Re: pandoc/citeproc issues: multiple bibliographies, nocite, citeonly

[John MacFarlane <fiddlosopher-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>]

+++ Nathan Gass [Nov 24 10 02:29 ]:
> On 22.11.10 00:26, Tillmann Rendel wrote:
> >John MacFarlane wrote:
> >>There's a proposal at
> >>
> >>http://gitit.net/PandocCitationGrammar
> >>
> >>that would address (2-4) by requiring the user to put an explicit
> >>
> >><references />
> >>
> >>tag where the bibliography goes;[...]
> >
> >I like the idea of explicitly specifying where the bibliography goes. I
> >don't like that syntax too much, however, because
> >
> >(a) it is HTML-focused, so it might look awkward in LaTeX-target
> >markdown files with lots of literal LaTeX code
> >
> >(b) it looks like literal HTML, but is actually (pandoc extended)
> >markdown, which might be confusing
> 
> I just wanted to add that I completely agree here. I find syntax
> which looks like html, but actually is not pass-through html but
> special markdown syntax confusing.
> 
> >
> >
> >I had a similar problem in my use of pandoc. I want to insert
> >system-generated content, such as a table of contents, at a specific
> >point in the document. So I decided to write a script which replaces a
> >whole section (or subsection etc.) with system-generated content, based
> >on the name of the section. So for example, the snippet:
> >
> >Table of Contents
> >=================
> >
> >It doesn't matter what you write here
> >
> >Introduction
> >============
> >
> >would get translated to something like:
> >
> >\tableofcontents
> >\section{Introduction}
> >
> >I think this would work well for references, too.
> >
> >
> >The main benefit is that one can use the input format's syntax for
> >headings to specify "special sections" like table of contents or
> >references. The input document therefore looks natural. (One could even
> >have one's editor and pandoc automatically fill in the section content
> >with a textual version of the system-generated data, for some kind of
> >semi-WYSIWYG effect).
> >
> >The main drawback is that the name of the section is relevant, so this
> >introduces a language dependency. For my scripts, I just have a
> >command-line flag for the various special sections:
> >
> >"--toc=Table of Contents"
> >
> 
> Other possibilities would be to add some label syntax, similar to
> the \label{} of latex, to just recognize most or even all possible
> headers for such a section, or use a special code block, which is at
> least clearly markdown syntax. Actually, when I think about it, the
> last one strikes me as a very good alternative. So instead of
> 
>     <reference>
>     some config
>     </reference>
> 
> we simply use
> 
>    ~~~~~~~~~~ {.reference}
>    some config
>    ~~~~~~~~~~


I'm open to suggestions other than the HTMLish syntax.  But I don't
think this is obviously better.  For one thing, it looks like a code
block.  And we'd have to implement some mini-language inside the
block to specify the includes, excludes, source, etc.  If we use
XML, we're using something that's already familiar.

One possibility would be a special attribute on a header:

# Works cited {.bibliography src="mybib.json"}

# References {.bibliography src="foo.bib" include="item2,item3"
               omit="item4" if-year="1999" only-if-type="primary"}

John