From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Richard Lawrence Subject: Re: Citation syntax: Underscore MUST(?) be allowed in cite keys? Date: Tue, 10 Mar 2015 08:32:30 -0700 Message-ID: <87wq2oyik1.fsf@berkeley.edu> References: <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> <87ioe9p34h.fsf@ucl.ac.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:41953) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YVM9r-0005MU-Cz for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Tue, 10 Mar 2015 11:33:29 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YVM9m-0008Ji-F1 for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Tue, 10 Mar 2015 11:33:23 -0400 Received: from plane.gmane.org ([80.91.229.3]:34310) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YVM9m-0008IY-6d for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Tue, 10 Mar 2015 11:33:18 -0400 Received: from list by plane.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1YVM9f-0006bR-Q4 for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Tue, 10 Mar 2015 16:33:12 +0100 Received: from c-67-169-117-151.hsd1.ca.comcast.net ([67.169.117.151]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Tue, 10 Mar 2015 16:33:11 +0100 Received: from richard.lawrence by c-67-169-117-151.hsd1.ca.comcast.net with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Tue, 10 Mar 2015 16:33:11 +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 Eric S Fraga writes: > 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! I too agree. If we only allow one syntax, I much prefer to stick with the original, and deal with the punctuation restriction elsewhere. As far as I can tell, the only actual example we've seen of a key that ends in punctuation is the one Vaidheeswaran sent, and that still seems like an edge case to me: it should be corrected by adding data to the reference database, not accommodated by Org's key syntax. I think Tom's worry that we might see more of that kind of thing in the future is fair, and deserves more thought. I suggest we stick with the original syntax for now, and revisit the issue in the future if it becomes clear that there are lots of non-conforming keys `in the wild'. In the meantime, tools that automatically insert keys from citation managers can warn the user if they don't conform to the syntax. Best, Richard