I have an article document in LaTeX in which I cite sources from a bibtex file. I want to be able to still cite these sources, but I also want to be able to compile the bibliography into a separate pdf document. This document is a grant proposal for NSF, and they want the bibliography to be in a separate document.
I have searched the web for solutions to this problem. Each solution is slightly different than what I need for my particular problem.
\usepackage{cite}
\usepackage{bibentry}
...
\nocite{*}
\bibliographystyle{plain}
\bibliography{MyBibliography}
The sources are included at the end of the document, and they are labeled "References". I need them in a separate document, labeled "Bibliography".
Assuming your main file is called test, you can simply import its bibliography in a new file with \input{test.bbl} and change the \renewcommand{\refname}{Bibliography} or \renewcommand{\bibname}{Bibliography}, depending on the documentclass. This way the references will have the same numbering as in the original document.
\documentclass{article}
\usepackage{cite}
\usepackage{bibentry}
\renewcommand{\refname}{Bibliography}
\begin{document}
\input{test.bbl}
\end{document}
Related
I' writing a new extension for Sphinx as a domain offering multiple directives, roles and indices for the hardware description language VHDL. This extension shall be able to auto document language constructs. In VHDL, we have e.g. entities/architectures or packages/package bodies. These could be documented as pairs in individual docutils documents, so each language construct has an individual URL (or page in PDF) in the documentation.
I'm looking for a solution to create new documents in Sphinx/docutils. According to the docutils API description, a document is the root element to a doctree (documentation tree). According to the Sphinx documentation, directives are items in the doctree that get consumed and can emit new nodes to the surrounding doctree. So it's a translation/replacement approach.
Non of the documentation seams to offer a way to create new document.
Looking at the autodoc extensions, there are 2 sides. There is sphinx.ext.autodoc coming with Sphinx. It offers .. auto*** directives to automatically document Python language constructs. It requires a user to place dozens to hundreds of auto-directives into the ReStructured Text. Of cause it automatically document e.g. classes or modules, but for a huge project it's a lot of work.
In addition, there is autoapi, which reads the Python code for a given package or module and generates ReST files on the fly when Sphinx is loaded. Then these files - containing auto-directives - are processed.
As I understand, autoapi workaround the problem of creating now docutils documents, by writing ReST files, so Sphinx generates document instances with a doctree, and then autodoc from Sphinx jumps in and replaces them with content from doc-strings.
So my questions after all investigations I did so far:
How can I create docutils or Sphinx document to get a HTML file per item I want to auto document?
Or do I always need to do a hack like autoapi from Carlos Jenkins and create ReST files as dummies or with auto directives, so I can use the replacement capabilities of Sphinx/autodoc from directive to documentation nodes?
Why don't I like the autoapi approach? I have parse VHDL files as input in form of a Code Document Object Model (CodeDOM). I don't want to serialize parse VHDL file into ReST, to parse it again, construct again a model of my source files, so I can then translate to documentation nodes like sections, paragraphs and lists.
I have all available to generate doc-nodes for docutils, but I need multiple documents, so I can distribute the content to hundreds of documentations file (HTML files).
I am writing lots of Sphinx/RestructuredText and this includes Sequence Diagrams using PlantUML. I have lots of text that I am reusing, so to make things cleaner, I created a definitions.iuml file. In this file, I can create named text references (via !startsub/!endsub blocks) that allows me to reference them in several different Sequence Diagrams. Change it once in the source location, and they all change. Perfect.
My problem is how to use these references outside of Sequence Diagrams? I use the exact same code (!includesub ../defintions.iuml!NAMED-REFERENCE) in the .rst file, and when I make docx/pdf, I see that link, I don't see the text that it is referencing. To make things worse, Google has like no documentation or search results on this. Queries of includesub, startsub, endsub +sphinx come back with nothing.
Help me obiwan kenobi.
I found the answer, which only resulted in more questions haha. Anyway, one thing at a time:
To create reference variables in your text document, use rst_prolog or rst_epilog in your Conf.py file. Why there are 2 commands that serve the same purpose, I dont know.
rst_prolog = """
.. |Variable1| replace:: Monday
.. |Variable2| replace:: Tuesday
"""
Now whenever you write |Variable1| in your text, the document will generate Monday.
The problem with the above is that its just for short words/phrases. You can't use it for code blocks, or anything that is more than one line. To reference in Code Blocks:
Create a new .rst file with the code you want to display. Best practice is to create a Code folder and place them all in there.
Further best practice is to stop using the '.. code block::' and instead use '.. parsed-literal::'. The output is the exact same, but parsed-literal allows you to use conf.py variables and ..codeblock:: doesn't.
So in this .rst file, first line is .. parsed-literal:: and all the text below it is the code you want to reference
In the original document that you wanted this code, type:
<4 spaces indent>.. include:: <Folder/File.rst>
Generate your document, and notice how the code is now being reference. You can include this reference all throughout your document.
I will soon be creating a new thread, this time asking how the text body and sequence diagrams can use the same reference. Currently, all text needs one reference, all sequences need another reference, and now we have double updates. Not ideal
I'd like to use TW5 to support a literature review, and the BibTeX import looks very useful. I am dragging a .bib file onto TW, and an import list is produced, one entry per article. Works well, and the tiddlys produced have the info in usefully named fields.
I would like to tag each entry of that list so I can find them later. Either at the "import list" stage, or once they have been imported (without finding each one individually).
Thanks!
Instead of tagging them you could use a field that always appears in the bibtex tiddlers (and never in any other tiddler) as an indicator, for example bibtex-title. This way you can retrieve all the bibtex tiddlers like this:
{{{[has[bibtex-title]]}}}
In case you're interested my webpage has an example of this technique (it's a bit messy, see some explanations here)
I have a couple of examples (all with titles) and I'd like to create an index/list out of them automatically.
An example can be seen in the chunked AsciiDoc User Guide table of contents (or beneath):
The asciidoc source of the AsciiDoc User Guide does not show anything specific to me for Asciidoc itself, I could find the following hint to Docbook:
DocBook toolchains will normally automatically number examples and generate a 'List of Examples' backmatter section.
I'm looking for the (asciidoctor?) standard html5 rendering, but I'm open for different suggestions.
Adding the :doctype: book attribute alone does not do it. So I merely hit dead ends not knowing if it is possible at all. Also I'm new to Asciidoc so I might just miss some pointers, too.
The Python Asciidoc repo includes the a2x tool, which is a wrapper around a DocBook toolchain. It is DocBook that is producing these entries in the table of contents. Neither Python Asciidoc, nor asciidoctor, can do this out of the box.
You would need to curate the lists manually, or create a macro that does the curation for you. This thread might prove helpful: https://github.com/asciidoctor/asciidoctor-extensions-lab/issues/111
Main Question:
Is there a way to flag Pandoc to turn off appending the bibliography but still have it insert the correct inline citations?
I am writing a Markdown / Knitr document that has a main file (article.Rmd) and several "child" files that are included in the main file using Knitr's "child=" chunk option.
The child files are basically sections of the main article file, just separated for easier editing and management. Throughout these child section files, I use the citations in the Markdown text (e.g. "#author_title_1999") to cite various papers. The main file and each child file has a YAML header that provides the BibTex file location, e.g.:
---
bibliography: mybibfile.bib
...
(Including this YAML entry more than once is not a problem; see the readme on metadata-blocks.)
When I compile the entire document using Knitr, a big Markdown document is created. I then use Pandoc with the --filter pandoc-citeproc option to manage the citations. Pandoc inserts nice citations and appends a list of the cited papers as references/bibliography. Cool.
As I write and edit the individual child sections, I use the same citation compiling which produces the correct inline citations, but unfortunately also appends the references at the end, even though it's just a section of the larger document. I would like to compile these small child sections with inline citations, but without the bibliography at the end.
I think this is possible with the suppress-bibliography metadata field first introduced in pandoc-citeproc 0.7 (released in May 2015). From the current pandoc-citeproc man page:
pandoc-citeproc will look for the following metadata fields in the input:
...
suppress-bibliography : If this has a true value, the bibliography will be left off. Otherwise a bibliography will be inserted into each Div element with id refs. If there is no such Div, one will be created at the end of the document.
(as a workaround, you can also quite easily create a custom CSL style that doesn't produce a bibliography, by deleting the cs:bibliography child element of the style. See http://docs.citationstyles.org/en/stable/specification.html#child-elements-of-cs-style.)