On Mon, Apr 13, 2020 at 4:34 AM Stefan Nobis <stefan...@snobis.de> wrote:
> [Placing bibliography with "#+bibliography: here"] > > It is smart, but I'm not sure I like using the same keyword for two > > different things. OTOH, I don't have a better idea. > > I personally also dislike one keyword for completely different > purposes. Therefore I suggest to take the idea from BibLaTeX and use a > keyword like "printbibliography" the mark the place where the > bibliography should be output. So we need one keyword to designate the bibliographic data file, and another where to place the formatted output. > This command may also have parameters like filtering options (maybe > depending on the backend processor; I only know BibLaTeX so I can't > say if it would be easy to abstract away differences between different > engines). In the case of BiBLaTeX the printbibliography command > optionally accepts multiple key-value parameters. Some examples for > the keys are "heading" for the chapter/section heading, "type" to > output/print only entries of a certain type (like "book"; or type > "online" and with the additional key "nottype" separate non-online and > online sources), "keyword" to filter entries with the associated > keyword etc. > > Another nice feature of BibLaTeX is the possibility to generate > bibliography per chapter/section (e.g. setting conference > proceedings). In the simplest case each chapter/section is marked, in > the case of LaTeX/BibLaTeX it is wrapped with "\begin{refsection}" and > "\end{refsection}" and the printbibliography command occurs inside > this refsection block. In this case BibLaTeX defaults to output only > references used inside the marked block. Indeed, this is a good summary, and also a feature often requested on the Zotero forums. I think the way biblatex handles this is general, based on reading the docs, is good. It'd be nice to have, but maybe not essential for a first step? Bruce