From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Rasmus Subject: Re: Citations, continued Date: Sat, 07 Feb 2015 00:16:07 +0100 Message-ID: <87vbjeoclk.fsf@gmx.us> References: <87vbjmn6wy.fsf@berkeley.edu> <87sieokx8e.fsf@berkeley.edu> <54d04780.cb58460a.5243.2603@mx.google.com> <87h9v3li8t.fsf@berkeley.edu> <54d078ff.b044440a.06ec.3cf6@mx.google.com> <87d25rkmag.fsf@berkeley.edu> <54d1bc7b.c57d440a.3c5d.2dca@mx.google.com> <87vbjh284z.fsf@nicolasgoaziou.fr> <87mw4tk4m7.fsf@berkeley.edu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:38512) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YJs8N-0004Dz-4i for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Fri, 06 Feb 2015 18:16:24 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YJs8I-0003hn-5h for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Fri, 06 Feb 2015 18:16:23 -0500 Received: from plane.gmane.org ([80.91.229.3]:48494) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YJs8H-0003hU-W6 for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Fri, 06 Feb 2015 18:16:18 -0500 Received: from list by plane.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1YJs8F-0007A3-RJ for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Sat, 07 Feb 2015 00:16:15 +0100 Received: from tsn109-201-154-185.dyn.nltelcom.net ([109.201.154.185]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Sat, 07 Feb 2015 00:16:15 +0100 Received: from rasmus by tsn109-201-154-185.dyn.nltelcom.net with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Sat, 07 Feb 2015 00:16:15 +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 Hi, I realize you list Pandoc features, but I will still point out some issues with this syntax. Richard Lawrence writes: > Specifically I think we need the following categories, all of which > would be objects: > - key > - prefix / pre-text > - suffix / post-text > - locator What is the point of an locator? Why not just suffix? Presumably, if I want to put pp. in front of my page numbers or whatever I can do it with a filter or manually. > These should have a grammar like the following, based on my > (reverse-engineered) understanding of the Pandoc syntax for citations: > ... > - A key optionally begins with '-', and obligatorily contains '@' > followed by a string of charcters which begins with a letter or '_', > and may contain alphanumeric characters and the following internal > punctuation characters: > :.#$%&-+?<>~/ I fail to understand this feature. The Pandoc manual uses something like this an example: A said X in @-key; which I think is bad practice. In latex you'd write \citeauthor{key} said X in \citeyear{key}. Unless we can access other keys, why adopt a special operator for year? Why not title or author which are e.g. useful when using number citations?q > - An unbracketed citation consists of a key, optionally followed by a > locator which is enclosed in '[' ']' This is another, to me, illogical structure. [A @key B] @key [B] It is not obvious that [B] relates to @key in the second example. –Rasmus -- This message is brought to you by the department of redundant departments