TeX - LaTeX Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for users of TeX, LaTeX, ConTeXt, and related typesetting systems. Join them; it only takes a minute:

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

I have to cite several OMG standards and specifications in a paper, such as MOF, UML, etc. What's the best BibTeX entry format to do so? These are not articles or conference papers. They are not exactly books, as they are not printed for publishing. They are also not exactly technical reports, since that the OMG does not have any other sort of publications. The "misc" type seems, however, somewhat demeaning for widely-adopted standards.

What sort of BibTeX entry, and with what fields, have you used to cite OMG specs (if you ever had to)?

share|improve this question

If it neither has an ISBN nor appears in a series with an ISSN, then it falls within the scope of what Chicago calls "informally published materials", which are, overall, not so well handled by Bibtex.

The downside of using the @misc entry type is that institution isn't a recognised field key for that entry type in the default Bibtex styles, so you have to use the howpublished kludge. I would go for @techreport, which does have the required documentation. You should be prepared to change the representation to get the output you want though.

I note that Jabref has a custom @standard entry type for the internal representation of these kinds of entry, which it translates as appropriate to the bibliography style you want to use in a particular article.

share|improve this answer

For UML 2.0 there seems to be a reference manual from pearson so I ended up citing it as:

  title = {Unified Modeling Language Reference Manual, The (2nd Edition)},
  publisher = {Pearson Higher Education},
  year = {2004},
  author = {Rumbaugh, James and Jacobson, Ivar and Booch, Grady},
  isbn = {0321245628}
share|improve this answer

I'm not sure how a bibliography entry type can be demeaning. I'd cite it as

        title = {Meta Object Facility {(MOF)} 2.0 Core Specification},
        year = 2003,
        mon = oct,
        note = {Version 2},
        key = {Meta Object Facility},

Similarly for UML.

share|improve this answer
You'll need to use the howpublished field to say the standard is released by the OMG group. – Charles Stewart Jan 15 '11 at 10:08

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.