Re: should a BIBLIOGRAPHY keyword supercede org-cite-global-bibliography?

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

Yes, you're right Emmanuel.

I guess this goes back to my file type/extension issue then.

I do expect this to be a non-issue in time though, as related packages
update to fully support all three common input formats.

On Mon, Jul 19, 2021 at 1:29 PM CHARPENTIER Emmanuel
<emmanuel.charpentier@aphp.fr> wrote:
>
> > It seems like that should not be the case, i.e. if you define
> > BIBLIOGRAPHY keywords it means you do not want to use the ones in
> > org-cite-global-bibliography. Is there a scenario where the union of
> > those makes sense?
>
> Yes indeed: you may have
>   - A library for background issues (e. g. methodology)
>   - A (or several) subject matter-specific library (e. g. a
>     subdiscipline, a method, etc...)
>   - A library specific to the question you are discussing (e. g.
>     results of a bibliographic search specific to your question).
>
> The first one is a perfect target for org-cite-global-bibliography. The
> last one is of course a target for #+BIBLIOGRAPHY ; I'd tend to let the
> subject matter library as a file-specific #+BIBLIOGRAPHY (my subject
> matters tend to vary...), but this depends on your field.
>
> You may also think of this typology as books, reviews and research
> papers respectively...
>
> HTH,
>
> --
> Emmanuel Charpentier
>