Some time ago there was this question from Igor on biblatex and REVTeX. Pretty much everyone in Physics is locked into using REVTeX because some of the most important journals require it, and it's stopping us from migrating to biblatex. Given this problem, I've been pondering writing a question on how to hack together a solution. There is a good chance this means changing a lot of code in the class file, but honestly I'm not sure. I've never had to dig into this kind of thing before. It could even be an entirely new macro package.
So the question is, will this be too big, even with a large bounty? At what point does a problem become too large to reasonably ask TeX.sx?
NOTE
I have accepted an answer, although at the time of writing this note the answers by Joseph Wright, lockstep and Andrew Stacey all raised good points, and are worth a read.
bbl
file to be included, so they never run BibTeX on their end anyway....bbl
file you get frombiblatex
is very different from that usingnatbib
. I had some discussions with a publisher recently about their TeX support, and in their BibTeX style there is some XML included in the.bbl
for the publisher. So any deviation from the official route would be a serious problem.