On Jan 8, 2010, at 0:59, david craig wrote: > > On Thu, 7 Jan 2010, david craig wrote: >> The obvious thing would seem to be to create, say, a static group for >> each paper. The next thing would be to save just this group as a >> single bib file that would include just the references in the group, >> along with any of the macros used in it. This is the part I can't >> figure out how to accomplish. > > That is to say, I know that you can select everything in a group, and so > long as you tick "export only selected items" you can save the result as > a single bib file. However, it also saves ALL your macros (perhaps not > such a big deal). This seems a bit clumsy, though. > > Is there a better way to manage individual paper bibliographies from a > master database than this? Or should I be making a feature request > to make it a little more seamless to export a group as a new bib file? > > Thanks, > David Craig > > > <http://www.panix.com/~dac/>
Is it really so important to include only the relevant macros? I agree with Adam that it's not worth doing it in the standard export from BibDesk, perhaps I'd even say it's unwanted. Macros are just a set of convenience shortcuts that you could use. You also wouldn't want to ask for a .bst or .sty file that just contains the definitions that you use. And as we've said in the other thread, when you want to do things differently, you need to use the template mechanism. Christiaan ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Verizon Developer Community Take advantage of Verizon's best-in-class app development support A streamlined, 14 day to market process makes app distribution fast and easy Join now and get one step closer to millions of Verizon customers http://p.sf.net/sfu/verizon-dev2dev _______________________________________________ Bibdesk-users mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bibdesk-users
