Crossmark: Display both print and online publication date when both are available, or whichever is present if there is only one.
Bringing over KM-13 from JIRA, because another member reported the same issue recently.
The Crossmark box displays the print publication date, and leaves it blank if there isn't one.
We should probably display both, but as an interim I suggest we switch to online publication date. This is likely to be the earlier date, and therefore more relevant.
Example from user.
DOI: 10.1128/mBio.02819-18 Published field is blank in Crossmark: https://crossmark.crossref.org/dialog/?doi=10.1128/mBio.02819-18&domain=asm.org Metadata only includes an 'online' publication date
<publication_date media_type="online">
<month>03</month>
<day>05</day>
<year>2019</year>
</publication_date>
as compared to
DOI: 10.1128/jvi.01824-18 Published field in Crossmark contains the date 2019-02-13 https://crossmark.crossref.org/dialog/?doi=10.1128/jvi.01824-18&domain=asm.org Metadata includes both 'online' and 'print' publication dates
<publication_date media_type="online">
<month>04</month>
<day>03</day>
<year>2019</year>
</publication_date>
<publication_date media_type="print">
<month>02</month>
<day>13</day>
<year>2019</year>
</publication_date>
Definition of ready
-
Product owner: @mrittman -
Tech lead: -
Service:: or C:: label applied -
Definition of done updated -
Acceptance testing plan: screenshot or demo -
Weight applied
Definition of done
-
Unit tests identified, implemented, and passing -
Code reviewed -
Available for acceptance testing via a staging URL, or otherwise -
Consider any impacts to current or future architecture/infrastructure, and update specifications and documentation as needed -
Knowledge base reviewed and updated -
Public documentation reviewed and updated -
Acceptance criteria met -
Use online publication date in Crossmark by default -
If there is no online publication date in metadata, use the print publication date
-
-
Acceptance testing passed -
Deployed to production