> It seems like that should not be the case, i.e. if you define
> BIBLIOGRAPHY keywords it means you do not want to use the ones in
> org-cite-global-bibliography. Is there a scenario where the union of
> those makes sense?
Yes indeed: you may have
- A library for background issues (e. g. methodology)
- A (or several) subject matter-specific library (e. g. a
subdiscipline, a method, etc...)
- A library specific to the question you are discussing (e. g.
results of a bibliographic search specific to your question).
The first one is a perfect target for org-cite-global-bibliography. The
last one is of course a target for #+BIBLIOGRAPHY ; I'd tend to let the
subject matter library as a file-specific #+BIBLIOGRAPHY (my subject
matters tend to vary...), but this depends on your field.
You may also think of this typology as books, reviews and research
papers respectively...
HTH,
--
Emmanuel Charpentier
