Thanks, Sebastian, I think it will work if we just test for the presence of `volume`. I've modified our copy of the american-medical-association.csl, and I'll send a pull request.
Now, the second, and larger problem: we need to encode the electronic publication date separately from `issued`. This is a resurrection of this thread from last year: “Multiple publication dates in citations”, http://sourceforge.net/p/xbiblio/mailman/message/31972432/. In addition to needing it for the NLM style, it is relevant with this "ahead-of-print" issue. For example, see this article, which is currently ahead-of-print: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4365985/. The american-medical-association style for this, now, is (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/utils/ctxp/?ids=PMC4365985&style=american-medical-association): Brown CM, Reilly A, Cole RW. A Quantitative Measure of Field Illumination. Journal of Biomolecular Techniques : JBT. July 2015:jbt.15-2602-001. doi:10.7171/jbt.15-2602-001. We need it to be the following, with the epub date appearing in the ahead-of-print notice: Brown CM, Reilly A, Cole RW. A Quantitative Measure of Field Illumination [published online ahead of print March 19, 2015]. Journal of Biomolecular Techniques : JBT. July 2015:jbt.15-2602-001. doi:10.7171/jbt.15-2602-001. I'd like to add this as a new date field in the citeproc-json format: `epub-date`. I tried using `original-date`, but that conflicts with other uses. One of the objections you raised last year was, > Would we ever really need the epub date for citations? I've never seen this > except when an article hasn't been published in paper yet. But this is exactly the use-case we are confronted with, and it seems to me that capturing the e-publication date for a citation before it's in print is pretty important. We also need it for the NLM style (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK7282/box/A33760/), where it is part of the citation format, even for versions of the article that appear after the print version (in other words, in my understanding, it should be preserved as part of the citation). Later in the thread, you wrote: > The two things that actually take work is: > 1. See this through in discussion of the next spec update, including making > the case that this is broadly needed for citations. I'm still unsure about > that, though the NLM example is helpful. It could also be used, together with > the absence of a (print) publication date, as an indicator for pre-print > publication in citations, so that'd be another plus. Actually, for our examples, even for ahead-of-print, we have both the e-publication and the `issued` date. As I mentioned, I'm using absence of `volume` to determine the ahead-of-print status. > 2. It would then also have to be taken up by reference managers and that > might be more of an issue. I'm not sure how happy they'd be with two > additional date fields and we'll definitely do original date of publication. I think it's just one additional date field. Can we get this process started? Thanks, -- Chris Maloney NIH/NLM/NCBI (Contractor) Building 45, 4AN36D-12 301-594-2842 "Sebastian Karcher" wrote: No, and we won't allow free-text matching on the value of a variable in CSL. The current solution for most styles is to simply test for the presence of a volume number or page range for journal articles, and in the absence of both treat articles as published ahead of print, potentially testing for a DOI to distinguish them from forthcoming works. That's the easiest solution and has the advantage that it works already. Option number two is two simply print Status, but that's tricky. We are doing that for articles without a date with a status in some styles. Also possible right now. Option three would be to require restricted vocabulary for status (the way we do e.g. for creator or locator types, i.e. likely via dropdown menu in GUI implementations). That likely is the cleanest solution, but it'd be a lot of effort and it'd require significant changes not just in the specs, but also in GUI implementations. On Fri, Jun 5, 2015 at 3:38 PM, Maloney, Christopher (NIH/NLM/NCBI) [C] <malon...@ncbi.nlm.nih.gov<mailto:malon...@ncbi.nlm.nih.gov>> wrote: We want to output citations that have an indication of an article’s status, when it comes out electronically, ahead of the print version. For example, in the AMA style, the article http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4365985/ would be cited as: Brown CM, Reilly A, Cole RW. A Quantitative Measure of Field Illumination [published online ahead of print March 19, 2015]. Journal of Biomolecular Techniques : JBT. July 2015:jbt.15-2602-001. doi:10.7171/jbt.15-2602-001. The “[published online …]” bit is inserted into the title macro, when the article has the given status. In citeproc-json, I’m thinking this could be encoded with * status: "ahead-of-print", But in CSL, I don’t know how to test for the particular value of a variable. None of the tests described here, http://docs.citationstyles.org/en/stable/specification.html#choose, do that. The closest I have come is to test whether or not the `status` variable exists: <choose> <if variable='status'> <group prefix=' [' suffix=']'> <text value='published online ahead of print '/> <date variable="original-date" form="text"/> </group> </if> </choose> This will work in our system, since we don’t use `status` for anything else (yet), but I don’t think it would work in general. Is there a way to do this? Thanks! -- Chris Maloney NIH/NLM/NCBI (Contractor) Building 45, 4AN36D-12 301-594-2842<tel:301-594-2842> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ _______________________________________________ xbiblio-devel mailing list xbiblio-devel@lists.sourceforge.net<mailto:xbiblio-devel@lists.sourceforge.net> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/xbiblio-devel -- Sebastian Karcher, PhD Department of Political Science Northwestern University
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________ xbiblio-devel mailing list xbiblio-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/xbiblio-devel
