[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [O] Citation syntax: a revised proposal
From: |
Aaron Ecay |
Subject: |
Re: [O] Citation syntax: a revised proposal |
Date: |
Tue, 03 Mar 2015 14:23:28 +0000 |
User-agent: |
Notmuch/0.19+52~g1722ea2 (http://notmuchmail.org) Emacs/25.0.50.2 (x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu) |
Hi Richard (again),
2015ko martxoak 2an, Richard Lawrence-ek idatzi zuen:
>
> Could we guess the backend from the file extension on the BIBLIOGRAPHY,
> to keep things simple here? I don't use a citation manager, so I don't
> know if this is possible for anything other than Bib(La)TeX.
>
> Also, as mentioned earlier, it would be really nice to support
> org-bibtex as one of the reference database formats. (It's what I use,
> so naturally it's what I think we should bless. :) This would allow
> storing your reference database in-document.
I too use org-bibtex, and I agree that in-document references would be
nice. My skeletal implementation supports only org-bibtex at the
moment.
>
> Some things to think about:
>
> 1) Is there ever a need to mix reference database formats in the same
> document (e.g., zotero and org-bibtex)? (I would think not, but my
> needs are simple.)
I think this is most likely in collaborative situations: you have your
carefully curated org-bibtex database, and your co-author sends you a
bunch of references in some other database format. I think it’s pretty
easy to support (convert everything to bibtex and concat it all
together).
>
> 2) Is there ever a need to mix multiple reference databases in the
> *same* format (e.g., two different .bib files)? (I would think so,
> given the existence in BibLaTeX of \addbibresource.)
Certainly yes (this can be seen as a degenerate case of (1) above).
>
> 3) If the answer to either 1 or 2 is yes, how should we decide
> precedence between multiple reference databases? (Two databases might
> contain the same key.)
Initially I think an admonition of “don’t do that.” Eventually, we
could raise a warning (or error) on detecting multiply-defined keys. I
think allowing, and trying to make sense of, multiple definitions is
more trouble than it’s worth.
--
Aaron Ecay
- Re: [O] Citation syntax: a revised proposal, (continued)
- Re: [O] Citation syntax: a revised proposal, Rasmus, 2015/03/02
- Re: [O] Citation syntax: a revised proposal, Nicolas Goaziou, 2015/03/02
- Re: [O] Citation syntax: a revised proposal, Rasmus, 2015/03/02
- Re: [O] Citation syntax: a revised proposal, Nicolas Goaziou, 2015/03/02
- Re: [O] Citation syntax: a revised proposal, Rasmus, 2015/03/02
- Re: [O] Citation syntax: a revised proposal, Richard Lawrence, 2015/03/02
- Re: [O] Citation syntax: a revised proposal, Nicolas Goaziou, 2015/03/03
- Re: [O] Citation syntax: a revised proposal, Richard Lawrence, 2015/03/03
- Re: [O] Citation syntax: a revised proposal, Matt Price, 2015/03/03
- Re: [O] Citation syntax: a revised proposal, Nicolas Goaziou, 2015/03/07
Re: [O] Citation syntax: a revised proposal,
Aaron Ecay <=
Re: [O] Citation syntax: a revised proposal, Aaron Ecay, 2015/03/02
Re: [O] Citation syntax: a revised proposal, Aaron Ecay, 2015/03/03
Re: [O] Citation syntax: a revised proposal, Rasmus, 2015/03/02