From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Matt Lundin <mdl@imapmail.org>
Subject: Re: Let's discuss citation and Org syntax
Date: Wed, 22 May 2013 16:53:36 -0500
Message-ID: <87d2siadgf.fsf@fastmail.fm>
References: <878v38cylw.fsf@pank.eu>
	<20130521175553.GA58360@client199-78.wlan.hu-berlin.de>
	<20130521233432.5b8a2bb8@aga-netbook>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Return-path: <emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:47124)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <mdl@imapmail.org>) id 1UfGym-000424-8r
	for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Wed, 22 May 2013 17:53:57 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <mdl@imapmail.org>) id 1UfGyh-0007cl-9P
	for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Wed, 22 May 2013 17:53:52 -0400
Received: from out2-smtp.messagingengine.com ([66.111.4.26]:57805)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <mdl@imapmail.org>) id 1UfGyh-0007cQ-0r
	for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Wed, 22 May 2013 17:53:47 -0400
In-Reply-To: <20130521233432.5b8a2bb8@aga-netbook> (Marcin Borkowski's message
	of "Tue, 21 May 2013 23:34:32 +0200")
List-Id: "General discussions about Org-mode." <emacs-orgmode.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/options/emacs-orgmode>,
	<mailto:emacs-orgmode-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-orgmode>
List-Post: <mailto:emacs-orgmode@gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:emacs-orgmode-request@gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-orgmode>,
	<mailto:emacs-orgmode-request@gnu.org?subject=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: Marcin Borkowski <mbork@wmi.amu.edu.pl>
Cc: emacs-orgmode@gnu.org

Marcin Borkowski <mbork@wmi.amu.edu.pl> writes:
> I do not use Org-mode for authoring (I'm quite happy with LaTeX itself
> for that), and in LaTeX, I use neither bibtex nor biblatex; but AFAIK,
> bibtex is basically dead like John Cleese's parrot.  I don't even think
> that it needs to or should be supported; the faster bibtex usage fades
> away, the better.

As a point of clarification, bibtex syntax and bib files remain alive
and well (albeit with modifications) for those who use biblatex.

> What I would suggest is to look into amsrefs manual.  The amsrefs
> package was (is?) an interesting attempt at a /pure LaTeX/ solution to
> the bibliography problem, not dependent on any executable other than
> LaTeX.  It is not capable of sorting bibliographies, but other than
> that is quite powerful (much more than bibtex, though seemingly less
> than biblatex).  What is interesting here is its \ycite and \ocite
> commands (see
> http://mirrors.ctan.org/macros/latex/contrib/amsrefs/amsrdoc.pdf); it
> might be a good idea to support something similar.  (I'm not sure
> whether biblatex supports such a thing.)

Most biblatex backends have multiple versions of cite commands. I use
biblatex-chicago, which provides, among others, \autocite, \fullcite,
\citetitle, \footfullcite, \headlesscite, \headlessfullcite, \shortcite.

Best,
Matt