Re: Standardize #+BIBLIOGRAPHY line

[Rasmus <rasmus@gmx.us>]

Nicolas Goaziou <n.goaziou@gmail.com> writes:

> Jambunathan K <kjambunathan@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> Getting Citation right to cater to general needs is going to be complex.
>> This is mainly because 
>>
>>     1. Org's object syntax is very rudimentary and not "extensible" 
>>     2. "real-world" citations may need some annotations page number etc.
>>
>> I think it is good to *atleast make a move* in standardizing the cite
>> elements.  My gut feeling is that cite objects - for now - should be
>> coded as \cite { } latex objects.  This specifically means that link
>> syntax for cite should NOT BE ENCOURAGED (or STRONGLY DISCOURAGED).
>
> I understand. You can still use ox-bibtex.el for now, and just ignore
> all the "[[cite:...]]" part.

I wouldn't go with \cite{·}.  When I did in the past  I often got into
trouble due to newlines. E.g.:

\parencite[this is my very long note before the author][this is my
long quote after the ]{key}

would be escaped by Org.  Perhaps it works better with ox, I haven't
tested.  But the above is printed as:

\parencite[this is my very long note before the author][this is my
long quote after the ]\{key\}
                      ^^^^^^^ 

As expressed elsewhere I think

  [cite:key :pre xxx :post yyy :mycrazykey zzz] 

is the most desirable syntax.

>> As an aside, I am inclined to think of cite objects as "special class"
>> of "footnote" elements.
>
> I tend to agree. 

Me too.  Although I think FN should be a special case of
[FUN:whatever] where FUN could be CITE or FN or whatever. . .

> There was a discussion on the ML about a possible
> syntax. I think it is a bit early to set it in stone anyway. As you
> said, the point here is to make a move towards standardization, even if
> it means using \cite{...} and `defadvice' for now.

Citation-support is a hack atm, and I think it's an area that would do
well with some standardization.

The system should exhibit some flexibility supporting e.g. notes,
parencite (prenote, key, year, postnote) and textcite key (prenote,
year, postnote).  But there could be others.  E.g. someone mentioned
using DOIs etc.

>> Does the author have copyright assignments for contributing to Emacs?
>>
>>         Taru Karttunen <taruti@taruti.net>
>>
>> As a personal policy, I don't want to touch a file which wouldn't end up
>> in Emacs proper.  
>>
>> Any changes that I make to Emacs - that includes Org-mode - is
>> *guaranteed* to end up in Emacs proper.  It's going to happen in it's
>> own time.
>
> Nobody can guarantee that code relative to bibliographies will become
> mainstream. What if normalization fails, for one reason or another?
>
> Anyway, I don't think assignment is a problem. If we decide to handle
> bibliographies in Org core, ox-bibtex will have to be rewritten anyway
> (and will become ox-bibliography or something like that). Though, it
> would obviously be best if original "org-bibtex.el" author (Cc'ed) had
> already signed FSF papers.

I'd be willing to put in work on ox-bibliography, although I don't
know if my 'skillz' suffice.

–Rasmus

-- 
A page of history is worth a volume of logic