Hi Gary & Stuart, I have had a chance overnight to consult the only Latexpert I know, in Germany. Whilst he hasn't seen this reply by Stuart, several of his comments fit right in.
On 15 February 2011 08:34, Stuart Rackham <[email protected]> wrote: > Your analysis is correct Lex, in particular: > > ``While this might be an unusual way of using docbook bibliography > entries, its perfectly legal and should work. I don't think FOP works > by accident, it works because it should.'' > > The cleanest solution would be for dblatex to translate the DocBook anchor > element in the bibliomisc element correctly. Whilst the Latexpert hasn't tried it he doesn't see any reason why you can't have a \label (the latex equivalent of an <anchor> ) in the text of a bibliography entry, so it should be fixable > > I'm not keen on an alternative syntax and I can't think of workable > alternative. Ahh, the reason I didn't suggest an alternative inline macro for a biblioref was that I couldn't think of a good one either, hmmm would still be nice to separate ordinary cross references from citations. The bibliography entries could probably be an ordinary macro since it doesn't matter (as much) if they disturb the text flow. Even with a workable alternative you would still have dblatex > and FOP rendering differently (dblatex with auto-numbers on bibliomixed > elements, FOP without). The last Uni I went to used Harvard style (like all Stuarts examples [Rack11] ) so I continue to use that, so no autonumbering anyway, I think its possible to tell Latex to not autonumber > > You could cut through this problem completely by dropping the bibliography > section and list styles and rendering the bibliography as a normal paragraph > e.g. > > Example Bibliography > -------------------- > The bibliography list is a style of AsciiDoc bulleted list. > > - [[[taoup]]] Eric Steven Raymond. 'The Art of Unix > Programming'. Addison-Wesley. ISBN 0-13-142901-9. > - [[[walsh-muellner]]] Norman Walsh & Leonard Muellner. > 'DocBook - The Definitive Guide'. O'Reilly & Associates. 1999. > ISBN 1-56592-580-7. Good idea, i guess you are not missing much except you might have to fiddle styling if your Bibliography styles are different. > > There are also other dblatex bibliography related issues: > > 1. dblatex does not render legal non-bibliographic block elements in a > bibliography element e.g. the simpara in this example is dropped by dblatex: > > <bibliography id="_example_bibliography"> > <title>Example Bibliography</title> > <simpara>The bibliography list is a style of AsciiDoc bulleted > list.</simpara> > : > : > </bibliography> > > > 2. dblatex does not render inline text elements inside the bibliomisc > element e.g. emphasis in this example: > > <bibliomisc> > Eric Steven Raymond. <emphasis>The Art of Unix > Programming</emphasis>. Addison-Wesley. ISBN 0-13-142901-9. > </bibliomisc> > This definitely should work, one of the Latexpert's comments was that it is common practice to emphasise a book title & it exists in several Latex examples I looked at & FOP seems to do it automatically. Yes I've now installed FOP for testing, style is a bit sparse but seems to work. > > These issues are avoided if you render the bibliography as a normal > paragraph. > The only place this won't work is for the autonumbered style of bookmark eg blah blah,[2] , but then I always think they look like footnotes & don't use them but others might if its their required style, eg its common in academic journal articles. Cheers Lex > > Cheers, Stuart > > > > EXAMPLES > > On 14/02/11 19:40, Lex Trotman wrote: >> >> On 14 February 2011 14:33, Gary F.<[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> Lex, >>> >> >> Hi Gary, >> >>> I am new to asciidoc and the entire dblatex tool chain, so can't offer >>> much insight. I do wonder if it might not make sense to invent a new >>> citation reference markup that can map directly to something in >>> Docbook that will result in a \cite{} in dblatex, >> >> I presume that would be the<biblioref> tag. Certainly a new macro >> can be defined to output this tag but existing documents still won't >> work unless someone goes through them and identifies which references >> are to bibliographic entries and changes them, this has to be done >> manually since currently the source format is the same for all links. >> It would be nice if the bug was fixed in the toolchain but given >> Latex's very specific bibliography handling I wouldn't be surprised if >> it objected to anchors in the middle of them, still it would be a good >> idea to ask Ben citing :-) the fact that it is legal docbook and >> backward compatibility issues. >> >> On the other hand separating bibliographic links from other links >> would be useful, having all xrefs in [] because thats the cite format >> is such a pain that I have changed it in some of the documents I have >> worked on (but they didn't have bibliographies). >> >> There would also have to be a new macro to generate bibliography >> entries that put an ID in the<bibliomixed> entity, again not backward >> compatible, but it could be a gateway to providing more of the docbook >> biblio capabilities so long as they can be suitably synthesized or >> ignored in other backends such as HTML& xhtml. >> >> Lets see what Stuart thinks about the idea of adding these as >> extensions, he has the habit of suddenly popping up with the perfect >> solution. >> >> Cheers >> Lex >> >> The formatting is now under the control of the backend, not the >> asciidoc configuration >> and also some other >>> >>> syntax extensions that might support the fuller bibliographic >>> capabilities present in docbook and the dblatex back end. >>> >>> I did wonder if the generated .xml might be tweaked so that slightly >>> different syntax resulted that would cause the (broken?) dblatex >>> application to do some approximation of the right thing, where "right >>> thing" is defined as producing a label that can be referenced by a >>> hyperlink. >>> >> >> Not backward compatibly AFAICT >> >>> -- >>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >>> "asciidoc" group. >>> To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. >>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >>> [email protected]. >>> For more options, visit this group at >>> http://groups.google.com/group/asciidoc?hl=en. >>> >>> >> > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "asciidoc" group. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > [email protected]. > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/asciidoc?hl=en. > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "asciidoc" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/asciidoc?hl=en.
