On 23/03/2022 00:20, Bruce D'Arcus wrote:
On Tue, Mar 22, 2022 at 10:42 AM Max Nikulin wrote:
John Kitchin, this thread, Sun, 20 Mar 2022 20:31:29 -0400.
https://list.orgmode.org/m2sfrc149c....@andrew.cmu.edu:
I don't know the equivalent of \citenum in CSL.
Right; so John or someone else should send a message to the list
requesting it specifically?
From my point of view he has already requested support of \citenum by
that message. I am taking into account that he is the developer org-ref
and he is happy with this package. John made a lot to adopt org-cite
syntax to ensure feature parity. Bruce, you should know it better than
me since you participated in discussions while I am merely and observer.
John does not really need \citenum namely in org-cite since his tool is
org-ref, but his words may affect perception of org-cite.
I have an impression that the ball is on the side of the org-cite, and
next steps may be to ask for real documents (e.g. open access papers)
that are prepared with such format and to discuss most suitable style
for CSL.
One possible idea to consider is to allow two systems in each of
LaTeX-oriented processors: what we might call a default "org-cite"
one, and an optional "literal" one. So if you only use oc-natbib, and
you want the natbib commands directly, you might change a variable to
get that.
Maybe I will share my idea in response to the message from Nicolas
https://list.orgmode.org/871qytlf49....@nicolasgoaziou.fr
Wed, 23 Mar 2022 00:52:22 +0100, this thread.
Since John explicitly confirmed that org-ref for cross-references may be
combined with org-cite for citations, it may be great that Org has 2
independent implementations for citations. When a user meets some corner
case their has an opportunity to try another package.
