Is it possible to use org babel to extract bibtex entries from file of notes
to a *.bib file?

The stumbling point for me in saving bibtex sources is I don't see a way to
use the file as a bibtex *.bib file so as to use that as the direct source
for the publication.  Perhaps this could be automated with babel?

Alan

On Fri, Apr 1, 2011 at 6:13 AM, Matt Lundin <mdl@imapmail.org> wrote:

> Stephen Eglen <S.J.Eglen@damtp.cam.ac.uk> writes:
>
> >> Agreed. Google Scholar citations need very close proofreading, as they
> >> can be erroneous or poorly formatted.
> >
> > Thanks Matt - I'd agree with this, having seen oddities from google
> > scholar.  I emailed them ages ago about one problem (formatting of
> > initials in author names), but never heard back... it is a pity that
> > there is no mechanism for tidying up their references, as it seems to be
> > the best thing out there that covers all the fields.
> >
> > Having said that, if google scholar can save me some typing, I'll
> > happilyuse it as a starting point for a bibtex entry.  I've just started
> > using pdfmeat -- this is nice, as given a pdf, it outputs the
> > corresponding bibtex entry from google scholar.  Probably works similar
> > to the way zotero does it, but can be used straight from the command
> > line:
> >
> >   http://code.google.com/p/pdfmeat/
> >
>
> Thanks for the link! That looks like a useful tool.
>
> >> accessed by bibsnarf are limited to math and sciences. Since I use
> >> biblatex together with the Chicago Manual of Style, any bibtex entry I
> >> clip has to be edited and tweaked substantially. (Indeed, manual editing
> >> is unavoidable when using biblatex.)
> >
> > If its not too tangential, why do you use biblatex -- is it the future
> > for bibtex?
>
> I use biblatex because I use citation styles in the humanities
> (especially the Chicago Manual of Style). Biblatex and the chicago-notes
> package (both now part of TeXLive) handle Chicago Style footnotes and
> bibliographies beautifully, with an astounding number of options and
> flawless formatting -- but the bibtex entries are a bit fussier than
> standard bibtex.
>
> Best,
> Matt
>
>