What about namingglossapsycholx() as their twitter account ?https://twitter.com/glossapsycholx

Shouldn't it beglossapx here ? You are not using the correct template I believe here

But are the template different ?

It might be possible to do it with settings differences? I'm not sure, but here's the diff from the glossa template to get something in glossa psycholinguistics format.

• Reference format: glossa psycholinguistics uses APA 7 , glossa template uses some non-standard bibtex files (although I now see that there exists a .csl for glossa's style)
• Section numbering: glossa doesn't do trailing dots after the section number, glossa psycholinguistics wants a trailing dot after sections (but not subsections "1. Intro", but "1.1 Stuff")
• Tables and figures: glossa psycholinguistics wants table captions above the table (but glossa does below), glossa psycholinguistics wants left-aligned captions (glossa template centers, although I couldn't find documentation on glossa's website for any preference, glossa's website does link to a latex .cls that centers)
• The set of unnumbered sections at the end of the paper differ slightly between the two journals, both on which sections are included and when they are required or not.

I think if it's possible to set toggles for the table captions and section numbering in the yaml that interact with the latex template, then glossa psycholinguistics format could be added to the glossa template by

• setting yaml toggles for tables, caption alignment, and section numbering (perhaps this should be one toggle for glossa versus glossa psycholinguistics?)
• switching to pandoc/csl for refs, and having both apa7 and glossa as labelled options
• adding all the unnumbered sections to the skeleton and labeling what each journal wants in them and when

If this sounds like a better way forward, I can work on adapting the glossa template to support both glossa and glossa psycholinguistics.

I would like to clarify where do you think those change go ? From what I can see in the PR, it seems nothing is different in thetemplate.tex or the associated resources, and things are different only in theskeleton.Rmd. Is that so ?

I understand now that there may not be an easy way to :

• Have aglossapsycholx_article() function in the package
• but none of the resources needs to be copied from glossa as template is the same.

There should be a way to reuse theglossa template, but provide another skeleton. If this is not possible easily already, I need to provide a way for this to happen.

So, probably clear question is: Is this PR aiming to offer askeleton.Rmd specific toGlossa Psycholinguistics journal which could useglossa_article() really ?

My understanding is thatGlossa Psycholinguistics is only some configuration variations from default glossa. Is that right ?

In the PR currently, there are

• differences in the glossa.cls file of a few lines
  diff glossa/skeleton/glossa.cls glossapx/skeleton/glossa.cls
  < \RequirePackage[font=sf,labelfont=bf,labelsep=colon,justification=raggedright,singlelinecheck=off,justification=centering]{caption}

\RequirePackage[font=sf,labelfont=bf,labelsep=colon,justification=raggedright,singlelinecheck=off]{caption}
498a499,502

\renewcommand{\thesection}{\arabic{section}.}
\renewcommand{\thesubsection}{\arabic{section}.\arabic{subsection}}
\renewcommand{\thesubsubsection}{\arabic{section}.\arabic{subsection}.\arabic{subsubsection}}

• apa7.csl for references in the skeleton
• differences to skeleton.Rmd

I agree that the resources/template.tex is the same, so I just need a different skeleton but it's more than just the skeleton.Rmd since it needs the different cls and csl files.

I don't know if these would count as configuration variations?

Thanks for the clarification.

I also read the following page:https://escholarship.org/uc/glossapsycholinguistics/structure_of_submission
and noticed this

Glossa Psycholinguistics follows many of the style guidelines specified for Glossa: a journal of general linguistics. However, due to important differencesGlossa: General stylesheets or template files should not be used for a Glossa Psycholinguistics submission, as detailed below.

I understand there are important differences now. I need to understand the maintainance part of this.

differences in the glossa.cls file of a few lines

Did you make the adaptation ? Is there aglossapsycholx LaTeX template we can use somewhere ?
How to we maintain the file ? How to update ? What is the source of truth for this template ?

Is there anything to change to follow the guideline on their website ? I don't see any mention of originalglossa.cls in their website.

I agree that the resources/template.tex is the same, so I just need a different skeleton but it's more than just the skeleton.Rmd since it needs the different cls and csl files.

I don't know if these would count as configuration variations?

Different CSL is a configuration with thecsl: field in YAML.

Regardingcls, does the line need to be inserted into the CLS file explicitly ?
Can't it be in thetemplate.tex directly ?

If this is really the same resource, but some different skeleton.Rmd and format function, I can think of how to allow that inrticles

Thanks a lot for the discussion, I think this is the first case we have like this. Really interesting.