On Jul 12, 2007, at 19:10, Rajarshi Guha wrote: > > On Jul 12, 2007, at 9:42 PM, Adam R. Maxwell wrote: > >> Parsing should be greatly improved in the next build, but let us know >> if there are still problems. Issue number doesn't seem to be >> available in the references I tried, except in a citation format, >> mixed with other numbers. If you know the correct field parameter >> for >> it, that would help. > > It looks like the bib_issue field doesn't return an issue number. The > bib_vol field doesn't return anything.
Yeah, that's the same thing I'm seeing; the DTD seems to indicate that bib_vol is the field for it, so it's strange that it's empty. > The only field that I could get an issue number was using the bib_id > field. Some examples of the field that I got are: > > <bib_id>40: 403-415 2005</bib_id> > <bib_id>78 (10): 1029-1033 FEB 2 2006</bib_id> > <bib_id>7: - MAR 10 2006</bib_id> > > So it looks like the portion before the ':' is the volume (issue), > though sometimes the issue will be missing. So it looks like the second line has an issue of (10), but it's possibly empty for the others (40 is probably volume, 7 could be either). > Personally, I've never bothered with issue, so it doesn't affect me. > But for completeness, it looks like the bib_id is the way to go I'll probably just ignore it for the time being, since that field seems to have an ambiguous definition. thanks, Adam ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by DB2 Express Download DB2 Express C - the FREE version of DB2 express and take control of your XML. No limits. Just data. Click to get it now. http://sourceforge.net/powerbar/db2/ _______________________________________________ Bibdesk-users mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bibdesk-users
