While looking at #2358 (minimally = patching my own local version of nbibtex.lua to use luautf8), I reconsidered how names with particles where handled, and something was amiss...
Actually, BibLaTeX expect such names to be writen as (say) author = {von Trier, Lars} , and the von is considered as a dropping-particle (which is extracted, and possibly rendered in ouput as "Lars von Trier", or "Trier, Lars von" depending on context and citation style. In the code, when leveraging nbibtex for CSL compatibility, I had noted an issue:
-- BibLaTex doesn't distinguish between dropping-particle and non-dropping-particle...
-- So we assume it is non-dropping-particle.
-- Note: citeproc-lua assumes a non-dropping-particle too, without comment (checking its code)
-- I'd like to be more convinced, or the BibLaTeX folks to evolve towards something more
-- explicit. We are in 2024, folks, there has been time to think about it...
set_name(von_start, von_lim, "non-dropping-particle", "non-dropping-particle-short") -- CSL compatibility
Well, whatever citeproc-lua does (or whether I read it correctly), the above is wrong. True, "BibLaTeX doesn't distinguish between dropping-particle and non-dropping-particle", but the assumption is that the "isVon" logic identifies a dropping-particle, and BibLaTeX has no support for non-dropping particles.
It happens to be a known issue (looking for discussions on the internet) -- and a real problem for Spanish and Portuguese conventions. E.g. "Cunegunda de la Torre" would theoretically have to be listed as "De la Torre, Cunegunda", considering the particle as non-dropping. Well, not even really, it's true in general usage, but in bibliographies, it depends on the citation style, and on what CSL calls "demote-non-dropping-particle". It's a mess, but in brief: there, it should be a non-dropping particle, and the citation style decides whether to demote it or not, for display or for sorting (wow indeed...). But that's not something one can do with BibLaTeX without using hacks of sorts such as bracing entries (which causes a bunch of other issues), adding commands (which do not make it portable and general), etc. -- So that's not something for which there's any kind of "good solution".
TL;DR: The above bit of code should be changed, and assume a dropping-particle, as was intended in that good old BibTeX, however bad it is.
While looking at #2358 (minimally = patching my own local version of nbibtex.lua to use luautf8), I reconsidered how names with particles where handled, and something was amiss...
Actually, BibLaTeX expect such names to be writen as (say)
author = {von Trier, Lars}, and the von is considered as a dropping-particle (which is extracted, and possibly rendered in ouput as "Lars von Trier", or "Trier, Lars von" depending on context and citation style. In the code, when leveraging nbibtex for CSL compatibility, I had noted an issue:Well, whatever citeproc-lua does (or whether I read it correctly), the above is wrong. True, "BibLaTeX doesn't distinguish between dropping-particle and non-dropping-particle", but the assumption is that the "isVon" logic identifies a dropping-particle, and BibLaTeX has no support for non-dropping particles.
It happens to be a known issue (looking for discussions on the internet) -- and a real problem for Spanish and Portuguese conventions. E.g. "Cunegunda de la Torre" would theoretically have to be listed as "De la Torre, Cunegunda", considering the particle as non-dropping. Well, not even really, it's true in general usage, but in bibliographies, it depends on the citation style, and on what CSL calls "demote-non-dropping-particle". It's a mess, but in brief: there, it should be a non-dropping particle, and the citation style decides whether to demote it or not, for display or for sorting (wow indeed...). But that's not something one can do with BibLaTeX without using hacks of sorts such as bracing entries (which causes a bunch of other issues), adding commands (which do not make it portable and general), etc. -- So that's not something for which there's any kind of "good solution".
TL;DR: The above bit of code should be changed, and assume a dropping-particle, as was intended in that good old BibTeX, however bad it is.