Changing from bibtex to biblatex

Jürgen Spitzmüller spitz at
Fri Sep 18 06:37:41 UTC 2020

Am Donnerstag, den 17.09.2020, 12:51 -0700 schrieb Rich Shepard:
> I reconfigured LyX to use biblatex rather than bibtex. Are there any
> differences in the structure of the *.bib file between the two?

Biblatex has many fields that BibTeX typically doesn't have, and some
fileds have a different syntax. E.g., address takes and "and"-separated 
list (Berlin and New York and Boston). However, Biblatex can deal with
all BibTeX fields and handle "classic" input.

> For the time being I'm sticking with JabRef-5.1 because I've been
> using it for years and I need to work with the contents rather than
> learning a new tool. And, I've learned that Ocular allows me to copy
> and paste from PDF-1.7 docs while the installed versions of xpdf and
> other PDF viewers won't.
> Cleaning up the .bib file JabRef shows some duplicates and I've cut
> those out. But, when I do an integrity check it shows errors that are
> not in the .bib file itself.
> Example: JabRef shows a list of authors with names separated by semi-
> colons Aazami, J.;Sari, A.E.; ... while the .bib file shows {Aazami,
> J. and Sari, A.E. and ... JabRef tells me that what it's displaying
> is not correct bibtex format. 

Yes, names must be and-separated (in both BibTeX and Biblatex).

> For that same article JabRef says it's missing page numbers but the
> .bib file shows pages = {260–-269},

Biblatex expects normal dash {260-269}, which will be automatically
transfered to en-dash (or whatever the style wants) in output. 
{260--269} in input works as well, but this won't be tranferred if the
style requires a different separator.


> I don't recall seeing anything like this before.
> All thoughts welcome,
> Rich
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 488 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <>

More information about the lyx-users mailing list