Bibtex key parser error using toJSON method

[diogomatheus]

Hi,

I found a scenario generated from scopus.com that is preventing to parser the bibtex using the toJSON method, resulting in error.

@Article{EuropeanCommission,T2019,
author={European Commission, T},
title={The new SME definition: User guide and model declaration},
journal={Enterprise and Industry Publications},
year={2019},
note={cited By 20},
source={Scopus},
}

I believe that the problem is in the bibtex key "EuropeanCommission,T2019". Do you think it's valid to implement some kind of treatment for this scenario, mainly because it was found in a reliable source (scopus)?

https://bibtex.online/ is parsing successfully. It can be interesting to accept any type of character or simply cut the key when finding invalid characters.

[TomDemeranville]

This is really a problem with the Scopus data rather than the parser. The bibtex 'format' is not very well documented, but in this case it's very clear according to https://www.bibtex.com/g/bibtex-format/

The citekey can be any combination of alphanumeric characters including the characters "-", "_", and ":"

In fact I'm amazed https://bibtex.online/ works! This is kind of like including an unclosed quote or extra comma in a CSV file.

[TomDemeranville]

For info, google books creates this bibtex for the previous version of the document:

@book{european2005new,
title={The New SME Definition: User Guide and Model Declaration},
author={European Commission and Europ{"a}ische Kommission and European Commission. Directorate-General for Employment, Social Affairs and Equal Opportunities. Unit E.3},
isbn={9789289479097},
lccn={2005534119},
series={EUi collection},
url={https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=-T2QAAAAMAAJ},
year={2005},
publisher={Office for Official Publications of the European Communities}
}

Which is very different!

[diogomatheus]

@TomDemeranville you're right, the root cause is the scopus data. However, treatment would prevent this kind of error, but I agree with you that it's not a parser problem.

Thanks for the answer.