From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Erik Hetzner Subject: Re: Citations, continued Date: Mon, 02 Feb 2015 23:30:04 -0800 Message-ID: <54d078ff.b044440a.06ec.3cf6@mx.google.com> References: <87vbjmn6wy.fsf@berkeley.edu> <87sieokx8e.fsf@berkeley.edu> <54d04780.cb58460a.5243.2603@mx.google.com> <87h9v3li8t.fsf@berkeley.edu> Reply-To: Erik Hetzner Mime-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI-EPG 1.14.7 - "Harue") Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:35943) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YIXw6-0007SS-Bh for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Tue, 03 Feb 2015 02:30:15 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YIXw2-00061A-Aq for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Tue, 03 Feb 2015 02:30:14 -0500 Received: from mail-pa0-x235.google.com ([2607:f8b0:400e:c03::235]:50109) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YIXw2-000614-2V for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Tue, 03 Feb 2015 02:30:10 -0500 Received: by mail-pa0-f53.google.com with SMTP id kx10so92766818pab.12 for ; Mon, 02 Feb 2015 23:30:09 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <87h9v3li8t.fsf@berkeley.edu> List-Id: "General discussions about Org-mode." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org To: Richard Lawrence Cc: emacs-orgmode@gnu.org Hi Richard, On Mon, 2 Feb 2015 at 20:41:06 PST, Richard Lawrence wrote: > > Hi Erik and all, > > Actually, I totally agree. For my own use, I would be completely happy > with just using the Pandoc syntax for citations in Org, without any > modifications. Great! > The only reason I proposed anything else was that it seemed like other > people already know that they need more than the Pandoc syntax provides. > I think the main realistic cases are those where, in LaTeX, you'd use > commands like \citetitle, \citedate, or \citejournal -- citation > commands that pull in just a particular field from the reference, > because that is what the context around the citation requires. I don't > see a way to do that in the Pandoc syntax. (But am I missing > something?) Hence my proposed field-selectors extension. If this is needed (and I still have a hard time seeing the use cases, but I am not an academic) perhaps it could mimic the -@doe (suppress author) syntax already used in pandoc (e.g. +title@doe). But citeproc-js/hs only support suppress author or author only, so these would not work in a pandoc export, nor any other that might depend on citeproc-js. > Personally, I need commands like these so little that I am happy to do > without them. So maybe my proposal was a bit hasty. Could we hear from > other people about how badly they need what such commands provide? > > > 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. > > Yes, I again totally agree. If people here settle on a syntax that is > close, but not quite the same as, Pandoc's, I will certainly do that. Again, this is great. I really do appreciate your getting this proposal out there. I hope that I can finish porting my pandoc parser to elisp within a week or so, so we can have an implementation to start with. best, Erik -- Sent from my free software system .