[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: citations: org-cite vs org-ref 3.0

From: John Kitchin
Subject: Re: citations: org-cite vs org-ref 3.0
Date: Sun, 27 Mar 2022 15:40:11 -0400
User-agent: mu4e 1.6.10; emacs 28.0.90

Max Nikulin <manikulin@gmail.com> writes:

> On 21/03/2022 18:51, John Kitchin wrote:
>> citenum and bibentry are the only two I am not sure have a CSL analog.
> I read your messages once more and I should say that I feel some disagreement 
> of
> this one (I removed most of it) and the earlier and longer one from Sun, 20 
> Mar
> 2022 20:31:29 -0400 m2sfrc149c.fsf@andrew.cmu.edu">https://list.orgmode.org/m2sfrc149c.fsf@andrew.cmu.edu
> I admit that org-ref is carefully tuned to your workflow. I hope, it is 
> possible
> to left aside decomposition of org-cite into modules for some time.
> Let's assume org-cite with natbib backend for citations and org-ref for
> cross-references. It seems, a couple of missed styles currently is not a 
> problem
> due to the defcustom for the mapping.
> Are there still any technical limitations that prevent getting in the exported
> LaTeX file the same citation commands as for org-ref?

If all one wants is LaTeX export, there are not technical limitations.
That is not all people want in general though, they also want other
exports, and that they are reasonably similar, or even possible. It is
easy to get \citenum and \bibentry for LaTeX. I promise though, someone
wants this or some other thing for HTML. 

Rather than rehash a lot of experiences, I really encourage you to try
writing a processor that can support this. Or even, try modifying
org-ref-cite to support it. Not as some thought experiment about what
should be possible, but an actual experiment that is worked out.

> In particular I am worrying concerning https://github.com/jkitchin/org-ref
> README (and the same phrase from the earlier message):
>> org-cite does not meet my citation and technical document publishing needs,
>> and it was not possible to integrate it into org-ref without compromising
>> those.

I have taken this out of the readme. I still agree with the sentiment,
but my needs are not the same as others (for example, I include in my
needs include ease of support and development, which is not a user
need), and it is possible to meet some basic needs fully.

> Does it refer to exported result or to convenience of working with citations?
> Would it help if it were possible to choose style by its natbib command?
> I see that you do not like org-cite styles, but I can not figure out what are
> the real blockers that prevent producing documents having the same
> quality.

If you spend enough time teaching people how to use these things, you
might feel differently about this. It is so easy to just switch away to
Endnote, Papers, Paperpile, Mendeley, Zotero, Overleaf, etc. I guess I
am not on the prevailing side here though.

Professor John Kitchin
Doherty Hall A207F
Department of Chemical Engineering
Carnegie Mellon University
Pittsburgh, PA 15213
Pronouns: he/him/his

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]