Re: [O] Should wip-cite branch be merged to master?

Hello, András Simonyi writes: > > [cite:author @Jones2018] > > > Again, maybe it's worth having some shortcuts here for the common cases, > > but I think in general we want to try to avoid proliferation of basic > > citation commands. So for that reason I think

Re: [O] Should wip-cite branch be merged to master?

Dear All, thanks for your responses. I find John's list of the most important capabilities of org-ref very useful and agree that in the long run we should aim at providing all of these functionality for the new syntax as well. One point where this might prove to be difficult is precisely the set

Re: [O] Should wip-cite branch be merged to master?

Hi all, Richard Lawrence writes: > I don't have too much to add to this, though I do want to thank > everyone for their continued interest in citations, and the work that > has been done! +1! With Org 9.2 knocking at the door, we can let users Org 9.2 a few

Re: [O] Should wip-cite branch be merged to master?

Hi everyone, I don't have too much to add to this, though I do want to thank everyone for their continued interest in citations, and the work that has been done! Since the question of syntax has come up again, I guess I want to address one point that András made: András Simonyi

Re: [O] Should wip-cite branch be merged to master?

I don't have any objections to merging now, or in the future. org-ref addresses a fairly specific need, which is simple citations that ultimately end up being processed by bib(la)tex/latex. It does a mediocre job supporting footnote style citations, and limitations of the link format it uses make

Re: [O] Should wip-cite branch be merged to master?

Dear All, thanks for bringing this up. I definitely agree that it'd be too early to merge the wip-cite branch. In fact, having added (experimental) support for it in citeproc-org I've been planning to propose some changes/extensions to the syntax but I wanted to wait until citeproc-org and

Re: [O] Should wip-cite branch be merged to master?

I have no opinion on whether it's time for a merge or not, but please don't wait up for me. Nicolas Goaziou writes: > I also remember that Christian Moe suggested an alternate syntax for > citations. He might want to point out what is missing from @cite syntax > and if he still prefers his

Re: [O] Should wip-cite branch be merged to master?

Hello, tumashu writes: > There is a package which support wip-cite: > https://github.com/andras-simonyi/citeproc-org, should wip-cite branch > be merged to master now? Merging wip-cite branch with master, and integration of citeproc-org into Org core, could be discussed with

[O] Should wip-cite branch be merged to master?

There is a package which support wip-cite: https://github.com/andras-simonyi/citeproc-org, should wip-cite branch be merged to master now?