CTAN package update: biblatex 0.3
CTAN Announcements
> I've uploaded `biblatex.tar.gz' to the incoming directory of the UK
> node. This is an update for macros/latex/exptl/biblatex.
i've installed the files as requested; i will update the catalogue
just as soon as i find the catalogue server has returned to the land
of the living :-(
meanwhile, users may browse the package by way of the old catalogue
entry:
http://www.tex.ac.uk/tex-archive/help/Catalogue/entries/biblatex.html
thanks for the update,
Robin Fairbairns
For the CTAN team
> ABOUT
>
> The biblatex package is a complete reimplementation of the
> bibliographic facilities provided by LaTeX in conjunction with
> BibTeX. It redesigns the way in which LaTeX interacts with BibTeX at
> a fairly fundamental level. With biblatex, BibTeX is only used to
> sort the bibliography and to generate labels. Instead of being
> implemented in BibTeX's style files, the formatting of the
> bibliography is entirely controlled by TeX macros. Good working
> knowledge in LaTeX should be sufficient to design new bibliography
> and citation styles. There is no need to learn BibTeX's postfix
> stack language. Just like the bibliography styles, all citation
> commands may be freely (re)defined.
>
> RELEASE NOTES
>
> See the file `RELEASE' for release notes.
>
> CHANGES
>
> * Renamed citation style `authortitle' to `authortitle-terse'
> * Renamed citation style `authortitle-comp' to `authortitle-cterse'
> * Renamed citation style `authortitle-verb' to `authortitle'
> * Added new citation style `authortitle-comp'
> * Citation style `traditional' now supports `loc. cit.'
> * Added package option `date'
> * Added package option `urldate'
> * Introduced new data type: literal lists
> * Renamed \citename to \citeauthor
> * Renamed \citelist to \citename
> * Added new \citelist command
> * Renamed \printlist to \printnames
> * Added new \printlist command
> * Renamed \indexlist to \indexnames
> * Added new \indexlist command
> * Renamed \DeclareListFormat to \DeclareNameFormat
> * Added new \DeclareListFormat command
> * Renamed \DeclareListAlias to \DeclareNameAlias
> * Added new \DeclareListAlias command
> * Renamed \DeclareIndexListFormat to \DeclareIndexNameFormat
> * Added new \DeclareIndexListFormat command
> * Renamed \DeclareIndexListAlias to \DeclareIndexNameAlias
> * Added new \DeclareIndexListAlias command
> * Renamed \biblist to \thename
> * Added new \thelist command
> * Renamed \bibfield to \thefield
> * Renamed \savelist to \savename
> * Added new \savelist command
> * Renamed \savelistcs to \savenamecs
> * Added new \savelistcs command
> * Renamed \iflistundef to \ifnameundef
> * Added new \iflistundef test
> * Renamed \iflistsequal to \ifnamesequal
> * Added new \iflistsequal test
> * Renamed \iflistequals to \ifnameequals
> * Added new \iflistequals test
> * Renamed \iflistequalcs to \ifnameequalcs
> * Added new \iflistequalcs test
> * Renamed \iflistequalstr to \ifnameequalstr
> * Added new \iflistequalstr test
> * Renamed \ifcurrentlist to \ifcurrentname
> * Added new \ifcurrentlist test
> * Entry type alias `conference' now resolved by BibTeX
> * Entry type alias `mastersthesis' now resolved by BibTeX
> * Entry type alias `phdthesis' now resolved by BibTeX
> * Entry type alias `techreport' now resolved by BibTeX
> * Entry type alias `www' now resolved by BibTeX
> * Added new custom fields `lista' through `listf'
> * Changed data type of `location'
> * Changed data type of `origlocation'
> * Changed data type of `publisher'
> * Changed data type of `institution'
> * Changed data type of `organization'
> * Modified values of `gender' field for `jurabib' compatibility
> * Modified and extended `idem...' keys for `jurabib' compatibility
> * Improved \addtocategory
> * Removed formatting command \mkshorthand
> * Added field formatting directive `shorthandwidth'
> * Added documentation of \shorthandwidth
> * Removed formatting command \mklabelnumber
> * Added field formatting directive `labelnumberwidth'
> * Added documentation of \labelnumberwidth
> * Removed formatting command \mklabelalpha
> * Added field formatting directive `labelalphawidth'
> * Added documentation of \labelalphawidth
> * Renamed \bibitem to \thebibitem
> * Renamed \lositem to \thelositem
> * Modified \AtBeginBibliography
> * Added \AtBeginShorthands
> * Added \AtEveryLositem
> * Extended `showkeys' compatibility to list of shorthands
> * Added compatibility code for the `hyperref' package
> * Added package option `hyperref'
> * Added package option `backref'
> * Added special field `pageref'
> * Added command \ifhyperref
> * Added command \bibhyperlink
> * Added field formatting directive `bibhyperlink'
> * Renamed \ifandothers to \ifmorenames
> * Added new \ifandothers test
> * Removed field `moreauthor'
> * Removed field `morebookauthor'
> * Removed field `moreeditor'
> * Removed field `morelabelname'
> * Removed field `moretranslator'
> * Removed field `morenamea'
> * Removed field `morenameb'
> * Removed field `morenamec'
> * Updated documentation at various places
> (see the changelog in biblatex.pdf for pointers)
> * Expanded documentation
> (see the changelog in biblatex.pdf for pointers)
> * Modified internal BibTeX interface
> * Fixed some typos in the manual
> * Fixed some bugs
Juergen Spitzmueller
>> * Introduced new data type: literal lists
Cool. Many thanks, Philipp!
Jürgen
Simon Spiegel
> Philipp Lehman writes:
>
>> I've uploaded `biblatex.tar.gz' to the incoming directory of the UK
>> node. This is an update for macros/latex/exptl/biblatex.
>
> i've installed the files as requested; i will update the catalogue
> just as soon as i find the catalogue server has returned to the land
> of the living :-(
>
> meanwhile, users may browse the package by way of the old catalogue
> entry:
>
> http://www.tex.ac.uk/tex-archive/help/Catalogue/entries/biblatex.html
>
> thanks for the update,
>
> Robin Fairbairns
>
> For the CTAN team
I don't know whether it's me or biblatex, but I seem to be unable to
define the format of indexes. I use the standard citeindex macro:
\newbibmacro*{citeindex}{%
\indexnames{labelname}%
\indexfield[citetitle]{title}}
and then try to define the format of the title this way:
\DeclareIndexFieldFormat{citetitle}{\emph{#1}}
The result is that all titles are omitted from the .idx file. They're
not just not formatted properly, they're simply not there. As soon as I
delete the DeclarIndexFieldFormat declaration, the titles appear again.
simon
Philipp Lehman
> I don't know whether it's me or biblatex, but I seem to be unable to
> define the format of indexes. I use the standard citeindex macro:
>
> \newbibmacro*{citeindex}{%
> \indexnames{labelname}%
> \indexfield[citetitle]{title}}
>
> and then try to define the format of the title this way:
>
> \DeclareIndexFieldFormat{citetitle}{\emph{#1}}
>
> The result is that all titles are omitted from the .idx file.
> They're not just not formatted properly, they're simply not there.
> As soon as I delete the DeclarIndexFieldFormat declaration, the
> titles appear again.
You're misconceiving index formatting directives. It's:
\DeclareIndexFieldFormat{citetitle}{\index{\emph{#1}}}
See the manual and the comments in biblatex.def.
--
Sender address blackholed; do not reply to From: address.
You can still reach me by email at: plehman gmx net.
Per Starbäck
>> * Introduced new data type: literal lists
But isn't it a problem that existing bib files might have an "and"
that isn't meant to be parsed like that in those fields? Grepping in
some bib files I find examples like
institution = "Office of Information Management and Communications,
United States. General Accounting Office",
organization = "William Reid and Company",
publisher = "American Society for Photogrammetry and Remote
Sensing, American Congress on Surveying and Mapping",
Philipp Lehman
> But isn't it a problem that existing bib files might have an "and"
> that isn't meant to be parsed like that in those fields?
In such cases you need to hide every "and" which is not a delimiter
but part of the name by wrapping it in braces:
> institution = "Office of Information Management and Communications,
> United States. General Accounting Office",
institution = "Office of Information Management {and} Communications",
BTW, I'm not fond of this "and"-delimited stuff at all (I'd rather
have the data in XML format to begin with, but that's a different
story). But since biblatex depends on Bibtex, I'm trying to keep
things as consistent as possible.
Per Starback
>> that isn't meant to be parsed like that in those fields?
> In such cases you need to hide every "and" which is not a delimiter
> but part of the name by wrapping it in braces:
Sorry, I know I can. What I meant is that there are already lots of bib
files around and it's practical to be able to use them without any
changes. The examples I took were all from bib files at
<http://www.math.utah.edu/~beebe/bibliographies.html>.
Maybe this is not a major problem. After Biblatex 1.0 is released and
is a big hit maybe most public bib repositories will adapt? But still
it seems to not be in line with other compatibility with old styles
and:
> But since biblatex depends on Bibtex, I'm trying to keep
> things as consistent as possible.
Would it be too unclean to make "institution" etc. work in the
traditional way and have new fields "institutions" etc. that are
literal lists? (The new s fields would have priority if both are
present.)
Philipp Lehman
> Sorry, I know I can. What I meant is that there are already lots of
> bib files around and it's practical to be able to use them without
> any
> changes. The examples I took were all from bib files at
> <http://www.math.utah.edu/~beebe/bibliographies.html>.
>
> Maybe this is not a major problem. After Biblatex 1.0 is released
> and is a big hit maybe most public bib repositories will adapt?
That's not very likely but I don't think that's a problem. I hate to
say it, but in 2006 the format used in bib files is utterly
irrelevant as an archival storage and interchange format.
> still it seems to not be in line with other compatibility with old
> styles and
Well, yes, but there are other fields posing similar problems. For
example, the "edition" field is an integer field with biblatex. A lot
of legacy files include things like "edition={First}". That's a very
bad idea because you can't localize the data. This makes a
considerable portion of the data found in public bib repositories
worthless if you're not writing in English.
There is some compatibility code in biblatex.bst which extracts all
numbers from the edition field. This code handles cases like
"edition={1st}" ("1st" just becomes "1"), but it fails with "First".
There are even worse hacks in bib files. For example, the test.bib
file which ships with Bibtex as an example (!) has this entry:
@Incollection{milton-24,
author = "John Milton",
title = "Paradise Lost",
booktitle = "The Complete Poetical Works of {John Milton}",
edition = "{Student's Cambridge}",
This is just absurd. I used to believe that the point of example files
is demonstrating how to do it right.
>> But since biblatex depends on Bibtex, I'm trying to keep
>> things as consistent as possible.
>
> Would it be too unclean to make "institution" etc. work in the
> traditional way and have new fields "institutions" etc. that are
> literal lists?
It would be possible and it wouldn't be that much of a hack but I
wonder whether it's worth the trouble. You will most likely have to
review legacy bib files before using them with biblatex anyway. The
compatibility code in biblatex.bst cannot possibly cover all cases.
Simon Spiegel
<devnull....@spamgourmet.com> said:
> Simon Spiegel wrote:
>
>> I don't know whether it's me or biblatex, but I seem to be unable to
>> define the format of indexes. I use the standard citeindex macro:
>>
>> \newbibmacro*{citeindex}{%
>> \indexnames{labelname}%
>> \indexfield[citetitle]{title}}
>>
>> and then try to define the format of the title this way:
>>
>> \DeclareIndexFieldFormat{citetitle}{\emph{#1}}
>>
>> The result is that all titles are omitted from the .idx file.
>> They're not just not formatted properly, they're simply not there.
>> As soon as I delete the DeclarIndexFieldFormat declaration, the
>> titles appear again.
>
> You're misconceiving index formatting directives. It's:
>
> \DeclareIndexFieldFormat{citetitle}{\index{\emph{#1}}}
>
> See the manual and the comments in biblatex.def.
I think I found a bug (and this time it's not my lack of LaTeX
expertise). Try the following minimal example:
\documentclass{article}
\usepackage[utf8]{inputenc}
\usepackage[style=german, german=swiss]{csquotes}
\usepackage[T1]{fontenc}
\usepackage[style=authoryear]{biblatex}
\bibliography{germanistik2}
\begin{document}
\cite{Westfahl.G:1989/90} \cite{Waggner.G:1941} \cite{Westfahl.G:2000*2}
\printbibliography
\end{document}
with the following bib entries.
@article{Westfahl.G:1989/90,
Author = {Westfahl, Gary},
Date-Modified = {2005-10-23 18:16:02 +0200},
Journal = {Foundation. The Review of Science Fiction},
Keywords = {Diss, Science Fiction, Genregeschichte, Literatur},
Number = {47},
Pages = {5--27},
Read = {Yes},
Standort = {ETH BIB, Kopie privat},
Title = {On The True History of Science Fiction},
Year = {1989/90},
Annote = {Westfahl, Gary}}
@misc{Waggner.G:1941,
Address = {USA},
Author = {Waggner, George},
Shortauthor = {{\textsc{The Wolf Man}} (1941)},
Sortname = {wolf_man},
Standort = {Privat Download},
Subtitle = {Wolfsmensch},
Title = {The Wolf Man},
Url = {http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0034398},
Year = {1941}}
@incollection{Westfahl.G:2000*2,
Address = {Westport{/""}London},
Author = {Westfahl, Gary},
Booktitle = {Space and Beyond. The Frontier Theme in American Science
Fiction},
Date-Modified = {2006-08-24 17:28:34 +0200},
Editor = {Westfahl, Gary},
Keywords = {Diss, Science Fiction, Film, Realismus, 2001, Destination Moon},
Pages = {55--65},
Read = {Yes},
Standort = {Kopie, ZB: NABM 2000:345},
Title = {The True Frontier: Confronting and Avoiding the Realities of
Space in American Science Fiction Films},
Year = {2000}}
Notice how in the second entry for Westfahl, the name isn't replaced
with a dash. This probably due to the fact that all authors have the
same initials 'WG'. As soon as you erase Waggner.G:1941, the second
Westfahl entry is correctly displayed.
Since I'm mentioning this mechanism: Jurabib has an option which will
take into account where a bibliography entry stands when it replaces a
name with a dash. If an entry is placed on a new page, the full name is
written (similar with ibidem citations in the text). Is this doable
with biblatex?
simon
Philipp Lehman
> Notice how in the second entry for Westfahl, the name isn't replaced
> with a dash. This probably due to the fact that all authors have the
> same initials 'WG'. As soon as you erase Waggner.G:1941, the second
> Westfahl entry is correctly displayed.
Yes, that's indeed a bug in biblatex.bst. I think I've fixed that in
the meantime (in my development version). Let me known if you want to
test the current version.
> Since I'm mentioning this mechanism: Jurabib has an option which
> will take into account where a bibliography entry stands when it
> replaces a name with a dash. If an entry is placed on a new page,
> the full name is written (similar with ibidem citations in the
> text). Is this doable with biblatex?
It is obviously doable in the sense that a bibliography or citation
style may implement it but it's not supported out of the box.
I'm a bit reluctant to implement this in the core package because it
will either eat control sequence hash space like crazy or require
low-level surgery on the output routine (scary stuff). jurabib goes
with eating hash space, iirc. It's the old story of Latex's
asynchronous output routine. You can't simply use the page counter to
find out on which page you are.
Simon Spiegel
<devnull....@spamgourmet.com> said:
> Simon Spiegel wrote:
>
>> Notice how in the second entry for Westfahl, the name isn't replaced
>> with a dash. This probably due to the fact that all authors have the
>> same initials 'WG'. As soon as you erase Waggner.G:1941, the second
>> Westfahl entry is correctly displayed.
>
> Yes, that's indeed a bug in biblatex.bst. I think I've fixed that in
> the meantime (in my development version). Let me known if you want to
> test the current version.
I'm definitely in trying this.
>
>> Since I'm mentioning this mechanism: Jurabib has an option which
>> will take into account where a bibliography entry stands when it
>> replaces a name with a dash. If an entry is placed on a new page,
>> the full name is written (similar with ibidem citations in the
>> text). Is this doable with biblatex?
>
> It is obviously doable in the sense that a bibliography or citation
> style may implement it but it's not supported out of the box.
>
> I'm a bit reluctant to implement this in the core package because it
> will either eat control sequence hash space like crazy or require
> low-level surgery on the output routine (scary stuff). jurabib goes
> with eating hash space, iirc. It's the old story of Latex's
> asynchronous output routine. You can't simply use the page counter to
> find out on which page you are.
Well, if you can give me a hint how I could implement it myself, I'm
already happy.
simon
Philipp Lehman
>> Let me known if you want to test the current version.
>
> I'm definitely in trying this.
OK
>> It is obviously doable in the sense that a bibliography or citation
>> style may implement it but it's not supported out of the box.
>
> Well, if you can give me a hint how I could implement it myself, I'm
> already happy.
I'm afraid I don't have time for this right now, but maybe someone
else here can explain it to you.
It's a very common thing, I'm surprised there is no package which
provides some user-level \ifsamepage test. But maybe there is such a
package?
Simon Spiegel
<devnull....@spamgourmet.com> said:
> Simon Spiegel wrote:
>
>>> Let me known if you want to test the current version.
>>
>> I'm definitely in trying this.
>
> OK
Oops, that meant: "definitely interested in", but I guess you got it alright.
>
>>> It is obviously doable in the sense that a bibliography or citation
>>> style may implement it but it's not supported out of the box.
>>
>> Well, if you can give me a hint how I could implement it myself, I'm
>> already happy.
>
> I'm afraid I don't have time for this right now, but maybe someone
> else here can explain it to you.
>
> It's a very common thing, I'm surprised there is no package which
> provides some user-level \ifsamepage test. But maybe there is such a
> package?
Anyone?
Simon Spiegel
>>>
>>
>> I'm afraid I don't have time for this right now, but maybe someone
>> else here can explain it to you.
>>
>> It's a very common thing, I'm surprised there is no package which
>> provides some user-level \ifsamepage test. But maybe there is such a
>> package?
>
> Anyone?
Another question. According to the doc, the sorting of the bibliography
always goes in the following order:
presort - name (sortname, author, editor, title) - sortyear -year -
sorttitle - title.
So, if I got this right, this means that if an author is given, the
bibliography should be sorted by author/year (which is what I want).
But somehow this doesn't seem to work:
\documentclass{article}
\usepackage[utf8]{inputenc}
\usepackage[ngerman]{babel}
\usepackage[style=german, german=swiss]{csquotes}
\usepackage[style=authoryear,citeindex=true,hyperref=true]{biblatex}
\bibliography{germanistik2}
\usepackage{graphicx}
\begin{document}
\cite{wells.h:1901} \cite{wells.h:1980} \cite{wells.h:1980*2}
\printbibliography
\end{document}
@book{wells.h:1901,
Address = {London},
Author = {Wells, H.{\,}G.},
Date-Added = {2006-02-07 19:27:02 +0100},
Date-Modified = {2006-02-18 19:25:42 +0100},
Keywords = {Diss, Science Fiction, Proto-SF, Scientific Romance,
Wells, Mondreise, Prim{\"a}rtext},
Title = {The First Men in the Moon},
Year = {1901}}
@incollection{wells.h:1980,
Address = {Sussex/New Jersey},
Author = {Wells, H.{\,}G.},
Bookauthor = {Wells, H.{\,}G.},
Booktitle = {H.{\,}G. Wells's Literary Criticism},
Editor = {Philmus, Robert M. and Parrinder, Patrick},
Keywords = {Diss, Science Fiction, Proto-SF, Scientific Romance, Wells},
Origyear = {1921},
Pages = {238--239},
Read = {Yes},
Title = {Preface to {\textit{The Sleeper Awakes}}},
Year = {1980}}
@incollection{wells.h:1980*2,
Address = {Sussex/New Jersey},
Author = {Wells, H.{\,}G.},
Bookauthor = {Wells, H.{\,}G.},
Booktitle = {H.{\,}G. Wells's Literary Criticism},
Editor = {Philmus, Robert M. and Parrinder, Patrick},
Keywords = {Diss, Science Fiction, Literatur, Scientific Romance,
Wells, Proto-SF},
Origyear = {1933},
Pages = {240--245},
Title = {Preface to {\textit{The Scientific Romances}}},
Year = {1980}}
With this example, wells.h:1901 which is the oldest and therefore
should be first is sorted last.
A bug or me getting something wrong?
TIA
simon
Philipp Lehman
> So, if I got this right, this means that if an author is given, the
> bibliography should be sorted by author/year (which is what I want).
> \usepackage[style=authoryear,citeindex=true,hyperref=true]{biblatex}
\usepackage[sorting=nyt]{biblatex}
Reading users' minds is scheduled for biblatex 2.0.
Simon Spiegel
<devnull....@spamgourmet.com> said:
> Simon Spiegel wrote:
>
>> So, if I got this right, this means that if an author is given, the
>> bibliography should be sorted by author/year (which is what I want).
>
>> \usepackage[style=authoryear,citeindex=true,hyperref=true]{biblatex}
>
> \usepackage[sorting=nyt]{biblatex}
D'Oh.
>
> Reading users' minds is scheduled for biblatex 2.0.
Certainly a useful addition.
Simon Spiegel
<si...@removethis.simifilm.ch> said:
> On 2006-09-29 12:24:30 +0200, Philipp Lehman
> <devnull....@spamgourmet.com> said:
>
>> Simon Spiegel wrote:
>>
>>> So, if I got this right, this means that if an author is given, the
>>> bibliography should be sorted by author/year (which is what I want).
>>
>>> \usepackage[style=authoryear,citeindex=true,hyperref=true]{biblatex}
>>
>> \usepackage[sorting=nyt]{biblatex}
Ok, more on sorting here:
It looks like biblatex doesn't handle umlauts and other special
characters well.
Currently Author = {M{\'e}li{\`e}s, Georges} is sorted after Auhtor =
{Mulhall, Steve} and Author = {{\v S}klovskij, Viktor} after Author =
{Spiegel, Simon}. Of course, this can easily be circumvented by usig
sortname, but I guess it would be much nicer if this cases were handled
automatically.
Another thing I noticed: biblatex doesn't like "= in entries, or, to be
more precise, it prevents them from turning into a hyphen. With jurabib
I used Journal = {Science{"=}Fiction Studies} which was handled
correctly, with biblatex this is printed as Science"=Fiction Studies.
Related to this: I use a slash for consecutive editors and cities.
Unfortunately, biblatex doesn't like /"" in entries or definitions
either. If I use a simple slash, this can lead to ugly layout because
something like 'Spiegel, Simon/Doe, John' can't be broken at the slash.
Maybe an \addslash command which allows LaTeX a linebreak would be
useful here.
TIA
simon
Philipp Lehman
> Ok, more on sorting here:
>
> It looks like biblatex doesn't handle umlauts and other special
> characters well.
I've added some more string normalization to biblatex.bst. I'll send
you the new version via PM.
I generally recommend using bibtex8, though.
> Another thing I noticed: biblatex doesn't like "= in entries, or, to
> be more precise, it prevents them from turning into a hyphen.
That's a babel issue. You obviously need to load babel (which you most
probably do) and, if you're using the "hyphenation" field and the
"babel" package option, make sure you're using the right setting.
\usepackage[babel=hypen]{biblatex}
This will only switch hyphenation patterns.
\usepackage[babel=other*]{biblatex}
This will also activate babel's shorthands. See section 3.2.2 of
the biblatex manual for details.
Also see the babel manual. When using the "babel" package option,
biblatex's behavior is strictly in line with the behavior of babel's
language environments. This also applies to csquotes, btw.
> Related to this: I use a slash for consecutive editors and cities.
> Unfortunately, biblatex doesn't like /"" in entries or definitions
> either. If I use a simple slash, this can lead to ugly layout
> because something like 'Spiegel, Simon/Doe, John' can't be broken at
> the slash. Maybe an \addslash command which allows LaTeX a linebreak
> would be useful here.
It's called \slash and it's part of the Latex kernel. Note that \slash
will penalize the slash using \exhyphenpenalty. You may want to use a
different definition which does not add a penalty, such as:
\def\myslash{/\hskip\z@skip}
If you want to fine-tune the line breaking further, modify the name
formatting directive such that it uses
\addcomma\penalty\value{namepenalty}\space
instead of
\addcomma\space
This will encourage TeX to use \myslash as a breakpoint rather than
the space after "Spiegel,". You may want to wait for biblatex 0.4,
though. The next version will provide improved controls for this.
Simon Spiegel
<devnull....@spamgourmet.com> said:
> Simon Spiegel wrote:
>
>> Ok, more on sorting here:
>>
>> It looks like biblatex doesn't handle umlauts and other special
>> characters well.
>
> I've added some more string normalization to biblatex.bst. I'll send
> you the new version via PM.
>
> I generally recommend using bibtex8, though.
Got it, thank you.
>
>> Another thing I noticed: biblatex doesn't like "= in entries, or, to
>> be more precise, it prevents them from turning into a hyphen.
>
> That's a babel issue. You obviously need to load babel (which you most
> probably do) and, if you're using the "hyphenation" field and the
> "babel" package option, make sure you're using the right setting.
>
> \usepackage[babel=hypen]{biblatex}
>
> This will only switch hyphenation patterns.
>
> \usepackage[babel=other*]{biblatex}
>
> This will also activate babel's shorthands. See section 3.2.2 of
> the biblatex manual for details.
>
> Also see the babel manual. When using the "babel" package option,
> biblatex's behavior is strictly in line with the behavior of babel's
> language environments. This also applies to csquotes, btw.
Either I still don't get it, or this doesn't work as supposed.
The following example sill displays '"='
\documentclass{article}
\usepackage[utf8]{inputenc}
\usepackage[ngerman]{babel}
\usepackage[style=german, german=swiss]{csquotes}
\usepackage[babel=hyphen,style=authoryear,citeindex=true,hyperref=true,sorting=nyt]{biblatex}
\bibliography{germanistik2}
\begin{document}
\cite{Luckhurst.R:1994a}
\printbibliography
\end{document}
@article{Luckhurst.R:1994a,
Author
= {Luckhurst, Roger},
Date-Added = {2006-06-19 11:54:02 +0200},
Date-Modified = {2006-08-24 17:19:30 +0200},
Journal = {Science{"=}Fiction Studies},
Keywords = {Diss, Science Fiction, Rezeption, Tod der SF, Gernsback},
Number = {62},
hyphenation = {ngerman},
Pages = {35-50},
Read = {Yes},
Standort = {Online},
Title = {The Many Deaths of Science Fiction: A Polemic},
Volume = {21.1},
Year = {1994}}
I trued this with and withou brackets.
simon
Philipp Lehman
> Either I still don't get it, or this doesn't work as supposed.
I've looked into it and it turned out to be a bug in \printtext.
It will be fixed in the next release (due out soon).
Simon Spiegel
<devnull....@spamgourmet.com> said:
> Simon Spiegel wrote:
>
>> Either I still don't get it, or this doesn't work as supposed.
>
> I've looked into it and it turned out to be a bug in \printtext.
> It will be fixed in the next release (due out soon).
Thanks.
Still another question. I'm still not sure how I sort entries by title
(which I need for my filmography). Jurabib has the "sortkey" field
which overrules everything else. Although biblatex has different
sorting fields there seems to be no equivalent. Take the following two
entries:
@misc{Tarkovsky.A:1975,
Address = {SU},
Author = {Tarkowskij, Andrej},
Date-Modified = {2006-02-24 12:37:15 +0100},
Read = {Yes},
Shortauthor = {\textsc{Zerkalo} (1975)},
Sortname = {Zerkalo},
Subtitle = {Der Spiegel},
Title = {Zerkalo},
Year = {1975}}
@misc{Yearworth.I:1958,
Address = {USA},
Author = {Yearworth, Irvin S.},
Date-Modified = {2005-09-09 15:09:51 +0200},
Gelesen = {Yes},
Read = {Yes},
Shortauthor = {\textsc{The Blob} (1958)},
Sortname = {blob},
Standort = {FiWi: V691},
Subtitle = {Blob -- Schrecken ohne Namen},
Title = {The Blob},
Year = {1958}}
Here I juste replaced jurabib's 'Sortkey' with 'Sortname' but the
result is not the same, Zerkalo is sorted before "The Blob" and I'm not
really sure why.
Philipp Lehman
> Still another question. I'm still not sure how I sort entries by
> title (which I need for my filmography). Jurabib has the "sortkey"
> field which overrules everything else. Although biblatex has
> different sorting fields there seems to be no equivalent.
"sortname" is the closest match in terms of its position in the
sorting process. But keep in mind that it's a name list, not a
literal field. I'll probably add a "sortkey" field as well.
> Take the following two entries:
> Sortname = {Zerkalo},
> Sortname = {blob},
> Here I juste replaced jurabib's 'Sortkey' with 'Sortname' but the
> result is not the same, Zerkalo is sorted before "The Blob" and I'm
> not really sure why.
As strange as it may seem, this is not really a biblatex issue. If you
use "Blob" as the "sortname", it should work. Note that Bibtex sorts
lowercase letters after *all* uppercase letters. So the sorting order
is:
A
Z
a
z
In your example:
Blob
Zerkalo
blob
That's Ascii sort order. The way Bibtex sorts is in fact utterly
unsuitable for a bibliography. If you find that very weird, you're in
good company.
If it seems to be different with jurabib, that's probably because it
normalizes all sortkeys by converting them to lowercase. All
traditional bst files do that as well. Just in case you want to find
out more about that, try the following. Make a copy of plain.bst and
locate the "sortify" function. Change it from:
FUNCTION {sortify}
{ purify$
"l" change.case$
}
to:
FUNCTION {sortify}
{ purify$
}
This will expose Bibtex's internal sort order by removing the line
that converts the sort keys to lowercase and thereby masks it to some
extend. It leads to rather funny results.
I'm reluctant to apply the same normalization in biblatex.bst since
bibtex8 properly handles character case and can make use of the extra
information.
Did I already mention bibtex8, by the way?
Simon Spiegel
<devnull....@spamgourmet.com> said:
> Simon Spiegel wrote:
>
>> Still another question. I'm still not sure how I sort entries by
>> title (which I need for my filmography). Jurabib has the "sortkey"
>> field which overrules everything else. Although biblatex has
>> different sorting fields there seems to be no equivalent.
>
> "sortname" is the closest match in terms of its position in the
> sorting process. But keep in mind that it's a name list, not a
> literal field. I'll probably add a "sortkey" field as well.
I guess that would be really useful.
Thanks for clearing things up. I tried bibtex8 but at least the version
I use on OSX seems to be unable to handle my bibliography. Even with
option -W ("really huge bibtex capacity") I get a "Sorry---you've
exceeded BibTeX's total number of string entry-variables 10000".
simon
George N. White III
> Thanks for clearing things up. I tried bibtex8 but at least the version I use
> on OSX seems to be unable to handle my bibliography. Even with option -W
> ("really huge bibtex capacity") I get a "Sorry---you've exceeded BibTeX's
> total number of string entry-variables 10000".
You can increase individual limits above those set by "-W" with
command-line flags:
$ bibtex8 -?
Usage: bibtex [options] aux-file
Valid options are:
-? --help display this help text
-7 --traditional operate in the original 7-bit mode
-8 --8bit force 8-bit mode, no CS file used
-c --csfile FILE read FILE as the BibTeX character set
and sort definition file
-d --debug TYPE report debugging information. TYPE is one
or more of all, csf, io, mem, misc, search.
-s --statistics report internal statistics
-t --trace report execution tracing
-v --version report BibTeX version
-B --big set large BibTeX capacity
-H --huge set huge BibTeX capacity
-W --wolfgang set really huge BibTeX capacity for Wolfgang
-M --min_crossrefs ## set min_crossrefs to ##
--mcites ## allow ## \cites in the .aux files
--mentints ## allow ## integer entries in the .bib databases
--mentstrs ## allow ## string entries in the .bib databases
--mfields ## allow ## fields in the .bib databases
--mpool ## set the string pool to ## bytes
--mstrings ## allow ## unique strings
--mwizfuns ## allow ## wizard functions
--
George N. White III <aa...@chebucto.ns.ca>
Philipp Lehman
> On Sun, 1 Oct 2006, Simon Spiegel wrote:
>
>> Thanks for clearing things up. I tried bibtex8 but at least the
>> version I use on OSX seems to be unable to handle my bibliography.
>> Even with option -W ("really huge bibtex capacity") I get a
>> "Sorry---you've exceeded BibTeX's total number of string
>> entry-variables 10000".
>
> You can increase individual limits above those set by "-W" with
> command-line flags:
There's a cap for --mstrings which is probably too low for Simon even
with -W.
It should be possible to increase that at compile time, though. In
bibtex.h I see the following:
/***************************************************************************
* WEB section number: 14
* ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
* These parameters may be changed at compile time to extend or reduce
* BiBTeX's capacity. They are set to accommodate a maximum of about
750
* cites when used with the standard styles.
***************************************************************************/
#define MIN_PRINT_LINE 3
#define MAX_PRINT_LINE 79
#define AUX_STACK_SIZE 20
#define MAX_BIB_FILES 20
#define BUF_SIZE 3000
#define MAX_CITES 750
#define MAX_ENT_INTS 3000
#define MAX_ENT_STRS 3000
#define MAX_FIELDS 17250L
#define MAX_STRINGS 4000
#define POOL_SIZE 65000L
#define MIN_CROSSREFS 2
#define WIZ_FN_SPACE 5000
#define SINGLE_FN_SPACE 100
#define ENT_STR_SIZE 250
#define GLOB_STR_SIZE 1000
#define LIT_STK_SIZE 100
Simon Spiegel
<devnull....@spamgourmet.com> said:
> George N. White III wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 1 Oct 2006, Simon Spiegel wrote:
>>
>>> Thanks for clearing things up. I tried bibtex8 but at least the
>>> version I use on OSX seems to be unable to handle my bibliography.
>>> Even with option -W ("really huge bibtex capacity") I get a
>>> "Sorry---you've exceeded BibTeX's total number of string
>>> entry-variables 10000".
>>
>> You can increase individual limits above those set by "-W" with
>> command-line flags:
>
> There's a cap for --mstrings which is probably too low for Simon even
> with -W.
By tweaking about every option there is, I finally succeeded. I first
thought that -W would push everything to the limit, but as it turned
out -W in combinations with other options did the trick.
simon