Missing fields

SiGi

I miss the fields named in the german translation "Standort im Archiv" (archiv location) and "Signatur" (signature) for the item types patents, presentation and laws. For the allmost other item types these fields are present.
It is possible to complement the missing fields by myself?
How can I do this, without loosing my extensions when installing a new version of zotero?
Or is it possible to add these fields in the next version of this really great tool?

(I startet a similar more general discussion in the category "feature request". But until now I got no answer. Perhaps it was the wrong discussion.)

Thanks.

dstillman

We'll make sure those are on all item types in the next release. Thanks.

bdarcus

Why would you need archive location information for those types? This field is not used for information about a personal archive.

SiGi

I need these two fields archive location and signature to be able to make a unique reference from the database item to a place in a folder, where a physical copy of that presentation, patent,... is stored, or where I could gather additional information not saved inside the zotero database.

I use these two fields really to refer to a personal archive. If that's not the normal use of these fields, sorry. But which fields can be used otherwise for making a unique reference from database entries to a physical place, where the printed hardware is stored.

bdarcus

I use these two fields really to refer to a personal archive. If that's not the normal use of these fields, sorry. But which fields can be used otherwise for making a unique reference from database entries to a physical place, where the printed hardware is stored.

That's what I thought.

I don't really think there is such a field now, but it's something the Zotero devs might consider as they revise the data model. They basically need to allow a distinction to be made between a users' data about a specific copy of a resource (in FRBR terms an "item"), and -- in the case of archival documents -- more general information about accessibility.

Bottom line: for archival documents (which can be almost anything), the physical location information needs to get printed in the bibliography; a user's information should not (would be a bug if it did).

So, Dan, I don't think it's so straightforward as just adding the fields.

SiGi

Ok, I understand the difference.

For me and my intended use it seems to be the simplest way to add these two fields to the few item types, where these fields are until now not available. Without a possibility to add such user information to refer to the printed document in a personal archive,it is hard to introduce this beautiful software in our company.

Perhaps there is a way to introduce a kind of special "note" field for "personal archiv location" and "personal signature" which works then really as user added information for any item type.

erazlogo

SiGi - there is an "extra" field for every item type where you can enter any user-specific information--maybe you could put your reference to the personal archive there.

SiGi

erazlogo - this would be a possible workaround. But it is not the optimal solution, because I have 2 seperate field information "personal archive" and "personal signature" and only one field "extra".

I thought, that my problem, to refer from database entries to a personal archive and over a personal signature to the document in a unique way is a more common problem. Everyone, who has books in a bookcase or printed paper in a folder has this problem.

The personal signature is comparable to the bibtex-key. When importing bib-Files, where is this unique bibtex-key stored?