At 10:58 AM 9/7/2001 +0200, Eckhart Guth�hrlein wrote:
>At 10:15 07.09.2001 +0200, Taco Hoekwater wrote:
>>\cite{..} is accepted as meaning the same as \cite[..]. It is in there
>>because existing databases use this syntax when refering to other items
>>in the database. But: it is very latexy and not in sync with the context
>>rule that typeset arguments use {} and setup arguments use [].
>>
>>So, question: to remove or not to remove? How many people share bibtex
>>databases between latex en context? (removal makes it easier to implement
>>the 'extra info').
>
>As far as I am concerned, it can be removed, since I'm planning to abandon
>the use of latex entirely and do not have large bibtex databases yet.
>
>A more general solution could be to use a different command for
>cross-referencing inside the bib file, let's call it \crosscite for
>example. Then you could say something like
>
>\def\crosscite#1{\cite[#1]} % for context
>
>or
>
>\def\crosscite#1{\cite{#1}} % for latex
then, how about:
\let\simplecite\cite
\def\complexcite[#1]{\normalcite{#1}}
\definecomplexorsimple\cite
now \cite[bla] and \cite{bla} both work (but i favor the [] only approach).
Hans
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hans Hagen | PRAGMA ADE | [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Ridderstraat 27 | 8061 GH Hasselt | The Netherlands
tel: +31 (0)38 477 53 69 | fax: +31 (0)38 477 53 74 | www.pragma-ade.com
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
