Received: by nummer-3.proteosys id <01C19442.D4314ED4@nummer-3.proteosys>; Thu, 3 Jan 2002 11:38:49 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 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]) Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C19442.D4314ED4" X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message Subject: RE: LATEX 3.0: FRONT MATTER BIBTEX Date: Fri, 5 Oct 1990 18:43:46 +0100 Message-ID: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: From: "MITTELBACH FRANK" Sender: "LaTeX-L Mailing list" To: "Rainer Schoepf" Reply-To: "LaTeX-L Mailing list" Status: R X-Status: X-Keywords: X-UID: 234 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------_=_NextPart_001_01C19442.D4314ED4 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I would like to foward a mail from Nico which was a reaction to some discussions at the Cork meeting. ------------------------ forwarded mail ------------- > > here are some first thoughts on BibTeX and front matter. > > BibTeX > ------ > BibTeX is unfortunately not a database management system -- > unfortunate in the sense that users have to think of a way to > *really* manage the database, i.e. add, change, remove, sort, select, > import and export entries. On my Atari I use a simple database > program -- a real GEM program with mouse and buttons -- to maintain a > literature database. I've written a conversion program that generates > a .bib file from this database. This system works and is also used ny > my ex-colleagues at the university. > > In general, working with BibTeX is cumbersome -- every time you add a > reference to your document you have to run LaTeX, BibTeX, and LaTeX > twice again -- and a lot of LaTeX users think it only pays off when > your document/bibliography is above a certain length. > > What I would like to see in LaTeX is coding of the logical structure > of every \bibitem. In version 2.09, BibTeX takes care of the logical > structure and outputs formatted text. In other words: a part of the > document, the one included by the \bibliography command, does not > contain tags for the logical structure. Furthermore, if a user > decides NOT to use BibTeX, he/she has to do the formatting completely > by hand. > > Front matter > ------------ > Currently, an article starts with \title, \author and \date > instructions. In the Elsevier styles I have added \address, > \received, \revised and \accepted commands, and also a keyword > environment, similar to the abstract environment. By doing so, we can > automatically convert a LaTeX-coded document to an SGML-coded > document. > I think it is a bad idea to put the front matter information in a > .bib record for the above reasons and also for the following reason: > some parts of the front matter do not have to be re-used again in > bibliographical entries, and therefore do not belong in the .bib > database. > Examples: list pf previous books in a series, LCC data, dedication, > motto (books), keywords, date of receipt, revision, acceptance > (articles). > > Nico Poppelier > Elsevier Science Publishers, PSED, R&D Department > Sara Burgerhartstraat 25, 1055 KV Amsterdam, The Netherlands > Phone: +(20)5862504. Fax: +(20)5862425. Email: n.poppelier@elsevier.nl > poppelier@med.ruu.nl The last comment about the bad idea probably needs some explanation: During the Cork conference we discussed the possibility to use an extended version of bibtex, which is able to produce several bibliogrphies at once, to format a title page (on request). The idea was that for larger documents one could set up a bibliography entry for the document itself with all relevant information in it. In the document itself the title would then be formated by a command, say \titlefrombib{} which would make request bibtex to produce a file containing all necessary information for producing the title. This means that every journal that accepts LaTeX input would supply a BibTeX style file which generates from a single bib entry such a file. The advantages of this method would be that unused information would produce no problem (the bst file would simply ignore them). Another advantage would be that authors (for eample for TUGboat) would already sending a bib entry along with his document. Of course, a standard way for simple document that generates titles without using BibTeX should be availabe too. And the standard document styles should also have their bst files for producing the title. This scheme if, of course only sensible (if at all) if \BibTeX is able to produce several bbl files in one pass. I still think that such a feature has some promising possibilites and would like to here other opinions about it. Frank ------_=_NextPart_001_01C19442.D4314ED4 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable RE: LATEX 3.0: FRONT MATTER BIBTEX

I would like to foward a mail from Nico which was a = reaction
to some discussions at the Cork meeting.

------------------------ forwarded mail = -------------
>
> here are some first thoughts on BibTeX and front = matter.
>
> BibTeX
> ------
> BibTeX is unfortunately not a database = management system --
> unfortunate in the sense that users have to = think of a way to
> *really* manage the database, i.e. add, change, = remove, sort, select,
> import and export entries. On my Atari I use a = simple database
> program -- a real GEM program with mouse and = buttons -- to maintain a
> literature database. I've written a conversion = program that generates
> a .bib file from this database. This system = works and is also used ny
> my ex-colleagues at the university.
>
> In general, working with BibTeX is cumbersome -- = every time you add a
> reference to your document you have to run = LaTeX, BibTeX, and LaTeX
> twice again -- and a lot of LaTeX users think it = only pays off when
> your document/bibliography is above a certain = length.
>
> What I would like to see in LaTeX is coding of = the logical structure
> of every \bibitem. In version 2.09, BibTeX takes = care of the logical
> structure and outputs formatted text. In other = words: a part of the
> document, the one included by the \bibliography = command, does not
> contain tags for the logical structure. = Furthermore, if a user
> decides NOT to use BibTeX, he/she has to do the = formatting completely
> by hand.
>
> Front matter
> ------------
> Currently, an article starts with \title, = \author and \date
> instructions. In the Elsevier styles I have = added \address,
> \received, \revised and \accepted commands, and = also a keyword
> environment, similar to the abstract = environment. By doing so, we can
> automatically convert a LaTeX-coded document to = an SGML-coded
> document.
> I think it is a bad idea to put the front matter = information in a
> .bib record for the above reasons and also for = the following reason:
> some parts of the front matter do not have to be = re-used again in
> bibliographical entries, and therefore do not = belong in the .bib
> database.
> Examples: list pf previous books in a series, = LCC data, dedication,
> motto (books), keywords, date of receipt, = revision, acceptance
> (articles).
>
> Nico Poppelier
> Elsevier Science Publishers, PSED, R&D = Department
> Sara Burgerhartstraat 25, 1055 KV Amsterdam, The = Netherlands
> Phone: +(20)5862504. Fax: +(20)5862425. Email: = n.poppelier@elsevier.nl
>          =             &= nbsp;           &n= bsp;           &nb= sp; poppelier@med.ruu.nl

The last comment about the bad idea probably needs = some
explanation: During the Cork conference we discussed = the possibility
to use an extended version of bibtex, which is able = to produce
several bibliogrphies at once, to format a title page = (on request).

The idea was that for larger documents one could set = up a bibliography
entry for the document itself with all relevant = information in it.
In the document itself the title would then be = formated by a command,
say \titlefrombib{<key>} which would make = request bibtex to produce
a file containing all necessary information for = producing the title.
This means that every journal that accepts LaTeX = input would supply
a BibTeX style file which generates from a single bib = entry such
a file. The advantages of this method would be that = unused information
would produce no problem (the bst file would simply = ignore them).
Another advantage would be that authors (for eample = for TUGboat) would
already sending a bib entry along with his = document.

Of course, a standard way for simple document that = generates titles
without using BibTeX should be availabe too. And the = standard document
styles should also have their bst files for producing = the title.

This scheme if, of course only sensible (if at all) if = \BibTeX is
able to produce several bbl files in one pass.

I still think that such a feature has some promising = possibilites
and would like to here other opinions about = it.

Frank

------_=_NextPart_001_01C19442.D4314ED4--