Re: On gripes with refer(1) and it's accumulate setting.

[Peter Schaffter]

On Fri, Oct 08, 2021, Sigurd Hermann wrote:
> I can't refer (easily) to the same book or paper multiple times
> without either (1) doing this:
> 
>     .[
>     $LIST$
>     .]
> 
> and then doing the reference again, with a different page number, but
> this is annoying, since unless I plan ahead it can look weird.
> <snip>
> I want to do this:
> 
>     .\" pretend of course that I've included whatever bibliography file
>     .\" before citation
>     .[
>     Standard ML
>     %P 50--75
>     .]
>     .[
>     Standard ML
>     %P 89--120
>     .]

It's hard to judge, but it looks as if the solution you're seeking
might be

  .[
  [ Standard ML
  .] 50-75)

Assuming you have

  bracket-label " (" ")" ", "

or similar in your .R1/.R2 block, the [ before "Standard ML" tells
refer(1) to print an opening parenthesis.  The text after .]
replaces the closing parenthesis, allowing you to cite the page
range.  Notice that you have to add the closing parenthesis yourself
after the page range.

The example is for MLA citations.  If you use, say, APA style, it
would look like this

  .[
  [ Standard ML
  .] , pp. 50-75)

Alternatively, you could create a database record for Standard ML
that omits the %P, in which case your

  .[
  Standard ML
  %P 50-75
  .]

or similar should work.  It depends on where the reference is going
(footnote, endnote, parenthetical insertion) and the style guide
you're following.  In cases where the style guide demands that
bibliography or List of Works Cited entries include the number of
pages in a work (i.e., it requires a %P field), the first suggestion
is the way to go.  If number of pages doesn't need to be included in
the bibliography entry, the second is preferable.

Hope this helps, at least a little.

I agree about the refer(1) manpage.  In my case, it required
considerably more than three readings.  It's so dense that every
time I opened it, I found myself thinking, "Did someone forget to
uncompress the file?"  It's like Jello without the water.

There was a thread earlier this year about refer(1).  I may return
to it.

-- 
Peter Schaffter
https://www.schaffter.ca