From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Matt Price Subject: Re: exporting zotxt or orgref links to HTML and ODF Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2015 21:10:43 -0500 Message-ID: References: <878ugo8i60.fsf@gmx.us> <8761bsp26n.fsf@berkeley.edu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a1135e57ef8b413050dace037 Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:35848) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YGI5f-00020s-C0 for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Tue, 27 Jan 2015 21:10:48 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YGI5d-0001YI-Gy for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Tue, 27 Jan 2015 21:10:47 -0500 Received: from mail-la0-x22d.google.com ([2a00:1450:4010:c03::22d]:54687) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YGI5d-0001Y3-3r for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Tue, 27 Jan 2015 21:10:45 -0500 Received: by mail-la0-f45.google.com with SMTP id gd6so16519455lab.4 for ; Tue, 27 Jan 2015 18:10:43 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: List-Id: "General discussions about Org-mode." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-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: Christian Moe , Org Mode --001a1135e57ef8b413050dace037 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 I am very eager to see this work of yours, Christian. I also would very much like to find a way to have a single, well-supported citation framework in org -- I certainly think John's work looks incredible, and zotxt is very powerful, but it would be fantastic if one could just choose a bibliographic backend and export seamlessly to any supported format. It would be a big step forward. I guess I don't quite see, yet, what has to happen for the work of various contributors to be consolidated; clearly Erik, You, and John have worked in overlapping and distinct directions, but I would be veyr enthusiastic about helping a unified approach emerge, espeically one that supported Zotero. Thanks everyone, Matt On Tue, Jan 27, 2015 at 3:01 PM, Christian Moe wrote: > > Richard Lawrence writes: > > > It looks to me like Pandoc has a quite general solution, and it also > > looks like Org could use Pandoc's citation syntax as-is. I would > > suggest borrowing this syntax as a starting point for building citation > > support into Org. > > It's been years since I looked at Pandoc, and I think they've added some > functionality since then. Prefix, locator, suffix, and multiple > references in one human-readable citation: Great! And /much/ nicer to > look at than latex \cite commands with their frankly bizarre placement > of locators etc. > > > Blah blah [see @doe99, pp. 33-35; also @smith04, ch. 1]. > > In my current homebrewn solution for Zotero, I have tried to do > something similarly readable using Org link syntax (sorry, Rasmus!) with > the database entry ID as link target, and parsing the description part > for prefix/author-date/locator/suffix, but with a slightly different > syntax than Pandoc uses. In my solution the above would be: > > Blah blah [[zotero:0_A43F89;0_E25CB3][(see: Doe 1999: p.33-35; also: > Smith 2004: ch. 1)]]. > > > A minus sign (-) before the @ will suppress mention of the author in the > > citation. This can be useful when the author is already mentioned in the > > text: > > > > Smith says blah [-@smith04]. > > In my current Zotero solution: > > Smith says blah [[zotero:0_E25CB3][(2004)]]. > > > Does anyone have citation needs that this syntax doesn't cover? > > It's great, as long as your database uses mnemonic citekeys like > doe99. Zotero doesn't, but uses keys that are meaningless to humans, > like 0_A43F89. Unfortunately [see @0_A43F89, p. 5] wouldn't look nearly > as nice as [see @doe99, p.5], and it wouldn't help you remember what you > referenced. > > I think the typical workflow combining Zotero with Pandoc is to export a > BibTex file from Zotero and reference the BibTex citekeys from > there. I could live with that much of the time. > > But that workflow doesn't help with something I often want to do, which > is to export to ODT and have 'live' Zotero citations that I can continue > to work with in LibreOffice. > > > Using this syntax would also have the advantage that Pandoc can already > > parse it, which would reduce friction for Org users who convert their > > documents with Pandoc (and Pandoc users who need to deal with Org > > inputs). Since this seems like a significant contingent of Org users, > > that's something to consider. > > That's a good point. OTOH, don't Org users convert their documents with > Pandoc mostly because cross-backend citation support is lacking? > > > The bigger question is whether, in addition to a citation *syntax*, it > > would be a lot of work to add support for the various citation database > > formats, as well as the various output styles, and which ones to > > support. > > Possibly more work if it's worth if we adopt Pandoc syntax, > since Pandoc-citeproc seems to handle nearly everything that is based on > plain text. > > To truly support citations natively, we'd essentially have to implement > something like citeproc in elisp. Not that I haven't been thinking about > that... > > Yours, > Christian > > > > > > > --001a1135e57ef8b413050dace037 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
I am very eager to see this work of yours, Christian.= =C2=A0 I also would very much like to find a way to have a single, well-sup= ported citation framework in org -- I certainly think John's work looks= incredible, and zotxt is very powerful, but it would be fantastic if one c= ould just choose a bibliographic backend and export seamlessly to any suppo= rted format.=C2=A0 It would be a big step forward.=C2=A0 I guess I don'= t quite see, yet, what has to happen for the work of various contributors t= o be consolidated; clearly Erik, You, and John have worked in overlapping a= nd distinct directions, but I would be veyr enthusiastic about helping a un= ified approach emerge, espeically one that supported Zotero.

T= hanks everyone,
Matt

On Tue, Jan 27, 2015 at 3:01 PM, Christian Moe <mai= l@christianmoe.com> wrote:
=
Richard Lawrence writes:

> It looks to me like Pandoc has a quite general solution, and it also > looks like Org could use Pandoc's citation syntax as-is.=C2=A0 I w= ould
> suggest borrowing this syntax as a starting point for building citatio= n
> support into Org.

It's been years since I looked at Pandoc, and I think they'v= e added some
functionality since then. Prefix, locator, suffix, and multiple
references in one human-readable citation: Great! And /much/ nicer to
look at than latex \cite commands with their frankly bizarre placement
of locators etc.

> Blah blah [see @doe99, pp. 33-35; also @smith04, ch. 1].

In my current homebrewn solution for Zotero, I have tried to do
something similarly readable using Org link syntax (sorry, Rasmus!) with the database entry ID as link target, and parsing the description part
for prefix/author-date/locator/suffix, but with a slightly different
syntax than Pandoc uses. In my solution the above would be:

Blah blah [[zotero:0_A43F89;0_E25CB3][(see: Doe 1999: p.33-35; also:
Smith 2004: ch. 1)]].

> A minus sign (-) before the @ will suppress mention of the author in t= he
> citation. This can be useful when the author is already mentioned in t= he
> text:
>
> Smith says blah [-@smith04].

In my current Zotero solution:

Smith says blah [[zotero:0_E25CB3][(2004)]].

> Does anyone have citation needs that this syntax doesn't cover?
It's great, as long as your database uses mnemonic citekeys like=
doe99. Zotero doesn't, but uses keys that are meaningless to humans, like 0_A43F89.=C2=A0 Unfortunately [see @0_A43F89, p. 5] wouldn't look = nearly
as nice as [see @doe99, p.5], and it wouldn't help you remember what yo= u
referenced.

I think the typical workflow combining Zotero with Pandoc is to export a BibTex file from Zotero and reference the BibTex citekeys from
there. I could live with that much of the time.

But that workflow doesn't help with something I often want to do, which=
is to export to ODT and have 'live' Zotero citations that I can con= tinue
to work with in LibreOffice.

> Using this syntax would also have the advantage that Pandoc can alread= y
> parse it, which would reduce friction for Org users who convert their<= br> > documents with Pandoc (and Pandoc users who need to deal with Org
> inputs).=C2=A0 Since this seems like a significant contingent of Org u= sers,
> that's something to consider.

That's a good point. OTOH, don't Org users convert their doc= uments with
Pandoc mostly because cross-backend citation support is lacking?

> The bigger question is whether, in addition to a citation *syntax*, it=
> would be a lot of work to add support for the various citation databas= e
> formats, as well as the various output styles, and which ones to
> support.

Possibly more work if it's worth if we adopt Pandoc syntax,
since Pandoc-citeproc seems to handle nearly everything that is based on plain text.

To truly support citations natively, we'd essentially have to implement=
something like citeproc in elisp. Not that I haven't been thinking abou= t
that...

Yours,
Christian







--001a1135e57ef8b413050dace037--