[OS X TeX] BibLaTeX and archival (a la jurabib)
peter.pagin at philosophy.su.se
Wed Dec 17 14:22:33 CET 2008
Just to add my two cents to this: I switched to BibLaTeX from natbib
about a year and a half ago. With the manual, no formal training in
programming and about two days of effort I managed to roll my own
style (humanities, author-date). After minor debugging it worked well
and I have used it since. Things that had to be taken care of by work-
arounds in natbib are now features of the style.
17 dec 2008 kl. 09.36 skrev Simon Spiegel:
> On 17.12.2008, at 09:23, Rolf Schmolling wrote:
>> since i started this row some month ago (no response on the list
>> then) I'd like to elaborate a bit what I'd expect.
>> Actually the "problem" is still present, I am currently still using
>> jurabib, basically for two reasons: I know how this particular
>> package works … – no modifications of the really complicated code –
>> some things I have not been able to accomplish like a better manage
>> of the archival-type entries. The other reason is that my
>> references (kept in BibDesk) are set up for jurabib.
> Just to make you feel more at easy: I also moved from jurabib to
> biblatex and I also use BibDesk, so the transition certainly can be
>> Simon and Dominik have promised that many things are easier to
>> accomplish, like multibib-functionality and formatting of
>> references. Furthermore since jurabib is not developed any more
>> this is a dead end. I do believe them but… 1) setting things up is
>> a lot of work (learning, changing the references (field and such
>> alike) testing 2) most important learning to write a NEW entry-type
>> (archival) which I believe is not trivial. So I am still shying
>> away from that huge effort.
>> In fact, I rather like the manual to be 175pages (but so far the
>> manual I have seen was much much shorter?!) I just recently
>> installed and updated TexLive2008 (wow that was easy!) and as far
>> as I know BibLaTeX was not part of this (hint hint: please include
>> this as the beta could be kept updated easily with the new package-
>> Manager!!) so maybe I missed the long long manual. I have to admit
>> I am not the programmer- or mathematical inclined type, writing
>> macros is too much for me. So I ultimately don't know if I will be
>> able to achieve my goal here – in the end it is to finish my thesis
>> – not be perfect with LaTeX/Bibtex/BibLaTeX/jurabib etc.
> The latest version of biblatex (0.8b) does indeed come with a 175
> page manual, so you might want to check your version. As for the
> inclusion of biblatex into TL: Philipp Lehmann has specifically
> asked distributors *not* to bundle biblatex at this point. I think
> who wants to wait until version 1.0.
> As for your specific needs. Do you actually need a new document type
> for this or can this be done with 'unpublished'? Or can you post a
> tpyical example and how it should look like so I can wrap my head
> around it?
> If you really can't do it with 'unpublished', it might be a good
> idea to post a feature request on http://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=244752
> . Philipp has been very responsive to user requests.
> Simon Spiegel
> Steinhaldenstr. 50
> 8002 Zürich
> Telephon: ++41 44 451 5334
> Mobophon: ++41 76 459 60 39
> „I have never been certain that the moral of the Icarus myth is, as
> is generally accepted, 'don't fly too high', or whether it might
> also be thought of as: 'forget about the wax and feathers, and do a
> better job on the wings.“ Stanley Kubrick
> ----------- Please Consult the Following Before Posting -----------
> TeX FAQ: http://www.tex.ac.uk/faq
> List Reminders and Etiquette: http://www.esm.psu.edu/mac-tex/list/
> List Archive: http://tug.org/pipermail/macostex-archives/
> TeX on Mac OS X Website: http://mactex-wiki.tug.org/
> List Info: http://email.esm.psu.edu/mailman/listinfo/macosx-tex
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the macostex-archives