Am Dienstag, den 10.03.2020, 13:12 -0700 schrieb Rich Shepard:
> For some reason that entry did not have a "year" field, only the
> "date"
> field. Many entries have both fields, but this one lacked the "year."
> So I
> added the year and now it shows up.
date is biblatex-specific*, while year is
On Tue, 10 Mar 2020, Rich Shepard wrote:
This may be a glitch in the JabRef 5.x snapshots. I don't recall which of
the 28597 entries in the bibliographic database I've entered most
recently, but they might also be lacking the year field. I'll ask on the
JabRef dev mail list if this could be
On Tue, 10 Mar 2020, Paul A. Rubin wrote:
I'm used to the date being the "year" field ("year = {1986}"). Is it
literally "date" in your .bib file and, if so, just for that one reference
or for all of them?
Paul,
The direct answer to your questrion is both yes and no.
For some reason that
