On Thursday 04 December 2008, Carcharoth wrote:
A popular approach? No offense, but isn't this just the way it should have been done all along? It is certainly the way many journals and books do it, and it is common sense.
By which standard? Short notes with bibliography is not that common from my experience and little covered in Chicago.
This is a good example of the form, though the non-hypertextual short note is certainly inconvenient.
This is a Frankenstein. A mixture of two styles: long notes and short notes + bibliography. I've never seen this in print and is poor practice.