emacs-orgmode
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [O] Citations, continued


From: Thomas S. Dye
Subject: Re: [O] Citations, continued
Date: Sun, 08 Feb 2015 12:23:51 -1000

Aloha all,

I'm having a hard time relating the various syntax proposals to a
common, shared goal for Org mode users.  This might just be me--I often
struggle to understand conversations on the Org mode list.  However, I'm
also convinced that lack of clearly shared goals really gets in the way
of project success.  So, because I'd like to see Org mode settle on a
citation syntax, I'll risk exposing my limitations by describing what I
think a reasonable goal might be and then offer some comments on a
recent post.

IIUC, Org mode citation syntax needs to capture four pieces of
information for an *individual* citation: a =key= into one or more
stores of bibliographic information; a =citation-command= that is
understood by the =citation-style= specified for the document; a
=pre-note= of arbitrary text in any language; and a =post-note= of
arbitrary text in any language.  At least, this is how the LaTeX world
accommodates the almost unconstrained and ever-growing variability in
bibliographic styles in the wild.

Note that =key= and =citation-command= are limited for any one document
by the keys used in the store of bibliographic information and the
commands defined for the citation style.  In practice, though, both
=key= and =citation-command= are arbitrarily complex, because there are
no universal constraints on either the content of keys used by current
and future bibliographic information stores, or the commands defined by
current and future citation styles.  Also, there is no guarantee that
the Org mode author created any of the keys and it is likely that the
Org mode author did not name any of the citation commands.

When I have targeted a specific citation style (typically specified by a
publisher) and a particular group of objects to cite, I want Org mode to
1) treat me kindly when I am creating a citation for my document, 2)
give me just enough information in the Org mode buffer so I can easily
identify the four pieces of information I've entered *without having to
do anything except read*, and 3) help me change from one citation
command to another when I'm editing.

During citation creation I want access to all the keys in the
bibliographic store(s), enough information so I can unambiguously
identify the object associated with each key, easy access to all the
commands defined by the citation style, and no constraints at all on
what I can write for the pre-note and post-note.  I want this part to be
as verbose as possible, but limited to the information that I really need.

When I look at the citation in the Org mode buffer I want to 1) see the
pre-note and post-note, preferably in the correct relationship to the
citation, 2) know what citation command I selected, and 3) know which
object I've cited.  *I don't want to see the key*; the keys I create
myself are long and ugly and those created by others are typically long,
ugly, and (for me) often indecipherable.  I also don't want to see the
citation command, just an indicator that distinguishes among the handful
or so possibilities allowed by the citation style and actually used in
the document.

When I'm rewriting or editing, I often need to change the citation
command, usually to switch between, e.g., (Lawrence 2014) and Lawrence
(2014).  In my current setup this is one of the actions that has its own
hot key (I have only a few hot keys because I have a hard time
remembering them).

Now that I've specified goals, there are a few comments interspersed
below.

Richard Lawrence <address@hidden> writes:

> Hi John and all,
>
> On Sun, Feb 8, 2015 at 1:46 AM, John Kitchin <address@hidden> wrote:
>> My only concern is that it remains possible to support this relatively
>> full set of citation options on export:
>> ...
>> which we are currently able to do. I never type any of those in, org-ref
>> does it automatically from a key selection tool.

I'd rather just see the citation commands associated with a particular
citation style.  I've been switching from natbib to biblatex over the
last few years (natbib at work with my colleagues there, and biblatex
for my research documents not associated with work) and I want Org mode
to remember which one I'm using, if possible, so I don't have to think
about it.

>
> My original proposal was that we achieve this by allowing splitting
> citations into an in-line pointer and out-of-line definition.  Since
> the out-of-line definition would be a greater element, it could take
> #+ATTR_BACKEND properties, which could be used for this, like so:
>
> The literature is divided on this point. [cite:1]
>
> #+ATTR_LATEX: :command autocites
> [cite:1] For Position A see @Doe99; @Smith99; for Position B see @Foobar87.
>

This is extremely problematic for me.  IIUC, I'd often need to click on
[cite:1] to learn what I'd cited and then I'd need to click again to
figure out which object was associated with each key.  I want to be able
to jump directly to the entry in the bibliographic store from the
in-text citation, and I want to jump into the bibliographic store only
when I want to pick out some specific information from the entry.

> What I like about this is that it separates the citation part from the
> LaTeX-specific part, and it leverages existing syntax for the
> LaTeX-specific part.  Something like this seems right to me.

I don't think the citation command should be thought of as LaTeX
specific, but rather as one of the four pieces of information required
to create arbitrarily complex citations in the output.  IIUC, it should
be possible to generate the required information for any document
preparation system from the information potentially supplied by
=pre-note=, =post-note=, =citation-command=, and =key=.

All the best,
Tom

-- 
Thomas S. Dye
http://www.tsdye.com



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]