Re: [O] org-exp-bibtex missing in git?

[Thomas S. Dye]

Jambunathan K <address@hidden> writes:

>
> I am not clear about:
>
> 1. How multiple keys are to be handled.
> 2. What prenotes or postnotes mean.
> 3. Chicago note style etc.
>
>
> I think the community should answer and articulate 1, 2, 3 clearly.
> With my proposal, there could be some minor changes in Footnotes
> normalization and some minor changes in existing transcoders.

1. One approach to multiple keys is "qualified citation lists", see
section 3.7.3 of _The biblatex Package Programmable Bibliographies and
Citations by Philipp Lehman_ (`texdoc biblatex' on my Mac).

2. (see Lehman 2012:92 for an explanation of prenotes and postnotes).
    ^^^                ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
  prenote               postnote

3. BibLaTeX ships with several standard styles, which can be used as
starting points for writing specific styles required by publishers.  See
section 3.3 of the BibLaTeX manual.  For an idea of what it takes to
support the Chicago style, please see the 129 page manual for the
biblatex-chicago style (http://www.ctan.org/pkg/biblatex-chicago).  This
package supports both the "author-date" system used in the sciences and
the "notes & bibliography" system used in the humanities.  (Jambunathan,
for your reference, the paper I sent you uses the "notes & bibliography"
system--it was written in Org-mode and formatted with LaTeX and BibLaTeX.)

We use the Chicago Manual of Style at work and the BibTeX approximation
of the Chicago bibliography and reference styles.  I looked at
biblatex-chicago several years ago and had to let it go because of the
heavy data requirements.  In particular, the changes needed for the .bib
database broke other styles that we thought we might use.  Apparently,
it's not possible to design a data table that supports all the
bibliography styles that one might want to use.

hth,
Tom


-- 
Thomas S. Dye
http://www.tsdye.com