Upgrade StorageIs Juris-M still active?
I will soon have much more of a need for "true" legal citations. I've until recently been primarily relying on the close-but-not-perfect citations generated by Zotero.
I can't tell if the Juris-M project is still active and if so, how far behind the true release it is.
As an aside, and I suspect this is an FAQ, why can't the codebase be merged eventually? Why does it need to be a fork?
I can't tell if the Juris-M project is still active and if so, how far behind the true release it is.
As an aside, and I suspect this is an FAQ, why can't the codebase be merged eventually? Why does it need to be a fork?
As we've said, this functionality should be turned into a plugin (like the new multilingual plugin), not attempted as a fork of Zotero, an approach that stopped making sense many years ago.
[deleted — D.S.]
E.g., Jurism does not "sometimes lag behind" Zotero. It hasn't been updated in years. Until there is a new release, it should be considered abandoned. It's not helpful to tell people otherwise. (In a few days, Jurism will stop even being able to sync down items from official releases.)
And no, Frank hasn't posted here in 5 years (to the day).
And btw - I've never understood this Zotero-'schism'. And why the main Zotero devs didn't try to keep Frank's (IMO quite valid) additions 'on board', because his use case (both the legal part AND the multilinguial part!!) IS so important the the global epistemic endeavor!!! I personally think Frank will clearly prove to be on the 'right' side of history on the need for better multilingual treatment in bibbliographic management. It is UNCONSCIONABLE how 'Western' scholars have ignored Chinese, Japanese. etc. etc. and yes - even -Russian scholarship. And Zotero COULD have bene on the forefront of this. As it HAS been on so many other issues. But it decided not to...
But so I AM looking into the CNE repo, and I'll probaly use it; BUT from what I see, the 'interceptor' is quite fragile - I'm suprised you're ok with 'monkey patching' core Zotero functions like Zotero.Utilities.Item.itemToCSLJSON, as opposed to trying to implement this functionality more organically); not using caching may alos not be the best solution, etc, etc.
But ok, I guess I'll abandon the Zotero forum on this then and will just move to Discord...
In any case, yes, we are much happier with people using a plugin than a fork, let alone an unmaintained fork. Monkey-patching isn't ideal, but that's why we've been adding more and more APIs for common integration points. (I would assume CNE is using the custom-field API we added specifically for developers to customize the item pane.) Plugin developers can request additional APIs to meet their needs.
Even if we did try to build the functionality for either of these things ourselves, we would almost certainly implement it as a plugin rather than trying to add this incredibly complex functionality into the core product.
I plan to alpha test for a bit on a non-syncing database, and then release it - it is pretty noninvasive data-wise, so I think a low risk for corruption once it comes out.
It's 8.0+ only. It probably works on 7.0 if someone wants to test once I release the code.
It is still in alpha, but I've been using it regularly for months, so I have pretty high confidence that it won't screw up any data - at least not in the US. I am about a week away from releasing a beta that is multijurisdictional and supports more styles than just indigobook.
On the one hand you think that you can comment knowledgably about what is discussed on the Discord channel and bad mouth Frank's efforts.
Yet on the other hand if we ask a question on the Zotero forums about Juris-M, we get the standard "we know nothing about" it reply. Fair enough but you cannot have it both ways.
I asked a simply question on the Zotero forum a few days ago and explained the position clearly and politely, yet no answer. All I needed to know was the DATE that Juris-M and Zotero stopped syncing so that I could manually update my files and transfer over to Zotero 9. I would point out that I pay for this data storage so am very disappointed that Zotero staff cannot find the time to answer.
I agree a fork is a nightmare! I have always guarded against the Zotero/Juris-M split when it came. But the cold hard truth is that Zotero 9 to this day does not offer the functionality for Russian, Japanese or Chinese scholars nor does this new plug-in. This plug-in description even admits it uses unstable code as get arounds so I have no faith it will last more than a year or two until the next Zotero upgrade.
Are alternate alphabet and legal requirements complex? No, they are just additional text field for a limited number of parameters (title, author, publisher, etc) and the ability to specify which field is used in a citation and in which order.
I will have to change my description if "unstable code as get arounds" is your takeaway (unless you are talking about the japanese language plugin and not mine. My plugin uses the API and some monkey patching (but not a lot). I hope to maintain it until I retire (in 10-14 years), because I need it! Which is why I wrote it in the first place. I don't care if anyone else does, really, but it would be nice if other people became familiar with the codebase and extended it.
I plan to release a beta of my plugin shortly that is multi-jurisdictional. No idea if it will support other language sets, though, so you might still be out of luck on that until I learn how to do it. Then again, maybe it will work with the multi-lingual plugin and the combination gets the job done.
To answer your question, Jan. 20 is probably a safe bet for sync failure, and no later than March 1. During that time, it appears that most items synced UP to the web (except maybe attachments), but did not sync down. There is discussion about it in the version 6 discord channel. At some point I think syncing UP stopped working (maybe), but there's no discussion I can find again on the discord.