On Sun, Jan 6, 2013 at 3:01 AM, Jürgen Spitzmüller <sp...@lyx.org> wrote:

> Jacob Bishop wrote:
> > However, it is still not clear to me how to properly allow for
> > the natbibapa or apacite options to be supported. Julien has mentioned
> the
> > Requires parameter, but it is not clear to me from reading the
> > documentation in the customization manual what Requires does. What is the
> > difference between using Requires and including a package
> > #\DeclareLaTeXClass[]{}?
>
> The latter only makes Lyx search if the package is available, and it
> issues a
> warning if not. But it does not actually load the package. Requires, on the
> other hand, loads the package.
>

Understood. Thanks for the explanation.

>
> I do not think "Requires apacite" is the way to go, since as you wrote, it
> rules out all other citation options (most importantly biblatex), although
> this could be worked around with a specific module.
>

I agree.

>
> > Whatever the solution, it would be ideal if it were possible to pass
> natbib
> > as either a package option, or to include natbib and/or apacite with
> > customizable options, such as in the preamble. One solution to this would
> > be to provide a checkbox where natbib is selected where we can suppress
> > loading natbib. Then, the options could be loaded elsewhere (preamble, or
> > document options). We could also provide a textbox where addtitional
> natbib
> > options could be passed, negating the need to load it elsewhere (but it
> > still might be nice to suppress it, such as when biblatex is used). Then
> > again, if we end up supporting biblatex as an option, this could happen
> > automatically.
>
> The patch I posted does the following:
>
> By default, no package is loaded. So all things are possible: biblatex,
> plain
> bibtex, apacite.
>
> But if you select "natbib" from the Document settings dialog, the class
> loads
> apacite/natbibapa. No module required. The only drawback I see is that
> "plain"
> natbib (without apacite) is not possible with that class.
>
> This seems to me like a reasonable solution. Thanks.

Jacob

Reply via email to