On 2015-02-24T10:25:39+1100, Richard Lawrence said:
RL> Vaidheeswaran C <vaidheeswaran.chinnar...@gmail.com> writes:
>>> But whatever style is chosen, I would still think that the
>>> fact that the citation is in-text rather than parenthetical,
>>> and that it has a prefix and suffix, should be represented in
>>> the output.
>>
>> 1. When you choose 'style' (Chicago etc.) wouldn't be one of
>> in-text or parenthetical already chosen for you? Stated other
>> way, is the choice between parenthetical or in-text
>> document-wide or is it that one could intermix the two styles
>> in the same document.
RL> These could be intermixed in the same document. The RL>
document-level style determines how each type ultimately looks,
RL> but the choice of style is (mostly) independent of using RL>
parenthetical vs. in-text citations.
Fwiw, it seems to me that there might be some confusion here arising
from two separate usages of the word 'style':
(a) 'style' to mean "writing style", i.e. which words are used,
how they're put together, etc. For example, "Plain English".
(b) 'style' to mean "presentation style", i.e. how words, symbols,
glyphs etc. are presented visually or (for vision-impaired people)
aurally. For example, the sort of things specified by Cascading
Style Sheets.
Thus, the citation 'style' can be independent of the presentation
style used for that citation style.
For examle, one might have a citation style like:
[Smith 2001]
which in certain contexts is expected to have a presentation style
of 'bolded'.
So what i understand Vaidheeswaran to be asking is: Please don't
code things such that presentation style is /necessarily/ carried
along with citation style. Make it so that exporting a document
faithfully reproduces the citation style in the target format, but
don't /force/ the presentation style used in the source format for
citation style to be the presentation style used in the
destination format.
Vaidheeswaran, is that correct?
Alexis.
