Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Do not set arXiv DOI #3384

Closed
wants to merge 19 commits into from
Closed

Do not set arXiv DOI #3384

wants to merge 19 commits into from

Conversation

thebluepotato
Copy link
Contributor

After the recent changes to the arXiv translator, items imported via identifier or from arXiv search pages no longer include the arXiv issued DOI, as intended. However, when imported from the webpage, the DOI would still be set.

I believe the consensus is that the DOI should reflect the published version. We have easy access to the arXiv page anyway.

Thanks to Zotero 7, was able to include multiple tests
Followed most of the review points, left `async` for now until there's more opinions on this. Will update again when remaining points have been clarified
Better handles the case where the ISBN search failed and relying on Kluwer itself as a fallback.
Refactored search logic and arbitration blog logic (supports multiples blog articles as well). All items set their URL now. Snapshots were considered but rejected since they only offer marginal improvements at a considerably larger size (footnote callout number are not clickable, only improvement is that in the endnotes the numbers are clickable).
… cases

- Saving dates in ISO format
- When `date` was set for cases or statutes published in a publication, `dateDecided` and `dateEnacted` respectively were ignored
@AbeJellinek
Copy link
Member

Revert Kluwer changes in this branch, but otherwise... @adam3smith, do we want arXiv DOIs? I really have no idea.

@thebluepotato
Copy link
Contributor Author

Oops sorry, my branches got mixed up... I'll probably end up deleting and re-doing #3161

@adam3smith
Copy link
Collaborator

I don't understand why we wouldn't want the DOI for arXiv? That's why they started issuing them, just like all.other preprint servers.

@AbeJellinek
Copy link
Member

OK, sorry @thebluepotato, appreciate this fix but I think we're going to do the opposite.

@AbeJellinek
Copy link
Member

(I see the argument for not saving redundant IDs, but choosing which IDs are relevant is ultimately the citation processor / style's job, and we should err on the side of saving as much as possible.)

@thebluepotato thebluepotato deleted the arxiv branch November 22, 2024 09:04
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants