On Thu, May 27, 2021 at 10:34 AM Bruce D'Arcus <bdar...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Thu, May 27, 2021 at 10:18 AM Bruce D'Arcus <bdar...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > I was expecting (not to say I should have necessarily) in this case: > > > > [cite:@doe p23] > > > > ... that either "p23" is recognized as a locator, or as a suffix > > string for the citation reference. > > To be clear, Nicolas, your change to the regex this today, however, > does recognize that as a locator, so this specific example is a > non-issue ATM.
Although, users should probably be encouraged to use the "p.1" syntax, so it's consistent with one or a range. One other thing I tested just now not yet accounted for: a locator whose values is a list; for example, that renders as (Doe 2019, pp. 23, 25). Is there an easy way to handle that? If not, it would seem even more important to output that as a suffix string, so users can still get the output they want? One other question: Right now, citeproc-el, and hence also oc-csl, only supports the "bare" variant. Would it be feasible, and make sense, to fall back all "bare" variants to "bare" for now? So this: [cite//bare-caps:@latexcompanion] ... would render as: Doe 2019 Bruce
