Biblatex citation order

Question

I'm facing a problem with biblatex citation order.

Using this configuration:

\documentclass {article}
\usepackage[brazil]{babel}
\usepackage[utf8]{inputenc}
\hyphenation{es-ta-bi-li-da-de}
\usepackage{setspace}
\singlespacing
\usepackage[natbib=true,style=numeric]{biblatex}
\addbibresource{frameworks.bib}

Being frameworks.bib this:

@Article{JONHSON88,
author = {Ralph Johnson, Brian Foote},
title = {Designin Reusable Classes},
journal = {Journal of Object-Oriented Programming SIGS},
year = {1988},
key = {Johnson:88},
volume = {1},
number = {5},
pages = {22-35},
month = jun
}

@book{UML-F:00,
author = {Fontoura M., Pree W., Rumpe B.},
editor = {Addison-Wesley},
title = {The UML Profile for Framework Architectures},
year = {2000},
}

The PDF is generated with a text like:

Something about something[4], and moo foo other children[1].

This citation [4] is the first in all text. How can I order this correctly to [1]...[2] ...?

score 230 · Accepted Answer · edited Apr 13 '17 at 12:35

230

You can achieve this by using the sorting=none option. Here is a fully working MWE:

\documentclass{article}
\usepackage[
    %backend=biber, 
    natbib=true,
    style=numeric,
    sorting=none
]{biblatex}

\addbibresource{biblatex-examples.bib}

\begin{document}
   Aksin~\cite{aksin} says one in his article.
   Aristotle~\cite{aristotle:poetics} says two in his book.
   Angenendt~\cite{angenendt} says three in his article.
   And Augustine \cite{augustine} says four in his book.
  \printbibliography
\end{document}

From section 3.1.2 of the biblatex documentation:
biblatex knows various schemes for sorting, these are:

nty Sort by name, title, year.
nyt Sort by name, year, title.
nyvt Sort by name, year, volume, title.
anyt Sort by alphabetic label, name, year, title.
anyvt Sort by alphabetic label, name, year, volume, title.
ynt Sort by year, name, title.
ydnt Sort by year (descending), name, title.
none Do not sort at all. All entries are processed in citation order.
debug Sort by entry key. This is intended for debugging only.

If sorting still fails, try backend=biber, it is more stable especially with UTF8 .bib files.
Instead of calling (pdf)latex, bibtex, (pdf)latex, (pdf)latex
you would then instead call (pdf)latex, biber, (pdf)latex.

edited Apr 13 '17 at 12:35

Community

1

answered Apr 10 '12 at 17:51

matth

12,381

1

Even doing this, the books are coming first. Does this make sense? – Custodio Apr 10 '12 at 20:22
2

Is it possible for you to switch to backend=biber instead of backend=bibtex? Then take a look at my updated MWE. Maybe it helps. – matth Apr 10 '12 at 21:02
It works like a charm. What's the behavior change of this modification? – Custodio Apr 10 '12 at 22:17
Good to hear it works. You can read more about biber on the biber homepage or here on this site: http://tex.stackexchange.com/questions/25701/bibtex-vs-biber-and-biblatex-vs-natbib – matth Apr 11 '12 at 07:37
3

Biber's sorting code is a lot more advanced than bibtex. It also allows custom sorting schemes, not just the built in biblatex defaults – PLK Apr 18 '12 at 18:00
17

I was wondering today why sorting=none wouldn't work for me. My first citation would still be a [24] and deleting all .aux files etc. didn't help. It turns out that I had 24 (!) unused entries in my .bib file. After deleting all unused entries, everything was fine. I figured I'd put that here, maybe it'll save someone some time. – Lars Jun 14 '13 at 19:26
3

You might want to want that especially with numeric styles it might be necessary to delete all temporary files (.aux, .bcf, .bbl, ...) after changing the sorting in order for the new settings to take effect properly. – moewe Jul 19 '17 at 13:30
Strange this happen here: even deleting all temporary files, resetting the biber cache and so on, the first \cite in the documents isn't [1]. – Jan Feb 22 '22 at 13:26

Biblatex citation order

1 Answers1

Linked

Related