Thanks for your swift reply! I would think it should comply with the Chicago Manual of Style, which states on p.748 of the 16th edition:
"14.230 Patents. Patents are cited under the names of the creators and dated by the year of filing."
As an example it gives:
"Iizuka, Masanori, and Hideki Tanaka. Cement admixture. US Patent 4,586,960, filed June 26, 1984, and issued May 6, 1986."
Note that there are two dates, both are important. Also the issuing authority, in this case U.S. patent, is crucial.
Further, on page 808 this is added:
"Patents or other documents cited by more than one date. Cite patents and other documents that include more than one date as follows (note that the year of issue is repeated to avoid ambiguity):
Iizuka, Masanori, and Hideki Tanaka. 1986. Cement admixture. US Patent 4,586,960, filed June 26, 1984, and issued May 6, 1986."
I've been trying to modify the Zotero style definition, but was painfully reminded of my limits in xml comprehension..
It would be much appreciated if this could be implemented!
That's clear, thanks. In the short term, the mappings needed for several things (issuing jurisdiction, filing date, other things in the right panel that might be relevant to a cite) are not yet mapped to CSL (that is, the data is not sent to the citation processor, so there is no way to render it in a citation). That's a bit of a sticking point.
If you're willing to test things for development, the legal style extensions that I'm working on in the MLZ project will be able to handle this (the cite forms would need to be implemented, but that's not much trouble). With some adjustments to a site translator or two, the system should work to grab patent records and cite them correctly into a document. If that sounds interesting, let me know; I'm looking at adapting one or more of the Chicago styles to the MLZ version of the style language (it's broadly compatible with the official version, but fussier about some details). If there is active interest, it will raise the motivation to do the work.
tnemeth - what Frank says - see also my last post in the Chicago-Author date thread you link to. I'll be happy to help implement patents once we have the necessary variables and mapping. This is not trivial not least because it involves csl, which in turn affects multiple reference management programs, so it won't happen tomorrow.
@Paul - changing that label is relatively easy, on the other hand, I'll see if we can get this started.
Yes, I am definitely interested in testing this - as long as it is reasonably stable. I'll install the client and will try to familiarize myself with the differences. Though unrelated, OSCOLA is also something I have use for so I'm following these developments too.
@adamsmith
Thanks for that, for the time being I am quite happy to work around manually as I don't have a large number of patents, but I'll follow the developments here.
Wow - a lot of movement since I last checked in! I'm not sure about formal styling for citations in a bibliography, but a typical shorthand style used by patent attorneys would be (the brackets are my explanation, not the formatting):
US 1,234,567 to Smith
(the patent number of a US Patent - i.e., granted)
US 2011/1234567 to Smith
(the application number of a US Patent Application)
WO 2011/1234567 to Smith
(the publication number of a WIPO (PCT) Patent Application)
US 60/123456 to Smith
(the application number of a US Provisional Application - perhaps don't worry about this type at first)
Note, the 'punctuation' of the numbers above are often done differently for technical reasons. For example, although the USPTO uses forward-slashes (/), this causes a problem in file systems, so people often replace the slash with a hyphen (e.g., US 2011-1234567), or with nothing (e.g., US 20111234567). Also, commas in the number (e.g., separating thousands) are sometimes included and sometimes not.
I look forward to hearing your progress! Thank you for putting in all this effort!
I would like to work out support for patents. The coding itself won't be too much trouble, but it sounds like references might adopt a variety of styles. These will need to recombined with various general styles ... I wonder if we can work out a typology, to help keep things straight with the naming of styles, and the tagging of styles for functionality.
So far we seem to have a Bluebook variant, the CMS style, and a shorthand style. Are there any gateways in legal process involving patents that have strict and well-defined standards for formatting (court filing requirements, reporting standards to national or international bodies)? Also, in general terms, is the field controlled (or afflicted) by strict citation standards, or do practitioners adopt a rule of reason, swinging with the author's chosen citation form so long as it fits common conventions closely enough to be easily interpreted?
Before starting to code this into styles, I'd like to work out a picture of the overall pool of facilities we're trying to build.
A question: are assignees relevant to a citation? If so, should they simply be subbed in for the inventor, or should they be noted separately in the cite in some form?
I see that the Inventor field is not yet mapped. I'll come up with a way to work around that in the short term, so we can get started building a style that supports this material, but in the meantime guidance on the use of the Assignee info will be good to have.
Great, we now have four possible citation formats. :) I guess the simplest way to move forward will be to incorporate patent cite support into a particular style when someone makes a specific request, and kind of wing it elsewhere. The notes on Chicago above are clear, and it looks like assignee info can be spliced into the samples more or less gracefully. I'll start there. More and better particulars when something emerges ...
Hello there.
Don't want to sound rude at all, but what is the status?
Specifically I need to export the patent info in bibtex format. Any citation format could work me: I need them for my PhD thesis so I'm pretty free with regard to the style.
This will take a good amount of time until it's implemented in Zotero for citation style purposes - but have you checked actual bibtex output?
Since bibtex is a translator and not a citation style it has access to all Zotero fields. Even if the current translator doesn't map the files, it can be customized with some very basic javascript.
Yes, I did check it.
Even though in zotero all the info are nicely present, after exporting in bibtex most of the fields are missing:
title -> title
inventors -> authors
abstract -> abstract
url -> url
year -> year
and that's it.
The biggest issue, I think, because it is exported as @misc instead of @patent which has the proper field to fill.
I found the bibtex.js file, but I have no javascript knowledge. Any help would be appreciated about this.
Do you need something like this? Where the first is the bibtex fields and this is {labelofzotero}
@PATENT{,
nationality = {Country},
number = {Patent Number},
year = {YYYY},
yearfiled = {YYYY},
author = {inventor and inventor and inventor and...},
title = {Title},
language = {Language},
It is reasonably common (it is in JabRef & was introduced into BibLaTeX, for example). But the only BibTeX styles I presently have installed that refer to it are achemso, IEEEtran, rsc, and vancouver.
I'm not necessarily opposed to including it in Zotero, but I would want to be much more methodical in choosing the fields to export to ensure the best compatibility with most BibTeX styles.
sure - I would have asked about that before submitting this for general use.
But putting in a couple of extra mappings isn't a lot of work, I was going to just do a quick custom version for drago and then see how/if we can use some of those more generally.
I fully agree on the idea to have a more strict methodology to map fields.
I'd like also to highlight that even though @patent isn't an official type, it starts to be a standard 'de facto' (i.e. it is included in JabRef & Co.).
I think that mapping the fields as suggested in the link proposed by noksagt will make most of the user happy (and my PhD thesis a lil' less painful) :)
hey, try this:
https://gist.github.com/1888964
Download using the raw link on the top right and save into the Zotero translator directory, which is a subfolder of the Zotero data folder: http://www.zotero.org/support/zotero_data , replacing the old file with the same name (it the old bibtex translator has a different filename you'll need to make sure to replace it).
You may have to restart FF/Zotero.
This should do most of what you want except the filing date - that would be more complicated and frankly I don't quite understand what's going on in the translator there.
I've done this quickly, so let me know how it goes.
this one should input and output patent - I'll raise with noksagt how and which of these changes can be integrated into the general Zotero/bibtex translator. I'd think a lot of what I did could be left in w/o problems - definitely language, probably country, maybe assignee and number, considering that it's not in standard bibtex. We'd probably want to limit patent as an item type to import and continue exporting out @misc.
Hello.
I followed you instructions and replaced the .js file. And restated ff.
I look for the same patent on two platforms (google and freepatentsonline). The import is working good only for the latter.
On export on bibtex format I got the same behavior on the previous one: exported as @misc where the 'inventors' become 'author' and the 'patent number' disappeared :S :(
You can download my .rdf file from here http://dl.dropbox.com/u/25682954/zotero/Exported%20Items.rdf
And the converted .bib from here http://dl.dropbox.com/u/25682954/zotero/Exported%20Items.bib
If anyone who works with patent references is following this thread, it would be great you could take a look at a proofsheet I've just put up on the CitationStylist site. Comments would be helpful; I don't have a very clear idea what these cites should look like in the wild. If something should be adjusted, let me know.
Upgrade Storage
Thanks for your swift reply! I would think it should comply with the Chicago Manual of Style, which states on p.748 of the 16th edition:
"14.230 Patents. Patents are cited under the names of the creators and dated by the year of filing."
As an example it gives:
"Iizuka, Masanori, and Hideki Tanaka. Cement admixture. US Patent 4,586,960, filed June 26, 1984, and issued May 6, 1986."
Note that there are two dates, both are important. Also the issuing authority, in this case U.S. patent, is crucial.
Further, on page 808 this is added:
"Patents or other documents cited by more than one date. Cite patents and other documents that include more than one date as follows (note that the year of issue is repeated to avoid ambiguity):
Iizuka, Masanori, and Hideki Tanaka. 1986. Cement admixture. US Patent 4,586,960, filed June 26, 1984, and issued May 6, 1986."
I've been trying to modify the Zotero style definition, but was painfully reminded of my limits in xml comprehension..
It would be much appreciated if this could be implemented!
If you're willing to test things for development, the legal style extensions that I'm working on in the MLZ project will be able to handle this (the cite forms would need to be implemented, but that's not much trouble). With some adjustments to a site translator or two, the system should work to grab patent records and cite them correctly into a document. If that sounds interesting, let me know; I'm looking at adapting one or more of the Chicago styles to the MLZ version of the style language (it's broadly compatible with the official version, but fussier about some details). If there is active interest, it will raise the motivation to do the work.
@Paul - changing that label is relatively easy, on the other hand, I'll see if we can get this started.
Yes, I am definitely interested in testing this - as long as it is reasonably stable. I'll install the client and will try to familiarize myself with the differences. Though unrelated, OSCOLA is also something I have use for so I'm following these developments too.
@adamsmith
Thanks for that, for the time being I am quite happy to work around manually as I don't have a large number of patents, but I'll follow the developments here.
US 1,234,567 to Smith
(the patent number of a US Patent - i.e., granted)
US 2011/1234567 to Smith
(the application number of a US Patent Application)
WO 2011/1234567 to Smith
(the publication number of a WIPO (PCT) Patent Application)
US 60/123456 to Smith
(the application number of a US Provisional Application - perhaps don't worry about this type at first)
Note, the 'punctuation' of the numbers above are often done differently for technical reasons. For example, although the USPTO uses forward-slashes (/), this causes a problem in file systems, so people often replace the slash with a hyphen (e.g., US 2011-1234567), or with nothing (e.g., US 20111234567). Also, commas in the number (e.g., separating thousands) are sometimes included and sometimes not.
I look forward to hearing your progress! Thank you for putting in all this effort!
Paul
So far we seem to have a Bluebook variant, the CMS style, and a shorthand style. Are there any gateways in legal process involving patents that have strict and well-defined standards for formatting (court filing requirements, reporting standards to national or international bodies)? Also, in general terms, is the field controlled (or afflicted) by strict citation standards, or do practitioners adopt a rule of reason, swinging with the author's chosen citation form so long as it fits common conventions closely enough to be easily interpreted?
Before starting to code this into styles, I'd like to work out a picture of the overall pool of facilities we're trying to build.
I see that the Inventor field is not yet mapped. I'll come up with a way to work around that in the short term, so we can get started building a style that supports this material, but in the meantime guidance on the use of the Assignee info will be good to have.
Don't want to sound rude at all, but what is the status?
Specifically I need to export the patent info in bibtex format. Any citation format could work me: I need them for my PhD thesis so I'm pretty free with regard to the style.
Regards,
Alex
Since bibtex is a translator and not a citation style it has access to all Zotero fields. Even if the current translator doesn't map the files, it can be customized with some very basic javascript.
Even though in zotero all the info are nicely present, after exporting in bibtex most of the fields are missing:
title -> title
inventors -> authors
abstract -> abstract
url -> url
year -> year
and that's it.
The biggest issue, I think, because it is exported as @misc instead of @patent which has the proper field to fill.
I found the bibtex.js file, but I have no javascript knowledge. Any help would be appreciated about this.
Thanks
@PATENT{,
nationality = {Country},
number = {Patent Number},
year = {YYYY},
yearfiled = {YYYY},
author = {inventor and inventor and inventor and...},
title = {Title},
language = {Language},
assignee = {Assignee},
day = {DD},
dayfiled = {DD},
month = {MM},
monthfiled = {MM},
url = {URL},
abstract = {Abstract},
}
http://newton.ex.ac.uk/tex/pack/bibtex/btxdoc/node6.html#SECTION00031000000000000000
It is reasonably common (it is in JabRef & was introduced into BibLaTeX, for example). But the only BibTeX styles I presently have installed that refer to it are achemso, IEEEtran, rsc, and vancouver.
I'm not necessarily opposed to including it in Zotero, but I would want to be much more methodical in choosing the fields to export to ensure the best compatibility with most BibTeX styles.
But putting in a couple of extra mappings isn't a lot of work, I was going to just do a quick custom version for drago and then see how/if we can use some of those more generally.
http://www.see-out.com/sandramau/bibpat.html
I'd like also to highlight that even though @patent isn't an official type, it starts to be a standard 'de facto' (i.e. it is included in JabRef & Co.).
I think that mapping the fields as suggested in the link proposed by noksagt will make most of the user happy (and my PhD thesis a lil' less painful) :)
Have a nice day
Alex
Dear adamsmith,
did you have by chance some time to look into the translator?
Thanks in advance
Adamsmith, may I stress you?
:)))))))))))))))
Alex
https://gist.github.com/1888964
Download using the raw link on the top right and save into the Zotero translator directory, which is a subfolder of the Zotero data folder: http://www.zotero.org/support/zotero_data , replacing the old file with the same name (it the old bibtex translator has a different filename you'll need to make sure to replace it).
You may have to restart FF/Zotero.
This should do most of what you want except the filing date - that would be more complicated and frankly I don't quite understand what's going on in the translator there.
I've done this quickly, so let me know how it goes.
I followed you instructions and replaced the .js file. And restated ff.
I look for the same patent on two platforms (google and freepatentsonline). The import is working good only for the latter.
On export on bibtex format I got the same behavior on the previous one: exported as @misc where the 'inventors' become 'author' and the 'patent number' disappeared :S :(
You can download my .rdf file from here http://dl.dropbox.com/u/25682954/zotero/Exported%20Items.rdf
And the converted .bib from here http://dl.dropbox.com/u/25682954/zotero/Exported%20Items.bib
http://forums.zotero.org/discussion/18761/google-patents-not-working/#Item_15
I'll look at the other issues.
In all the bibtex specs I can see, inventors in the patent type are supposed to be "author"
It's working now. :)
Thanks very much!!!
Alex
Thank you for implementing this!
AFAIK, the CMS is not entirely correct.
It should be:
Format: Names, Creator. Patent title. Patent number, and year of filing.
Example 1: Iizuka, Masanori, and Hideki Tanaka. Cement admixture. US Patent 4,586,960, filed June 26, 1984, and issued May 6, 1986.
So no need for the parenthesis and the designations 'inventors' and 'assignee'.
There is a summary of styles that seems reliable here:
http://instr.iastate.libguides.com/content.php?pid=44041&sid=1666876
Hope that helps a little.