From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Nicolas Goaziou Subject: Re: Citation syntax: a revised proposal Date: Mon, 16 Feb 2015 18:43:22 +0100 Message-ID: <874mqliwg5.fsf@nicolasgoaziou.fr> References: <87k2zjnc0e.fsf@berkeley.edu> <87zj8fjdnv.fsf@nicolasgoaziou.fr> <873867m4kg.fsf@berkeley.edu> <87fva7jaly.fsf@nicolasgoaziou.fr> <87zj8fc7w5.fsf@gmail.com> <87bnkvj85w.fsf@nicolasgoaziou.fr> <87wq3jc6dc.fsf@gmail.com> <877fvjj5kx.fsf@nicolasgoaziou.fr> <873865rdwm.fsf@berkeley.edu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:53385) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YNPgY-0004Pd-2O for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Mon, 16 Feb 2015 12:42:19 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YNPgT-0005HZ-Q4 for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Mon, 16 Feb 2015 12:42:18 -0500 Received: from relay3-d.mail.gandi.net ([2001:4b98:c:538::195]:54214) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YNPgT-0005HD-JT for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Mon, 16 Feb 2015 12:42:13 -0500 In-Reply-To: <873865rdwm.fsf@berkeley.edu> (Richard Lawrence's message of "Mon, 16 Feb 2015 08:59:05 -0800") 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 Richard Lawrence writes: > I am OK with this if it is important, though I am a little hesitant. I don't know if it is important. Just thinking out loud. > In the last thread, you expressed concern that we not have too much > variation after the opening `[' for performance reasons, which is why I > kept all the (non-simple) citations to `[cite: ...]'. Sorry if I wasn't clear. Variations after the opening "[" are OK as long as they are contained in a _fixed_ set. Of course, the smaller the set the better. However, a customizable "cite" keyword (=C3=A0 la `org-add-link-type') is a no-go. If this is really needed, I already suggested [cite:subtype: ...] where "subtype" can be associated to any number of attributes, at user's discretion. > Unless you have changed your mind, I assume this means we should try not > to have very many options for this position. Expressing capitalization > here would mean there are now four options, two of which are devoted to > expressing capitalization. Is capitalization important enough to > introduce the complexity for it at *this* crucial syntactic position? Again, I don't know if capitalization is important enough, but the added complexity in this case is negligible. Anyhow, I am not wedded to the idea. > If we're trying to keep the number of variants after `[' low, we should > think carefully about what is important enough to go there. (I think > parenthetical vs. in-text does meet that bar, but I am not sure > special-case capitalization does.) OK. > Aesthetically, this feels a little *too* much like BibLaTeX to me. I didn't know BibLaTeX used it at the time I suggested the idea. I didn't know BibLaTeX was deemed as aesthetically wrong either (why is it so?). Regards,