Context: I am writing in cooperation a long document (book), split into different TeX inputs, calling different bibfiles, modified by several users, with potential duplicates. I am trying to homogenize and rename the used bib keys, using some "almost unique" pattern (which I can describe later), removing dups, correcting all the bib fields, etc. [EDIT] When the used bibkeys are cleaned, I want to gather them in another existing master bibfile, that serves as a common reference base.

The master bibfile has about 10.000 references, managed by Jabref. I would like to clean keys and fields from the others before appending them to the master.

As compiling can be long, even in draft version, I would like to focus on \cite, \citep or \citet (with natbib) occurrences only, and the related warnings and errors, to correct them.

I am looking for tools:

  • that provide options to identify the .bib file of a given bibkey (for instance, appending the name of the .bib used after the reference),
  • that identify which .tex input is concerned,
  • that shorten the compiling part (e.g. non displaying the text outside citations).

Basically, I would like the output pdf to display, after each reference, where the reference comes from (.tex input and origin .bib), so that I can quickly modify the concerned .bib and .tex.

My environment is texniccenter, jabref and miktex (in Windows).

  • 2
    Use package citeall and go over the list of bib files. You are thinking too complicated. Oh wait, citeall is for the modern biblatex only. Sorry. – Johannes_B Apr 9 '17 at 10:27
  • I shall look into the citeall doc. However, the shared document cites about 400 references, while all the bib files contain about 10.000 keys – Laurent Duval Apr 9 '17 at 10:38
  • 2
    a good source of bibtex tools is nelson beebe's site, as mentioned in this answer: tex.stackexchange.com/a/40713/579 – barbara beeton Apr 9 '17 at 18:21
  • 1
    Why not using JabRef for management? Either importing all bib files into one database and then running the duplicate checker or using the shared SQL database feature? – koppor Apr 10 '17 at 11:08
  • 1
    @koppor I do, but the master file (updated in the question) is huge, and deduplication seems less efficient – Laurent Duval Apr 10 '17 at 12:19

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.