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

SWB -> K10plus #445

Open
LauraErhard opened this issue Apr 3, 2019 · 4 comments
Open

SWB -> K10plus #445

LauraErhard opened this issue Apr 3, 2019 · 4 comments
Labels
back-end This issue needs to be addressed by the back-end.

Comments

@LauraErhard
Copy link

The SWB is now integrated in the K10plus and the SWB database will not be updated anymore. The SWB PPN is still in the metadata but is not the primary ID anymore:
2019-04-03_ingest_ids

Ingest part:
Uploading with the SWB-PPN is not possible at the moment:
2019-04-03_Ingest
If I replace the SWB PPN with the K10plus ID the upload is possible.

@abdelqader-mohammad
Copy link

If the K10plus is the primary ID and mandatory, it makes sense to me that entries without a K10plus ID are rejected, so it shouldn't be possible to enter another type of ID in the frontend. If it should be possible to enter Ressources without a primary ID then the Backend has to resolve the new resource, in which case the actual error response from the Backend should show if this error could be solved in the frontend. We will try to reproduce that error.

@abdelqader-mohammad
Copy link

It seems like the the the backend ignores the identifier selected in the input form and treats the identifier as the expected type. So creating an electronic resource with an SWB_PPN results in an http 500 exception from the server without any details.

So as a quick fix, we replaced the SWB PPN with K10plus. @LauraErhard can you test the dev if everything works fine? before deploying the changes into production.

@LauraErhard
Copy link
Author

Now neither the SWB PPN nor the K10plus ID works. Therefore I can't upload anything.

@lgalke
Copy link
Member

lgalke commented Apr 9, 2019

Our input types as described by Anne (See also #251):

es sind aktuell erlaubt: 1) alle, wenn die resource schon existiert und man nur einen scan (also ein file) anhängen möchte. Da mache ich keinen unterschied. Dann 2) journal: required ist zdbid; 3) journalArticle: required ist doi, 4) book_chapter mit doi oder swb ppn oder 5) proceedings_article auch mit doi oder ppn, 6) monograph mit swb ppn und 7) book mit swbppn an alle kann man einen scan dranhängen außer bei journal

Translated:

  • All identifiers are allowed when the resource exists already
  • Journal requires ZBD ID
  • journalArticle requires DOI
  • bookChapter requires either DOI or SWB PPN
  • ProceedingsArticle requires either DOI or SWB PPN
  • Book SWB PPN
  • All types except for Journal may have a scan attached

In Anne's backend specification, I find:

/saveResource:
// [...] //
 parameters:
        - name: identifierScheme
          in: formData
          description: The scheme of the identifier of the resource
          required: true
          type: string
          enum: [SWB_PPN, ZDB_PPN, DOI, OLC_PPN]

There is no K10plus ID in the list of allowed identifier schemes regardless of any resource type.

The corresponding controller also does not have any specific logic for K10plus identifiers.So, adding the identifier to the enum above will not be enough.

It would require a major update of the back-end to enable ingesting resource via K10Plus ids. DOI's should, however, work and trigger a CrossRef lookup.

@abdelqader-mohammad abdelqader-mohammad added the back-end This issue needs to be addressed by the back-end. label Apr 9, 2019
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
back-end This issue needs to be addressed by the back-end.
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants