#35 Edited book does not display editor in \cite completion

open
nobody
None
5
2011-08-02
2011-08-02
Bernhard Fisseni
No

\cite completion does not show the editor for edited books (which only have an editor, no author field in the BIBTex entry); the attached patch to bibtools.py solves this. (I hope I haven't overlooked any patch, but googling for "editor", "edited" in connection with "latexsuite" etc. is quite hopeless, and I didn't find anything in the current git repository.)

Suggested change: If for a book no author is present, the editor is shown. (If neither author not editor is present, there's no help anyway; if both author and editor are present, that's either an error or a hack, and then author and editor should be the same.) -- For all other bibtypes, the editor is shown (after the author) if present.

Highlighting for the editor(s) is also added.

Discussion

  • Patch to show editor in \cite completion

     
    Attachments
  • Andreas Wagner
    Andreas Wagner
    2011-08-02

    Just for the record:
    "if both author and editor are present, that's either an error or a hack, and then author and editor should be the same." IIUC, that's not true: Francisco de Vitoria, Political Writings, edited by Anthony Pagden and Jeremy Lawrance. Cambridge UP, 1991 would be a case in point. Many similar cases exist.

     
  • That's true.

    All BIBTeX styles I used flagged it with a warning[1]. Therefore I thought it was a built-in limitation of BIBTeX, but it seems to be programmed into the BSTs. Thank you for the correction!

    Thus one should always show the editor if present?

    [1] "can't use both author and editor fields in" returns 2800 hits on Google.

     
  • Patch to show editor in \cite completion (always, if present)

     
  • I attached an alternate patch: "Patch to show editor in \cite completion (always, if present)"

     
  • Andreas Wagner
    Andreas Wagner
    2011-08-02

    Cool! To be honest, I don't even know if any other tools, including bibtex/biblatex allow to handle this, but just thought I should mention that there are reasonable uses for both fields at the same time. Thanks for taking it into account.