A submitted raw LaTeX file lacks bibliographic info

[Haines Brown]

When an article is submitted to a publisher, it asks for a LaTeX file
(several noteworthy publishers don't seem able to process XeLaTeX, which
forces me to convert). When the article is accepted, it sends the file
to a typesetter. How can the article be typeset if the typesetter has no
access to the my local bibiographic database that biber used to build
the .bbl file?

I offered to send the typesetter a the .bbl file. Would this be
sufficient for the typesetter to then run the LaTeX or XeLaTeX command
to imbed its information in the output file? That is, does the
XeLaTeX/LaTeX command automatically access a .bbl file if one is present
to build a Reference list? Is the .bcf or .blg file also needed?

Haines Brown

[Rolf Niepraschk]

You should send the final pdf file to the typesetter.

...Rolf

[Nicola Talbot]

I suggest you check with the publisher to find out if they will accept
the bib file along with the LaTeX code. If not you could replace
\bibliography{your-bib-file} with the contents of the .bbl file.

Regards
Nicola Talbot
--
Home: http://www.dickimaw-books.com/
Creating a LaTeX Minimal Example:
http://theoval.cmp.uea.ac.uk/~nlct/latex/minexample/

[Ulrike Fischer]

Am Tue, 23 Jul 2013 07:21:06 -0400 schrieb Haines Brown:

> That is, does the XeLaTeX/LaTeX command automatically access a
> .bbl file if one is present to build a Reference list? Is the
> .bcf or .blg file also needed?

Well why don't you simply test it? Put the tex and the bbl in a
folder and try out.


--
Ulrike Fischer
http://www.troubleshooting-tex.de/

[Haines Brown]

Rolf Niepraschk <Rolf.Ni...@gmx.de> writes:

> Am 23.07.2013 13:21, schrieb Haines Brown:
>> When an article is submitted to a publisher, it asks for a LaTeX file
>> (several noteworthy publishers don't seem able to process XeLaTeX, which
>> forces me to convert). When the article is accepted, it sends the file
>> to a typesetter. How can the article be typeset if the typesetter has no
>> access to the my local bibiographic database that biber used to build
>> the .bbl file?
>

> You should send the final pdf file to the typesetter.

Rolf, I assume the typesetter is typesetting electronically and not by
hand ;-) Wouldn't a PDF only allow manual typesetting from scratch? I'm
surprised that the review board seems to have accepted the article on
the basis of a pdf generated by its own software from just the simple
LaTeX file I sent them, and thus lacking in any reference
list. Strange. Surely a Reference list is important.

Do you have any thoughts on why some top journals can't accept XeLaTeX
files? I thought XeLaTeX was becoming fairly standard.

Haines

[Andrew]

When I have finalied a paper I always include the bbl file generated by bibtex directly into the tex file(and comment out the \bibliography{} command). This way there is no need to keep mutiple files lying round for the paper and the bibliogaphy is safeguarded against future changes to the bibtex files.

Andrew

[Sven Köhler]

On 23/07/13 14:21, Haines Brown wrote:
> When an article is submitted to a publisher, it asks for a LaTeX file
> (several noteworthy publishers don't seem able to process XeLaTeX, which
> forces me to convert). When the article is accepted, it sends the file
> to a typesetter. How can the article be typeset if the typesetter has no
> access to the my local bibiographic database that biber used to build
> the .bbl file?

Every publisher is different. Some let you submit a PDF file - other
want the latex source. If they would accept a *.tex file but no other
files (a book would probably consists of multiple *.tex files, some
*.sty and some *.bib files), that would seem very strange to me. Also,
there is probably no way to tell them to use biber instead of bibtex.
Also, you never know which (possibly outdated) version of latex they are
using.

Which publisher are you refering to, actually? For all journals and
conferences so far, I have uploaded all LaTeX sources (tex, bib, some
special sty) that were necessary to "compile" the document. So far, I
had no problems.

> I offered to send the typesetter a the .bbl file. Would this be
> sufficient for the typesetter to then run the LaTeX or XeLaTeX command
> to imbed its information in the output file? That is, does the
> XeLaTeX/LaTeX command automatically access a .bbl file if one is present
> to build a Reference list? Is the .bcf or .blg file also needed?

As far as I know, the .bbl file suffices. Why don't you simply test by
yourself? Copy all you sent to the publisher into a folder, and run
pdflatex.


Regards,
Sven

[Haines Brown]

Nicola Talbot <n.ta...@uea.ac.uk> writes:

> On 23/07/13 12:21, Haines Brown wrote:
>> I offered to send the typesetter a the .bbl file. Would this be
>> sufficient for the typesetter to then run the LaTeX or XeLaTeX command
>> to imbed its information in the output file? That is, does the
>> XeLaTeX/LaTeX command automatically access a .bbl file if one is present
>> to build a Reference list? Is the .bcf or .blg file also needed?
>>
>> Haines Brown

> I suggest you check with the publisher to find out if they will accept the
> bib file along with the LaTeX code. If not you could replace
> \bibliography{your-bib-file} with the contents of the .bbl file.

Nicola, it occurred to me that I might simply replace the
\printbibliography command with the contents of the .bbl file, and I
thank you for your assurrance that it can be done. I contacted the
typesetter to ask what might be acceptable to them.

Is it the usual practice for folks submitting journal articles to
dispose of the \bibliography{} or \printbibliography command and replace
it with raw BibTeX data?

Haines

[Sven Köhler]

On 23/07/13 16:20, Haines Brown wrote:
> Rolf Niepraschk <Rolf.Ni...@gmx.de> writes:
>
>> Am 23.07.2013 13:21, schrieb Haines Brown:
>>> When an article is submitted to a publisher, it asks for a LaTeX file
>>> (several noteworthy publishers don't seem able to process XeLaTeX, which
>>> forces me to convert). When the article is accepted, it sends the file
>>> to a typesetter. How can the article be typeset if the typesetter has no
>>> access to the my local bibiographic database that biber used to build
>>> the .bbl file?
>>
>> You should send the final pdf file to the typesetter.
>
> Rolf, I assume the typesetter is typesetting electronically and not by
> hand ;-) Wouldn't a PDF only allow manual typesetting from scratch? I'm
> surprised that the review board seems to have accepted the article on
> the basis of a pdf generated by its own software from just the simple
> LaTeX file I sent them, and thus lacking in any reference
> list. Strange. Surely a Reference list is important.

There are publishers, that basically take your PDF. Other publishers
redo the whole thing: they change the font, add header/fotter graphics
here and there, change the page geometry, and what not.

> Do you have any thoughts on why some top journals can't accept XeLaTeX
> files? I thought XeLaTeX was becoming fairly standard.

My impression is that lualatex will become the new standard - and
xelatex is pretty much dead. I might have the wrong perspective though.

Beside that, publishers are pretty much a black box. Nobody knows what
goes on inside. They might not even be aware of alternatives like
xelatex or lualatex.


Regards,
Sven

[Nicola Talbot]

It depends on the journal. When I do any production editing, I prefer
authors to provide a .bib file as it fits my workflow and makes it
easier to ensure consistency in the bibliography layout for all the
articles. My main gripe is when authors submit a .bib file that contains
several thousand entries when there are only 30 or 40 cited in the
article. (That may be why some typesetters prefer to have the contents
of the bbl file copied into the LaTeX source code.)

Best regards

[Ulrike Fischer]

Am Tue, 23 Jul 2013 09:29:18 -0400 schrieb Haines Brown:

>
> Nicola, it occurred to me that I might simply replace the
> \printbibliography command with the contents of the .bbl file, and I
> thank you for your assurrance that it can be done. I contacted the
> typesetter to ask what might be acceptable to them.

If you are using biblatex you can't replace \printbibliography by
the content of the bbl. This works only with bbl generated by the
standard bibtex/style combination. \printbibliography does a lot of
post processing.

[us...@domain.invalid]

Hello Sven

The submission formats/TeX engines supported journals/publishers is
often determined by the online submission/peer review system they use
--- such as ScholarOne or Editorial Manager, to name but 2 (there are
many others). If the vendors of such systems add support for new TeX
engines then so too could the journals/publishers that use them.

Best

Graham Douglas
http://readytext.co.uk

[Sven Köhler]

On 23/07/13 17:56, us...@domain.invalid wrote:
> The submission formats/TeX engines supported journals/publishers is
> often determined by the online submission/peer review system they use
> --- such as ScholarOne or Editorial Manager, to name but 2 (there are
> many others). If the vendors of such systems add support for new TeX
> engines then so too could the journals/publishers that use them.

True! It could also be, that the developers of such systems wait until
the first publisher requests supports for other TeX engines.

[us...@domain.invalid]

In my experience it's likely to require more than 1 publisher to bring
about such change, unless that 1 publisher is very large and influential
with these vendors. Almost certainly, the starting point would be
sustained lobbying by authors, especially influential/high profile
authors that journals want or need to publish. However, there's also the
need to look through the whole production workflow, from submission
right through to offshore typesetting (i.e., usually India) and
full-text XML article production. Any "new TeX engine" would need to be
evaluated in the context of specific publisher/offshore vendor
production capabilities/workflows, of course.

Best
Graham
http://readytext.co.uk

[Haines Brown]

Sven Köhler <remove-sv...@gmail.com> writes:

> On 23/07/13 14:21, Haines Brown wrote:
>> When an article is submitted to a publisher, it asks for a LaTeX file
>> (several noteworthy publishers don't seem able to process XeLaTeX, which
>> forces me to convert).

> Also, there is probably no way to tell them to use biber instead of
> bibtex. Also, you never know which (possibly outdated) version of
> latex they are using.
>
> Which publisher are you refering to, actually? For all journals and
> conferences so far, I have uploaded all LaTeX sources (tex, bib, some
> special sty) that were necessary to "compile" the document. So far, I had
> no problems.

> As far as I know, the .bbl file suffices. Why don't you simply test by
> yourself? Copy all you sent to the publisher into a folder, and run
> pdflatex.

Springer merely asked me to upload a tex file, and that was what I did,
although I could have added other files had I wanted. Perhaps had I
uploaded a .bbl file at same time Springer's program would have picked
it up.

I tried to comment the \printbibliography command and insert in its
place the content of the .bbl, but it didn't go well. Minor problems:
ispell wanted to run automatically, which took time, and characters that
had diacritics not understood. However, the main problem is that the
command \sortlist{entry}{nyt} in the .bbl was unknown, "Undefined
control sequence".

Biber does not generate any .bib file, which might have done better.
Perhaps if I get rid of the pointer to biber in the preamble and instead
rely on bibtex and supply the typesetter with a .bib file that would
work.

Haines

[Dieter Britz]

On Tue, 23 Jul 2013 09:29:18 -0400, Haines Brown wrote:
[...]

> Is it the usual practice for folks submitting journal articles to
> dispose of the \bibliography{} or \printbibliography command and replace
> it with raw BibTeX data?

It is my practice to insert the bbl file and it works fine.

--
Dieter Britz

[Sven Köhler]

On 23/07/13 20:44, Haines Brown wrote:
> Sven Köhler <remove-sv...@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> On 23/07/13 14:21, Haines Brown wrote:
>>> When an article is submitted to a publisher, it asks for a LaTeX file
>>> (several noteworthy publishers don't seem able to process XeLaTeX, which
>>> forces me to convert).
>
>> Also, there is probably no way to tell them to use biber instead of
>> bibtex. Also, you never know which (possibly outdated) version of
>> latex they are using.
>>
>> Which publisher are you refering to, actually? For all journals and
>> conferences so far, I have uploaded all LaTeX sources (tex, bib, some
>> special sty) that were necessary to "compile" the document. So far, I had
>> no problems.
>
>> As far as I know, the .bbl file suffices. Why don't you simply test by
>> yourself? Copy all you sent to the publisher into a folder, and run
>> pdflatex.
>
> Springer merely asked me to upload a tex file, and that was what I did,
> although I could have added other files had I wanted. Perhaps had I
> uploaded a .bbl file at same time Springer's program would have picked
> it up.

Is it a Springer Journal that uses the Editorial Manager? If so, upload
the *.tex and everything that's needed to build it. You will certainly
face problems if you upload the *.bib file, as the Editorial Manager
will probably run bibtex instead of biber. It has worked for me a number
of times.

I don't even know whether they have biblatex installed (they might not
have). And since the Editorial Manager may run bibtex, it may actually
overwrite your bbl file by doing so. So I hereby revert my previous
comment, that including the bbl file should work.

If you're unlucky, they don't have biblatex installed - but even if they
do, your upload will be more likely to work if you use bibtex as a backend.

> I tried to comment the \printbibliography command and insert in its
> place the content of the .bbl, but it didn't go well. Minor problems:
> ispell wanted to run automatically, which took time, and characters that
> had diacritics not understood. However, the main problem is that the
> command \sortlist{entry}{nyt} in the .bbl was unknown, "Undefined
> control sequence".

As Ulrike pointed out, \printbibliography does a lot more than just load
the bbl file.

> Biber does not generate any .bib file, which might have done better.
> Perhaps if I get rid of the pointer to biber in the preamble and instead
> rely on bibtex and supply the typesetter with a .bib file that would
> work.

What do you mean by "biber does not generate any .bib file"? Certainly
you already have a *.bib file, right?

Also, what happens if the publisher starts editing your *.bib file. I
mean, certain field names are different or typeset differently.

Also, how did you mimic Springer's bibliography style with biblatex?
Springer provides you with a documentclass and a bst file, that you
should also use!

I think, the best would be if you switch from biblatex to just bibtex.


Regards,
Sven

[Haines Brown]

My attempt to do so failed, and so can I ask for specifics? The bbl file
begins with the lines:

% $ biblatex auxiliary file $
% $ biblatex bbl format version 2.1 $
% Do not modify the above lines!

These I omitted. Then came

\begingroup
\makeatletter
\@ifundefined{v...@biblatex.sty}
{\@latex@error
{Missing 'biblatex' package}
{The bibliography requires the 'biblatex' package.}
\aftergroup\endinput}
{}
\endgroup

The above material I included. The remainder of the .bbl was enclosed by:

\refsection{0}
\sortlist{entry}{nyt}
...
\endsortlist
\endrefsection
\endinput

Othewise the .bbl file consists of stanzas for each citation:

\entry{key}{nyt}
...
\endentry

Just what did you include in place the the \printbibiography command? In
my preface I have:

\usepackage[backend=biber,style=authoryear,sorting=nyt]{biblatex} %

Do you also specify biber like this?

Haines

[Haines Brown]

Sven Köhler <remove-sv...@gmail.com> writes:

> On 23/07/13 20:44, Haines Brown wrote:
>> Sven Köhler <remove-sv...@gmail.com> writes:
>>
>>> On 23/07/13 14:21, Haines Brown wrote:
>> Springer merely asked me to upload a tex file, and that was what I did,
>> although I could have added other files had I wanted. Perhaps had I
>> uploaded a .bbl file at same time Springer's program would have picked
>> it up.
>
> Is it a Springer Journal that uses the Editorial Manager? If so, upload the
> *.tex and everything that's needed to build it. You will certainly face
> problems if you upload the *.bib file, as the Editorial Manager will
> probably run bibtex instead of biber. It has worked for me a number of
> times.

If I recall, it used Editorial Manager. Not realizing that obiously
other files would be needed than what was asked for was my fault. Am I
correct to infer from your comments that the most conservative approach
would be to specify bibtex as backend and to supply the .bbl file. I'll
try that with the typesetter.

>> Biber does not generate any .bib file, which might have done better.
>> Perhaps if I get rid of the pointer to biber in the preamble and instead
>> rely on bibtex and supply the typesetter with a .bib file that would
>> work.
>
> What do you mean by "biber does not generate any .bib file"? Certainly you
> already have a *.bib file, right?

No, I don't. In the preamble I have:

\documentclass[12pt,titlepage]{article}%
\usepackage[utf8]{inputenc} %
...
\usepackage[backend=biber,style=authoryear,sorting=nyt]{biblatex} %

> Also, how did you mimic Springer's bibliography style with biblatex?
> Springer provides you with a documentclass and a bst file, that you should
> also use!

I expected to be directed to those file, but that didn't happen. I
assumed the question of style would be addressed after article
review. Instead Springer simply shipped if off to the typesetter without
support for a list of references. Not only that, but I had originally
made the submission anonymous by sending separate title and body .tex
files, and they simply shipped the two files to the typesetter, much to
his confusion.

Sven, thank you for your comments. It looks like I'd better get the
Springer style files and use then for an integrated .tex file that
relies on bibtex backend, and then send it to the typesetter along with
the .bbl file.

Haines

[Nicola Talbot]

I think you need to refer back to Ulrike's answer. You can replace
\bibliography with the contents of the .bbl file but you can't do
likewise with \printbibliography. (I'm sorry I didn't pick up on that in
my earlier answer.)

[Sven Köhler]

On 24/07/13 15:36, Haines Brown wrote:
> I expected to be directed to those file, but that didn't happen. I
> assumed the question of style would be addressed after article
> review.

That depends on the author instructions of your journal.
The Springer journal I submitted to had instructions that told me to
download a ZIP file which contained svjour3.cls and various bibtex styles.

> Instead Springer simply shipped if off to the typesetter without
> support for a list of references. Not only that, but I had originally
> made the submission anonymous by sending separate title and body .tex
> files, and they simply shipped the two files to the typesetter, much to
> his confusion.

That is odd!

Personally, I have always uploaded .tex + .bib but no .bbl file to the
Editorial Manager, but I have been using bibtex instead of biblatex.
That worked in the sense that the PDF file generated by the Editorial
Manager included the references.

> Sven, thank you for your comments. It looks like I'd better get the
> Springer style files and use then for an integrated .tex file that
> relies on bibtex backend, and then send it to the typesetter along with
> the .bbl file.

As I pointed out in my previous post, uploading a .bbl but no .bib file
might or might not work, depending on whether bibtex overwrites the .bbl
file. If bibtex is run accidently (either by the Editorial Manager
software or the TypeSetter), bibtex will state that there has been an
error opening the .bib file and then exit. The question is: does bibtex
overwrite the .bbl file before exiting, or does it not?


Regards,
Sven

[Haines Brown]

Sven Köhler <remove-sv...@gmail.com> writes:

> On 24/07/13 15:36, Haines Brown wrote:
>> I expected to be directed to those file, but that didn't happen. I
>> assumed the question of style would be addressed after article
>> review.
>
> That depends on the author instructions of your journal.
> The Springer journal I submitted to had instructions that told me to
> download a ZIP file which contained svjour3.cls and various bibtex styles.

Interesting. I recheched back with Springer's "Instructions for Authors"
for the Axiomathes journal, and nothing was mentioned about style,
although they provided plenty of specific directions about style.

> Personally, I have always uploaded .tex + .bib but no .bbl file to the
> Editorial Manager, but I have been using bibtex instead of biblatex. That
> worked in the sense that the PDF file generated by the Editorial Manager
> included the references.

I've rebuilt the article to use bibtex, and everything seems to be
running smoothly. However, it generates a .bbl and .blg, and does so
by extracing from multiple huge .bib databases. Obviously I cannot sent
these databases to the typesetter, but I gather there's a way to
generate a .bib file just for the document. Not sure how.

Haines

[Sven Köhler]

On 24/07/13 18:58, Haines Brown wrote:
> Sven Köhler <remove-sv...@gmail.com> writes:

>> That depends on the author instructions of your journal.
>> The Springer journal I submitted to had instructions that told me to
>> download a ZIP file which contained svjour3.cls and various bibtex styles.
>
> Interesting. I recheched back with Springer's "Instructions for Authors"
> for the Axiomathes journal, and nothing was mentioned about style,
> although they provided plenty of specific directions about style.

I took a look at their instructions, and in deed: no document class or
bibtex style. The available article look like A5 size to me. The
articles look like they are typeset with svjour3 document class:
ftp://ftp.springer.de/pub/tex/latex/svjour3/

Take a look at the A5 examples. They should be what you need.


The instructions of the Distributed Computing journal for example
provides you with a ZIP which contains svjour3.cls and the bibtex
styles. And it uses A4 2 column style.


Regards,
Sven

[Herbert Schulz]

Howdy,

After playing around a bit I can get a file using biblatex + biber to
compile properly without the original .bib file if I include the .bbl,
.bcf, .blg and .run.xml files for the complete compile I did at home.

--
Good Luck,
Herb Schulz

[jon]

On Wednesday, 24 July 2013 11:58:04 UTC-4, Haines Brown wrote:
> I've rebuilt the article to use bibtex, and everything seems to be
> running smoothly. However, it generates a .bbl and .blg, and does so
> by extracing from multiple huge .bib databases. Obviously I cannot sent
> these databases to the typesetter, but I gather there's a way to
> generate a .bib file just for the document. Not sure how.

check out bibtool. it works well with the .aux files generated
from a latex-bibtex workflow. with biber/biblatex, i find it less
useful, unfortunately. i feel like biber should be able to output
a mini .bib file from a master bibliography all on its own, but i
haven't looked into that. but note that biber can re-encode and
output a .bib file (from a non-ascii one) that is bibtex friendly.

cheers,
jon.

[Julien Salort]

Haines Brown <hai...@histomat.net> wrote:

> Is it the usual practice for folks submitting journal articles to
> dispose of the \bibliography{} or \printbibliography command and replace
> it with raw BibTeX data?

That is what I have always done and they never complained about it.

Besides, I am not sure that they even use latex at all (at least in the
AIP journals I've published in). My impression was that they somehow
convert the tex file into their own xml format and don't use latex at
all for typesetting.

--
Julien Salort

[Haines Brown]

li...@juliensalort.org (Julien Salort) writes:

> Haines Brown <hai...@histomat.net> wrote:
>
>> Is it the usual practice for folks submitting journal articles to
>> dispose of the \bibliography{} or \printbibliography command and replace
>> it with raw BibTeX data?
>
> That is what I have always done and they never complained about it.

Well, at least that's simple. How then do you create the needed BibTeX
stanzas? Surely not by hand, and so presumably it is by somehow
converting the .bbl file into a .bib file. Is there a utility or command
to do it? And how then is the reference list styled?

Haines

[Haines Brown]

jon <jonwro...@gmail.com> writes:

> On Wednesday, 24 July 2013 11:58:04 UTC-4, Haines Brown wrote:
>> I've rebuilt the article to use bibtex, and everything seems to be
>> running smoothly. However, it generates a .bbl and .blg, and does so
>> by extracing from multiple huge .bib databases. Obviously I cannot
>> sent these databases to the typesetter, but I gather there's a way to
>> generate a .bib file just for the document. Not sure how.
>
> check out bibtool. it works well with the .aux files generated
> from a latex-bibtex workflow. with biber/biblatex, i find it less
> useful, unfortunately.

I did check out bibtool, and it does generate a .bib file by drawing
data from an .aux file. Thank you, for that basically solved the
problem.

$ bibtool -s -x foo.aux -o foo.bib

However, I wanted to remove certain fields such as Abstract, Comment
and Review because they can be huge and irrelevant. To do this I may
need:

delete.field={abstract,comment,review}

Are these fields comma separated? But what do I do with this? I suspect
it should be appended in the biber.conf file, perhaps in a <map> stanza.

> i feel like biber should be able to output a mini .bib file from a
> master bibliography all on its own, but i haven't looked into that.
> but note that biber can re-encode and output a .bib file (from a
> non-ascii one) that is bibtex friendly.

In my stumbling about with this issue I encountered a suggestion that if
biber is in tool mode (biber called with --tool foo.bib, but I see no
indication of such a mode in the manual), it can generate a .bib file if
this is appended into biber.conf and telling biber of it with the -g
option (I see no such option in man biber). I only pass this along for
your interest with no suggestion it actually works:

<config>
<sourcemap>
<maps datatype="bibtex" map_overwrite="1">
<map>
<map_step map_field_source="entrykey" \
map_match="^(?!(?:key1|key2))" \
map_final="1"/>
<map_step map_entry_null="1"/>
</map>
</maps>
</sourcemap>
</config>

Haines

[Julien Salort]

Haines Brown <hai...@histomat.net> wrote:

> Well, at least that's simple. How then do you create the needed BibTeX
> stanzas? Surely not by hand, and so presumably it is by somehow
> converting the .bbl file into a .bib file. Is there a utility or command
> to do it? And how then is the reference list styled?

They usually provide a template, RevTeX documentclass for AIP journals,
as well as bibtex styles. So you don't really have the choice to decide
what to use.

I have always used pdflatex+bibtex for papers (I use biblatex, lualatex
and fancy things only for documents that I don't have to give to a
journal). For the figures that use TikZ or anything fancy, a seperate
PDF file has to be generated (they ask for one PDF or EPS file for each
figure anyway).

Hence, I usually comment out the \bibliography macro and copy-paste the
content of the bbl file instead, just before sending the tex file to the
journal.

From what I understand, we should not assume that they actually use
LaTeX at all. They probably convert the tex file to whatever format is
useful to them...

--
Julien Salort

[Haines Brown]

li...@juliensalort.org (Julien Salort) writes:

> They usually provide a template, RevTeX documentclass for AIP
> journals, as well as bibtex styles. So you don't really have the
> choice to decide what to use.

Yes, but my problem so far is that the publisher in the case of this
journal did not refer to any bibtex style beyond some general
guidelines. I wrote them a note but have not heard back yet.

> I have always used pdflatex+bibtex for papers (I use biblatex,
> lualatex and fancy things only for documents that I don't have to give
> to a journal). For the figures that use TikZ or anything fancy, a
> seperate PDF file has to be generated (they ask for one PDF or EPS
> file for each figure anyway).

I use XeLaTeX for all sorts of things, but article submission is
apparently another matter. In light of what you say I might start using
LuaLaTeX after all. The reason for my using XeLaTeX was that I thought
it was more widely used and settled.

> Hence, I usually comment out the \bibliography macro and copy-paste
> the content of the bbl file instead, just before sending the tex file
> to the journal.

I'm surprised to learn that you can simply paste the .bbl file. Do you
paste it in its entirety? It didn't look to me like something LaTeX
could handle, but apparently I'm mistaken. One minor problem with this
procedure is that my abstract and review fields are often huge. It would
be nice to expunge them somehow before pasting.

> From what I understand, we should not assume that they actually use
> LaTeX at all. They probably convert the tex file to whatever format is
> useful to them...

I suppose to XML. If so wonder if the publisher then leaves setting
style in the hands of the typographer.

In my exploration I came upon BibTool, and playing with it to find it
readily pulls data from the .aux file to construct a .bib file for the
document. Then it seems I only need to change the original tex file to
use this .bib file. I'm hoping to figure out how to have it remove the
abstract and review fields as it does so.

Haines

[Jellby]

Haines Brown wrote:

>> Hence, I usually comment out the \bibliography macro and copy-paste
>> the content of the bbl file instead, just before sending the tex file
>> to the journal.
>
> I'm surprised to learn that you can simply paste the .bbl file. Do you
> paste it in its entirety? It didn't look to me like something LaTeX
> could handle, but apparently I'm mistaken. One minor problem with this
> procedure is that my abstract and review fields are often huge. It would
> be nice to expunge them somehow before pasting.

Note that you should paste the .bbl file, not the .bib

The .bbl file is the bibliography once processed by bibtex, it should
contain only the references and fields that are actually used in your
article+style.

--
Ignacio __ Fernández Galván
/ /\
Linux user / / \
#289967 / / /\ \ PGP Pub Key
/ / /\ \ \ 0x01A95F99
/ /_/__\ \ \
/________\ \ \
jellby \___________\/ yahoo.com