In-text, note and bibliography citation styles are not supported as per their definition

[Omikhleia]

As of 0.14.17-0.15.0, the bibtex package provides two commands:

• "an inline citation", with \cite -- in our current Chicago-style author-date implementation, (Doe 2023)
• "a full reference", with \reference -- in our Chicago-style implementation... something, but see below....

The crux of the matter is that most bibliography styles define not 2, but 3 ways of formatting entries -- and. Chicago doesn't make an exception here...

• "in-text" citation = how one would format a citation in the text flow. In "true" form: Some text (Doe, 2023; Smith, 2024).
• "note" citation = how one would format a (ex. foot)note. A longer form, e.g. John Doe, "My Article." etc.
• "bibliography" reference = how one format the entry in a bibliography (typically at the end of an article), e.g. Doe, John. "My Article." etc.

Where does CSL stands?

• It usually has 2 different style files, one for "in-text" <citation> and one for "note" <citation>
• This does make sense, because:
  • Normally one does not mix both citation types in a given work.
  • The <bibliography> reference format usually depends on the former citation style, e.g. (I'm simplifying)
    • With "in-text citations (Doe, 2023), the reference in a bibliography would be keyed: Doe, John. 2023. "My Article." etc.
    • With "note" citations, the reference in a bibliography would be keyed: Doe, John. "My Article." etc. (note the use of a period here, not a comma)

Where does SILE stands?

• \cite corresponds to the "in-text" citation but takes one key only, so can't handle (Doe, 2023; Smith 2024)...
• \reference is unclear, but the fact that it uses a comma after the contributors hints toward a "note" citation style, not a bibliography one...

So nothing is right here.