Re: [Bibdesk-users] [OS X TeX] Re: html output from bib file (BibDesk)

[Christiaan H. <chr...@we...>]

On 29 May 2006, at 1:51 AM, James Owen wrote:

>
> On 26 May 2006, at 22:24, Christiaan Hofman wrote:
>
>>
>> On 26 May 2006, at 9:05 AM, James Owen wrote:
>>
>>>>>
>>>>> We should somewhere put a list of keys that can be used in the
>>>>> templates. We could either do this in the help, maybe in an
>>>>> appendix, or on the wiki page. We could also put a library of
>>>>> templates or links to templates from users on the wiki, similar
>>>>> to the scripts page.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> A list of keys is definitely needed and I think a help appendix
>>>> would be a good place. A templates library on the wiki would be
>>>> nice as well.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Just want to second a request for a list of keys,
>>
>> In the latest nightly you can find a list of keys in the Help. I
>> also put this list on the wiki.
>
>
> Yes, I saw those in the Help pages, and played around with some
> possibilities. Thank you.
> Can I have two options at the same time, e.g. something like
> Authors.capitalized.commaAndAnd ?
>

that should be

authors.name.capitalizedString.@componentsJoinedByCommaAndAnd

You can make key paths as long as you like, but you can only combine  
key paths in a meaningful way. Follow the path and try to think of  
what it represents. 'authors' will give you a collection of author  
objects, so capitalizedString wouldn't make sense on them (as it's  
not a string). However authors.name gives a collection of their  
names, so you can use capitalizedString. At this point you still have  
a collection of strings (capitalized names), and you can combine  
those using @componentsJoinedByCommaAndAnd. Hope that makes sense.

>
>>
>>> and also to report yet another glitch, with the 0524 nightly.
>>> Now, the option for html export has disappeared completely from
>>> the export menu!
>>
>> That's because the output format depends on the template that you
>> choose, so the old title HTML was not very appropriate anymore.
>
> I understand that html is a form of plain text, but this might not be
> very intuitive, especially as the form of plain text is likely to be
> html most of the time. Also you have broken out BibTeX in the menu,
> which is also plain text.

But we don't use templates for bibtex. The difference between the  
'text' and 'rich text' templates is basically what kind of files the  
template files are, namely a plain text file or a rich text file like  
rtf (I assume nobody will ever directly edit the underlying plain  
text of an rtf or doc file, while you probably will edit the plain  
html text, I don't even think the html templates would work if you'd  
create them in a wysiwyg editor). Internally we use different methods  
for those.

Christiaan