On Mon,  2 Feb 2015 at 10:02:41 PST,
Richard Lawrence <richard.lawrence@berkeley.edu> wrote:
> 
> Hi all,
> 
> Here is the citation syntax proposal I have mentioned in a couple of
> posts now.  I have attached it as an Org document for better
> readability, and also reproduced the text below.  Let me know what you
> think!

Hi Richard,

I am really, really glad to see people discussing citations in
org-mode. But I have some concerns about this proposal.

Before extensions are proposed to the pandoc format, I think it is
important to understand how flexible the combination of pandoc, and
what citeproc provides. I believe that pandoc can cover most of what
you want.

I also believe it would be a mistake to start from the idea of a
pandoc-style citation syntax that deviates from pandoc. Better instead
to start from what pandoc does now and find out what isn’t working for
org-mode users before extending pandoc, especially in ways that are
not compatible with pandoc.

And if extensions are proposed, it would be best to propose them on
the pandoc-discuss mailing list. It would be wonderful for users if
the syntax in pandoc-markdown and org-mode could stay aligned.

For more info on the flexibility of pandoc+citeproc, see
http://johnmacfarlane.net/pandoc/README.html#citations and
http://johnmacfarlane.net/pandoc/demos.html. It is also important to
distinguish what are features of the citeproc style (e.g. inline v.
footnote citations) and what are determined by the author and thus
should be present in the syntax (e.g. use or do not use a suffix or
locator).

From the example document:

1.   @item1 says blah.
2.   @item1 [p. 30] says blah.
3.   @item1 [p. 30, with suffix] says blah.
4.   @item1 [-@item2 p. 30; see also @item3] says blah.
5.   A citation group [see @item1 p. 34-35; also @item3 chap. 3].
6.   Another one [see @item1 p. 34-35].
7.   Citation with a suffix and locator [@item1 pp. 33, 35-37, and nowhere else].
8.   A citation without locators [@item3].
9.   Citation with suffix only [@item1 and nowhere else].
10.  Like a citation without author: [-@item1], and now Doe with a locator [-@item2 p. 44].

How this is rendered depends on the note style. In chicago author date it will have:

1.   Doe (2005) says blah.
2.   Doe (2005, 30) says blah.
3.   Doe (2005, 30, with suffix) says blah.
4.   Doe (2005; 2006, 30; see also Doe and Roe 2007) says blah.
5.   A citation group (see Doe 2005, 34–35; also Doe and Roe 2007, chap. 3).
6.   Another one (see Doe 2005, 34–35).
7.   Citation with a suffix and locator (Doe 2005, 33, 35–37, and nowhere else).
8.   A citation without locators (Doe and Roe 2007).
9.   Citation with suffix only (Doe 2005 and nowhere else).
10.  Like a citation without author: (2005), and now Doe with a locator (2006, 44).

with a bibliography, while in chicago fullnote bibliography everything
will be in footnotes (this is easier to see in HTML:
http://johnmacfarlane.net/pandoc/demo/example24b.html) or attached.

best, Erik