Why be consistent in footnotes?

I recently spent hours going over a copy-edited book manuscript, and one of the most time-consuming pieces involved trying to make footnote format consistent from chapter to chapter and note to note (this is a book with two co-authors).  And I wondered... WHY AM I DOING THIS? Law professors whine all the time about bluebooking, but let me take the whining a step further: it's not just that particular citation conventions (bluebooking, Chicago Style Manual, whatever) are arbitrary, but the insistence that note styles within a book or article be internally consistent also seems pointless. That is: there is one and only one thing a reader needs in a footnote, right, and that's the ability to go find the source themselves if so inclined. But does the reader give a hoot if footnote 6 lists volume number after the name of the journal, while footnote 45 lists volume number before the name of the journal? Who cares? Is there any non-ritualistic, non-aesthetic reason for any of this?

Comments

[Guest]

One nonaesthetic, nonritualistic reason is that it spares the reader the inconvenience of wondering whether your inconsistency is intentional or not. Besides generally increasing the level of confidence the reader has in an author and a text, consistent references mean the reader doesn't have to wonder if you've made a mistake, and if so, in what direction. What if the journal number could be mistaken for a page number? That would be wicked annoying.

[Guest]

PS: isn't this why law profs have research assistants? :-)

[ed hardy caps]

one day i went shopping outside,and in an ed hardy store,I found some kinds of ed hardy i love most they are Your website is really good Thank you for the information

[Coach Outlet]

Chief Justice Robert's decision for the unanimous Court in in the law school/military recruiting

[bridesmaiddresses]

Do not get your girls wear a plain white bridesmaid dress on stage in order to avoid distracting.
http://www.weddingdressmart.com