BibTeX, biblatex and biber ⇒ An issue with Bibtex reference

[vinp]

Hi,

I am very new to latex and a new member of this list. I am using natbib to author my thesis report. I want IETF RFC style citations for my references, so I am using the following package:
\usepackage[numbers,square]{natbib}

I am getting into a strange problem wrt how references appear in the pdf file after it is generated.

In my .bib file I have entries as follows:

Code: Select all

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
@Book{etsigsmplmnph1,
  ALTauthor =    {},
  ALTeditor =    {},
  title =    {Recommendation GSM 02.01, Version 3.2.0 Principles of telecommunication services supported by a GSM PLMN, Phase 1},
  publisher =    {European Telecommunications Standards Institute},
  year =     {1992},
  OPTkey =   {},
  OPTvolume =    {},
  OPTnumber =    {},
  OPTseries =    {},
  OPTaddress =   {},
  OPTedition =   {},
  month =    {February},
  OPTnote =      {},
  OPTannote =    {}
}
@Book{etsigsmbearerph1,
  ALTauthor =    {},
  ALTeditor =    {},
  title =    {Recommendation GSM 02.02, Version 3.2.0 Bearer Services Supported by a GSM PLMN, Phase 1},
  publisher =    {European Telecommunications Standards Institute},
  year =     {1992},
  OPTkey =   {},
  OPTvolume =    {},
  OPTnumber =    {},
  OPTseries =    {},
  OPTaddress =   {},
  OPTedition =   {},
  month =    {February},
  OPTnote =      {},
  OPTannote =    {}
}
 
 
הההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההה
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

Now, when I generate the pdf, I see the following entries under my References section:
[6] (1992a). Recommendation GSM 02.01, Version 3.2.0 Principles of telecommunica-
tion services supported by a GSM PLMN, Phase 1. European Telecommunications
Standards Institute.
[7] (1992b). Recommendation GSM 02.02, Version 3.2.0 Bearer Services Supported by
a GSM PLMN, Phase 1. European Telecommunications Standards Institute.

I am not able to figure out why the tool appends the letters a and b to the year. Can any of the members help me?

TIA
Vin

[frabjous]

Because neither has an author or editor, they're treated as having the same "blank" author, and multiple works by the same author/editor from the same year are given letters in this style.

You really should fill out either the author or editor field for each entry, even if you need to fill in the same of the institution instead. (In that case, make it read

author = {{Institution Name}},

the double brackets will prevent it being parsed as a name.

[vinp]

Thanks for your response. I did in fact try that but still see the same issue. For instance, for the following entry in my .bib file

Code: Select all

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
@Manual{etsigsmplmnph1,
  title =    {Recommendation GSM 02.01, Version 3.2.0 Principles of telecommunication services supported by a GSM PLMN, Phase 1},
  OPTkey =   {},
  author =   {European Telecommunications Standards Institute (ETSI)},
  OPTorganization = {},
  OPTaddress =   {},
  OPTedition =   {},
  month =    {February},
  year =     {1992},
  OPTnote =      {},
  OPTannote =    {}
}
@Manual{etsigsmteleph1,
  title =    {Recommendation GSM 02.03, Version 3.4.0 Teleservices Supported by a GSM PLMN, Phase 1},
  OPTkey =   {},
  author =   {European Telecommunications Standards Institute (ETSI)},
  OPTorganization = {},
  OPTaddress =   {},
  OPTedition =   {},
  month =    {February},
  year =     {1992},
  OPTnote =      {},
  OPTannote =    {}
}
 
 
הההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההה
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

I see the following entry in the generated pdf file:
[23] (ETSI), E. T. S. I. (1992a). Recommendation GSM 02.01, Version 3.2.0 Principles
of telecommunication services supported by a GSM PLMN, Phase 1.
[24] (ETSI), E. T. S. I. (1992b). Recommendation GSM 02.03, Version 3.4.0 Teleser-
vices Supported by a GSM PLMN, Phase 1.

Of course, I did not use double braces for the authpr field, so that should explain the abbreviation E.T.S.I in the output.

Vin

[frabjous]

When listing multiple reports by the same author (or "author") for the same year, adding the letter after the date to differentiate them is normal and intended behavior for many bibliographical styles. This isn't BibTeX's fault, it's how the style file you're using works. If you want something different, you'll need to use a different style, or edit the one you have. I don't think you ever mentioned what that was.

[vinp]

Thanks for the response. If you can help me with your email ID, I could mail the .sty file to you. I guess that is the relevant file?

[frabjous]

The relevant file is the .bst file, called by the \bibliographystyle command.

There is no need to use email. If you want to share something like that, upload it as an attachment here. (Put it in a .zip file if the forum won't accept the extension.) But I personally know very little about editing .bst files anyway. Still, I don't understand why you want to change this behavior. It makes no sense at all to use BibTeX with author/date references and not have a way of differentiating distinct works from the same institution and the same year inside the citations.

[vinp]

I have attached the .zip file, and apparently the .bst file seems to be a modification of chicago.bst, as gleaned from comments. I guess the distinction between publications from the same organization or author during the same year can be made in terms of the title, so I would like to do away with the a, b, c qualification if I can. Incidentally, I guess the line number of relevance inside the .bst file is line #1014.

[frabjous]

I guess the distinction between publications from the same organization or author during the same year can be made in terms of the title, so I would like to do away with the a, b, c qualification if I can.

I just noticed now that you were using the numbers option to natbib. The chicago.bst style, and it seems, the otago.bst styles were meant to be used with author-year style internal citations, and then, you would definitely need to make the differentiation without needing the title.

But I'm very curious why you chose this style. You must have had a reason. If some publisher, or your university, or something, was urging you to use it, most likely they meant you to use author/date style citations.

Incidentally, I guess the line number of relevance inside the .bst file is line #1014.

Lots of lines are relevant. It seems to work if you comment out part of line 286, i.e., change:

Code: Select all

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
FUNCTION {output.year.check}
{ year empty$
     { "empty year in " cite$ * warning$ }
     { write$
        " (" year * extra.label *
       month empty$
          { ")" * }
          { ")" * }  %% Nope. For otago.bst, no month.
%          { ", " * month * ")" * }
       if$
       mid.sentence 'output.state :=
     }
  if$
}
 
 
הההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההה
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

to

Code: Select all

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
FUNCTION {output.year.check}
{ year empty$
     { "empty year in " cite$ * warning$ }
     { write$
        " (" year * %extra.label *
       month empty$
          { ")" * }
          { ")" * }  %% Nope. For otago.bst, no month.
%          { ", " * month * ")" * }
       if$
       mid.sentence 'output.state :=
     }
  if$
}
 
 
הההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההההה
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

(Notice the % before "extra-label" here.)

I tried some other things, but it uses the extra.label part for sorting, so you can't try to prevent it from determining it, only try to prevent it from inserting it into the output.

I'd save the modified .bst file with a different name, e.g., otago-mod.bst, and change the your \bibliographystyle command appropriately, e.g., \bibliographystyle{otago-mod}.

But I really haven't tested that much, and you may run into problems down the road.

[vinp]

Thank you very much for your time and suggestions.