Hi Nicolas, Nicolas Goaziou <m...@nicolasgoaziou.fr> 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 -@Doe2014 for a recent review.] Apart from that, I would think a subtype/property would suffice. Best, Richard
