From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Rasmus <rasmus@gmx.us>
Subject: Re: Citation syntax: Underscore MUST(?) be allowed in cite keys?
Date: Tue, 10 Mar 2015 09:50:33 +0100
Message-ID: <87385dtew6.fsf@gmx.us>
References: <md7ibs$di1$2@ger.gmane.org> <54F75222.8030805@gmail.com>
	<87pp8o1t9f.fsf@gmx.us> <87pp8o6nt9.fsf@berkeley.edu>
	<87fv9i9z8s.fsf@nicolasgoaziou.fr> <mdc762$sf7$1@ger.gmane.org>
	<87bnk60zhc.fsf@berkeley.edu> <54FA9AA9.9070505@gmail.com>
	<m28uf81yu8.fsf@tsdye.com> <87r3t05okc.fsf@nicolasgoaziou.fr>
	<87ioeci6f6.fsf@gmx.us> <m2twxwm88t.fsf@tsdye.com>
	<87r3szk6q9.fsf@gmx.us> <m2oao3mn9g.fsf@tsdye.com>
	<87oao3yluf.fsf@berkeley.edu> <m2bnk2nbt1.fsf@tsdye.com>
	<87k2yqyx55.fsf@berkeley.edu> <871tkyxgjg.fsf@ucl.ac.uk>
	<871tkxzo16.fsf@berkeley.edu> <87385ds54y.fsf@ucl.ac.uk>
	<87sidd2rph.fsf@nicolasgoaziou.fr>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Return-path: <emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:51378)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <geo-emacs-orgmode@m.gmane.org>) id 1YVFsK-0007RG-Bc
	for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Tue, 10 Mar 2015 04:50:53 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <geo-emacs-orgmode@m.gmane.org>) id 1YVFsF-0007gL-9N
	for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Tue, 10 Mar 2015 04:50:52 -0400
Received: from plane.gmane.org ([80.91.229.3]:56731)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <geo-emacs-orgmode@m.gmane.org>) id 1YVFsF-0007g3-2d
	for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Tue, 10 Mar 2015 04:50:47 -0400
Received: from list by plane.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69)
	(envelope-from <geo-emacs-orgmode@m.gmane.org>) id 1YVFsD-0005Q1-Fp
	for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Tue, 10 Mar 2015 09:50:45 +0100
Received: from tsn109-201-154-163.dyn.nltelcom.net ([109.201.154.163])
	by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian))
	id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00
	for <emacs-orgmode@gnu.org>; Tue, 10 Mar 2015 09:50:45 +0100
Received: from rasmus by tsn109-201-154-163.dyn.nltelcom.net with local
	(Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00
	for <emacs-orgmode@gnu.org>; Tue, 10 Mar 2015 09:50:45 +0100
List-Id: "General discussions about Org-mode." <emacs-orgmode.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/options/emacs-orgmode>,
	<mailto:emacs-orgmode-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-orgmode>
List-Post: <mailto:emacs-orgmode@gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:emacs-orgmode-request@gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-orgmode>,
	<mailto:emacs-orgmode-request@gnu.org?subject=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: emacs-orgmode@gnu.org

Nicolas Goaziou <mail@nicolasgoaziou.fr> writes:

> I'd rather have a single syntax for keys.

Me to.

> Since this one is not much more intrusive than the previous one, we
> could as well drop @key in favor of @{key}.

It seems like a moderately dear price to pay for everyone with "normal"
citation keys...  It's better than @key-with-',?.'{}.

How about other citations?  Are we talking the wholesale solution:

    [cite: @{key}]
    [(cite): @{key}]
    [@{key}]

Otherwise, I don't see how we have come closer to one syntax from a user
point of view.  And I don't like the above.

—Rasmus


-- 
Vote for proprietary math!