with a
+lowercase letter and let the automatic field formatting with
+\cmd{autocap} do its work, though this isn't strictly necessary with
+\textsf{biblatex-chicago-authordate}.
+
+\mylittlespace One detail of the \textsf{review} type is new to both
+specifications, and responds to the needs of the 16th edition of the
+\emph{Manual}.  As I mentioned above, blogs are best treated as
+\textsf{articles} with \texttt{magazine} \textsf{entrysubtype},
+whereas comments on those blogs --- or on any similar sort of online
+content --- need the \textsf{review} type with the same
+\textsf{entrysubtype}.  What they will frequently also need is a date
+of some sort closely associated with the comment (14.246; ac:comment),
+so I have now included the \mycolor{\textsf{eventdate}} in
+\textsf{review} entries for just this purpose.  The \textsf{eventyear}
+will appear in citations and at the head of the reference list entry,
+while the remainder of the \textsf{eventdate} will be printed just
+after the \textsf{title}.  If, in addition, you need an identifying
+timestamp, then the \textsf{nameaddon} field is the place for it, but
+you'll have to provide your own parentheses, in order to preserve the
+possibility of providing pseudonyms in square brackets that is the
+standard function of this field in all other entry types, and possibly
+in the the \textsf{review} type as well.  (Cf.\ the documentation of
+\textsf{eventdate} in section~\ref{sec:fields:authdate},
+\cmd{DeclareLabelyear} in section~\ref{sec:authformopts}, and
+\texttt{avdate} in section~\ref{sec:authpreset}.)
 
 %\enlargethispage{\baselineskip}
 
@@ -5069,17 +5717,21 @@ depending on the context.  Examples might be \enquote{\texttt{preface
 that unless you use a \cmd{bibstring} command in the \textsf{type}
 field, the resultant entry will not be portable across languages.)
 
+\enlargethispage{-\baselineskip}
+
 \mylittlespace The other rules for constructing your .bib entry remain
 the same.  The \textsf{author} field refers to the author of the
 introduction or afterword, while \textsf{bookauthor} refers to the
-author of the main text of the work, if the two differ.  If the focus
-of the reference is the main text of the book, but you want to mention
-the name of the writer of an introduction or afterword for
-completeness, then the normal \textsf{biblatex} rules apply, and you
-can just put their name in the appropriate field of a \textsf{book}
-entry, that is, in the \textsf{foreword}, \textsf{afterword}, or
-\textsf{introduction} field.  (See \emph{Manual} 17.74--75;
-friedman:intro, polakow:afterw, prose:intro).
+author of the main text of the work, if the two differ.  For the 16th
+edition \colmarginpar{New!}, the \emph{Manual} requires that you
+include the page range for the cited part in the list of references.
+As ever, if the focus of the reference is the main text of the book,
+but you want to mention the name of the writer of an introduction or
+afterword for completeness, then the normal \textsf{biblatex} rules
+apply, and you can just put their name in the appropriate field of a
+\textsf{book} entry, that is, in the \textsf{foreword},
+\textsf{afterword}, or \textsf{introduction} field.  (See
+\emph{Manual} 14.116; friedman:intro, polakow:afterw, prose:intro).
 
 \mybigspace This \mymarginpar{\textbf{suppcollection}} fulfills a
 function analogous to \textsf{suppbook}.  Indeed, I believe the
@@ -5087,18 +5739,17 @@ function analogous to \textsf{suppbook}.  Indeed, I believe the
 both types of work, so this entry type is an alias to
 \textsf{suppbook}, which see.
 
-\mybigspace This \mymarginpar{\textbf{suppperiodical}} type is
+\mybigspace This \colmarginpar{\textbf{suppperiodical}} type is
 intended to allow reference to generically-titled works in
 periodicals, such as regular columns or letters to the editor.
 \textsf{Biblatex} also provides the \textsf{review} type for this
-purpose, and in the notes \&\ bibliography style
-\textsf{suppperiodical} is an alias of \textsf{review}.  In the
-author-date style, however, as discussed above, you really only need
-the \textsf{article} entry type for this purpose, though I have
-retained \textsf{suppperiodical} in order to facilitate switching
-between the two Chicago styles.
-
-\mybigspace This \mymarginpar{\textbf{video}} is the last of the new
+purpose, so in both Chicago styles \textsf{suppperiodical} is an alias
+of \textsf{review}.  In the 16th edition of the author-date style, as
+discussed above, the use of this latter entry type has become
+necessary, so please see its documentation for instructions on how to
+construct a .bib entry for such works.
+
+\mybigspace This \mymarginpar{\textbf{video}} is the last of the three
 audiovisual entry types, and as its name suggests it is intended for
 citing visual media, be it films of any sort or TV shows, broadcast,
 on the Net, on VHS, DVD, or Blu-ray.  As with the \textsf{music} type
@@ -5128,48 +5779,53 @@ by \textsf{biblatex}.  Here are the main correspondences:
   identify performers, as they usually don't need further specifying
   and this role prevents \textsf{biblatex} from falling back on the
   default \texttt{editor} bibstring.
-\item[title, titleaddon, booktitle, maintitle:] As with the other
-  audiovisual types, \textsf{video} serves as an analogue both to
-  books and to collections, so the \textsf{title} may be of a whole
-  film DVD or of a TV series, or it may identify one episode in a
-  series or one scene in a film.  In the latter cases, the title of
-  the whole would go in \textsf{booktitle}.  The \textsf{titleaddon}
-  field may be useful for specifying the season and/or episode number
-  of a TV series, or for any other information that needs to come
-  between the \textsf{title} and the \textsf{booktitle}
-  (cleese:holygrail, episode:tv, handel:messiah).  As in the
-  \textsf{music} type, \textsf{maintitle} may be necessary for a boxed
-  set or something similar.
-\item[date, origdate, pubstate:] The publication details of this sort
-  of material are usually straightforward, at least compared with the
-  \textsf{music} type, but there will be occasions when you need two
-  dates.  When citing an episode of a long-running TV series you may
-  need both a date for the episode and either a range for the whole
-  run or a year for the release of the box set, and when citing a film
-  on DVD you may want to present both the original release date and
-  the date of release on DVD.  In these cases, the usual
-  \textsf{chicago-authordate} mechanisms for choosing the date to
-  appear at the head of an entry apply.  You can also use the standard
+\item[title, titleaddon, booktitle, \mycolor{booktitleaddon},
+  maintitle:] As with the other audiovisual types, \textsf{video}
+  serves as an analogue both to books and to collections, so the
+  \textsf{title} may be of a whole film DVD or of a TV series, or it
+  may identify one episode in a series or one scene in a film.  In the
+  latter cases, the title of the whole would go in \textsf{booktitle}.
+  The \mycolor{\textsf{booktitleaddon}} field, in a change from the
+  15th edition, may be useful for specifying the season and/or episode
+  number of a TV series, while the \textsf{titleaddon} is for any
+  information that needs to come between the \textsf{title} and the
+  \textsf{booktitle} (cleese:holygrail, episode:tv, handel:messiah).
+  As in the \textsf{music} type, \textsf{maintitle} may be necessary
+  for a boxed set or something similar.
+\item[\mycolor{date, eventdate, origdate}, pubstate:] The 16th edition
+  of the \textsf{Manual} now \enquote{recommends a more comprehensive
+    approach to dating audiovisual materials than in previous
+    editions} (15.53).  Indeed, \enquote{citations without a date are
+    generally unacceptable} (14.276), while if there is more than one
+  date \enquote{the date of the original recording should be
+    privileged} (15.53).  As with \textsf{music} entries, in order to
+  follow these specifications I have had to provide three separate
+  date fields for citing \textsf{video} sources, but their uses differ
+  somewhat between the two types.  In both, the \textsf{date} will
+  generally provide the publishing or copyright date of the medium you
+  are referencing.  More specific to this entry type, the
+  \textsf{origdate} will generally hold the date of the original
+  theatrical release of a film, while the \textsf{eventdate} will most
+  commonly present either the broadcast date of a particular TV
+  program, or the recording/performance date of, for example, an opera
+  on DVD.  The style will automatically prepend the bibstring
+  \texttt{broadcast} to such a date, though you can use the new field
+  \mycolor{\textsf{userd}} to change the string printed there.
+  (Absent an \textsf{eventdate}, the \textsf{userd} field in
+  \textsf{video} entries will revert to modifying the
+  \textsf{urldate}, the standard behavior in all but these and
+  \textsf{music} entries.)  Typically, any given \textsf{video} entry
+  will only need an \textsf{eventdate} \emph{or} an \textsf{origdate},
+  and it is this date that will appear in citations and at the head of
+  the entry in the reference list.  It's conceivable that you may need
+  all three dates, in which case you can also use the standard
   \textsf{pubstate} field with \texttt{reprint} in it to control the
-  printing of the original date in parentheses at the end of the
-  entry, though I have altered the string that is printed there (see
-  next item).  I have also disabled the printing of the
-  \cmd{bibstring\{reprint\}} before the publication information, as it
-  doesn't really apply to this class of material.  Cf.\ episode:tv,
-  hitchcock:nbynw; \textsf{pubstate}, below.
-\item[entrysubtype:] In most entry types, the string printed in
-  parentheses to date the original appearance of a work is
-  \enquote{\texttt{Orig.\ pub.}}  This won't work in \textsf{video},
-  so by default in this entry type it will print
-  \enquote{\texttt{Orig.\ released.}}  As this isn't quite right for
-  TV shows, you can place the exact string \texttt{tv} into the
-  \textsf{entrysubtype} field to obtain \enquote{\texttt{Orig.\
-      shown.}}  Alternatively, you can put whatever you like in the
-  \textsf{pubstate} field, including parentheses and the year if you
-  want them, and all of it will appear where it should.  (The
-  \emph{Manual} gives no guidance on presenting televisual materials,
-  so I've improvised.  Any improvements will be gratefully
-  considered.)
+  printing of the \textsf{origdate} at the end of the entry, though I
+  have altered the string that is printed there.  Cf.\ friends:leia,
+  handel:messiah, hitchcock:nbynw; \textsf{pubstate}, below.
+\item[\mycolor{entrysubtype:}] With the changes to the date fields
+  detailed just above, this field is no longer needed for
+  \textsf{video} entries, and will be ignored.
 \item[type:] As in all the audiovisual entry types, the \textsf{type}
   field holds the medium of the \textsf{title}, e.g., 8 mm, VHS, DVD,
   Blu-ray, MPEG.
@@ -5177,8 +5833,10 @@ by \textsf{biblatex}.  Here are the main correspondences:
 
 As with the \textsf{music} type, entries in \textsf{dates-test.bib}
 should at least give you a good idea of how all this works.  (Cf.\
-17.270, 273; cleese:holygrail, episode:tv, handel:messiah,
-hitchcock:nbynw, loc:city.)
+14.279--80; \textsf{eventdate}, \textsf{origdate}, \textsf{userd};
+\cmd{DeclareLabelyear} in section~\ref{sec:authformopts}, and
+\texttt{avdate} in section~\ref{sec:authpreset}; cleese:holygrail,
+friends:leia, handel:messiah, hitchcock:nbynw, loc:city.)
 
 \subsection{Entry Fields}
 \label{sec:fields:authdate}
@@ -5201,7 +5859,8 @@ filing and issue dates.  In any entry type, if your data begins with a
 word that would ordinarily only be capitalized at the beginning of a
 sentence, then simply ensure that that word is in lowercase, and the
 style will take care of the rest.  Cf.\ \textsf{note}. (See
-\emph{Manual} 17.145, 17.123; davenport:attention, natrecoff:camera.)
+\emph{Manual} 14.119, 14.166--68; davenport:attention,
+natrecoff:camera.)
 
 \mybigspace In most \mymarginpar{\textbf{afterword}} circumstances,
 this field will function as it does in standard \textsf{biblatex},
@@ -5220,8 +5879,8 @@ afterword, foreword, or introduction the main focus of a citation.  If
 it's an afterword at issue, simply define \textsf{afterword} any way
 you please, leave \textsf{foreword} and \textsf{introduction}
 undefined, and \textsf{biblatex-chicago} will do the rest. Cf.\
-\textsf{foreword} and \textsf{introduction}. (See \emph{Manual} 17.46,
-17.74; polakow:afterw.)
+\textsf{foreword} and \textsf{introduction}. (See \emph{Manual} 14.91,
+14.116; polakow:afterw.)
 
 \mybigspace At \mymarginpar{\textbf{annotation}} the request of Emil
 Salim, \textsf{biblatex-chicago} has, as of version 0.9, added a
@@ -5229,7 +5888,7 @@ package option (see \texttt{annotation} below, section
 \ref{sec:useropts}) to allow you to produce annotated lists of
 references.  The formatting of such a list is currently fairly basic,
 though it conforms with the \emph{Manual's} minimal guidelines
-(16.77).  The default in \textsf{chicago-authordate.cbx} is to define
+(14.59).  The default in \textsf{chicago-authordate.cbx} is to define
 \cmd{DeclareFieldFormat\{an\-notation\}} using \cmd{par}\cmd{nobreak}
 \cmd{vskip} \cmd{bibitemsep}, though you can alter it by re-declaring
 the format in your preamble.  The page-breaking algorithms don't
@@ -5246,40 +5905,22 @@ serves as an alias for this.)
 do, even though the \emph{Manual} doesn't actually mention it.  It may
 be useful for some purposes.  Cf.\ \textsf{commentator}.
 
-\mybigspace For \mymarginpar{\textbf{author}} the most part, I have
+\mybigspace For \colmarginpar{\textbf{author}} the most part, I have
 implemented this field in a completely standard \textsc{Bib}\TeX\
 fashion.  Remember that corporate or organizational authors need to
 have an extra set of curly braces around them (e.g.,
 \texttt{\{\{Associated Press\}\}}\,) to prevent \textsc{Bib}\TeX\ from
-treating one part of the name as a surname (17.47, 17.197;
+treating one part of the name as a surname (14.92, 14.212, 15.36;
 assocpress:gun, chicago:manual).  If there is no \textsf{author}, then
 \textsf{biblatex-chicago} will look, in sequence, for an
 \textsf{editor}, \textsf{translator}, or \textsf{compiler} (actually
 \textsf{namec}, currently) and use that name (or those names) instead,
-followed by the appropriate identifying string (esp.\ 17.41, also
-17.28--29, 17.88, 17.95, 17.172; boxer:china, brown:bremer,
+followed by the appropriate identifying string (esp.\ 15.35, also
+14.76, 14.87, 14.126, 14.132, 14.189; boxer:china, brown:bremer,
 harley:cartography, schellinger:novel, sechzer:women, silver:ga\-wain,
-soltes:georgia).  Please note that when a \textsf{namec} appears at
-the head of an entry, you'll need to assist \textsf{biblatex}'s
-sorting algorithms by providing a \textsf{sortkey} field to ensure
-correct alphabetization in the list of references.  Also, a
-\textsf{shortauthor} field is necessary to provide a name for
-citations.
-
-\mylittlespace As its name suggests, the author-date style very much
-wants to have a name of some sort present both for the entries in the
-list of references and for the in-text citations.  Indeed,
-\enquote{this system works best where all or most of the sources are
-  easily convertible to author-date references} (16.4).  The
-\emph{Manual} is nothing if not flexible, however, so with unsigned
-articles or encyclopedia entries the \textsf{journaltitle} or
-\textsf{title} may take the place of the \textsf{author}
-(gourmet:052006, lakeforester:pushcarts, nyt:trevorobit,
-unsigned:ranke, wikipedia:bibtex).  Even in such \textsf{article}
-entries, however, it may be advantageous to provide a (formatted and
-abbreviated) \textsf{shortauthor} field to keep the in-text citations
-to a reasonable length, though not at the expense of making it hard to
-find the relevant entries in the reference list.
+soltes:georgia).  \textsf{Biber} now takes care of alphabetizing
+entries no matter which name appears at their head, and the package
+also automatically provides a name for citations.
 
 \mylittlespace If you wish to emphasize the activity of an editor or a
 translator, you can use the \textsf{biblatex} and
@@ -5301,13 +5942,19 @@ package begins its search at \textsf{translator} and continues on to
 \textsf{options}.  The result will be that the compilers' names will
 appear at the head of the entry.  If you want to skip over parts of
 the chain, you must turn off \emph{all} of the parts up to the one you
-wish printed.
+wish printed.  Another peculiarity of the system is that setting the
+Chicago-specific \texttt{usecompiler} option to \texttt{false} doesn't
+remove \textsf{namec} from the sorting list, whereas the other
+standard \textsf{biblatex} toggles \emph{do} remove their names from
+the sorting list, so in some corner cases you may need the
+\textsf{sortkey} field.  See \cmd{DeclareSortingScheme} in
+section~\ref{sec:authformopts}, below.
 
 \mylittlespace This system of toggles, then, can turn off
 \textsf{biblatex-chicago}'s mechanism for finding a name to place at
 the head of an entry, but it also very usefully adds the possibility
 of citing a work with an \textsf{author} by its editor, compiler or
-translator instead (17.45; eliot:pound), something that wasn't
+translator instead (14.90; eliot:pound), something that wasn't
 possible before.  For full details of how this works, see the
 \textsf{editortype} documentation below.  (Of course, in
 \textsf{collection} and \textsf{proceedings} entry types, an
@@ -5315,21 +5962,41 @@ possible before.  For full details of how this works, see the
 required, as in standard \textsf{biblatex}.  Also, in \textsf{article}
 entries with \textsf{entrysubtype} \texttt{magazine}, the absence of
 an \textsf{author} triggers the use of the \textsf{journaltitle} in
-its stead.  See those entry types for further details.)
+its stead.  See the next paragraph, and those entry types, for further
+details.)
 
-\mylittlespace \textbf{NB}: The \emph{Manual} provides specific
-instructions for formatting the names of both anonymous and
-pseudonymous authors (17.32--39).  The use of \enquote{Anonymous} as
-the name is \enquote{generally to be avoided,} but may in some cases
-be useful \enquote{in a bibliography in which several anonymous works
-  need to be grouped.}  I would add that sometimes it's the simplest
-option for a difficult citation --- cf.\ virginia:plantation, where
-placing \enquote{\texttt{Anon.}\hspace{-2pt}}\ in the \textsf{author}
-field seems about the only way to fit this text into the author-date
-style.  If \enquote{the authorship is known or guessed at but was
-  omitted on the title page,} then you need to use the
+\mylittlespace As its name suggests, the author-date style very much
+wants to have a name of some sort present both for the entries in the
+list of references and for the in-text citations.  The \emph{Manual}
+is nothing if not flexible, however, so with unsigned articles or
+encyclopedia entries the \textsf{journaltitle} or \textsf{title} may
+take the place of the \textsf{author} (gourmet:052006,
+lakeforester:pushcarts, nyt:trevorobit, unsigned:ranke,
+wikipedia:bibtex).  Even in such \textsf{article} entries, however, it
+may be advantageous to provide a (formatted and abbreviated)
+\textsf{shortauthor} field to keep the in-text citations to a
+reasonable length, though not at the expense of making it hard to find
+the relevant entries in the reference list.
+
+\mylittlespace Recommendations \colmarginpar{New!} concerning
+anonymous authors in other kinds of references have changed somewhat
+in the 16th edition of the \emph{Manual} (15.32), placing greater
+emphasis on using the \textsf{title} in citations and at the head of
+reference list entries, rather than \enquote{Anonymous.}  The latter
+may still in some cases be useful \enquote{in a bibliography in which
+  several anonymous works need to be grouped} (14.79), but even with a
+source like virginia:plantation, \enquote{the reference list entry
+  should normally begin with the title\ldots\ Text citations may refer
+  to a short form of the title but must include the first word (other
+  than an initial article)} (15.32).  The \textsf{shorttitle} field is
+the place for the short form, and you'll also need a \textsf{sortkey}
+of some sort if the full title begins with an article that is to be
+ignored when alphabetizing.
+
+\mylittlespace If \enquote{the authorship is known or guessed at but
+  was omitted on the title page,} then you need to use the
 \textsf{authortype} field to let \textsf{biblatex-chicago} know this
-fact.  If the author is known (horsley:prosodies), then put
+fact (15.33).  If the author is known (horsley:prosodies), then put
 \texttt{anon} in the \textsf{authortype} field, if guessed at
 (cook:sotweed) put \texttt{anon?}\ there.  (In both cases,
 \textsf{biblatex-chicago} tests for these \emph{exact} strings, so
@@ -5352,21 +6019,28 @@ name in the \textsf{author} field, then the pseudonym goes in
 (creasey:ashe:blast, creasey:morton:hide, creasey:\\york:death).  This
 latter method will allow you to keep all references to one author's
 work under different pseudonyms grouped together in the list of
-references, a method recommended by the \emph{Manual}.
+references, a method recommended by the \emph{Manual}.  The 16th
+edition of the \emph{Manual} (14.84) has now strengthened its policies
+about cross-references from author to pseudonym or vice versa, so in
+these latter examples I have included such references from the various
+pseudonyms back to the author's name, using the \textsf{customc} entry
+type, which see (ashe:creasey, morton:creasey, york:creasey).
 
 \mylittlespace One final piece of advice.  An institutional author's
 name, or a journal's name being used in place of an author, can be
 rather too long for in-text citations.  In unsigned:ranke I placed an
 abbreviated form of the \textsf{journaltitle} into
-\textsf{shortauthor}, a practice condoned by the \emph{Manual}
-(17.159) even in author-date reference lists.  In iso:electrodoc, I
-provided a \textsf{shorthand} field, which by default in
+\textsf{shortauthor}, adapting for a periodical the practice
+recommended for books in 15.32.  In iso:electrodoc, I provided a
+\textsf{shorthand} field, which by default in
 \textsf{biblatex-chicago-authordate} will appear in text citations.
-With this release, you can expand the abbreviation inside the list of
-references itself, as suggested by the \emph{Manual}, (17.47).  Please
-see \textsf{customc} above and \textsf{shorthands} below for the
-details.  (A list of shorthands can still clarify the abbreviation, if
-you wish.)
+Pursuant to the 16th edition's specifications, this \textsf{shorthand}
+will now also appear at the head of the entry in the list of
+references, followed, within the entry, by its expansion, this latter
+placed within parentheses.  You no longer, therefore, need to use a
+\textsf{customc} entry to provide the expansion --- please see
+\textsf{shorthand} below for the details.  (You can also still utilize
+the list of shorthands to clarify the abbreviation, if you wish.)
 
 \mybigspace In \mymarginpar{\textbf{authortype}}
 \textsf{biblatex-chicago}, this field serves a function very much in
@@ -5387,8 +6061,8 @@ yourself doesn't work right, hence this mechanism.)  The macros test
 for these \emph{exact} strings, so check your typing if you don't see
 the brackets.  Assuming the strings are correct,
 \textsf{biblatex-chicago} will also automatically do the right thing
-in the short note form.  (See the \textsf{author} docs just above.
-Also \emph{Manual} 17.33--34; cook:sotweed, horsley:prosodies.)
+in citations.  (See the \textsf{author} docs just above.  Also
+\emph{Manual} 15.33; cook:sotweed, horsley:prosodies.)
 
 %\enlargethispage{-\baselineskip}
 
@@ -5396,8 +6070,8 @@ Also \emph{Manual} 17.33--34; cook:sotweed, horsley:prosodies.)
 \textsf{biblatex}, a \textsf{bookauthor} is the author of a
 \textsf{booktitle}, so that, for example, if one chapter in a book has
 different authorship from the book as a whole, you can include that
-fact in a reference (17.75; will:cohere).  Keep in mind, however, that
-the entry type for introductions, forewords and afterwords
+fact in a reference (will:cohere).  Keep in mind, however, that the
+entry type for introductions, forewords and afterwords
 (\textsf{suppbook}) uses \textsf{bookauthor} as the author of
 \textsf{title} (polakow:afterw, prose:intro).
 
@@ -5423,12 +6097,12 @@ specification, which may be confusing if they don't produce the
 strings you expect.  Second, remember that \textsf{bookpagination}
 applies only to the \textsf{pages} field --- if you need to format a
 citation's \textsf{postnote} field, then you must use
-\textsf{pagination}, which see (15.45--46, 17.128--138).
+\textsf{pagination}, which see (10.43--44, 14.154--163).
 
 \mybigspace The \mymarginpar{\textbf{booksubtitle}} subtitle for a
 \textsf{booktitle}.  See the next entry for further information.
 
-\mybigspace In \mymarginpar{\textbf{booktitle}} the
+\mybigspace In \colmarginpar{\textbf{booktitle}} the
 \textsf{bookinbook}, \textsf{inbook}, \textsf{incollection},
 \textsf{inproceedings}, and \textsf{letter} entry types, the
 \textsf{booktitle} field holds the title of the larger volume in which
@@ -5441,8 +6115,8 @@ find a \textsf{booktitle} in other sorts of entries (e.g.,
 \textsf{book} or \textsf{collection}), but there it will almost
 invariably be providing information for the \textsc{Bib}\TeX\
 cross-referencing apparatus (prairie:state), which I discuss below
-(\textbf{crossref}).  The \textsf{booktitle} takes sentence-style
-capitalization in author-date.
+(\textbf{crossref}).  The \textsf{booktitle} no longer takes
+sentence-style capitalization in author-date.
 
 %\enlargethispage{\baselineskip}
 
@@ -5491,7 +6165,7 @@ field to prevent it inheriting the unwanted subtitle from
 prairie:state.
 
 \mylittlespace Turning now more narrowly to \textsf{biblatex-chicago},
-the \emph{Manual} (17.70) specifies that if you cite several
+the \emph{Manual} (15.37) specifies that if you cite several
 contributions to the same collection, all (including the collection
 itself) may be listed separately in the list of references, which the
 package does automatically, using the default inclusion threshold of 2
@@ -5511,18 +6185,17 @@ references.  If you wish to disable this, then simply don't use a
 %\enlargethispage{\baselineskip}
 
 \mylittlespace A published collection of letters requires a somewhat
-different treatment (17.77--78).  If you cite more than one letter
-from the same collection, then the \emph{Manual} specifies that only
-the collection itself --- probably in a \textsf{book} entry --- should
-appear in the list of references.  In the author-date style, it
-discourages individual letters from appearing in that list at all,
-even if only one is cited from a collection.  If you have special
-reason to do so, however, you can still present individual published
-letters there, and they too can use the system of shortened references
-just outlined, even though the \emph{Manual} doesn't explicitly
-require it.  As with \textsf{incollection} and \textsf{inproceedings},
-mere use of a \textsf{crossref} or \textsf{xref} field will activate
-this mechanism, while avoidance of said fields will disable it.  (See
+different treatment (15.40).  In the author-date style, the
+\emph{Manual} discourages individual letters from appearing in the
+list of references at all, preferring that the \enquote{dates of
+  individual correspondence should be woven into the text.}  If you
+have special reason to do so, however, you can still present
+individual published letters there (using the \textsf{letter} entry
+type), and they too can use the system of shortened references just
+outlined, even though the \emph{Manual} doesn't explicitly require it.
+As with \textsf{incollection} and \textsf{inproceedings}, mere use of
+a \textsf{crossref} or \textsf{xref} field will activate this
+mechanism, while avoidance of said fields will disable it.  (See
 white:ross:memo, white:russ, and white:total, for examples of the
 \textsf{xref} field in action in this way, and please note that the
 second of these entries is entirely fictitious, provided merely for
@@ -5542,30 +6215,33 @@ the key fields for the author-date style, and one which, as a general
 rule, every .bib entry designed for this system ought to contain.  So
 important is it, that \textsf{biblatex-chicago-authordate} will, in
 most entry types, supply a missing \cmd{bibstring\{nodate\}} if there
-is no date otherwise provided; citations will look like (Author n.d.),
-and entries in the list of references will begin: Author, Firstname.\
-n.d.  This seems simple enough, but there are a surprising number of
-complications which require attention.
+is no date otherwise provided (15.41); citations will look like
+(Author n.d.), and entries in the list of references will begin:
+Author, Firstname.\ n.d.  This seems simple enough, but there are a
+surprising number of complications which require attention.
 
 \mylittlespace First, with \textsf{Biber}, an absent \textsf{date}
 will automatically provoke it into searching for other sorts of dates
 in the entry, in the order \textsf{date, eventdate, origdate,
-  urldate}.  Only when it finds no year at all will it fall back on
-\cmd{bibstring\{nodate\}}.  You can eliminate some of these dates from
-the running, or change the search order, using the
-\cmd{DeclareLabelyear} command in your preamble, but please be aware
-that I have hard-coded this order into the author-date style in order
-to cope with some tricky corners of the specification.  If you reorder
-these dates, and your references enter these tricky corners, the
-results might be surprising.  (Cf.\ section~4.5.2 in
-\textsf{biblatex.pdf} for the \cmd{DeclareLabelyear} command.)
-Second, the entry types in which this automatic provision is turned
-off are \textsf{inreference}, \textsf{misc}, and \textsf{reference},
-none of which may be expected in the standard case to have a date
-provided.  In all other entry types \enquote{\texttt{n.d.}}\ will
-appear if no date is provided, though you can turn this off throughout
-the document in all entry types with the option \texttt{nodates=false}
-when loading \textsf{biblatex-chicago} in your preamble.  (See
+  urldate}.  (In \textsf{music} and \textsf{video} entries, the
+default order has been changed, in the 16th edition, to
+\textsf{eventdate, origdate, date, urldate}.)  Only when it finds no
+year at all will it fall back on \cmd{bibstring\{nodate\}}.  You can
+eliminate some of these dates from the running, or change the search
+order, using the \cmd{DeclareLabelyear} command in your preamble, but
+please be aware that I have hard-coded this order into the author-date
+style in order to cope with some tricky corners of the specification.
+If you reorder these dates, and your references enter these tricky
+corners, the results might be surprising.  (Cf.\ section~4.5.2 in
+\textsf{biblatex.pdf} for the \cmd{DeclareLabelyear} command, and
+\texttt{avdate} in section~\ref{sec:authpreset}, below.)  Second, the
+entry types in which this automatic provision is turned off are
+\textsf{inreference}, \textsf{misc}, and \textsf{reference}, none of
+which may be expected in the standard case to have a date provided.
+In all other entry types \enquote{\texttt{n.d.}}\ will appear if no
+date is provided, though you can turn this off throughout the document
+in all entry types with the option \texttt{nodates=false} when loading
+\textsf{biblatex-chicago} in your preamble.  (See
 section~\ref{sec:authpreset}, below.)  Third, if you wish to provide
 the \enquote{\texttt{n.d.}}\ yourself in the \textsf{year} field,
 please instead put \cmd{bibstring\{nodate\}} there, as otherwise the
@@ -5585,100 +6261,132 @@ instead.  If you want a more compressed year range, then you'll want
 to use the \textsf{year} field.
 
 \mylittlespace Fifth, for most entry types, only a year is really
-necessary, and in all types only the year --- or year range --- will
-be printed in text citations and at the head of entries in the list of
-references.  More specific \textsf{date} fields are often present,
-however, in \textsf{article}, \textsf{misc}, \textsf{online},
-\textsf{patent}, and \textsf{unpublished} entries, for all of which
-any day or month provided will be printed later in the reference list
-entry.  The \emph{Manual} is a little inconsistent when presenting the
-names of months in the author-date style, but currently
-\textsf{biblatex-chicago-authordate} uses abbreviated forms, which you
-can change by setting the option \texttt{dateabbrev=false} in your
-document preamble.  (Cf.\ assocpress:gun, barcott:review, batson,
-creel:house, nass:address, petroff:impurity, powell:email.)
-
-\mylittlespace Sixth, the \emph{Manual} (17.125--7) provides a number
-of options for when a particular entry --- a reprinted edition, say
---- has more than one date, and \textsf{biblatex-chicago-authordate}
-allows you to choose among all of them.  The user interface is a
-little more complicated than I had hoped, but I shall attempt to
-explain it here as clearly as I can.  If a reprinted book, say, has
-both a \textsf{date} of publication for the reprint edition and an
+necessary, and in most situations only the year --- or year range ---
+will be printed in text citations and at the head of entries in the
+list of references.  More specific \textsf{date} fields are often
+present, however, in \textsf{article}, \textsf{misc}, \textsf{music},
+\textsf{online}, \textsf{patent}, \textsf{unpublished}, and
+\textsf{video} entries, for all of which any day or month provided
+will be printed later in the reference list entry.  If you follow the
+recommendations of the 16th edition of the \emph{Manual} and present
+newspaper and magazine articles \enquote{entirely within the text}
+(15.47), then the citations need to contain the complete \textsf{date}
+along with the \textsf{journaltitle}.  Placing
+\mycolor{\texttt{cmsdate=full}} (and \texttt{skipbib}) in the
+\textsf{options} field of an \textsf{article} or a \textsf{review}
+entry, alongside a possible \texttt{useauthor=false}, should allow you
+to achieve this.  While we're on this subject, the \emph{Manual} is
+flexible (in both specifications) on abbreviating the names of months
+(14.180).  By default, \textsf{biblatex-chicago-authordate} uses the
+full names, which you can change by setting the option
+\texttt{dateabbrev=true} in your document preamble.  (Cf.\
+assocpress:gun, barcott:review, batson, creel:house, friends:leia,
+holiday:fool, nass:address, petroff:\-impurity, powell:email.)
+
+\mylittlespace Sixth, the 16th edition of the \emph{Manual} (15.38)
+has simplified the options for when a particular entry --- a reprinted
+edition, say --- has more than one date, and
+\textsf{biblatex-chicago-authordate} allows you to tailor the
+presentation on an entry-by-entry basis.  (\textsf{Music} and
+\textsf{video} entries have their own rules, and their own version of
+\cmd{DeclareLabelyear}, so please see their documentation above in
+section~\ref{sec:types:authdate} for the details of how multiple dates
+will be treated in such entries.)  The user interface is a little more
+streamlined than in previous releases, and I shall attempt to explain
+it here as clearly as I can.  If a reprinted book, say, has both a
+\textsf{date} of publication for the reprint edition and an
 \textsf{origdate} for the original edition, then by default
 \textsf{biblatex-chicago-authordate} will use the \textsf{date} in
 citations and at the head of the entry in the reference list.  If you
 inform \textsf{biblatex-chicago} that the book is a reprint by putting
 the string \texttt{reprint} in the \textsf{pubstate} field, then a
-parenthetical notice will be printed at the end of the entry saying
-\enquote{(Orig.\ pub.\ 1898.)}  With no \textsf{pubstate} field (and
-no \texttt{cmsdate} option), the algorithms will ignore the
+notice will be printed at the end of the entry saying \enquote{First
+  published 1898.}  With no \textsf{pubstate} field (and no
+\texttt{cmsdate} option), the algorithms will ignore the
 \textsf{origdate}.
 
 \mylittlespace If, for any reason, you wish the \textsf{origdate} to
 appear at the head of the entry, then you need to use the
-\texttt{cmsdate} toggle in the \textsf{options} field.  This has 4
-possible states:
+\texttt{cmsdate} toggle in the \textsf{options} field.  This has 3
+possible states relevant to this context, though there is a fourth
+state (\mycolor{\texttt{full}}) which I've discussed two paragraphs
+up:
 
 \begin{enumerate}
-\item \texttt{cmsdate=on} prints the \textsf{origdate} at the head of
-  the entry in the list of references and in citations: (Author 1898).
-\item \texttt{cmsdate=new} prints both the \textsf{origdate} and the
-  \textsf{date}, using the \emph{Manual's}\ \enquote{new} format:
-  (Author 1898/1952).
-\item \texttt{cmsdate=old} prints both the \textsf{origdate} and the
-  \textsf{date}, using the \emph{Manual's}\ \enquote{old} format:
-  (Author [1898] 1952).
+\item \mycolor{\texttt{cmsdate=both}} prints both the
+  \textsf{origdate} and the \textsf{date}, using the \emph{Manual's}\
+  standard format: (Author [1898] 1952) in parenthetical citations,
+  Author (1898) 1952 outside parentheses, e.g., in the reference list.
 \item \texttt{cmsdate=off} is the default, discussed above:
   (Author 1952).
+\item \mycolor{\texttt{cmsdate=on}} prints the \textsf{origdate} at
+  the head of the entry in the list of references and in citations:
+  (Author 1898).  \textbf{NB: The \emph{Manual} no longer includes
+    this among the acceptable options.}  If you want to present the
+  \textsf{origdate} at the head of an entry, then generally speaking
+  you should use \texttt{cmsdate=both}.  I have retained this option
+  for corner cases where it might be useful.  The 15th-edition options
+  \texttt{new} and \texttt{old} now work like \texttt{both}.
 \end{enumerate}
 
-In the first three cases, if you put the string \texttt{reprint} in
-the \textsf{pubstate} field, then the publication data in the list of
-references will include a notice, formatted according to the
-specifications, that the modern, cited edition is a reprint.  In the
-first case, since the \textsf{date} hasn't yet been printed, this
+In the first and third cases, if you put the string \texttt{reprint}
+in the \textsf{pubstate} field, then the publication data in the list
+of references will include a notice, formatted according to the
+specifications, that the modern edition is a reprint.  In the third
+case, since the \textsf{date} hasn't yet been printed, this
 publication data will also include the date of the modern reprint.
 
 \mylittlespace Let us imagine, however, that your list of references
 contains another book by the same author, also a reprint edition:
-(Author 1896/1974).  How will these two works be ordered in the list
+(Author [1896] 1974).  How will these two works be ordered in the list
 of references?  By whatever appears in the \textsf{date} field, which
 appears first in the default definition of \cmd{DeclareLabelyear}, and
 which in this case will be wrong, because the entries should always be
 ordered by the \emph{first} date to appear there, in this case the
 contents of \textsf{origdate}.  In this example, the solution can be
 as simple as a \textsf{sortyear} field set to something earlier than
-the date of the other work, e.g., 1951.
-
-\mylittlespace And if the original publication dates of the two works
-are the same?  Just as when it is ordering entries, \textsf{biblatex}
-will always first process the contents of the \textsf{date} field when
-it is deciding whether to add the alphabetical suffix (\texttt{a,b,c}
-etc.)  to the year to distinguish different works by the same author
-published in the same year.  You can't even put the suffix on yourself
-because the \textsf{origdate} field only accepts numerical data.
-Citations of the two works should read, e.g., (Author 1898a) and
-(Author 1898b), but will in fact read, ambiguously, (Author 1898) and
-(Author 1898).  Here we are forced to resort to an unusual expedient,
-which amounts to switching the two date fields, placing the earlier
-date in \textsf{date} and the later one in \textsf{origdate}.
-\textsf{Biblatex-chicago-authordate} tests for this condition using a
-simple arithmetical comparison between the two years, then printing
-the two dates according to the state of the \texttt{cmsdate} toggle.
-The four states of this toggle are the same as before, but there are
-only three possible outcomes, as follows:
+the date of the other work, e.g., \texttt{1951}.
+
+\mylittlespace And if the reprint dates of the two works are the same?
+Just as when it is ordering entries, \textsf{biblatex} will always
+first process the contents of the \textsf{date} field when it is
+deciding whether to add the alphabetical suffix (\texttt{a,b,c} etc.)\
+to the year to distinguish different works by the same author
+published in the same year.  Our hypothetical examples would look like
+this: ([1896] 1974a) and ([1898] 1974b), with the suffixes
+unnecessary, strictly-speaking, either for ordering or for
+disambiguating the entries.  If the original publication dates are the
+same, and the reprint dates different, you may prefer citations of the
+two works to read, e.g., (Author [1898a] 1952) and (Author [1898b]
+1974), when they in fact read (Author [1898] 1952) and (Author [1898]
+1974).  These latter forms aren't ambiguous, and even if the reprints
+themselves appeared in the same year then the alphabetical suffix
+would appear attached to the \textsf{date}, again avoiding ambiguity.
+The \emph{Manual} doesn't give clear instructions for how to cope with
+these situations, but \textsf{biblatex-chicago-authordate} provides
+help.  You can't manually put the alphabetical suffix on an
+\textsf{origdate} yourself because that field only accepts numerical
+data.  Indeed, we are forced to resort to an unusual expedient, which
+amounts to switching the two date fields, placing the earlier date in
+\textsf{date} and the later one in \textsf{origdate}.  The style tests
+for this condition using a simple arithmetical comparison between the
+two years, then prints the two dates according to the state of the
+\texttt{cmsdate} toggle.  The three relevant states of this toggle are
+the same as before, but there are only two possible outcomes, as
+follows:
 
 \begin{enumerate}
-\item \texttt{cmsdate=off} (the default) and \texttt{cmsdate=on}
-  \emph{both} print the \textsf{date} at the head of the entry in the
-  list of references and in citations: (Author 1898a), (Author 1898b).
-\item \texttt{cmsdate=new} prints both the \textsf{date} and the
-  \textsf{origdate}, using the \emph{Manual's}\ \enquote{new} format:
-  (Author 1898a/1952), (Author 1898b/1974).
-\item \texttt{cmsdate=old} prints both the \textsf{date} and the
-  \textsf{origdate}, using the \emph{Manual's}\ \enquote{old} format:
-  (Author [1898a] 1952), (Author [1898b] 1974).
+\item \texttt{cmsdate=off} (the default) and
+  \mycolor{\texttt{cmsdate=on}} \emph{both} print the \textsf{date} at
+  the head of the entry in the list of references and in citations:
+  (Author 1898a), (Author 1898b).  As noted above, \textbf{this style
+    is no longer recommended by the 16th edition of the
+    \emph{Manual}}.
+\item \mycolor{\texttt{cmsdate=both}} prints both the \textsf{date}
+  and the \textsf{origdate}, using the \emph{Manual's}\ preferred
+  format: (Author [1898a] 1952), (Author [1898b] 1974).  The
+  15th-edition options \texttt{old} and \texttt{new} are now synonyms
+  for this.
 \end{enumerate}
 
 If, for some reason, the automatic switching of the dates cannot be
@@ -5688,15 +6396,10 @@ white:russ), or perhaps in a reprint edition that hasn't yet appeared
 in print (preventing the comparison between a year and the word
 \enquote{forthcoming}), then you can use the per-entry option
 \texttt{switchdates} in the \textsf{options} field to achieve the
-required effects.  It may also be worth remarking that the
-instructions in the \emph{Manual} aren't entirely clear on the subject
-of the alphabetical affix when both dates are used in a citation or at
-the head of an entry.  It's possible that the differentiation between
-(Author 1898/1952) and (Author 1898/1974) is good enough without
-affixing anything to the first year, but then in this situation you
-would have to be using either \texttt{cmsdate=new} or
-\texttt{cmsdate=old}, so the switching functionality at least allows
-maximum flexibility.
+required effects.  It's difficult to imagine these date-switching
+options often being required, but their presence at least should allow
+maximum flexibility in reference lists that contain a lot of
+\textsf{origdates}.
 
 \mylittlespace Finally, in the \textsf{misc} entry type this field can
 help to distinguish between two classes of archival material, letters
@@ -5715,7 +6418,7 @@ a look through \textsf{dates-test.bib} to see how all these
 complications will affect the construction of your .bib database,
 especially at aristotle:metaphy:gr, creel:house, emerson:nature,
 james:ambassadors, maitland:canon, maitland:equity, schweit\-zer:bach,
-spock:in\-terview, white:ross:memo, and white:russ.  Cf.\ also
+spock:in\-terview, white:ross:me\-mo, and white:russ.  Cf.\ also
 \textsf{origdate} and \textsf{year}, below, and the \texttt{cmsdate},
 \texttt{nodates}, and \texttt{switchdates} options in
 sections~\ref{sec:preset:authdate} and \ref{sec:authentryopts}.
@@ -5724,11 +6427,12 @@ sections~\ref{sec:preset:authdate} and \ref{sec:authentryopts}.
 \textsf{biblatex} 0.9, is obsolete, and will be ignored if you use it
 in your .bib files.  Use \textsf{date} instead.
 
-\mybigspace Standard \mymarginpar{\textbf{doi}} \textsf{biblatex}
-field.  The Digital Object Identifier of the work, which the
-\emph{Manual} suggests you can use \enquote{in place of page numbers
-  or other locators} (17.181; friedman:learn\-ing).  Cf.\
-\textsf{url}.
+\mybigspace Standard \colmarginpar{\textbf{doi}} \textsf{biblatex}
+field, providing the Digital Object Identifier of the work.  The 16th
+edition of the \emph{Manual} specifies that, given their relative
+permanence compared to URLs, \enquote{authors should include DOIs
+  rather than URLs for sources that make them readily available}
+(14.6; cf.\ 15.9).  (14.184; friedman:learn\-ing).  Cf.\ \textsf{url}.
 
 %\enlargethispage{-\baselineskip}
 
@@ -5806,18 +6510,17 @@ proceeding in order through \textsf{editor}, \textsf{translator}, and
 entries with a \texttt{magazine} \textsf{entrysubtype}, a missing
 author immediately prompts the use of \textsf{journaltitle} at the
 head of an entry.  See above under \textsf{article} for details.)  The
-\textsf{editortype} field provides even greater flexibility, giving
-you the ability to put a compiler at the head of an entry without
-using \textsf{namec}, freeing you from the need to use a
-\textsf{sortkey} and a \textsf{shortauthor}.  You can do this even
-though an author is named (eliot:pound shows this mechanism in action
-for a standard editor, rather than a compiler).  Two things are
-necessary for this to happen.  First, in the \textsf{options} field
-you need to set \texttt{useauthor=false} (if there is an
-\textsf{author)}, then you need to put the name you wish to see at the
-head of your entry into the \textsf{editor} or the \textsf{namea}
-field.  If the \enquote{editor} is in fact a compiler, then you need
-to put \texttt{compiler} into the \textsf{editortype} field, and
+\textsf{editortype} field provides even greater flexibility, allowing
+you to choose from a variety of editorial roles while only using the
+\textsf{editor} field.  You can do this even though an author is named
+(eliot:pound shows this mechanism in action for a standard editor,
+rather than for some other role).  Two things are necessary for this
+to happen.  First, in the \textsf{options} field you need to set
+\texttt{useauthor=false} (if there is an \textsf{author}), then you
+need to put the name you wish to see at the head of your entry into
+the \textsf{editor} or the \textsf{namea} field.  If the
+\enquote{editor} is in fact, e.g., a compiler, then you need to put
+\texttt{compiler} into the \textsf{editortype} field, and
 \textsf{biblatex} will print the correct string after the name in the
 list of references.
 
@@ -5828,17 +6531,18 @@ which gives you the ability to identify the editor specifically of a
 \textsf{booktitle}, the \textsf{editortype} mechanism checks first to
 see whether a \textsf{namea} is defined.  If it is, that name will be
 used at the head of the entry, if it isn't it will go ahead and look
-for an \textsf{editor}.  When the \textsf{editor} field is used,
-\textsf{biblatex}'s sorting algorithms will work properly, and also
-its \textsf{labelname} mechanism, meaning that a shortened form of the
-\textsf{editor} will be used in citations.  If, however, the
-\textsf{namea} field provides the name, then your .bib entry will need
-to have a \textsf{sortkey} field to aid in alphabetizing, and it will
-also need a \textsf{shorteditor} defined to help with in-text
-citations, not a \textsf{shortauthor}, ruled out because
-\texttt{useauthor=false}.
+for an \textsf{editor}.  \textsf{Biblatex}'s sorting algorithms, and
+also its \textsf{labelname} mechanism, should both work properly no
+matter sort of name you provide, thanks to \textsf{Biber} and the
+(default) Chicago-specific definitions of \cmd{DeclareLabelname} and
+\cmd{DeclareSortingScheme}.  (Cf.\ section~\ref{sec:authformopts},
+below).  If, however, the \textsf{namea} field provides the name, and
+that name isn't automatically shortened properly by \textsf{biblatex},
+then your .bib entry will need to have a \textsf{shorteditor} defined
+to help with in-text citations, not a \textsf{shortauthor}, possibly
+ruled out because \texttt{useauthor=false}.
 
-\mylittlespace In \textsf{biblatex} 0.9 Lehman has reworked the string
+\mylittlespace In \textsf{biblatex} 0.9 Lehman reworked the string
 concatenation mechanism, for reasons he outlines in his RELEASE file,
 and I have followed his lead.  In short, if you define the
 \textsf{editortype} field, then concatenation is turned off, even if
@@ -5848,8 +6552,8 @@ usual mechanisms remain in place, that is, if the \textsf{editor}
 exactly matches a \textsf{translator} and/or a \textsf{namec}, or
 alternatively if \textsf{namea} exactly matches a \textsf{nameb}
 and/or a \textsf{namec}, then \textsf{biblatex} will print the
-appropriate strings.  The \emph{Manual} specifically (17.41)
-recommends not using these identifying strings in citations, and
+appropriate strings.  The \emph{Manual} specifically (15.7) recommends
+not using these identifying strings in citations, and
 \textsf{biblatex-chicago-authordate} follows that recommendation.  If
 you nevertheless need to provide such a string, you'll have to do it
 manually in the \textsf{shorteditor} field, or perhaps, in a different
@@ -5872,7 +6576,7 @@ styles do, and they have now found a use particularly in
 \textsf{music} and \textsf{video} entries.  Cf.\
 bernstein:shostakovich, handel:messiah.
 
-\enlargethispage{\baselineskip}
+%\enlargethispage{\baselineskip}
 
 \mybigspace Standard \mymarginpar{\textbf{eid}} \textsf{biblatex}
 field, providing a string or number some journals use uniquely to
@@ -5882,7 +6586,7 @@ identify a particular article.  Only applicable to the
 
 \mybigspace Standard \mymarginpar{\textbf{entrysubtype}} and very
 powerful \textsf{biblatex} field, left undefined by the standard
-styles.  In \textsf{biblatex-chicago-authordate} it has five very
+styles.  In \textsf{biblatex-chicago-authordate} it has four very
 specific uses, the first three of which I have designed in order to
 maintain, as much as possible, backward compatibility with the
 standard styles.  First, in \textsf{article} and \textsf{periodical}
@@ -5919,7 +6623,7 @@ Also, and the specification isn't entirely clear about this, works
 from the Renaissance and later, even if cited by the traditional
 divisions, seem to have citations formatted normally, and therefore
 don't need an \textsf{entrysubtype} field.  (See \emph{Manual}
-17.246--262; aristotle:metaphy:gr, plato:republic:gr;
+14.256--268; aristotle:metaphy:gr, plato:republic:gr;
 euripides:orestes is an example of a translation cited by page number
 in a modern edition.)
 
@@ -5936,24 +6640,60 @@ work.
 \mylittlespace Fourth, the field can be defined in the
 \textsf{artwork} entry type in order to refer to a work from antiquity
 whose title you do not wish to be italicized.  Please see the
-documentation of \textsf{artwork} above for the details.  Fifth, and
-finally, you can use the exact string \texttt{tv} to identify
-televisual material as a subset of the \textsf{video} entry type.
-This will only affect the entry in the list of references if you use
-\texttt{reprint} in the \textsf{pubstate} field in order to print
-the date a program was originally shown in parentheses at the end of
-such an entry.  (It's a niche usage but it at least maintains
-consistency for the \texttt{reprint} mechanism.  Cf.\
-\textsf{pubstate}, below.)
+documentation of \textsf{artwork} above for the details.  (In previous
+releases, there was a special \texttt{tv} \textsf{entrysubtype} for
+\textsf{video} entries.  This is no longer necessary.  Please see the
+documentation of \textsf{video} in section~\ref{sec:types:authdate}
+above, and that of \textsf{userd} below.)
+
+\mybigspace Kazuo
+\colmarginpar{\textbf{eprint}\\\textbf{eprintclass}\\\textbf{eprinttype}}
+Teramoto suggested adding \textsf{biblatex's} excellent
+\textsf{eprint} handling to \textsf{biblatex-chicago}, and he sent me
+a patch implementing it.  With minor alterations, I have applied it to
+this release, so these three fields now work more or less as they do
+in standard \textsf{biblatex}.  They may prove helpful in providing
+more abbreviated references to online content than conventional URLs,
+though I can find no specific reference to them in the \emph{Manual}.
 
 \mybigspace This \colmarginpar{\textbf{eventdate}} is a standard
-\textsf{biblatex} field, added recently to the \textbf{music} entry
-type in case users need it to identify a particular recording session
-or concert.  See the documentation of that type above.  In the default
-configuration of \cmd{DeclareLabelyear}, an entry missing a
-\textsf{date} will use the \textsf{eventdate} to find a year for the
-citation and list of references, though the rest of the field would in
-such a case be ignored in any entry other than \textsf{music}.
+\textsf{biblatex} field.  In the 15th edition it was barely used, but
+in order to comply with changes in the 16th edition of the
+\emph{Manual} it will now play a significant role in \textsf{music},
+\textsf{review}, and \textsf{video} entries.  In \textsf{music}
+entries, it identifies the recording or performance date of a
+particular song (rather than of a whole disc, for which you would use
+\textsf{origdate}), whereas in \textsf{video} entries it identifies
+either the original broadcast date of a particular episode of a TV
+series or the date of a filmed musical performance.  In both these
+cases \textsf{biblatex-chicago} will automatically prepend a bibstring
+--- \texttt{recorded} and \texttt{aired}, respectively --- to the
+date, but you can change this string using the new \textsf{userd}
+field, something you'll definitely want to do for filmed musical
+performances (friends:leia, handel:messiah, holiday:fool).
+
+\mylittlespace In the default configuration of \cmd{DeclareLabelyear},
+dates for citations and for the head of reference list entries are
+searched for in the order \textsf{date, eventdate, origdate, urldate}.
+This suits the Chicago author-date style very well, except for
+\textsf{music} and \textsf{video} entries, where the general rule is
+to emphasize the earliest date, whether that be, for example, the
+recording date or original release date (15.53).  For these two entry
+types, then, \cmd{DeclareLabelyear} uses the order \textsf{eventdate,
+  origdate, date, urldate}.
+
+\mylittlespace For \textsf{review} entries I use the same, custom
+definition of \cmd{DeclareLabelyear}, but for somewhat different
+reasons.  In general, such an entry will only have a \textsf{date},
+but an \textsf{eventdate} can be used to identify a particular comment
+within an online thread.  The year of the comment will therefore
+appear at the head of the entry and in citations, while the remainder
+of the \textsf{eventdate} will appear just after the \textsf{title},
+and the \textsf{date} after the \textsf{journaltitle}.  There isn't a
+particular string associated with the \textsf{eventdate}, but you can
+further specify a comment by placing a time\-stamp in parentheses in
+the \textsf{nameaddon} field, in case the date alone isn't enough
+(14.246; ac:comment, ellis:blog).
 
 \mybigspace As \mymarginpar{\textbf{foreword}} with the
 \textsf{afterword} field above, \textsf{foreword} will in general
@@ -5976,8 +6716,7 @@ parentheses, just after the author(s).
 \textsf{biblatex} field, mainly applicable in the \textsf{booklet}
 entry type, where it replaces the \textsf{publisher}.  I have also
 retained it in the \textsf{misc} and \textsf{unpublished} entry types,
-for historical reasons, and either it or \textsf{pubstate} can be used
-in \textsf{music} entries to clarify publication details.
+for historical reasons.
 
 \mybigspace Standard \mymarginpar{\textbf{institution}}
 \textsf{biblatex} field.  In the \textsf{thesis} entry type, it will
@@ -6034,11 +6773,12 @@ contextual capitalization.
 \textsf{biblatex} field, replacing the standard \textsc{Bib}\TeX\
 field \textsf{journal}, which, however, still works as an alias.  It
 contains the name of any sort of periodical publication, and is found
-in the \textsf{article} entry type.  In the case where a piece in an
-\textsf{article} (\textsf{entrysubtype} \texttt{magazine}) doesn't
-have an author, \textsf{biblatex-chicago} provides for this field to
-be used as the author.  See above (section~\ref{sec:fields:authdate})
-under \textbf{article} for details.  The lakeforester:pushcarts and
+in the \textsf{article} and \textsf{review} entry types.  In the case
+where a piece in an \textsf{article} or \textsf{review}
+(\textsf{entrysubtype} \texttt{magazine}) doesn't have an author,
+\textsf{biblatex-chicago} provides for this field to be used as the
+author.  See above (section~\ref{sec:fields:authdate}) under
+\textbf{article} for details.  The lakeforester:pushcarts and
 nyt:trevorobit entries in \textsf{dates-test.bib} will give you some
 idea of how this works.
 
@@ -6053,14 +6793,14 @@ references, though the toggle \texttt{skipbib} in the \textsf{options}
 field works just as well, and perhaps more simply.  There are a few
 reasons for so excluding entries.  When citing both an original text
 and its translation (see \textbf{userf}, below), the \emph{Manual}
-(17.66) suggests including the original at the end of the
+(14.109) suggests including the original at the end of the
 translation's reference list entry, a procedure which requires that
 the original not also be printed as a separate entry
 (furet:passing:eng, furet:passing:fr, aristotle:metaphy:trans,
 aristotle:metaphy:gr).  Well-known reference works (like the
 \emph{Encyclopaedia Britannica}, for example) and many sacred texts
 need only be presented in citations, and not in the list of references
-(17.238--239; ency:britannica, genesis, wikiped:bibtex; see
+(14.247--248; ency:britannica, genesis, wikiped:bibtex; see
 \textsf{inreference} and \textsf{misc}, above).
 
 \mybigspace A \mymarginpar{\textbf{language}} standard
@@ -6073,7 +6813,7 @@ however, when the \emph{Manual} does specify this data, and that is
 when the title of a work is given in translation, even though no
 translation of the work has been published, something that might
 happen when a title is in a language deemed to be unparseable by a
-majority of your expected readership (17.65--67, 17.166, 17.177;
+majority of your expected readership (14.108, 14.110, 14.194;
 chu:panda, pirumova, rozner:liberation).  In such a case, you should
 provide the language(s) involved using this field, connecting multiple
 languages using the keyword \texttt{and}.  (I have retained
@@ -6111,40 +6851,42 @@ appropriate string (\enquote{s.v.,} \emph{sub verbo}, pl.\
 \enquote{s.vv.}).  \textsf{Biblatex-chicago} will only print such a
 field in a \textsf{book} or an \textsf{inreference} entry, and you
 should look at the documentation of these entry types for further
-details.  (See \emph{Manual} 17.238--239; grove:sibelius, times:guide,
+details.  (See \emph{Manual} 14.247--248; grove:sibelius, times:guide,
 wikiped:bibtex.)
 
 \mybigspace This \mymarginpar{\textbf{location}} is
 \textsf{biblatex}'s version of the usual \textsc{Bib}\TeX\ field
 \textsf{address}, though the latter is accepted as an alias if that
 simplifies the modification of older .bib files.  According to the
-\emph{Manual} (17.99), a citation usually need only provide the first
+\emph{Manual} (14.135), a citation usually need only provide the first
 city listed on any title page, though a list of cities separated by
 the keyword \enquote{\texttt{and}} will be formatted appropriately.
 If the place of publication is unknown, you can use
-\cmd{autocap\{n\}.p.}\ instead (17.102), though in many or even most
-cases this isn't strictly necessary (17.32--34; virginia:plantation).
-For all cities, you should use the common English version of the name,
-if such exists (17.101).
+\cmd{autocap\{n\}.p.}\ instead (14.138).  For all cities, you should
+use the common English version of the name, if such exists (14.137).
 
 %\enlargethispage{\baselineskip}
 
-\mylittlespace One other use needs explanation here.  In
-\textsf{article} and \textsf{periodical} entries, there is usually no
-need for a \textsf{location} field, but \enquote{if a journal might be
-  confused with another with a similar title, or if it might not be
-  known to the users of a bibliography,} then this field can present
-the place or institution where it is published (17.174, 17.196;
-garrett, kimluu:diethyl, and lakeforester:pushcarts).
+\mylittlespace Two other uses need explanation here.  In
+\textsf{article}, \textsf{periodical}, and \textsf{review} entries,
+there is usually no need for a \textsf{location} field, but
+\enquote{if a journal might be confused with another with a similar
+  title, or if it might not be known to the users of a bibliography,}
+then this field can present the place or institution where it is
+published (14.191, 14.203; garrett, kimluu:diethyl, and
+lakeforester:pushcarts).  For blogs cited using \textsf{article}
+entries, this is a good place to identify the nature of the source ---
+i.e., the word \enquote{blog} --- letting the style automatically
+provide the parentheses (14.246; ellis:blog).
 
 \mybigspace The \mymarginpar{\textbf{mainsubtitle}} subtitle for a
 \textsf{maintitle} --- see next entry.
 
-\mybigspace The \mymarginpar{\textbf{maintitle}} main title for a
+\mybigspace The \colmarginpar{\textbf{maintitle}} main title for a
 multi-volume work, e.g., \enquote{Opera} or \enquote{Collected Works.}
-It takes sentence-style capitalization in author-date.  (See
+It no longer takes sentence-style capitalization in author-date.  (See
 donne:var, euripides:\-orestes, harley:cartography, lach:asia,
-pelikan:chris\-tian, and plato:republic:gr.)
+pelikan:chris\-tian, and plato:re\-public:gr.)
 
 \mybigspace An \mymarginpar{\textbf{maintitleaddon}} annex to the
 \textsf{maintitle}, for which see previous entry.  Such an annex would
@@ -6167,15 +6909,15 @@ the \textsf{editor} would be associated with one of these latter
 fields (donne:var).  You should present names in this field exactly as
 you would those in an \textsf{author} or \textsf{editor} field, and
 the package will concatenate this field with \textsf{nameb} if they
-are identical.  See under \textbf{editor} above for the full details.
-Cf.\ also \textsf{nameb}, \textsf{namec}, \textsf{translator}, and the
-macros \cmd{partedit}, \cmd{parttrans}, \cmd{parteditandtrans},
-\cmd{partcomp}, \cmd{parteditandcomp}, \cmd{parttransandcomp}, and
-\cmd{partedittransand\-comp}, for which see
-section~\ref{sec:formatting:authdate}.
-
-\mybigspace This \mymarginpar{\textbf{nameaddon}} field is provided by
-\textsf{biblatex}, though not used by the standard styles.  In
+are identical.  See under \textbf{editor} and \textbf{editortype}
+above for the full details.  Cf.\ also \textsf{nameb}, \textsf{namec},
+\textsf{translator}, and the macros \cmd{partedit}, \cmd{parttrans},
+\cmd{parteditandtrans}, \cmd{partcomp}, \cmd{parteditandcomp},
+\cmd{parttransandcomp}, and \cmd{partedittransand\-comp}, for which
+see section~\ref{sec:formatting:authdate}.
+
+\mybigspace This \colmarginpar{\textbf{nameaddon}} field is provided
+by \textsf{biblatex}, though not used by the standard styles.  In
 \textsf{biblatex-chicago}, it allows you to specify that an author's
 name is a pseudo\-nym, or to provide either the real name or the
 pseudonym itself, if the other is being provided in the
@@ -6187,10 +6929,20 @@ creasey:york:death, and le\-carre:quest); \cmd{bibstring\{pseudonym\}}
 does the work for you.  See under \textbf{author} above for the full
 details.
 
-\mylittlespace In the \textsf{customc} entry type, on the other hand,
-which is used to create alphabetized expansions of
-\textsf{shorthands}, the \textsf{nameaddon} field allows you to change
-the default string linking the two parts of the expansion.  The code
+\mylittlespace In \textsf{review} entries, I have removed the
+automatic provision of square brackets from the field, allowing it to
+be used in at least two ways.  First, if you provide your own square
+brackets, then it can have its standard function, as above.  Second,
+and new to the 16th edition of the \emph{Manual}, you can further
+specify comments to blogs and other online content using a timestamp
+(in parentheses) that supplements the \textsf{eventdate}, particularly
+when the latter is too coarse a specification to identify a comment
+unambiguously.  Cf.\ ac:comment.
+
+\mylittlespace In the \textsf{customc} entry type, finally, which is
+used to create alphabetized cross-references to other entries in the
+reference list, the \textsf{nameaddon} field allows you to change the
+default string linking the two parts of the cross-reference.  The code
 automatically tests for a known bibstring, which it will italicize.
 Otherwise, it prints the string as is.
 
@@ -6211,7 +6963,7 @@ with \textsf{namea} if they are identical.  See under the
 \cmd{parteditandcomp}, \cmd{parttransandcomp}, and
 \cmd{partedittransandcomp} in section~\ref{sec:formatting:authdate}.
 
-\mybigspace The \mymarginpar{\textbf{namec}} \emph{Manual} (17.41)
+\mybigspace The \mymarginpar{\textbf{namec}} \emph{Manual} (15.35)
 specifies that works without an author may be listed under an editor,
 translator, or compiler, assuming that one is available, and it also
 specifies the strings to be used with the name(s) of compiler(s).  All
@@ -6236,12 +6988,7 @@ please note that I've arranged the concatenation algorithms to include
 so in this particular circumstance you can, if needed, make
 \textsf{namec} analogous to these two latter, \textsf{title}-only
 fields.  (See above under \textbf{editortype} for details of how you
-may, in certain circumstances, use that field to identify a compiler.
-This method will be particularly useful if you don't need to
-concatenate the \textsf{namec} with any other role, because if you use
-the \textsf{editor} field \textsf{biblatex} will automatically attend
-to alphabetization and name-replacement in the list of references, and
-will also provide a name for citations.)
+can use that field to identify a compiler.)
 
 \mylittlespace It might conceivably be necessary at some point to
 identify the compiler(s) of a \textsf{title} separate from the
@@ -6261,11 +7008,12 @@ therefore to be concatenated.  In a change from the previous behavior,
 these algorithms also now test for \textsf{namea} or \textsf{nameb},
 which will be used instead of \textsf{editor} and \textsf{translator},
 respectively, giving the package the greatest likelihood of finding a
-name to place at the head of an entry.  Please remember, however, that
-if this name is supplied by any of the non-standard fields
-\textsf{name[a-c]}, then you will need to provide a \textsf{sortkey}
-to assist with alphabetization in the list of references, and a
-\textsf{shortauthor} for citations.
+name to place at the head of an entry.  \textsf{Biblatex}'s sorting
+algorithms, and also its \textsf{labelname} mechanism, should both
+work properly no matter sort of name you provide, thanks to
+\textsf{Biber} and the (default) Chicago-specific definitions of
+\cmd{DeclareLabelname} and \cmd{DeclareSortingScheme}.  (Cf.\
+section~\ref{sec:authformopts}, below).
 
 \mybigspace As \mymarginpar{\textbf{note}} in standard
 \textsf{biblatex}, this field allows you to provide bibliographic data
@@ -6274,41 +7022,39 @@ very like \textsf{addendum}, but the information provided here will be
 printed just before the publication data.  (See chaucer:alt,
 cook:sotweed, emerson:nature, and rodman:walk for examples of this
 usage in action.)  It also has a specialized use in the periodical
-types (\textsf{article} and \textsf{periodical}), where it holds
-supplemental information about a \textsf{journaltitle}, such as
-\enquote{special issue} (conley:fifthgrade, good:wholeissue).  In all
-uses, if your data begins with a word that would ordinarily only be
-capitalized at the beginning of a sentence, then simply ensure that
-that word is in lowercase, and \textsf{biblatex-chicago} will
+types (\textsf{article}, \textsf{periodical}, and \textsf{review}),
+where it holds supplemental information about a \textsf{journaltitle},
+such as \enquote{special issue} (conley:fifthgrade, good:wholeissue).
+In all uses, if your data begins with a word that would ordinarily
+only be capitalized at the beginning of a sentence, then simply ensure
+that that word is in lowercase, and \textsf{biblatex-chicago} will
 automatically do the right thing.  Cf.\ \textsf{addendum}.
 
 \mybigspace This \mymarginpar{\textbf{number}} is a standard
 \textsf{biblatex} field, containing the number of a
-\textsf{journaltitle} in an \textsf{article} entry, the number of a
-\textsf{title} in a \textsf{periodical} entry, or the volume/number of
-a book in a \textsf{series}.  Generally, in an \textsf{article} or
-\textsf{periodical} entry, this will be a plain cardinal number, but
-in such entries \textsf{biblatex-chicago} now does the right thing if
-you have a list or range of numbers (unsigned:ranke).  In any
-\textsf{book}-like entry it may well contain considerably more
-information, including even a reference to \enquote{2nd ser.,} for
-example, while the \textsf{series} field in such an entry will contain
-the name of the series, rather than a number.  This field is also the
-place for the patent number in a \textsf{patent} entry.  Cf.\
-\textsf{issue} and \textsf{series}.  (See \emph{Manual} 17.90--95 and
-boxer:china, palmatary:pottery, wauchope:ceramics; 17.163 and
-beattie:crime, conley:fifthgrade, friedman:learning, garrett, gibbard,
-hlatky:hrt, mcmillen:antebellum, rozner:liberation, warr:ellison.)
+\textsf{journaltitle} in an \textsf{article} or \textsf{review} entry,
+the number of a \textsf{title} in a \textsf{periodical} entry, or the
+volume/number of a book in a \textsf{series}.  Generally, in an
+\textsf{article}, \textsf{periodical}, or \textsf{review} entry, this
+will be a plain cardinal number, but in such entries
+\textsf{biblatex-chicago} now does the right thing if you have a list
+or range of numbers (unsigned:ranke).  In any \textsf{book}-like entry
+it may well contain considerably more information, including even a
+reference to \enquote{2nd ser.,} for example, while the
+\textsf{series} field in such an entry will contain the name of the
+series, rather than a number.  This field is also the place for the
+patent number in a \textsf{patent} entry.  Cf.\ \textsf{issue} and
+\textsf{series}.  (See \emph{Manual} 14.128--132 and boxer:china,
+palmatary:pottery, wauchope:ceramics; 14.180--181 and beattie:crime,
+conley:fifthgrade, friedman:learn\-ing, garrett, gibbard, hlatky:hrt,
+mcmillen:antebellum, rozner:liberation, warr:el\-lison.)
 
 \mylittlespace \textbf{NB}: This may be an opportune place to point
-out that the \emph{Manual} (17.129) prefers arabic to roman numerals
+out that the \emph{Manual} (14.154) prefers arabic to roman numerals
 in most circumstances (chapters, volumes, series numbers, etc.), even
 when such numbers might be roman in the work cited.  The obvious
 exception is page numbers, in which roman numerals indicate that the
 citation came from the front matter, and should therefore be retained.
-Another possible exception is in references to works \enquote{with
-  many and complex divisions,} in which \enquote{a mixture of roman
-  and arabic} may be \enquote{easier to disentangle.}
 
 \mybigspace A \mymarginpar{\textbf{options}} standard
 \textsf{biblatex} field, for setting certain options on a per-entry
@@ -6330,45 +7076,81 @@ organization sponsoring a conference in a \textsf{proceedings} or
 possibility, though the \emph{Manual} is silent on the matter.
 
 \mybigspace This \colmarginpar{\textbf{origdate}} is a standard
-\textsf{biblatex} field which replaced the obsolete \textsf{origyear},
-and which therefore allows more than one full date specification for
-those references which need to provide more than just one.  As with
-the analogous \textsf{date} field, you provide the date (or range of
-dates) in \textsc{iso}8601 format, i.e., \texttt{yyyy-mm-dd}.  In most
-entry types, you would use \textsf{origdate} to provide the date of
-first publication of a work, most usually needed only in the case of
-reprint editions, but also recommended by the \emph{Manual} for
-electronic editions of older works (17.123, 17.146--7;
-aristotle:metaphy:gr, emerson:nature, james:ambassadors,
-schweitzer:bach).  In both the \textsf{letter} and \textsf{misc} (with
-\textsf{entrysubtype)} entry types, the \textsf{origdate} identifies
-when a letter (or similar) was written.  In such \textsf{misc}
-entries, some \enquote{non-letter-like} materials (like interviews)
-need the \textsf{date} field for this purpose, while in
-\textsf{letter} entries the \textsf{date} applies to the publication
-of the whole collection.  If such a published collection were itself a
-reprint, judicious use of the \textsf{pubstate} field or perhaps
-improvisation in the \textsf{location} field might be able to rescue
-the situation.  (See white:ross:memo, white:russ, and white:total for
-how \textsf{letter} entries can work; creel:house shows the field in
-action in a \textsf{misc} entry, while spock:interview uses
-\textsf{date} instead.)
+\textsf{biblatex} field which allows more than one full date
+specification for those references which need to provide more than
+just one.  As with the analogous \textsf{date} field, you provide the
+date (or range of dates) in \textsc{iso}8601 format, i.e.,
+\texttt{yyyy-mm-dd}.  In most entry types, you would use
+\textsf{origdate} to provide the date of first publication of a work,
+most usually needed only in the case of reprint editions, but also
+recommended by the \emph{Manual} for electronic editions of older
+works (15.38, 14.119, 14.166, 14.169; aristotle:metaphy:gr,
+emerson:nature, james:ambassadors, schweitzer:bach).  In both the
+\textsf{letter} and \textsf{misc} (with \textsf{entrysubtype)} entry
+types, the \textsf{origdate} identifies when a letter (or similar) was
+written.  In such \textsf{misc} entries, some
+\enquote{non-letter-like} materials (like interviews) need the
+\textsf{date} field for this purpose, while in \textsf{letter} entries
+the \textsf{date} applies to the publication of the whole collection.
+If such a published collection were itself a reprint, judicious use of
+the \textsf{pubstate} field or perhaps improvisation in the
+\textsf{location} field might be able to rescue the situation.  (See
+white:ross:memo, white:russ, and white:total for how \textsf{letter}
+entries can work; creel:house shows the field in action in a
+\textsf{misc} entry, while spock:interview uses \textsf{date}
+instead.)
 
 \mylittlespace Because of the importance of date specifications in the
-author-date style, \textsf{biblatex-chicago-authordate} provides a
-series of options and automated behaviors to allow you to emphasize
-the \textsf{origdate} in citations and at the head of entries in the
-list of references.  In entries which have \emph{only} an
-\textsf{origdate} --- usually \textsf{misc} with an
-\textsf{entrysubtype} --- \textsf{Biber} and the default
-\cmd{DeclareLabelyear} configuration now make it possible to do
-without a \texttt{cmsdate} option, as the \textsf{origdate} will
-automatically appear where and as it should.  In entries with both
-dates you have a choice of which appears where.  In some cases it may
-even be necessary to reverse the two date fields, putting the earlier
-year in \textsf{date} and the later in \textsf{origdate}.  Please see
-above under \textbf{date} for all the details on how these options
-interact.
+author-date style, \textsf{biblatex-chicago-authordate} provides
+options and automated behaviors that allow you to emphasize the
+\textsf{origdate} in citations and at the head of entries in the list
+of references.  In entries which have \emph{only} an \textsf{origdate}
+--- usually \textsf{misc} with an \textsf{entrysubtype} ---
+\textsf{Biber} and the default \cmd{DeclareLabelyear} configuration
+now make it possible to do without a \texttt{cmsdate} option, as the
+\textsf{origdate} will automatically appear where and as it should.
+In \textsf{book}-like entries with both a \textsf{date} and an
+\textsf{origdate}, and this has \colmarginpar{New!} changed from the
+15th edition, the 16th edition of the \emph{Manual} recommends that
+you present, in citations and at the head of reference list entries,
+only the \textsf{date} or both dates together.  The latter is
+accomplished using the \texttt{cmsdate} entry option.  In some cases
+it may even be necessary to reverse the two date fields, putting the
+earlier year in \textsf{date} and the later in \textsf{origdate}.
+Please see above under \textbf{date} for all the details on how these
+options interact.
+
+\mylittlespace In the default configuration of \cmd{DeclareLabelyear},
+dates for citations and for the head of reference list entries are
+searched for in the order \textsf{date, eventdate, origdate, urldate}.
+This suits the Chicago author-date style very well, except for
+\textsf{music} and \textsf{video} entries, and, exceptionally, some
+\textsf{review} entries.  Here the general rule is to emphasize the
+earliest date.  For these three entry types, then,
+\cmd{DeclareLabelyear} uses the order \textsf{eventdate, origdate,
+  date, urldate}.  In \textsf{music} entries, you can use the
+\textsf{origdate} in two separate but related ways.  First, it can
+identify the recording date of an entire disc, rather than of one
+track on that disc, which would go in \textsf{eventdate}.  (Compare
+holiday:fool with nytrumpet:art.)  Second, the \textsf{origdate} can
+provide the original release date of an album.  For this to happen,
+you need to put the string \texttt{reprint} in the \textsf{pubstate}
+field, which is the standard mechanism across many other entry types
+for identifying a reprinted work.  (See floyd:atom.)  In
+\textsf{video} entries, the \textsf{origdate} is intended for the
+original release date of a film, whereas the \textsf{eventdate} would
+hold the original broadcast date of, e.g., an episode of a TV series.
+In both these two entry types, the style will, depending on the
+context, automatically prepend appropriate bibstrings to the
+\textsf{origdate}.  You can, assuming you've not activated the
+\textsf{pubstate} mechanism in a \textsf{music} entry, choose a
+different string using the new \mycolor{\textsf{userd}} field, but
+please be aware that if an entry also has an \textsf{eventdate}, then
+\textsf{userd} will apply to that, instead, and you'll be forced to
+accept the default string.  (Compare friends:leia with
+hitchcock:nbynw; 15.53, 14.279-280; cf.\ \cmd{DeclareLabelyear} below
+in section~\ref{sec:authformopts}, and \texttt{avdate} in
+section~\ref{sec:authpreset}.)
 
 \mylittlespace Because the \textsf{origdate} field only accepts
 numbers, some improvisation may be needed if you wish to include
@@ -6382,26 +7164,25 @@ numbers, some improvisation may be needed if you wish to include
 \mybigspace In \mymarginpar{\textbf{origlanguage}} keeping with the
 \emph{Manual}'s specifications, I have fairly thoroughly redefined
 \textsf{biblatex}'s facilities for treating translations.  The
-\textsf{origtitle} and \textsf{origlocation} fields aren't used, while
-the \textsf{language} and \textsf{origdate} fields have been
-press-ganged for other duties.  The \textsf{origlanguage} field, for
-its part, retains a dual role in presenting translations in a list of
-references.  The details of the \emph{Manual}'s suggested treatment
-when both a translation and an original are cited may be found below
-under \textbf{userf}.  Here, however, I simply note that the
-introductory string used to connect the translation's citation with
-the original's is \enquote{Originally published as,} which I suggest
-may well be inaccurate in a great many cases, as for instance when
-citing a work from classical antiquity, which will most certainly not
-\enquote{originally} have been published in the Loeb Classical
-Library.  Although not, strictly speaking, authorized by the
-\emph{Manual}, I have provided another way to introduce the original
-text, using the \textsf{origlanguage} field, which must be provided
-\emph{in the entry for the translation, not the original text}
-(aristotle:metaphy:trans).  If you put one of the standard
-\textsf{biblatex} bibstrings there (enumerated below), then the entry
-will work properly across multiple languages.  Otherwise, just put the
-name of the language there, localized as necessary, and
+\textsf{origtitle} field isn't used, while the \textsf{language} and
+\textsf{origdate} fields have been press-ganged for other duties.  The
+\textsf{origlanguage} field, for its part, retains a dual role in
+presenting translations in a list of references.  The details of the
+\emph{Manual}'s suggested treatment when both a translation and an
+original are cited may be found below under \textbf{userf}.  Here,
+however, I simply note that the introductory string used to connect
+the translation's citation with the original's is \enquote{Originally
+  published as,} which I suggest may well be inaccurate in a great
+many cases, as for instance when citing a work from classical
+antiquity, which will most certainly not \enquote{originally} have
+been published in the Loeb Classical Library.  Although not, strictly
+speaking, authorized by the \emph{Manual}, I have provided another way
+to introduce the original text, using the \textsf{origlanguage} field,
+which must be provided \emph{in the entry for the translation, not the
+  original text} (aristotle:metaphy:trans).  If you put one of the
+standard \textsf{biblatex} bibstrings there (enumerated below), then
+the entry will work properly across multiple languages.  Otherwise,
+just put the name of the language there, localized as necessary, and
 \textsf{biblatex-chicago} will eschew \enquote{Originally published
   as} in favor of, e.g., \enquote{Greek edition:} or \enquote{French
   edition:}.  This has no effect in citations, where only the work
@@ -6428,20 +7209,43 @@ be one of \texttt{american}, \texttt{brazilian}, \texttt{danish},
 \texttt{portuguese}, \texttt{spanish}, or \texttt{swedish}, to which
 I've added \texttt{russian}.
 
-\mybigspace This \mymarginpar{\textbf{origyear}} field is, as of
-\textsf{biblatex} 0.9, obsolete.  It is ignored if it appears in a
-.bib file.  Please use \textsf{origdate} instead.
+\mybigspace The \colmarginpar{\textbf{origlocation}} 16th edition of
+the \emph{Manual} has somewhat clarified issues pertaining to the
+documentation of reprint editions and their corresponding originals
+(14.166, 15.38).  Starting with this release of
+\textsf{biblatex-chicago}, you can provide both an
+\textsf{origlocation} and an \textsf{origpublisher} to go along with
+the \textsf{origdate}, should you so wish, and all of this information
+will be printed in the reference list.  You can now also use this
+field in a \textsf{letter} or \textsf{misc} (with
+\textsf{entrysubtype}) entry to give the place where a published or
+unpublished letter was written (14.117).  (Jonathan Robinson has
+suggested that the \textsf{origlocation} may in some circumstances
+actually be helpful for disambiguation, his example being early
+printed editions of the same material printed in the same year but in
+different cities.  The new functionality should make this simple to
+achieve.  Cf.\ \textsf{origdate}, \textsf{origpublisher} and
+\textsf{pubstate}; schweitzer:bach.)
+
+\mybigspace As \colmarginpar{\textbf{origpublisher}} with the
+\textsf{origlocation} field just above, the 16th edition of the
+\emph{Manual} has clarified issues pertaining to reprint editions and
+their corresponding originals (14.166, 15.38).  You can now provide an
+\textsf{origpublisher} and/or an \textsf{origlocation} in addition to
+the \textsf{origdate}, and all will be presented in long notes and
+bibliography.  (Cf.\ \textsf{origdate}, \textsf{origlocation}, and
+\textsf{pubstate}; schweitzer:bach.)
 
 \mybigspace This \mymarginpar{\textbf{pages}} is the standard
 \textsf{biblatex} field for providing page references.  In many
 \textsf{article} entries you'll find this contains something other
 than a page number, e.g. a section name or edition specification
-(17.188, 17.191, 17.202; kozinn:review, nyt:trevorobit).  Of course,
-the same may be true of almost any sort of entry, though perhaps with
-less frequency.  Curious readers may wish to look at brown:bremer
-(17.172) for an example of a \textsf{pages} field used to facilitate
-reference to a two-part journal article.  Cf.\ \textsf{number} for
-more information on the \emph{Manual}'s preferences regarding the
+(14.203, 14.209; kozinn:review, nyt:trevorobit).  Of course, the same
+may be true of almost any sort of entry, though perhaps with less
+frequency.  Curious readers may wish to look at brown:bremer (14.189)
+for an example of a \textsf{pages} field used to facilitate reference
+to a two-part journal article.  Cf.\ \textsf{number} for more
+information on the \emph{Manual}'s preferences regarding the
 formatting of numerals; \textsf{bookpagination} and
 \textsf{pagination} provide details about \textsf{biblatex's}
 mechanisms for specifying what sort of division a given \textsf{pages}
@@ -6461,7 +7265,7 @@ just mentioned the two fields are equivalent.
 field, which identifies physical parts of a single logical volume in
 \textsf{book}-like entries, not in periodicals.  It has the same
 purpose in \textsf{biblatex-chicago}, but because the \emph{Manual}
-(17.88) calls such a thing a \enquote{book} and not a \enquote{part,}
+(14.126) calls such a thing a \enquote{book} and not a \enquote{part,}
 the string printed in the list of references will, at least in
 English, be \enquote{\texttt{bk.}\hspace{-2pt}}\ instead of the plain
 dot between volume number and part number (harley:cartography,
@@ -6472,55 +7276,60 @@ example, then you'll need to use a different field, (which in the case
 of a series would be \textsf{number} [palmatary:pottery]).  Cf.\
 \textsf{volume}; iso:electrodoc.
 
-\mybigspace Standard \mymarginpar{\textbf{publisher}}
+\mybigspace Standard \colmarginpar{\textbf{publisher}}
 \textsf{biblatex} field.  Remember that \enquote{\texttt{and}} is a
 keyword for connecting multiple publishers, so if a publisher's name
 contains \enquote{and,} then you should either use the ampersand (\&)
 or enclose the whole name in additional braces.  (See \emph{Manual}
-17.103--114; aristotle:metaphy:gr, cohen:schiff, creasey:ashe:blast,
+14.139--148; aristotle:metaphy:gr, cohen:schiff, creasey:ashe:blast,
 dunn:revolutions.)
 
 \mylittlespace There are, as one might expect, a couple of further
-subtleties involved here.  Ordinarily, two publishers will be
-separated by a forward slash in the list of references, but if a
-company issues \enquote{certain books through a special publishing
-  division or under a special imprint,} then the two names will be
-separated by a comma, which you will need to provide in the
-\textsf{publisher} field.  The \emph{Manual}'s example (17.112) is
-\enquote{\texttt{Ohio University Press, Swallow Press},} which would
-cause \textsf{biblatex-chicago} no problems.  If a book has two
-co-publishers, \enquote{usually in different countries,} (17.113) then
-the simplest thing to do is to choose one, probably the nearest one
-geographically.  If you feel it necessary to include both, then
-levistrauss:savage demonstrates one way of doing so, using a
-combination of the \textsf{publisher} and \textsf{location} fields.
-Finally, if the publisher is unknown, then the \emph{Manual}
-recommends (17.109) simply using the place (if known) and the date.
-If for some reason you need to indicate the absence of a publisher,
-the abbreviation given by the \emph{Manual} is \texttt{n.p.}, though
-this can also stand for \enquote{no place.}  Some style guides
-apparently suggest using \texttt{s.n.}\,(= \emph{sine nomine}) to
-specify the lack of a publisher, but the \emph{Manual} doesn't mention
-this.
-
-\mybigspace A \mymarginpar{\textbf{pubstate}} standard
-\textsf{biblatex} field, new to version 0.9.  Because the author-date
-specification has fairly complicated rules about presenting reprinted
-editions, I have adopted this field as a means of simplifying the
-problem for users.  Instead of hand-formatting in the
+subtleties involved here.  Two publishers will be separated by a
+forward slash in the list of references, and you no longer, in the
+16th edition, need to provide hand formatting if a company issues
+\enquote{certain books through a special publishing division or under
+  a special imprint,} as these, too, should be separated by a forward
+slash.  If a book has two co-publishers, \enquote{usually in different
+  countries,} (14.147) then the simplest thing to do is to choose one,
+probably the nearest one geographically.  If you feel it necessary to
+include both, then levistrauss:savage demonstrates one way of doing
+so, using a combination of the \textsf{publisher} and
+\textsf{location} fields.  Finally, if the publisher is unknown, then
+the \emph{Manual} recommends (14.143) simply using the place (if
+known) and the date.  If for some reason you need to indicate the
+absence of a publisher, the abbreviation given by the \emph{Manual} is
+\texttt{n.p.}, though this can also stand for \enquote{no place.}
+Some style guides apparently suggest using \texttt{s.n.}\,(=
+\emph{sine nomine}) to specify the lack of a publisher, but the
+\emph{Manual} doesn't mention this.
+
+\mybigspace A \colmarginpar{\textbf{pubstate}} standard
+\textsf{biblatex} field, introduced in version 0.9.  Because the
+author-date specification has fairly complicated rules about
+presenting reprinted editions, I have adopted this field as a means of
+simplifying the problem for users.  Instead of hand-formatting in the
 \textsf{location} field, you can now simply put the string
 \texttt{reprint} into the \textsf{pubstate} field, and depending on
-which date you have chosen to appear at the head of the entry,
+which date(s) you have chosen to appear at the head of the entry,
 \textsf{biblatex-chicago-authordate} will either print the (localized)
-string \texttt{Repr.}\ in the proper place or otherwise provide a
+string \texttt{Reprint} in the proper place or otherwise provide a
 parenthesized notice at the end of the entry detailing the original
 publication date.  See under \textbf{date} above for the available
-permutations. (Cf.\ aristotle:metaphy:gr, maitland:canon,
+permutations.  (Cf.\ aristotle:metaphy:gr, maitland:canon,
 maitland:equity, schweitzer:bach.)  If the field contains something
 other than the word \texttt{reprint}, then it will be treated as in
 the standard styles, and printed after the publication information.
-In \textsf{music} entries, its literal contents will always be printed
-as part of the publication data.
+
+\mylittlespace There is one subtlety of which you ought to be aware.
+In \textsf{music} entries, the \textsf{pubstate} mechanism transforms
+the \textsf{origdate} from a recording date for an album into the
+original release date for that album.  If that date appears in
+citations and at the head of reference-list entries, then this
+mechanism won't generally make much difference, but if it appears
+elsewhere then a recording date will be printed in the middle of the
+reference list entry, the original release date will be printed near
+the end, preceded by the appropriate string.
 
 \mybigspace I \mymarginpar{\textbf{redactor}} have implemented this
 field just as \textsf{biblatex}'s standard styles do, even though the
@@ -6535,7 +7344,7 @@ purposes.  Cf.\ \textsf{annotator} and \textsf{commentator}.
 included a means of providing the original publication details of an
 essay or a chapter that you are citing from a subsequent reprint,
 e.g., a \emph{Collected Essays} volume.  In such a case, at least
-according to the \emph{Manual} (17.73), such details need be provided
+according to the \emph{Manual} (14.115), such details need be provided
 only if they are \enquote{of particular interest.}  The data would
 follow an introductory phrase like \enquote{originally published as,}
 making the problem strictly parallel to that of including details of a
@@ -6557,7 +7366,7 @@ be \enquote{Orig.\ pub.\ in.}  Please see the documentation on
 \textsf{userf} below for all the details on how to create .bib entries
 for presenting your data.
 
-\enlargethispage{-\baselineskip}
+\enlargethispage{\baselineskip}
 
 \mybigspace A \mymarginpar{\textbf{series}} standard \textsf{biblatex}
 field, usually just a number in an \textsf{article},
@@ -6579,45 +7388,39 @@ field in \textsf{manual}, \textsf{patent}, \textsf{report}, and
 place; see the discussion of \cmd{bibstring} below for details.)  In
 whatever entry type, these bibstrings produce the required
 abbreviation.  (For books and similar entries, see \emph{Manual}
-17.90--95; boxer:china, browning:aurora, palmatary:pottery,
-plato:republic:gr, wauchope:ceramics; for periodicals, see 17.178;
+14.128--132; boxer:china, browning:aurora, palmatary:pottery,
+plato:republic:gr, wauchope:ceramics; for periodicals, see 14.195;
 garaud:gatine, sewall:letter.)  Cf.\ \textsf{number} for more
 information on the \emph{Manual}'s preferences regarding the
 formatting of numerals.
 
-\mybigspace This \mymarginpar{\textbf{shortauthor}} is a standard
+\mybigspace This \colmarginpar{\textbf{shortauthor}} is a standard
 \textsf{biblatex} field, but \textsf{biblatex-chicago} makes
 considerably grea\-ter use of it than the standard styles.  For the
 purposes of the author-date specification, the field provides the name
 to be used in text citations.  In the vast majority of cases, you
 don't need to specify it, because the \textsf{biblatex} system selects
 the author's last name from the \textsf{author} field and uses it in
-such a reference, but in a few cases this default behavior won't work.
-In books without an author and listed under an editor,
-\textsf{biblatex} does the right thing and uses the surname of the
-editor in a short note (zukowsky:chicago), but if the work is listed
-under a \textsf{namec} (or any of the non-standard names
-\textsf{name[a-c]}), you need to provide that person's name in
-\textsf{shortauthor}, and also remember to provide a \textsf{sortkey}
-to make sure the work will be alphabetized correctly in the list of
-references.  (The current version of \textsf{biblatex} will now
-automatically alphabetize by \textsf{translator} if that is the name
-given at the head of an entry.)  If, in an author-less
-\textsf{article} entry (\textsf{entrysubtype} \texttt{magazine}), you
-allow \textsf{biblatex-chicago} to use the title of the periodical as
-the author --- the default behavior --- then your \textsf{shortauthor}
+such a reference, and if there is no \textsf{author} it will search
+\textsf{namea}, \textsf{editor}, \textsf{nameb}, \textsf{translator},
+and \textsf{namec}, in that order.  The current versions of
+\textsf{biblatex} and \textsf{biber} will now automatically
+alphabetize by any of these names if they appear at the head of an
+entry.  If, in an author-less \textsf{article} entry
+(\textsf{entrysubtype} \texttt{magazine}), you allow
+\textsf{biblatex-chicago} to use the title of the periodical as the
+author --- the default behavior --- then your \textsf{shortauthor}
 field can optionally contain an abbreviated form of the periodical
 name, formatted appropriately, which usually means something like
-\enquote{\cmd{mkbibemph\{Abbrev. Period. Title\}}.}  Note that in this
-case, too, you'll need to help the alphabetizing routines by providing
-a \textsf{sortkey} field (gourmet:052006, lakeforester:pushcarts,
-nyt:trevorobit, unsigned:ranke).  Indeed, with long, institutional
-authors, a shortened version in \textsf{shortauthor} may save space in
-the running text (cotton:manufacture, evanston:library).  See just
-below under \textbf{shorthand} for another method of saving space.
+\enquote{\cmd{mkbibemph\{Abbrev.\ Period.\ Title\}}} (gourmet:052006,
+lakeforester:pushcarts, nyt:trevorobit, unsigned:ranke).  Indeed, with
+long, institutional authors, a shortened version in
+\textsf{shortauthor} may save space in the running text
+(evanston:library).  See just below under \textbf{shorthand} for
+another method of saving space.
 
 \mylittlespace As mentioned under \textsf{editortype}, the
-\emph{Manual} (17.41) recommends against providing the identifying
+\emph{Manual} (15.21) recommends against providing the identifying
 string (e.g., ed.\ or trans.)\ in text citations, and
 \textsf{biblatex-chicago} follows their recommendation.  If you need
 to provide these strings in such a citation, then you'll have to do so
@@ -6635,12 +7438,12 @@ only \textsf{shorteditor} will be recognized.  Cf.\
 
 %\enlargethispage{\baselineskip}
 
-\mybigspace This \mymarginpar{\textbf{shorthand}} is
+\mybigspace This \colmarginpar{\textbf{shorthand}} is
 \textsf{biblatex}'s mechanism for using abbreviations in citations.
 For \textsf{biblatex-chicago-authordate} I have modified it somewhat
 to conform to the needs of the specification, though there is a
 package option to revert the behavior to something closer to the
-\textsf{biblatex} standard --- see under \texttt{cmslos} in
+\textsf{biblatex} standard --- see below and under \texttt{cmslos} in
 section~\ref{sec:authpreset}.  The main problem when presenting
 readers with an abbreviation is to ensure that they know how to expand
 it.  In the notes \&\ bibliography style this is accomplished with a
@@ -6658,26 +7461,56 @@ to you just above (cf.\ \textbf{shortauthor}), but for this to work
 the abbreviation must either be instantly recognizable to your
 readership or at least easily parseable by them.
 
-\mylittlespace The \emph{Manual's} suggestion, particularly when
-\enquote{long names are cited several times} (17.47), is to provide an
-abbreviation which is then explained by an alphabetized
-cross-refer\-ence inside the list of references itself.  In this
-release of \textsf{biblatex-chicago}, I have reclaimed one of the
-custom entry types (\textbf{customc}) to implement exactly this
-system.  See the explanation of this entry type above, but basically
-you can put the abbreviation itself in the \textsf{author} field and
-its expansion in the \textsf{title} field, then use either
-\cmd{nocite} or a \textsf{userc} field to ensure the entry appears in
-the list of references.  (Cf.\ abbrev:BSI, abbrev:ISO,
-bsi:abbreviation, iso:electrodoc.)
-
-\mylittlespace The author-date style will still automatically print
-the cross-reference in the list of shorthands too, as in standard
-\textsf{biblatex}, if the \cmd{printshorthands} command appears in
-your document.  You can place \texttt{skiplos} in the \textsf{options}
-field to exclude a particular entry from the list of shorthands if you
-do decide to print that list, giving maximum flexibility.  (See
-16.39--40, and also \textsf{biblatex.pdf} for more information.)
+\mylittlespace The \colmarginpar{New!} \emph{Manual's} recommendation
+(15.36), and this has changed for the 16th edition, involves using an
+abbreviation for long institutional names, an abbreviation which will
+appear not only in citations but also at the head of the entry in the
+list of references.  Such an entry should therefore be alphabetized by
+the abbreviation, which will be expanded within the same entry and
+placed (inside parentheses) between the abbreviation and the date.
+This new formatting can be produced in one of two ways: either you can
+provide a specially-formatted \textsf{author} field (for the reference
+list, and including both the abbreviation and the parenthesized
+expansion) + a \textsf{shortauthor} (for the citations), or you can
+use a normal \textsf{author} field + a \textsf{shorthand}, in which
+case \textsf{biblatex-chicago-authordate} will automatically use the
+\textsf{shorthand} in text citations and also place it at the head of
+the reference list entry, followed by the \textsf{author} within
+parentheses.  This method is simpler and more compatible with other
+styles, though you do need a \textsf{sortkey} when you use the
+\textsf{shorthand} field this way.  (Cf.\ bsi:abbreviation,
+iso:electrodoc.)
+
+\mylittlespace I should clarify here that this automatic placement of
+the \textsf{shorthand} at the head of the entry will \emph{not} occur
+if you set the package option \texttt{cmslos=false} in your preamble.
+This allows you to implement other systems of shorthand expansion
+using either a list of shorthands (via \cmd{printshorthands}, which is
+always available no matter what the state of \texttt{cmslos}) or
+cross-references (via \textsf{customc}) within the reference list
+itself.  You can place \texttt{skiplos} in the \textsf{options} field
+to exclude a particular entry from the list of shorthands if you do
+decide to print that list, giving maximum flexibility.
+
+\mylittlespace Indeed, \colmarginpar{New!} for this release, I have
+provided two new options to add to this flexibility.  First, I have
+included two new \texttt{bibenvironments} for use with the
+\texttt{env} option to the \cmd{printshorthands} command:
+\mycolor{\texttt{losnotes}} is designed to allow a list of shorthands
+to appear inside footnotes, while \mycolor{\texttt{losendnotes}} does
+the same for endnotes.  Their main effect is to change the font size,
+and in the latter case to clear up some spurious punctuation and white
+space that I see on my system when using endnotes.  (You'll probably
+also want to use the option \texttt{heading=none} in order to get rid
+of the [oversized] default, providing your own within the
+\cmd{footnote} command.)  Second, I have provided a new package
+option, \mycolor{\texttt{shorthandfull}}, which prints entries in the
+list of shorthands which contain full bibliographical information,
+effectively allowing you to eschew the list of references in favor of
+a fortified shorthand list.  This option will only work if used in
+tandem with \texttt{cmslos=false}, as otherwise the shorthand will be
+printed twice.  (See 15.36, 13.65, 14.54--55, and also
+\textsf{biblatex.pdf} for more information.)
 
 %\enlargethispage{-\baselineskip}
 
@@ -6700,132 +7533,145 @@ entries (where the \textsf{title} takes the place of the
 space in your running text this is the field where you can provide it.
 (Cf.\ ency:britannica, grove:sibelius, aristotle:metaphy:gr.)
 
-\mybigspace A \mymarginpar{\textbf{sortkey}} standard
+\mybigspace A \colmarginpar{\textbf{sortkey}} standard
 \textsf{biblatex} field, designed to allow you to specify how you want
 an entry alphabetized in a list of references.  In general, if an
 entry doesn't turn up where you expect or want it, this field should
-provide the solution.  More particularly, entries without an
-\textsf{author} an \textsf{editor}, or a \textsf{translator}, or with
-a corporate author beginning with the definite or indefinite article,
-will usually require your assistance in this way (cotton:manufacture,
-dyna:browser, gourmet:052006, grove:sibelius, lakeforester:pushcarts,
-nyt:trevorobit, unsigned:ranke).  There may be circumstances ---
-several reprinted books by the same author, for example --- when the
-\textbf{sortyear} field is more appropriate, on which see below.
-Lehman also provides \textbf{sortname} and \textbf{sorttitle} for
-equally fine-grained control.  Please consult \textsf{biblatex.pdf}
-for the details.
+provide the solution.  Entries with a corporate author can now omit
+the definite or indefinite article, which should help (14.85;
+cotton:manufacture, nytrumpet:art).  The default settings of
+\cmd{DeclareSortingScheme} now include the three supplemental name
+fields (\textsf{name[a-c]}) and also the \textsf{journaltitle} in the
+sorting algorithm, so once again you should find those algorithms
+needing less help than before.  Entries using a \textsf{shorthand},
+and entries headed by a \textsf{title} beginning with the definite or
+indefinite article, may well now require such assistance
+(bsi:abbreviation, grove:sibelius, iso:electrodoc).  There may be
+circumstances --- several reprinted books by the same author, for
+example --- when the \textbf{sortyear} field is more appropriate, on
+which see below.  Lehman also provides \textbf{sortname} and
+\textbf{sorttitle} for equally fine-grained control.  Please consult
+\textsf{biblatex.pdf} for the details.
 
 \mybigspace A \mymarginpar{\textbf{sortyear}} standard
 \textsf{biblatex} field, provided by Lehman for more fine-grained
 control over the sorting of entries in a list of references, and
 possibly useful in \textsf{biblatex-chicago-authordate} to help
 present several reprinted books by the same author.  See
-\textsf{sortkey} above and maitland:equity.
+\textsf{sortkey} and \textsf{date} above.
 
 \mybigspace The \mymarginpar{\textbf{subtitle}} subtitle for a
 \textsf{title} --- see next entry.
 
 %\enlargethispage{-\baselineskip}
 
-\mybigspace In \mymarginpar{\textbf{title}} the vast majority of
+\mybigspace In \colmarginpar{\textbf{title}} the vast majority of
 cases, this field works just as it always has in \textsc{Bib}\TeX, and
-just as it does in \textsf{biblatex}.  Nearly every entry for the
-author-date specification will have such a field, any exceptions
-likely stemming from the need to re-use a database for the notes \&\
-bibliography style.  Aside from this, the main source of difficulties
-flows from the \emph{Manual}'s rules for formatting \textsf{titles},
-rules which also hold for \textsf{booktitles} and \textsf{maintitles}.
-The whole point of using a \textsc{Bib}\TeX-based system is for it to
-do the formatting for you, and in most cases
-\textsf{biblatex-chicago-authordate} does just that, capitalizing them
-sentence-style, italicizing them, and sometimes both.  There are two
-situations that require user intervention.  First, in titles that take
-sentence-style capitalization, you need, as always in traditional
-\textsc{Bib}\TeX, to assist the algorithms by placing anything that
-needs to remain capitalized within an extra pair of curly braces.
-Second, when a title is quoted within a title, you need to know some
-of the rules of the Chicago style.  A summary here should serve to
-clarify them, and help you to understand when
+just as it does in \textsf{biblatex}.  In a major change to previous
+editions of the \emph{Manual}, the 16th edition now recommends that
+\textsf{titles} be treated more or less identically across both its
+systems of documentation, whether with respect to headline-style
+capitalization or to the use of italics and quotation marks (15.2,
+15.6, 15.13).  This means that users of the author-date style no
+longer need to worry about sentence-style capitalization when
+compiling their .bib databases, and so can eschew the extra curly
+braces needed to preserve uppercase letters in this context.  The
+other new rules, however, mean that a few new complications, familiar
+to users of the notes \&\ bibliography style, will arise.  First,
+although nearly every entry will have a \textsf{title}, there are some
+exceptions, particularly \textsf{incollection} or \textsf{online}
+entries with a merely generic title, instead of a specific one
+(centinel:letters, powell:email).  Second, the \emph{Manual}'s rules
+for formatting \textsf{titles}, which also hold for
+\textsf{booktitles} and \textsf{maintitles}, require additional
+attention.  The whole point of using a \textsc{Bib}\TeX-based system
+is for it to do the formatting for you, and in most cases
+\textsf{biblatex-chicago-authordate} does just that, surrounding
+titles with quotation marks, italicizing them, or occasionally just
+leaving them alone.  When, however, a title is quoted within a title,
+then you need to know some of the rules.  A summary here should serve
+to clarify them, and help you to understand when
 \textsf{biblatex-chicago-authordate} might need your help in order to
 comply with them.
 
-\mylittlespace With regard to sentence-style capitalization, the rules
-of the Chicago author-date style are fairly simple:
-
-\begin{description}
-\item[\qquad Headline Style:] \textsf{journaltitle} in all types,
-  \textsf{series} in all \textsf{book}-like entries (i.e., not in
-  \textsf{articles}), and \textsf{title} in \textsf{periodical}
-  entries.
-\item[\qquad Sentence Style:] Every other \textsf{title},
-  \emph{except} in \textsf{letter} entries and in \textsf{misc}
-  entries with an \textsf{entrysubtype}.  Also, the
-  \textsf{booktitle}, \textsf{issuetitle}, and \textsf{maintitle} in
-  all entry types.
-\item[\qquad Contextual Capitalization of First Word:]
-  \textsf{titleaddon}, \textsf{booktitleaddon},
-  \textsf{maintitleaddon} in all entry types, and the \textsf{title}
-  of \textsf{misc} entries with an \textsf{entrysubtype}.
-\item[\qquad Plain:] \textsf{title} in \textsf{letter} entries.
-\end{description}
-
-What this means in practice is that to get a title like \emph{The
-  Chicago manual of style}, your .bib entry needs to have a field that
-looks something like this:
-\begin{quote}
-  \texttt{title = \{The \{Chicago\} Manual of Style\}}
-\end{quote}
-
-This is completely straightforward, but remember that if an
-\textsf{article} has a title like: Review of \emph{The Chicago manual
-  of style}, then the curly braces enclosing material to be formatted
-in italics will cause the capitalization algorithm to stop and leave
-all of that material as it is, so your .bib entry would need to have a
-field something like this:
-
-\begin{quote}
-  \texttt{title = \{}\cmd{bibstring\{reviewof\}} \cmd{mkbibemph\{The
-    Chicago manual of style\}\}}
-\end{quote}
-
-(As an aside, the use of the \texttt{reviewof} bibstring isn't
-strictly necessary here, but it helps with portability across
-languages and across the two Chicago styles.  If you've noticed a lot
-of lowercase letters starting fields in \textsf{dates-test.bib},
-they're present because in the notes \&\ bibliography style
-capitalization is complicated by notes using commas where the
-bibliography uses periods, and words like \enquote{review} start in
-uppercase only if the context demands it.  There's considerably less
-of this in the author-date style [note the \textsf{*titleaddon}
-fields], but it still pays to be aware of the issue.)
+% \mylittlespace With regard to sentence-style capitalization, the rules
+% of the Chicago author-date style are fairly simple:
+
+% \begin{description}
+% \item[\qquad Headline Style:] \textsf{journaltitle} in all types,
+%   \textsf{series} in all \textsf{book}-like entries (i.e., not in
+%   \textsf{articles}), and \textsf{title} in \textsf{periodical}
+%   entries.
+% \item[\qquad Sentence Style:] Every other \textsf{title},
+%   \emph{except} in \textsf{letter} entries and in \textsf{misc}
+%   entries with an \textsf{entrysubtype}.  Also, the
+%   \textsf{booktitle}, \textsf{issuetitle}, and \textsf{maintitle} in
+%   all entry types.
+% \item[\qquad Contextual Capitalization of First Word:]
+%   \textsf{titleaddon}, \textsf{booktitleaddon},
+%   \textsf{maintitleaddon} in all entry types, and the \textsf{title}
+%   of \textsf{misc} entries with an \textsf{entrysubtype}.
+% \item[\qquad Plain:] \textsf{title} in \textsf{letter} entries.
+% \end{description}
+
+% What this means in practice is that to get a title like \emph{The
+%   Chicago manual of style}, your .bib entry needs to have a field that
+% looks something like this:
+% \begin{quote}
+%   \texttt{title = \{The \{Chicago\} Manual of Style\}}
+% \end{quote}
+
+% This is completely straightforward, but remember that if an
+% \textsf{article} has a title like: Review of \emph{The Chicago manual
+%   of style}, then the curly braces enclosing material to be formatted
+% in italics will cause the capitalization algorithm to stop and leave
+% all of that material as it is, so your .bib entry would need to have a
+% field something like this:
+
+% \begin{quote}
+%   \texttt{title = \{}\cmd{bibstring\{reviewof\}} \cmd{mkbibemph\{The
+%     Chicago manual of style\}\}}
+% \end{quote}
+
+% (As an aside, the use of the \texttt{reviewof} bibstring isn't
+% strictly necessary here, but it helps with portability across
+% languages and across the two Chicago styles.  If you've noticed a lot
+% of lowercase letters starting fields in \textsf{dates-test.bib},
+% they're present because in the notes \&\ bibliography style
+% capitalization is complicated by notes using commas where the
+% bibliography uses periods, and words like \enquote{review} start in
+% uppercase only if the context demands it.  There's considerably less
+% of this in the author-date style [note the \textsf{*titleaddon}
+% fields], but it still pays to be aware of the issue.)
 
-\mylittlespace With regard to italics, the rules of
-\textsf{biblatex-chicago-authordate} are as follows:
+\mylittlespace The internal rules of \textsf{biblatex-chicago-notes}
+are as follows:
 
 \begin{description}
 \item[\qquad Italics:] \textsf{booktitle}, \textsf{maintitle}, and
   \textsf{journaltitle} in all entry types; \textsf{title} of
   \textsf{artwork}, \textsf{book}, \textsf{bookinbook},
-  \textsf{booklet}, \textsf{collection}, \textsf{inbook},
-  \textsf{manual}, \textsf{misc} (with no \textsf{entrysubtype}),
-  \textsf{periodical}, \textsf{proceedings}, \textsf{report},
-  \textsf{suppbook}, and \textsf{suppcollection} entry types.
-\item[\qquad Main Text Font (Roman):] \textsf{title} of
-  \textsf{article}, \textsf{image}, \textsf{incollection},
-  \textsf{inproceedings}, \textsf{letter}, \textsf{misc} (with an
-  \textsf{entrysubtype}), \textsf{online}, \textsf{patent},
-  \textsf{periodical}, \textsf{suppperiodical}, \textsf{thesis}, and
-  \textsf{unpublished} entry types, \textsf{issuetitle} in
-  \textsf{article} and \textsf{periodical} entry types.
-  \textsf{booktitleaddon}, \textsf{maintitleaddon}, and
-  \textsf{titleaddon} in all entry types.
-\item[\qquad Italics or Roman:] All of the audiovisual entry types ---
-  \textsf{audio}, \textsf{music}, and \textsf{video} --- have to serve
-  as analogues both to \textsf{book} and to \textsf{inbook}.
-  Therefore, if there is both a \textsf{title} and a
-  \textsf{booktitle}, then the \textsf{title} will be in the main text
-  font.  If there is no \textsf{booktitle}, then the \textsf{title}
+  \textsf{booklet}, \textsf{collection}, \mycolor{\textsf{image}},
+  \textsf{inbook}, \textsf{manual}, \textsf{misc} (with no
+  \textsf{entrysubtype}), \textsf{periodical}, \textsf{proceedings},
+  \textsf{report}, \textsf{suppbook}, and \textsf{suppcollection}
+  entry types.
+\item[\qquad Quotation Marks:] \textsf{title} of \textsf{article},
+  \textsf{incollection}, \textsf{inproceedings}, \textsf{online},
+  \textsf{periodical}, \textsf{thesis}, and \textsf{unpublished} entry
+  types, \textsf{issuetitle} in \textsf{article}, \textsf{periodical},
+  and \textsf{review} entry types.
+\item[\qquad Unformatted:] \textsf{booktitleaddon},
+  \textsf{maintitleaddon}, and \textsf{titleaddon} in all entry types,
+  \textsf{title} of \textsf{customc}, \textsf{letter}, \textsf{misc}
+  (with an \textsf{entrysubtype}), \mycolor{\textsf{patent}},
+  \textsf{review}, and \textsf{suppperiodical} entry types.
+\item[\qquad Italics or Quotation Marks:] All of the audiovisual entry
+  types --- \textsf{audio}, \textsf{music}, and \textsf{video} ---
+  have to serve as analogues both to \textsf{book} and to
+  \textsf{inbook}.  Therefore, if there is both a \textsf{title} and a
+  \textsf{booktitle}, then the \textsf{title} will be in quotation
+  marks.  If there is no \textsf{booktitle}, then the \textsf{title}
   will be italicized.
 \end{description}
 
@@ -6833,7 +7679,7 @@ Now, the rules for which entry type to use for which sort of work tend
 to be fairly straightforward, but in cases of doubt you can consult
 section~\ref{sec:types:authdate} above, the examples in
 \textsf{dates-test.bib}, or go to the \emph{Manual} itself,
-8.164--210.  Assuming, then, that you want to present a title within a
+8.154--195.  Assuming, then, that you want to present a title within a
 title, and you know what sort of formatting each of the two would, on
 its own, require, then the following rules apply:
 
@@ -6842,33 +7688,94 @@ its own, require, then the following rules apply:
   quotation marks and italicized, so in such cases all you need to do
   is provide the quotation marks using \cmd{mkbibquote}, which will
   take care of any following punctuation that needs to be brought
-  within the closing quotation mark(s) (17.58; donne:var,
+  within the closing quotation mark(s) (14.102; donne:var,
   mchugh:wake).
-\item Inside a plain-text title, you should present another title as
-  it would appear if it were on its own, so in such cases you'll need
-  to do the formatting yourself, using \cmd{mkbibemph} or
-  \cmd{mkbibquote}.  (See 17.157; barcott:review, garrett, gibbard,
-  loften:hamlet, loomis:structure, murphy:silent, osborne:poi\-son,
-  ratliff:review, unsigned:ranke, white:callimachus.)
+\item Inside a quoted title, you should present another title as it
+  would appear if it were on its own, so in such cases you'll need to
+  do the formatting yourself.  Within the double quotes of the title
+  another quoted title would take single quotes --- the
+  \cmd{mkbibquote} command does this for you automatically, and also,
+  I repeat, takes care of any following punctuation that needs to be
+  brought within the closing quotation mark(s).  (See 14.177; garrett,
+  loften:hamlet, murphy:silent, white:callimachus.)
+\item Inside a plain title (most likely in a \textsf{review} entry or
+  a \textsf{titleaddon} field), you should present another title as it
+  would appear on its own, once again formatting it yourself using
+  \cmd{mkbibemph} or \cmd{mkbibquote}.  (barcott:review, gibbard,
+  osborne:poison, ratliff:review, unsigned:ranke).
 \end{enumerate}
 
 The \emph{Manual} provides a few more rules, as well.  A word normally
-italicized in text should also be italicized in a plain-text title,
-but should be in roman (\enquote{reverse italics}) in an italicized
-title.  A quotation used as a (whole) title (with or without a
-subtitle) retains its quotation marks when it is plain, but loses them
-when it is italicized (17.60, 17.157; lewis).  A word or phrase in
-quotation marks, but that isn't a quotation, retains those marks in
-all title types (kimluu:diethyl).
+italicized in text should also be italicized in a quoted or plain-text
+title, but should be in roman (\enquote{reverse italics}) in an
+italicized title.  A quotation used as a (whole) title (with or
+without a subtitle) retains its quotation marks in an italicized title
+\enquote{only if it appears that way in the source,} but always
+retains them when the surrounding title is quoted or plain (14.104,
+14.177; lewis).  A word or phrase in quotation marks, but that isn't a
+quotation, retains those marks in all title types (kimluu:diethyl).
+
+% \mylittlespace With regard to italics, the rules of
+% \textsf{biblatex-chicago-authordate} are as follows:
+
+% \begin{description}
+% \item[\qquad Italics:] \textsf{booktitle}, \textsf{maintitle}, and
+%   \textsf{journaltitle} in all entry types; \textsf{title} of
+%   \textsf{artwork}, \textsf{book}, \textsf{bookinbook},
+%   \textsf{booklet}, \textsf{collection}, \textsf{inbook},
+%   \textsf{manual}, \textsf{misc} (with no \textsf{entrysubtype}),
+%   \textsf{periodical}, \textsf{proceedings}, \textsf{report},
+%   \textsf{suppbook}, and \textsf{suppcollection} entry types.
+% \item[\qquad Main Text Font (Roman):] \textsf{title} of
+%   \textsf{article}, \textsf{image}, \textsf{incollection},
+%   \textsf{inproceedings}, \textsf{letter}, \textsf{misc} (with an
+%   \textsf{entrysubtype}), \textsf{online}, \textsf{patent},
+%   \textsf{periodical}, \textsf{suppperiodical}, \textsf{thesis}, and
+%   \textsf{unpublished} entry types, \textsf{issuetitle} in
+%   \textsf{article} and \textsf{periodical} entry types.
+%   \textsf{booktitleaddon}, \textsf{maintitleaddon}, and
+%   \textsf{titleaddon} in all entry types.
+% \item[\qquad Italics or Roman:] All of the audiovisual entry types ---
+%   \textsf{audio}, \textsf{music}, and \textsf{video} --- have to serve
+%   as analogues both to \textsf{book} and to \textsf{inbook}.
+%   Therefore, if there is both a \textsf{title} and a
+%   \textsf{booktitle}, then the \textsf{title} will be in the main text
+%   font.  If there is no \textsf{booktitle}, then the \textsf{title}
+%   will be italicized.
+% \end{description}
+
+% \begin{enumerate}
+% \item Inside an italicized title, all other titles are enclosed in
+%   quotation marks and italicized, so in such cases all you need to do
+%   is provide the quotation marks using \cmd{mkbibquote}, which will
+%   take care of any following punctuation that needs to be brought
+%   within the closing quotation mark(s) (17.58; donne:var,
+%   mchugh:wake).
+% \item Inside a plain-text title, you should present another title as
+%   it would appear if it were on its own, so in such cases you'll need
+%   to do the formatting yourself, using \cmd{mkbibemph} or
+%   \cmd{mkbibquote}.  (See 17.157; barcott:review, garrett, gibbard,
+%   loften:hamlet, loomis:structure, murphy:silent, osborne:poi\-son,
+%   ratliff:review, unsigned:ranke, white:callimachus.)
+% \end{enumerate}
+
+% The \emph{Manual} provides a few more rules, as well.  A word normally
+% italicized in text should also be italicized in a plain-text title,
+% but should be in roman (\enquote{reverse italics}) in an italicized
+% title.  A quotation used as a (whole) title (with or without a
+% subtitle) retains its quotation marks when it is plain, but loses them
+% when it is italicized (17.60, 17.157; lewis).  A word or phrase in
+% quotation marks, but that isn't a quotation, retains those marks in
+% all title types (kimluu:diethyl).
 
 \mylittlespace Finally, please note that in all \textsf{review} (and
-\textsf{suppperiodical}) entries (if you happen to be using those),
-and in \textsf{misc} entries with an \textsf{entrysubtype}, and only
-in those entries, \textsf{biblatex-chicago-authordate} will
-automatically capitalize the first word of the \textsf{title} after
-sentence-ending punctuation, assuming that such a \textsf{title}
-begins with a lowercase letter in your .bib database.  See
-\textbf{\textbackslash autocap} below for more details.
+\textsf{suppperiodical}) entries, and in \textsf{misc} entries with an
+\textsf{entrysubtype}, and only in those entries,
+\textsf{biblatex-chicago-authordate} will automatically capitalize the
+first word of the \textsf{title} after sentence-ending punctuation,
+assuming that such a \textsf{title} begins with a lowercase letter in
+your .bib database.  See \textbf{\textbackslash autocap} below for
+more details.
 
 %\enlargethispage{\baselineskip}
 
@@ -6977,61 +7884,94 @@ do the right thing in citations.  Cf.\ \textsf{artwork},
 above, for all the details.  (See auden:reading, bedford:photo,
 cleese:holygrail, leo:madonna, nytrumpet:art.)
 
-\mybigspace Standard \mymarginpar{\textbf{url}} \textsf{biblatex}
+\mybigspace Standard \colmarginpar{\textbf{url}} \textsf{biblatex}
 field, it holds the url of an online publication, though you can
-provide one for all entry types.  The required \LaTeX\ package
+provide one for all entry types.  The 16th edition of the
+\textsf{Manual} expresses a strong preference for DOIs over URLs if
+the former is available --- cf.\ \textsf{doi} above, and also
+\textsf{urldate} just below.  The required \LaTeX\ package
 \textsf{url} will ensure that your documents format such references
 properly, in the text and in the reference apparatus.
 
 \mybigspace Standard \colmarginpar{\textbf{urldate}} \textsf{biblatex}
-field, it identifies exactly when you accessed a given url.  This
-field would contain the whole date, in \textsc{iso}8601 format
-(evanston:library, grove:sibelius, hlatky:hrt, osborne:poison,
+field, it identifies exactly when you accessed a given url.  The 16th
+edition of the \emph{Manual} prefers DOIs to URLs; in the latter case
+it allows the use of access dates, particularly in contexts that
+require it, but prefers that you use revision dates, if these are
+available.  To enable you to specify which date is at stake, I have
+provided the \mycolor{\textbf{userd}} field, documented below.  If an
+entry doesn't have a \textsf{userd}, then the \textsf{urldate} will be
+treated, as before, as an access date (14.6--8, 14.184, 15.9;
+evanston:library, grove:sibelius, hlatky:hrt, osborne:poison,
 sirosh:visualcortex, wikiped:bibtex).  In the default setting of
 \cmd{DeclareLabelyear}, any entry without a \textsf{date},
 \textsf{eventdate}, or \textsf{origdate} will now use the
 \textsf{urldate} to find a year for citations and the list of
-references (grove:sibelius, wikiped:bibtex).  Please note that the
-\textbf{urlday}, \textbf{urlmonth}, and \textbf{urlyear} fields are
-all now obsolete.
+references (grove:sibelius, wikiped:bibtex).
 
-%\enlargethispage{\baselineskip}
+\enlargethispage{\baselineskip}
 
 \mybigspace A \mymarginpar{\textbf{usera}} supplemental
 \textsf{biblatex} field which functions in \textsf{biblatex-chicago}
 almost as a \enquote{\textsf{journaltitleaddon}} field.  In
-\textsf{article} and \textsf{periodical} entries with
-\textsf{entrysubtype} \texttt{maga\-zine}, the contents of this field
-will be placed, unformatted and between commas, after the
+\textsf{article}, \textsf{periodical}, and \textsf{review} entries
+with \textsf{entrysubtype} \texttt{maga\-zine}, the contents of this
+field will be placed, unformatted and between commas, after the
 \textsf{journaltitle} and before the date.  The main use is for
 identifying the broadcast network when you cite a radio or television
-program (bundy:macneil), though you may also want to use it to
-identify the section of a newspaper in which you've found a particular
-article (morgenson:market).  (See \emph{Manual} 17.190, 17.207.  As
-far as I can work out, newspaper section information may be placed
-either before the date [\textsf{usera}] or after it [\textsf{pages}].
-Cp. kozinn:review [17.202] and morgenson:market [17.190].  The choice
-would appear to be yours.)
+program (14:221; bundy:macneil).
 
-\mybigspace I \mymarginpar{\textbf{userc}} have now implemented this
+\mybigspace I \colmarginpar{\textbf{userc}} have now implemented this
 supplemental \textsf{biblatex} field as part of the Chicago
-author-date style's handling of the \textsf{shorthand} field and other
-cross-references within the list of references.  (The \enquote{c} part
-is meant as a sort of mnemonic for this latter, general function,
-though its main use will probably be in association with the former.)
-If you use the \textbf{customc} entry type to include alphabetized
-expansions of \textsf{shorthands} in the reference list, or indeed to
-provide cross-references of any sort to separate entries in that list,
-it is unlikely that you will cite the \textsf{customc} entry itself in
-the body of your text.  Therefore, in order for it to appear in the
-reference list, you have two choices.  You can either include the
-entry key of the \textsf{customc} entry in a \cmd{nocite} command
-inside your document, or you can place that entry key in the
-\textsf{userc} field of the .bib entry that actually uses the
-\textsf{shorthand}.  In the latter case, \textsf{biblatex-chicago}
-will call \cmd{nocite} for you when you cite the main entry.  (See
-17.39--40,47; abbrev:BSI, abbrev:ISO, bsi:abbreviation,
-iso:electrodoc.)
+author-date style's handling of cross-references within the list of
+references.  (The \enquote{c} part is meant as a sort of mnemonic for
+this latter function.)  In the 16th edition of the \emph{Manual}, you
+no longer need to use the \textbf{customc} entry type to include
+alphabetized expansions of \textsf{shorthands} in the reference list,
+but you may still need to provide cross-references of some sort to
+separate entries in that list, perhaps when a single author uses
+multiple pseudonyms.  In such a case it is unlikely that you will cite
+the \textsf{customc} entry itself in the body of your text.
+Therefore, in order for it to appear in the reference list, you have
+two choices.  You can either include the entry key of the
+\textsf{customc} entry in a \cmd{nocite} command inside your document,
+or you can place that entry key in the \textsf{userc} field of the
+.bib entry that actually contains one of the full citations.  In the
+latter case, \textsf{biblatex-chicago} will call \cmd{nocite} for you
+when you cite the main entry.  (See 14.84, 14.86; creasey:ashe:blast,
+creasey:morton:hide, creasey:york:death, lecarre:quest.)
+
+\mybigspace The \colmarginpar{\textbf{userd}} \textsf{userd} field,
+new in this release, acts as a sort of \enquote{\textsf{datetype}}
+field, allowing you in most entry types to identify whether a
+\textsf{urldate} is an access date or a revision date.  The general
+usage is fairly simple.  If this field is absent, then a
+\textsf{urldate} will be treated as an access date, as has long been
+the default in \textsf{biblatex} and in \textsf{biblatex-chicago}.  If
+you need to identify it in any other way, what you include in
+\textsf{userd} will be printed \emph{before} the \textsf{urldate}, so
+phrases like \enquote{\texttt{last modified}} or \enquote{\texttt{last
+    revised}} are what the field will typically contain (14.7--8;
+wikiped:bibtex).
+
+\mylittlespace Because of the rather specialized needs of some
+audio-visual references, this basic schema changes for \textsf{music}
+and \textsf{video} entries.  In \textsf{music} entries where an
+\textsf{eventdate} is present, \textsf{userd} will modify that date
+instead of any \textsf{urldate} that may also be present, and it will
+modify an \textsf{origdate} if it is present and there is no
+\textsf{eventdate}.  In \textsf{video} entries it will modify an
+\textsf{eventdate} if it is present, and in its absence the
+\textsf{urldate}.  In all these cases, \textsf{userd} will modify what
+remains of any date, i.e., the month and the day, if that date's year
+has been printed at the head of the entry.  Please see the
+documentation of the \textsf{music} and \textsf{video} entry types,
+and especially of the \textsf{eventdate}, \textsf{origdate}, and
+\textsf{urldate} fields, above (14.276--279, 15.53; nytrumpet:art).
+
+\mylittlespace In all cases, you can start the \textsf{userd} field
+with a lowercase letter, and \textsf{biblatex} will take care of
+automatic contextual capitalization for you.
 
 \mybigspace Another \mymarginpar{\textbf{usere}} supplemental
 \textsf{biblatex} field, which \textsf{biblatex-chicago} uses
@@ -7043,15 +7983,15 @@ can translate the title and use that translation in your
 \textsf{title} field, providing the original language in
 \textsf{language}, or you can give the original title in
 \textsf{title} and the translation in \textsf{usere}.  Cf.\
-\textbf{language}, above.  (See 17.65--67, 17.166, 17.177; kern,
+\textbf{language}, above.  (See 14.108--110, 14.194; kern,
 pirumova:russian, weresz.)
 
-\enlargethispage{-\baselineskip}
+%\enlargethispage{-\baselineskip}
 
 \mybigspace This \mymarginpar{\textbf{userf}} is the last of the
-supplemental fields which \textsf{biblatex} provides, used by
+supplemental fields which \textsf{biblatex} provides, and is used by
 \textsf{biblatex-chicago} for a very specific purpose.  When you cite
-both a translation and its original, the \emph{Manual} (17.66)
+both a translation and its original, the \emph{Manual} (14.109)
 recommends that, in a reference list at least, you combine references
 to both texts in one entry.  Lacking specific instructions about the
 author-date style, I have nonetheless chosen to implement this
@@ -7108,7 +8048,7 @@ e.g.:
 \cmd{autocite}\texttt{[3:25]\{bibfile:key\}}.  
 \end{quote}
 
-Cf.\ 16.110; meredith:letters, tillich:system, weber:saugetiere,
+Cf.\ 15.22; meredith:letters, tillich:system, weber:saugetiere,
 wright:evolution.  The entry wright:theory presents one volume of such
 a multi-volume work, so you would no longer need to give the volume in
 any \textsf{postnote} field when citing it.
@@ -7124,7 +8064,7 @@ put \cmd{bibstring\{nodate\}} here if required, or indeed any other
 sort of non-numerical date information.  If you can guess the date
 then you can include that guess in square brackets instead of
 \cmd{bibstring\{nodate\}}.  Cf.\ bedford:photo, clark:mesopot,
-ross:leo, thesis:madonna.
+leo:madonna, ross:thesis.
 
 \subsection{Commands}
 \label{sec:commands:authdate}
@@ -7232,34 +8172,36 @@ if possible.
 \mybigspace This \mymarginpar{\textbf{\textbackslash mkbibquote}} is
 the standard \textsf{biblatex} command, which requires attention here
 because it is a crucial part of the mechanism of Lehman's
-\enquote{American} punctuation system.  No titles in the author-date
-system require quotation marks, but titles-within-titles frequently
-do, so it is best to get accustomed to using this command to make sure
-any periods or commas appearing in the neighborhood of the closing
-quotes will appear inside them automatically.  A few examples from
-\textsf{dates-test.bib} should help to clarify this.
+\enquote{American} punctuation system.  Quotation marks around the
+\textsf{title} field in various entry types are automatically provided
+by \textsf{biblatex-chicago}, but titles-within-titles frequently also
+require them, so it is best to get accustomed to using this command to
+make sure any periods or commas appearing in the neighborhood of the
+closing quotes will appear inside them automatically.  A few examples
+from \textsf{dates-test.bib} should help to clarify this.
 
 \mylittlespace In an \textsf{article} entry, the \textsf{title}
 contains a quoted phrase:
 
 \begin{quotation}
   \noindent\texttt{title = \{Diethylstilbestrol and Media Coverage of the \\
-    \indent\cmd{mkbibquote}\{morning after\} Pill\}}
+    \indent\cmd{mkbibquote}\{Morning After\} Pill\}}
 \end{quotation}
 
 Here, because the quoted text doesn't come at the end of title, and no
 punctuation will ever need to be drawn within the closing quotation
-mark, you could instead use \texttt{\cmd{enquote}\{morning after\}} or
-even \texttt{``morning after''}. (Note the double quotation marks here
+mark, you could instead use \texttt{\cmd{enquote}\{Morning After\}} or
+even \texttt{`Morning After'}. (Note the single quotation marks here
 --- the other two methods have the virtue of taking care of nesting
-for you.)  All of these will produce the formatted: Diethylstilbestrol
-and media coverage of the \enquote{morning after} pill.
+for you.)  All of these will produce the formatted:
+\enquote{Diethylstilbestrol and Media Coverage of the \enquote{Morning
+    After} Pill.}
 
 \mylittlespace Here, by contrast, is a \textsf{book title}:
 
 \begin{quotation}
   \noindent \texttt{title = \{Annotations to
-    \cmd{mkbibquote}\{Finnegans wake\}\}}
+    \cmd{mkbibquote}\{Finnegans Wake\}\}}
 \end{quotation}
 
 Because the quoted title within the title comes at the end of the
@@ -7267,13 +8209,13 @@ field, and because this reference unit will be separated from
 what follows by a period in the list of references, then the
 \cmd{mkbibquote} command is necessary to bring that period within the
 final quotation marks, like so: \emph{Annotations to
-  \enquote{Finnegans wake.}}
+  \enquote{Finnegans Wake.}}
 
-\mylittlespace Note in both cases how you need to be careful with the
-sentence-style capitalization inside the curly brackets.  The
-automatic algorithms assume anything inside the brackets doesn't need
-alteration, so you need to provide lower- or uppercase as they should
-appear in the list of references.
+\mylittlespace Note in both cases how you no longer need to be careful
+with the capitalization inside the curly brackets, as the 16th edition
+of the \textsf{Manual} has unified the title formatting of both its
+styles, which means that all lower- and uppercase letters remain as
+they are typed in your .bib file.
 
 \mylittlespace Let me also add that this command interacts well with
 Lehman's \textsf{csquotes} package, which I highly recommend, though
@@ -7410,7 +8352,7 @@ strictly-defined circumstances.  The Chicago author-date style doesn't
 print \enquote{Ibid} in citations, but in general a repeated citation
 on the same page will print only the page reference.  Technically,
 this should only occur when a source is cited \enquote{more than once
-  in one paragraph} (16.114), so you can use the \cmd{citereset}
+  in one paragraph} (15.26), so you can use the \cmd{citereset}
 command from \textsf{biblatex} to achieve the greatest compliance, as
 the package only offers automatic resetting on part, chapter, section,
 and subsection boundaries, while \textsf{biblatex-chicago}
@@ -7431,12 +8373,12 @@ parentheses, like so: ().
 tells \textsf{biblatex} to provide the special \textsf{labelyear} and
 \textsf{extrayear} fields for author-date styles.
 
-\mylittlespace These \colmarginpar{\textsf{\texttt{maxbibnames\\=10\\
+\mylittlespace These \mymarginpar{\textsf{\texttt{maxbibnames\\=10\\
       minbibnames\\=7}}} two options are new, and control the number
 of names printed in the list of references when that number exceeds
 10.  These numbers follow the recommendations of the \emph{Manual}
 (17.29--30), and they are different from those for use in citations.
-With \textsf{biblatex} 1.6 and later you can no longer redefine
+With \textsf{biblatex} 1.6 you can no longer redefine
 \texttt{maxnames} and \texttt{minnames} in the \cmd{printbibliography}
 command at the bottom of your document, so \textsf{biblatex-chicago}
 now does this automatically for you, though of course you can change
@@ -7455,29 +8397,33 @@ or whole spreads in twoside mode.
 minor problem with punctuation in titles, ensuring that the colon
 between a title and a subtitle appears in the correct, matching font.
 
-\mylittlespace This \colmarginpar{\texttt{sortcase=\\false}} turns off
+\mylittlespace This \mymarginpar{\texttt{sortcase=\\false}} turns off
 the sorting of uppercase and lowercase letters separately, a practice
 which the \emph{Manual} doesn't appear to recommend.
 
-\mylittlespace This \mymarginpar{\texttt{sorting=nyt}} changes
-\textsf{biblatex's} default sorting order in the list of references to
-comply with the Chicago author-date specification.
+\mylittlespace This \colmarginpar{\texttt{sorting=cms}} setting, new
+in this release, takes advantage of the \cmd{DeclareSortingScheme}
+command provided by \textsf{biblatex} and \textsf{biber}, in effect
+implementing a default sorting order in the list of references
+tailored to comply with the Chicago author-date specification.  Please
+see the documentation of \cmd{DeclareSortingScheme} in
+section~\ref{sec:authformopts}, below.
 
-\mylittlespace This \colmarginpar{\texttt{uniquelist=\\minyear}}
+\mylittlespace This \mymarginpar{\texttt{uniquelist=\\minyear}} option
 enables \textsf{biblatex-chicago-authordate} to disambiguate entries
 which have more than three \textsf{authors}, but which differ
 \emph{after} the first name in the list.  This will only occur when
-two such entries have the same \textsf{year} (16.118).  The option is
+two such entries have the same \textsf{year} (15.28).  The option is
 \textsf{Biber}-only, like the following, which means that this
-next-generation \textsc{Bib}\TeX\ replacement is now required for the
+next-generation \textsc{Bib}\TeX\ replacement is required for the
 author-date style.  Please see \textsf{cms-dates-sample.pdf} and
 section~\ref{sec:otherhints:auth}, below, for further details.
 
-\mylittlespace This \colmarginpar{\texttt{uniquename=\\minfull}}
+\mylittlespace This \mymarginpar{\texttt{uniquename=\\minfull}}
 enables the package to distinguish different authors who share a
 surname, using initials in the first instance, and whole names if
-initials aren't enough (16.108).  The option is now
-\textsf{Biber}-only, like the previous one.
+initials aren't enough (15.21).  The option is \textsf{Biber}-only,
+like the previous one.
 
 \mylittlespace This \mymarginpar{\texttt{usetranslator\\=true}}
 enables automatic use of the \textsf{translator} at the head of
@@ -7487,15 +8433,123 @@ translator's surname.  You can disable this functionality on a
 per-entry basis by setting \texttt{usetranslator=false} in the
 \textsf{options} field.  Cf.\ silver:gawain.
 
+\subsubsection*{Other \textsf{biblatex} Formatting Options}
+\label{sec:authformopts}
+
+I've chosen defaults for many of the general formatting commands
+provided by \textsf{biblatex}, including the vertical space between
+items in the list of references and between items in the list of
+shorthands (\cmd{bibitemsep} and \cmd{lositemsep}).  I define many of
+these in \textsf{biblatex-chicago.sty}, and of course you may want to
+redefine them to your own needs and tastes.  It may be as well you
+know that the \emph{Manual} does state a preference for two of the
+formatting options I've implemented by default: the 3-em dash as a
+replacement for repeated names in the list of references (15.17--19,
+and just below); and the formatting of note numbers, both in the main
+text and at the bottom of the page / end of the essay (superscript in
+the text, in-line in the notes; 14.19).  The code for this last
+formatting is also in \textsf{biblatex-chicago.sty}, and I've wrapped
+it in a test that disables it if you are using the \textsf{memoir}
+class, which I believe has its own commands for defining these
+parameters.  You can also disable it by using the \texttt{footmarkoff}
+package option, on which see below.
+
+\mylittlespace Gildas Hamel pointed out that my default definition, in
+\textsf{biblatex-chicago.sty}, of \textsf{biblatex's}
+\cmd{bibnamedash} didn't work well with many fonts, leaving a line of
+three dashes separated by gaps.  He suggested an alternative, which
+I've adopted, with a minor tweak to make the dash thicker, though you
+can toy with all the parameters to find what looks right with your
+chosen font.  The default definition is:
+\cmd{renewcommand*\{\textbackslash bibnamedash\}\{\textbackslash
+  rule[.4ex]\{3em\}\{.6pt\}\}}.
+
+\mylittlespace With \colmarginpar{\texttt{losnotes}
+  \&\\\texttt{losendnotes}} this release, and at the request of
+Kenneth Pearce, I have added two new \texttt{bibenvironments} to
+\textsf{chicago-authordate.bbx}, for use with the \texttt{env} option
+to the \cmd{printshorthands} command.  The first, \texttt{losnotes},
+is designed to allow a list of shorthands to appear inside footnotes,
+while \texttt{losendnotes} does the same for endnotes.  Their main
+effect is to change the font size, and in the latter case to clear up
+some spurious punctuation and white space that I see on my system when
+using endnotes.  (You'll probably also want to use the option
+\texttt{heading=none} in order to get rid of the [oversized] default,
+providing your own within the \cmd{footnote} command.)  Please see the
+documentation of \textsf{shorthand} in
+section~\ref{sec:fields:authdate} above for further options available
+to you for presenting and formatting the list of shorthands.
+
+\mylittlespace The next-generation backend \textsf{Biber} offers
+enhanced functionality in many areas, three of which I've implemented
+in this release.  If the default definitions don't work well for you,
+you can redefine all of them in your document preamble --- see
+\textsf{biblatex.pdf} §§4.5.1 and 4.5.2.
+
+\mylittlespace This \colmarginpar{\cmd{Declare-}\\\texttt{Labelname}}
+option allows you to add name fields for consideration when
+\textsf{biblatex} is attempting to find a shortened name for in-text
+citations.  This, for example, allows a compiler (=\textsf{namec}) to
+appear in citations without any other intervention from the user,
+rather than requiring a \textsf{shortauthor} field as previous
+releases of \textsf{biblatex-chicago} did.  The default definition
+currently is
+\texttt{\{shortauthor,author,\\shorteditor,namea,editor,nameb,%
+  translator,namec\}}.
+
+\mylittlespace This \colmarginpar{\cmd{Declare-}\\\texttt{Labelyear}}
+option allows you to alter the order in which \textsf{Biber} and
+\textsf{biblatex} search for the year to use both in citations and at
+the head of entries in the list of references.  (This will also be the
+year to which an alphabetical suffix will be appended when an author
+has published more than one work in the same year.)  In the default
+configuration, a year will be searched for in the order \textsf{date,
+  eventdate, origdate, urldate}.  This suits the Chicago author-date
+style very well, except for \textsf{music} and \textsf{video} entries,
+and, exceptionally, some \textsf{review} entries.  Here the general
+rule is to emphasize the earliest date.  For these three entry types,
+then, \cmd{DeclareLabelyear} uses the order \textsf{eventdate,
+  origdate, date, urldate}.  See \texttt{avdate} in
+section~\ref{sec:authpreset}, just below.
+
+\enlargethispage{\baselineskip}
+
+\mylittlespace The
+\colmarginpar{\cmd{Declare-}\\\texttt{SortingScheme}} third
+\textsf{Biber} enhancement I have implemented allows you to include
+almost any field whatsoever in \textsf{biblatex's} sorting algorithms
+for the list of references, so that a great many more entries will be
+sorted correctly automatically rather than requiring manual
+intervention in the form of a \textsf{sortkey} field or the like.
+Code in \textsf{biblatex-chicago.sty} sets the \textsf{biblatex}
+option \texttt{sorting=cms}, which is a custom scheme, basically a
+Chicago-specific variant of the default \texttt{nyt}.  You can find
+its definition in \textsf{chicago-authordate.cbx}.
+
+\mylittlespace The advantages of this scheme are, specifically, that
+any entry headed by one of the supplemental name fields
+(\textsf{name[a-c]}), a \textsf{manual} entry headed by an
+\textsf{organization}, or an \textsf{article} or \textsf{review} entry
+headed by a \textsf{journaltitle} will no longer need a
+\textsf{sortkey} set.  The main disadvantage should only occur very
+rarely, and appears because the supplemental name fields are treated
+differently from the standard name fields by \textsf{biblatex}.
+Ordinarily, you can set, for example, \texttt{useauthor=false} in the
+\textsf{options} field to remove the \textsf{author's} name from
+consideration for sorting purposes.  The Chicago-specific option
+\textsf{usecompiler=false}, however, doesn't remove \textsf{namec}
+from such consideration, so in some rare corner cases you may need a
+\textsf{sortkey}.
+
 \subsubsection{{Pre-set \textsf{chicago} Options}}
 \label{sec:authpreset}
 
-At \mymarginpar{\texttt{bookpages=\\true}} the request of Scot
-Becker, I have included this rather specialized option, which controls
-the printing of the \textsf{pages} field in \textsf{book} entries.
-Some bibliographic managers, apparently, place the total page count in
-that field by default, and this option allows you to stop the printing
-of this information in the reference list.  It defaults to true, which
+At \mymarginpar{\texttt{bookpages=\\true}} the request of Scot Becker,
+I have included this rather specialized option, which controls the
+printing of the \textsf{pages} field in \textsf{book} entries.  Some
+bibliographic managers, apparently, place the total page count in that
+field by default, and this option allows you to stop the printing of
+this information in the reference list.  It defaults to true, which
 means the field is printed, but it can be set to false either in the
 preamble, for the whole document, or on a per-entry basis in the
 \textsf{options} field (though rather than use this latter method it
@@ -7506,7 +8560,15 @@ affected entries).
 whether any \textsf{doi} fields present in the .bib file will be
 printed in the reference list.  It defaults to true, and can be set to
 false either in the preamble, for the whole document, or on a
-per-entry basis, in the \textsf{options} field.
+per-entry basis, in the \textsf{options} field.  In \textsf{online}
+entries, the \textsf{doi} field will always be printed.
+
+\mylittlespace This \colmarginpar{\texttt{eprint=true}} option controls
+whether any \textsf{eprint} fields present in the .bib file will be
+printed in the list of references.  It defaults to true, and can be
+set to false either in the preamble, for the whole document, or on a
+per-entry basis, in the \textsf{options} field.  In \textsf{online}
+entries, the \textsf{eprint} field will always be printed.
 
 \mylittlespace This \mymarginpar{\texttt{isbn=true}} option controls
 whether any \textsf{isan}, \textsf{isbn}, \textsf{ismn},
@@ -7515,7 +8577,7 @@ whether any \textsf{isan}, \textsf{isbn}, \textsf{ismn},
 true, and can be set to false either in the preamble, for the whole
 document, or on a per-entry basis, in the \textsf{options} field.
 
-\enlargethispage{-\baselineskip}
+%\enlargethispage{-\baselineskip}
 
 \mylittlespace Once \mymarginpar{\texttt{numbermonth=\\true}} again
 at the request of Scot Becker, I have included this option, which
@@ -7538,36 +8600,64 @@ printed in \textsf{online} entries, regardless of the state of this
 option.
 
 \mylittlespace This \mymarginpar{\texttt{includeall=\\true}} is the
-one option that rules the five preceding, either printing all the
+one option that rules the six preceding, either printing all the
 fields under consideration --- the default --- or excluding all of
 them.  It is set to \texttt{true} in \textsf{chicago-authordate.cbx},
-but you can change it either in the preamble for the whole document or
-in the \textsf{options} field of individual entries.  The rationale
-for all of these options is the availability of bibliographic managers
-that helpfully present as much data as possible, in every entry, some
-of which may not be felt to be entirely necessary.  Setting
-\texttt{includeall} to \texttt{true} probably works just fine for
-those compiling their .bib databases by hand, but others may find that
-some automatic pruning helps clear things up, at least to a first
-approximation.  Some per-entry work afterward may then polish up the
-details.
-
-\mylittlespace This \mymarginpar{\texttt{cmslos=true}} option alters
+but you can change it either in the preamble for the whole document
+or, for specific fields, in the \textsf{options} field of individual
+entries.  The rationale for all of these options is the availability
+of bibliographic managers that helpfully present as much data as
+possible, in every entry, some of which may not be felt to be entirely
+necessary.  Setting \texttt{includeall} to \texttt{true} probably
+works just fine for those compiling their .bib databases by hand, but
+others may find that some automatic pruning helps clear things up, at
+least to a first approximation.  Some per-entry work afterward may
+then polish up the details.
+
+\mylittlespace For \colmarginpar{\texttt{avdate=true}} \textsf{music}
+and \textsf{video} entries, the 16th edition of the \emph{Manual}
+(15.53) strongly recommends both that you provide a recording,
+release, or broadcast date for your references and also that this
+earlier date should appear in citations and at the head of reference
+list entries.  In the default setting of \cmd{DeclareLabelyear},
+\textsf{biblatex} searches for dates in the following order:
+\textsf{year, eventyear, origyear, urlyear}.  This option changes the
+default ordering in \textsf{music} and \textsf{video} entries to the
+following: \textsf{eventyear, origyear, year, urlyear}.
+\textsf{Review} entries presenting on-line comments have similar
+needs, so the same reordering applies to that entry type, too.  If you
+simply want to apply the defaults to these three entry types, you can
+use \texttt{avdate=false} in the options when loading
+\textsf{biblatex-chicago}.  If, however, you want to tailor the
+algorithm to your own needs, then you can use \cmd{DeclareLabelyear}
+commands in your preamble.  Please be aware, however, that some parts
+of the style hard-code the search syntax, and although they take
+account of the \texttt{avdate} setting, if you use your own
+definitions of \cmd{DeclareLabelyear} the results may, in some corner
+cases, surprise.  Please see \textsf{music}, \textsf{review}, and
+\textsf{video} in section~\ref{sec:types:authdate}; \textsf{date},
+\textsf{eventdate}, \textsf{origdate}, and \textsf{urldate} in
+section~\ref{sec:fields:authdate}; and \cmd{DeclareLabelyear} in
+section~\ref{sec:authformopts}.
+
+\mylittlespace This \colmarginpar{\texttt{cmslos=true}} option alters
 \textsf{biblatex's} standard behavior when processing the
 \textsf{shorthand} field.  Chicago's author-date style only seems to
 recommend the use of shorthands as abbreviations for long authors'
 names, particularly institutional names, which means the shorthand
 will replace only the name part in citations rather than the whole
-citation (17.47; bsi:abbreviation, iso:electrodoc).  It suggests
-placing the expansion of the abbreviation into the reference list
-itself, a procedure that I have implemented in this release using the
-\textbf{customc} entry type, which see.  Please note that you can
-still print a list of shorthands if you wish, and you can also get
-back something approaching the \enquote{standard} behavior of
-shorthands if you give the \texttt{cmslos=false} option to
-\textsf{biblatex-chicago} in your document preamble.  Cf.\
-section~\ref{sec:fields:authdate}, s.v. \enquote{\textbf{shorthand}}
-above, and also \textsf{cms-dates-sample.pdf}.
+citation (15.36; bsi:abbreviation, iso:electrodoc).  The 16th edition
+now suggests placing the abbreviation at the head of the entry,
+followed by its expansion inside parentheses, an arrangement
+automatically provided by \textsf{biblatex-chicago-authordate} when
+you use the \textsf{shorthand} field, assuming you retain the default
+setting of this option.  Please note that you can still print a list
+of shorthands if you wish, and you can also get back something
+approaching the \enquote{standard} behavior of shorthands if you give
+the \texttt{cmslos=false} option to \textsf{biblatex-chicago} in your
+document preamble.  Cf.\ section~\ref{sec:fields:authdate},
+s.v. \enquote{\textbf{shorthand}} above, and also
+\textsf{cms-dates-sample.pdf}.
 
 \mylittlespace This \mymarginpar{\texttt{nodates=true}} option means
 that for all entry types except \textsf{inreference}, \textsf{misc},
@@ -7579,45 +8669,20 @@ preamble, then the package won't perform this substitution in any
 entry type whatsoever.  (The bibstring expands to
 \enquote{\texttt{n.d.}} in English.)
 
-\mylittlespace This \mymarginpar{\texttt{usecompiler=\\true}} option
+\mylittlespace This \colmarginpar{\texttt{usecompiler=\\true}} option
 enables automatic use of the name of the compiler (in the
 \textsf{namec} field) at the head of an entry, usually in the absence
 of an \textsf{author}, \textsf{editor}, or \textsf{translator}, in
-accordance with the specification (\emph{Manual} 17.41).  It may also,
+accordance with the specification (\emph{Manual} 15.35).  It may also,
 like \texttt{useauthor}, \texttt{useeditor}, and
 \texttt{usetranslator}, be disabled on a per-entry basis by setting
-\texttt{usecompiler=false} in the \textsf{options} field.  Please
-remember that, because \textsf{namec} isn't a standard
-\textsf{biblatex} field, this name won't be part of its sorting
-algorithms, and that any entry headed by a \textsf{namec} will
-therefore need a \textsf{shortauthor} defined for citations and a
-\textsf{sortkey} or the like in order to have it appear in the correct
-place in the list of references.  (The exception to this is when you
-modify the \textsf{editor's} identifying string using the
-\textsf{editortype} field, which is the procedure I recommend if the
-entry-heading compiler is only a compiler, and not also, e.g., an
-editor or a translator.  Cf.\ times:guide.)
-
-\subsubsection*{Other \textsf{biblatex} Formatting Options}
-\label{sec:authformopts}
-
-I've chosen defaults for many of the general formatting commands
-provided by \textsf{biblatex}, including the vertical space between
-items in the list of references and between items in the list of
-shorthands (\cmd{bibitemsep} and \cmd{lositemsep}).  I define many of
-these in \textsf{biblatex-chicago.sty}, and of course you may want to
-redefine them to your own needs and tastes.  It may be as well you
-know that the \emph{Manual} does state a preference for two of the
-formatting options I've implemented by default: the 3-em dash as a
-replacement for repeated names in the list of references
-(16.103--106); and the formatting of note numbers, both in the main
-text and at the bottom of the page / end of the essay (superscript in
-the text, in-line in the notes; 16.25).  The code for this last
-formatting is also in \textsf{biblatex-chicago.sty}, and I've wrapped
-it in a test that disables it if you are using the \textsf{memoir}
-class, which I believe has its own commands for defining these
-parameters.  You can also disable it by using the \texttt{footmarkoff}
-package option, on which see below.
+\texttt{usecompiler=false} in the \textsf{options} field.  The only,
+subtle, difference between this switch and those standard
+\textsf{biblatex} switches is that this one won't remove
+\textsf{namec} from the sorting list, whereas \texttt{useauthor=false}
+and \texttt{useeditor=false} do remove the \textsf{author} and
+\textsf{editor}.  You may, therefore, in corner cases, require a
+\textsf{sortkey} in the entry.
 
 \subsubsection{Style Options -- Preamble}
 \label{sec:authuseropts}
@@ -7640,7 +8705,7 @@ please have a look at the documentation for the \textsf{annotation}
 field, in section~\ref{sec:fields:authdate} above.
 
 \mylittlespace Although \mymarginpar{\texttt{footmarkoff}} the
-\emph{Manual} (16.25) recommends specific formatting for footnote (and
+\emph{Manual} (14.19) recommends specific formatting for footnote (and
 endnote) marks, i.e., superscript in the text and in-line in foot- or
 endnotes, Charles Schaum has brought it to my attention that not all
 publishers follow this practice, even when requiring Chicago style.  I
@@ -7654,11 +8719,13 @@ once again footnote marks will revert to the \LaTeX\ default, but of
 course you also lose a fair amount of other formatting, as well.  See
 section~\ref{sec:loading:auth}, below.
 
+\enlargethispage{\baselineskip}
+
 \mylittlespace The \mymarginpar{\texttt{juniorcomma}} \emph{Manual}
-(6.49) states that \enquote{commas are no longer required around
-  \emph{Jr.}\ and \emph{Sr.},} so by default \textsf{biblatex-chicago}
-has followed standard \textsf{biblatex} in using a simple space in
-names like \enquote{John Doe Jr.}  Charles Schaum has pointed out that
+(6.47) states that \enquote{commas are not required around \emph{Jr.}\
+  and \emph{Sr.},} so by default \textsf{biblatex-chicago} has
+followed standard \textsf{biblatex} in using a simple space in names
+like \enquote{John Doe Jr.}  Charles Schaum has pointed out that
 traditional \textsc{Bib}\TeX\ practice was to include the comma, and
 since the \emph{Manual} has no objections to this, I have provided an
 option which allows you to turn this behavior back on, either for the
@@ -7674,8 +8741,6 @@ correctly puts the \enquote{Jr.}\ part at the end, after the given
 names, and in this position it always takes a comma, the presence of
 which is unaffected by this option.
 
-\enlargethispage{\baselineskip}
-
 \mylittlespace This \mymarginpar{\texttt{natbib}} may look like the
 standard \textsf{biblatex} option, but to keep the coding of
 \textsf{biblatex-chicago.sty} simpler for the moment I have
@@ -7700,8 +8765,20 @@ use the \cmd{citereset} command, allied possibly with the
 \textsf{biblatex}\ \texttt{citereset} option, on which see
 \textsf{biblatex.pdf} §3.1.2.1.
 
+\mylittlespace Kenneth Pearce \colmarginpar{\texttt{shorthandfull}}
+has suggested that, in some fields of study, a list of shorthands
+providing full bibliographical information may replace the list of
+references itself.  This option, which must be used in tandem with
+\texttt{cmslos=false}, prints this full information in the list of
+shorthands, though of course you should remember that any .bib entry
+not containing a \textsf{shorthand} field won't appear in such a list.
+Please see the documentation of the \textsf{shorthand} field in
+section~\ref{sec:fields:authdate} above for information on further
+options available to you for presenting and formatting the list of
+shorthands.
+
 \mylittlespace This \mymarginpar{\texttt{strict}} still-experimental
-option attempts to follow the \emph{Manual}'s recommendations (16.57)
+option attempts to follow the \emph{Manual}'s recommendations (14.36)
 for formatting footnotes on the page, using no rule between them and
 the main text unless there is a run-on note, in which case a short
 rule intervenes to emphasize this continuation.  I haven't tested this
@@ -7715,23 +8792,27 @@ These options are settable on a per-entry basis in the
 \textsf{options} field; both relate to the presentation of dates in
 citations and the list of references.
 
-\mylittlespace The \colmarginpar{\texttt{cmsdate}} \emph{Manual}
-outlines a series of options for entries with more than one date
-(17.124--27).  All of these possibilities are available in
-\textsf{biblatex-chicago} using the \texttt{cmsdate} entry option.  It
-has 4 possible states, which are perhaps best illustrated by example.
-Let us assume that an entry presents a reprinted edition of a work by
-Smith, first published in 1926 (the \textsf{origdate}) and reprinted
-in 1985 (the \textsf{date}):
+\mylittlespace The \colmarginpar{\texttt{cmsdate}} 16th edition of the
+\emph{Manual} has simplified the options for entries with more than
+one date (15.38).  You can choose among them using the
+\texttt{cmsdate} entry option.  It has 3 possible states relevant to
+this problem, alongside a fourth which I discuss below.  An example
+should make this clearer.  Let us assume that an entry presents a
+reprinted edition of a work by Smith, first published in 1926 (the
+\textsf{origdate}) and reprinted in 1985 (the \textsf{date}):
 
 \begin{description}
 \item[\qquad \textbf{off}:] This is the default.  The citation will
   look like (Smith 1985).
-\item[\qquad \textbf{on}:] The citation will look like (Smith 1926).
-\item[\qquad \textbf{new}:] The citation will look like (Smith
-  1926/1985).
-\item[\qquad \textbf{old}:] The citation will look like (Smith [1926]
+\item[\qquad \textbf{both}:] The citation will look like (Smith [1926]
   1985).
+\item[\qquad \textbf{on}:] The citation will look like (Smith 1926).
+  \textbf{NB: The \emph{Manual} no longer includes this among the
+    acceptable options.}  If you want to present the \textsf{origdate}
+  at the head of an entry, then generally speaking you should use
+  \texttt{cmsdate=both}.  I have retained this option for corner cases
+  where it might be useful.  The 15th-edition options \texttt{new} and
+  \texttt{old} now work like \texttt{both}.
 \end{description}
 
 As I explained in detail above in section~\ref{sec:fields:authdate},
@@ -7748,12 +8829,14 @@ be as follows:
 
 \begin{description}
 \item[\qquad \textbf{off}:] This is the default.  The citation will
-  look like (Smith 1926a).
+  look like (Smith 1926a).  \textbf{This style is no longer
+    recommended by the 16th edition of the \emph{Manual}}.
+\item[\qquad \textbf{both}:] The citation will look like (Smith
+  [1926a] 1985).  The 15th-edition options \texttt{old} and
+  \texttt{new} are now synonyms for this.
 \item[\qquad \textbf{on}:] The citation will look like (Smith 1926a).
-\item[\qquad \textbf{new}:] The citation will look like (Smith
-  1926a/1985).
-\item[\qquad \textbf{old}:] The citation will look like (Smith [1926a]
-  1985).
+  As noted above, \textbf{this style is no longer recommended by the
+    16th edition of the \emph{Manual}}.
 \end{description}
 
 If, \mymarginpar{\texttt{switchdates}} for any reason, simply
@@ -7764,6 +8847,26 @@ at the full documentation of the \textbf{date} field to which I
 referred just above, and also at \textsf{cms-dates-sample.pdf} and
 \textsf{dates-test.bib} for examples of how all this works.
 
+\mylittlespace The \colmarginpar{New!} 16th edition of the
+\emph{Manual} now specifies that it is \enquote{usually sufficient to
+  cite newspaper and magazine articles entirely within the text}
+(15.47).  This will apply mainly to \textsf{article} and
+\textsf{review} entries with \textsf{entrysubtype} \texttt{magazine},
+and involves a parenthetical citation giving the \textsf{journaltitle}
+and then the full \textsf{date}, not just the year, with any other
+relevant identifying information incorporated into running text.
+(Cf.\ 14.206.)\ In order to facilitate this, I have added a further
+switch to the \texttt{cmsdate} option
+\colmarginpar{\mycolor{\texttt{cmsdate=full}}} ---
+\mycolor{\textbf{full}} --- which \emph{only} affects the presentation
+of citations, and causes the printing of the full date specification
+there.  You can use the standard \textsf{biblatex} \texttt{skipbib}
+option to keep such entries from appearing in the list of references,
+and you may, if your .bib entry is a complete one, also need
+\texttt{useauthor=false} in order to ensure that the
+\textsf{journaltitle} appears in the citations rather than the
+\textsf{author}.
+
 \mylittlespace As a final note, I should point out that the code in
 \textsf{chicago-authordate.cbx} allows \texttt{cmsdate} to be used in
 the document preamble as a general setting.  This leads to a world of
@@ -7783,14 +8886,14 @@ provided two keys for choosing which style to load, \texttt{notes} and
 \textsf{biblatex-chicago}, the standard way of loading the package was
 via a call to \textsf{biblatex}, e.g.:
 \begin{quote}
-  \cmd{usepackage[style=chicago-authordate,strict,backend=bibtex8,\%\\
+  \cmd{usepackage[style=chicago-authordate,strict,backend=biber,\%\\
     babel=other,bibencoding=inputenc]\{biblatex\}}
 \end{quote}
 Now, the default way to load the style, and one that will in the
 vast majority of standard cases produce the same results as the old
 invocation, will look like this:
 \begin{quote}
-  \cmd{usepackage[authordate,strict,backend=bibtex8,babel=other,\%\\
+  \cmd{usepackage[authordate,strict,backend=biber,babel=other,\%\\
     bibencoding=inputenc]\{biblatex-chicago\}}
 \end{quote}
 
@@ -7836,15 +8939,11 @@ suggestions on this score are, of course, welcome.
 Starting with \textsf{biblatex} version 1.5, in order to adhere to the
 author-date specification you will need to use \textsf{Biber} to
 process your .bib files, as \textsc{Bib}\TeX\ (and its more recent
-variants) will no longer provide all the required features.  The
-previous release of \textsf{Biber} (0.9.5), however, contained bugs
-that made it tricky to use with \textsf{biblatex-chicago}.  These bugs
-have been addressed in 0.9.6, so I recommend you upgrade to it and to
-the latest \textsf{biblatex} (1.7), which are designed to work
-together.  This document assumes that you are using \textsf{Biber}; if
-you wish to continue using \textsc{Bib}\TeX\ then you need
-\textsf{biblatex} version 1.4c and, if you have any problems with the
-current release, possibly \textsf{biblatex-chicago} 0.9.7a.
+variants) will no longer provide all the required features.  This
+document assumes that you are using \textsf{Biber}; if you wish to
+continue using \textsc{Bib}\TeX\ then you need \textsf{biblatex}
+version 1.4c and, if you have any problems with the current release,
+possibly \textsf{biblatex-chicago} 0.9.7a.
 
 \mylittlespace If your .bib file contains a large number of entries
 with more than three authors, then you may run into some limitations
@@ -7856,10 +8955,10 @@ will present all of them in the list of references but will truncate
 to one in citations, like so: (Hlatky et al. 2002).  For the vast
 majority of circumstances, these settings are exactly right for the
 Chicago author-date specification.  However, if \enquote{a reference
-  list includes another work \emph{of the same date} that would also
-  be abbreviated as [\enquote{Hlatky et al.}] but whose coauthors are
+  list includes another work of the same date that would also be
+  abbreviated as [\enquote{Hlatky et al.}] but whose coauthors are
   different persons or listed in a different order, the text citations
-  must distinguish between them} (16.118).  The new
+  must distinguish between them} (15.28).  The new
 (\textsf{Biber}-only) \textsf{biblatex} option \texttt{uniquelist},
 set for you in \textsf{biblatex-chicago.sty}, will automatically
 handle many of these situations for you, but it is as well to
@@ -7921,9 +9020,10 @@ option to excise with one command all the fields under consideration
 -- please see section~\ref{sec:authpreset} above.
 
 \mylittlespace Finally, allow me to reiterate what Philipp Lehman says
-in \textsf{biblatex.pdf}, to wit, use \textsf{bibtex8}, rather than
-standard \textsc{Bib}\TeX, and avoid the cryptic errors that ensue
-when your .bib file gets to a certain size.
+in \textsf{biblatex.pdf}, to wit, if you aren't going to use
+\textsf{Biber}, use \textsf{bibtex8}, rather than standard
+\textsc{Bib}\TeX, and avoid the cryptic errors that ensue when your
+.bib file gets to a certain size.
 
 \section{Internationalization}
 \label{sec:international}
@@ -7934,7 +9034,7 @@ in other \enquote{American} \textsf{biblatex} styles (e.g.,
 for producing a Chicago-like style in other languages.  I have
 supplied three new lbx files, \textsf{cms-german.lbx}, its clone
 \textsf{cms-ngerman.lbx}, and \textsf{cms-french.lbx}, in at least
-partial fulfilment of this request.  This means that all of the
+partial fulfillment of this request.  This means that all of the
 Chicago-specific bibstrings are now available for documents and
 reference apparatuses written in French and German, with, as I intend,
 more languages to follow, limited mainly by my finite time and
@@ -7976,23 +9076,22 @@ follow these three steps:
 \end{enumerate}
 
 If you want to use French or German strings in the reference
-apparatus, then you can:
-\begin{enumerate}
-\item Load \textsf{babel} with \texttt{german} or \texttt{french} as
-  the main document language.
-\item Put \cmd{DeclareLanguageMapping\{german\}\{cms-german\}} or
-  \cmd{Declare-\\ LanguageMapping\{french\}\{cms-french\}} in your
-  document preamble.
-\end{enumerate}
-
-You can also define which bibstrings to use on an entry-by-entry basis
-by using the \textsf{hyphenation} field in your bib file, but you will
-have to make sure that the Chicago-specific strings for the given
-language are loaded using a \cmd{DeclareLanguageMapping} call in the
-preamble.  Indeed, if \texttt{american} isn't the main text language
-when loading \textsf{babel}, then in order to have access to those
-strings you'll need
-\cmd{DeclareLanguageMapping\{american\}\{cms-american\}} in your
+apparatus, then you can load \textsf{babel} with \texttt{german} or
+\texttt{french} as the main document language.  You no longer need
+\cmd{DeclareLanguageMapping\{german\}\{cms-german\}} or
+\cmd{Declare\-LanguageMapping\{french\}\{cms-french\}} in your
+document preamble, since \textsf{bib\-latex-chicago.sty} now
+automatically provides this if you load the package in the standard
+way.
+
+\mylittlespace You can also define which bibstrings to use on an
+entry-by-entry basis by using the \textsf{hyphenation} field in your
+bib file, but you will have to make sure that the Chicago-specific
+strings for the given language are loaded using a
+\cmd{DeclareLanguageMapping} call in the preamble.  Indeed, if
+\texttt{american} isn't the main text language when loading
+\textsf{babel}, then in order to have access to those strings you'll
+need \cmd{DeclareLanguageMapping\{american\}\{cms-american\}} in your
 preamble, as \textsf{biblatex-chicago.sty} won't load it for you.
 
 \mylittlespace Three other hints may be in order here.  Please note,
@@ -8038,13 +9137,14 @@ my formatting decisions, please let me know.
 
 I have, when designing this package, attempted to keep at least half
 an eye on the possibility that users might want to re-use a .bib
-database in documents using the two different Chicago styles.  I have
-no idea whether this will even be a common concern, but I thought I
-might gather in this section the issues that a hypothetical user might
-face.  The two possible conversion vectors are by no means
-symmetrical, so I provide two lists, items within the lists appearing
-in no particular order.  These may well be incomplete, so any
-additions are welcome.
+database in documents using the two different Chicago styles.  The
+extensive unification of the two styles in the 16th edition of the
+\emph{Manual} has simplified things, and though I have no idea whether
+this will even be a common concern, I still thought I might gather in
+this section the issues that a hypothetical user might face.  The two
+possible conversion vectors are by no means symmetrical, so I provide
+two lists, items within the lists appearing in no particular order.
+These may well be incomplete, so any additions are welcome.
 
 \subsection{Notes -> Author-Date }
 \label{sec:conv:notesauth}
@@ -8055,9 +9155,9 @@ This is, I believe, the simpler conversion, as most well-constructed
 nonetheless:
 
 \begin{enumerate}
-\item You'll need curly brackets in titles, subtitles, etc., to
-  protect capitalization in the sentence-style defaults of
-  author-date.
+\item \textbf{NB: The formatting of titles in the two styles is now
+    the same, which means you no longer need to worry about extra
+    curly brackets and their affects on capitalization.}
 \item You may need to reevaluate your use of shorthands, given that by
   default the author-date style uses them in place of authors rather
   than in place of the whole citation.  The preamble option
@@ -8069,7 +9169,7 @@ nonetheless:
   alteration according to the instructions in
   section~\ref{sec:otherhints:auth} above.
 \item Date presentation is relatively simple in notes \& bibliography,
-  but you'll need to contemplate the \texttt{cmsdate} options from
+  so you'll need to contemplate the \texttt{cmsdate} options from
   section~\ref{sec:authentryopts} when doing the conversion to
   author-date.
 \end{enumerate}
@@ -8095,16 +9195,9 @@ of the things you may need to address:
   in section~\ref{sec:formatting:authdate} above may help.
 \item You also need to be more careful about the use of abbreviations,
   e.g., in journal names, where the author-date style is more liberal
-  in their use than the notes \&\ bibliography style.  (Cf.\ 17.159.)
+  in their use than the notes \&\ bibliography style.  (Cf.\ 14.179.)
   The bibstrings mechanism and package options sort much of this out
   automatically, but not all.
-\item Although you can get away with the \textsf{article} type for all
-  sorts of periodical entries in author-date, you'll need the
-  \textsf{review} type for notes \& bibliography.  Any
-  well-constructed \textsf{review} entry should work just fine in
-  author-date, so this is a one-time conversion.  Please see the
-  documentation in section~\ref{sec:entrytypes},
-  s.vv. \enquote{article} and \enquote{review,} above.
 \item The \textsf{shorttitle} field is used extensively in notes \&
   bibliography to keep short notes short, so you may find that you
   need to add a fair number of these to an author-date database.  In
@@ -8160,25 +9253,24 @@ capitalization routines.  Some of these problems disappeared when I
 switched to using Lehman's punctuation-tracking code for
 \enquote{American} styles, but some remained.  A bug report from
 J. P. E.~Harper-Scott suggested a new way of addressing the issue, and
-the newest version of Lehman's \textsf{csquotes} package (4.4)
-incorporates a full fix.  This, thankfully, doesn't require turning
-off any of Xe\LaTeX 's features, and indeed merely involves upgrading
-to the latest version of \textsf{csquotes}, which I recommend doing in
-any case.  Compatibility with the EU1 encoding is now standard in that
+newer versions of Lehman's \textsf{csquotes} package incorporate a
+full fix.  This, thankfully, doesn't require turning off any of
+Xe\LaTeX 's features, and indeed merely involves upgrading to the
+latest version of \textsf{csquotes}, which I recommend doing in any
+case.  Compatibility with the EU1 encoding is now standard in that
 package.
 
 \section{TODO \&\ Known Bugs}
 \label{sec:bugs}
 
-Following the arrival last autumn of the 16th edition of the
-\emph{Chicago Manual of Style}, I intend to devote the next major
-release more or less entirely to implementing the new specification.
-That task, a fairly extensive one, is well under way.  My current plan
-is to continue to maintain the 15th edition style files, providing bug
-fixes and any compatibility updates, while switching the main focus of
-development over to the most recent edition.  If, after the next
-release, you still have feature requests for the older specification,
-I'll do what I can to include them.
+This release now, belatedly, implements the 16th edition of the
+\emph{Chicago Manual of Style}.  The next release will also contain a
+version of the author-date style with traditional title formatting
+alongside the current code which unifies the treatment of titles
+across the two styles.  I hope that, in time, users will migrate to
+the most recent specification, so that I can focus my development
+there.  If you still have feature requests for the older
+specification, I'll do what I can to include them.
 
 \mylittlespace Regardless of which edition you are considering, there
 are a number of things I haven't implemented.  The solution in
@@ -8191,7 +9283,7 @@ particular documentation scheme (for which there exist at least three
 widely-used standards in the US), then providing what would be, it has
 seemed to me, an entirely separate \textsf{biblatex} style, bearing
 little or no relation to the usual look of Chicago citations.  Indeed,
-the \emph{Manual} (17.275) even makes it clear that you should be
+the \emph{Manual} (14.281) even makes it clear that you should be
 using a different reference book if you are presenting work in the
 field, so I've thought it prudent to stay clear of those waters so
 far.  I have received a request for this feature, however, so when I
@@ -8203,16 +9295,26 @@ it seems to me that the available entry types could be pressed into
 service to address the vast majority of them.  If this optimism proves
 misguided, please let me know.
 
+\mylittlespace I am very grateful to Baldur Kristinsson for sending a
+Chicago-specific Icelandic localization file
+(\textsf{cms-icelandic.lbx}).  This requires the file
+\textsf{icelandic.lbx}, which will be part of version 2.0 of
+\textsf{biblatex}.  I shall incorporate the localization in the next
+release, when I expect the newest \textsf{biblatex} will have
+appeared.
+
 \mylittlespace Kenneth L. Pearce has reported a bug that appears when
 using multiple citation commands inside the \textsf{annotation} field
-of annotated bibliographies.  As late as I am with the update to the
-16th edition of the \emph{Manual}, I shall attempt to address this in
-a future release.  If you run into this problem, he suggests placing
-all the citations together in parentheses at the end of the
-annotation, though on my machine this doesn't always work too well,
-either.
+of annotated bibliographies.  As late as I am with the file for the
+16th edition, I shall attempt to address this in a future release.  If
+you run into this problem, he suggests placing all the citations
+together in parentheses at the end of the annotation, though on my
+machine this doesn't always work too well, either.
 
-\enlargethispage{\baselineskip}
+\mylittlespace The same user has requested a way to provide shortened
+citations not just of essays in one \textsf{collection}, but also of
+multiple books in, for example, a collected works.  I shall be looking
+into this for future releases.
 
 \mylittlespace Version 1.5 of \textsf{biblatex} revised the way the
 package deals with breaking long URLs and DOIs across lines.  The new
@@ -8225,11 +9327,9 @@ done by copying and pasting the old definition of the
 \cmd{biburlsetup} command into your document preamble.  If you look in
 the preambles of \textsf{cms-notes-sample.tex} or
 \textsf{cms-dates-sample.tex}, you can see the redefinition and copy
-it from there, just to see whether it helps your situation.
-\textsf{Biblatex} 1.7 also now provides several new counters for
-tuning the formatting of URLs, and these may serve you better than the
-old code.  I have tested them in \textsf{cms-dates-sample.tex} and
-they work well.  Cf.\ \textsf{biblatex.pdf}, §~4.10.3.
+it from there, just to see whether it helps your situation.  If it
+would be generally useful, I could also easily turn it into a package
+option.  Feedback welcome.
 
 \mylittlespace The switch to \textsf{Biber} for the author-date
 specification means that \textsf{biblatex} now provides considerably
@@ -8249,7 +9349,15 @@ time required to implement the changes for the 16th edition, these
 types may make it into the package for the next major release, or they
 may have to wait until the one after.
 
-%\enlargethispage{-2\baselineskip}
+\mylittlespace Roger Hart has requested that I incorporate some means
+of changing the punctuation before \textsf{titleaddon} fields, perhaps
+using a customizable command like \cmd{titleaddonpunct}.  I hope to
+provide this in the next release.  He has also requested, despite the
+\emph{Manual's} objections, the possibility of using both
+\texttt{Idem} and \texttt{Ibid.}\ in notes.  I shall look into this
+for the next release.
+
+\enlargethispage{-5\baselineskip}
 
 \mylittlespace This release fixes the formatting errors of which I am
 aware, though users writing in French should be aware of problems with
@@ -8270,18 +9378,302 @@ author-date specification from the 13th edition of the \emph{Manual}.
 If anyone is still using the style, and requires some compatibility
 code for it, let me know, and I'll look into it.
 
-\mylittlespace On my 800 MHz PIII with 256 MB of RAM (running
-Slackware), it has to be admitted that \textsf{biblatex-chicago} makes
-\LaTeX\ run a bit slowly.  The \textsf{bibtex8} run is swift enough,
-but the actual formatting of the document can lag.  It may be that
-newer machines mostly eliminate this, or it may be that I need to pay
-more attention to the efficiency of the code, but in any case I
-thought I should warn you in advance.
-
 \section{Revision History}
 \label{sec:history}
 
-\textbf{0.9.8d: Released \today}
+\textbf{0.9.9: Released \today}
+
+\mylittlespace \label{deprec:obsol} Converting 15th-Edition .bib Files
+to Use the 16th Edition:
+
+\mylittlespace \textbf{Notes and Bibliography Style}
+
+\begin{itemize}
+\item The specification for \textbf{music} entries has been
+  significantly altered for the new edition.  You no longer need to
+  worry about the \texttt{\textcircledP} and \texttt{\textcopyright}
+  signs in the \textsf{howpublished} field, which will be silently
+  ignored, and the \textsf{pubstate} field now reverts to its usual
+  function of identifying reprints or, in this case, reissues.  The
+  spec really only requires a record label (\textsf{series}) and
+  catalog number (\textsf{number}), though \textsf{publisher} is still
+  available if you need it.  There is a new emphasis, finally, on the
+  dating of musical recordings, so that the \textsf{eventdate} gives
+  the recording date of a particular song or other portion of a
+  recording, the \textsf{origdate} the recording date of an entire
+  album, and the \textsf{date} the publishing date of that album.
+  Please see the full documentation in section~\ref{sec:entrytypes},
+  above.
+\item The specification for \textbf{video} entries has also been
+  clarified.  For television series, the episode and series numbers go
+  in \textsf{booktitleaddon} instead of \textsf{titleaddon} and, as
+  with \textsf{music} entries, the \textsf{eventdate} will hold the
+  original broadcast date of such an episode, or perhaps the
+  recording/performance date of, e.g., an opera on DVD.  The
+  \textsf{origdate} will still hold the original release date of a
+  film, and the \textsf{date} the publishing or copyright date of the
+  medium you are referencing.  Please see the full documentation in
+  section~\ref{sec:entrytypes}, above.
+\item You should add \textbf{customc} entries to provide
+  bibliographical cross-references from multiple pseudonyms back to
+  the author's name.
+\item In \textbf{suppbook} entries, the \emph{Manual} now requires you
+  to provide the page range (in the \textsf{pages} field) for the
+  specific part you are citing, e.g., an introduction, foreword, or
+  afterword.
+\item In \textbf{patent} entries, the \emph{Manual} now prefers
+  sentence-style capitalization for titles, which you'll need to
+  provide yourself by hand.
+\item When a descriptive phrase is used as an \textsf{author}, you can
+  now omit an initial definite or indefinite article, which will help
+  with alphabetization in the bibliography.
+\item A DOI is now preferred to a URL, if both are available.
+\item On the same subject, a revision date (or similar) is preferred
+  to an access date for online material.  You can use the new
+  \textbf{userd} field to change the string introducing the
+  \textsf{urldate}, which defaults to being an access date.
+\item Special imprints are now separated from their parent press by a
+  forward slash rather than a comma, so can just be added to the
+  \textsf{publisher} field with the usual keyword \texttt{and}.
+\item I have implemented a reasonable, less-flexible facsimile of the
+  \textsf{Biber}-only command \mycolor{\cmd{DeclareLabelname}} which
+  should work for those using any backend.  It allows
+  \textsf{biblatex} to find a name for short notes outside the
+  standard name fields, including, notably, in the \textsf{name[a-c]}
+  fields.  This should reduce the instances where you need a
+  \textsf{shortauthor} field to provide such a name.
+\item The Chicago-specific setting of another \textsf{Biber}-only
+  command, \mycolor{\cmd{Declare\-SortingScheme=cms}}, allows
+  non-standard fields to be considered by \textsf{biblatex's} sorting
+  algorithms, which should reduce the instances where you need a
+  \textsf{sortkey} or the like in your entries.  If you aren't using
+  \textsf{Biber}, the package reverts to the standard \texttt{nty}
+  sorting scheme.
+\end{itemize}
+
+\textbf{Author-Date Style}
+
+\begin{itemize}
+\item All title fields now follow the rules for the notes \&\
+  bibliography style as far as punctuation, formatting, and
+  capitalization are concerned.  \textsf{Biblatex-chicago-authordate}
+  will deal with most of this automatically, but if you have any hand
+  formatting of lowercase letters within curly braces in your .bib
+  file, you will need to restore the headline-style capitalization
+  there.  Also, you'll need to be more careful when you provide
+  quotation marks inside titles, remembering to use \cmd{mkbibquote}
+  so that punctuation can be brought inside nested quotation marks.
+  These revisions will apply particularly to \textbf{title},
+  \textbf{booktitle}, and \textbf{maintitle} fields.
+\item The one exception to these rules is in \textbf{patent} entries,
+  where sentence-style capitalization of the \textsf{title} is now
+  specified.  You'll have to provide this by hand yourself, as in the
+  notes \&\ bibliography style.
+\item Because of these changes to title formatting, you'll need to
+  observe the difference between \textbf{article} and \textbf{review}
+  entries, where the latter contain generic, \enquote{Review of
+    \ldots} titles and the former standard, specific titles.
+\item The presentation of \textbf{shorthand} fields has changed.  You
+  no longer need to use the \textbf{customc} entry type to include
+  cross-references from shorthands to expansions in the list of
+  references.  Now, simply using a \textsf{shorthand} field in an
+  entry places that \textsf{shorthand} in citations and at the head of
+  the entry in the list of references, where it will be followed by
+  its expansion within parentheses.  The new system will require help
+  with sorting in the reference list --- placing the
+  \textsf{shorthand} also in a \textsf{sortkey} should do the trick.
+\item On the subject of \textbf{customc} entries, the \emph{Manual}
+  now recommends using cross-references in several contexts,
+  particularly when a single author uses more than one pseudonym.
+  Adding \textsf{customc} entries makes this happen.
+\item There have been significant changes when presenting book-like
+  entries with more than one date.  If you are using the
+  \texttt{cmsdate=on} option, or indeed simply placing the earlier
+  date in the \textbf{date} field and the later one in
+  \textbf{origdate}, the presentation will be the same as before, but
+  you should understand that the \emph{Manual} no longer recommends
+  this \textsf{origdate}-only style.  It prefers, instead, to present
+  either the \textsf{date} alone or both dates in citations and at the
+  head of reference list entries.  When presenting both dates, there
+  is now no longer a choice between the \texttt{old} and \texttt{new}
+  options for \texttt{cmsdate}, but only the \texttt{both} option.  If
+  you have \texttt{old} or \texttt{new} in your .bib files, they will
+  be treated as synonyms of \texttt{both}.
+\item The specification for \textbf{music} entries has been
+  significantly altered for the new edition.  You no longer need to
+  worry about the \texttt{\textcircledP} and \texttt{\textcopyright}
+  signs in the \textsf{howpublished} field, which will be silently
+  ignored, and the \textsf{pubstate} field reverts to its more usual
+  function of identifying reprints or, in this case, reissues.  The
+  spec really only requires a record label (\textsf{series}) and
+  catalog number (\textsf{number}), though \textsf{publisher} is still
+  available if you need it.  There is a new emphasis, finally, on the
+  dating of musical recordings, which means that such entries will fit
+  better with the author-date style.  It also means that I have had to
+  redefine the various date fields.  The \textsf{eventdate} gives the
+  recording date of a particular song or other portion of a recording,
+  the \textsf{origdate} the recording date of an entire album, and the
+  \textsf{date} the publishing date of that album.  The earlier date
+  is the one that will appear in citations and at the head of
+  reference list entries.  Please see the full documentation in
+  section~\ref{sec:types:authdate}, above.
+\item The specification for \textbf{video} entries has also been
+  clarified.  For television series, the episode and series numbers go
+  in \textsf{booktitleaddon} instead of \textsf{titleaddon} and, as
+  with \textsf{music} entries, the \textsf{eventdate} will hold the
+  original broadcast date of such an episode, or perhaps the
+  recording/performance date of, e.g., an opera on DVD.  The
+  \textsf{origdate} will still hold the original release date of a
+  film, and the \textsf{date} the publishing or copyright date of the
+  medium you are referencing.  The earlier date, once again, is the
+  one that will appear in citations and at the head of reference list
+  entries.  Please see the full documentation in
+  section~\ref{sec:types:authdate}, above.
+\item In \textbf{suppbook} entries, the \emph{Manual} now requires you
+  to provide the page range (in the \textsf{pages} field) for the
+  specific part you are citing, e.g., an introduction, foreword, or
+  afterword.
+\item The author-date style now prefers longer bibstrings in the list
+  of references, bringing it into line with the notes \&\ bibliography
+  style.  Generally, the package will take care of this for you, but
+  if you've been using abbreviated strings in \textsf{note} fields,
+  for example, you may want to change them so that they conform with
+  the strings the package provides.  In some circumstances the
+  \cmd{partedit} macro, and its relatives, may help.  See
+  section~\ref{sec:formatting:authdate}.
+\item When a descriptive phrase is used as an \textsf{author}, you can
+  now omit an initial definite or indefinite article, which will help
+  with alphabetization in the bibliography.
+\item A DOI is now preferred to a URL, if both are available.
+\item On the same subject, a revision date (or similar) is preferred
+  to an access date for online material.  You can use the new
+  \textbf{userd} field to change the string introducing the
+  \textsf{urldate}, which defaults to being an access date.
+\item Special imprints are now separated from their parent press by a
+  forward slash rather than a comma, so can just be added to the
+  \textsf{publisher} field with the usual keyword \texttt{and}.
+\item The 16th edition of the \emph{Manual} is less than enthusiastic
+  about the use of \enquote{Anon.}\ as the \textsf{author}, preferring
+  instead that the \textsf{title} or the \textsf{journaltitle} take
+  its place.  If you do decide to get rid of \enquote{Anon.,} new
+  facilities provided by \textsf{Biber} --- see next entry --- should
+  mean that \textsf{biblatex} no longer requires assistance when
+  alphabetizing such author-less entries.
+\item The Chicago-specific setting of the \textsf{Biber}-only command,
+  \mycolor{\cmd{DeclareSort\-ing\-Scheme=cms}}, allows non-standard
+  fields to be considered by \textsf{biblatex's} sorting algorithms,
+  which should reduce the instances where you need a \textsf{sortkey}
+  or the like in your entries.
+\item The Chicago-specific setting of the \textsf{Biber}-only command
+  \mycolor{\cmd{DeclareLabel\-name}} allows \textsf{biblatex} to find
+  a name (\enquote{\textsf{label}}) for citations outside the standard
+  name fields, including, notably, in the \textsf{name[a-c]} fields.
+  This should reduce the instances where you need a
+  \textsf{shortauthor} field to provide such a name.
+\end{itemize}
+
+Other New Features:
+
+\begin{itemize}
+\item For reprinted books, you can now present more detailed
+  publishing information about the original edition using the new
+  \mycolor{\textbf{origlocation}} and \mycolor{\textbf{origpublisher}}
+  fields.  You can also use the \textsf{origlocation} in
+  \textsf{letter} or \textsf{misc} (with \textsf{entrysubtype})
+  entries to identify where a published or unpublished letter was
+  written.  These uses apply to both Chicago styles.
+\item Thanks to a patch sent by Kazuo Teramoto, you can now take
+  advantage of \textsf{biblatex's} facilities for citing
+  \mycolor{\textbf{eprint}} resources.  There is also a new
+  \mycolor{\texttt{eprint}} option, set to \texttt{true} by default,
+  which controls the printing of this field in both Chicago styles.
+  You can set the option both in the preamble and in the
+  \textsf{options} field of individual entries.  The field will always
+  print in \textbf{online} entries.
+\item I have added a new citation command,
+  \mycolor{\cmd{citejournal}}, to the notes \&\ bibliography style to
+  allow you to present journal articles using an alternative short
+  note form, which may be a clearer form of reference in certain
+  circumstances.  Such short notes will present the name of the
+  \textsf{author}, the \textsf{journaltitle}, and the \textsf{volume}
+  number.
+\item I have included a very slightly modified version of the standard
+  \textsf{biblatex} \cmd{citeauthor} command, which may be useful for
+  references to works from classical antiquity.
+\item I have added a new \texttt{cmsdate=\mycolor{full}} switch to the
+  author-date style, which only affects citations in the text, and
+  means that a full date specification will appear there, rather than
+  just the year.  If you follow the \emph{Manual's} recommendations
+  concerning newspaper and magazine articles only appearing in running
+  text and not in the reference list, this option will help.
+\item I have added a new \mycolor{\texttt{avdate}} option to the
+  author-date style, set to \texttt{true} by default in
+  \textsf{biblatex-chicago.sty}.  This alters the default setting of
+  \cmd{Declare\-Labelyear} in \textbf{music}, \textbf{review}, and
+  \textbf{video} entries to take account of specialized instructions
+  in the \emph{Manual} for finding dates to appear in citations and at
+  the head of reference list entries.  Setting \texttt{avdate=false}
+  in the options when you load \textsf{biblatex-chicago} restores the
+  default settings for all entry types.  See \texttt{avdate} in
+  section~\ref{sec:authpreset}.
+\item The \emph{Manual} has added recommendations for citing blogs,
+  which generally will need an \textbf{article} entry with
+  \texttt{magazine} \textsf{entrysubtype}.  You can identify a blog as
+  such by placing \enquote{blog} in the \textsf{location} field.  If
+  you want to cite a comment to a blog or to other online material,
+  the \textbf{review} entry type, \textsf{entrysubtype}
+  \texttt{magazine} will serve.  The \textbf{eventdate} dates the
+  comment, and any timestamp that is required can go in
+  \textsf{nameaddon}.  These instructions work in both specifications.
+\item Photographs are no longer presented differently from other sorts
+  of artworks so, in effect, in both styles, the \textbf{image} type
+  is now a clone of \textbf{artwork}, though retained for backward
+  compatibility.
+\item Following a request by Kenneth Pearce, I have added new
+  facilities for presenting \textbf{shorthands} in both Chicago
+  styles.  In both, there are two new \texttt{bibenvironments} which
+  you can set using the \texttt{env} option to the
+  \cmd{printshorthands} command: \mycolor{\texttt{losnotes}} formats
+  the list of shorthands so that it can be presented in a footnote,
+  while \mycolor{\texttt{losendnotes}} does the same for endnotes.  In
+  both styles, there is a new preamble option,
+  \mycolor{\texttt{shorthandfull}}, which prints the full
+  bibliographical information of each entry inside the list of
+  shorthands, allowing such a list effectively to replace a
+  bibliography or list of references.  In the author-date style, you
+  need to set the \texttt{cmslos=false} option as well, in order for
+  this to work.  In the notes \&\ bibliography style, I have added a
+  new citation command, \mycolor{\cmd{shorthandcite}}, which prints
+  the \textsf{shorthand} even in the first citation of a given work.
+\item Following suggestions by Roger Hart, I have implemented three
+  new field-exclusion options in the notes \&\ bibliography style.  In
+  all three cases, the field in question will always appear in the
+  bibliography, but not in long notes, which may help to save space.
+  The fields at stake are \textsf{addendum}, \textsf{note}, and
+  \textsf{series}, controlled respectively by the new
+  \mycolor{\texttt{addendum}}, \mycolor{\texttt{notefield}}, and
+  \mycolor{\texttt{bookseries}} options.  All of these are set to
+  \texttt{true} using the new \mycolor{\texttt{completenotes}} option
+  in \textsf{chicago-notes.cbx}, but you can change the settings
+  either in the preamble or in the \textsf{options} field of
+  individual entries.  Please see the documentation of these options
+  in section~\ref{sec:chicpreset}, above, for details on which entry
+  types are excluded from their scope.
+\item Thanks to a coding suggestion from Gildas Hamel, I have
+  redefined the \cmd{bibnamedash} in \textsf{biblatex-chicago.sty},
+  which should now by default look a little better in a wider variety
+  of fonts.
+\item At the request of Baldur Kristinsson, I have added
+  \cmd{DeclareLanguageMap\-ping} commands to
+  \textsf{biblatex-chicago.sty} for all the languages
+  \textsf{biblatex-chicago} currently provides.  If you load the style
+  in the standard way, you no longer need to provide these mappings
+  manually yourself.
+\item I have improved the date handling in both styles, particularly
+  with regard to date ranges.
+\end{itemize}
+
+\textbf{0.9.8d: Released November 15, 2011}
 \begin{itemize}
 \item Some minor fixes to both styles for compatibility with
   \textsf{biblatex} 1.7.
@@ -8295,8 +9687,6 @@ thought I should warn you in advance.
   instead when you have set the \texttt{short} option.
 \end{itemize}
 
-\enlargethispage{\baselineskip}
-
 \textbf{0.9.8c: Released October 12, 2011}
 \begin{itemize}
 \item Emil Salim pointed out some rather basic errors in the
@@ -8336,7 +9726,6 @@ thought I should warn you in advance.
 
 \textbf{0.9.8: Released August 31, 2011}
 
-\mylittlespace \label{deprec:obsol} Obsolete and Deprecated Features:
 \begin{itemize}
 \item Starting with \textsf{biblatex} version 1.5, in order to adhere
   to the author-date specification you will need to use \textsf{Biber}