On Mon, 18 Jul 2016 20:05:52 +0200
Henri Menke
I think it would be advantageous to also have the eprint/howpublished field available for @article such that I can link the arXiv even though an article has been published. This way people without subscription to a specific journal can readily access the preprint (open-access philosophy). Do you consider this a viable option?
Actually, correct usage *requires* you to give the published reference and doi. The APS, for example, will accept manuscripts that have been put on a preprint database, but the author *must* subsequently modify the entry on the preprint database to give the published reference. The howpublished field would be inappropriate for a published @article{}. An author can always choose to add a note, as in note={preprint available as arxiv:1607.04624}, but this will not get hyperlinked to the url using the aps bibliography specifications. My suggestion would be to keep your (@electronic) entry in the .bib file and to add the published version as a new @article entry. Then one has two choices: \cite[article,electronic] that will generate two references, or \cite[article+electronic] that will generate a single reference. Note that (often?) the year might differ (depending on when in the year and how long it took to get published)! Alan