From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mp0 ([2001:41d0:2:4a6f::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by ms11 with LMTPS id uL0pECtyrV6eDgAA0tVLHw (envelope-from ) for ; Sat, 02 May 2020 13:14:19 +0000 Received: from aspmx1.migadu.com ([2001:41d0:2:4a6f::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by mp0 with LMTPS id gD0NKzRyrV63EQAA1q6Kng (envelope-from ) for ; Sat, 02 May 2020 13:14:28 +0000 Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [IPv6:2001:470:142::17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by aspmx1.migadu.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B04C39408BB for ; Sat, 2 May 2020 13:14:27 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost ([::1]:44642 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jUryN-0002fr-Tj for larch@yhetil.org; Sat, 02 May 2020 09:14:27 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:41386) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jUrxr-0002cw-B2 for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Sat, 02 May 2020 09:13:55 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jUrxn-0002H1-3M for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Sat, 02 May 2020 09:13:54 -0400 Received: from relay4-d.mail.gandi.net ([217.70.183.196]:51621) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jUrxm-0002EP-DT for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Sat, 02 May 2020 09:13:50 -0400 X-Originating-IP: 185.131.40.67 Received: from localhost (40-67.ipv4.commingeshautdebit.fr [185.131.40.67]) (Authenticated sender: admin@nicolasgoaziou.fr) by relay4-d.mail.gandi.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 86B7DE0004; Sat, 2 May 2020 13:13:44 +0000 (UTC) From: Nicolas Goaziou To: Richard Lawrence Subject: Re: wip-cite status question and feedback References: <777184861.71192.1586510991834@office.mailbox.org> <1016821769.78551.1586641375789@office.mailbox.org> <87h7xp0z1y.fsf@nicolasgoaziou.fr> <874kto245n.fsf@nicolasgoaziou.fr> <87sgh8zpmg.fsf@nicolasgoaziou.fr> <1084456979.81820.1586724551265@office.mailbox.org> <877dykz6ri.fsf@nicolasgoaziou.fr> <87r1wrwvam.fsf@fastmail.fm> <87wo6hfg4k.fsf@aquinas> <87v9lx6ju6.fsf@aquinas> <87r1wj7scc.fsf@aquinas> <87lfmjzgeq.fsf@nicolasgoaziou.fr> <87h7x7z62q.fsf@nicolasgoaziou.fr> <87k11v5zdn.fsf@aquinas> Mail-Followup-To: Richard Lawrence , Bruce D'Arcus , org-mode-email , John Kitchin Date: Sat, 02 May 2020 15:13:42 +0200 In-Reply-To: <87k11v5zdn.fsf@aquinas> (Richard Lawrence's message of "Fri, 01 May 2020 19:38:44 +0200") Message-ID: <87ees27a49.fsf@nicolasgoaziou.fr> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.3 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Received-SPF: pass client-ip=217.70.183.196; envelope-from=mail@nicolasgoaziou.fr; helo=relay4-d.mail.gandi.net X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: First seen = 2020/05/02 09:13:46 X-ACL-Warn: Detected OS = Linux 3.11 and newer [fuzzy] X-Received-From: 217.70.183.196 X-BeenThere: emacs-orgmode@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: "General discussions about Org-mode." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: org-mode-email , Bruce D'Arcus , John Kitchin Errors-To: emacs-orgmode-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org Sender: "Emacs-orgmode" X-Scanner: scn0 X-Spam-Score: -1.01 Authentication-Results: aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=none; dmarc=none; spf=pass (aspmx1.migadu.com: domain of emacs-orgmode-bounces@gnu.org designates 2001:470:142::17 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=emacs-orgmode-bounces@gnu.org X-Scan-Result: default: False [-1.01 / 13.00]; RCVD_VIA_SMTP_AUTH(0.00)[]; GENERIC_REPUTATION(0.00)[-0.49494680628904]; HAS_XOIP(0.00)[]; DWL_DNSWL_FAIL(0.00)[2001:470:142::17:server fail]; R_SPF_ALLOW(-0.20)[+ip6:2001:470:142::/48:c]; IP_REPUTATION_HAM(0.00)[asn: 22989(0.15), country: US(-0.00), ip: 2001:470:142::17(-0.49)]; TO_DN_ALL(0.00)[]; MX_GOOD(-0.50)[cached: eggs.gnu.org]; MAILLIST(-0.20)[mailman]; FORGED_RECIPIENTS_MAILLIST(0.00)[]; RCVD_IN_DNSWL_FAIL(0.00)[2001:470:142::17:server fail]; RCVD_TLS_LAST(0.00)[]; R_DKIM_NA(0.00)[]; MID_RHS_MATCH_FROM(0.00)[]; TAGGED_FROM(0.00)[larch=yhetil.org]; ASN(0.00)[asn:22989, ipnet:2001:470:142::/48, country:US]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; RCVD_COUNT_FIVE(0.00)[6]; FROM_NEQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[mail@nicolasgoaziou.fr,emacs-orgmode-bounces@gnu.org]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; RCPT_COUNT_THREE(0.00)[4]; URIBL_BLOCKED(0.00)[uni-tuebingen.de:email]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; DMARC_NA(0.00)[nicolasgoaziou.fr]; HAS_LIST_UNSUB(-0.01)[]; FREEMAIL_CC(0.00)[gnu.org,gmail.com,andrew.cmu.edu]; FORGED_SENDER_MAILLIST(0.00)[] X-TUID: RzOTUguBDf2x Hello, Richard Lawrence writes: > If so, then I think Nicolas' proposal to have "cite" mean default and > make non-default citations available as "cite/xxx" makes sense > (especially with the other syntax supporting suppress-author, etc.). > > If not, then the "cite/xxx" syntax makes less sense to me; it just sort > of looks like a different way of writing BibLaTeX commands, and will be > hard to support when LaTeX is not the output format. I would be hesitant > in that case to make "cite/xxx" the standard way to express "this > citation should be rendered in manner xxx, instead of the default". Note that I only followed as many requests from participants to this thread as possible. Anyway, I'm a bit lost here. The point to the syntax is to support Citeproc as well as Bib(La)TeX and Org Ref, so it has to deal with both processors using a limited set of cite commands, and processors with an awful lot of cite commands. On top of that, some users requested name spaces for custom commands, which only makes sense in Bib(La)TeX context, IIUC. So, there we are. I suggested to support at least "cite", "cite/text" and "cite/paren", but it sounds like "cite/paren" is not possible with Citeproc. This doesn't matter much, we can limit the supported set to "cite" and "cite/text" in Citeproc. I think there are really two paths here: either we only support the common denominator between all processors, like, e.g., Pandoc, or we handle every possible command, knowing that most of them will not be portable anyways. WDYT? Regards, -- Nicolas Goaziou