Re: [O] Citation syntax and ODT

[Thomas S. Dye]

Aloha Vaidheeswaran C,

Vaidheeswaran C <address@hidden> writes:

> On Tuesday 24 February 2015 10:31 AM, Thomas S. Dye wrote:
>> Vaidheeswaran C<address@hidden>  writes:
>>
>>> Often times there is a difference between what is possible and what is
>>> the common practice.  So,
>>>
>>> 1. How often do you intermix in-text and parenthetical styles.
>>
>> Every day?
>
> Ok.
>
>>> 2. Can the document author re-word his work in such a way that an
>>>     in-text or parenthetical citation could be replaced by the other
>>>     without compromising on the overall style of the produced document.
>>
>> Yes, but the author will certainly choose to use a tool that doesn't
>> require this.
>
> (Let me remind you, when it comes to LaTeX, I have zero knowledge.)
>
> 1. When you say 'tool' what exactly do you mean?

A citation manager.

> 2. Give us some concrete examples of what 'this tool' does.

Manages citations.  The author wants to do as little of this as
possible. 

>    a) Can an elisp module aspire to replicate what 'this tool' does?

Yes, I believe so.

>    b) 'The task' that 'this tool' accomplishes, is it 'common' across
>       all the citation engines that the participants (in this
>       discussion) have in mind.

I don't know.  Do other citation engines require that a document author
re-word his work in such a way that in-text or parenthetical citations
could be replaced by the other?

> ----------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Org crowd is essentially a LaTeX crowd and Emacs crowd is invariably
> academic in nature.  It is for this sole reason, that one often
> doesn't hear much frequent complaints regarding lack of citation
> support.

Actually, Org mode supports citations quite well through links, so there
is no need to complain.

In my field of archaeology it is not unusual to find a journal that does
not accept LaTeX.  When the journal requires Word, which is very common,
I've been converting from LaTeX with tex4ht, but it would be neat to
export directly to ODT.

> (I think), if we could keep the OTHER users -- by this I mean, users
> of ASCII or HTML or ODT backends happy or 'just happy' we have made a
> good progress.

Agreed.  Are they unhappy now?  I use the ASCII and HTML exporters
regularly, and I'm quite happy with them.

> Pleasing LaTeX crowd, which is already pleased with status-quo seems a
> bit pointless to me.  Put other way, the LaTeX crowd should represent
> just those aspects which it is displeased with.

There is no displeasure in my corner of the LaTeX crowd.

I believe we are all here on this list because we enjoy Emacs and Org
mode, which is an awesome tool for authors.

All the best,
Tom

-- 
T.S. Dye & Colleagues, Archaeologists
735 Bishop St, Suite 315, Honolulu, HI 96813
Tel: 808-529-0866, Fax: 808-529-0884
http://www.tsdye.com