> I'm starting to think that the "dialect" design within bibtex.el was
> confused about bibtex vs. biblatex (this is pretty confusing, as we
> can see here: https://tex.stackexchange.com/q/25701/34063). However,
> I'm not sure what is the correct solution. At the very least,
> bibtex.el should be more permissive about what entry types get parsed
> by bibtex-parse-entry.
The range of "acceptable" entry types needs to be compatible with the
BibTeX style files that one wants to use. Certainly, these style files
can be modified to handle any entry types you like. But I am not sure
it makes sense to extend the defaults of bibtex.el beyond the defaults
defined by BibTeX and / or biblatex.
I really wish this was more permissive. Looking at a .bib file, we have no way of knowing the biblio style that it's going to be set with. We also have no way of knowing whether the user is going to parse it with bibtex or biber.
If you want to use the full range
of entry types defined by biblatex, you may be served better by making
biblatex your default dialect of bibtex-mode. (I find it useful if
bibtex-mode keeps track of the entry types known to a dialect.)
I am still missing something... as far as I can tell, the "dialect" is just controlling which entries are valid. Is that right? But this is not within the purview of whether we use bibtex, or biber+biblatex. It depends on the biblio style that the user wants to use for setting their bibliography.
I am currently working on a patch for bibtex-mode that will make it
easier for users to customize the entry types known by a dialect,
including the possibility to define aliases for entry types. This patch
should be installed on master in a few weeks. (I want to test it
first.)
I'm happy to hear that there will be future improvements. I sincerely request that parsing of entries be made more permissive — not restricted to a list of entry types, or relying on the user to make some customizations [I think most users are not going to discover that it's possible to customize this].
PS: My reading of the above thread on stackexchange is that it will not
make everyone happy if the distinction between old BibTeX and new
biblatex gets blurred by bibtex-mode.
Again I don't understand why bibtex-mode is making a distinction. The syntax of the .bib is identical whether the user wants to use bibtex or biber+biblatex.
Best,
Leo