Exporting the reference of a journal's double issues

[laspic]

• I have verified that I am on the latest release of BBT (https://github.com/retorquere/zotero-better-bibtex/releases/latest) and Zotero
• I am posting a single question, bug or feature request
• I have included a descriptive subject of the problem
• I am available for follow-up questions and testing

Exporting references

I noticed something strange when exporting the reference of a journal's double issue.

Here is two slightly different references:

• Bob Bob, « A Very Nice Title », Annual Review of Nothing 10, nᵒ 2 (1996)
• John John, « A Nice Title », Annual Review of Something 10, nᵒ 2‑3 (1996).

Here is what ZBB gives when exporting them in .bib file, using Better BibLaTeX format:

@article{Bob1996,
  title = {A {{Very Nice Title}}},
  volume = {10},
  number = {2},
  journaltitle = {Annual Review of Nothing},
  date = {1996},
  author = {Bob, Bob}
}

@article{John1996,
  title = {A {{Nice Title}}},
  volume = {10},
  issue = {2-3},
  journaltitle = {Annual Review of Something},
  date = {1996},
  author = {John, John}
}

Why does the field name 'number' turns into 'issue' when its content is not a specifically numerical value? Is it a bug or a feature ?
When you customize a biblatex style, dealing with that causes some headaches ! :-)

Report ID : 4DCD7RZU

[retorquere]

What field would it have to be in instead? @njbart, opinions?

[laspic]

In my opinion, it has to remain 'number', whatever its content.
Is there a good reason to rename it when filled by something else than a number ?

[retorquere]

Ah, like that. The biblatex manual section 2.2.2 says:

number: field (integer)

The number of a journal or the volume/number of a book in a series. See also issue as well as §§2.3.7 and 2.3.9. With @patent entries, this is the number or record token of a patent or patent request. It is expected to be an integer, not necessarily in arabic numerals since biber will automatically from roman numerals or arabic letter to integers internally for sorting purposes.

and 2-3 is not an integer.

[laspic]

I would further add (same source):

issue field (literal)

The issue of a journal. This field is intended for journals whose individual issues
are identified by a designation such as ‘Spring’ or ‘Summer’ rather than the month
or a number. Since the placement of issue is similar to month and number, this
field may also be useful with double issues and other special cases. See also month,
number, and § 2.3.9.

So, it's clear. This not a bug, but a feature. Thanks !

[njbart]

IMHO, the vast majority of biblatex’s design decisions make a lot of sense, but this one (distinguishing numbers (field number) from ranges and other stuff (field issue)) does not:

It does not just create a minor inconsistency in the database, but standard biblatex even renders issue = {2–3} different than number = {2} – arguably not quite what’s expected, at the very least not in case of a number range:

I tested number = {2–3} with biblatex, biblatex-apa, and biblatex-chicago, and it is rendered as expected in all cases. (If you want a typographically correct en dash, you’ll have to enter it yourself, though.)

So I don’t think BBT would create any problems if it mapped ranges etc. to biblatex number.

As to the underlying biblatex issue, this is certainly something worth bringing up at the biblatex forum.

[retorquere]

I would normally shy away from deviating what seems to be quite explicitly in the manual, but I'll follow your recommendation here. Or we could wait for responses from the biblatex forum.

[laspic]

I've already posted a question concerning this issue on Tex.sx : https://tex.stackexchange.com/questions/418590/biblatex-doesnt-recognize-the-journals-issue-number-when-filled-by-a-non-numer

Feel free to join us !

[moewew]

The situation is a bit more complicated here. As far as the TeXnical side of biblatex is concerned ranges such as 2-3 should be fine in the number field. Biber does not complain either, not even with --validate-datamodel. So I think it would definitely be worth thinking about opening the number field a bit.

issue really is only good for things like 'Summer'/'Winter'. Everything else looks just weird...

[retorquere]

So does that mean biblatex accepts things that according to its own manual it should not?

[moewew]

Yes and no, but more yes than no. I'll open a ticket for biblatex to discuss this.