Am 02.05.2020 um 18:34 schrieb Nicolas Goaziou:
It seems you didn't copy the list. I add it again.
No, I think that should be fine. (Perhaps also a fourth one for
author-only. And what about nocite?)
Sorry. I wasn't clear.
There is still full support for styles behind the suggested syntax,
Hello,
Am 25.04.2020 um 18:19 schrieb Nicolas Goaziou:
Hello,
I cannot answer all open questions as the thread would spread too thin.
So, I'll try to subsume where Org is at the moment, and what need to be
decided.
Thanks for the suggestion. Looks like a pretty solid approach.
There is a
> Bruce D'Arcus hat am 18. April 2020 15:22 geschrieben:
>
>
> But ...
>
> On Sat, Apr 18, 2020 at 9:17 AM Bruce D'Arcus wrote:
>
> ...
>
> > I can't see that it's necessary to have a fourth, because I think the
> > result of that would be this, which doesn't make any sense.
> >
> > 4.
> Bruce D'Arcus hat am 18. April 2020 15:22 geschrieben:
>
>
> But ...
>
> On Sat, Apr 18, 2020 at 9:17 AM Bruce D'Arcus wrote:
>
> ...
>
> > I can't see that it's necessary to have a fourth, because I think the
> > result of that would be this, which doesn't make any sense.
> >
> > 4.
> Stefan Nobis hat am 13. April 2020 10:33 geschrieben:
>
>
> Nicolas Goaziou writes:
>
> > Alphanumeric suffix provides 62 combinations, which should hopefully
> > be enough for any citation back-end out there (I'm looking at you
> > biblatex). It's not terribly readable, tho, as you point
Sorry, my last message was unreadable. (and possibly sent twice, once from a
wrong account... don't know if this will come through)
> Stefan Nobis hat am 13. April 2020 10:33 geschrieben:
>
>
> Nicolas Goaziou writes:
>
> > Alphanumeric suffix provides 62 combinations, which should
> > Stefan Nobis hat am 13. April 2020 10:33 geschrieben:
> >
> >
> > Nicolas Goaziou writes:
> >
> > > Alphanumeric suffix provides 62 combinations, which should hopefully
> > > be enough for any citation back-end out there (I'm looking at you
> > > biblatex). It's not terribly readable,
> Nicolas Goaziou hat am 13. April 2020 00:19
> geschrieben:
>
>
> Hello,
>
> denis.maier.li...@mailbox.org writes:
>
> > Just one question concerning typed citations. citeX is good and
> > concise, but why limit this to only one character?
>
> Because… it is good and concise? ;)
>
> >
Nicolas Goaziou hat am 12. April 2020 17:32
geschrieben:
>
>
> "Bruce D'Arcus" writes:
>
> > On Sun, Apr 12, 2020 at 10:02 AM Nicolas Goaziou
> > wrote:
>
> >> Yes, and a "t-styled" citation would be:
> >>
> >> [citet:see;@doe2020;@doe2019]
> >>
> >> Barring the prefix, the syntax of
Hi,
> Let's assume Org implements SuppressAuthor as "-@doe", so far it has:
>
> | Syntax| Mode| Sample output
> |
> |---+-+---|
> | @doe or [cite:@doe] | AuthorInText
Hi,
very good to see these things are getting discussed again. (Back then, I have
been following the citation syntax discussion from a distance rather then
participating actively, so that's my first post here.)
It would be great if Org had a closer integration with a Citeproc. This would
be a
101 - 111 of 111 matches
Mail list logo
