Rasmus <ras...@gmx.us> writes: > Perhaps the difference is too subtle. Note that you would never deal with > a `citation' other than through a mapping.
Hmm. I still find `citations/citation' pair confusing. What about `citation/part'? > Right, I was trying *to add* support for [@k1; ⋯;@kN]. Please don't. Let's keep shortcuts simple. > I was talking about paring [cite: pre @k post] as > > > (citation (:begin n :end N > :cites > '((cite (:key key :begin n1 :end N1 :prefix pre :suffix > post))))) > > And not: > > (citation (:begin n :end N :prefix pre :suffix post > :cites '((cite (:key key :begin n1 :end N1))))) > > Perhaps I'm worrying about things that need not be worried about. The latter would be obtained with [cite: pre; @k; post] Regards,
