On Sat, Apr 24, 2021, 1:08 PM Nicolas Goaziou <mail@nicolasgoaziou.fr>
wrote:

> Hello,
>
> "Bruce D'Arcus" <bdarcus@gmail.com> writes:
>
> > This distinction is wrong, and we should treat "suppress-author" as a
> > citation style instead.
> >
> > The result would be:
> >
> > [cite/supress-author:doe19;doe20]
> >
> > Or even can keep the shorthand:
> >
> > [cite/-:doe19;doe20]
> >
> > In fact, with the change, could even remove it entirely
>
> We introduced :suppress-author because someone requested it at some
> point. I don't remember who, but it may be worth asking that person.
>

I did some quick searching.

Wow; this goes back a long time!

Anyway, Richard Lawrence summarized previous discussions, which includes
this detail, in this 2015 post:

https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-orgmode/2015-02/msg00932.html

Not sure if he introduced the idea or not, but if not, he should know.

I think there are two points to consider before removing suppress-author
> syntax:
>
> 1. does it make sense to apply it independently on references within
>    a full citation?
>
> 2. does it make sense to apply it on top of another style?
>

Yes; excellent summary.

As I say, my impulse is to say no to both, outside some corner cases that
people could work around in other ways.

But I hope people will challenge me if this is a bad idea.

And hopefully Richard can weigh in.

If both answers are no, this can definitely go away.
>
> > Or even can keep the shorthand:
> >
> > [cite/-:doe19;doe20]
>
> Note that Org Citation library does not recognize styles. It is up to
> the processor to interpret it as a short-hand for "suppress-author".
>

Right; I understand.

Bruce

>