Re: Question about citation processors [wip-cite branch]

[Denis Maier <denis.maier.lists@mailbox.org>]

Am 04.05.2021 um 17:27 schrieb Joost Kremers:
> 
> On Tue, May 04 2021, Bruce D'Arcus wrote:
>> On Tue, May 4, 2021 at 10:47 AM Joost Kremers <joostkremers@fastmail.fm> wrote:
>>
>>> I can add some comments regarding biblatex:
>>>
>>> - default: \parencite[1]
>>
>> WDYT of \autocite for default?
>>
>> It's conceptually the same as the CSL default.
> 
> If that is the case then it's probably the better choice. The biblatex manual
> states that \autocite requires that the citation style defines a command for it
> and that it is not appropriate for author-year style citations. I assume that's
> something for the user to be aware of when using such citations?

Well, IIRC, in author-year styles \autocite is equivalent to \parencite. 
I think, what the manual talks about is not that \autocite wouldn't be 
appropriate for author-year styles, but rather that relying /solely/ on 
\autocite doesn't give authors the flexibility they might want in these 
styles, like when you want something like in your example:
```
According to \textcite[]{Jones1998} , ``students often had difficulty 
using APA
style, especially when it was their first time'' 
\pnotecite[][199]{Jones1998}.
```

So, I think \autocite is the better choice.

Denis