X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil t nil]
	[nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil])
Date:         Tue, 17 Jul 90 07:39:54 bst
Reply-To: LaTeX-L Mailing list <LATEX-L%DHDURZ1@unido.bitnet>
From: Sebastian Rahtz <spqr@ECS.SOTON.AC.UK>
Subject:      Re: Another way to do bibliographic entries
To: Rainer Schoepf <BK4@DHDURZ1.uucp>
Status: R
X-Status: 
X-Keywords:                  
X-UID: 188

"Nelson H. F. Beebe" writes:

 > masse into the end of the document, and this problem remains
 > if the alternate method of putting references in footnotes
 > is done.

I come across this quite often; and it is unfortunate that the
{nt}roff tools handle this situation much better; as does Tib, but I
am distinctly unconvinced by Tib - it breaks, and the format is ugly.

I like Don's solution; some comments:

   > \cite would do an unskip to take care of any space preceding it
   > (typing %\cite{foo} is an ingrained habit in any BibTeXnical
why is space preceding a \cite supposed to be an error? I do all my
citations in APA-like style, where a space before (Jones 1989) is what
I want, surely?

   > execute the command \cite@foo (or some such).
   >
   > The bbl file would define \cite@foo such that the first time it
thats an awful lot of material to have hanging around in memory from
the first citation in the text; it could get unmanageable quite
quickly. It is so easy to run LaTeX out of memory anyway, we don't
want yet another gob of the stuff taken away. Of course, there is no
other solution, except
 - a preprocessor like Tib or refer to do textual substitution
 - system access other than file reading, to kick off a decent
   database search
 - reading a .bbl-like file every time one met a cite, and searching
   for the key (probably not *that* slow, actually, but clumsy)

   > (2) There should be a default bibliography style. Especially
   > important for, say, an APA style which implies
   > \bibliographystyle{apalike}.
agreed!

   > (4) There should be a way for a citation along the lines of
   > [Hosek, pp. 12-13, Schwartz, p. 14]
I would also note that whenever I get people to type in LaTeXery for
me, it is distinctly counter-intuitive for them to type
 \cite[p.~41]{Jones:1989}
to get
 Jones 1989, p. 41

why isn't the syntax \cite{Jones:1989}[p.~41]?

one solution to Don's (4) is to put the stuff currently in [] inside
the {} seperated by some character
   \cite{Hosek/pp. 12-13,Schwartz/p. 14}

but that would be a bit of a radical break from current stuff.

does history relate if Patashnik is doing *anything* to the interface
of BibTeX for 1.0?

sebastian