Dear all (and esp. Taco), in March 2005, there was a discussion about having multiple bibliographies in one document, very much like with the LaTeX package chapterbib. I may be missing something obvious, but I'm wondering whether this is now possible with Taco's module. Maybe a bit of background, and please tell me if you think this is a stupid idea: every term, I have to prepare lists of references for my several classes, and there usually is a lot of repetition and overlap. So I'm dreaming of having one big bibtex database and producing the lists via assorted \nocite commands. But i usually split up these bibliographies into several sections, and I want all items numbered in sequence, so I have in my source: \section{One} \nocite[myfirst] \nocite[mysecond] \placepublications \section{Two} \nocite[mythird] \nocite[myfourth] \placepublications to get this output: A. One [1] myfirst publication [2] mysecond publication B. Two [3] mythird publication [4] myfourth publication Is this reasonable? feasible? Or should I just use the old approach and copy/paste the same references into \itemize lists? Help and opinions appreciated! Thomas
On Tue, 5 Sep 2006, Thomas A. Schmitz wrote:
Dear all (and esp. Taco), Maybe a bit of background, and please tell me if you think this is a stupid idea: every term, I have to prepare lists of references for my several classes, and there usually is a lot of repetition and overlap. So I'm dreaming of having one big bibtex database and producing the lists via assorted \nocite commands. But i usually split up these bibliographies into several sections, and I want all items numbered in sequence, so I have in my source:
\section{One}
\nocite[myfirst] \nocite[mysecond]
\placepublications
\section{Two}
\nocite[mythird] \nocite[myfourth]
\placepublications
I do not know anything about feasibility, but have a suggestion for the input syntax. How about if there is \definecitemethod[one] \definecitemethod[two] after which you can do \cite[method=one][myfirst] or \nocite[method=one][mysecond] and also \cite[method={one,two}][ref] and so on. And to obtain a list of bibliographies, do \placepublications[method=one] I am not sure whether this is same as how criteria works right now. Do you think that a syntax like this makes sense? Aditya
Hi guys, Aditya Mahajan wrote:
On Tue, 5 Sep 2006, Thomas A. Schmitz wrote:
Dear all (and esp. Taco), Maybe a bit of background, and please tell me if you think this is a stupid idea: every term, I have to prepare lists of references for my several classes, and there usually is a lot of repetition and overlap. So I'm dreaming of having one big bibtex database and producing the lists via assorted \nocite commands. But i usually split up these bibliographies into several sections, and I want all items numbered in sequence, so I have in my source:
This should work except that the numbers in the second \placepublications will probably restart at 1 with the current version. That would be easy to fix, so if you send me a small test file I can easily add a no-reset switch.
I do not know anything about feasibility, but have a suggestion for the input syntax. How about if there is
\definecitemethod[one] \definecitemethod[two]
I have to think about that. It sounds useful, but I am not sure off-hand how to make it work. Cheers, Taco
Taco, I played some more with the patched version you sent yesterday, and everything seems to be working as desired, thanks a lot! So, AFAICS, this is ready to roll and become part of the module. On Sep 6, 2006, at 8:17 AM, Taco Hoekwater wrote:
This should work except that the numbers in the second \placepublications will probably restart at 1 with the current version. That would be easy to fix, so if you send me a small test file I can easily add a no-reset switch.
I do not know anything about feasibility, but have a suggestion for the input syntax. How about if there is
\definecitemethod[one] \definecitemethod[two]
I have to think about that. It sounds useful, but I am not sure off-hand how to make it work.
Cheers, Taco
Aditya, thanks for your suggestion. This would allow us not only to have per-chapter bibliographies, but several bibliographies, if I understand you right? Would be a very useful thing, I agree, but the solution for my question turned out to be a lot easier. Thanks, and best Thomas
participants (3)
-
Aditya Mahajan -
Taco Hoekwater -
Thomas A. Schmitz