Hi, Richard Lawrence <richard.lawre...@berkeley.edu> writes: > Hi Eric and all, > > Eric S Fraga <e.fr...@ucl.ac.uk> writes: > >> On Wednesday, 1 Apr 2015 at 08:49, Andreas Leha wrote: >> >> [...] >> >>> I am a happy biblatex user for all my 'own' documents. But (as was >>> mentioned previously) scientific journals that accept latex submissions >>> will require bibtex and won't support biblatex. So, I'd say that one of >>> the other methods (preferably bibtex) is still necessary. >> >> Ahhh, yes, I'd forgotten that journals expect bibtex. This is a key >> requirement for me as well therefore. > > Can someone suggest how a parenthetical citation with common prefix and > suffix data, like > > [(cite): For more on this topic, see:; @Work1 for a review; @Work2; > and references therein.] > > should map to plain BibTeX? Maybe there is no general answer to this > question, but what would a reasonable default be? Maybe this? > > (For more on this topic, see: \cite{Work1} for a review, \cite{Work2}, > and references therein.) > > That is, just place the prefix and suffix data in the surrounding text, > inserting commas after the part for each individual work, and wrapping > the whole thing in parentheses? >
To me that seems a reasonable thing to do. At least I would write it probably in such a way. Depending on the citation style ("author, year") I might add a comma after the citation, so that it becomes (For more on this topic, see: Max Mustermann, 2015, for a review, The Internet Consortium, 2014, and references therein.) compared to (For more on this topic, see: Max Mustermann, 2015 for a review, The Internet Consortium, 2014 and references therein.) But: - I am no native English speaker and comma placement in English is very unclear to me - my citation requirements are quite low, I guess... Best, Andreas