search

ieeevgtc / tvcg-journal-latex

19 stars 15 forks source link

Natbib support #5

Open FlyingSamson opened 1 year ago

FlyingSamson commented 1 year ago

I love that the template now supports and encourages the use of '\cref' over '\autoref'.

Maybe it would also be a nice addition to support/encourage the use of natbib to allow for '\citet' and '\citeauthor' commands. Especially since the template proposes not to use '\cite' as the subject in sentences. It would be way easier to do so if LaTeX figures out the authors itself (including using 'and' for two and et al. for more than two authors), also reducing the risk of misspelled names.

codydunne commented 1 year ago

Thanks! I'm glad you like the change! That bugged me too :-).

We should rename this issue to Enhancement: use natbib or biblatex & biber. If we were going to move in either direction, I'd lean toward using biblatex with the biber backend rather than natbib. (We wouldn't use both.)

I'd jump to biblatex & biber in a heartbeat if we didn't have to contend with the TVCG special issue and the rapid resubmit to TVCG options... There would also be the training authors bit.

Let's enumerate the things we would need to do to make either of these changes so we know what we're getting in for. @FlyingSamson, can you comment with any more implications you can think of esp. for natbib?

  1. Talk with TVCG about how they treat the special issue and the rapid resubmit papers. a) Do they need you to submit bibitems in the .tex? b) Do they run bibtex themselves using their own bst file? c) Would they accept biblatex or natbib commands in the .tex file? d) How hard would it be to convert back to bibtex if that's what we need for the rapid resubmit papers for the new template available through the template selector? (The old template: homepage, CTAN.)
  2. Talk with the VEC, VSC, and publications chairs about moving to using biber as the backend instead of bibtex and the implications for author workflows.
  3. Create the natbib or biblatex style file.
  4. Write any updated author instructions.
levitabris commented 1 year ago

Thanks! I'm glad you like the change! That bugged me too :-).

We should rename this issue to Enhancement: use natbib or biblatex & biber. If we were going to move in either direction, I'd lean toward using biblatex with the biber backend rather than natbib. (We wouldn't use both.)

I'd jump to biblatex & biber in a heartbeat if we didn't have to contend with the TVCG special issue and the rapid resubmit to TVCG options... There would also be the training authors bit.

Let's enumerate the things we would need to do to make either of these changes so we know what we're getting in for. @FlyingSamson, can you comment with any more implications you can think of esp. for natbib?

  1. Talk with TVCG about how they treat the special issue and the rapid resubmit papers. a) Do they need you to submit bibitems in the .tex? b) Do they run bibtex themselves using their own bst file? c) Would they accept biblatex or natbib commands in the .tex file? d) How hard would it be to convert back to bibtex if that's what we need for the rapid resubmit papers for the new template available through the template selector? (The old template: homepage, CTAN.)
  2. Talk with the VEC, VSC, and publications chairs about moving to using biber as the backend instead of bibtex and the implications for author workflows.
  3. Create the natbib or biblatex style file.
  4. Write any updated author instructions.

I'm so happy to know that this issue is being taken care of.

I spent quite some time with custom-bib to make my own author-year compatible .bst file. However, it seems a bad idea since the afterward processing looks quite strict on the command and style usage.

Anyway, the newer version is much nicer to work with. Thanks for the work.

Regarding the TODOs:

  1. pass
  2. I think the required effort to change is trivial. There are free tools available to convert the database such as JabRef (see discussion). Remapping the commands such as \citet -> \textcite should be simple if they are already using natbib commands.
  3. I vote for biblatex if it is not too much of a change. natbib is also good if preserving bibtex compatibility is a serious concern.
  4. Let me know if I could help.

This can save authors' time on working out their own ways, which could be problematic afterwards.

codydunne commented 1 year ago

@mattbrehmer What do you think? Would you want to try to roll biblatex support into the next version? I could help with discussions with TVCG, VEC, VSC.