what to do with `\cite{RFC7230}`?

[simsong]

The datatracker.ietf.org service returns RFC BiBTeX entries with the letters rfc in lowercase:

@misc{rfc7230,
    series =    {Request for Comments},
    number =    7230,
    howpublished =  {RFC 7230},
    publisher = {RFC Editor},
    doi =       {10.17487/RFC7230},
    url =       {https://rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc7230.txt},
        author =    {Roy T. Fielding and Julian Reschke},
    title =     {{Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP/1.1): Message Syntax and Routing}},
    pagetotal = 89,
    year =      2014,
    month =     jun,
    abstract =  {The Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP) is a stateless application-level protocol for distributed, collaborative, hypertext information systems. This document provides an overview of HTTP architecture and its associated terminology, defines the "http" and "https" Uniform Resource Identifier (URI) schemes, defines the HTTP/1.1 message syntax and parsing requirements, and describes related security concerns for implementations.},
}

How should we handle the situation when a person does a \cite{RFC7230} ? I think that BibTeX labels are case-sensitive. Should we modify the code that we receive from ietf.org, or should we not accept \cite{RFC7230}, only \cite{rfc7230}, or should we just leave it as is, and have \cite{RFC7230} bring in a BiBTeX entry, and then ignore it?

[iluxonchik]

@simsong apologies for inactivity, I have been extremely busy with work. I will answer to this and the remaining issues very soon.

[simsong]

No problem, we are all crazy busy.

On Oct 5, 2018, at 7:56 PM, Illya Gerasymchuk notifications@github.com wrote:

@simsong https://github.com/simsong apologies for inactivity, I have been extremely busy with work. I will answer to this and the remaining issues very soon.

— You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/iluxonchik/rfc-bibtex/issues/10#issuecomment-427528213, or mute the thread https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ABhTrCmZfCqhA7n-r25EzwwObBc0uuGbks5uh_G7gaJpZM4W1_rb.

[iluxonchik]

@simsong I think that we should accept both version \cite{RFC123} and \cite{rfc123}.

This gives the flexibility to the user (some prefer lowercase, some uppercase). There is no obvious reason why someone would want to have RFC123 and rfc123 point to two different things.

[simsong]

So we will need to preserve case in the .bib file.

On Nov 15, 2018, at 10:43 AM, Illya Gerasymchuk notifications@github.com wrote:

@simsong I think that we should accept both version \cite{RFC123} and \cite{rfc123}.

This gives the flexibility to the user (some prefer lowercase, some uppercase). There is no obvious reason why someone would want to have RFC123 and rfc123 point to two different things.

— You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or mute the thread.

[iluxonchik]

Yes. What are your thoughts on this? Do you agree?

[simsong]

I think that preserving case is good. But what do we do if a sloppy person has both \cite{rfc7230} and \cite{RFC7230} ? Putting it twice in the .bib file will result in duplicate entries, which will be confusing. So do we throw an error?

On Nov 16, 2018, at 12:06 PM, Illya Gerasymchuk notifications@github.com wrote:

Yes. What are your thoughts on this? Do you agree?

— You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/iluxonchik/rfc-bibtex/issues/10#issuecomment-439460176, or mute the thread https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ABhTrFj3Wmx7H9Htgp3Z2zp0U-bKaZC3ks5uvvCJgaJpZM4W1_rb.

[iluxonchik]

You are raising a very interesting question. I suggest showing a warning message for now.

[iluxonchik]

Closed in #12