Marcin Borkowski <mb...@wmi.amu.edu.pl> writes: > I do not use Org-mode for authoring (I'm quite happy with LaTeX itself > for that), and in LaTeX, I use neither bibtex nor biblatex; but AFAIK, > bibtex is basically dead like John Cleese's parrot. I don't even think > that it needs to or should be supported; the faster bibtex usage fades > away, the better.
As a point of clarification, bibtex syntax and bib files remain alive and well (albeit with modifications) for those who use biblatex. > What I would suggest is to look into amsrefs manual. The amsrefs > package was (is?) an interesting attempt at a /pure LaTeX/ solution to > the bibliography problem, not dependent on any executable other than > LaTeX. It is not capable of sorting bibliographies, but other than > that is quite powerful (much more than bibtex, though seemingly less > than biblatex). What is interesting here is its \ycite and \ocite > commands (see > http://mirrors.ctan.org/macros/latex/contrib/amsrefs/amsrdoc.pdf); it > might be a good idea to support something similar. (I'm not sure > whether biblatex supports such a thing.) Most biblatex backends have multiple versions of cite commands. I use biblatex-chicago, which provides, among others, \autocite, \fullcite, \citetitle, \footfullcite, \headlesscite, \headlessfullcite, \shortcite. Best, Matt