Well, best to have the full functionality. These things are intended to be both book components and stand-alone pages. Citation formats are a religious war anyway. --jh-- Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2009 12:41:17 -0500 From: Alan G Isaac <aisaac@american.edu> Subject: Re: [Numpy-discussion] coding style: citations To: Discussion of Numerical Python <numpy-discussion@scipy.org> Message-ID: <496B80BD.8050102@american.edu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed On 1/12/2009 9:08 AM jh@physics.ucf.edu apparently wrote:

For citation keys, what's wrong with good old author-year format? Most scientific journals use it (Abt 1985). Abt, H. 1985. Harold Abt used to publish surveys of things like citations when he was ApJ editor in the 1980s but I'm making this one up just to demonstrate the format except he'd never allow an article title in a citation because he wanted to save ink which everyone hated so other journals keep the titles and we should too. ApJ 123:1-23.

There are two problems. 1. The only real problem is that it is not a reST citation, so links to the citation will not be generated, and you cannot control the citation formatting separately. You can still of course use normal internal targets: See `(Abt 1985)`_. Some more text, and later ... .. _(Abt 1985): Abt, H. 1985. Harold Abt used to publish surveys of things like citations when he was ApJ editor in the 1980s but I'm making this one up just to demonstrate the format except he'd never allow an article title in a citation because he wanted to save ink which everyone hated so other journals keep the titles and we should too. ApJ 123:1-23. 2. The failure to use citation keys implies that there will be neither a citation database nor consistent formatting. (Say, if the docs become a book.) I do not suppose this is *currently* a real problem. Cheers, Alan Isaac