On 2017-12-05 13:20, Gour wrote:
On Sun, 7 May 2017 23:33:30 +0200
r.erm...@hccnet.nl wrote:
I recently finished a book project in multimarkdown, which I
converted to LaTeX (I could not use ConTeXt because of its limited
bibliographical functions in comparison to BibLatex).
Just wonder, since I plan to embrace ConTeXt for a larger educational-based
project with the need to use bibliographical functions, what did you prevent
you to use it?
Let me say that I'm fully familiar with neither BibLatex's capabilities nor
with the similar things in MkIV...
Sincerely,
Gour
The utility of the new bibliography subsystem is a function of your
ability to work within the rigid structure of the APA reference
standards. Even with that, there are outstanding bugs that have not been
addressed for many months.
If your publisher requires adherence to some other bibliographical
standards, or even variations of the APA standards, the new subsystem
may not suffice, or may not suffice without significant customization
that requires understanding of the source code.
(ConTeXt also has some support for the APS standard, but that is
secondary to APA in the implementation plan as so far revealed. There is
no current plan of which I am aware to support more humanities-focused
standards (Chicago, MHRA, Turabian, ...), although I would be happy to
be proved wrong on that.)
For comparison, BibLaTeX supports tens of different standards and
variants, and has (or had a couple of years ago when I last used it) an
active community of developers. To accomplish this, BibLaTeX relies on
many added tags to BibTeX, thus forgoing compatibility with other systems.
The differences between the two derive from a few basic decisions taken
by the ConTeXt developers. Among these, ConTeXt prefers to not add
additional fields to BibTeX, and prefers to develop its own code without
reliance on third-party software.
If your document requires bibliographic support beyond what ConTeXt
currently provides, there is another mechanism by which you can
incorporate other reference standards. You can write your document in
Pandoc <http://pandoc.org/> [1] Markdown and use any of the hundreds of
reference standards and variants supported there through CSL
<http://citationstyles.org/> [2]. Pandoc can create an XML result that
can be transformed into a PDF by ConTeXt with the bibliography created
according the the selected CSL format. This works well for documents
that do not require significant customization, but may become cumbersome
when you must fiddle with many individual objects. I have done this for
a book-scale project as a proof of concept, and the bibliography
handling works well. My work expands on that of Pablo Rodríguez, who
addressed the method in a note to you last year
<https://www.mail-archive.com/ntg-context@ntg.nl/msg83581.html> [3].
[1] http://pandoc.org/
[2] http://citationstyles.org/
[3] https://www.mail-archive.com/ntg-context@ntg.nl/msg83581.html
--
Rik
___________________________________________________________________________________
If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the
Wiki!
maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
webpage : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://context.aanhet.net
archive : https://bitbucket.org/phg/context-mirror/commits/
wiki : http://contextgarden.net
___________________________________________________________________________________
