Re: [wip-cite-new] New natbib processor

["Bruce D'Arcus" <bdarcus@gmail.com>]

On Wed, May 5, 2021 at 10:53 AM Nicolas Goaziou <mail@nicolasgoaziou.fr> wrote:

> Another thread! Yay!

We should be close to the finish line!

> I just added a new `natbib' processor in "wip-cite-new" branch, in the
> file "oc-natbib.el"

Awesome!

> However, I'm not convinced by them [sub-styles].
>
> On the bright side, sub-styles can be put in any order, so we're
> avoiding combinatorial explosion of commands.
>
> However, they do not play well with shortcuts. For example, if shortcut
> for "caps" is "C" and "full" is "F",
>
>   [cite/text/caps/full:...] is equivalent to [cite/t/C/f:...]
>
> which is not great.

I'm just going to focus on these points.

The question comes down to whether to support sub-styles or not, and
if yes, what the syntax should be.

I think it makes more sense to include them because otherwise you end
up with an insanely long list of styles, which won't map well onto
different kinds of output formats.

E.g. biblatex users will want like 20 commands available, which won't
all work with other formats.

Also consider that for processors, they're going to have to map those
internally to something like styles+sub-styles anyway.

So I think sub-styles are good for users and developers alike.

Syntax?

I see your point on short-cuts; maybe your previous idea would work
better; a plus-separated list?

[cite:t/a+f+c]

... and the full names:

[cite:text/alt+full+caps]

Even if not perfect, I think it's a small price to pay for the benefits.

Bruce