Re: [O] Citation syntax: a revised proposal

[Matt Price]

On Feb 17, 2015 1:12 PM, "Rasmus" <address@hidden> wrote:
>
> Richard Lawrence <address@hidden> writes:
>
> > Basically, I think you could ignore the distinctions that the [cite:
> > ...] syntax is capable of expressing, and just write all your citations
> > like:
> >
> >   [cite: See @Doe99 for more on this point.] %%(:type footnoted)
> >
> > or, in the syntax Nicolas proposed, something like:
> >
> >   [cite: See @Doe99 for more on this point.]{:type footnoted}
> >
> > You would then use an export filter to transform citations with this
> > :type into the appropriate command, something along the lines of:
>
> This seems backward and wrong /to me/.  Why not global options?  I
> actually think we "agreed" on this earlier.
>
> #+cite: text-cite
> #+(cite): parenthesis-cite
>
> Or
>
> #+cite: numeric
> #+(cite): footnote-cite
>
> This is why I asked Tom earlier if he normally uses more than two citation
> TYPES.  Presumably citeauthor and citeyear works irrespective of the main
> citation type.  So I still think that having two TYPES handy will meet
> most requirements.

This is clearly preferable.  Using zotero in odt ,  rtf ,  or docx,  you would normally just set a citation style and let zotero take care of the reformatting.  Rasmus's solution is almost as convenient as that,  and presumably backend-independent.
>
> —Rasmus
>
> --
> m-mm-mmm-mmmm bacon!
>
>