Re: Citation syntax and ODT

[Vaidheeswaran C <vaidheeswaran.chinnaraju@gmail.com>]

On Tuesday 24 February 2015 10:31 AM, Thomas S. Dye wrote:
> Vaidheeswaran C<vaidheeswaran.chinnaraju@gmail.com>  writes:
>
>> Often times there is a difference between what is possible and what is
>> the common practice.  So,
>>
>> 1. How often do you intermix in-text and parenthetical styles.
>
> Every day?

Ok.

>> 2. Can the document author re-word his work in such a way that an
>>     in-text or parenthetical citation could be replaced by the other
>>     without compromising on the overall style of the produced document.
>
> Yes, but the author will certainly choose to use a tool that doesn't
> require this.

(Let me remind you, when it comes to LaTeX, I have zero knowledge.)

1. When you say 'tool' what exactly do you mean?

2. Give us some concrete examples of what 'this tool' does.

    a) Can an elisp module aspire to replicate what 'this tool' does?

    b) 'The task' that 'this tool' accomplishes, is it 'common' across
       all the citation engines that the participants (in this
       discussion) have in mind.

----------------------------------------------------------------

Org crowd is essentially a LaTeX crowd and Emacs crowd is invariably
academic in nature.  It is for this sole reason, that one often
doesn't hear much frequent complaints regarding lack of citation
support.

(I think), if we could keep the OTHER users -- by this I mean, users
of ASCII or HTML or ODT backends happy or 'just happy' we have made a
good progress.

Pleasing LaTeX crowd, which is already pleased with status-quo seems a
bit pointless to me.  Put other way, the LaTeX crowd should represent
just those aspects which it is displeased with.