Bruce D'Arcus

Given this behavior is already configurable (just create your own function and use that in your templates), is there really any point in changing the default function there? Or maybe...

Hoping @roshanshariff can weigh in on this, but will also note this is the kind of example we've previously discussed as likely better handled by #681. @aikrahguzar had a promising...

OK, so you're not asking to change the default, but to add another option? I don't see any particular problem doing that. Can you submit a PR? https://github.com/emacs-citar/citar/blob/main/CONTRIBUTING.org

One design option worth considering (I'm not myself sure): Perhaps `citar--shorten-names` should be generalized, where this becomes a parameter on that? Whether or not to do that probably comes down...

> I think a better way to solve this problem would be allow display transform functions to make some part of the string invisible. I was wondering about this, though...

I'll defer to @roshanshariff and @aikrahguzar on the technical details, but just note: we don't only do bibtex/biblatex; we also support CSL JSON.

> I think a potential downside would be that affixation function would also need to highlight the candidate since losing all highlighting of matches would be too big a loss....

@torfjelde > So do we then close this PR in favour of the invisibility-solution? Or do we try to get this merged first, and then invisibility-solution afterwards? Indeed, this is...

> are there any tests for this stuff? Do you mean in this project, or more generally? If the former, this is an example (see #780) where we should probably...

> Are there an existing list of author names that I could maybe draw from as test-cases, or should I add some? There isn't, but I can give you an...