biblatex-chicago (29sep11)

git-svn-id: svn://tug.org/texlive/trunk@24143 c570f23f-e606-0410-a88d-b1316a301751

8 files changed, 198 insertions, 141 deletions

diff --git a/Master/texmf-dist/doc/latex/biblatex-chicago/README b/Master/texmf-dist/doc/latex/biblatex-chicago/README
index 659f3944ffd..96f958a9f6d 100644
--- a/Master/texmf-dist/doc/latex/biblatex-chicago/README
+++ b/Master/texmf-dist/doc/latex/biblatex-chicago/README
@@ -9,7 +9,7 @@ date.  Most particularly please note that Biber 0.9.6 beta is now
 required for the author-date style, and indeed for the notes &
 bibliography style if you choose to use Biber with it.
 
-README (version 0.9.8a, 2011-09-21):
+README (version 0.9.8b, 2011-09-29):
 
 Biblatex-chicago contains two biblatex styles implementing the
 specifications of the Chicago Manual of Style, 15th edition.  (If you
diff --git a/Master/texmf-dist/doc/latex/biblatex-chicago/RELEASE b/Master/texmf-dist/doc/latex/biblatex-chicago/RELEASE
index b24fc823123..d2685ba84aa 100644
--- a/Master/texmf-dist/doc/latex/biblatex-chicago/RELEASE
+++ b/Master/texmf-dist/doc/latex/biblatex-chicago/RELEASE
@@ -1,3 +1,18 @@
+Release notes for version 0.9.8b [2011-09-29]:
+
+ - Christian Boesch alerted me to some bad date-formatting errors
+   produced when using the styles with the "german" option to babel.
+   A little further investigation revealed similar problems with
+   "french," and before long it became clear that date handling in
+   biblatex-chicago was generally, and significantly, sub-optimal.
+   The whole system should now be more robust and more accurate.
+
+ - The new date-handling code shouldn't require any changes to your
+   .bib files, but users of the author-date style may want to have a
+   look at the documentation of the Letter and Misc entry types, and
+   of the four date fields, for some information about how the changes
+   could simplify the creation of their databases.
+
 Release notes for version 0.9.8a [2011-09-21]:
 
  - Fixed a series of unsightly errors in the author-date style,
diff --git a/Master/texmf-dist/doc/latex/biblatex-chicago/biblatex-chicago.pdf b/Master/texmf-dist/doc/latex/biblatex-chicago/biblatex-chicago.pdf
index 27628565307..1fbd493dd56 100644
--- a/Master/texmf-dist/doc/latex/biblatex-chicago/biblatex-chicago.pdf
+++ b/Master/texmf-dist/doc/latex/biblatex-chicago/biblatex-chicago.pdf
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 2dcdce43825..d3e7183dfbf 100644
--- a/Master/texmf-dist/doc/latex/biblatex-chicago/biblatex-chicago.tex
+++ b/Master/texmf-dist/doc/latex/biblatex-chicago/biblatex-chicago.tex
@@ -56,7 +56,7 @@
   Style files for biblatex
 
 \vspace{.3\baselineskip}
-\sffamily\normalsize\bfseries David Fussner\qquad Version 0.9.8a (beta) \\
+\sffamily\normalsize\bfseries David Fussner\qquad Version 0.9.8b (beta) \\
 \href{mailto:djf027@googlemail.com}{djf027@googlemail.com}\\ \today
 
 \end{center} 
@@ -4188,11 +4188,11 @@ alias, is as follows: \textbf{article}, \textbf{artwork},
 \textbf{audio}, \textbf{book}, \textbf{bookinbook}, \textbf{booklet},
 \textbf{collection}, \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}),
-\textbf{patent}, \textbf{periodical}, \textbf{proceedings},
-\textbf{reference}, \textbf{report} (with its alias
-\textbf{techreport}), \textbf{review}, \textbf{suppbook},
+\textbf{inreference}, \mycolor{\textbf{letter}}, \textbf{manual},
+\mycolor{\textbf{misc}}, \textbf{music}, \textbf{online} (with its
+alias \textbf{www}), \textbf{patent}, \textbf{periodical},
+\textbf{proceedings}, \textbf{reference}, \textbf{report} (with its
+alias \textbf{techreport}), \textbf{review}, \textbf{suppbook},
 \textbf{suppcollection}, \textbf{suppperiodical}, \textbf{thesis}
 (with its aliases \textbf{mastersthesis} and \textbf{phdthesis}),
 \textbf{unpublished}, and \textbf{video}.
@@ -4691,7 +4691,7 @@ 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 \mymarginpar{\textbf{letter}} entry type was designed
+\mybigspace This \colmarginpar{\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
@@ -4707,24 +4707,22 @@ above for the notes \&\ bibliography style in
 section~\ref{sec:entrytypes}, s.v.\ \enquote{\textsf{letter,}} should
 get you started.  There are a few wrinkles, related to date
 specifications, that I shall attempt to clarify here.  If you look at
-white:ross and white:russ, you'll see the worst-case scenario, when
-you want to present two letters from the same published collection,
-which two letters were written in the same year.  The
-\texttt{cmsdate=on} call in the \textsf{options} field means that it
-will be the \textsf{origdate}, i.e., the year the letter was written,
-that will head the entry (and appear in a citation).  Since the two
-letters are from the same year, the \textsf{origdate} field can't
-actually be used, as \textsf{biblatex} will only append the letters
-\texttt{a,b,c} etc.\ to a \textsf{date}, so we place the
-\textsf{origdate} in the \textsf{date} field and put
-\texttt{switchdates} in the \textsf{options} field.  The latter is
-necessary because the entry doesn't have both dates, which would turn
-on the \texttt{switchdates} mechanism automatically if the
-\textsf{date} were earlier than the \textsf{origdate}.  This is the
-case, in turn, because we are using the \textsf{xref} mechanism to
-refer to the whole published collection (white:total), so that entry
-provides the \textsf{date} for the shortened cross-reference included
-in the list of references.
+white:ross:memo and white:russ, you'll see two letters from the same
+published collection, both written in the same year.  You can now
+simply use the \textsf{origdate} field in both of them, because in the
+absence of a \textsf{date} (or an \textsf{eventdate}) \textsf{Biber}
+and \textsf{biblatex} will use the \textsf{origyear} as the
+\textsf{labelyear}, putting it at the head of the entry and in the
+citation, and also ensuring that the letters \texttt{a,b,c} are
+appended to disambiguate the two sources.  You no longer need anything
+in the \textsf{options} field at all, thanks to the way
+\cmd{DeclareLabelYear} works through the possibilities and finds a
+date to head the entry.  In this case, it works because we are using
+the \textsf{xref} mechanism to refer to the whole published collection
+(white:total), so a separate citation of that entry provides the
+\textsf{date} for the shortened cross-reference included in the list
+of references, and the \textsf{letter} entry never sees that
+\textsf{date} at all.
 
 \mylittlespace If this all seems clear as mud, I'm not surprised, but
 let me suggest that you experiment with the different date settings to
@@ -4749,7 +4747,7 @@ then you would need to define both \textsf{author} and
 \textsf{organization}.  (See 17:47; chicago:manual, dyna:browser,
 natrecoff:camera.)
 
-\mybigspace As \mymarginpar{\textbf{misc}} its name suggests, the
+\mybigspace As \colmarginpar{\textbf{misc}} its name suggests, the
 \textsf{misc} entry type was designed as a hold-all for citations that
 didn't quite fit into other categories.  In \textsf{biblatex-chicago},
 I have somewhat extended its applicability, while retaining its
@@ -4795,11 +4793,12 @@ 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.\ (creel:house),
 and into the \textsf{date} field for the others (spock:interview).
-Like with the \textsf{letter} type, if you've used the
-\textsf{origdate} field, you need to put \texttt{cmsdate=on} in the
-\textsf{options} field to make sure that that year appears at the head
-of the entry (and in citations).  (Cf.\ particularly the documentation
-in section~\ref{sec:fields:authdate} below, s.v.\ \enquote{date}, and
+Like with the \textsf{letter} type, if the only date present is an
+\textsf{origdate}, you no longer need to set the \texttt{cmsdate}
+option in your .bib entry to make sure that that year appears at the
+head of the entry (and in citations) --- this now happens
+automatically.  (Cf.\ particularly the documentation in
+section~\ref{sec:fields:authdate} below, s.v.\ \enquote{date}, and
 also the \textsf{letter} type above for some of the date-related
 complications that can arise, and how you can address them with
 judicious use of the \textsf{options}, \textsf{date}, and
@@ -5554,25 +5553,29 @@ 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{year, eventyear, origyear,
-  urlyear}.  You can eliminate some of these dates from the running,
-or change the search order, using the \cmd{DeclareLabelYear} command
-in your preamble.  (Cf.\ section~4.5.2 in \textsf{biblatex.pdf} for
-the details.)  Only when it finds no date at all will it fall back on
-\cmd{bibstring\{nodate\}}.  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
+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
 section~\ref{sec:authpreset}, below.)  Third, if you wish to provide
-the \enquote{\texttt{n.d.}}  yourself in the \textsf{year} field,
+the \enquote{\texttt{n.d.}}\ yourself in the \textsf{year} field,
 please instead put \cmd{bibstring\{nodate\}} there, as otherwise the
 punctuation in citations will come out (subtly) wrong.  Fourth, while
 we're on the subject, the \textsf{year} field is also the place for
-things like \enquote{\texttt{forthcoming}}, though you should use the
+things like \enquote{\texttt{forthcoming},} though you should use the
 \cmd{autocap} macro there to make sure the word comes out correctly in
 both citations and the list of references.  The reason for this is
 that the \textsf{date} field accepts only numerical data, in
@@ -5644,18 +5647,19 @@ 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
-of references?  By whatever appears in the \textsf{date} field,
-\emph{always}, 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.
+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 only 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
+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
@@ -5684,9 +5688,9 @@ only three possible outcomes, as follows:
 If, for some reason, the automatic switching of the dates cannot be
 achieved, perhaps in crossref'd \textsf{letter} entries that you
 really want to have in your list of references (white:ross:memo,
-white:russ), or perhaps in a reprint edition that 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
+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
@@ -5703,17 +5707,22 @@ help to distinguish between two classes of archival material, letters
 and \enquote{letter-like} sources using \textsf{origdate} while others
 (interviews, wills, contracts) use \textsf{date}.  (See \textsf{misc}
 in section~\ref{sec:types:authdate} for the details.)  If such an
-entry, as may well occur, contains only an \textsf{origdate}, you need
-to provide \texttt{cmsdate=on} if you don't want the \textsf{origyear}
-to reappear in the body of the entry in the reference list.  I
-recommend that you have 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 \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}.
+entry, as may well occur, contains only an \textsf{origdate}, as can
+also be the case in the \textsf{letter} entries I mentioned in the
+previous paragraph, \textsf{Biber} and the default
+\cmd{DeclareLabelYear} definition now make it possible to do without a
+\texttt{cmsdate} option, as \textsf{biblatex} will in such a case use
+the \textsf{origdate} to order the entries in a reference list, and
+will also append the alphabetical suffix if more than one entry by the
+same author has the same \textsf{origyear}.  I recommend that you have
+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
+\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}.
 
 \mybigspace This \mymarginpar{\textbf{day}} field, as of
 \textsf{biblatex} 0.9, is obsolete, and will be ignored if you use it
@@ -5867,6 +5876,8 @@ styles do, and they have now found a use particularly in
 \textsf{music} and \textsf{video} entries.  Cf.\
 bernstein:shostakovich, handel:messiah.
 
+\enlargethispage{\baselineskip}
+
 \mybigspace Standard \mymarginpar{\textbf{eid}} \textsf{biblatex}
 field, providing a string or number some journals use uniquely to
 identify a particular article.  Only applicable to the
@@ -5939,11 +5950,14 @@ such an entry.  (It's a niche usage but it at least maintains
 consistency for the \texttt{reprint} mechanism.  Cf.\
 \textsf{pubstate}, below.)
 
-\mybigspace This \mymarginpar{\textbf{eventdate}} is a standard
+\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.  The field will
-currently be ignored in any other sort of entry.
+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}.
 
 \mybigspace As \mymarginpar{\textbf{foreword}} with the
 \textsf{afterword} field above, \textsf{foreword} will in general
@@ -6319,7 +6333,7 @@ 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 standard
+\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
@@ -6350,13 +6364,15 @@ 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} --- you'll need to include \texttt{cmsdate=on}
-in your \textsf{options} field so that that date will appear where it
-should, but in other entries you have a choice of which year 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.
+\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.
 
 \mylittlespace Because the \textsf{origdate} field only accepts
 numbers, some improvisation may be needed if you wish to include
@@ -6365,7 +6381,7 @@ 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}
+%\enlargethispage{\baselineskip}
 
 \mybigspace In \mymarginpar{\textbf{origlanguage}} keeping with the
 \emph{Manual}'s specifications, I have fairly thoroughly redefined
@@ -6545,6 +6561,8 @@ 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}
+
 \mybigspace A \mymarginpar{\textbf{series}} standard \textsf{biblatex}
 field, usually just a number in an \textsf{article},
 \textsf{periodical}, or \textsf{review} entry, almost always the name
@@ -6619,7 +6637,7 @@ most situations, but if you have set \texttt{useauthor=false} (and not
 only \textsf{shorteditor} will be recognized.  Cf.\
 \textsf{editortype}, above.
 
-\enlargethispage{\baselineskip}
+%\enlargethispage{\baselineskip}
 
 \mybigspace This \mymarginpar{\textbf{shorthand}} is
 \textsf{biblatex}'s mechanism for using abbreviations in citations.
@@ -6712,7 +6730,7 @@ present several reprinted books by the same author.  See
 \mybigspace The \mymarginpar{\textbf{subtitle}} subtitle for a
 \textsf{title} --- see next entry.
 
-\enlargethispage{-\baselineskip}
+%\enlargethispage{-\baselineskip}
 
 \mybigspace In \mymarginpar{\textbf{title}} the vast majority of
 cases, this field works just as it always has in \textsc{Bib}\TeX, and
@@ -6969,15 +6987,19 @@ provide one for all entry types.  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}
+\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,
-sirosh:visualcortex, wikiped:bibtex).  Please note that the
+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.
 
-\enlargethispage{\baselineskip}
+%\enlargethispage{\baselineskip}
 
 \mybigspace A \mymarginpar{\textbf{usera}} supplemental
 \textsf{biblatex} field which functions in \textsf{biblatex-chicago}
@@ -7028,6 +7050,8 @@ can translate the title and use that translation in your
 \textbf{language}, above.  (See 17.65--67, 17.166, 17.177; kern,
 pirumova:russian, weresz.)
 
+\enlargethispage{-\baselineskip}
+
 \mybigspace This \mymarginpar{\textbf{userf}} is the last of the
 supplemental fields which \textsf{biblatex} provides, used by
 \textsf{biblatex-chicago} for a very specific purpose.  When you cite
@@ -7207,7 +7231,7 @@ though I have added the last, style-specific, one.  If Lehman
 generalizes it still further in a future release, I shall do the same,
 if possible.
 
-\enlargethispage{\baselineskip}
+%\enlargethispage{\baselineskip}
 
 \mybigspace This \mymarginpar{\textbf{\textbackslash mkbibquote}} is
 the standard \textsf{biblatex} command, which requires attention here
@@ -7405,7 +7429,7 @@ specific page, then it's better only to use one citation rather than
 two, as otherwise, in the current state of the code, you'll get empty
 parentheses, like so: ().
 
-\enlargethispage{\baselineskip}
+%\enlargethispage{\baselineskip}
 
 \mylittlespace This \mymarginpar{\texttt{labelyear=\\true}} option
 tells \textsf{biblatex} to provide the special \textsf{labelyear} and
@@ -7435,7 +7459,7 @@ 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 \colmarginpar{\texttt{sortcase=\\false}} turns off
 the sorting of uppercase and lowercase letters separately, a practice
 which the \emph{Manual} doesn't appear to recommend.
 
@@ -7495,6 +7519,8 @@ 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}
+
 \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
@@ -7652,6 +7678,8 @@ 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
@@ -7676,8 +7704,6 @@ use the \cmd{citereset} command, allied possibly with the
 \textsf{biblatex}\ \texttt{citereset} option, on which see
 \textsf{biblatex.pdf} §3.1.2.1.
 
-%\enlargethispage{\baselineskip}
-
 \mylittlespace This \mymarginpar{\texttt{strict}} still-experimental
 option attempts to follow the \emph{Manual}'s recommendations (16.57)
 for formatting footnotes on the page, using no rule between them and
@@ -7693,7 +7719,7 @@ 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 \mymarginpar{\texttt{cmsdate}} \emph{Manual}
+\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
@@ -7715,10 +7741,11 @@ in 1985 (the \textsf{date}):
 As I explained in detail above in section~\ref{sec:fields:authdate},
 s.v.\ \enquote{\textbf{date},}\ because \textsf{biblatex's} sorting
 algorithms and automatic creation of the \textsf{extrayear} field
-\emph{always} refer to the \textsf{date}, there may be situations when
-you need to have the \emph{earlier} year in the \textsf{date} field,
-and the later one in \textsf{origdate}, e.g., if you have another
-reprinted work by the same author originally printed in the same year.
+refer by default to the \textsf{date} before the \textsf{origdate}
+when both are present, there may be situations when you need to have
+the \emph{earlier} year in the \textsf{date} field, and the later one
+in \textsf{origdate}, e.g., if you have another reprinted work by the
+same author originally printed in the same year.
 \textsf{Biblatex-chicago-authordate} will automatically detect this
 switch, and given the same reprinted work as above, the results will
 be as follows:
@@ -8225,7 +8252,7 @@ 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}
+%\enlargethispage{-2\baselineskip}
 
 \mylittlespace This release fixes the formatting errors of which I am
 aware, though users writing in French should be aware of problems with
@@ -8257,7 +8284,24 @@ thought I should warn you in advance.
 \section{Revision History}
 \label{sec:history}
 
-\textbf{0.9.8a: Released \today}
+\textbf{0.9.8b: Released \today}
+\begin{itemize}
+\item Bad Dates: Christian Boesch alerted me to some date-formatting
+  errors produced when using the styles with the \texttt{german}
+  option to \textsf{babel}.  A little further investigation revealed
+  similar problems with \texttt{french}, and before long it became
+  clear that date handling in \textsf{biblatex-chicago} was generally,
+  and significantly, sub-optimal.  The whole system should now be more
+  robust and more accurate.
+\item The new date-handling code shouldn't require any changes to your
+  .bib files, but users of the author-date style may want to have a
+  look at the documentation of the \textsf{letter} and \textsf{misc}
+  entry types, and of the four date fields, for some information about
+  how the changes could simplify the creation of their databases.
+\item Various other minor improvements.
+\end{itemize}
+
+\textbf{0.9.8a: Released September 21, 2011}
 \begin{itemize}
 \item Fixed a series of unsightly errors in the author-date style,
   discovered while working on the pending update to the 16th edition.
diff --git a/Master/texmf-dist/doc/latex/biblatex-chicago/cms-dates-sample.pdf b/Master/texmf-dist/doc/latex/biblatex-chicago/cms-dates-sample.pdf
index 8144329f62a..9a4956e9fde 100644
--- a/Master/texmf-dist/doc/latex/biblatex-chicago/cms-dates-sample.pdf
+++ b/Master/texmf-dist/doc/latex/biblatex-chicago/cms-dates-sample.pdf
diff --git a/Master/texmf-dist/doc/latex/biblatex-chicago/cms-dates-sample.tex b/Master/texmf-dist/doc/latex/biblatex-chicago/cms-dates-sample.tex
index 2f3c49172af..e8b20b2f592 100644
--- a/Master/texmf-dist/doc/latex/biblatex-chicago/cms-dates-sample.tex
+++ b/Master/texmf-dist/doc/latex/biblatex-chicago/cms-dates-sample.tex
@@ -168,7 +168,12 @@ the order \textsf{year, eventyear, origyear, urlyear}: e.g.,
 \autocite{evanston:library}, which only has a \textsf{urlyear}.  (You
 can eliminate some of these dates from the running, or change the
 search order, using the \cmd{DeclareLabelYear} command in your
-preamble.  Please cf.\ section~4.5.2 in \textsf{biblatex.pdf} for the
+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} and section~5.2,
+s.v.\ \enquote{date} in \textsf{biblatex-chicago.pdf} for the
 details.)  In most entry types, the absence of all four possible dates
 will automatically produce \enquote{\texttt{n.d.}\hspace{-2pt}}
 instead: \autocite{bernstein:shostakovich}.  You can also give it
@@ -234,13 +239,11 @@ place for it, making sure to include formatting:
 \label{sec:misc}
 
 When citing individual letter-like pieces from an unpublished archive
-using \textsf{origdate}, you can set the \texttt{cmsdate=on} option so
-that not only will the \textsf{origyear} appear in the citation and at
-the head of the entry in the list of references --- something
-\textsf{Biber} now does by default --- but that year also won't
-reappear in the body of the reference list entry:
+where only an \textsf{origdate} is present, you no longer need to set
+the \texttt{cmsdate} option in your .bib entry, as \textsf{Biber} and
+\textsf{biblatex-chicago} now handle this automatically:
 \autocite{creel:house}.  Non-letters, e.g., interviews, use the
-\textsf{date} field, so you don't need \texttt{cmsdate};
+\textsf{date} field, so you don't need \texttt{cmsdate} there, either:
 \autocite{spock:interview}.  For undated pieces you can put
 \cmd{bibstring\{nodate\}} in the \textsf{year} field:
 \autocite{dinkel:agassiz}.  For citing whole collections, see the next
diff --git a/Master/texmf-dist/doc/latex/biblatex-chicago/cms-notes-sample.pdf b/Master/texmf-dist/doc/latex/biblatex-chicago/cms-notes-sample.pdf
index 3c9dce93698..9e969c6e80a 100644
--- a/Master/texmf-dist/doc/latex/biblatex-chicago/cms-notes-sample.pdf
+++ b/Master/texmf-dist/doc/latex/biblatex-chicago/cms-notes-sample.pdf
diff --git a/Master/texmf-dist/doc/latex/biblatex-chicago/dates-test.bib b/Master/texmf-dist/doc/latex/biblatex-chicago/dates-test.bib
index 576b56ff528..b7d57de6083 100644
--- a/Master/texmf-dist/doc/latex/biblatex-chicago/dates-test.bib
+++ b/Master/texmf-dist/doc/latex/biblatex-chicago/dates-test.bib
@@ -724,28 +724,26 @@
   author = 	 {Creel, George},
   entrysubtype = {letter},
   title = 	 {George Creel to Colonel House},
-  options = 	 {cmsdate=on},
   note = 	 {Edward~M. House Papers},
   origdate = 	 {1918-09-25},
   organization =  {Yale University Library},
   annotation = 	 {An unpublished letter from an archive, presented in
                   a Misc entry with an entrysubtype.  The cmsdate
-                  option means that the origdate will appear at the
-                  head of the entry in the list of references, and
-                  also in citations.  The manuscript collection is
-                  found in the note and organization fields --
-                  depending on the entry, you can use note,
-                  organization, institution, and/or location, in
-                  ascending order of generality, though you should
-                  consistently put the most specific collection name
-                  in the note field.  If you are citing several items
-                  from the same collection, then the Manual suggests
-                  not having individual entries but only one for the
-                  collection (house:papers), with more specific
-                  information forming part of the flow of the text
-                  (17.233).  If, however, you cite only one item from
-                  a collection, then you can use an entry like this
-                  one.  Cf. dinkel:agassiz, spock:interview.}
+                  option is no longer needed in such an entry.  The
+                  manuscript collection is found in the note and
+                  organization fields -- depending on the entry, you
+                  can use note, organization, institution, and/or
+                  location, in ascending order of generality, though
+                  you should consistently put the most specific
+                  collection name in the note field.  If you are
+                  citing several items from the same collection, then
+                  the Manual suggests not having individual entries
+                  but only one for the collection (house:papers), with
+                  more specific information forming part of the flow
+                  of the text (17.233).  If, however, you cite only
+                  one item from a collection, then you can use an
+                  entry like this one.  Cf. dinkel:agassiz,
+                  spock:interview.}
 }
 
 @Book{davenport:attention,
@@ -886,7 +884,7 @@
                   information given in the note field, it may be less
                   awkward to use a cmsdate option rather than to put
                   reprint into a pubstate field.  This cmsdate option
-                  will print both dates, in the format 1836 [1985].}
+                  will print both dates, in the format [1836] 1985.}
 }
 
 @InReference{ency:britannica,
@@ -2646,9 +2644,8 @@
   title = 	 {EBW to Harold Ross},
   titleaddon = 	 {memorandum},
   xref = 	 {white:total},
-  options = 	 {cmsdate=on,switchdates},
   pages = 	 273,
-  date = 	 {1946-05-02},
+  origdate = 	 {1946-05-02},
   annotation = 	 {In the author-date style, the Manual recommends that
                   the list of references contain only the whole
                   collection of published letters (white:total below),
@@ -2662,22 +2659,19 @@
                   cross-references is operative in Letter entries
                   using crossref or xref (as in InCollection and
                   InProceedings entries), so the information printed
-                  in the list of references will be abbreviated.  By
-                  using the date instead of the origdate field for the
-                  date of the letter, combined with the switchdates
-                  and cmsdate calls in the options field, you'll get
-                  separate letters, ordered by date, and with a,b,c
-                  etc. appended to differentiate letters from the same
-                  year.}
+                  in the list of references will be abbreviated.  You
+                  can now simply use the origdate field for the date
+                  of the letter, and you'll get separate letters,
+                  ordered by date, and with a,b,c etc. appended to
+                  differentiate letters from the same year.}
 }
 
 @Letter{white:russ,
   author = 	 {White, E.~B.},
   title = 	 {EBW to B.~Russell},
-  options = 	 {cmsdate=on,switchdates},
   xref =  {white:total},
   pages = 	 283,
-  date = 	 {1946-09-02},
+  origdate = 	 {1946-09-02},
   annotation = 	 {This is a spurious entry I've just made up to show
                   the cross-referencing mechanism at work in Letter
                   entries.  See white:ross above for the details.}
@@ -2727,14 +2721,15 @@
 @InReference{wikiped:bibtex,
   title = 	 {Wikipedia},
   lista = {BibTeX},
-  year = 	 {2008},
   url = 	 {http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BibTeX},
   urldate = 	 {2008-06-24},
-  annotation =       {An online InReference entry, usually not presented
-                  in a list of references.  Here is how you might do
-                  so, borrowing from the urldate for the date field.
-                  You must have the urldate field, as such sources
-                  change rather rapidly.}
+  annotation =       {An online InReference entry, usually not
+                  presented in a list of references.  Here is how you
+                  might do so, with the urldate, in the absence of the
+                  other three kinds of date, providing the year for
+                  citations and list of references.  It is strongly
+                  recommended that you at least have a urldate field,
+                  as such sources change rather rapidly.}
 }
 
 @InBook{will:cohere,