Hello, aarone...@gmail.com writes:
>> I think that if we ever implement a bibliography/citations handlers, >> they should be first class objects in Org syntax (like footnotes). >> Overloading link syntax would, IMO, be wrong in that case. > > Do you have a proposal for how this syntax would look? You certainly > know the parser very well, so you probably have an idea of what will > work and not conflict with other things. I think minimally we need > to include info on: > - how to look up the citation (DOI, arXiv id, in a bibtex file, ...) > - how to display/export the citation (parens, footnote, in-text, ...) > - a list of properties (incl. at least pre- and post-note) > - (of course) the citation key > > So maybe: > > [cite:lookup-type:display-type:key:prop1=val1,prop2=val2] I favor [cite:PROPERTIES] over [[cite:PROPERTIES]], because the latter (link syntax) implies a (optional) description part. I don't think a description is ever meaningful in citations. Also, as I already mentioned, link syntax is already overloaded: there are many types of links and the link transcoder function in export back-ends is generally one of the most complicated to write (along with tables). Regards, -- Nicolas Goaziou
