Re: crossref in bibtex

[Taco Hoekwater <taco@elvenkind.com>]

Hi Ulf,
Ulf Martin wrote:
> Crossrefs don't seem to work properly.

There isn't one, only a partial workaround: manually add a line of

   \nocite[<crossref-ed entry>]

in your source somewhere, and at least the module will typeset the 
cross-referenced item itself.

I will reconsider fixing this, but it is one of the more annoying
things to get right.

> 
> A hint to the solution for an expert could be the bbl file. Note that 
> the order of the entries is turned around:

No, that is absolutely unrelated. The .bbl file in context is nothing
else than a representation in TeX macros of the original .bib file(s).

> (If ordered by author first, then year. Note also that in \language[de] 
> "vol." should be "Bd." and "p." be "S.".)

Someone could create a bibl-aps-de.tex file, but I can not. It would
just be a copy of bibl-aps.tex, but with german strings instead of
english ones. You would still need to use an explicit language like

   \setuppublications[alternative=aps-de]

though (because switching based on the current document language is not
necessarily correct and is therefore unsupported).

> Any ideas of what to do or hints where to find more info?

Rgiht here, on this list.

>    * * *
> 
> Additional question: what is the best way to generate the bbl file in 
> the project directory? (I use "Central.bib" for all my documents).
> 
> Using
> 
> % texexec mainsetup
> 
> in the projects directory produces many unnecessary files (e.g. a dvi 
> file) as it is only meant as a setup file.

You only have to generate the bbl file once, so that should not be
a big burden. You could feasibly create a dummy file that is 4 or 5 
lines long and has nothing but the \usemodule & \setupbibtex lines,
run that, and rename the resulting bbl file.

> However, proper bibliography processing is a "killer feature" for me -- 
> I have virtually no document whithout references. (I wonder, what the 
> direction of the ConText development here is; arguably, odd old BibTeX 
> has reached an end of its history and support for more modern and 
> complete, e.g. XML-based formats would be preferable (say, MODS) -- 
> considering the seeminly nice XML support that is already there.)

Bibtex is a rather idiosyncratic and LaTeX-centric program, and it
already takes some effort to make bibtex believe that ConTeXt is
enough like LaTeX to make it work. I do not wish to spend much
more time catering for the bizarreness that is bibtex than I
already have.

The next major release of the module (but don't expect a release
anywhere this year) will indeed support MODS through citeproc:

	http://xbiblio.sourceforge.net/citeproc/

Cheers, Taco