Re: DOCBOOK-APPS: Re: Bibliography management/BibTex equivalent

[Mark Wroth <mark@astrid.upland.ca.us>]

BibTeX allows any fields  in any entry.  Each bibliography style then 
parses the fields into "required", "optional", and "ignored", and provides 
typesetting rules for the required and optional fields.  Any field that is 
neither required nor optional is treated as ignored.

         The operational advantage of this is that I can (with a certain 
amount of effort :-) define a new style that takes advantage of fields not 
present in the standard styles, or even define new entry types.

         That strikes me as a good model for the problem in DocBook.


At 02.01.24 16:04 -0800, Bernd Kreimeier wrote:
>Jirka Kosek wrote:
> > I plan to add support for ISO 690 rendering of biblioentryes. However it
> > is pretty down on my to-do list. And as Norm said, it is very hard to
> > handle all possible combinations of biblioentry content.
>
>I would guess that BibTex for that reason defined a small number of
>distinct entry types with mostly required fields, instead of permitting
>all permutations.
>
>                                                     b.

Mark Wroth
<mark@astrid.upland.ca.us>