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 Sun, Apr 17, 2022 at 4:41 AM Ihor Radchenko <yanta...@gmail.com> wrote: > "Bruce D'Arcus" <bdar...@gmail.com> 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 using unicode characters, but otherwise I have no > objections and no better ideas (except a general desire to solve similar > parser issues more generally). > > However, I am not org-cite's maintainer. So, I would prefer to hear from > Nicolas before implementing anything myself. > > Best, > Ihor > -- 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
