GNU bug report logs - #16781
24.3; bibtex required fields

Previous Next

To add a comment to this bug, you must first unarchive it, by sending
a message to control AT debbugs.gnu.org, with unarchive 16781 in the body.
You can then email your comments to 16781 AT debbugs.gnu.org in the normal way.

Toggle the display of automated, internal messages from the tracker.

Message #5 received at submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: starback <at> stp.lingfil.uu.se (Per Starbäck)
To: bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org
Subject: 24.3; bibtex required fields
Date: Mon, 17 Feb 2014 17:12:31 +0100

In GNU Emacs 24.3.1,
bibtex-biblatex-entry-alist in lisp/textmodes/bibtex.el tells about
required and optional fields in biblatex, refering to biblatex
documentation.

In the development version of biblatex this was recently changed in the edit
https://github.com/plk/biblatex/commit/b23f504d9138feb4faa2148de6e059d43c43405c

This diff follows suite for Emacs:

----------------------------------------------------------------------
$ diff -u /local/src/emacs-24.3/lisp/textmodes/bibtex.el bibtex-fixed.el
--- /local/src/emacs-24.3/lisp/textmodes/bibtex.el	2013-01-01 21:37:17.000000000 +0100
+++ bibtex-fixed.el	2014-02-17 17:06:19.147293472 +0100
@@ -546,9 +546,9 @@
       ("location") ("isbn") ("pagetotal") ("addendum") ("pubstate") ("doi")
       ("eprint") ("eprintclass") ("eprinttype") ("url") ("urldate")))
     ("InCollection" "Article in a Collection"
-     (("author") ("editor") ("title") ("year" nil nil 0) ("date" nil nil 0))
+     (("author") ("title") ("year" nil nil 0) ("date" nil nil 0))
      (("booktitle"))
-     (("editora") ("editorb") ("editorc") ("translator") ("annotator")
+     (("editor") ("editora") ("editorb") ("editorc") ("translator") ("annotator")
       ("commentator") ("introduction") ("foreword") ("afterword")
       ("subtitle") ("titleaddon") ("maintitle") ("mainsubtitle")
       ("maintitleaddon") ("booksubtitle") ("booktitleaddon")
@@ -616,10 +616,11 @@
       ("addendum") ("pubstate") ("doi") ("eprint") ("eprintclass")
       ("eprinttype") ("url") ("urldate")))
     ("Proceedings" "Single-Volume Conference Proceedings"
-     (("editor") ("title") ("year" nil nil 0) ("date" nil nil 0))
+     (("title") ("year" nil nil 0) ("date" nil nil 0))
      nil
      (("subtitle") ("titleaddon") ("maintitle") ("mainsubtitle")
       ("maintitleaddon") ("eventtitle") ("eventdate") ("venue") ("language")
+      ("editor")
       ("volume") ("part") ("volumes") ("series") ("number") ("note")
       ("organization") ("publisher") ("location") ("month")
       ("isbn") ("chapter") ("pages") ("pagetotal") ("addendum") ("pubstate")
@@ -633,9 +634,9 @@
       ("isbn") ("pagetotal") ("addendum") ("pubstate")
       ("doi") ("eprint") ("eprintclass") ("eprinttype") ("url") ("urldate")))
     ("InProceedings" "Article in Conference Proceedings"
-     (("author") ("editor") ("title") ("year" nil nil 0) ("date" nil nil 0))
+     (("author") ("title") ("year" nil nil 0) ("date" nil nil 0))
      (("booktitle"))
-     (("subtitle") ("titleaddon") ("maintitle") ("mainsubtitle")
+     (("editor") ("subtitle") ("titleaddon") ("maintitle") ("mainsubtitle")
       ("maintitleaddon") ("booksubtitle") ("booktitleaddon")
       ("eventtitle") ("eventdate") ("venue") ("language")
       ("volume") ("part") ("volumes") ("series") ("number") ("note")
----------------------------------------------------------------------

There is actually nothing in biblatex that upholds this distinction
between required and optional arguments, so it's only a documentation
thing, and (as the documentation says), the bibliography styles can
actually handle data very well that lack for example these "required"
fields.

Because of that there's no need to wait for a released version
where this documentation change has taken place, I think. The biblatex
issue is at https://github.com/plk/biblatex/issues/199 for more details
about this.

Message #8 received at 16781 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Glenn Morris <rgm <at> gnu.org>
To: starback <at> stp.lingfil.uu.se (Per Starbäck)
Cc: 16781 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#16781: 24.3; bibtex required fields
Date: Mon, 17 Feb 2014 13:09:07 -0500

Per Starbäck wrote:

> In the development version of biblatex this was recently changed in the edit

I'm a bit confused. You talk about both bibtex and biblatex.
bibtex is part of Emacs.
I thought biblatex was part of AUCTeX:
http://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/auctex.git/commit/style/biblatex.el

So I'm not sure whose github repository that is, nor why it says: "This
is the current home of biblatex as the status of the author of biblatex
is currently unclear."

Message #11 received at 16781 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Glenn Morris <rgm <at> gnu.org>
To: starback <at> stp.lingfil.uu.se (Per Starbäck)
Cc: 16781 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#16781: 24.3; bibtex required fields
Date: Fri, 21 Feb 2014 15:30:56 -0500

Glenn Morris wrote:

>> In the development version of biblatex this was recently changed in the edit
>
> I'm a bit confused. You talk about both bibtex and biblatex.
> bibtex is part of Emacs.
> I thought biblatex was part of AUCTeX:
> http://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/auctex.git/commit/style/biblatex.el

Oh, duh, I get it now. You were talking about biblatex; for some
inexplicable reason I thought you were talking about biblatex.el.
I have no idea why I thought that...

Message #14 received at 16781 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: starback <at> stp.lingfil.uu.se (Per Starbäck)
To: Glenn Morris <rgm <at> gnu.org>
Cc: 16781 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#16781: 24.3; bibtex required fields
Date: Mon, 24 Feb 2014 12:23:42 +0100

Glenn Morris wrote:
> Oh, duh, I get it now. You were talking about biblatex; for some
> inexplicable reason I thought you were talking about biblatex.el.
> I have no idea why I thought that...

I'm glad that confusion is over before I had time to reply.

> So I'm not sure whose github repository that is, nor why it says: "This
> is the current home of biblatex as the status of the author of biblatex
> is currently unclear."

Since those not into biblatex may wonder if this is the real deal I
should add here that it is indeed. This is what is part of CTAN and what
is distributed to TeX distributions like Tex Live and MikTeX.

My proposed change are about fields there always were optional in
bibtex, and are therefore are omitted in most bib files.

Even though biblatex always have managed without them just as fine as
bibtex its documentation (until now) said they were required, so
bibtex-biblatex-entry-alist requires them, and therefore (with default
settings) refuses to add entries without them.

Message #19 received at 16781-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Glenn Morris <rgm <at> gnu.org>
To: 16781-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#16781: 24.3; bibtex required fields
Date: Fri, 28 Feb 2014 01:51:26 -0500

Version: 24.4

Applied.

Previous Next

GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.