# \emph vs. \mkbibemph and other things

I usually use the commands that come with biblatex (like mkbibemph, mkbibquote etc.) only in my bibliography.

What about using them in the text of my document? Should I do that? Are there any advantages?For example, I remember reading something about that the biblatex-commands can rule whether or not the dot is inside or outside the quotation marks. But I don't know whether this is still the case, whether it works and if it is recommended.

So, what about \emph vs. \mkbibemph? Or \mkbibquote vs. "..." vs. \enquote (of csquotes)?

(I think these are the two commands I am most interested in, but I am sure that there are others that also come with biblatex, isn't that so (e.g. \mkbibparens)? What about those?)

-

\show\mkbibemph
\show\mkbibquote


produces

> \mkbibemph=\protected macro:
->\emph .
l.6 \show\mkbibemph

?
> \mkbibquote=\protected macro:
->\enquote .
l.10 \show\mkbibquote


so the biblatex ones are defined to expand to the normal ones by default.

-
The purpose of having different names is that they can be redefined when working on the bibliography. –  egreg Oct 11 '12 at 13:12
@egreg yes that's what I meant by "by default" either way it means there is no harm using them in the main document if you wish I think? –  David Carlisle Oct 11 '12 at 13:54
I'd prefer using the "normal" names. –  egreg Oct 11 '12 at 13:56