Christian Wittern <cwitt...@gmail.com> writes: > On 2015-12-03 8:27, Matt Lundin wrote: >> Given these complexities, it seems that if we went the zotero route we >> could end up with a fairly large installation chain (firefox, zotero, >> zotxt, plugin for zotero). And this would require installing items from >> multiple, heterogeneous sources. > I guess it depends on where you come from. For those who already maintain > the bibliography in Zotero this is not much of an extra load.
Yes, I think this is the key point. For those of us who maintain bib databases within emacs, importing in zotero is problematic (overhead, potential of data loss, etc.). >> As a GNU/Linux user, I would find installing zotero and all the add-ons >> messier and more cumbersome than installing pandoc and/or node-js (were >> we to use citeproc-js) from the command line. > Maybe the best situation would be to support both the pandoc and zotero > toolchain as backends and let the user decide what to use. If the result is > in both cases org-formated citations, that should not make it too difficult, > no? That sounds right. Ideally, org-cite could support zotero *and* bibtex users (i.e., gui and text based/command line) solutions. Matt
