DOAB Fetcher now fetches ISBN and imprint fields where possible

[shafinkamal]

Fixes #8708.

Previously, the DOAB Fetcher could not obtain the ISBN of a DOAB entry. This PR modifies the URL for DOAB query to include BITSTREAM data (where ISBN information can be found).

Below is an example of the previous and updated URL's for DOAB queries (note the ",bitstreams" suffix)

PREVIOUS: https://directory.doabooks.org/rest/search?query=handle:%2220.500.12854/26303%22&expand=metadata

UPDATED: https://directory.doabooks.org/rest/search?query=handle:%2220.500.12854/26303%22&expand=metadata,bitstreams

The fetcher can then obtain the ISBN and add the field to the entry accordingly. I am creating this Draft PR to discuss with maintainers that it seems like many DOAB entries do not have ISBN metadata or BITSTREAM objects and so the ISBN may perhaps be unobtainable in these instances. So I am wondering if there is anything more can be done or if (under the assumption that this PR is accepted firstly) #8708 should be closed?

• Change in CHANGELOG.md described in a way that is understandable for the average user (if applicable)
• Tests created for changes (if applicable)
• Manually tested changed features in running JabRef (always required)
• Screenshots added in PR description (for UI changes)
• Checked developer's documentation: Is the information available and up to date? If not, I outlined it in this pull request.
• Checked documentation: Is the information available and up to date? If not, I created an issue at https://github.com/JabRef/user-documentation/issues or, even better, I submitted a pull request to the documentation repository.

[ThiloteE]

When DOAB entries lack ISBN, then obviously JabRef can't fetch them. That's fine then. No more work needed to be done. 👍

As long as your changes do not break anything and JabRef now can fetch the ISBN and the imprint fields, issue 8708 can indeed be closed.

[shafinkamal]

Thanks for clarifying, @ThiloteE.

To follow up, which StandardField should the imprint field be associated with? The only related StandardField I see is PUBLISHER which is already associated with is publisher.name.

Thanks again :)

[ThiloteE]

You are correct. Nice catch. imprint is indeed not a bibtex or biblatex standard field. Using https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imprint_(trade_name) as basis and comparing with bibtex and biblatex standards, the bibtex / biblatex Publisher field indeed seems to be the closest to it.

So, I would introduce a "If the publisher field is empty, then map imprint to publisher" condition

I found an entry for testing:

https://directory.doabooks.org/handle/20.500.12854/70984 has both imprint and publisher.

I have not found an entry without publisher yet.

[shafinkamal]

Hello, I am seeking advice/recommendations on how to resolve the failing checks. The 'Fetcher Tests' check seems to fail at DBLPFetcherTest which from my understanding, is not related to the commits I have made.

Also unsure on how to resolve the check: Deployment / Create installer and portable version for macOS.

Any help is greatly appreciated.

Thanks!

[ThiloteE]

You can ignore those two. The fetcher error is a http error code 500, which points to serverside error and to compile the macOS version of JabRef there has to be done something related to certificates and/or injecting secrets, which usually is only done by maintainers for a proper release of JabRef.

[shafinkamal]

Thanks @ThiloteE. Marking the PR for review.

[Siedlerchr]

Thanks for your contribution! Overall looks good to me! Just a tiny improvement

[shafinkamal]

Thanks @Siedlerchr. Committed + pushed the changes.

[calixtus]

Thanks @shafinkamal for you contribution. Just merged it! Looking forward to see more 👍