Standards for Publication References

[Kathy]

What are the current standards when referencing the name of a
publication in a document -
(now I'm dating myself) the 'old' standard was to underline the name.
I am under the belief that the 'new' standard is to italicize (e.g.
IRS Publication 2011 Employee Blah, Blah Blah) with no underline. Is
the entire publication name to be italicized or only, in the above
example, Employee Blah, Blah, Blah - or should the entire name be
italicized???

 

[Jay Freedman]

There is no "standard" standard, but rather a multiplicity of standards for
citation formats.

The underline-vs.-italic question is fairly simple to answer: When everyone
used typewriters, there was no way to use italic type unless you could
afford an IBM Selectric with interchangeable type elements. Underlining was
accepted as a substitute, although in large quantities it made the text
unreadable. Now that true italic type is available to anyone, it should be
used. (My apologies to attorneys whose courts mandate Courier font and
underlining. Let's hope the courts come into the 20th century some time
during the 21st.)

With regard to your example, I would italicize only the publication's title,
and possibly place a comma between the publication number and the title. But
that's just me... You could look at the IRS web site or their other
publications, or other places where they're cited. There are numerous style
guides, most of which disagree with each other.

--
Regards,
Jay Freedman
Microsoft Word MVP
Email cannot be acknowledged; please post all follow-ups to the newsgroup so
all may benefit.