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

Adding mass addition of bib information feature #664

Draft
wants to merge 3 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

u7485624
Copy link

Begun working on Issue #372 - #372

Just added some basic functions to a class. Need some help figuring out the exact guidelines/functionality that the feature requires. Do we assume that the ID (DOI/arxiv) is given or do we extract it from a given URL etc?
If so, can we just use pattern matching from the URL to determine the IDs?
In terms of the better implementation, do we compare extracted entries from DOI/arxiv and then take the longer string?

Mandatory checks

  • 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.

// draft function to fetch entries through arxiv ID
public Optional<BibEntry> fetchEntryByArxivID(String arxivID) throws FetcherException {
try {
URLDownload download = new URLDownload(ARXIV_API + arxivID);
Copy link
Owner

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

No need to re-implement fetching from arxiv. JabRef already has arxiv support. You "just" need to wire the existing fetchers together in a smart way.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants