[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [O] Citations, continued
From: |
Rasmus |
Subject: |
Re: [O] Citations, continued |
Date: |
Mon, 09 Feb 2015 11:02:13 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.0.50 (gnu/linux) |
Nicolas Goaziou <address@hidden> writes:
> In the initial suggestion @k:journal or @k:author was not possible. In
> pandoc, AFAIU, in-text means author is outside parenthesis. Nothing
> fancier. So address@hidden would mean: "author" is outside parenthesis, but
> should not be displayed anyway.
If address@hidden has non-obvious, interchangeable meanings depending on where
it
happens to be typed I like it even less. "-@" seems flaky and
over-complicated IMO.
> Really my concerns are about parsing speed and readability within the
> document.
Agreed.
> Heavy biblatex users will eventually have to fall-back to
> LaTeX-specific syntax at some point anyway.
That's unfortunate.
>>> I understand, but would it be needed to have both A (Y, C) and A (B, Y)
>>> in the same document?
>>
>> Sure, why not?
>
> I don't know. Pandoc doesn't allow it, and, apparently, nobody
> complained enough to add this feature to Pandoc citations. So, either it
> is not that useful, or Pandoc citations are hardly used.
Perhaps Org-Mode users write more sophisticated documents
See Tom's post for a more careful analysis of what data a citation
contains.
> Also, it is ambiguous with link syntax (e.g., if pre begin with "[") and
> footnotes syntax.
So don't allow footnotes and links within citations. Emphasis is enough.
This is a less severe loss than PRENOTE. Also, nested citations can be
dropped: e.g. A1 (Y1, POST1, PRE1 A2 Y2 POST2) if that makes parsing
easier.
>>> I haven't much against @k1, but it introduces more false positives than
>>> address@hidden
>>
>> It could check if k1 is a known key and interpret "@k1" accordingly.
>
> No it couldn't. Org doesn't know about keys. Or, more precisely, syntax
> mustn't depend on known keys. I don't want to make the same mistake as
> export blocks (i.e., #+begin_html doesn't mean the same thing if
> "ox-html" is loaded or not).
That's valid. I remember having run into this (and maybe even report it
as a bug).
—Rasmus
--
With monopolies the cake is a lie!
- Re: [O] Citations, continued, (continued)
- Re: [O] Citations, continued, Thomas S. Dye, 2015/02/10
- Re: [O] Citations, continued, Nicolas Goaziou, 2015/02/08
- Re: [O] Citations, continued, Richard Lawrence, 2015/02/08
- Re: [O] Citations, continued, Nicolas Goaziou, 2015/02/08
- Re: [O] Citations, continued, Rasmus, 2015/02/08
- Re: [O] Citations, continued, Nicolas Goaziou, 2015/02/08
- Re: [O] Citations, continued, Rasmus, 2015/02/08
- Re: [O] Citations, continued, Nicolas Goaziou, 2015/02/08
- Re: [O] Citations, continued, Rasmus, 2015/02/08
- Re: [O] Citations, continued, Nicolas Goaziou, 2015/02/08
- Re: [O] Citations, continued,
Rasmus <=
- Re: [O] Citations, continued, Nicolas Goaziou, 2015/02/08
- Re: [O] Citations, continued, Rasmus, 2015/02/08
- Re: [O] Citations, continued, John Kitchin, 2015/02/09
- Re: [O] Citations, continued, Nicolas Goaziou, 2015/02/10
- Re: [O] Citations, continued, Rasmus, 2015/02/10
- Re: [O] Citations, continued, Nicolas Goaziou, 2015/02/10
- Re: [O] Citations, continued, Rasmus, 2015/02/10
- Re: [O] Citations, continued, Andreas Leha, 2015/02/10
- Re: [O] Citations, continued, John Kitchin, 2015/02/10
- Re: [O] Citations, continued, Rasmus, 2015/02/10