Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Change order of ISBN fetchers to improve fetching most complete information #8652

Closed
ThiloteE opened this issue Apr 7, 2022 · 13 comments · Fixed by #8700
Closed

Change order of ISBN fetchers to improve fetching most complete information #8652

ThiloteE opened this issue Apr 7, 2022 · 13 comments · Fixed by #8700

Comments

@ThiloteE
Copy link
Member

ThiloteE commented Apr 7, 2022

See discussion and report of the problem in the forum: https://discourse.jabref.org/t/ebook-de-incomplete-isbn-information/3313

When using the Import by ID feature using ISBN, the first search engine is ebook(dot)de, as explained in the jabref documentation. It seems that ebook(dot)de only provides one author in the author field (this has happened multiple times, I don’t know if it’s a general feature of ebook(dot)de). For example, for ISBN 0521099064, the ebook.de output 1 shows Stephen Hawking as author, while the ottobib.com output 1 correctly shows S. Hawking and G. Ellis as authors. Shouldn’t the first search tool provide the most complete information?

Can reproduce with ISBN: 9780203854693

I think it makes sense to switch the order. Ottobib apparently uses WorldCat as source

@ThiloteE ThiloteE added [outdated] type: enhancement component: fetcher good first issue An issue intended for project-newcomers. Varies in difficulty. labels Apr 7, 2022
@a1819644
Copy link

a1819644 commented Apr 8, 2022

Hi, just wondering if this issue has been taken by someone? If not can my team have look into it.
about us: Group of 4 from University of Adelaide

@ThiloteE
Copy link
Member Author

ThiloteE commented Apr 8, 2022

Yes, this issue is for the taking :) Thanks for your interest!

Please check out https://github.com/JabRef/jabref/blob/main/CONTRIBUTING.md for a start. Also, https://devdocs.jabref.org/getting-into-the-code/guidelines-for-setting-up-a-local-workspace is worth looking at. Feel free to ask if you have any questions here on GitHub or also at gitter.

Try to open a (draft) pull request early on, so that people can see you are working on the issue and so that they can see the direction the pull request is heading towards. This way, you will likely receive valuable feedback.

@ThiloteE
Copy link
Member Author

ThiloteE commented Apr 8, 2022

(Could be that this issue in iteself might be a little too small for a team of 4 though)

@a1819644
Copy link

a1819644 commented Apr 9, 2022

@ThiloteE thanks for your time and opportunity
Can we still take this issue cause none of my group member has any experience with open source contribution.
I believe this issue will be good start for us. To get familiar with the Jebref.

@ThiloteE
Copy link
Member Author

ThiloteE commented Apr 9, 2022

Of course you can take this issue. I am not familiar with your course requirements and if you think it is alright, go ahead :-)
A lot of the other Adelaide students were choosing issues from the "candidates for university projects" page, so that made me think a little, but you do you! :-)

@a1819644
Copy link

a1819644 commented Apr 10, 2022

Thanks for you quick response, we are the student of the "software development improvement".

Yes, I have visited the page and currently waiting on Jabref members reply.
: )

@a1819644
Copy link

@ThiloteE Going to create a pr draft for this but before that may I know what do you mean by "I think it makes sense to switch the order."(https://discourse.jabref.org/t/ebook-de-incomplete-isbn-information/3313) ?

Also, for some reason I am having issue with recreating the issue using ISSB : 9780203854693. Please see the attached snapshot of the issue.

issue cant fetch

@JustinNgu18

@Siedlerchr
Copy link
Member

Jabref has two ISBN fetchers, ebook.de and ottobib. If the first fetcher does not find any results, the second one is automatically called.
So you simply need to change the code so that ottobib is called first and ebook.de second.

And of course adapt the tests.

@ThiloteE
Copy link
Member Author

Also, for some reason I am having issue with recreating the issue using ISSB : 9780203854693. Please see the attached snapshot of the issue.

I also have this issue now.

This would be the entry in question:

@Book{PerseLambe20160829mea,
  author    = {Elizabeth M. Perse and Jennifer Lambe},
  date      = {2016-08-29},
  title     = {Media Effects and Society},
  doi       = {10.4324/9780203854693},
  edition   = {2},
  isbn      = {9780203854693},
  pages     = {340},
  publisher = {Routledge},
  url       = {https://books.google.de/books?id=W8bLDAAAQBAJ},
  urldate   = {2022-01-22},
}

@Siedlerchr
Copy link
Member

Oh damn, forget about it: https://www.ottobib.com/ says:
OttoBib is no longer operational (in service from 2005 - 2022)

@a1819644
Copy link

a1819644 commented Apr 16, 2022

Oh damn, forget about it: https://www.ottobib.com/ says: OttoBib is no longer operational (in service from 2005 - 2022)

True, Forgot to mention it. So, do you recommend to use the alternatives of the OttoBib such as https://zbib.org/
https://www.mybib.com/
https://app.bibguru.com/
https://www.worldcat.org
https://www.citethisforme.com/ (it uses the worldcat as source)

and take out the OttoBib from second search now and use alternatives?

@JustinNgu18

@Siedlerchr
Copy link
Member

Siedlerchr commented Apr 18, 2022

The zbib.org or the paperpile could work https://www.bibtex.com/c/isbn-to-bibtex-converter/
WorldCat requires an API key

A free alternative: https://openlibrary.org/dev/docs/api/books

@koppor
Copy link
Member

koppor commented Apr 18, 2022

Maybe, we should merge the information of all fetchers? Think, we discussed that somehow and neglected it because of traffic and difficulty of merging. Currently, I think, we can do a test phase with more users and then decide whether we a) call all and merge or b) use a different ordering...

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
Archived in project
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

4 participants