From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mp1 ([2001:41d0:2:4a6f::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by ms11 with LMTPS id cKwdOU8lk17DDAAA0tVLHw (envelope-from ) for ; Sun, 12 Apr 2020 14:27:27 +0000 Received: from aspmx1.migadu.com ([2001:41d0:2:4a6f::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by mp1 with LMTPS id aG+5FFIlk16cJAAAbx9fmQ (envelope-from ) for ; Sun, 12 Apr 2020 14:27:30 +0000 Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by aspmx1.migadu.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1C421942D65 for ; Sun, 12 Apr 2020 14:27:28 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost ([::1]:33974 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jNda3-0000Ap-1T for larch@yhetil.org; Sun, 12 Apr 2020 10:27:27 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:33974) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jNdYs-00009M-2Y for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Sun, 12 Apr 2020 10:26:16 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1jNdYh-000806-Vb for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Sun, 12 Apr 2020 10:26:14 -0400 Received: from mail-ua1-x92e.google.com ([2607:f8b0:4864:20::92e]:35117) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1jNdYh-0007zv-S0 for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Sun, 12 Apr 2020 10:26:03 -0400 Received: by mail-ua1-x92e.google.com with SMTP id a6so2285551uao.2 for ; Sun, 12 Apr 2020 07:26:03 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=adGMWDQhwM4FGmpa9mVObZC+Ft3xl/VOVAwFsZOlqm0=; b=TUiZ0N9We+qSVkKdFPwmMCXtpxZjEAIyhwsxl1kQRuMYrnZbqAAe62Wt26HXQAgfHp at4ijSlJHn9IhekI/wuzC3ifJ49DpquMEU8Ug8zdORd1OlVZtCwhbPprm58s+Gm6p8pl 614Vo24SuvIpFZOYZl2aDotgjq7gwjk4rYc/UHrcwRxYZTmZ0BNEpfxGWOomm2sXALJL v82/xW9T8utns1tYWsSMiyKEnYmVfB4MIAZcSjI/q0NVLSGXBKRZiPIsYk49+qhNvQDO Px7+Sc65WW5rBo4zuxfktDRk4lMlyGgqtquhtFF1iV/6q0ag2pFzbYdk8wxJCF62HiHG 1mCQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to; bh=adGMWDQhwM4FGmpa9mVObZC+Ft3xl/VOVAwFsZOlqm0=; b=VZ2Xg4w24rgoNBWMPDNGV/EYXqsO+A6aCLtZ32Jd+5MIAaGmdmzi2H/S0zGaYWrMnx Kcc2P5E6PCTRK4kj8G4KnFrlL3pyziiHnPcossl4pM87Afi/tvMojFDY1wqoLEmhLA+f bFJWAlFl5dTMpGWe6ZFa03VD32XWH2OxZ5FjP4aBVmwXoszPtCiE+bA4QzFRBRNTVfuo yow5a9srOs6mgIKy0La5kl3M7QjuCpyNJrSJVD6kq6S2H3+I2R9akKJWyi8MgkeSLQbk olk3OZjtBJRCorwM3NC1MNMDN3cFWbnbqDl9w2J+W2ShY5+fwTkHeatWCP0rS7k0BMHU ll/w== X-Gm-Message-State: AGi0PuZ0+mzYQZ4OjIKNzyx8TFn5wkYiJmvX/kbX1CuI2pboF5tWjkyy Pk4P4a5dDm/bf8MZ5c67yeKfsiGZQ1OzPDdAnJA= X-Google-Smtp-Source: APiQypLxbDJkyi9eud4dDx4gxIrpa4FTqFNLIN8kkVZUGCiQqc0FsDAiE/OhAiGqv1hVnpVoYDTdXMHQsfNmtfISq1o= X-Received: by 2002:a9f:2484:: with SMTP id 4mr8918351uar.6.1586701563140; Sun, 12 Apr 2020 07:26:03 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <777184861.71192.1586510991834@office.mailbox.org> <87imi72bn0.fsf@nicolasgoaziou.fr> <1016821769.78551.1586641375789@office.mailbox.org> <87h7xp0z1y.fsf@nicolasgoaziou.fr> <874kto245n.fsf@nicolasgoaziou.fr> In-Reply-To: <874kto245n.fsf@nicolasgoaziou.fr> From: "Bruce D'Arcus" Date: Sun, 12 Apr 2020 10:25:51 -0400 Message-ID: Subject: Re: wip-cite status question and feedback To: "Bruce D'Arcus" , "emacs-orgmode@gnu.org" , denis.maier.lists@mailbox.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. X-Received-From: 2607:f8b0:4864:20::92e X-BeenThere: emacs-orgmode@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: "General discussions about Org-mode." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-orgmode-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org Sender: "Emacs-orgmode" X-Scanner: scn0 X-Spam-Score: -1.71 Authentication-Results: aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=pass header.d=gmail.com header.s=20161025 header.b=TUiZ0N9W; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=gmail.com; spf=pass (aspmx1.migadu.com: domain of emacs-orgmode-bounces@gnu.org designates 209.51.188.17 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=emacs-orgmode-bounces@gnu.org X-Scan-Result: default: False [-1.71 / 13.00]; TO_DN_EQ_ADDR_SOME(0.00)[]; GENERIC_REPUTATION(0.00)[-0.57946378305587]; TO_DN_SOME(0.00)[]; R_SPF_ALLOW(-0.20)[+ip4:209.51.188.0/24:c]; FREEMAIL_FROM(0.00)[gmail.com]; IP_REPUTATION_HAM(0.00)[asn: 22989(0.29), country: US(-0.01), ip: 209.51.188.17(-0.58)]; DKIM_TRACE(0.00)[gmail.com:+]; DMARC_POLICY_ALLOW(-0.50)[gmail.com,none]; MX_GOOD(-0.50)[cached: eggs.gnu.org]; MAILLIST(-0.20)[mailman]; FREEMAIL_TO(0.00)[gmail.com,gnu.org,mailbox.org]; FORGED_RECIPIENTS_MAILLIST(0.00)[]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; RCVD_TLS_LAST(0.00)[]; ASN(0.00)[asn:22989, ipnet:209.51.188.0/24, country:US]; TAGGED_FROM(0.00)[larch=yhetil.org]; FROM_NEQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[bdarcus@gmail.com,emacs-orgmode-bounces@gnu.org]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; R_DKIM_ALLOW(-0.20)[gmail.com:s=20161025]; RCVD_COUNT_FIVE(0.00)[6]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; RCPT_COUNT_THREE(0.00)[3]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; PREVIOUSLY_DELIVERED(0.00)[emacs-orgmode@gnu.org]; HAS_LIST_UNSUB(-0.01)[]; FORGED_SENDER_MAILLIST(0.00)[] X-TUID: VBDFiTceQrTC I'm going to split off the syntax part of your email, Nicholas, for quick comment. I need to think more about the other questions. On Sun, Apr 12, 2020 at 10:02 AM Nicolas Goaziou wrote: > > Finally, what does the above example look like when, say, there are > > two cites (say @doe2020 and @doe2019), and a global prefix? > > > > Is it this? > > > > [cite:see ;@doe2020;@doe2019] > > Yes, and a "t-styled" citation would be: > > [citet:see;@doe2020;@doe2019] > > Barring the prefix, the syntax of the citation does not change wrt to > "wip-cite" branch. However, this is enough to be slightly incompatible, > hence the "wip". > > > And a SuppressAuthor variant would be this? > > > > [cite:see ;-@doe2020;-@doe2019] > > Indeed. > > How does that sound? Good; no issues that I see with this at all. Only question is I see you removed whitespace after the prefix on your citet: example. Is the expectation (which is reasonable; am just asking) that prefixes would add the whitespace after it on output, so users don't have worry about this? So in other words, the value of an affix would be a trimmed string? Bruce