Open joemull opened 1 year ago
The publisher should come from the journal publisher field not from the press as a whole
Should this fallback when the publisher is not set?
The publisher should come from the journal publisher field not from the press as a whole
Should this fallback when the publisher is not set?
Yeah I think that would be good.
The below changes are requested by a publishing librarian:
[x] Add our
first_page
andlast_page
fields to the XML.[x] The proceedings title should include exactly what is in the journal name and not end with a final space hyphen space.
[x] The publisher should come from the journal publisher field not from the press as a whole
[ ] The article number is important for citation. There is not an article number field in crossref. However, looking at PLoS One (looking at their schema tags and also looking at how it imports into Zotero) I think the article number should map to the first page number. JM question: Can you clarify what you mean here? Are you saying the crossref deposit should use Janeway's article number in Crossref's first page field if there's no first page in Janeway?
[ ] Map our
page_numbers
field to Crossref's fieldother_pages
. JM note: It looks like Crossref's fieldother_pages
is used for items with non-contiguous page information. That's different from our page_numbers field, which is for a custom page range, like with roman numerals or something. I think we should not populate it with our custom page range field because the systems ingesting this info will not expect that field to duplicate info in first_page and last_page, just provide extra info. Something I'm not considering?