[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [O] Citation syntax: a revised proposal
From: |
Stefan Nobis |
Subject: |
Re: [O] Citation syntax: a revised proposal |
Date: |
Mon, 16 Feb 2015 09:53:50 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.4 (darwin) |
Richard Lawrence <address@hidden> writes:
> Rasmus <address@hidden> writes:
>> 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.
I would say, just keep "@" to mark the key. The others are not really
needed. Both, "&" and "-" are better handled by a nice internal
syntax, something like
[cite:command ...]
or
[cite: ... @key :part year ...]
These internal extensions via keywords are IMHO much nicer that the
"%%(...)" variant (as a programmer I also like "%%(...)", but not as
an author).
I think this kind of syntax (only plain "@key" or maybe "address@hidden" as
shortcut and everything else within "[cite:...]") is also easier to
handle with overlays, user input helpers etc.
Some input helper can make remembering all the options and keywords
inside [cite:...] a non-issue and overlays will render it nice in the
text. Therefore the syntax should be rather simple and regular with as
few exceptions and shorthands as sensible.
--
Until the next mail...,
Stefan.
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, Nicolas Goaziou, 2015/02/15
Re: [O] Citation syntax: a revised proposal, Nicolas Goaziou, 2015/02/15