From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: jorge.alfaro-murillo@yale.edu (Jorge A. Alfaro-Murillo) Subject: Re: Citation syntax: a revised proposal Date: Mon, 16 Feb 2015 11:35:02 -0500 Message-ID: <874mql7r2h.fsf@yale.edu> References: <87k2zjnc0e.fsf@berkeley.edu> <87a90e83ki.fsf@ucl.ac.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:39093) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YNOht-0004dc-22 for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Mon, 16 Feb 2015 11:39:38 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YNOhp-0001nN-HX for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Mon, 16 Feb 2015 11:39:37 -0500 Received: from plane.gmane.org ([80.91.229.3]:53316) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YNOhp-0001nF-9y for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Mon, 16 Feb 2015 11:39:33 -0500 Received: from list by plane.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1YNOhn-0007aG-FG for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Mon, 16 Feb 2015 17:39:31 +0100 Received: from nat-130-132-173-151.central.yale.edu ([130.132.173.151]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Mon, 16 Feb 2015 17:39:31 +0100 Received: from jorge.alfaro-murillo by nat-130-132-173-151.central.yale.edu with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Mon, 16 Feb 2015 17:39:31 +0100 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: emacs-orgmode@gnu.org 0. John Kitchin writes: > Citations in org are /far/ more than just references in the text > for me. They are functional links, gateways to a lot of > information connected to the citation. My org-files are much > more useful than the PDF manuscripts that get exported. I completely agree. > I also would like to see if it is workable. Same here. > There is nothing to lose in trying. org-ref will always be an > alternative option, and if the new syntax is extendable enough > it might even replace the citation links. The big advantage of org-ref is that it builds on BibTeX. From what I read in this and the previous thread, the new proposal tries more or less to reimplement BibTeX in org. (If it is not so, I apologize, because I confess that I haven't read every single email in these two veery long threads. If you plan to use BibTeX as a base, disregard the rest of the email). BibTeX is IMHO one of the best pieces of software ever created. It had a stable version from 1988 to 2010, in 2010 it was last updated, because we started to cite with long URLs (not the norm in 1988). It is something that just works as it is supposed to and has all you need for creating bibliographies. The biggest advantage of having something org/elisp native as in the proposal would be the implementation of functions to create bibliographies with a specific style, what Oren Patashnik called "Bibliography-style hacking", which is very cumbersome in BibTeX (maybe is just that I cannot read WEB/Pascal and have a strong preference for Lisp dialects). Just let me drop the mandatory reading: http://www.tex.ac.uk/tex-archive/bibliography/bibtex/base/btxdoc.pdf http://www.tex.ac.uk/tex-archive/bibliography/bibtex/base/btxhak.pdf and references therein. Best, -- Jorge.