EPrints Technical Mailing List Archive

Message: #06451

< Previous (by date) | Next (by date) > | < Previous (in thread) | Next (in thread) > | Messages - Most Recent First | Threads - Most Recent First

Re: [EP-tech] Sub types on fields

I was going to suggest something similar - like the way the datesdatesdates plugin works.

See: https://github.com/eprintsug/datesdatesdates/blob/master/lib/cfg.d/zz_datesdatesdates_triggers.pl#L3-L45

It chooses the *best* (most published) date to promote to the default field - which works well with export plugins that reference the default 'date' field.

 

Do your academics know whether an ISSN is print or online? Do you trust them to assert this accurately?

 

I'd possibly apply the logic:

If there's only one ISSN in your repeatable field, promote that to the default ISSN field.

If there are two (or more), prefer one.

 

*But* really you should be thinking about exposing all this data to other downstream systems (which would mean altering export plugins to output multiple ISSNs…)

 

Cheers,

John

 

From: eprints-tech-bounces@ecs.soton.ac.uk [mailto:eprints-tech-bounces@ecs.soton.ac.uk] On Behalf Of Adam Field
Sent: 20 April 2017 10:09
To: eprints-tech@ecs.soton.ac.uk
Subject: Re: [EP-tech] Sub types on fields

 

You could have a Print ISSN field and an Online ISSN field, and then an ISSN field which is virtual (or automatic) and selects an appropriate ISSN from the two and returns it.  That way the user would have two explicitly labelled fields, but the behavior of the issn field could be programmatically controlled.

 

--

Adam

 

From: <eprints-tech-bounces@ecs.soton.ac.uk> on behalf of Andrew Beeken <anbeeken@lincoln.ac.uk>
Reply-To: <eprints-tech@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
Date: Wednesday, 19 April 2017 15:21
To: "eprints-tech@ecs.soton.ac.uk" <eprints-tech@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
Subject: [EP-tech] Sub types on fields

 

Hello!

 

So, I’m trying to sort out an issue in our EPrints where we have two ISSN fields – a Print ISSN and an Online ISSN. The problem with these is that neither of these fields are the ACTUAL ISSN which causes some issues on both output as well as making adding records clunky to ensure that academics put their ISSN in the correct field.

 

What I’m looking at doing is adding a “Type” dropdown to the Print ISSN definition that can toggle the ISSN to Print or Online, change the phrase on the Print ISSN field to just identify it as an ISSN (it’s already repeatable) and make sure that the ISSN field is included in the export. There are a few potential “gotcha’s” with this that I’m concerned about.

 

·         Will doing this jeapordise the existing data in any way?

·         If I set the default to “Print” will this default any pre-existing records to a Print type?

·         At the moment we’re looking at manually moving the Online ISSN’s over to the new field, however if there is an easy way to consolidate these two fields I’m all ears! J

 

Thanks in advance!

 

Andrew


The University of Lincoln, located in the heart of the city of Lincoln, has established an international reputation based on high student satisfaction, excellent graduate employment and world-class research.


The information in this e-mail and any attachments may be confidential. If you have received this email in error please notify the sender immediately and remove it from your system. Do not disclose the contents to another person or take copies.

Email is not secure and may contain viruses. The University of Lincoln makes every effort to ensure email is sent without viruses, but cannot guarantee this and recommends recipients take appropriate precautions.

The University may monitor email traffic data and content in accordance with its policies and English law. Further information can be found at: http://www.lincoln.ac.uk/legal.

*** Options: http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/eprints-tech *** Archive: http://www.eprints.org/tech.php/ *** EPrints community wiki: http://wiki.eprints.org/ *** EPrints developers Forum: http://forum.eprints.org/