Nicolas Goaziou <m...@nicolasgoaziou.fr> writes: > Rasmus <ras...@gmx.us> writes: > >> PS: Here's a quick link "proof-of-concept" (not really) with biblatex >> only, and cite it textcitation. Documents with this type of syntax are >> indeed pleasant to the eye. >> >> [[cite: pre1 @bohringer14 post1; pre2 @davis14 post2]] > > As pointed out already, the double square bracket is not needed, and can > introduce ambiguity with links.
Hence the double warning: >>"proof-of-concept" (not really) > I'm fine with > > [cite: pre1 @bohringer14 post1; pre2 @davis14 post2] > > but how do you distinguish between in-text and in-parenthesis? In the above with "citet" and "citep" or similar. The above was only meant to try out the [PRE @KEY POST; PRE @KEY POST] format and show that it indeed is nice. That's all. > Also, how do you extract year or journal from the key (since you > suggested these features in the first place)? Actually, I first suggested only having /types/ of citations. Richard suggested extraction of fields. —Rasmus -- The right to be left alone is a human right
