I used to edit all my Tex documents using the online tex editor named "Overleaf" so far. I'm interested in submitting an article to some journal where they specifically mention that the manuscript should be edited using Latex2e editor. I need to know whether there's any online editing facility just like Overleaf for Latex, to get my files compiled using Latex2e editor. Also, would prefer if I can handle Latex2e environment using Overleaf online editor which will be very convenient to me rather than going for an offline editor. Is there any such possibility? NOTE: Latex2e is something unfamiliar to me, but no option, the journal's style guide does not compile properly in Overleaf without bugs.
Latex2e Vs Overleaf online editor
overleaf
Related Solutions
The instructions from Overleaf (https://www.overleaf.com/help/219) are specifically for use with BibTeX-based bibliographies. Herbert's answer to Biblatex: submitting to a journal explains how you could do something similar with biblatex.
For most intents and purposes, however, that will not work as intended. Unlike with BibTeX-based bibliographies, where the .bbl file contains ready-to-typeset material, biblatex's .bbl files contain the rehashed raw data in a LaTeX-readable format. The exact format of biblatex's .bbl file will depend on the biblatex and Biber version. The .bbl file on your machine can only be understood by systems with the same biblatex version (well, actually the same internal .bbl file version; biblatex development is still ongoing, so there is no stable state of affairs yet). See Matching biblatex in two machines, Making the arXiv accept a BibTeX BBL (May 2018) and Which biblatex/biber version produces BBL format 2.8? for more background on this.
In fact copying biblatex's .bbl file into your .tex document makes your document less portable. By using internal commands in your .tex file you effectively restrict the possible versions of biblatex that you could use, because biblatex is sensitive to changes in these internal macros. The user interface on the other hand is stable when it comes to high-level features and changes are usually attempted in a backwards compatible way (unfortunately, that does not always work out). So while it is possible to include a biblatex .bbl into a .tex file it usually does more harm than good.
Additionally, it is not guaranteed that publishers can deal with biblatex submissions anyway (see Joseph's answer to Biblatex: submitting to a journal). For journal submissions it is usually safer to use the provided classes (if any) or use standard classes and simple BibTeX or a manual thebibliography.
The bottom line is that for journal submissions your best chance is still good old BibTeX with \bibliographystyle and \bibliography.
The difficulties with the arXiv demonstrate that if publishers want to support biblatex they should accept uploading .bib files. User-submitted .bbl files only cause version conflicts and pain. That would mean, however, that they would have to run LaTeX and Biber on the submitted files, which would significantly complicate their workflow. I don't see that happening any time soon.
Note that using BibTeX as backend for biblatex has the same issues as using Biber since the use of the .bbl file is the same and the format is only very slightly different, so simply switching to backend=bibtex in biblatex will not bring measurable improvement.
Overleaf uses a “normal latex compiler” (they recently upgraded to TeX Live 2018) on the backend. That is, converting your .tex file into PDF (using pdflatex or xelatex or whatever) happens on Overleaf's servers. After that, the system sends the resulting PDF to your browser, where their frontend code uses pdf.js to render the PDF in a HTML canvas. Some part of the Overleaf/ShareLaTeX source code is available on GitHub (the original 2014 blog post was at this link (now redirected)).
Apart from Overleaf, as far as “I want to show a compiled version of some latex document […] in my website” goes, another option is to produce DVI (instead of PDF) on the server, and then convert to SVG using dvisvgm.
The other possible approach is to run the compilation process in the user's browser instead. I know of two projects that aim to do this; so far both are experimental and rather slow:
There exists texlive.js (see demo) and xetex.js, which compile the TeX Live code to Javascript via Emscripten (could also compile to WebAssembly instead these days).
There's also Jim Fowler's recent work; see demo here and here, source code here/here/here, and TUGboat article in Vol 40 (2019) Issue 1. This compiles the WEB/Pascal code of TeX using a custom compiler into WebAssembly, then uses a custom DVI converter to render into HTML.
Best Answer
overleaf is an online installation of the standard texlive tex distrubution, so you are using latex2e there. latex2e is not an editor it is the tex format you are using. The same latex2e text may be used whether you write it in a local editor or copy it from this website or write it in overleaf.
The problem was with errors in the journal suppled template.
An overleaf project using the sample document and supplied file is here
https://www.overleaf.com/read/xyxsvytvrsnk
The TeX code in both is really awful but if that is a requirement for submission you have to do what you have to do....
The first error is that
\Nois undefined, I think it is just supposed to makeNo.so I addedIt then runs without error but warns that
so I added
It now runs without error.