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

[Andrea Rossato <andrea.rossato-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>]

On Wed, Nov 24, 2010 at 11:42:40PM -0800, John MacFarlane wrote:
> +++ Andrea Rossato [Nov 24 10 21:51 ]:
> > Can we do it now? If no I'm not going to work on the citeproc side any
> > longer for the time being.
> 
> There's at least one thing that needs to be done anyway -- the
> spacing issue between multiple locators.  (See the failing
> tests when you do 'make test'.)

I mean that I'm not going to work on this specific issue anymore (I'll
leave it for the next release), to concentrate on the remaining issues
(page ranges, which involves also the problem you reported, style
version recognition, rich text formatting and flip-flopping, etc.).

> > For the syntax: I like the xml syntax you proposed.
> 
> I'm a bit uncertain how to proceed, because the xml syntax seems
> unpopular (judging from responses on the list), and I don't have
> a good alternative in mind.
> 
> Also, I'm not *sure* that the select/include/exclude/quash system
> is the best way to go on filtering.  It works pretty well with
> the xml syntax, but less well with some of the other options.
> 
> Hence the temptation to avoid solving all these problems and
> just release something workable. But let me think on it some more.

If you want to wait I have no objections. Still I would like to change
the type signature of citeproc to include the ProcOpts parameter, so
that we don't need to change it at a latter time.

Related to that: in pandoc.cabal the citeproc-hs dependency has been
set to:

citeproc-hs >= 0.3 && < 0.4

Do we want to drop the upper bound?

Andrea