From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mp0 ([2001:41d0:2:4a6f::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by ms11 with LMTPS id GIhfD/Hcml5OKwAA0tVLHw (envelope-from ) for ; Sat, 18 Apr 2020 10:56:49 +0000 Received: from aspmx1.migadu.com ([2001:41d0:2:4a6f::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by mp0 with LMTPS id KO+hHvXcml7vcQAA1q6Kng (envelope-from ) for ; Sat, 18 Apr 2020 10:56:53 +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 DDE05941C6E for ; Sat, 18 Apr 2020 10:56:52 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost ([::1]:56722 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jPl9W-0002am-Bm for larch@yhetil.org; Sat, 18 Apr 2020 06:56:50 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:49366) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jPl97-0002ae-Mp for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Sat, 18 Apr 2020 06:56:26 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1jPl96-0003bQ-Hx for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Sat, 18 Apr 2020 06:56:25 -0400 Received: from mail-ua1-x92e.google.com ([2607:f8b0:4864:20::92e]:39709) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1jPl96-0003XV-BN for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Sat, 18 Apr 2020 06:56:24 -0400 Received: by mail-ua1-x92e.google.com with SMTP id i22so1670257uak.6 for ; Sat, 18 Apr 2020 03:56:23 -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 :cc; bh=4HG4qvDN3iR3sOzvorzVAXN+U7zt2FK1F0FV/OAsdUo=; b=oRN7mCclOq/HhreD2KCT12tIZoViU/siNfSE6lTM/IytoMkeFoBtJSRkU4wm8zqUfI MRQZ6bGQ4HqLQrV3bWvxP0QEwS43/vMgbl+vgZ3rYuJS/CVgnCxrW9c20vC37FkuPKQP r2YYz7uCcZsyCCSCglIjgkQbLnocZZ6F2CvjiQhuhosOwwGd6c10BRFTXIBTd6kMKwZz ybCDexc7NhmtQ4aRjemZqFcU0oY3v5myuOlq5SrWwoXdp2+pEyr5Cwm9SoFZPOU6hn46 OLisb8V//sEEcePX47XspVLVuK3XUIJ3eN9ubE6+7woHKKYiuoV3JRdztFzLhJ+OAmIV orGg== 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:cc; bh=4HG4qvDN3iR3sOzvorzVAXN+U7zt2FK1F0FV/OAsdUo=; b=HxOUJZ7455/ZFnfYiCWpe9Y7xGVel1m/9Ppl23eu3baZ0HWvsrtItFJ92RsgAeal+F U8N73wdnwNl+7kJIjjVN7VcNmHAgZJNkVuIRtHmEH5J7co3holjsqYv0ap+0In48Jf0b twsJdKQL0Er0cz2wDJLwGrx4QpzSLzFKNsU0CzQ19TTjiYtKAU3/FCi/HxevmN8mLdAW Ugnvb7DVmBC53INfurpkRXyrmsOJKBoBtRKlYJEUt/a51qgG+qNqgrs3yzhsAb2/GINJ y4HQDkp60ruQLQysBlXT5yDUgAQ3ZaXSF8PC7juAVE0JEdJqgHKyysfv1PUz+Wo8LjC6 hRzw== X-Gm-Message-State: AGi0Pubt3bcAvQax0PEZcMVIY/kj8/Z5kiDups2rZXA931NOAgWWT/Yi qmsa2oCDaMbzGKovIiVQvRtDrpfBpIS8RHjBpb4= X-Google-Smtp-Source: APiQypJC9E30M2C55t+M2E01EJK8h1QEILKRALN+D5dBH2vwqvUx9ZBIUuZHbdPYLLLUF1iytQFdQPNi28Rsk0vmQXU= X-Received: by 2002:ab0:63cd:: with SMTP id i13mr1960349uap.82.1587207382411; Sat, 18 Apr 2020 03:56:22 -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> <87sgh8zpmg.fsf@nicolasgoaziou.fr> <1084456979.81820.1586724551265@office.mailbox.org> <877dykz6ri.fsf@nicolasgoaziou.fr> <87r1wrwvam.fsf@fastmail.fm> <87wo6hfg4k.fsf@aquinas> In-Reply-To: <87wo6hfg4k.fsf@aquinas> From: "Bruce D'Arcus" Date: Sat, 18 Apr 2020 06:56:10 -0400 Message-ID: Subject: Re: wip-cite status question and feedback To: Richard Lawrence 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: , Cc: Joost Kremers , org-mode-email Errors-To: emacs-orgmode-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org Sender: "Emacs-orgmode" X-Scanner: scn0 X-Spam-Score: -1.81 Authentication-Results: aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=pass header.d=gmail.com header.s=20161025 header.b=oRN7mCcl; 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 [-1.81 / 13.00]; GENERIC_REPUTATION(0.00)[-0.57454064773496]; 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(0.25), country: US(-0.01), ip: 209.51.188.17(-0.57)]; TO_DN_ALL(0.00)[]; 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]; FORGED_RECIPIENTS_MAILLIST(0.00)[]; RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW(-0.10)[209.51.188.17:from]; 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]; DWL_DNSWL_NONE(0.00)[gmail.com:dkim]; 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]; URIBL_BLOCKED(0.00)[uni-tuebingen.de:email]; FROM_NEQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[bdarcus@gmail.com,emacs-orgmode-bounces@gnu.org]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; PREVIOUSLY_DELIVERED(0.00)[emacs-orgmode@gnu.org]; HAS_LIST_UNSUB(-0.01)[]; FREEMAIL_CC(0.00)[fastmail.fm,gnu.org]; FORGED_SENDER_MAILLIST(0.00)[] X-TUID: PKcbsX2sG4ug Just one question, Richard ... On Sat, Apr 18, 2020 at 5:50 AM Richard Lawrence wrote: [...] > I think it is worth pointing out to Bib(La)TeX users that it is useful > to avoid a proliferation of citation commands in Org syntax. The syntax > discussed so far achieves this by "factoring out" formatting information > that BibLaTeX puts into the command into other parts of the syntax and > into the choice of citation stylesheet. For example, instead of having > \footnotecite and \parencite as separate commands, you can just have a > single cite command, and the choice of stylesheet determines whether > citations get formatted as footnotes or as in-text parenthetical > citations or as something else. Before the question, I did just want to add that this is an excellent point. [...] > My experience is that it's typically just two (e.g. parenthetical and > author-in-text), and my memory of the earlier conversation was that most > people agreed. Just to align what you're saying and what I'm saying: I see three commands in the pandoc syntax: standard/parenthetical, author-in-text, and suppress-author; that look like so: [@doe17] @doe17 -@doe17 Implicit in what you wrote is the last one is not needed. The question, then: Is that what you're saying; we don't need suppress-author? I think I actually agree, though will add a topic that came up in the CSL implementation discussion for the author-in-text styles in the past few days. Here's a common way a citation might be integrated in a narrative text: Doe, by contrast, found negative results (2017). So we have the author name in-text, than some text, then the year-only citation. The traditional way to do that in pandoc is to use the suppress-author command at the end. Doe, by contrast, found negative results [-@doe17]. So the piece of information I refer to above is that one of the CSL implementers (Frank Bennett) figured out how to make the above example an author-in-text variant, so that you don't need suppress-author, and the entire sentence is the citation. He did this by adding an optional "infix" variable to the citation. So in that example, you would have: - command: "author-in-text" - citekey: "doe17" - infix: "by contrast, found negative results" This is arguably an edge case, but it does relate to the question of whether we need two (standard and author-in-text) or three commands (adding the suppress-author). One could make the reasonable argument (I think, though not everyone would agree) that the workaround for the above example is to use author-in-text command but restructure the sentence: @doe17, by contrast, found negative results. >From that perspective, I guess we indeed need only two commands: standard (parenthetical) and author-in-text. Bruce