Are there any news on this? I have found a solution that works quite ok. I use a fake reference that I cite between two real references. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ --- references: - id: a title: test author: - family: familyname given: givenname type: article-journal issued: year: 2014 - id: mancite title: !mancite! ... Sentence 1. [@a] Sentence 2.^[Some text in a footnote. @mancite] Sentence 3. [@a] ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Then I use the following workflow: 1. Run pandoc on this file, create a new markdown file with resolved citations. 2. Use sed to get rid of the mancite-citations and the mancite-reference-entry in the bilbiography. 3. Run pandoc on this final file to create a pdf, docx, etc. This works, but it is not elegant. One problem is that the sed replacement rules only apply to a given citation style. Does anyone know a better solution? Perhaps a pandoc filter so that I don't need sed to clean up the file (one tool less involved)? And, is there a way to suppress certain entries in the bibliography? Am Dienstag, 2. September 2014 19:48:49 UTC+2 schrieb John MacFarlane: > > Thanks for the bug report on github, which I saw. I will try to > fix this when I can, but probably not in the very near future. > I am still trying to get on top of some of the old citeproc-hs > code. There are still quite a few problems with disambiguation > in footnote styles, and this is related. It will be solved in time. > > +++ Denis Maier [Sep 02 14 08:07 ]: > > Hey there, > > I have recently posted a problem on github concerning pandoc-citeproc > > (https://github.com/jgm/pandoc-citeproc/issues/79) and I am just > > wondering if anybody else has run into that kind of problems, or if > > anyone has an idea how this can be solved. > > The problem is that when using a citation style that supports "Ibid." > > (I am using "chicago-fullnote-bibliography") pandoc-citeproc produces > > ambiguous or wrong results. Consider this example: > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > > --- > > references: > > - id: a > > title: test > > author: > > - family: familyname > > given: givenname > > type: article-journal > > issued: > > year: 2014 > > ... > > Sentence 1. [@a] > > Sentence 2.^[Many examples can be found in the Babylonian Talmud.] > > Sentence 3. [@a] > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > > After Sentence 3 the source is rendered as "Ibid.". It should print > the > > normal citation instead since after sentence 2 we have another > > footnote. (A similar example in LibreOffice with Zotero works just > > fine. Is it possible that pandoc-citeproc does not take "near-note" > > into account?) > > The same also applies for author-date styles that use "Ibid." if we > > enter a manual citation from a classical source like the bible between > > two identical sources: > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > > --- > > references: > > - id: a > > title: test > > author: > > - family: familyname > > given: givenname > > type: article-journal > > issued: > > year: 2014 > > ... > > Sentence [@a]. Sentence (see Exodus 1:1). Sentence 3 [@a]. > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > > ==> Sentence (familyname, test). Sentence (see Exodus 1:1). Sentence 3 > > (ibid.). > > Looking at this more generally, the problem is that certain sources > can > > not easily be rendered automatically. The rules for citing classical > > sources (like the bible, the talmud, the quran, other religious texts, > > texts from Greek and Roman antiquity) are often obscure, and can > hardly > > be automated. So it is often more convenient to enter the reference > > manually. But this conflicts of course with automatically generated > > references. > > In BibLaTeX there is a command "\mancite" that prevents the wrong > > "ibid.". Perhaps it might be feasible to implement something like this > > in pandoc-citeproc? If I am converting to LaTeX I could of course > enter > > \mancite as a raw tex command. However, I'd prefer to be as > independent > > of any particular output format as possible so suggestions that work > > also when going from markdown to odt or docx are highly appreciated. > > Best, > > Denis > > > > -- > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > > Groups "pandoc-discuss" group. > > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send > > an email to [1]pandoc-discus...-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFF+G/Ez6ZCGd0@public.gmane.org > > To post to this group, send email to > > [2]pandoc-...-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFF+G/Ez6ZCGd0@public.gmane.org > > To view this discussion on the web visit > > [3] > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/pandoc-discuss/5f1ba639-7d7c-49e1- > > b48f-5f7cba72f1dd%40googlegroups.com. > > For more options, visit [4]https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > > > >References > > > > 1. mailto:pandoc-discuss+unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org > > 2. mailto:pandoc-...-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org > > 3. > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/pandoc-discuss/5f1ba639-7d7c-49e1-b48f-5f7cba72f1dd-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer > > > 4. https://groups.google.com/d/optout Am Dienstag, 2. September 2014 19:48:49 UTC+2 schrieb John MacFarlane: > > Thanks for the bug report on github, which I saw. I will try to > fix this when I can, but probably not in the very near future. > I am still trying to get on top of some of the old citeproc-hs > code. There are still quite a few problems with disambiguation > in footnote styles, and this is related. It will be solved in time. > > +++ Denis Maier [Sep 02 14 08:07 ]: > > Hey there, > > I have recently posted a problem on github concerning pandoc-citeproc > > (https://github.com/jgm/pandoc-citeproc/issues/79) and I am just > > wondering if anybody else has run into that kind of problems, or if > > anyone has an idea how this can be solved. > > The problem is that when using a citation style that supports "Ibid." > > (I am using "chicago-fullnote-bibliography") pandoc-citeproc produces > > ambiguous or wrong results. Consider this example: > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > > --- > > references: > > - id: a > > title: test > > author: > > - family: familyname > > given: givenname > > type: article-journal > > issued: > > year: 2014 > > ... > > Sentence 1. [@a] > > Sentence 2.^[Many examples can be found in the Babylonian Talmud.] > > Sentence 3. [@a] > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > > After Sentence 3 the source is rendered as "Ibid.". It should print > the > > normal citation instead since after sentence 2 we have another > > footnote. (A similar example in LibreOffice with Zotero works just > > fine. Is it possible that pandoc-citeproc does not take "near-note" > > into account?) > > The same also applies for author-date styles that use "Ibid." if we > > enter a manual citation from a classical source like the bible between > > two identical sources: > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > > --- > > references: > > - id: a > > title: test > > author: > > - family: familyname > > given: givenname > > type: article-journal > > issued: > > year: 2014 > > ... > > Sentence [@a]. Sentence (see Exodus 1:1). Sentence 3 [@a]. > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > > ==> Sentence (familyname, test). Sentence (see Exodus 1:1). Sentence 3 > > (ibid.). > > Looking at this more generally, the problem is that certain sources > can > > not easily be rendered automatically. The rules for citing classical > > sources (like the bible, the talmud, the quran, other religious texts, > > texts from Greek and Roman antiquity) are often obscure, and can > hardly > > be automated. So it is often more convenient to enter the reference > > manually. But this conflicts of course with automatically generated > > references. > > In BibLaTeX there is a command "\mancite" that prevents the wrong > > "ibid.". Perhaps it might be feasible to implement something like this > > in pandoc-citeproc? If I am converting to LaTeX I could of course > enter > > \mancite as a raw tex command. However, I'd prefer to be as > independent > > of any particular output format as possible so suggestions that work > > also when going from markdown to odt or docx are highly appreciated. > > Best, > > Denis > > > > -- > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > > Groups "pandoc-discuss" group. > > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send > > an email to [1]pandoc-discus...-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org . > > To post to this group, send email to > > [2]pandoc-...-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org . > > To view this discussion on the web visit > > [3] > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/pandoc-discuss/5f1ba639-7d7c-49e1- > > b48f-5f7cba72f1dd%40googlegroups.com. > > For more options, visit [4]https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > > > >References > > > > 1. mailto:pandoc-discuss+unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org > > 2. mailto:pandoc-...-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org > > 3. > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/pandoc-discuss/5f1ba639-7d7c-49e1-b48f-5f7cba72f1dd-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer > > 4. https://groups.google.com/d/optout > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "pandoc-discuss" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to pandoc-discuss+unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFF+G/Ez6ZCGd0@public.gmane.org To post to this group, send email to pandoc-discuss-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFF+G/Ez6ZCGd0@public.gmane.org To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/pandoc-discuss/2e01906a-5449-44cc-834c-3e87ef3c30a2%40googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.