Closed gvwilson closed 3 years ago
I suspect this isn't always deliberate, but that we can't assume consistency will solve it (some places may reference the author's name as a part of the narrative). This is normally the type of thing I'd love to do, but I won't be able to get to it till probably Sunday.
This is deliberate. @Nobl2009
is the equivalent of \citet
(a textual citation) and [@nobl2009]
is like \citep
(a parenthetical citation).
Well, I'm glad I didn't "fix" it then :-)
Sometimes we use
@Nobl2009
, which producesNoble (2009)
, but sometimes we use[@Nobl2009]
, which produces(Noble 2009)
. Is this deliberate, or should we do a pass to make them consistent?