Re: [wip-cite-new] Initial implementation of `csl' citation processor

["András Simonyi" <andras.simonyi@gmail.com>]

Dear All,

I'm trying to catch up  with the new developments, it isn't easy :-).
I think it would be really helpful to be able to map different
backends to different processors, because latex based solutions like
natbib can handle only latex-based backends, so anybody who wanted to
export both to latex (with a latex citation processor) and something
else would need to constantly change the used citation processor.
Maybe instead of a full alist mapping backends to citation processors
we could have only options to declare a separate processor for
latex-based backends and another for non-latex ones?

best regards,
András

On Fri, 28 May 2021 at 21:41, Nicolas Goaziou <mail@nicolasgoaziou.fr> wrote:
>
> "Bruce D'Arcus" <bdarcus@gmail.com> writes:
>
> > On Fri, May 28, 2021 at 1:54 PM Timothy <tecosaur@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> Nicolas Goaziou <mail@nicolasgoaziou.fr> writes:
> >>
> >> > I wouldn't hold my breath.
> >> >
> >> > First, IIUC, there's no reason to force biblatex over natbib OOTB as
> >> > both are widely in use. But, more importantly, "oc-csl" require the
> >> > external Citeproc library, so it cannot be loaded by default. As
> >> > a consequence, no default configuration can use it.
> >>
> >> If you don't mind some follow-up questions.
> >> + I take it that natbib is used by default for LaTeX then? Is it fairly
> >>   easy for the user to switch to biblatex?
> >> + With citeproc, I don't suppose something could be put behind a
> >>   (featurep) switch to use oc-csl if citeproc is available, and fall
> >>   back gracefully otherwise?
> >
> > Not sure about generally (Nicolas can comment on that), but in this
> > case, if you specify this:
> >
> > #+cite_export: natbib
> >
> > ... the export process runs through that processor, even if you are
> > outputting to plain text or HTML, where natbib is not supported.
>
> Exactly.
>
> By default, no export processor is selected. All citations are removed
> from output, and print_bibliography keywords, ignored.
>
> You have to actively select what processor you want for the document,
> globally, through a variable, or with a cite_export keyword. Therefore,
> the processor does not depend on the back-end used; you are supposed to
> choose the one you think to be appropriate. There is no falling back
> either. You get what you asked for. That's the way.
>
> It could be possible to change `org-cite-export-processor' so it becomes
> an alist where you can associate back-ends to processors. But I can't
> see how to transpose it nicely to cite_export keyword.
>
> I'm not convinced this would be an improvement either. For example, you
> may want to use two different processors with the same back-end.
>