Thanks for the quick help. I will try it this way, although it means that several settings of the earlier contributor -- which are correct -- will be changed. You can then decide when I send a pull request. I am not sure whether this is a good solution, and in the long term, I can imagine that creating additional versions for attributes can be added to the frequent "single" and "multiple", e.g. "kanji", "kanji-abbreviated", "kana"; the alphabetical version could then stay as is, and according to the journal's requirements, one can choose single and multiple "p." / "pp." and the kana version of et al. beside an abbreviated kanji version for translator. But I see that this needs additional programming in the CSL processor which may be difficult, beside the discussions about what to add and what not. So I will work on "hard coded" Japanese CSL styles for the time being as well. -- The locale will be my first pull request, so bare with me.

Sebastian, today I uploaded a version of the Japanese locale. But I am not happy with it and need to test it. I did not know how to test without having that locale registered, so I sent a pull request. But now I see that I could set up a CSL style with a special locale tag at the beginning where I can set up all elements and attributes to test. I could later update the existing locale, when I have tested the individual locale elements in the CSL files. Do I understand that correctly? That would make working with all these different versions in Japanese paper really easy, and there is no need to officially post the version I have uploaded (though it should be OK). After all, I have to say that CSL and the locale XML is much easier and a lot better developed than the fragile BibLatex / Biber environment that I have tested for years now. I would wish for some more CSL variables for the multilingual work I am doing, but at least, a stable and easy to understand environment is already there. Best, Maria