[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [O] Citation syntax: a revised proposal
From: |
Richard Lawrence |
Subject: |
Re: [O] Citation syntax: a revised proposal |
Date: |
Sun, 15 Feb 2015 09:05:52 -0800 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.4 (gnu/linux) |
Hi Rasmus,
Rasmus <address@hidden> writes:
> 0
>
> Parts I like:
>
> 1) a parenthetical citation for a single work with no prefix and
> suffix may be written by just surrounding the key with brackets,
> like: address@hidden
> 2) an in-text citation for a single work with no prefix and suffix
> may be written as a /bare/ key, without brackets, like: @Doe99.
>
> I recently cracked up something similar for a paper we are working on, and
> I think it's nice. I have yet to get the verdict from my coauthor,
> though.
Cool. :)
> Parts that I don't care for:
>
> [cite: whatever (@Doe99) whatever]
>
> Not intuitive to me, but I could get used to it.
It's not super intuitive to me either, and it just occurred to me
yesterday, so maybe there's a better way. The reason I went this way
was so that we could represent the difference between parenthetical and
in-text citations without moving the cite key and without using
different tags (citet: vs. citep:). That makes it easy to write a
function that will quickly switch a citation between the two styles,
without using the tag to express the difference, which Nicolas was
worried would slow down the parser.
> Parts I hate:
>
> The flag is either `@' or `&'. `@' [...] The optional hyphen (`-')
>
> Too many weird symbols that I won't be able to remember, much less explain
> to somebody else.
I don't love these either, but I am not sure what a better alternative
would be. The `@' is vestigial inspiration from Pandoc, and is used
infrequently enough elsewhere in Org syntax that Nicolas at one point
said it would be OK performance-wise to have address@hidden' appear alone in the
text. `&' seemed like a natural counterpart for the same reasons, but I
agree it isn't terribly intuitive. (Though maybe there's one supporting
intuition: `&' is used to introduce keys in URL parameters...)
I disagree with you about the hyphen, but I wouldn't use it enough to
lobby for it (it is just vestigial Pandoc). If others think we should
take it out, that's fine with me.
> `%%( ... )'.
>
> Just too odd. Extensibilty should not be delegated to some weird
> construct outside of the element in question.
Again, I don't exactly love this either, but I chose this syntax because
%%(...) is already used elsewhere in Org to represent embedded
s-expressions (notably in timestamps -- see section 8.1 of the manual).
%(...) is also used for s-expressions in capture templates, though I'm
not sure why the first case uses two `%'s and the second only one.
The only reason to use these delimiters is consistency; I'm not opposed
to something prettier if there's a better alternative.
Keeping this part of the syntax outside the [cite: ...] brackets allows
it to be used with bare keys for simple in-text citations, and prevents
a further syntactic restriction on prefix/suffix text inside the
brackets. I'm not opposed to moving it inside if that seems really
important, but these two considerations weigh against it in my opinion.
Best,
Richard
- Re: [O] Citation syntax: a revised proposal, (continued)
- Re: [O] Citation syntax: a revised proposal, Rasmus, 2015/02/27
- Re: [O] Citation syntax: a revised proposal, Melanie Bacou, 2015/02/20
- Re: [O] Citation syntax: a revised proposal, Richard Lawrence, 2015/02/20
- Re: [O] Citation syntax: a revised proposal, Vaidheeswaran C, 2015/02/24
- Re: [O] Citation syntax: a revised proposal, Richard Lawrence, 2015/02/24
- Re: [O] Citation syntax: a revised proposal, Vaidheeswaran C, 2015/02/25
Re: [O] Citation syntax: a revised proposal, Tory S. Anderson, 2015/02/15
Re: [O] Citation syntax: a revised proposal, Rasmus, 2015/02/15
- Re: [O] Citation syntax: a revised proposal,
Richard Lawrence <=
Re: [O] Citation syntax: a revised proposal, Nicolas Goaziou, 2015/02/15
Re: [O] Citation syntax: a revised proposal, Nicolas Goaziou, 2015/02/15