Re: wip-cite status question and feedback

[Denis Maier]

Am 27.04.2021 um 14:32 schrieb Bruce D'Arcus:
> On Tue, Apr 27, 2021 at 7:44 AM Denis Maier <denismaier@mailbox.org> wrote:
>
> > Regarding simpler ways, why not just:
> >
> > "A simple quote." [cite: @doe p. 45]
>
> No, that's worse ;-)
>
> Let's review basic requirements:
>
> 1. a plain text document really should be readable and its semantics clear
> 2. a user should be able to write their documents, and use different
> output styles, without modifying that source document
>
> Your example fails on 1 because it suggests the citation attaches to
> (starts) the following sentence.
Only if you mentally parse it as a parenthetical author-date citation. 
If you read it as note citation then your conclusion doesn't follow 
naturally.

> 2 is hard given the details we've laid out, but if whatever solution
> works for the majority of cases, and at worst requires the user either
> a) to be aware of how the processing works and adjust accordingly+,
> and/or b) to edit the final document a bit, that seems a reasonable
> balance.
>
> Bruce
>
> + a lot of the corner cases in citations come from a mismatch between
> the need for a certain regularity and rigor required for
> machine--processing, and users' desire for complete flexibility

Yes, that's indeed the question.

I'm after all not totally sure we need a one-size-fits-all solution. By 
way of analogy, biblatex has an \autocite command that scans ahead for 
following punctuation and moves that around.

Bla bla \autocite{doe20}.
can be
Bla bla (Doe 2020).
Or
Bla bla.\footnote{Doe 2020.)

"Bla bla" \autocite{doe20}.
can be
"Bla bla" (Doe 2020).
Or
"Bla bla".\footnote{Doe 2020.)

Then, for more complex cases you'll need special markup provided by the 
csquotes package. Maybe such a modular solution could be useful?

Denis