Upgrade StorageComplex locators (& multivolume again)
Wondering if there is any chance of getting Zotero to render anything like these:
(Note)
John Doe, The Doe Saga, London, 1933-1935, 6 vols., vol. 1, The Rise of the Does, p. 33, note 4.
or even with the date of a specific volume:
John Doe, The Doe Saga, London, 1933-1935, 6 vols., vol. 1, The Rise of the Does, 1934, p. 33, note 4.
John Doe, "The Does and Their Dough", in Dough Studies, vol. 12, 1933, p. 23-45, on pages 25-26.
(i.e. pages of the complete article, plus reference to specific pages).
I gather that for multivolume works you can only type volume and page together into the "volume" box, but then you lose things like automatically localised labels for both vol. and p.
I was also hoping one could format volume numbers so as to have, say, roman numerals when quoting books, vs arabic for periodicals; but then page numbers would also become arabic [corr.: I meant roman], which is no good.
As the editor of a scholarly journal, I use these niceties every day. French citation traditions, you see, are somewhat less compact than English norm ("1:16-17" is unheard of, apart from Bible studies maybe).
Also wondering, does/could Zotero check "volume" against "number-of-volumes", or "page" against "number-of-pages" or, more usefully, against the range of pages of an article? Just to help prevent typos.
(Note)
John Doe, The Doe Saga, London, 1933-1935, 6 vols., vol. 1, The Rise of the Does, p. 33, note 4.
or even with the date of a specific volume:
John Doe, The Doe Saga, London, 1933-1935, 6 vols., vol. 1, The Rise of the Does, 1934, p. 33, note 4.
John Doe, "The Does and Their Dough", in Dough Studies, vol. 12, 1933, p. 23-45, on pages 25-26.
(i.e. pages of the complete article, plus reference to specific pages).
I gather that for multivolume works you can only type volume and page together into the "volume" box, but then you lose things like automatically localised labels for both vol. and p.
I was also hoping one could format volume numbers so as to have, say, roman numerals when quoting books, vs arabic for periodicals; but then page numbers would also become arabic [corr.: I meant roman], which is no good.
As the editor of a scholarly journal, I use these niceties every day. French citation traditions, you see, are somewhat less compact than English norm ("1:16-17" is unheard of, apart from Bible studies maybe).
Also wondering, does/could Zotero check "volume" against "number-of-volumes", or "page" against "number-of-pages" or, more usefully, against the range of pages of an article? Just to help prevent typos.
if locator="volume"
etc. - I'd be surprised if that isn't possible anymore. I think that causes more problems than it solves - apart from the fact that CSL currently does no such checking for anything, my main concern would be that this would raise flags whenever a user does something unexpected with the page/# of pages fields and that seems very undesirable to me.
Quite right, "p. 23-45, on pages 25-26" is OK w/ Z. + plugin.
With box I meant the plugin locator field, referring to the fact that you must hard-code, e.g. in my first example, [vol.] "1, p. 33".
And so, you can't get a roman numeral for the volume w/o contaminating the page number at the same time.
And yes, now I see the problem with the check-against idea (not that it would have been that useful anyway).
Cheers everybody.
@noksagt - I don't really see useful workaround for volume titles in that thread - the last issue in that thread, with the multivolume conference proceedings I think is mostly solved, but I don't really see how you'd get any of the first two examples cited above.
Well all I can have in Zotero is: John Doe, The Doe Saga, London, 1933-1935, 6 vols. — not vol. 1? Unless I enter each volume as a separate book, which is what tends to happen in library catalogues, and is a pain.
@noksagt
Thanks for the suggestion? Actually I was considering that workaround, but it feels a bit drastic. The output in my case could look like this:
John Doe, The Rise of the Does, London, 1934 (id., The Doe Saga, London, 1933-1935, 6 vols), p. 33 — supposing I enter the complete information for the set in the "series" field
or just:
John Doe, The Rise of the Does, London, 1934 (id., The Doe Saga, 1), p. 33.
Either of these could be an option in certain cases, but would entail (among other drawbacks) forgetting about italics for the title of the set.
Which leads me to a further (minor) question: Z. has "vol." and "number of vols" for a book. But how do you know if "vol. 2" & "2 vols" means "vol. 2 of 2", or "vol. 2, in 2 vols"?
Or maybe in the second case one shouldn't use vol. 2, but some other notion, such as "part 2" — although vol. 2, in 2 parts, might be more satisfactory than part 2, in 2 vols.
Your second question I don't follow - it would help if you were clear about where you're adding things - Zotero or plugin? Also, I'm never quite sure if you're talking about an existing style or general possibilities - because, in general, using the volume and # of volume fields, it's very much possible to render "volume 1 of 2" or "vol.2 in to vols" etc.
Actually I am making a custom style, hence my question. Yes, I suppose I can get an italicised series title and non-italic number if the number is entered separately, in the appropriate field (which apparently isn't how libraries do it, at least from French catalogues Zotero imports the number directly into the series field).
The order of output elements will still be a bit unusual compared to what I had in mind at first, but logical enough, and it might solve a caseor two whenever I decide I really need both titles. Thanks.
@adamsmith
1° — Yes, I just wondered if there was anything less unwieldy, if there isn't, then never mind. What would be the quickest way: duplicating a title and then editing vol. and date, I suppose? (in Zotero).
2° — I mean, what are the two fields meant for, or what does it mean per se if you enter a figure into both fields (in Zotero): "volume 1 of 2" (probably) or "vol.2 in two vols"(possibly?). Or could it be used for both cases? But then, I can't see how any style could make this distinction in the output format.
Maybe I am splitting hairs, just trying to understand the logic of Z, and I don't want to bother you all day, I now understand that the primary use is apparently for multiple entries for multivols (as in 1° above). Thanks again.
(catalogues: data import for some of the less common fields is not terribly consistent, yes).
2. I think everyone understand this as "volume 1 of 2" - the existing styles certainly do as do any translators that include that information (not sure how many actually do, I'd guess Library of Congress probably does).
That said, you can obviously hack a custom style to do whatever you want it to if needed.
Re your second point (as adamsmith notes): vol 1 of 2. 'Volume' refers to the same hierarchical level in both fields and there is no further breakdown of a volume into sub-numbered parts (e.g. 'issue' in the journal article type).
Librarians cram everything they can about the series into the series field. Where you woud expect
Series: "Les publications de Scriptorium"
Number: "9"
you get
Series: "(Les publications de Scriptorium. - Bruxelles : Erasme : puis Centre d'étude des manuscrits, 1947 -... ; 9)"
and possibly the ISSN thrown in too.
Broadly speaking, I have often the need to clean up a bit metadata... I think you can't avoid it for some catalogues.
I agree that some translators could be (slightly) improved (e.g.: sudoc). However, what is "of no use for citations" can be different according to styles + zotero is much more than a citation tool...
It should be possible to developp an ISBD parser to extract informations from these fields ...
Title field:
The Doe Saga, <i>London, 1933-1935, 6 vols., vol. 1,</i> The Rise of the Does
Or just
The Doe Saga, <i>1,</i> The Rise of the Does
if I decide to use place and date for the only volume I am citing
(output: John Doe, The Doe Saga, 1, The Rise of the Does, London, 1934).
Thank heavens for rich text markup!