using Springer's svjour3 with NatBib, \citet, \citep and spphys for .bbl

[Phillip Helbig (undress to reply)]

The template says to use

\documentclass[smallextended,natbib]{svjour3}

and

\bibliographystyle{spphys}

However, the \citet command doesn't work.

Someone suggested adding

\bibpunct[,]{[}{]}{,}{n}{,}{,}

but that doesn't solve my problem.

I can get something to look like the expected output via the following
hack:

1) run LaTeX normally with natbib explicit, i.e.

\documentclass[smallextended]{svjour3}

\usepackage[square,numbers]{natbib}

including BibTeX and then running LaTeX twice again

2) use unsrtnat.sty to generate a new .bbl via .bbl (run LaTeX, run
BibTeX)

3) run LaTeX with new .bbl

4) replace new bbl with old

5) run LaTeX

The resulting .DVI (and hence .PS and .PDF) look fine. That's enough
for submission. Unfortunately, like many journals, they don't actually
use LaTeX for production, but still want my LaTeX .tex and .bbl (and
maybe .bib) files. If I supply them, I would like a standard LaTeX
installation to be able to process them and produce the desired output
withouth any hacks. It is OK if I have different commands in the .tex
file than in the template regarding package use, options, etc.

[Phillip Helbig (undress to reply)]

In article <s9dg19$1evn$1...@gioia.aioe.org>,
hel...@asclothestro.multivax.de (Phillip Helbig (undress to reply))
writes:

> The template says to use
>
> \documentclass[smallextended,natbib]{svjour3}
>
> and
>
> \bibliographystyle{spphys}
>
> However, the \citet command doesn't work.

> I can get something to look like the expected output via the following
> hack:

Here is a shorter description of the hack:

1) Use

\documentclass[smallextended]{svjour3}
\usepackage[square,numbers]{natbib}

instead of above.

2) standard processing: latex, bibtex, latex, latex

3) change bibliography style to unsrtnat

4) latex, bibtex, latex

5) replace new.bbl with old

6) change bibliography style back to spphys

7) latex