0

Hopefully, this question is going to be a quick and clean one to be solved. I am directly diving into my problem that I faced while I was working with biblatex package options.

I had a working copy document, which had the biblatex package that uses the biber as a backend option. Until now, nothing unusual. Everything worked fine..

But due to the some constraints, I needed to change my backend from biber to bibtex (then, bibtex8 but results was same with bibtex). Then, I started to see some differences.. The difference, at the first time was very hard to find, even I found it 1-2 days after. Problem there was about a missing "-" character. And, it is placed between the document code and its' name, used like splitting the those two strings.

Below you can find my biblatex package definiton via using the biber as a backend and its' output:

\usepackage[backend=biber, style=numeric, sorting=none, defernumbers=true]{biblatex}

Biber Output

Below you can find my biblatex package definition via using the bibtex as a backend and its' output:

\usepackage[backend=bibtex, style=numeric, sorting=none, defernumbers=true]{biblatex}

Bibtex Output

As it can be seen after the document code, its' name starting with a gap (.bib not shared, checked it many times and "-" character was there all the time, it is not the problem trust me). But that gap actually should not be there. As given above with biber example, reference output should have the document code and its' name with "-" character between them to be able to separate both.


Here, listing command (same for above given both example) to create reference and applicable documents:

\section{APPLICABLE and REFERENCED DOCUMENTS}

\subsection{Reference Documents}
\printbibliography[keyword={RD},heading=none,resetnumbers=true]

\subsection{Applicable Documents}
\printbibliography[keyword={AD},heading=none,resetnumbers=true]


Here you could find my .bib files for every example given above:

Biber reference .bib file:

@misc{A14-000,
  author       = {A14-000000-NNNNN-002-A - NNN},
  title        = {},
  howpublished = {},
  year         = {},
  keywords     = {RD}
}


@misc{A14-001,
  author       = {A14-000000-NNNNN-001-A - NNN},
  title        = {},
  howpublished = {},
  year         = {},
  keywords     = {RD}
}

@misc{A14-002,
  author       = {NNN - NNN},
  title        = {},
  howpublished = {},
  year         = {},
  keywords     = {RD}
}

Biber applicable .bib file:

     @misc{A14-004,
  author       = {A14-000000-NNNNN-001-B - NNN},
  title        = {},
  howpublished = {},
  year         = {},
  keywords     = {AD}
}

@misc{A14-005,
  author       = {A14-000000-NNNNN-001-B - Test 1},
  title        = {},
  howpublished = {},
  year         = {},
  keywords     = {AD}
}

@misc{A14-006,
  author       = {A14-000000-NNNNN-001-B - Test 2},
  title        = {},
  howpublished = {},
  year         = {},
  keywords     = {AD}
}

Bibtex reference .bib file:

@misc{A14-004,
  author       = {A14-000000-NNNNN-001-B - NNN},
  title        = {},
  howpublished = {},
  year         = {},
  keywords     = {AD}
}

Bibtex applicable .bib file:

@misc{A14-SSSSSS-MMMMM-001,
  author       = {A14-SSSSSS-MMMMM-001 - Service Platform Dummy Document 1},
  title        = {},
  howpublished = {},
  year         = {},
  keywords     = {AD}
}


@misc{A14-SSSSSS-MMMMM-002,
  author       = {A14-SSSSSS-MMMMM-002 - Service Platform Dummy Document 2},
  title        = {},
  howpublished = {},
  year         = {},
  keywords     = {RD}
}

@misc{A14-GGGGGG-LLLLL-002,
  author       = {A14-GGGGGG-LLLLL-002 - General Applicable Document},
  title        = {},
  howpublished = {},
  year         = {},
  keywords     = {AD}
}


I am thinking that , possible error might be the encoding support between those two backend options. Since, biber has the most advanced encoding supports rather than bibtex. But, it is only a guess.

I do not know the exact trouble maker here? What it should be?

0

1 Answer 1

2

If you write

author = {A14-SSSSSS-MMMMM-001 - Service Platform Dummy Document 1},

then BibTeX tries to parse the field as person's name consisting of first and last name. Obviously that absolutely does not make sense here. Apparently during the parsing the - gets lost. This is not something unique to biblatex, it can also be reproduced with natbib styles

\documentclass[british]{article}
\usepackage[T1]{fontenc}
\usepackage{babel}

\usepackage{natbib}

\begin{filecontents}{\jobname.bib}
@misc{A14-SSSSSS-MMMMM-001,
  author       = {A14-SSSSSS-MMMMM-001 - Service Platform Dummy Document 1},
  keywords     = {AD}
}
\end{filecontents}


\begin{document}
Lorem \citep{A14-SSSSSS-MMMMM-001}

\bibliographystyle{plainnat}
\bibliography{\jobname}
\end{document}

A14-SSSSSS-MMMMM-001 Service Platform Dummy Document 1.

The solution would be not to abuse the author field for something that blatantly is not an author name. Or at the very least enclose the contents of the field in curly braces to stop BibTeX from trying to parse it as a name.

\documentclass[british]{article}
\usepackage[T1]{fontenc}
\usepackage{babel}
\usepackage{csquotes}

\usepackage[backend=bibtex, style=numeric, sorting=none, defernumbers=true]{biblatex}

\begin{filecontents}{\jobname.bib}
@misc{A14-004,
  author       = {{A14-000000-NNNNN-001-B - NNN}},
  keywords     = {AD}
}
@misc{A14-SSSSSS-MMMMM-001,
  author       = {{A14-SSSSSS-MMMMM-001 - Service Platform Dummy Document 1}},
  keywords     = {AD}
}
@misc{A14-SSSSSS-MMMMM-002,
  author       = {{A14-SSSSSS-MMMMM-002 - Service Platform Dummy Document 2}},
  keywords     = {RD}
}
@misc{A14-GGGGGG-LLLLL-002,
  author       = {{A14-GGGGGG-LLLLL-002 - General Applicable Document}},
  keywords     = {AD}
}
\end{filecontents}
\addbibresource{\jobname.bib}

\begin{document}
Lorem \nocite{*}

\section{APPLICABLE and REFERENCED DOCUMENTS}
\printbibliography[
  keyword={RD},
  title = {Reference Documents},
  heading=subbibnumbered,
  resetnumbers=true
]
\printbibliography[
  keyword={AD},
  title = {Applicable Documents},
  heading=subbibnumbered,
  resetnumbers=true
]
\end{document}

A14-SSSSSS-MMMMM-002 - Service Platform Dummy Document 2.

1
  • Second option worked perfectly. Thank you for your support! Sep 24, 2021 at 6:31

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .