On Sun, Apr 17, 2022 at 9:18 AM Ihor Radchenko <yanta...@gmail.com> wrote:
> John Kitchin <jkitc...@andrew.cmu.edu> writes: > > > I am also not a fan of using Unicode here and prefer a simple ascii > > asterisk. That works fine for me so far, but I am not a heavy user of > bold > > markup and citations. > > What about something like [cite/citet*/:@key]? > "*/" is not recognised as bold ending. That is a great solution when you want to have bold, and it would be optional if you don’t use bold there. You still would need to add * to the cite pattern. > > > > As I mentioned there is the same problem for links, and in the last 10 > > years I can’t recall an issue being reported with bold. > > This is because links containing "\\*[ -.,;:!?'")}\\[]" match are > extremely rare. > > In contrast, [cite/citet*:@key] is likely to be used fairly frequently > and has much higher chance to break things. We have had a citet*:key link (and all the other * variants) for a long time in org-ref, with no reported issues I can recall. > > Best, > Ihor > > -- John ----------------------------------- Professor John Kitchin (he/him/his) Doherty Hall A207F Department of Chemical Engineering Carnegie Mellon University Pittsburgh, PA 15213 412-268-7803 @johnkitchin http://kitchingroup.cheme.cmu.edu
