Precautions when migrating a TeX template from “bmc_article”to“peps_article”
May 08, 2014
This document describes precautions whenrecompiling a manuscript that has been written using“bmc_article (BioMed Central LaTeX template)” into an updated TeX manuscript by using “peps_article (Progress in Earth and Planetary Science LaTeX template)”.
Note: This document is intended only for a manuscript that has been written using an original “bmc_article” without changes. In case any modification is made to the class file or any other .bst file is used, another handling may be required.
Preconditions：”pepsart.cls” and “peps-article.bst” provided by “peps_article” are just modifiedonly in a part of each fileon the basis of “bmcart.cls” and “bmc-mathphys.bst” in order to make the manuscript as close to the PEPS style as possible. Therefore these templatesdo not fully comply with the PEPS Word style. The reason for this is to ensure consistency similar to the “bmc_article” both in the manuscript structure and the output data.
1. Differences between “bmc_article” and “peps_article”
The styles for references differ from each other.
When making a list of references using “bmc-mathphys.bst” and then compiling it using “bmcart.cls”;
- The superscript reference labels are output in the main text, and the numbered references are listed in order of first appearance in References.
When making a list of references using “peps-article.bst” and then compiling it using “pepsart.cls”;
- No reference labels are output in the main text, and the references are listed in order by the last name of the first author and the year of publication.
- The reference information including the author name, the manuscript title and the year of publication is output in the alignment order as close to the PEPS Word style as possible.
2. Required work
2.1 Reference citations in the main text
When a citation is written as below, please replace ¥cite with ¥nocite.
Example 1
Smith and Jones (1999)¥cite{smi99}
↓↓↓
Smith and Jones (1999)¥nocite{smi99}
Example 2
(Slifka et al.¥ 2000a¥cite{sli2000a}; Slifka et al.¥ 2000b¥cite{sli2000b})
↓↓↓
(Slifka et al.¥ 2000a¥nocite{sli2000a}; Slifka et al.¥ 2000b¥nocite{sli2000b})
When a citation differs from the PEPS style as shown in the following example, please write the items (i.e. Author name and Year of publication) in accordance with the specified style, in addition to replacing ¥cite with ¥nocite.
Example1
xxxx xxxxx xxxxx¥cite{sli2000}
↓↓↓
xxxx xxxxx xxxxx (Slifka et al.¥ 2000a¥nocite{sli2000})
Example 2
xxxx xxxxx xxxxx Smith and Jones¥cite{smi99}
↓↓↓
xxxx xxxxx xxxxx Smith and Jones (1999)¥nocite{smi99}
Note 1：If you are using two or more references by the same authors, published in the same year, please distinguish them by adding alphabets after the year of publication.
Note 2：The reason ¥nocite is used is because the “bmc_article” requires to use ¥nocite for citation styles other than “unsorted”.
2.2 List of references
When ¥nocite commands are used in the main text, and the references in the list have already been sorted by the first author’s name and the year of publication, please compile the list using “pepsart.cls”.
If the list of references has been generated using “bmc-mathphys.bst”, the references are sorted in order of first appearance. In this case, please directly realignthe references in the bibliography by the first author’s name and the year of publication.
Even if you made any modification directly in your existing list of references, such direct modifications will not be reflected to the new list to be generated by “peps-article.bst”.
Because “peps-article.bst” does not fully comply with the PEPS Word style, please make modifications as necessary.