When the fields order are arranged in a different manner than Jabref do it, Jabref, even if the data is Ok in the bibtex view, the corresponding fields are not shown.Others tools doesn’t use the same rules than Jabref for indentation or = sign.If you merge 2 entries, you’ll have the same result. bib file some entries doesn’t have the “format used by Jabref” I mean : begins at col 1, the indentation varies depending the source of the data (2 spaces (Jabref), 4 spaces or more (other tools), = sign aligned or not, indentation or alignment of the equal sign is made with tabs (Referencer), for the whole line, partially or not), fields order is not the same between the bib file exported from EndNote, Mendeley or Referencer (I suppose Referencer uses the bibtex library with Python ?) and the fields order done by Jabref So, if you update an entry in Jabref “generated by Referencer for example”, into the file, you’ll find the new entry with the Jabref format and some garbage before the entry, especialy when you have data with special characters like in the institution field). publishandperish or Mendeley.Īfter all these manipulations, I updated all my entries to complete the information I need. bib file I did some other requests with other tools e.g. Medline (export from pubmed, import into Endnote, export all the selection with a custom format (bibtex amended) to have the complete data, including abstract, DOI and PMID) in a. After having understood how to find the “bad entry” I saw other possible sources of y problem.Īt the beginning my bib file results of the merging of different sources eg. After saving the data and open the file again in jabref, I got new errors. I did a new export in a new bib file to open it into jabref. I tried to load my bib file in an other tool, Referencer with Linux Mint. If needed, I can send you the files saved at each step.Īt the first time, I comprised the problem (not all the entries displayed) as I’ve lost all the entries not shown. May be I found another source of the problem. I found one on stackoverflow but it is not complete. I’ll try to find a python3 script to check the brackets (or delimiters eg. If you choose “ne conserver que les entrées fusionnées” (save only the 2 merge entries ? - the second button from the bottom right), the merge is not done… and the “file is corrupted”. When you click on the small icon, it shows you the 2 entries (left and rignt panel with the difference shown). In the window presenting the search result, some times, it indicates you a possible duplicate entry. You will find the same problem when, from an entry, you do an Internet search (medline for me with the PMID ou the DOI). I don’t know is this is a bug or a misusage by me. I found, in the original file, the errors. To do this, I’ve unchecked the ordered column (3 clics, one for sorting the entries from a-z, one for sorting from z to a, the third one to have the entries in the same order than the file. It seems the garbage appears when the field “Institution” is filled. I saw too that when you merge 2 entries, you’ll find in the file saved the too entries :Īnd some “résidus” (garbage) of the old one. Some times, I don't know why, some entries are partially duplicated.Īn example = īy the mean time I found some errors like this one. I’ve removed all the “special characters” (and latex formulation too), even if the file is UTF-8 coded. The line indicate is positioned at the end of file.įor example, if I merge 2 entries and I save the file under e new name, the new file “is corrupted”. I get a partial file (in my example, 790 entries of 1086). "Une erreur est survenue pendant le traitement de l’entrée: ‘Error in line 22336: EOF in mid-string’. I manage a “large” bibtext file (about 1080 entries (with non documents attached, research purpose).Įach time I update something on a “good file” (with no errors) and saving it, I get an error when I open it 1. First of all, thanks for this tools, containing more and more features.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |