Hi Nicolas,
Nicolas Goaziou <m...@nicolasgoaziou.fr> writes:
> To support multi cites, we must first decide how the parsed will present
> information, i.e., what are the properties in the following case
>
> [cite:pre; pre1 @k1 post1; pre2 @k2 post2; post]
I was thinking that this should yield a citation object with a structure like:
('citation ...
:common-prefix pre
:common-suffix post
:references ((:prefix pre1
:key "k1"
:suffix post1 ...)
(:prefix pre2
:key "k2"
:suffix post2 ...))
...)
Would that work?
> There is also the following degenerate case
>
> [cite:pre; pre ;post]
>
> What should be done about it?
Hmm, I don't quite understand what you mean. This is not allowed by the
grammar (as far as I can tell), so that should not parse as a citation
object, IMO.
> I didn't implement &-keys as there is no consensus on them.
Oh, I did not realize there were outstanding issues with this. I
remember Rasmus not liking `&'. I'm fine with changing it, though I
cannot think of a better symbol. Does someone think we should not have
a way of indicating that a reference should produce a full bibliography
entry? Or that we should indicate it in some other way?
Best,
Richard
