Am 11.09.2020 um 18:46 schrieb Albert Krewinkel:
John MacFarlane writes:
It would be good to get clear on this. We could expose
a --citeproc and require it to be used to process citations.
That would also give control of order; it could be treated as
a built-in filter. So maybe it's the thing to do -- but I did
like the idea of doing it automatically.
I agree, that's much nicer. Would an additional `--no-citeproc`
option make sense? It could suppress the automatic run.
It should be pretty straightforward to expose this to Lua
filters. (But again, I'd be curious to hear why calling
manually from Lua filters would be needed.) At heart it's just a
Pandoc -> m Pandoc transformation in PandocMonad.
Indeed, that should be really easy then. :)
Lua filters which call out to pandoc-citeproc, or which rely on a
special filter order:
- cito: allows to add information about the semantic relation of the
cited work to the current document. Plugs into the citation syntax and
requires citation IDs to be rewritten before pandoc-citeproc is
called.
- section-refs: adds "References" for all first level sections; creates
temporary documents from sections, then calls `pandoc-citeproc` on
the temporary docs.
- multiple-bibliographies: allows to partition references into
categories; implementation is similar to section-refs.
Adding a `-citeproc` option would be a good option.
But that aside, I think that these particular filters (or replacements
thereof) could/should be included in the new citeproc library.
--
Albert Krewinkel
GPG: 8eed e3e2 e8c5 6f18 81fe e836 388d c0b2 1f63 1124
--
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-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/pandoc-discuss/1adfb0c1-d745-a6dc-bf14-f790e3f1280f%40mailbox.org.