Thanks for the links. Those are not submitted yet, so I missed them.
Some parts of my package are complementary and some others are duplicates of course. We should probably merge. Then a JuliaTeX group is even more relevant I think.
Unfortunately, my package is not pushed on my github yet and I won’t have access to it before a couple of days.
The current list of implemented features:
- A Julia internal format for bib entries (this is probably close to what is in BibTeX.jl but I need some time to check)
- Including sets of rules for each types of entries to check if required/forbidden fields are given
- Convertor from this internal format to “user-friendly” bibtex format (lexicographically ordered fields, column aligned equal signs, ordered citations by keys|year|authors, everything to lower case if relevant, …)
- A bibtex file/entry parser using Automa.jl and the grammar from this bibtex summary
- I don’t know which one of it and BibTeX.jl is faster to parse. At first glance I would say my version is more compact and can be extended (to include the above-mentioned rules checking for instance) easily, but it depends on another package.
In the end I need to take more time to check those two packages, and also to upload mine (no documentation yet … I was planning to wait a bit more haha).
So what about the JuliaTeX group ?