Dear Martin, Thanks for following up on this.
Best, John > -----Original Message----- > From: Martin Maechler [mailto:maech...@stat.math.ethz.ch] > Sent: March 27, 2017 9:26 AM > To: Fox, John <j...@mcmaster.ca> > Cc: Martin Maechler <maech...@stat.math.ethz.ch>; r-package-devel@r- > project.org > Subject: RE: [R-pkg-devel] multiple bibentry()s in CITATION > > >>>>> Fox, John <j...@mcmaster.ca> > >>>>> on Mon, 16 Jan 2017 15:44:05 +0000 writes: > > > Dear Martin, > > Thanks for addressing this question, if belatedly! > > > After a little bit of thought, perhaps a default somewhere between 1 and > Inf makes sense, along with an additional argument to citation: > citation(package="pkg", bibtex.max=n), with default bibtex.max= > getOption("citation.bibtex.max"), where the citation.bibtex.max option is > initially set to something like 4. If the number of available citations > exceeds > bibtex.max, then a message like "there are additional BiBTeX citations, enter > 'citation(package="pkg", bibtex.max=Inf)' to see all of them." > > In the mean time, I have always used my proposed change. > I think any number between 1 and Inf is so much arbitrary that inspite of your > good thoughts I kept the *new* default at Inf. > > and because of this open question, I have forgotten to commit the change to > the development version of R ! > > I have done so now, however not ported it yet to "R 3.4.0 alpha". > If not much surfaces (in CRAN / Bioc checks), we may port it in time for > 3.4.0. > > > Martin > > > Best, > > John > > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: Martin Maechler [mailto:maech...@stat.math.ethz.ch] > >> Sent: Monday, January 16, 2017 10:02 AM > >> To: Fox, John <j...@mcmaster.ca> > >> Cc: r-package-devel@r-project.org > >> Subject: Re: [R-pkg-devel] multiple bibentry()s in CITATION > >> > >> >>>>> Fox, John <j...@mcmaster.ca> > >> >>>>> on Fri, 2 Sep 2016 15:42:46 +0000 writes: > >> > >> (which is more than 4 months ago) > >> > >> > Dear list members, > >> > I've noticed that citation(package="pkg") generates both a text > >> citation and a BiBTeX entry when the CITATION file contains a single > >> call to bibentry() or citEntry(), but that only text citations are > shown > >> if there are multiple calls to bibentry() or citEntry(). > >> > >> > Is this behaviour intentional? In my opinion, it's useful always > >> to show the BiBTeX (although it's available through > >> toBibtex(citation(package="pkg")) ). > >> > >> > The Writing R Extensions manual says, "A CITATION file will > >> contain *calls* [my emphasis] to function bibentry." > >> > >> > Thanks, > >> > John > >> > >> and you did not get a reply.... > >> I had wanted but forgotten about it ... two parts : > >> > >> 1) On November 24, 2012, I had improved R with an option to get this > >> so this has been a "hidden gem" ;-) for a while in R: > >> > >> > options(citation.bibtex.max = Inf) > >> > citation(package = "Rcmdr") > >> > >> To cite the 'Rcmdr' package in publications use: > >> > >> Fox, J., and Bouchet-Valat, M. (2017). Rcmdr: R Commander. R package > >> version 2.3-2. > >> > >> A BibTeX entry for LaTeX users is > >> > >> @Manual{, > >> title = {{Rcmdr: R Commander}}, > >> author = {John Fox and Milan Bouchet-Valat}, > >> year = {2017}, > >> note = {R package version 2.3-2}, > >> url = {http://socserv.socsci.mcmaster.ca/jfox/Misc/Rcmdr/}, > >> } > >> > >> Fox, J. (2017). Using the R Commander: A Point-and-Click Interface or > >> R. Boca Raton FL: > >> Chapman and Hall/CRC Press. > >> > >> A BibTeX entry for LaTeX users is > >> > >> @Book{, > >> title = {Using the {R Commander}: A Point-and-Click Interface for > >> {R}}, > >> author = {John Fox}, > >> year = {2017}, > >> publisher = {Chapman and Hall/CRC Press}, > >> address = {Boca Raton {FL}}, > >> url = {http://socserv.mcmaster.ca/jfox/Books/RCommander/}, > >> } > >> > >> Fox, J. (2005). The R Commander: A Basic Statistics Graphical User > >> Interface to R. > >> Journal of Statistical Software, 14(9): 1--42. > >> > >> A BibTeX entry for LaTeX users is > >> > >> @Article{, > >> title = {The {R} {C}ommander: A Basic Statistics Graphical User > >> Interface to {R}}, > >> author = {John Fox}, > >> year = {2005}, > >> journal = {Journal of Statistical Software}, > >> volume = {14}, > >> number = {9}, > >> pages = {1--42}, > >> url = {http://www.jstatsoft.org/v14/i09}, > >> } > >> > >> > > >> ---------------- > >> > >> This all works "obviously" (;-) via utils:::format.bibentry () and even > >> when I had made the number one an argument to that function with a > >> default you can set via options(), I had wondered a bit why the > cutoff > >> should by default be at one. > >> > >> E.g., it looks strange that by *adding* a 2nd reference, you get > shorter > >> citation output.... and to me it would seem more coherent to have the > >> default rather be 'Inf' instead of '1', i.e. always showing both text > >> and bibtex. > >> > >> There is quite a difference though: For our copula package, e.g., > >> > >> > options(citation.bibtex.max = 1); citation(package = "copula") > >> > >> To cite the R package copula in publications use: > >> > >> Marius Hofert, Ivan Kojadinovic, Martin Maechler and Jun Yan (2017). > >> copula: > >> Multivariate Dependence with Copulas. R package version 0.999-16 URL > >> https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=copula > >> > >> Jun Yan (2007). Enjoy the Joy of Copulas: With a Package copula. > >> Journal of Statistical > >> Software, 21(4), 1-21. URLhttp://www.jstatsoft.org/v21/i04/. > >> > >> Ivan Kojadinovic, Jun Yan (2010). Modeling Multivariate Distributions > >> with Continuous > >> Margins Using the copula R Package. Journal of Statistical Software, > >> 34(9), 1-20. URL > >> http://www.jstatsoft.org/v34/i09/. > >> > >> Marius Hofert, Martin Maechler (2011). Nested Archimedean Copulas > Meet > >> R: The nacopula > >> Package. Journal of Statistical Software, 39(9), 1-20. URL > >> http://www.jstatsoft.org/v39/i09/. > >> > >> > > >> > >> This is relatively compact (18 lines) > >> whereas it gives 67 lines of output when the option is set to > something > >> >= 4. > >> > >> Other opinions? > >> What do you think, would it be worth the compatibility break to change > >> the default from '1' to 'Inf' ? > >> > >> Best regards, > >> Martin ______________________________________________ R-package-devel@r-project.org mailing list https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-package-devel
