On 12/29/07, James Howison <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Dec 29, 2007, at 11:37 AM, P Kishor wrote: > > > I frequently file books and committee reports (those published by the > > National Academy Press are a good example) where there is no "author" > > but there are "editor"s. Since my BD generates cite_keys as %a1_%Y_u2, > > the %a part goes unfilled in the cite_keys for these reports. Is there > > any way to ask BD to use the author, but if author is not set then use > > the editor? > > %p should do this rather than %a. At least that's what the drop down > for "Authors or Editors" shows. > > > Another question -- what is the best practice? Do folks file the > > entire reports? (that is what I do, because that is how I find them). > > But then, how do you cite individual papers within those reports as in > > case of conf. proceedings, the reports are typically a set of papers > > by indiv. authors preceded by come commentary by the editors... can I > > generate indiv. cite_keys for each component paper? I realize I am > > probably asking a basic BD-use question, so if this use-case is > > already described somewhere, kindly point me to it. > > Have you tried inproceedings? I don't heavily use cross-refs, but > presumably you can create a single proceedings and cross-ref a set of > inproceedings. You might also explore book/inbook and incollection.
Dang it! that's what inproceedings is for! Well then, I am going to try this out, but if someone has written up a usecase for using proceedings + inproceedings or book + inbook along with crossref, I would love to read that. Many thanks, .. Puneet ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2005. http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/ _______________________________________________ Bibdesk-users mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bibdesk-users
