Many thanks for your reply. I have looked back through the documentation and found the relevant section, which I seem to have overlooked.

I was convinced it had once been different, but as you say, looking back I see that it wasn't. Sorry, my error.

I have done some experimentation, and it seems that within a *footnote* (so, using ^[text]), adding a period between references is not a problem. I *think* that when I was first learning to use pandoc/markdown (about two years ago), I ran into the problem that citations within footnotes weren't cooperating very well with those simply in brackets with regard to recognising where "ibid" would be appropriate. At least I recall such problems.

As a result I had -- through whatever method -- discovered the method that I described above and stuck with it. Now that I'm updating my setup to a new machine I discovered that it didn't work any more.

Although it is curious that was working for me for a while.

So: using the explicit footnote format would be the right way to add multiple references in sentences (so separated by periods) in a note? This is common in the humanities.

I suppose the best advice is "read the manual". :-)

Thanks again for your help! Much appreciated.

On Monday, October 28, 2019 at 6:57:25 PM UTC+1, John MacFarlane wrote:

I'm not sure why it would have worked with an earlier version.
However, the documentation specifies that citations in a citation
group need to be separated by semicolons.

So [@item1; see also @item2].

That has been the documented behavior since the beginning.

John Carter Wood <johann...-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> writes:

> Hello,
>
> I've been using a Pandoc setup combined with Zotero and markdown
> successfully for a couple of years. But new versions of this set-up, using
> a later version of Pandoc, have been having problems: in references
> (footnotes) that use periods, subsequent reference keys are not converted
> into full references: they remain in the key format
> "@authorname_titleword_year".
>
> (The formatting of the quotation marks is correct: I'm in Germany.)
>
> Here is a sample markdown text.
>
> [image: Markdown_citation.jpg]
>
>
>
> Using this text works fine using pandoc 1.19.2.1/pandoc-citeproc 0.10.4 All
> references are converted. (The issue comes up in footnote 3.)
>
> [image: earlier_pandoc_version.jpg]
>
>
>
> However, using the *exact same* markdown text and .bib file, running pandoc
> 2.2.1/pandoc-citeproc 0.14.3.1, the second citation in footnote three does
> not convert.
>
> [image: later_pandoc_version.jpg]
>
>
> When I remove the period, it works. But I have several documents that have
> this kind of citation, and I don't want to have to go back and change them
> all. Moreover, this kind of extensive footnote with citations is normal in
> my field (history).
>
> Am I doing something wrong? or has something changed with different
> versions?
>
> I appreciate any help. And I'm happy to provide any info if I've forgotten
> something.
>
>
> --
> 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-...@googlegroups.com.
> To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/pandoc-discuss/ab2a282c-b491-4b78-86e4-526a37170e8c%40googlegroups.com.