On 08.10.2007, at 17:30, Adam M. Goldstein wrote: > On Oct 8, 2007, at 10:35 AM, Adam R. Maxwell wrote: > >> >> On Oct 8, 2007, at 04:10, Jason Davies wrote: >> >>>> As an alternative for collaborative work that has to use some >>>> kind of >>>> "widely accepted commercial software", I use LaTeX / BibTeX > >>>> latex2rtf. So I can at least write my initial text and citations >>>> in a >>>> manner that does not completely drive me crazy… >>> >>> yes, I've been doing this increasingly too. Most annoying is >>> when it's part of a collection that you can bet the publisher >>> will convert back to LaTeX or XML from the Word version you >>> provided the editor! >> >> Yeah, this is precisely what I do as well. Using latex2rtf at least >> avoids most of the insanity of trying to enter and reference figures/ >> tables/equations/citations in a word processor. Since it (fully?) >> supports natbib, there's pretty good bibliography support as well. > > I will put in another vote for this strategy, which I use frequently. > I haven't had any problems with using bib styles of my own creation, > either.
IME latex2rtf is way too limited. It doesn't produce anything useful with either jurabib nor biblatex which is a big problem for people in humanities. simon -- Simon Spiegel Steinhaldenstr. 50 8002 Zürich Telephon: ++41 44 451 5334 Mobophon: ++41 76 459 60 39 http://www.simifilm.ch "Was soll aus mir mal werden, wenn ich mal nicht mehr bin?" Robert Gernhardt ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Still grepping through log files to find problems? Stop. Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser. Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >> http://get.splunk.com/ _______________________________________________ Bibdesk-users mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bibdesk-users
