Comparing existing bib tools

Update to this post: turns out there was a page, just not one I was aware of – please see I have linked to this from Isn’t it handy when people have already done the job for us…

Recently, a discussion on the Working Group List raised the subject of existing technologies that store and share reading / publication lists, and how BibSoup / BibServer compares to them.

Tom Morris said:

Perhaps it would be illustrative to compare and contrast with other existing widely known services and tools such as Zotero, Mendeley, CiteUlike, and the venerable emacs/Bibtex/LaTex. What is better, worse, or just different? Which sets of things are alternatives to each other and which complement each other? What are the things which make BibSoup/BibServer unique?

Of course, if this is already laid out in detail somewhere on a web page, just point me there.

There wasn’t, until now, so please refer to this wiki page set up for this purpose and start comparing!

I have used Thad Guidry’s notes on Mendeley, as well as the first line of the Wikipedia entry, to populate that example. Please do edit and add to this page – we want to avoid a debate on which is better than which, so please keep your opinions in check, but hopefully this will be a good opportunity to get a sense of what is in use and how they compare with one another and BibSoup.

Profile photo of Naomi Lillie

About Naomi Lillie

Naomi has been working for Open Knowledge since 2011 and is based in the UK. She supports operations, projects, staff and the community network.
This entry was posted in BibServer, Data, JISC OpenBib, OKFN Openbiblio and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *