Nevertheless, I've done my best, and I've made the the natbib-compatible result splncsnat.bst available for download. I was able to remove the need for some of the manual editing by a smarter choice of docstrip options, but I still ended up having to create a patch on top of a stock docstrip-generated BST (the docstrip driver splncsnat-unpatched.dbj and patch splncsnat.patch are also available). Hopefully that helps someone out there.
- splncsnat.bst: natbib-compatible BST file for Springer LNCS-type publications
Download and place splncsnat.bst in same directory as document's TeX source code. In the TeX preamble of the document, use
and then in the text use macros like\usepackage[numbers]{natbib}
\bibliographystyle{splncsnat}
The normal \bibliography{FILENAME} can be used at the end of the text where the BBL will be inserted by BibTeX.\cite{smith77} % to get a "[1]" in the text
\citep{smith77} % to get a "[1]" in the text
\citet{smith77} % to get a "Smith [1]" in the text
\citeauthor{smith77} % to get a "Smith" in the text - splncsnat-unpatched.dbj: docstrip driver used to generate splncsnat-unpatched.bst
- splncsnat.patch: patch used to generate splncsnat.bst from splncsnat-unpatched.bst (assuming version 4.20 [2007/04/24 (PWD, AO, DPC)] of merlin.mbs)
5 comments:
Wow! That was exactly what i was looking for. Thank's a lot for publishing this.
Thanks for putting this out in the open! Lack of natbib support is a serious handicap. Hope Springer takes note of this.
Thank you! This is useful. I noticed two issues though:
* the references should be in order of forst mentioning, not alphabetical,
* (minor) month and URL are added if supplied, while they should not.
Roman -- Thanks for the feedback. Do you have a link enumerating the bib conventions you're referring to? If I get a chance, I can try to update the DBJ and BST files to the (new?) conventions.
Regarding the ordering, that actually isn't standard across Springer journals. Different journals have different conventions. It should be easy to edit the DBJ to change the ordering though. Hopefully(?) that won't change things so much to muck up the patch.
I run a pre-processor on a slice of my BIB on each my journal submissions, and that masked off any issues with URL/etc. Again, it should be easy to remove those from the DBJ. Again, hopefully that wouldn't muck up the patch.
Ted,
there is no explicit statement, though the ordering is clear from the examples. Look here, for example:
http://www.springer.com/cda/content/document/cda_downloaddocument/typeinst.pdf
I'll try to follow your advice, though I have no experience of editing BST. :)
Post a Comment