t...@tsdye.com (Thomas S. Dye) writes: >> Biblatex is the gold standard. Maybe not in input-aesthetics..., but in >> terms of amenability, usability and output it surely is. (No, I have >> nothing to back this up). > > Compare the bibtex style, chicago.bst, with biblatex-chicago and note > how much more closely the biblatex version approximates the Chicago > Manual of Style.
Before biblatex-chicago, I used to generate my own bst files with custom-bib. It was awful 'cause I would often answer questions wrong and would have to start over... > Also, biber is required for some biblatex features that bibtex doesn't > support. I haven't followed this development and am not sure what they > are, though. My understanding is that a major limitation of bibtex was that it didn't handle sorting of anything more complex than [a-zA-Z]. Bibtex8 extended this, but you still needed special support, see e.g. dk-bib on CTAN. Lars Madsen, of "Avoid eqnarray!"-fame (and much else in the TeX-verse), has an excellent intro in Danish. If my memory serves me correctly, earlier β-versions had instructions on how to do hacks to get better support when writing in Danish. —Rasmus -- Lasciate ogni speranza, voi che leggete questo.
