On Sun, 18 Feb 2018 19:23:25 +0100
Hans Hagen
On 2/18/2018 7:07 PM, Rik Kabel wrote:
On 2018-02-18 12:23, Thomas A. Schmitz wrote:
On 02/18/2018 06:07 PM, Alan Braslau wrote:
title={The Cambridge Companion to {\em Ulysses}},
Alan, I think this was Rik Kabel's point: for some scenarios, you cannot avoid to have some sort of context commands in your bibtex file. For a while, I also used biblatex from time to time, so I tried to have a bibtex file that would be as clean as possible and work with both systems, but your example shows that this is not always possible. Well, nothing that some well-written perl couldn't get rid of...
All best
Thomas
Indeed, that was my point. Even without the mathematics components that were cited, I cannot imagine how markup could be excluded from the BibTeX file, and for that matter, from any other bibliographical database I have seen, if we have to comply with arbitrary formatting standards. The statement that one should not put any such formatting into the file is perhaps aspirational, but not really useful. If you code clean it's no problem as we can map commands (\btxcommand) but most (large) bibtex databases we've seen so far are quite inconsistent (not only in usage of commands, also in author names).
(And of course Thomas meant Lua and not Perl.)
The message was meant to be "don't abuse" markup in data; Don't attempt bibtex/latex hackery. As Hans mentions, \btxcommand was introduced to handle some formatting in bibtex entries that might be inconsistent or in conflict with standard ConTeXt commands. When no \btxcommand definition is found, the system falls-back on standard ConTeXt (or luatex) syntax. Sloppy bibtex files should be cleaned up, but the aim is to allow files to be shared with bibtex/latex (minus any hackery, which could/should be fixed in the bibtex style files, but usually is not). Alan