[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: wip-cite status question and feedback

From: Denis Maier
Subject: Re: wip-cite status question and feedback
Date: Sat, 18 Apr 2020 22:23:34 +0200 (CEST)

> Bruce D'Arcus <address@hidden> hat am 18. April 2020 15:22 geschrieben:
> But ...
> On Sat, Apr 18, 2020 at 9:17 AM Bruce D'Arcus <address@hidden> wrote:
> ...
> > I can't see that it's necessary to have a fourth, because I think the
> > result of that would be this, which doesn't make any sense.
> >
> > 4.  "Doe blah blah {2017}"/"Doe blah blah {[3]}" ->
> > author-in-text+suppress-author command
> ... notwithstanding that, I think Nicolas' latest proposed syntax
> would support this anyway.
> [citet:-@doe17]

Perhaps that can be used as author-only?

That would be:
[cite: @doe17] => (Doe 2017) [or a footnote, of course.)
[cite: -@doe17] => (2017)
[citet: @doe17] => Doe (2017)
[citet: -@doe17] => Doe

So we have like two basic citation types: One that is part of the narrative, 
one where the citation is set off from the main text. Both citations can be 
modified with a minus prefix. In one case this leads to "suppress author", in 
the other case this means "author only". (Using the same prefix for two 
different things can be considered problematic.)


reply via email to

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