From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Eric S Fraga Subject: Re: Citation syntax: Underscore MUST(?) be allowed in cite keys? Date: Tue, 10 Mar 2015 10:18:22 +0000 Message-ID: <87ioe9p34h.fsf@ucl.ac.uk> References: <87pp8o1t9f.fsf@gmx.us> <87pp8o6nt9.fsf@berkeley.edu> <87fv9i9z8s.fsf@nicolasgoaziou.fr> <87bnk60zhc.fsf@berkeley.edu> <54FA9AA9.9070505@gmail.com> <87r3t05okc.fsf@nicolasgoaziou.fr> <87ioeci6f6.fsf@gmx.us> <87r3szk6q9.fsf@gmx.us> <87oao3yluf.fsf@berkeley.edu> <87k2yqyx55.fsf@berkeley.edu> <871tkyxgjg.fsf@ucl.ac.uk> <871tkxzo16.fsf@berkeley.edu> <87385ds54y.fsf@ucl.ac.uk> <87sidd2rph.fsf@nicolasgoaziou.fr> <87385dtew6.fsf@gmx.us> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:56986) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YVHFB-0004kE-Gc for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Tue, 10 Mar 2015 06:18:34 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YVHF7-0003Er-RS for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Tue, 10 Mar 2015 06:18:33 -0400 Received: from mail-am1on0106.outbound.protection.outlook.com ([157.56.112.106]:10216 helo=emea01-am1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YVHF7-0003D5-JV for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Tue, 10 Mar 2015 06:18:29 -0400 In-Reply-To: <87385dtew6.fsf@gmx.us> (rasmus@gmx.us's message of "Tue, 10 Mar 2015 09:50:33 +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: Rasmus Cc: emacs-orgmode@gnu.org On Tuesday, 10 Mar 2015 at 09:50, Rasmus wrote: > Nicolas Goaziou writes: >> 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-',?.'{}. I agree. I would rather type @key >90% of the time instead of @{key}. For me, the alternative is more than a moderately high price to pay! If we don't want a proliferation of alternative syntax, maybe we need to impose the restriction already suggested of not allowing punctuation at the end of a key. Solve the problem upstream... and not have the tail wag the dog! But, of course, don't let this tail (me) wag the dog (the rest of you) should the consensus be that the design is cleaner with @{key}. I'll manage! :) Thanks, eric -- : Eric S Fraga (0xFFFCF67D), Emacs 25.0.50.1, Org release_8.3beta-843-ga5f1a3.dirty