That'd be my preferred solution, with (notwithstanding name overlap with org-ref) an org-ref-insert entry point.
On Wed, Aug 11, 2021, 12:10 PM Timothy <tecos...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Bruce, John, > > Regarding the issues with overloading [cite:@] syntax, would it be too > much to > introduce [ref:@] which would function identically, but deal with > references? > > All the best, > *Timothy* >
