Now that the amsrefs package for references has been available for a decade, how does it compare in popularity with Bibtex? Does there exist a pro and cons list for amsrefs?
@egreg's comment is correct; the user base for
amsrefs is mainly material published by the ams, although i know of a few other journals that accept
bibtex was very solidly entrenched before
amsrefs was envisioned, and
there were (sadly unrealized) hopes for its "completion".
there are, as far as i know, no formal pros/cons lists for
one characteristic, which can be seen either as pro or con, depending on
one's point of view, is that the data is fully embedded in the subject
document (so it must be in the desired order of appearance).
more pro than con, i think: since the data elements are fully tagged, they can be used directly for generating structured references outside of the tex file, for example by being converted to [x|ht]ml.
I use amsrefs because I like to annotate my bibliographies, and that's much easier in the amsrefs structure. Publishers have never complained about my using it, although some have asked me to do some work getting the italics how they want, and such minutiae.