BibLaTeX: How to create NewDocumentCommand for automated Prenotes?
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
Description:
I am using a small modification to automatically add the abbreviation "cf." into citation prenotes:
renewbibmacro*{prenote}{%
iffieldundef{prenote}%
{% true
printtext{cfadddot}%
}{% false
printfield{prenote}}%
setunit{prenotedelim}%
}%
Always adding "cf." is mostly useful, but not in every case. Therefore I want to outsource this auto-prenote into a separate NewDocumentCommand
. Only when typing cf-cite
or cf-autocite
the abbreviation should be added as a prenote.
How can I introduce that?
Minimum Working Example (MWE):
begin{filecontents}{jobname.bib}
@book{Doe,author = {Doe, Jon},date = {1998}}
end{filecontents}
% ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
documentclass{book}
usepackage[backend=biber,citestyle=numeric,style=authoryear,natbib=true]{biblatex}
usepackage{filecontents}
setlengthparindent{0pt}
renewbibmacro*{prenote}{%
iffieldundef{prenote}%
{% true
printtext{cfadddot}%
}{% false
printfield{prenote}}%
setunit{prenotedelim}%
}%
bibliography{jobname}
begin{document}
This is a very simple example to demonstrate citing with auto-added prenotes autocite[25]{Doe}.
parbigskip As you can see, the abbreviation enquote{cf.} will always be displayed. It is not possible to keep this field empty anymore. However, this is not useful in every case. Therefore I want to generate two textbackslash NewDocumentCommand's:
begin{itemize}
item textbackslash cf-cite and
item textbackslash cf-autocite
end{itemize}
Only when using one of those two new commands, the previous mentioned enquote{cf.} should be displayed as a prenote. In all other cases the field should remain empty.
parbigskip How can I do that?
end{document}
Edit: When thinking about my previous idea that does not make big sense anymore. It does not matter if I have to write autocite[cf.][35]{Doe}
or cf-autocite[35]{Doe}
. :-)
biblatex citing biber newdocumentcommand prenote
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
Description:
I am using a small modification to automatically add the abbreviation "cf." into citation prenotes:
renewbibmacro*{prenote}{%
iffieldundef{prenote}%
{% true
printtext{cfadddot}%
}{% false
printfield{prenote}}%
setunit{prenotedelim}%
}%
Always adding "cf." is mostly useful, but not in every case. Therefore I want to outsource this auto-prenote into a separate NewDocumentCommand
. Only when typing cf-cite
or cf-autocite
the abbreviation should be added as a prenote.
How can I introduce that?
Minimum Working Example (MWE):
begin{filecontents}{jobname.bib}
@book{Doe,author = {Doe, Jon},date = {1998}}
end{filecontents}
% ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
documentclass{book}
usepackage[backend=biber,citestyle=numeric,style=authoryear,natbib=true]{biblatex}
usepackage{filecontents}
setlengthparindent{0pt}
renewbibmacro*{prenote}{%
iffieldundef{prenote}%
{% true
printtext{cfadddot}%
}{% false
printfield{prenote}}%
setunit{prenotedelim}%
}%
bibliography{jobname}
begin{document}
This is a very simple example to demonstrate citing with auto-added prenotes autocite[25]{Doe}.
parbigskip As you can see, the abbreviation enquote{cf.} will always be displayed. It is not possible to keep this field empty anymore. However, this is not useful in every case. Therefore I want to generate two textbackslash NewDocumentCommand's:
begin{itemize}
item textbackslash cf-cite and
item textbackslash cf-autocite
end{itemize}
Only when using one of those two new commands, the previous mentioned enquote{cf.} should be displayed as a prenote. In all other cases the field should remain empty.
parbigskip How can I do that?
end{document}
Edit: When thinking about my previous idea that does not make big sense anymore. It does not matter if I have to write autocite[cf.][35]{Doe}
or cf-autocite[35]{Doe}
. :-)
biblatex citing biber newdocumentcommand prenote
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
Description:
I am using a small modification to automatically add the abbreviation "cf." into citation prenotes:
renewbibmacro*{prenote}{%
iffieldundef{prenote}%
{% true
printtext{cfadddot}%
}{% false
printfield{prenote}}%
setunit{prenotedelim}%
}%
Always adding "cf." is mostly useful, but not in every case. Therefore I want to outsource this auto-prenote into a separate NewDocumentCommand
. Only when typing cf-cite
or cf-autocite
the abbreviation should be added as a prenote.
How can I introduce that?
Minimum Working Example (MWE):
begin{filecontents}{jobname.bib}
@book{Doe,author = {Doe, Jon},date = {1998}}
end{filecontents}
% ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
documentclass{book}
usepackage[backend=biber,citestyle=numeric,style=authoryear,natbib=true]{biblatex}
usepackage{filecontents}
setlengthparindent{0pt}
renewbibmacro*{prenote}{%
iffieldundef{prenote}%
{% true
printtext{cfadddot}%
}{% false
printfield{prenote}}%
setunit{prenotedelim}%
}%
bibliography{jobname}
begin{document}
This is a very simple example to demonstrate citing with auto-added prenotes autocite[25]{Doe}.
parbigskip As you can see, the abbreviation enquote{cf.} will always be displayed. It is not possible to keep this field empty anymore. However, this is not useful in every case. Therefore I want to generate two textbackslash NewDocumentCommand's:
begin{itemize}
item textbackslash cf-cite and
item textbackslash cf-autocite
end{itemize}
Only when using one of those two new commands, the previous mentioned enquote{cf.} should be displayed as a prenote. In all other cases the field should remain empty.
parbigskip How can I do that?
end{document}
Edit: When thinking about my previous idea that does not make big sense anymore. It does not matter if I have to write autocite[cf.][35]{Doe}
or cf-autocite[35]{Doe}
. :-)
biblatex citing biber newdocumentcommand prenote
Description:
I am using a small modification to automatically add the abbreviation "cf." into citation prenotes:
renewbibmacro*{prenote}{%
iffieldundef{prenote}%
{% true
printtext{cfadddot}%
}{% false
printfield{prenote}}%
setunit{prenotedelim}%
}%
Always adding "cf." is mostly useful, but not in every case. Therefore I want to outsource this auto-prenote into a separate NewDocumentCommand
. Only when typing cf-cite
or cf-autocite
the abbreviation should be added as a prenote.
How can I introduce that?
Minimum Working Example (MWE):
begin{filecontents}{jobname.bib}
@book{Doe,author = {Doe, Jon},date = {1998}}
end{filecontents}
% ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
documentclass{book}
usepackage[backend=biber,citestyle=numeric,style=authoryear,natbib=true]{biblatex}
usepackage{filecontents}
setlengthparindent{0pt}
renewbibmacro*{prenote}{%
iffieldundef{prenote}%
{% true
printtext{cfadddot}%
}{% false
printfield{prenote}}%
setunit{prenotedelim}%
}%
bibliography{jobname}
begin{document}
This is a very simple example to demonstrate citing with auto-added prenotes autocite[25]{Doe}.
parbigskip As you can see, the abbreviation enquote{cf.} will always be displayed. It is not possible to keep this field empty anymore. However, this is not useful in every case. Therefore I want to generate two textbackslash NewDocumentCommand's:
begin{itemize}
item textbackslash cf-cite and
item textbackslash cf-autocite
end{itemize}
Only when using one of those two new commands, the previous mentioned enquote{cf.} should be displayed as a prenote. In all other cases the field should remain empty.
parbigskip How can I do that?
end{document}
Edit: When thinking about my previous idea that does not make big sense anymore. It does not matter if I have to write autocite[cf.][35]{Doe}
or cf-autocite[35]{Doe}
. :-)
biblatex citing biber newdocumentcommand prenote
biblatex citing biber newdocumentcommand prenote
edited Dec 5 at 18:58
asked Dec 5 at 18:33
Dave
719516
719516
add a comment |
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
up vote
2
down vote
accepted
This is not exactly what you asked for, but I think it is an improvement on your attempt. I do think having the prenote built in is a little over, but to have your own "outsourced" prenotes as you suggested would require quite some structure with DeclareCitationCommand
for each variant of the several biblatex
commands available for which you'd want this facility.
I think your original structure would work quite well in practice, and it is easy to disable the automatic insertion of "cf." with a simple toggle.
begin{filecontents}{jobname.bib}
@book{Doe,author = {Doe, Jon},date = {1998}}
end{filecontents}
% ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
documentclass{book}
usepackage[backend=biber,citestyle=numeric,style=authoryear,natbib=true]{biblatex}
usepackage{filecontents}
setlengthparindent{0pt}
newtoggle{nocf}
newcommand*{nocf}{AtNextCite{toggletrue{nocf}}}
renewbibmacro*{prenote}{%
iffieldundef{prenote}%
{% true
iftoggle{nocf}{}{%
printtext{cfadddot}%
}%
}{% false
printfield{prenote}%
}%
setunit{prenotedelim}%
}
addbibresource{jobname.bib}
begin{document}
This is a very simple example to demonstrate citing with auto-added prenotes
autocite[25]{Doe}.
bigskip
As you can see, the abbreviation “cf.” will be displayed by
default. But it is possible to leave it empty with
‘verb|nocf|’ nocfautocite[34]{Doe}.
bigskip
However, without it, the default behavior is back autocite[29]{Doe}.
end{document}
1
A cheap way to get anocfautocite
that way is withnewcommand*{nocfautocite}{nocfautocite}
. (Though I think the logic was exactly the other way round in the question.)
– moewe
Dec 5 at 20:55
@moewe I know, as I said "this is not exactly what you asked for"...
– gusbrs
Dec 5 at 21:02
@moewe Btw, I'm gonna get a printscreen of this comment of yours before it vanishes. You suggesting a definition of a citation command withnewcommand
! I thought that was banned by the Gospel! ;-)
– gusbrs
Dec 5 at 21:04
Ah. I thought the 'not exactly what you asked for' referred to not defining a command, but using a prefix command instead. I must say that I prefer theautocite
gives no "cf.",cfautocite
gives "cf." rule, but as the OP realised themselves, that almost makes the exercise pointless. As tonewcommand
forcite
commands: There are some situations like this (and the ones inblx-natbib.def
) where it does make sense: Things only become problematic when people try to combine several (proto-)cite
commands in one. (But of course you know that...)
– moewe
Dec 5 at 21:14
@moewe Yes I'd simply go myself withautocite[cf.][23]{Doe}
. I also said I thought that the attempt was "over", but I didn't think of emphasizing that much, cause we all know: it's part of the fun too. As tonewcommand
I get why it's safe here, of course, but I wouldn't miss the pun, would I?
– gusbrs
Dec 5 at 21:22
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
2
down vote
accepted
This is not exactly what you asked for, but I think it is an improvement on your attempt. I do think having the prenote built in is a little over, but to have your own "outsourced" prenotes as you suggested would require quite some structure with DeclareCitationCommand
for each variant of the several biblatex
commands available for which you'd want this facility.
I think your original structure would work quite well in practice, and it is easy to disable the automatic insertion of "cf." with a simple toggle.
begin{filecontents}{jobname.bib}
@book{Doe,author = {Doe, Jon},date = {1998}}
end{filecontents}
% ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
documentclass{book}
usepackage[backend=biber,citestyle=numeric,style=authoryear,natbib=true]{biblatex}
usepackage{filecontents}
setlengthparindent{0pt}
newtoggle{nocf}
newcommand*{nocf}{AtNextCite{toggletrue{nocf}}}
renewbibmacro*{prenote}{%
iffieldundef{prenote}%
{% true
iftoggle{nocf}{}{%
printtext{cfadddot}%
}%
}{% false
printfield{prenote}%
}%
setunit{prenotedelim}%
}
addbibresource{jobname.bib}
begin{document}
This is a very simple example to demonstrate citing with auto-added prenotes
autocite[25]{Doe}.
bigskip
As you can see, the abbreviation “cf.” will be displayed by
default. But it is possible to leave it empty with
‘verb|nocf|’ nocfautocite[34]{Doe}.
bigskip
However, without it, the default behavior is back autocite[29]{Doe}.
end{document}
1
A cheap way to get anocfautocite
that way is withnewcommand*{nocfautocite}{nocfautocite}
. (Though I think the logic was exactly the other way round in the question.)
– moewe
Dec 5 at 20:55
@moewe I know, as I said "this is not exactly what you asked for"...
– gusbrs
Dec 5 at 21:02
@moewe Btw, I'm gonna get a printscreen of this comment of yours before it vanishes. You suggesting a definition of a citation command withnewcommand
! I thought that was banned by the Gospel! ;-)
– gusbrs
Dec 5 at 21:04
Ah. I thought the 'not exactly what you asked for' referred to not defining a command, but using a prefix command instead. I must say that I prefer theautocite
gives no "cf.",cfautocite
gives "cf." rule, but as the OP realised themselves, that almost makes the exercise pointless. As tonewcommand
forcite
commands: There are some situations like this (and the ones inblx-natbib.def
) where it does make sense: Things only become problematic when people try to combine several (proto-)cite
commands in one. (But of course you know that...)
– moewe
Dec 5 at 21:14
@moewe Yes I'd simply go myself withautocite[cf.][23]{Doe}
. I also said I thought that the attempt was "over", but I didn't think of emphasizing that much, cause we all know: it's part of the fun too. As tonewcommand
I get why it's safe here, of course, but I wouldn't miss the pun, would I?
– gusbrs
Dec 5 at 21:22
add a comment |
up vote
2
down vote
accepted
This is not exactly what you asked for, but I think it is an improvement on your attempt. I do think having the prenote built in is a little over, but to have your own "outsourced" prenotes as you suggested would require quite some structure with DeclareCitationCommand
for each variant of the several biblatex
commands available for which you'd want this facility.
I think your original structure would work quite well in practice, and it is easy to disable the automatic insertion of "cf." with a simple toggle.
begin{filecontents}{jobname.bib}
@book{Doe,author = {Doe, Jon},date = {1998}}
end{filecontents}
% ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
documentclass{book}
usepackage[backend=biber,citestyle=numeric,style=authoryear,natbib=true]{biblatex}
usepackage{filecontents}
setlengthparindent{0pt}
newtoggle{nocf}
newcommand*{nocf}{AtNextCite{toggletrue{nocf}}}
renewbibmacro*{prenote}{%
iffieldundef{prenote}%
{% true
iftoggle{nocf}{}{%
printtext{cfadddot}%
}%
}{% false
printfield{prenote}%
}%
setunit{prenotedelim}%
}
addbibresource{jobname.bib}
begin{document}
This is a very simple example to demonstrate citing with auto-added prenotes
autocite[25]{Doe}.
bigskip
As you can see, the abbreviation “cf.” will be displayed by
default. But it is possible to leave it empty with
‘verb|nocf|’ nocfautocite[34]{Doe}.
bigskip
However, without it, the default behavior is back autocite[29]{Doe}.
end{document}
1
A cheap way to get anocfautocite
that way is withnewcommand*{nocfautocite}{nocfautocite}
. (Though I think the logic was exactly the other way round in the question.)
– moewe
Dec 5 at 20:55
@moewe I know, as I said "this is not exactly what you asked for"...
– gusbrs
Dec 5 at 21:02
@moewe Btw, I'm gonna get a printscreen of this comment of yours before it vanishes. You suggesting a definition of a citation command withnewcommand
! I thought that was banned by the Gospel! ;-)
– gusbrs
Dec 5 at 21:04
Ah. I thought the 'not exactly what you asked for' referred to not defining a command, but using a prefix command instead. I must say that I prefer theautocite
gives no "cf.",cfautocite
gives "cf." rule, but as the OP realised themselves, that almost makes the exercise pointless. As tonewcommand
forcite
commands: There are some situations like this (and the ones inblx-natbib.def
) where it does make sense: Things only become problematic when people try to combine several (proto-)cite
commands in one. (But of course you know that...)
– moewe
Dec 5 at 21:14
@moewe Yes I'd simply go myself withautocite[cf.][23]{Doe}
. I also said I thought that the attempt was "over", but I didn't think of emphasizing that much, cause we all know: it's part of the fun too. As tonewcommand
I get why it's safe here, of course, but I wouldn't miss the pun, would I?
– gusbrs
Dec 5 at 21:22
add a comment |
up vote
2
down vote
accepted
up vote
2
down vote
accepted
This is not exactly what you asked for, but I think it is an improvement on your attempt. I do think having the prenote built in is a little over, but to have your own "outsourced" prenotes as you suggested would require quite some structure with DeclareCitationCommand
for each variant of the several biblatex
commands available for which you'd want this facility.
I think your original structure would work quite well in practice, and it is easy to disable the automatic insertion of "cf." with a simple toggle.
begin{filecontents}{jobname.bib}
@book{Doe,author = {Doe, Jon},date = {1998}}
end{filecontents}
% ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
documentclass{book}
usepackage[backend=biber,citestyle=numeric,style=authoryear,natbib=true]{biblatex}
usepackage{filecontents}
setlengthparindent{0pt}
newtoggle{nocf}
newcommand*{nocf}{AtNextCite{toggletrue{nocf}}}
renewbibmacro*{prenote}{%
iffieldundef{prenote}%
{% true
iftoggle{nocf}{}{%
printtext{cfadddot}%
}%
}{% false
printfield{prenote}%
}%
setunit{prenotedelim}%
}
addbibresource{jobname.bib}
begin{document}
This is a very simple example to demonstrate citing with auto-added prenotes
autocite[25]{Doe}.
bigskip
As you can see, the abbreviation “cf.” will be displayed by
default. But it is possible to leave it empty with
‘verb|nocf|’ nocfautocite[34]{Doe}.
bigskip
However, without it, the default behavior is back autocite[29]{Doe}.
end{document}
This is not exactly what you asked for, but I think it is an improvement on your attempt. I do think having the prenote built in is a little over, but to have your own "outsourced" prenotes as you suggested would require quite some structure with DeclareCitationCommand
for each variant of the several biblatex
commands available for which you'd want this facility.
I think your original structure would work quite well in practice, and it is easy to disable the automatic insertion of "cf." with a simple toggle.
begin{filecontents}{jobname.bib}
@book{Doe,author = {Doe, Jon},date = {1998}}
end{filecontents}
% ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
documentclass{book}
usepackage[backend=biber,citestyle=numeric,style=authoryear,natbib=true]{biblatex}
usepackage{filecontents}
setlengthparindent{0pt}
newtoggle{nocf}
newcommand*{nocf}{AtNextCite{toggletrue{nocf}}}
renewbibmacro*{prenote}{%
iffieldundef{prenote}%
{% true
iftoggle{nocf}{}{%
printtext{cfadddot}%
}%
}{% false
printfield{prenote}%
}%
setunit{prenotedelim}%
}
addbibresource{jobname.bib}
begin{document}
This is a very simple example to demonstrate citing with auto-added prenotes
autocite[25]{Doe}.
bigskip
As you can see, the abbreviation “cf.” will be displayed by
default. But it is possible to leave it empty with
‘verb|nocf|’ nocfautocite[34]{Doe}.
bigskip
However, without it, the default behavior is back autocite[29]{Doe}.
end{document}
answered Dec 5 at 19:49
gusbrs
6,4942838
6,4942838
1
A cheap way to get anocfautocite
that way is withnewcommand*{nocfautocite}{nocfautocite}
. (Though I think the logic was exactly the other way round in the question.)
– moewe
Dec 5 at 20:55
@moewe I know, as I said "this is not exactly what you asked for"...
– gusbrs
Dec 5 at 21:02
@moewe Btw, I'm gonna get a printscreen of this comment of yours before it vanishes. You suggesting a definition of a citation command withnewcommand
! I thought that was banned by the Gospel! ;-)
– gusbrs
Dec 5 at 21:04
Ah. I thought the 'not exactly what you asked for' referred to not defining a command, but using a prefix command instead. I must say that I prefer theautocite
gives no "cf.",cfautocite
gives "cf." rule, but as the OP realised themselves, that almost makes the exercise pointless. As tonewcommand
forcite
commands: There are some situations like this (and the ones inblx-natbib.def
) where it does make sense: Things only become problematic when people try to combine several (proto-)cite
commands in one. (But of course you know that...)
– moewe
Dec 5 at 21:14
@moewe Yes I'd simply go myself withautocite[cf.][23]{Doe}
. I also said I thought that the attempt was "over", but I didn't think of emphasizing that much, cause we all know: it's part of the fun too. As tonewcommand
I get why it's safe here, of course, but I wouldn't miss the pun, would I?
– gusbrs
Dec 5 at 21:22
add a comment |
1
A cheap way to get anocfautocite
that way is withnewcommand*{nocfautocite}{nocfautocite}
. (Though I think the logic was exactly the other way round in the question.)
– moewe
Dec 5 at 20:55
@moewe I know, as I said "this is not exactly what you asked for"...
– gusbrs
Dec 5 at 21:02
@moewe Btw, I'm gonna get a printscreen of this comment of yours before it vanishes. You suggesting a definition of a citation command withnewcommand
! I thought that was banned by the Gospel! ;-)
– gusbrs
Dec 5 at 21:04
Ah. I thought the 'not exactly what you asked for' referred to not defining a command, but using a prefix command instead. I must say that I prefer theautocite
gives no "cf.",cfautocite
gives "cf." rule, but as the OP realised themselves, that almost makes the exercise pointless. As tonewcommand
forcite
commands: There are some situations like this (and the ones inblx-natbib.def
) where it does make sense: Things only become problematic when people try to combine several (proto-)cite
commands in one. (But of course you know that...)
– moewe
Dec 5 at 21:14
@moewe Yes I'd simply go myself withautocite[cf.][23]{Doe}
. I also said I thought that the attempt was "over", but I didn't think of emphasizing that much, cause we all know: it's part of the fun too. As tonewcommand
I get why it's safe here, of course, but I wouldn't miss the pun, would I?
– gusbrs
Dec 5 at 21:22
1
1
A cheap way to get a
nocfautocite
that way is with newcommand*{nocfautocite}{nocfautocite}
. (Though I think the logic was exactly the other way round in the question.)– moewe
Dec 5 at 20:55
A cheap way to get a
nocfautocite
that way is with newcommand*{nocfautocite}{nocfautocite}
. (Though I think the logic was exactly the other way round in the question.)– moewe
Dec 5 at 20:55
@moewe I know, as I said "this is not exactly what you asked for"...
– gusbrs
Dec 5 at 21:02
@moewe I know, as I said "this is not exactly what you asked for"...
– gusbrs
Dec 5 at 21:02
@moewe Btw, I'm gonna get a printscreen of this comment of yours before it vanishes. You suggesting a definition of a citation command with
newcommand
! I thought that was banned by the Gospel! ;-)– gusbrs
Dec 5 at 21:04
@moewe Btw, I'm gonna get a printscreen of this comment of yours before it vanishes. You suggesting a definition of a citation command with
newcommand
! I thought that was banned by the Gospel! ;-)– gusbrs
Dec 5 at 21:04
Ah. I thought the 'not exactly what you asked for' referred to not defining a command, but using a prefix command instead. I must say that I prefer the
autocite
gives no "cf.", cfautocite
gives "cf." rule, but as the OP realised themselves, that almost makes the exercise pointless. As to newcommand
for cite
commands: There are some situations like this (and the ones in blx-natbib.def
) where it does make sense: Things only become problematic when people try to combine several (proto-)cite
commands in one. (But of course you know that...)– moewe
Dec 5 at 21:14
Ah. I thought the 'not exactly what you asked for' referred to not defining a command, but using a prefix command instead. I must say that I prefer the
autocite
gives no "cf.", cfautocite
gives "cf." rule, but as the OP realised themselves, that almost makes the exercise pointless. As to newcommand
for cite
commands: There are some situations like this (and the ones in blx-natbib.def
) where it does make sense: Things only become problematic when people try to combine several (proto-)cite
commands in one. (But of course you know that...)– moewe
Dec 5 at 21:14
@moewe Yes I'd simply go myself with
autocite[cf.][23]{Doe}
. I also said I thought that the attempt was "over", but I didn't think of emphasizing that much, cause we all know: it's part of the fun too. As to newcommand
I get why it's safe here, of course, but I wouldn't miss the pun, would I?– gusbrs
Dec 5 at 21:22
@moewe Yes I'd simply go myself with
autocite[cf.][23]{Doe}
. I also said I thought that the attempt was "over", but I didn't think of emphasizing that much, cause we all know: it's part of the fun too. As to newcommand
I get why it's safe here, of course, but I wouldn't miss the pun, would I?– gusbrs
Dec 5 at 21:22
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to TeX - LaTeX Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.
Please pay close attention to the following guidance:
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2ftex.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f463360%2fbiblatex-how-to-create-newdocumentcommand-for-automated-prenotes%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown