Is there any way to add the "place" field to the webpage item type?
I'd like to use the maps plug-in for a database of webpages but I haven't figuered it out. Thanks.
I would like to see an edition field added to Report. I encounter situations with both report numbers and editions often enough that having both fields available would be very convenient for getting citations to format correctly with hacking.
A few examples: Campbell, J. P. (1996) Project A: Final report. (ARI Research Report No. DC18056, revised ed.). Ft Belvoir, VA: Army Research Institute.
Here, "ARI Research Report" is the report type, "DC18056" is the report number, and "revised" is the edition. "No." is supplied by the style. Ideally, "ed." could also be supplied by the style.
Hogan, R. & Hogan, J. (2002). The Hogan Personality Inventory (Test manual, 2nd ed.). Tulsa, OK, Hogan Assessment Systems.
Here, "Test manual" is the report type. Edition would be "2".
Wonderlic. (2006). The Wonderlic Personnel Test(Form G). Vernon Hills, IL: Wonderlic.
Here, I put "Form G" into the report type field.
A related form is: CGC. (2010). The Depression Inventory (Version 2.6). Washington, DC.
Here, the reference uses a version number instead of an edition number. This could be accommodated without adding a separate version field by entering "Version 2.6" into Report type or by accepting "2.6 ed." instead of "Version 2.6". I'm not sure this corner case is worth adding an second additional field.
Frequently with military reports, the report contains chapters with different sets of authors collected into an overall report with an editor (just like an edited book). Unfortunately, these overall reports tend to also be parts of report series, so co-opting the Series field doesn't quite work. I would just use Book Section, but the reference needs a Report Type and Report Number.
An example in APA 6th:
Barge, B. N., & Hough, L. M. (1988). Utility of interest assessment for predicting job performance. In L. M. Hough (Ed.), Literature review: Utility of temperament, biodata, and interest assessment for predicting job performance (ARI Research Note 88-02; pp. 131–188). Alexandria, VA: U.S. Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences.
The series title for this report is: Project A: Improving the selection, classification, and utilization of army enlisted personnel.
Earlier in this thread, it was accepted that Editor should be added as a creator type for reports. On another thread, it was commented that Report should have a # of Pages field. Given this citation format, it should also retain the Pages field.
Could another field be added to store title of the full report to which the section belongs (mapped to CSL container-title), perhaps called something like "Containing Report" or "Containing Report Title"?
no concerns about edition for reports, that should be done.
The other issue is more problematic. Right now, I can e.g. determine whether a title should be in italics just by looking at the item type. But if we allow both full reports and report chapters to be cited using the same item type, that'd complicate things a lot (we'd have to, for this instance, add different tests for container titles in all styles).
I think my preferred approach would be the same that I outlined for music scores, which have similar issues: https://github.com/ajlyon/zotero-bits/issues/28 , i.e. try to see if we could handle this in the book section item type.
In that case, we would need a way to accommodate Report Type and Report Number in the book section type. Would the addition of general Type and Number fields to Book Section work? If those labels are too general, would it be too jarring to just have Report Type and Report Number as fields for Book Section?
As another alternative, would a new Zotero item type reportSection mapped to CSL type chapter be the best way to handle this situation, so that the Type and Number fields could be included only there?
This actually brings to mind another APA-related need for books, book sections, journal articles, and some other item types. I'd like to bring it up so that we don't inadvertently map a Type field where this other field might go.
When an item is an unusual type (e.g. a Monograph or a Special Issue) or in a particular unusual format (e.g. Kindle version), that information should be noted, non-italicized in brackets after the title. MLA, I believe, has similar requirements for formats of electronic versions of books. This was raised before without a clear resolution. It would be good to add a Format (or specifically Special Format) field mapped to CSL medium. In the past, the recommendation for things like [Monograph] have been to include them in the title, but that can mess with formatting (e.g. if the monograph is published as a standalone book, rather than in a journal).
Examples from the APA 6th edition manual (page 201): Haney, C., & Wiener, R. L. (Eds.). (2004). Capital punishment in the United States [Special issue]. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 10(4). Ganster, D. C., Schaubroeck, J., Sime, W. E., & Mayes, B. T. (1991). The nomological validity of the Type A personality among employed adults [Monograph]. Journal of Applied Psychology, 76, 143-1 68. doi: Editorial: "What is a disaster" and why does this question matter? [Editorial]. (2006). Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management, 14, 1-2.
This poses a slight problem for Computer Program, which has System mapped to medium and CSL type book. Perhaps this field could be remapped to genre?
Sorry to bring up another issue in the middle of discussing the previous one; they happened to start to overlap and wanted to be sure all parameters were under consideration.
Just out of curiosity, are these changes potentially getting closer, with the new API syncing that came out at the beginning of the month? (The development roadmap page is currently outdated.) The need for some of these is beginning to get desperate, notably the lack of a DOI for anything apart from journal articles (cf. the new integration between GitHub and Zenodo for getting DOIs for code).
Around 1 in 6 of my references when report writing cite authored specialist contributions (sub-reports) within a larger report by a different author. I see there was discussion earlier this year of the issue of authoured Report Sections.
Is sounded like there were no plans for a report section type. Is that the case?
I am just experimenting with transferring my references to zotero, but I think this could be a major sticking point. I don't really want to use category 'fudges' to get outputs because I want to share the library with colleagues and for the field titles to be intuitively used correctly. I think report section would be the only way to achieve this.
Boreham, S., 2010. Stratigraphy, Physical & Chemical Analyses from Bronze Age sediments at Must Farm, Whittlesey, Peterborough, in D. Gibson, M. Knight & M. Allen, The Must Farm Timber Alignments: An Archaeological and Environmental Evaluation. Post-excavation Assessment Vol. 2 (CAU Report 935.) Cambridge Archaeological Unit, 123–42.
Hmm. I may have to rethink my opposition to allowing both reports and report sections in reports. We just can't have item types for all of this. It becomes unmanageable, both GUI-wise and for the citation-styles (if we're less concerned about the former bwiernik's idea to have reportSection in Zotero and map to chapter could work).
The bracketed comment is suggesting that there could be a Report Section item type in Zotero that could be formatted in the same manner as a chapter, as this would not require large changes to any citation styles or the CSL language. That is my preferred approach for this type (and similar issues). I don't think the impact on the GUI will be great, especially if combined with the ability to hide unused item types in a "More Types" menu.
Could a Chapter Number field be added to Book Section and mapped to CSL chapter-number? Not aware of any style requirements; major reference use case is preparing readings lists for courses/workshops/etc. where many chapters from a single textbook are assigned.
I'd like to see more of a rationale for that--I think there's a good chance there is, since otherwise I'd be surprised that there's a CSL variable, but I would be reluctant to add it if it's really just for syllabi/reading lists.
OK, so in IEEE (p.35) that really does seem to be what we're looking for, though it looks rather odd--why is the chapter number in that reference but not in others? Presumably all of those chapters have numbers?
For Chicago, that's actually a locator, for which we already have chapters.
For ASME, that's a chapter in a whole book and it looks like one of those odd numeric with locator type of references that we really can't handle properly (and that I don't understand, tbh).
So given IEEE, my concern would then be: If people start filling these out and we put them in the citation style--would those citations be OK? Odd but fine? Wrong?
We try to make the reference as complete as possible. Both chapter and/or section information, and/or page nos. are optional for either online or print books. What is required are:1) Title of Book; 2) publisher with location or URL; and 3) year of publication.
Hope this helps, Mona Mittra
So it seems that chapter numbers are preferred--if people use the field and the style includes them, they would be fine.
I've been using Zotero with no problems for about two months, and a few days ago, I started getting two error messages as I tried to add citations into footnotes. One is "You have modified this citation since Zotero generated it. Do you want to keep your modifications and prevent future updates? Clicking 'yes' will prevent Zotero from updating this citation if you add additional citations, switch styles, or modify the item to which it refers. Clicking 'no' will erase your changes." I've selected yes and no, and I don't get the citation in the footnote and it messes up the formatting of the other footnotes.
The other error message is "The Zotero field code corresponding to this citation, which tells Zotero which item in your library this citation represents, has been corrupted. Would you like to reselect the item? Clicking 'no' will delete the field codes for citations containing this item, preserving the citation text but potentially deleting it from your bibliography."
I installed the update, have re-installed Zotero, and I'm still getting this error. Please help!
Not sure I'm in the right place to ask for that, but I'm embarrassed in storing an entry in a manuscript catalogue (the BNF one), like this : http://archivesetmanuscrits.bnf.fr/ead.html?id=FRBNFEAD000094636
Actually it is recognized as "book", but it does not really fit the object. I try to use the "article d'encyclopédie" but it is not really the right one, neither. Do you think a new category could be added for this kind of entry ?
The fields needed are
- author of the notice
- name of the notice
- url
- name of the catalogue (here, "Archives et Manuscrits")
- name of the library (=editor ?)
- (date)
- (place)
I guess a written catalogue can be considered as a "book", but the individual items are not really "chapters", so something like an ameliorated "encyclopedy" could be useful, especially for online catalogues.
@Julie: It seems the translator is not working, at least I can't add this item, but that's not the question here (@adamsmith: can you confirm that?).
but it does not really fit the object
Generally speaking, don't forget what ajlyon wrote in the first post of this thread (§4).
Anyway, can you tell us how this should be cited ? That's probably obvious, but who's the author of the notice in your example. (I assume its name is "Miscellanea de artibus liberalibus".) At first glance, I think you could use the "Manuscript" item type.
With regard to the discussion in https://forums.zotero.org/discussion/46940/missing-fields-for-artwork/ I would like to propose to map existing CSL fields publisher-place and publisher to new Zotero fields/UI labels "Place" and "Museum/Gallery" (or something like it) for type Artwork so we can have
Nam June Paik: TV-Buddha, New York: Galleria Bonino 1974 (CCTV installation with bronze sculpture)
With regard to the discussion in https://forums.zotero.org/discussion/38784/additional-field-needed-for-map-sheet-number/ I would like to propose to map existing CSL field volume to new Zotero field/UI label "Sheet" for type Map so we can have
Bundesamt für Landestopographie swisstopo: Landeskarte der Schweiz 1:25'000, Blatt 1047: Basel, Wabern 2011
where "1047: Basel" is value of volume (with prefix "Blatt: " for sheet in German)
With regard to the discussion in https://forums.zotero.org/discussion/5780/better-patent-support-needed-in-bibliography-country-in-database/ I would like to ask whether there are plans to map existing CSL field original-date to new Zotero field/UI label "Priority date" for type Patent in the next major update of Zotero?
Upgrade Storage
I'd like to use the maps plug-in for a database of webpages but I haven't figuered it out. Thanks.
A few examples:
Campbell, J. P. (1996) Project A: Final report. (ARI Research Report No. DC18056, revised ed.). Ft Belvoir, VA: Army Research Institute.
Here, "ARI Research Report" is the report type, "DC18056" is the report number, and "revised" is the edition. "No." is supplied by the style. Ideally, "ed." could also be supplied by the style.
Hogan, R. & Hogan, J. (2002). The Hogan Personality Inventory (Test manual, 2nd ed.). Tulsa, OK, Hogan Assessment Systems.
Here, "Test manual" is the report type. Edition would be "2".
Wonderlic. (2006). The Wonderlic Personnel Test(Form G). Vernon Hills, IL: Wonderlic.
Here, I put "Form G" into the report type field.
A related form is:
CGC. (2010). The Depression Inventory (Version 2.6). Washington, DC.
Here, the reference uses a version number instead of an edition number. This could be accommodated without adding a separate version field by entering "Version 2.6" into Report type or by accepting "2.6 ed." instead of "Version 2.6". I'm not sure this corner case is worth adding an second additional field.
An example in APA 6th:
Barge, B. N., & Hough, L. M. (1988). Utility of interest assessment for
predicting job performance. In L. M. Hough (Ed.), Literature review:
Utility of temperament, biodata, and interest assessment for predicting
job performance (ARI Research Note 88-02; pp. 131–188). Alexandria,
VA: U.S. Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences.
The series title for this report is: Project A: Improving the selection, classification, and utilization of army enlisted personnel.
Earlier in this thread, it was accepted that Editor should be added as a creator type for reports. On another thread, it was commented that Report should have a # of Pages field. Given this citation format, it should also retain the Pages field.
Could another field be added to store title of the full report to which the section belongs (mapped to CSL container-title), perhaps called something like "Containing Report" or "Containing Report Title"?
The other issue is more problematic. Right now, I can e.g. determine whether a title should be in italics just by looking at the item type. But if we allow both full reports and report chapters to be cited using the same item type, that'd complicate things a lot (we'd have to, for this instance, add different tests for container titles in all styles).
I think my preferred approach would be the same that I outlined for music scores, which have similar issues: https://github.com/ajlyon/zotero-bits/issues/28 , i.e. try to see if we could handle this in the book section item type.
As another alternative, would a new Zotero item type reportSection mapped to CSL type chapter be the best way to handle this situation, so that the Type and Number fields could be included only there?
This actually brings to mind another APA-related need for books, book sections, journal articles, and some other item types. I'd like to bring it up so that we don't inadvertently map a Type field where this other field might go.
When an item is an unusual type (e.g. a Monograph or a Special Issue) or in a particular unusual format (e.g. Kindle version), that information should be noted, non-italicized in brackets after the title. MLA, I believe, has similar requirements for formats of electronic versions of books. This was raised before without a clear resolution. It would be good to add a Format (or specifically Special Format) field mapped to CSL medium. In the past, the recommendation for things like [Monograph] have been to include them in the title, but that can mess with formatting (e.g. if the monograph is published as a standalone book, rather than in a journal).
Examples from the APA 6th edition manual (page 201):
Haney, C., & Wiener, R. L. (Eds.). (2004). Capital punishment in the United States [Special issue]. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 10(4).
Ganster, D. C., Schaubroeck, J., Sime, W. E., & Mayes, B. T. (1991). The nomological validity of the Type A personality among employed adults [Monograph]. Journal of Applied Psychology, 76, 143-1 68. doi:
Editorial: "What is a disaster" and why does this question matter? [Editorial]. (2006). Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management, 14, 1-2.
This poses a slight problem for Computer Program, which has System mapped to medium and CSL type book. Perhaps this field could be remapped to genre?
Sorry to bring up another issue in the middle of discussing the previous one; they happened to start to overlap and wanted to be sure all parameters were under consideration.
Is sounded like there were no plans for a report section type. Is that the case?
I am just experimenting with transferring my references to zotero, but I think this could be a major sticking point. I don't really want to use category 'fudges' to get outputs because I want to share the library with colleagues and for the field titles to be intuitively used correctly. I think report section would be the only way to achieve this.
We just can't have item types for all of this. It becomes unmanageable, both GUI-wise and for the citation-styles (if we're less concerned about the former bwiernik's idea to have reportSection in Zotero and map to chapter could work).
Thanks for your response. Obviously I'd be keen to see that development.
I don't follow your last comment in brackets though.
Iona
IEEE specifies that chapter number should be included if available.
http://www.ieee.org/documents/style_manual.pdf
So does ASME.
https://www.asme.org/shop/proceedings/conference-publications/references
Chicago MOS also appears to recommend chapter numbers for use in references to books without fixed page numbers (i.e., electronic versions).
http://www.chicagomanualofstyle.org/tools_citationguide.html
For Chicago, that's actually a locator, for which we already have chapters.
For ASME, that's a chapter in a whole book and it looks like one of those odd numeric with locator type of references that we really can't handle properly (and that I don't understand, tbh).
So given IEEE, my concern would then be: If people start filling these out and we put them in the citation style--would those citations be OK? Odd but fine? Wrong?
What's the error ID 763561676?
Thanks
Read that before : http://www.zotero.org/support/reporting_problems
Hello,
I've been using Zotero with no problems for about two months, and a few days ago, I started getting two error messages as I tried to add citations into footnotes. One is "You have modified this citation since Zotero generated it. Do you want to keep your modifications and prevent future updates? Clicking 'yes' will prevent Zotero from updating this citation if you add additional citations, switch styles, or modify the item to which it refers. Clicking 'no' will erase your changes." I've selected yes and no, and I don't get the citation in the footnote and it messes up the formatting of the other footnotes.
The other error message is "The Zotero field code corresponding to this citation, which tells Zotero which item in your library this citation represents, has been corrupted. Would you like to reselect the item? Clicking 'no' will delete the field codes for citations containing this item, preserving the citation text but potentially deleting it from your bibliography."
I installed the update, have re-installed Zotero, and I'm still getting this error. Please help!
Thanks,
Stephanie
Not sure I'm in the right place to ask for that, but I'm embarrassed in storing an entry in a manuscript catalogue (the BNF one), like this : http://archivesetmanuscrits.bnf.fr/ead.html?id=FRBNFEAD000094636
Actually it is recognized as "book", but it does not really fit the object. I try to use the "article d'encyclopédie" but it is not really the right one, neither. Do you think a new category could be added for this kind of entry ?
The fields needed are
- author of the notice
- name of the notice
- url
- name of the catalogue (here, "Archives et Manuscrits")
- name of the library (=editor ?)
- (date)
- (place)
I guess a written catalogue can be considered as a "book", but the individual items are not really "chapters", so something like an ameliorated "encyclopedy" could be useful, especially for online catalogues.
Anyway, can you tell us how this should be cited ? That's probably obvious, but who's the author of the notice in your example. (I assume its name is "Miscellanea de artibus liberalibus".)
At first glance, I think you could use the "Manuscript" item type.
Nam June Paik: TV-Buddha, New York: Galleria Bonino 1974 (CCTV installation with bronze sculpture)
Bundesamt für Landestopographie swisstopo: Landeskarte der Schweiz 1:25'000, Blatt 1047: Basel, Wabern 2011
where "1047: Basel" is value of volume (with prefix "Blatt: " for sheet in German)