Stefan Nobis writes:
jorge.alfaro-muri...@yale.edu (Jorge A. Alfaro-Murillo) writes:
From what I read in this and the previous thread, the new
proposal tries more or less to reimplement BibTeX in org.
No, that's wrong, not the database should be replaced. The goal
is to make citations a first class citizen in the org world (so
no fallback to LaTeX commands or links with special handlings
are needed).
I see, so in the examples provided Doe99 is only the key, org
would not have to know that the author name is Doe and its year is
1999, or any other information about the citation. I thought it
was more or less the equivalent of implementing natbib
(http://merkel.zoneo.net/Latex/natbib.php) in org, a way to decide
if I wanted textual, parenthesis or numerical citations, and thus
you would have to go to the process of determining what
information each citation needs, for example: an article always
has an author, a book always has a publisher, but a book can have
an author or an editor if each chapter has a different author,
that kind of thing, among many other complicated things. Sorry for
the noise.
But now it is not clear to me what the actual org reference points
to. If it is the actual reference, I mean the article's PDF or
URL, what would you do when you need to cite a physical book? Also
in this case you will not be able to produce a proper bibliography
when exporting since the key cannot contain all the information
needed. Now if the reference points to be entry for that reference
in a database, isn't there a lot of compatibility problems if one
uses one type of database vs another? Again here you will not be
able to produce the bibliography when exporting
--
Jorge.
