On Sat, 2 Nov 2019, Kornel Benko wrote:
Checking TL19 I found some .bst files containing this string.
./texmf-dist/bibtex/bst/uestcthesis/uestcthesis.bst:1687: { "Tech.
rept." } % ODWE abbrevs.
./texmf-dist/bibtex/bst/seuthesis/seuthesis.bst:1685: { "Tech.
rept." } % ODWE abbrevs.
./texmf-dist/bibtex/bst/authordate/authordate1.bst:570: { "Tech.
rept." } % ODWE abbrevs.
./texmf-dist/bibtex/bst/authordate/authordate3.bst:570: { "Tech.
rept." } % ODWE abbrevs.
./texmf-dist/bibtex/bst/authordate/authordate4.bst:571: { "Tech.
rept." } % ODWE abbrevs.
./texmf-dist/bibtex/bst/authordate/authordate2.bst:571: { "Tech.
rept." } % ODWE abbrevs.
./texmf-dist/doc/latex/seuthesis/zharticle/zharticle.bst:1684: { "Tech.
rept." } % ODWE abbrevs.
Kornel,
I hadn't thought to look at the .bst files. I did find deprecated font
encodings (e.g., \sc, \bf) in the authordate series but did not look further
in them.
I've used authordate3 or 4 for years so the font encodings were not an issue
before, but I hadn't encountered the 'Tech. rept.' string before now.
Think it's time to send a message to TUG about these.
Thanks,
Rich
--
lyx-users mailing list
lyx-users@lists.lyx.org
http://lists.lyx.org/mailman/listinfo/lyx-users
