> Bruce D'Arcus <bdar...@gmail.com> hat am 18. April 2020 15:22 geschrieben:
>
>
> But ...
>
> On Sat, Apr 18, 2020 at 9:17 AM Bruce D'Arcus <bdar...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> ...
>
> > I can't see that it's necessary to have a fourth, because I think the
> > result of that would be this, which doesn't make any sense.
> >
> > 4. "Doe blah blah {2017}"/"Doe blah blah {[3]}" ->
> > author-in-text+suppress-author command
>
> ... notwithstanding that, I think Nicolas' latest proposed syntax
> would support this anyway.
>
> [citet:-@doe17]
Perhaps that can be used as author-only?
That would be:
[cite: @doe17] => (Doe 2017) [or a footnote, of course.)
[cite: -@doe17] => (2017)
[citet: @doe17] => Doe (2017)
[citet: -@doe17] => Doe
So we have like two basic citation types: One that is part of the narrative,
one where the citation is set off from the main text. Both citations can be
modified with a minus prefix. In one case this leads to "suppress author", in
the other case this means "author only". (Using the same prefix for two
different things can be considered problematic.)
Best,
Denis
