[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [wip-cite-new] Initial implementation of `biblatex' citation process
From: |
Nicolas Goaziou |
Subject: |
Re: [wip-cite-new] Initial implementation of `biblatex' citation processor |
Date: |
Wed, 19 May 2021 17:23:50 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.2 (gnu/linux) |
Denis Maier <denismaier@mailbox.org> writes:
> In that case, I'd think that note/bare => footcitecite isn't
> a particular good fit. Footcitetext puts the citation in a footnote,
> just that it doesn't print a footnote mark in a running text.
> (This is useful in cases where the regular footnote mechanism in LaTeX
> doesn't work, e.g. in headings or tables. In these cases you' can
> place the mark manually with \footnotemark, and later you specify the
> text with \footnotetext, or in that case with \footcitetext.)
OK, I'll remove it.
What about also removing \footcite altogether? We could simply
automatically wrap the citation in a inline footnote before exporting
the document. No need for a special command.
Org already handles footnotes in headings and tables, so there may be no
need to footcitetext either…
> Regarding:
>> | locators | bare | notecite |
>> | locators | caps | Pnotecite |
>> | locators | bare-caps | Notecite |
>> | locators | | pnotecite |
>
> fnotecite should be added.
Under what style/variant combination?
>> One problem is there is no "\cite", or "\parencite". I though they would
>> make a good fit for the default style, "\cite" being the "bare" variant
>> of "\parencite", and "\autocite" could be moved to a "auto" style. I'm
>> not sure where to put \cite, then.
>
> Why not just add a cite/parens style?
OK.
> \cite could be [cite/bare: ...]
This would be confusing. So far, "bare" is a style variant. Your
suggestion promotes it exceptionally to a full-fledged style. It hurts
my logic. :)
Could "\cite" be [cite/parens/bare:...] instead?
> Regarding \autocite being the default:
> I think one strong argument in favor of this is that people may want
> to switch between different citation export processors. So if you
> typeset your article with latex you may want to use biblatex. But if
> the journal accepts submissions only as docx files you'll have to
> switch to a CSL-based citeproc. Here, the default is to wrap the
> citation either in a footnote or in parentheses, depending on the
> style.
> So, to ensure portability of documents across export systems [cite:
> @doe] should give similar results with different systems, and I think
> \autocite would be the best choice. (By the way, it's also the way
> pandoc implements this.)
Users can disregard any default style chosen by the processor. If
I write:
#+cite_export: biblatex whatever text
all [cite:...] objects will create \textcite commands, no matter what
the processor thinks about it.
So, an hypothetical
#+cite_export: biblatex foo auto
could also turn all [cite:...] into \autocite commands and the document
would be portable.
The default processor style for citations is to be understood as
a fall-back style, not necessarily as "the style associated to
[cite:...]".
Anyway, I don't have a strong opinion about autocite being the default.
If it makes sense and we can put \cite elsewhere, let's use that.
Regards,
- Re: [wip-cite-new] Initial implementation of `biblatex' citation processor, (continued)
- Re: [wip-cite-new] Initial implementation of `biblatex' citation processor, Bruce D'Arcus, 2021/05/18
- Re: [wip-cite-new] Initial implementation of `biblatex' citation processor, Denis Maier, 2021/05/19
- Re: [wip-cite-new] Initial implementation of `biblatex' citation processor, Bruce D'Arcus, 2021/05/19
- Re: [wip-cite-new] Initial implementation of `biblatex' citation processor, Denis Maier, 2021/05/19
- Re: [wip-cite-new] Initial implementation of `biblatex' citation processor, Nicolas Goaziou, 2021/05/19
- Re: [wip-cite-new] Initial implementation of `biblatex' citation processor, Bruce D'Arcus, 2021/05/19
- Re: [wip-cite-new] Initial implementation of `biblatex' citation processor, Denis Maier, 2021/05/19
- Re: [wip-cite-new] Initial implementation of `biblatex' citation processor, Bruce D'Arcus, 2021/05/19
- Re: [wip-cite-new] Initial implementation of `biblatex' citation processor,
Nicolas Goaziou <=
- Re: [wip-cite-new] Initial implementation of `biblatex' citation processor, Denis Maier, 2021/05/20
- Re: [wip-cite-new] Initial implementation of `biblatex' citation processor, Bruce D'Arcus, 2021/05/20
- Re: [wip-cite-new] Initial implementation of `biblatex' citation processor, Bruce D'Arcus, 2021/05/20
- Re: [wip-cite-new] Initial implementation of `biblatex' citation processor, Bruce D'Arcus, 2021/05/20
- Re: [wip-cite-new] Initial implementation of `biblatex' citation processor, Denis Maier, 2021/05/20
- Re: [wip-cite-new] Initial implementation of `biblatex' citation processor, Denis Maier, 2021/05/20
- Re: [wip-cite-new] Initial implementation of `biblatex' citation processor, Bruce D'Arcus, 2021/05/20
- Re: [wip-cite-new] Initial implementation of `biblatex' citation processor, Denis Maier, 2021/05/20
- Re: [wip-cite-new] Initial implementation of `biblatex' citation processor, Bruce D'Arcus, 2021/05/20
- Re: [wip-cite-new] Initial implementation of `biblatex' citation processor, Denis Maier, 2021/05/20