Re: [O] Citation syntax: a revised proposal

[Richard Lawrence]

Hi Nicolas,

Nicolas Goaziou <address@hidden> writes:

>> Oh, I did not realize there were outstanding issues with this.  I
>> remember Rasmus not liking `&'.  I'm fine with changing it, though I
>> cannot think of a better symbol.  Does someone think we should not have
>> a way of indicating that a reference should produce a full bibliography
>> entry?  Or that we should indicate it in some other way?
>
> AFAIC, I don't think a dedicated symbol is useful. It can be implemented
> through subtypes/properties. 

It would be useful to have a per-key symbol rather than a subtype if one
wants to mix regular and `full' references in the same citation.  But I
am not sure there are any realistic use cases for this, so I am fine
with expressing `full' citations via a subtype.
 
> Besides LaTeX, could other back-end provide that feature anyway?

Yes, I don't think that would be a problem, if we are using a CSL
processor.  You can ask a CSL processor for either a citation or a full
bibliography entry.

> I have no opinion about the :suppress-author symbol.

The case I can think of where it would be most useful to have this
expressed via the key is when you have multiple works by the same author
in a citation, like:

[cite: This was originally proposed by @Doe1999.; See his address@hidden for a 
recent review.]

Apart from that, I would think a subtype/property would suffice.

Best,
Richard