Original Date of Publication

Maybe this is really obvious but I have not been able to figure out/find information on how to enter two dates in zotero:

especially when using a very new edition of a literary work (e.g. 2003), it would be very useful if I could include the original date of publication (e.g 1921). Is there a way to store this information in my zotero entries and to have it automatically added to my bibliography?

Thanks very much!
  • There is currently no way to work with original dates of publication. There is a outstanding ticket for this but it will most likely not be taken care of until the more hierarchical data model is incorporated into Zotero.
  • Wouldn't putting the original date in parenthesessolve this for now? That's at least how I do this: superscripted EDITION NUMBER; DATE; (ORIGINAL DATE).

    Hope that has been some help...
  • That's what I've already been trying to do... I put the original date in brackets, but when I use the word plugin to generate bibliographies, zotero ignores anything that is in brackets... and I am not quite sure how to edit these styles...

    But thank you for the suggestion, I'll try to find a way to do that :)

  • It would indeed be nice to have two dates as suggested by joshjosh.
  • This is indeed an indispensable bibliographic feature. Now that Zotero is coming of age, we do not want to be without it much longer. Hopefully when the syncing wrinkles are ironed out the devs get time for requests like this.
  • I would really like to see this as a feature added very soon, too. For example, I just added the latest (2009) edition of Jacob Riis's _How the Other Half LIves_ (published in various versions in the 1890s) to a bib, and I want to sort it into sequence with a bunch of 1890s newspaper articles I am looking at. It would help to be able to have an original publication date field in order to do that more easily.

    Also, it would be helpful to have this field for generating a timeline of publication through exhibit.

    But regardless of whether you can do this soon or not, *THANKS A MILLION* for Zotero. What a boon it' s been to literary scholars (and others).

    Mike Duvall
    College of Charleston
  • It would be wonderful to have this feature soon. Those of us who work with older books would make frequent use of it. Incidentally the Chicago Manual (17.127) specifies that the two dates can either be presented with square brackets (Jones 2003 [1921]) or with a virgule (Jones 1921/2003).

    Perhaps along with an amendment to this, Zotero could allow non-CE dates; i.e., BCE, or alternative systems like the Islamic Hijri calendar (H).
  • I would be glad if there were just an original publication date field. I like my references to look like this:
    Claude Lévi-Strauss, The Elementary Structures of Kinship, trans. James Harle Bell, Richard von Sturmer, and Rodney Needham (1949; Boston: Beacon Press, 1969).
    Where 1949 is the first date of publication and 1969 the date of the edition I am citing. This would just require an additional date field, no? Hierarchy would be nice, for sure, but just this simple flat fix would make zotero -- already the greatest bibliographic program for history and humanities -- even greaterer, especially for history and humanities. Many thanks!
  • @pashakhan, It's an issue separate from the main topic of this thread, but if I understand correctly, the Hijra calendar has exactly twelve months, and (unlike the Chinese and Chinese-derived calendars) does not attempt to preserve alignment of lunar months with the seasons through periodic insertions of an intercalary month. In that case, it is mainly just a matter of presentation. The existing Zotero date parsing mechanism should serve to capture the date elements. If that works, then the new CSL processor, when it arrives, supports localized dates, and will be able to handle the presentation details. Gregorian (and presumably Hijra) dates BCE will also be supported.

    Chinese and Chinese-derived calendars are another ball of wax, but I'm not sure how frequently such dates are used in citations.
  • edited March 23, 2010
    Any plans to include this feature suggested by joshjosh any soon (having 2 dates: for the original and the current edition)?
    And what about translations and citations of this sort?:
    Heidegger, M. (1927, translated 1962). Being and time. New York: Harper & Row.

    Thank you!
  • a lot of this is going to be possible with the just released csl 1.0 which will be included in Zotero 2.1
  • adamsmith, that sounds great! Thanks for the good news!
  • This is just to add my voice to the calls for the implementation of this feature. It's the main oversight in an otherwise amazing product.
  • A must-need feature, hope it will come in soon. By the way, someone has a link to explain how the date format works (is it "2004 april" or "2004/05"?). If it's the former, is the language a problem (can I write "2004 abril" or "2004 avril" or must it be in English?)

  • why don't you try it out - I don't think there's documentation. Both 2004 May and 2004/05 (and 2004-05) work - with English localization abril or avril don't work, but possibly do if you have a localized FF or Zotero with a different language.
  • edited April 20, 2010
    Thanks - I'm only learning since yesterday about Zotero. I think that I need using numbers (not a really big deal after all). But what about double-months ? Like for bimonthly journals : 2004-03/04 doesn't seems to work (it reads the 04 as 4th of March).
  • Date ranges are supported in CSL 1.0, which will be deployed in Zotero later this year.
  • Has there been any progress yet? News on implementation? Are there any workarounds? This feature is truly indispensible
  • edited May 26, 2010
    I've found a workaround. It's clumsy, it won't work with all styles, but it's still better than nothing.

    1. Enter both original date and published date in the "Extras" field thorough Zotero interface. Like this, for example: "1971/2003" or "2003 [1971]". Whatever suits you.

    2. In the csl-style you wish to use (I edited chicago-note-with-bibliography) find the macro namesd "issued" and change it like follows (removing <date>...</date>):

    <macro name="issued">
    <else-if type="book chapter thesis" match="any">
    <text variable="note"/> <!-- remove date-tags and insert this -->

    (the above applies to books/chapters/thesis, for other types you obviously need to change these as well )
  • Agreed that this is very important.

    Just for the purpose of bringing together all the information about this topic in one place, wanted to point out that this same issue was raised in another thread: http://forums.zotero.org/discussion/8239/multiple-dates-for-published-and-republished/#Item_10
  • I look forward to this feature being added too. But just wanted to advocate (and remind) for original publication information to be added to MLA style as well. The examples used by most people in this discussion have been in Chicago and APA style, but MLA also allows a very elegant way of including original publication info:

    Arendt, Hannah. _The Human Condition_. 1958. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1999.

    Hobbes, Thomas. _Leviathan_. 1651. London: Fontana–Collins, 1962.

  • euj - the two issues are distinct: First orig. date of publication has to be included in Zotero/csl.
    Then we can adjust the relevant styles - that will take a while, because it has to be done for each style by itself, but should still happen quickly for common styles such as CMOS, MHRA, and APA.
  • CSL already supports original publication info (not only dates; publisher info too). It just needs to be added to Zotero. Given we've been talking about this for years, we really ought to deal with it.
  • How disappointing to find this thread is years old and still there is no support for original publication date information! This is supported in other tools, even very basic ones like BibMe and is a reason to opt against using Zotero until it is resolved. Please add this important and simple feature!
  • Maybe it's time to consider drawing back from the "hierarchical data model" thing, and commit to the addition of this field. Maybe an original-date field, anad new parsing and storage machinery with support for date ranges and fuzzy dates can be done in one go?
  • Why should this mean giving up the hierarchical model? Very much looking forward to that too!
  • As long as new pseudo-hierarchical fields have a clear migration path to the hierarchical model, I agree that there's no reason to delay adding them any longer.
  • @MHSmith: Yes, by drawing back, I didn't mean to suggest giving up. It's just that when this topic is raised, the prospect of the eventual implementation of a hierarchical model tends to have a chilling effect. As ajlyon says, it needn't be an either/or choice; we could have our cake and eat it later, as it were.
  • OK, I wasn't quite sure I got your meaning. Thanks.
Sign In or Register to comment.