Hey, @xUser5000 ! Thank you for your hard work, it already works wonderfully : ) !
I'm a bit surprised, however, that the format of the reference seem to be fixed, and not very pretty to read:
It seems like changing the format/text of the reference from something else than the citekey (i.e. changing bettsForestDegradationNot2021 into something like Betts et al. 2021) breaks the reference.
I'm doubly surprised that this aspect of the plugin does not appear in the trello, or on the GitHub page. From my point of view, an important aspect of references is that they should be included nicely in the text, and especially follow the format of academic literature (e.g. "(Betts et al. 2021)", or [1], etc.) rather than a code or a citekey that is rather strange to read.
A potential solution that I'd see to this issue would be to replace the DOI link in the current system with the citekey, and to let the user input the text that they want for the link. The plugin could then "read" the citekey contained in the link. What I mean, is that instead of having:
[@bettsForestDegradationNot2021](http://dx.doi.org/10.21203%2Frs.3.rs-686817%2Fv1)
We would have:
[(Betts et al. 2021)](@bettsForestDegradationNot2021)
However, such a solution would present another problem when compared to how references are currently handled in most current software: that as soon as the user have chosen the reference(s) to add, the rest of the formatting (both in the end section of the document and in the place of the text where the reference is inserted) should be completely automatic. Therefore, the user should not even have to input "Betts et al. 2021"; from my point of view, this should be done for them, as is done in Zettlr and Pandoc.
That's why I still think that the best implementation of this might be the current functioning of Pandoc, which just reads citekeys and other syntax to format the citations automatically, very quickly (no need to write a full link), and with total and complete customization from the user in how they ultimatly look like. For that, I refer to post I made previously: BibTeX Plugin - #18 by Klemet .
Still, I really don't want to sound either judgmental, or ungrateful about what you've done. I'm really impressed that the plugin have already come so far, and it's still a wonderful new option that will make Joplin incredible for use in academia : ) ! I'm just afraid that as is, it's not going to be very popular as the formatting is pretty strict and strange from my point of view.