Re: [O] Citations, continued

[Eric S Fraga]

On Tuesday,  3 Feb 2015 at 08:27, Richard Lawrence wrote:

[...]

>> For me, any solution will likely do just fine as my use of citations is
>> quite straightforward.  I seldom, if ever, have pre or post text but I
>> do use a couple of alternative citation types (author, year; year only).
>
> Just to clarify: these are only `alternative' citation types if you're
> not using a citation style where they are the default types, like
> Chicago, right?  I assume you are using a numeric style, like ACM?

It depends on the journal I am writing for.  For those with numeric
styles (Chicago), i.e. "blah blah [1]", there are no alternatives so I
just use [[cite:blah]]; for journals expecting a Harvard (natbib) style
(blah, 1999), I will use both citet "Blah et al. (1999)" and citep
"(Blah et al, 1999)" as appropriate.

I prefer numeric styles but it's not typically up to me.  Harvard styles
are a throwback to typewriters (and people using Word etc. without any
automated reference software ;-).  IMO, of course!

So there needs to be some way to distinguish between styles, as already
noted I think (although much of the discussion has been about how to
include extra information...).
-- 
: Eric S Fraga (0xFFFCF67D), Emacs 25.0.50.1, Org 
release_8.3beta-750-gb6fce5.dirty