Change source for the ISBN-Search by Identifier
For the search with certain unique identifiers Zotero uses WorldCat as source for ISBNs. Is it possible th change the source and to add another database, for example the german catalogue "GVK - Gemeinsamer Verbundkatalog" (http://gso.gbv.de/)?
Thanks for response
Juergen
Thanks for response
Juergen
If I research in my library's catalogue and import the metadata, they are retrieved not from my library but from WorldCat. Is it possible to change that?
Thanks for your response
Katja
(As for the original question: no, that's not possible. We do, though, currently check the library of congress before we go to WorldCat. We're considering adding GBV, but don't want to add too many layers).
I import my metadata from my library catalogue https://wlb.ibs-bw.de/ by clicking on the URL bar icon.
Then in my zotero record, in category "library catalogue" it says "Open WorldCat" or "Library of Congress ISBN".
Now I've just noticed that when I import from other German libary catalogues, zotero does seem to import the metadata from the catalogue itself; then it says e.g. "Library Catalog - iaiweb1.iai.spk-berlin.de" or "Library Catalog - stabikat.de".
Could that be a problem of our library catalogue? Maybe it doesn't communicate well with zotero, and so zotero uses the ISBN and searches in the LoC catalogue and WorldCat instead?
Katja
As per the ticket zuphilip links to, it would certainly be possible to improve this for the aDis catalog family, but it's a fair amount of work and no one has gotten around to it yet.
A translator for aDIS catalogues would be nice. There are quite a few libraries that use aDIS, especially in the southwest of Germany. But I know that would mean a lot of work...
Thanks again for the information.
What actually happens at the moment is the following: The zotero picker (url bar icon) is using the COinS data from your catalogue. This is incomplete, as the authors/contributors are always missing. Then the COinS translator will look the same item up in several other catalogues (e.g. LoC, WorldCat) to receive better metadata.
Thus, we should first try to improve the COinS data in your catalogue. The advantage is that also the Citavi picker can read COinS data and therefore could be helpful for Citavi users as well. Moreover, your RIS exports seem to begin with some strange symbols
ïůż
and bibtex seems not working reasonable:@book {
author = {Breindl, Eva and Volodina, Anna and Waßner, Ulrich Hermann},
title = {Semantik der deutschen Satzverknüpfer},
address = {Berlin},
year = {2014},
publisher = {De Gruyter Mouton},
pages = {XII, 681 },
URL = {http://deposit.d-nb.de/cgi-bin/dokserv?id=4561711&prov=M&dok_var=1&dok_ext=htm},
ISBN = {978-3-11-034134-8},
ISBN = {978-3-11-039453-5 (Sekundärausgabe)},
}
U1 - Hauptbibliothek
ER -
%@ 978-3-11-039453-5 (Sekundärausgabe)
%[ 20140826
%= 20141128
%1 Hauptbibliothek
Here are some background information how to expose metadata such that reference management tools can grab them. @kselmiwlb: Let us know if you can change something from your side and feel free to write me also at my work email adress. We also understand German if that is easier for you at any point.
Testing a new version of our catalogue, we have noticed in the meantime that the import works just fine there. I suppose that the coins data have been improved for this version (which is not online yet, it will be so within a few weeks.)
We know about the problems with our RIS export. If you remove the "strange symbols" at the beginning of a RIS export text, you can import the data... Our IT is in contact with the catalogue developers in order to solve this problem.
it seems that I have imported GBV data when using " Add Item(s) by Identifier " option. Great! I particularly like that the ToC is imported as well.
Three things that could do with some improvement:
Only the first editor of five has been imported. Adding the other four is a bit cumbersome.
The language field has " ger " as a value.
Could that be change to " de "?
When there is more than one place for a pulisher, it is abbreviated with [u.a.]. This is a German abbreviation and I always have to delete it because I write English papers as well. Furthermore, the citation styles that I use only require the first place.
1) Can you give an example with five editors?
2) The codes should come from this list: http://www.loc.gov/marc/languages/language_code.html . Thus, I guess we could map at least the common languages spoken today. @adamsmith, @aurimasv: Do you agree? Is the Marc translator the correct place to do this?
3) That is a tough one and I am not sure how much we can/should trying to change during import of metadata.
2)
@adamsmith: You're right. For my purposes, it actually doesn't make a difference.
3)
I wish it would be "fixed" on GBV's side but perhaps that's too much to ask. I wonder whether there is any scenario where having the [u.a.] makes sense.
3) I could delete "[u.a.]" at the end of the publication place in the GBV translator (I guess that is better than in the MARC translator). However, if more places are given then they also should show up in zotero. @adamsmith: Do you agree on this changes?
http://www.gbv.de/kontakt
I don't think it is needed to bring this issue to someone's attention. Actually, I rather expect they have discussed this already, but I don't know details about it. Maybe, we can just wait and try to see how it will be handled.
There are utilities within several library automation software packages that 1) will help with the crosswalk from one cataloging standard to another; and 2) commercial and crowdsourced databases that can provide new record versions of old titles. I have no idea about the quality or completeness of these projects.
I think I remember reading that the OCLC is working on this.