On Thu, Apr 9, 2020 at 3:38 AM Albert Krewinkel <alb...@zeitkraut.de> wrote: > > Hello, > > Bruce D'Arcus writes: > > > On Wed, Apr 8, 2020 at 5:32 AM Nicolas Goaziou <m...@nicolasgoaziou.fr> > > wrote: > >> "Bruce D'Arcus" <bdar...@gmail.com> writes: > >> > >> > Note that in CSL processors, the locators are meaningful key-values, > >> > basically; not plain text strings. > >> > >> OK, but it is enough for Org to feed a CSL processor with, e.g., > >> > >> key -> "@doe99" > >> prefix -> "see " > >> suffix -> ", pp. 33-35" > >> > >> Then CSL processor does its job to extract whatever information it > >> needs. Am I right? > > > > On this, I would defer to András and Albert (who maintains the pandoc > > org code, I believe). > > Yes, that is correct. Pandoc parses `prefix` and `suffix` as markup, so > the pp in ", /pp/. 33-35." would be italicized.
And Pandoc parses that "suffix" into two parts: the locators, and the suffix proper. In this example, from the CSL perspective, there is no suffix; just a locator. So to answer Nicholes' "CSL processor does its job" question, the answer would be "yes'; correct? The only thing I would add on that is if the org citation syntax has no notion of locators, and simply folds them into the suffix, that could cause problems for users. This may or may not be a problem to worry about now; I don't know. Maybe if org and emacs were to include citeproc-org, you support it, and otherwise keep simpler? FWIW, I asked about this on the CSL developers subforum, and got a very helpful reply from Denis Maier, first discussing the pandoc citation model and parsing, and then the org citation syntax and global affixes it supports. https://discourse.citationstyles.org/t/ideal-api-to-expose-for-csl-processor/1622/3 https://discourse.citationstyles.org/t/ideal-api-to-expose-for-csl-processor/1622/4 He suggests considering adding support for the global prefix to CSL 1.2. Bruce
