As far as I can tell the three major citation packages are:
natbib
cite
biblatex
There already is a discussion on the relation between natbib
and biblatex
here: bibtex vs. biber and biblatex vs. natbib However, the cite
package is left out, and I'm having a hard time finding anything on this stack exchange about the matter.
The linked question has me wanting to use biblatex
, however I don't know if cite
would be better.
So my question is:
What are the pros and cons of cite
compared to natbib
and biblatex
and are there other packages in the jungle of citation packages? If there are other packages then; when (if ever) should I consider using them?
Best Answer
Most of what is said about
natbib
in bibtex vs. biber and biblatex vs. natbib also applies tocite
. They play a similar role and both use the same underlying workflow to produce bibliographies: Compilation with BibTeX and.bst
files (this is what I called "the BibTeX way of creating bibliographies" elsewhere). In fact both packages are mainly concerned with the output of citations and not so much with the bibliography output, which is controlled by the.bst
files.The difference between
natbib
andcite
is 'only' in their specific set of features, while the difference tobiblatex
is conceptional.natbib
andcite
are incompatible andnatbib
emulates some key features of thecite
package (see p. 1 of thenatbib
documentation). I haven't actually checked if you can recreate everything thatcite
can do withnatbib
, but I'm fairly confident that you can get quite far.natbib
offers many features thatcite
does not have, mainly support for author-year citations (.bst
file permitting) and new citation commands like\citep
,\citet
, ...There are more BibTeX-based citation packages:
apacite
,harvard
, ... There is alsojurabib
, butjurabib
takes the idea of BibTeX bibliographies to the next level and is in some ways much closer tobiblatex
's approach than to the other packages.For what it is worth you might not need a package like
cite
ornatbib
at all if you are only after simple numeric citations. LaTeX's built-in\cite
might already be enough for you. See What bibliography is used if no package is loaded? and What is the default bibliography package and backend in LaTeX?.If you have already decided that you want to use
biblatex
instead ofnatbib
, I don't really think you would want to usecite
instead.That said, while I am very happy to recommend to use
biblatex
there is at least one area wherebiblatex
is clearly inferior to BibTeX-based bibliography solutions: Submissions to publishers and journals as well as preprint services with on-server compilation like the arXiv (see Biblatex: submitting to a journal and Making the arXiv accept a BibTeX BBL (May 2018) as well as many other questions about this topic). Additionally,biblatex
is still being developed, so there is a risk of changes (some of which might not be fully backwards compatible, take the notorious Biblatex 3.3 name formatting). Most BibTeX-based solutions have been stable for many moons and are therefore usually not very sensitive to version issues.