citation parser isn't general enough (e.g. `@doi:10.1016/S1045-926X(05)80012-6`)
joshuahhh opened this issue · comments
"10.1016/S1045-926X(05)80012-6" is a valid DOI (see https://doi.org/10.1016/S1045-926X(05)80012-6), but when I put @doi:10.1016/S1045-926X(05)80012-6 or [@doi:10.1016/S1045-926X(05)80012-6] in my document, the system says
Citation doi lookup failed: 10.1016/S1045-926X
I suppose the parser doesn't support a broad enough range of characters, so it's stopping at the (?
We currently use Pandoc’s citation reference parsing directly and so inherit its quirks and limitations.
DOI suffixes are very flexible, often more so than the systems in which they are embedded (including browser URLs). This page is relevant: https://www.doi.org/syntax.html
One idea is to allow URL encoding (e.g., %43) and have Living Papers perform URL decoding on citation keys. That will help make “difficult” URIs expressible, though the author experience isn’t the best. Still, that may be an acceptable workaround until a parsing solution is available.
URL encoding is a good idea. It actually works, without any changes, in the HTML output. But TeX hates percent signs, so that doesn't last. I added some code to my branch to decodeURI citation keys ASAP: ee2a7e6.