Could you also add a call to test the format here:https://github.com/rstudio/rticles/blob/master/tests/testthat/test_formats.R#L42-L48

Would it be okay if I contribute or submit the requested revisions to this PR? I would like to get theIEEEtrans format available inrticles.

@coatless Yes, please. Go ahead. Due to work overload here at school, I had planned to do the revisions at the end of this month.

@Emaasit: Could you give me write access to your fork? Or would you prefer if I PR'd against your fork and on merge those changes would appear here?

@coatless I have added you as a collaborator to my fork. That gives read/write permissions.

Addressed the concerns in136c182.

As a side note,@Emaasit, did you want to add in support for thejournal,technote,peerreview, andpeerreviewca paper modes? Or just keep it focused on theconference mode?

@coatless Thanks for those patches. Two more fixes are needed before it's perfect.

• The sections should be numbered: How about we just addnumber_sections: true in the yaml header

• The References should be numbered

Regarding support for other articles formats, I think we should add only thejournal format for now.

Good catches by the way.

1. Why not remove this variable entirely as IEEE requires section to be numbered?
2. Regarding citations:

• The IEEE style will not work withbiblatex since the package is anti.bst. However, it seems as if using\usepackage[style=ieee]{biblatex} to get around this hiccup is not possible either. I'll test this out on a different machine tomorrow. An alternative solution to address this issue is to just fall back and use thebibtex backend.

• Meanwhile, thenatbib setup can easily be handled by:

\usepackage[numbers]{natbib}\bibliographystyle{IEEEtranN}

whereIEEEtranN is theIEEEtranN.bst fromIEEEtran.

Regarding supporting thejournal in addition toconference mode, I'll add a few variables in that allow a paper mode to be specified. The main task to supporting different modes is being able to handle the different styles of author listings and allowing for IEEE keywords.

This PR looks quite a mature contribution...is there any plans to merge it?
(The merge conflict is trivial to solve...I did it in my own cloned repo)