ACM digital library request

monsanto
Hi all,

For most conference proceedings the ACM page lists two "publications": the conference it appeared in, and a newsletter such as SIGPLAN notices or SIGOPS review. Here's an example: http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=258948.258973&coll=DL&dl=ACM&CFID=76827707&CFTOKEN=71462889. When importing from these pages, one gets two entries, even though the newsletter entry is completely useless. I fixed this by adding on line 122

if (!(item.itemType == "journalArticle" && (item.publicationTitle == "SIGPLAN Not." || item.publicationTitle == "SIGOPS Oper. Syst. Rev.") || ...) {

but I wonder if there is a more elegant way to do this that scales to all of the different newsletters. If there is, it'd be cool if the translator for the ACM DL had this functionality. I'd be happy to help any way I can.
  • adamsmith
    thanks for reporting this, I agree it should be fixed.
    I'm thinking it might be possible to check if the item type (as determined in the detect funtion) is conference paper and then throw out all others - if you want to take a stab at coding that that'd be great.
  • adamsmith
    I think I have a nice solution, if you're interested have a look at the pull request
    https://github.com/zotero/translators/pull/90/files
    l. 135-138
  • monsanto
    That looks like it will work. Thanks a lot!
  • adamsmith
    the fix is now up. We went a different route because we were concerned that testing item types against each other would potentially throw out good items. Instead, we're just only take the first item for single item imports - works well.
  • monsanto
    I'm pretty sure I explored that route and found examples where the newsletter was first. I don't have time to look right this minute, but I'll see if I can dig up an example sometime soon.
  • ajlyon
    In that case, we can do it on some other basis, like preferring conference papers over newsletters when we have both for a single page.

This is an old discussion that has not been active in a long time. Before commenting here, you should strongly consider starting a new discussion instead. If you think the content of this discussion is still relevant, you can link to it from your new discussion.

Sign In or Register to comment.