new fields for archival documents

dstillman
This discussion was created from comments split from: Zotero 5.0 Beta.
  • zotero-ajl
    I'm in the process of moving a database from Endnote to Zotero; many of my records are archival documents that also have "Boxes/Carton" and "Document Numbers". (In Endnote, were stored in the Volume and Number fields, respectively.) If I understand this discussion correctly, Zotero _will_ at some point add fields more appropriate to archival research. I know the discussions about adding fields and hierarchies have been going on for some time, but might one expect these to appear in Zotero 5.0? If not, what might "best practice" be for storing archival data in Zotero? (Note: placing the Carton and Document Number fields in one note field is not really a solution...) Any guidance would be greatly appreciated.
  • bwiernik
    New fields will come in Zotero 5.1. Best practice now is to use he Archive and Archive Location fields, but it is acknowledged that at least one more Archive location field is needed.
  • adamsmith
    edited November 29, 2016
    No, field updates will be in 5.1, not 5.0 and since that requires 4.x to be cut off from sync, I wouldn't expect it super soon (as in, certainly not in the next 2 months and may well take 6+). Field updates will generally be easier after that.

    Best practice for storing archival data is include both box and document number in the "Loc. in Archive" field. There simply is no practical solution for putting them in separate fields, sorry. I'm actually a bit surprised that having them in separate fields is critical for you. Having talked to archivists and librarians quite a bit, this has rarely if ever come up. The main issues I'm aware of are that you can't specify archival collections and the phsyical location of the archive (the latter is possible with a workaround, btw.).
    edit: I would be interested in a follow-up on that, but please put that in a new thread since it wouldn't be related to Zotero 5.0 anymore.
  • zotero-ajl
    Many thanks for the quick replies; much appreciated!
    adamsmith, the reason for the separation of the document number from the carton is that for my work it's important to be able to sort on document number. The document number is assigned by the issuing office or bureau (I work with French military archives), but contiguous documents are not necessarily filed in the same cartons. And sometimes copies of the same document are sent to multiple recipients, which then archive them in different cartons. Say I have a document on the army's morale sent to two different recipients, and in one office, someone scrawls an angry reply or commentary on that copy, and in another office (and another carton), there are approving comments in the margins. I'd like to be able to find the two copies in my database easily.
  • adamsmith
    @Dan%20Stillman -- probably makes sense to split this off if you could?

    You could use call number for the Document number then? This won't work with standard citation styles (and we very likely won't make it work), but it fits as a description and the necessary tweak is fairly trivial.
  • erazlogo
    Loc in Archive is only one field because locations are too different for various archives--it could box/folder, or record group/box/folder, or also document number, and the order of fields often depends on how the archive wants them cited. Having two fields would only make it more confusing in my opinion. I would put the document number into Loc. in Archive for citation, and then again into another field for sorting--Call number or Extra, for example.

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.