Cleanup actions. Move action for issue, number, eid, pages fields.

[ThiloteE]

Came up during https://github.com/JabRef/jabref/issues/8372

Specifically, here: https://github.com/JabRef/jabref/issues/8372#issuecomment-1008898616

• Specification of number in bibtex (p. 10): https://mirror.informatik.hs-fulda.de/tex-archive/biblio/bibtex/base/btxdoc.pdf
• Specification of number and issue in biblatex (p. 22 and 23): https://packages.oth-regensburg.de/ctan/macros/latex/contrib/biblatex/doc/biblatex.pdf
• Specification of number and issue in CSL: https://docs.citationstyles.org/en/stable/specification.html#number-variables

Desired solution

Edited:

• [x] A) (Manual trigger) Move data from number field (present in Bibtex AND Biblatex) to issue field (only present in Biblatex) and also create action that can do the reverse.
  • Why? - Many people in the past put wrong stuff into the issue and numbers field. Allow them to correct their mistakes.
  • How? - Clean up action for this
• [ ] B) (Automated) Move seasons from number field to the issue field (e.g. via RegEx).
  • Do this during conversion from Bibtex to Biblatex.
  • Do the reverse move during conversion from Biblatex to Bibtex, but check if the number field is empty.
  • Maybe integrity check for this instead of clean up action
• [ ] C) (Manual trigger) Move data from pages field to eid field and also allow to do the reverse.
  • Why? - Bibtex does have no eid field, so some journals put the article number into the pages field. The eid field does not exist in Bibtex library mode, so it will be good if we could do the reverse in case people want to convert their library from Biblatex to Bibtex.
• [ ] D) (Semi automatic) Create action that detects and moves article number from pages field to eid field, if the eid field is empty.
  • Why? - Bibtex does have no eid field, so some journals put the article number into the pages field.
  • How? - Write a RegEx that detects page ranges for this. Only move article numbers, not the page numbers or page ranges.

[tobiasdiez]

According to the biblatex docs you reference to, the issue field:

This field is intended for journals whose individual issues are identified by a designation such as ‘Spring’ or ‘Summer’ rather than the month or a number. The placement of issue is similar to month and number. Integer ranges and short designators are better written to the number field.

So I think biblatex and bibtex are not too different there, and the number field is what should be used more often.

But maybe we can add an integrity check that checks if things like "Spring" are in number and proposes to move to issue; and conversely if a number is in issue and the number field is empty, then propose to move to number.

[ThiloteE]

Thank you Tobias, sounds good 👍

Also relevant here: "Moving the issue number to issue and article number to number would not be my preference, because the issue number is traditionally number and the article number is eid in biblatex"

The long answer: plk/biblatex#726 (comment)

• The extraction of seasons from number to issue sounds pretty riskless.
• Conversely, moving from issue field towards number field or towards eid field should probably be a manual trigger, not automatic. It would be a lot harder to write a RegEx that differentiates between number and eid.

[ThiloteE]

A and C will or could be solved by https://github.com/JabRef/jabref/issues/6536#issuecomment-1146494805

[HoussemNasri]

Option A is already possible within 'Manage field names & content' e.g. to move data from 'number' to 'issue':

1. Choose 'number' as the field name from the Combobox.
2. Select the 'Rename field to:' radio button and enter 'issue' in the adjacent text field.
3. Tick 'Overwrite existing field values'
4. Click 'OK'