Ihor Radchenko <yanta...@posteo.net> writes: > Zac E <zac.end...@gmail.com> writes: > >>>> [cite:@cohen2003consum-repub.;@trentmann2016empire-things] > >>> This is ambiguous. "." can be a part of citation key. >>> There is no bug here. Just a limitation that we cannot easily force end >>> of citation key in Org syntax. [...] >> It is absolutely a bug in the general sense, i.e. the >> software does not behave in the expected way. >> I would add that this bug is quite literally the only one >> keeping org-mode from being capable of generating >> papers in the humanities.
I don't think it's a bug, but I agree with Zac that it would be nice to be able to escape the period here (or not count it as part of the citekey). Zero-width space does not give the desired result at the moment. However, it's perfectly possible to get the desired result in a different way: By putting the citations in a footnote instead of in the body text. I've tested this using the csl processor with the style chicago-note-bibliography.csl. Separate citations in an Org `[fn:]' footnote are correctly formatted, and terminated with periods. That is, given a document like this: Some text.[fn:someref] * Footnotes [fn:someref] [cite:@cohen2003consum-repub] [@trentmann2016empire-things] The result should look something like this (here I'm pretending Trentman's is an article, to show where the quotes go): Some text.[1] Footnotes _________ [1] Cohen, /A Consumer's Republic/. Trentman, “Empire of Things.” It's not a 100% ideal solution, since in-footnote citations are more cumbersome to convert to e.g. author-date style than in-text citations are. On the other hand, if your footnote needs multiple periods, you may want to leave it as a footnote anyway. The use of `fn:' footnotes can be minimized by using in-text `cite:' citations when possible (with both exporting to footnotes when using a footnote style; Org will take care of the numbering). There are also other cases where `fn:'-type footnotes may be necessary (e.g. to refer back to an earlier footnote). And for long, discursive notes I also find this easier to read and edit than having all the discussion stuffed into fontified `cite:' brackets. Org parses the square brackets smartly enough that you can even nest the citations inside an inline footnote. I'm not sure how sane this solution, but it should work: Some text.[fn:someref:[cite:@cohen2003consum-repub] [@trentmann2016empire-things]] Yours, Christian
