On Thu, Apr 21, 2022 at 4:06 AM Nicolas Goaziou wrote:
> If there's no objection, I'll add asterisk character to the list of
> allowed characters in citation style.
It's been a month without objection. Could we please add this then?
Bruce
I agree.
John
---
Professor John Kitchin (he/him/his)
Doherty Hall A207F
Department of Chemical Engineering
Carnegie Mellon University
Pittsburgh, PA 15213
412-268-7803
@johnkitchin
http://kitchingroup.cheme.cmu.edu
On Fri, Apr 22, 2022 at 8:57 AM Bruce D'Arcus
On Thu, Apr 21, 2022 at 4:06 AM Nicolas Goaziou wrote:
> If there's no objection, I'll add asterisk character to the list of
> allowed characters in citation style.
>
> More generally, what other characters should be allowed ?
This request is to accommodate latex command names, and the only
Nicolas Goaziou writes:
> I had your
>
> *bold [cite:citet*:@key]
>
> example in mind. Sure, if bold jumps across the citation this is
> different. I'm not sure this is something that is frequent enough to
> worry.
According to Prof. Kitchin, it is not frequent. However, if it does
happen it
Ihor Radchenko writes:
>> I think the zero-width space can be inserted on the other side.
>
> Could you elaborate? In the following example, inserting zero-width
> space at *bold will break the intended bold emphasis *bold ... here*.
>
> Some *bold emphasis with reference [cite/citet*:@key] will
Nicolas Goaziou writes:
>> Note that inserting zero-width space will not only be awkward here, but
>> also breaks parser: e.g. [cite/citet:@key] is not currently
>> recognised as a citation.
>
> I think the zero-width space can be inserted on the other side.
Could you elaborate? In the
Hello,
Ihor Radchenko writes:
> "Bruce D'Arcus" writes:
>
>> On Sun, Apr 3, 2022 at 5:07 PM John Kitchin wrote:
>>>
>>> I was looking into using latex commands as styles in org-cite, e.g.
>>>
>>> [cite/citet:@key]. That example works fine, but [cite/citet*:@key] is not
>>> allowed. Could
"Bruce D'Arcus" writes:
> Just to clarify, I don't believe the discussion is to add such styles to
> the included org-cite processors (which already support such
> functionality), but rather to allow it, for example for third party ones;
> say a hypothetical org-ref one.
Sure. However, the
On Mon, Apr 18, 2022, 5:08 AM Ihor Radchenko wrote:
> John Kitchin writes:
>
> >> In contrast, [cite/citet*:@key] is likely to be used fairly frequently
> >> and has much higher chance to break things.
> >
> >
> > We have had a citet*:key link (and all the other * variants) for a long
> > time
John Kitchin writes:
>> In contrast, [cite/citet*:@key] is likely to be used fairly frequently
>> and has much higher chance to break things.
>
>
> We have had a citet*:key link (and all the other * variants) for a long
> time in org-ref, with no reported issues I can recall.
I respect your
On Sun, Apr 17, 2022 at 9:18 AM Ihor Radchenko wrote:
> John Kitchin writes:
>
> > I am also not a fan of using Unicode here and prefer a simple ascii
> > asterisk. That works fine for me so far, but I am not a heavy user of
> bold
> > markup and citations.
>
> What about something like
John Kitchin writes:
> I am also not a fan of using Unicode here and prefer a simple ascii
> asterisk. That works fine for me so far, but I am not a heavy user of bold
> markup and citations.
What about something like [cite/citet*/:@key]?
"*/" is not recognised as bold ending.
> As I mentioned
I am also not a fan of using Unicode here and prefer a simple ascii
asterisk. That works fine for me so far, but I am not a heavy user of bold
markup and citations.
As I mentioned there is the same problem for links, and in the last 10
years I can’t recall an issue being reported with bold.
On
"Bruce D'Arcus" writes:
>> A less awkward solution (IMO) would be to use an entity like ⋆. It is
>> straightforward to add that to the org-element-citation-prefix-re. Then I
>> see something like this.
>
> So Ihor, is there any problem with John's proposed change here?
I am not a big fan of
On Thu, Apr 7, 2022 at 7:30 AM John Kitchin wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 7, 2022 at 12:17 AM Ihor Radchenko wrote:
>
>> "Bruce D'Arcus" writes:
>>
>> > On Sun, Apr 3, 2022 at 5:07 PM John Kitchin
>> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> I was looking into using latex commands as styles in org-cite, e.g.
>> >>
>> >>
On Thu, Apr 7, 2022 at 12:17 AM Ihor Radchenko wrote:
> "Bruce D'Arcus" writes:
>
> > On Sun, Apr 3, 2022 at 5:07 PM John Kitchin
> wrote:
> >>
> >> I was looking into using latex commands as styles in org-cite, e.g.
> >>
> >> [cite/citet:@key]. That example works fine, but [cite/citet*:@key]
"Bruce D'Arcus" writes:
> On Sun, Apr 3, 2022 at 5:07 PM John Kitchin wrote:
>>
>> I was looking into using latex commands as styles in org-cite, e.g.
>>
>> [cite/citet:@key]. That example works fine, but [cite/citet*:@key] is not
>> allowed. Could that be allowed?
>
> I have no insight into
On Tue, Apr 5, 2022 at 12:11 PM John Kitchin wrote:
>
> Would you find it suitable to use [cite/command:pre @key post] in general?
I think it's a reasonable approach that would appeal to some users who
would treat org as a front-end to LaTeX primarily, and obviously
previous org-ref users, and
Would you find it suitable to use [cite/command:pre @key post] in general?
For portability, I suppose there could be a defcustom mapping if one wanted
to leverage the oc-csl library with pretty minimal effort.
I think two things need to be addressed to fix that. First is allowing a *
in the
On Sun, Apr 3, 2022 at 5:07 PM John Kitchin wrote:
>
> I was looking into using latex commands as styles in org-cite, e.g.
>
> [cite/citet:@key]. That example works fine, but [cite/citet*:@key] is not
> allowed. Could that be allowed?
I have no insight into the restriction, but I hope it can be
I was looking into using latex commands as styles in org-cite, e.g.
[cite/citet:@key]. That example works fine, but [cite/citet*:@key] is not
allowed. Could that be allowed?
John
---
Professor John Kitchin (he/him/his)
Doherty Hall A207F
Department of Chemical
21 matches
Mail list logo
