I'm hitting a (non-fatal but annoying) problem. The multibib filter first runs citeproc to generate a list of all citations, then it reruns citeproc once for each supplied bibliography file, and this generates warnings for the citations in the _other_ bibliography files. For example, the test in the repo works ... but apparently doesn't (and it took me a while to realise this)! % make [WARNING] Citeproc: citation Bae not found [WARNING] Citeproc: citation Knu86 not found [WARNING] Citeproc: citation Bel not found [WARNING] Citeproc: citation Nie72 not found I think that the best way to avoid the warnings would be to capture and ignore them, but I'd (much) rather do that only for the secondary citeproc runs that are _expected_ to output warnings. Is there a way to do this using the existing utils.citeproc() function? I tried naively temporarily redefining io.stderr but perhaps that was never going to work in the presumably-Haskell utils.citeproc(). Thanks, William On Fri, 8 Sept 2023 at 13:03, William Lupton wrote: > Thanks! https://github.com/pandoc-ext/multibib I assume. I'll look into > it. > > On Fri, 8 Sept 2023 at 12:53, Bastien DUMONT > wrote: > >> I would split my bibliography file in two and use the >> multiple-bibliographies filter. That's a sometimes irritating limitation of >> CSL: you can check if a variable is set, but not test its value. >> >> Le Friday 08 September 2023 à 11:17:57AM, 'William Lupton' via >> pandoc-discuss a écrit : >> > Hello, >> > >> > I'd like to sort references so a given publisher's ("BBF") references >> are >> > listed first, and am wondering whether it's possible to compare the >> publisher >> > variable with "BBF". I tried, but it doesn't seem to work (and the CSL >> spec. >> > doesn't appear to indicate that you can do this), so I've fallen back >> on using >> > original-publisher (I'll have to make sure that all the BBF references >> use this >> > rather than publisher). This works, but I'd prefer the first approach. >> Any >> > suggestions? >> > >> > CSL is attached. >> > >> > Thanks, >> > William >> > >> > -- >> > 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-discuss+unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFF+G/Ez6ZCGd0@public.gmane.org >> > To view this discussion on the web visit [2] >> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/ >> > pandoc-discuss/ >> > CAEe_xxi5Q%2BBhE%2BO2EjfnYZAyF%3D_hr7HMcgKHcNKEYoFiJNSraw% >> 40mail.gmail.com. >> > >> > References: >> > >> > [1] mailto:pandoc-discuss+unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org >> > [2] >> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/pandoc-discuss/CAEe_xxi5Q%2BBhE%2BO2EjfnYZAyF%3D_hr7HMcgKHcNKEYoFiJNSraw%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer >> >> >> -- >> 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 view this discussion on the web visit >> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/pandoc-discuss/ZPsLPLC_YQ-aiL_A%40localhost >> . >> > -- 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 view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/pandoc-discuss/CAEe_xxgf_LcjS%3DZ%3D482ShAeMvMLdrmfHvYbEfMkVShcEuncROw%40mail.gmail.com.