Closed darijgr closed 5 years ago
I'm afraid I can't debug this; is there a way to see the line number?
The reason for removing the {}s is that your site doesn't seem to correctly parse \mathbb{...}'s; it appears to just throw away the {} signs, leaving unparseable things like "\mathbbZ" behind. But maybe the whitespace solution is just as bad.
Hmm, I don't know how this "mathbb" is handled. There is a parser script pubparse.py
and it does some conversions for the website. I even found mathbb
somewhere in a replacement table. I might have touched it once or twice, but I'm not sure what it does. What you describe sounds like a bug report.
well, I think I'll just try to merge this and fix whatever is going on. Probably putting back the curly brackets. Then in a second iteration we can look into what's going on with the formulas.
ok, merged, and ready for round 2 :-)
Thanks Harald for tracing this one back to the typo! I wasn't aware of biber; now I'm wondering if I should use it for my own papers (have been avoiding bibtex so far for its pitfalls and inflexibility).
On Thursday, April 18, 2019, Harald Schilly notifications@github.com wrote:
ok, merged, and ready for round 2 :-)
— You are receiving this because you modified the open/close state. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/sagemath/publications/pull/95#issuecomment-484576301, or mute the thread https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AB5LMPNB6BNKCQYMJIREF6TPRCMM7ANCNFSM4HGY3ANA .
If you're curious, here is how cocalc calls biber as a tool.
and please be aware that it canonicalized many fields as well. e.g. your year and month became date = {2011-01},
I don't know much about the syntax details and their history, but I just blindly trust that it knows what it is doing :walking_man: … not sure if this is still bibtex compatible.
Travis fails, see error in the details above.