188BET靠谱吗BUG: Zotero won't import all attachments from Zotero RDF/XML

Hi,

I am currently migrating my academic reading biography from a long-demised reference manager.188BET靠谱吗I do so by generating Zotero RDF/XML from my existing data (the code can be found at https://github.com/tillgrallert/convert_tss-to-bibliographic-data188BET靠谱吗) and have encountered a reproducible import bug: Zotero fails to import any files with a #in their file names even if they are available on the file system.

188BET靠谱吗Take for instance the following Zotero RDF/XML fragments:

http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema";
rdf:about="#uuid_2841851E-BD71-49E4-9599-8470F051A30B">
attachment


2

http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema";
rdf:about="#uuid_7283E593-207F-41DB-A26E-5128C6FCE228">
attachment


2



The first attachment will import just fine.The second won't. #is allowed as part of an URI in @rdf:about.Hence, I deem this behaviour to be a bug.

All the best,

Till
  • It has to be %23.The two URIs there aren't equivalent.In rdf:about it's a unique identifier, so using a fragment identifier for the current document is fine, but for rdf:resource, it's an actual file URI*, so if you keep the #then you're saying the file ends in image.

    It looks like we're not properly using %23when exporting to RDF, though, so we'll fix that.

    * I'm not sure about using an absolute path there, if that's what you're doing.As far as I know we only export relative paths, which are valid URIs.For an absolute path, I would think it would technically need to be a file://URI, but it's possible we're accepting regular absolute paths too.
  • Thanks for responding and for pointing out that the two URI's aren't equivalent.Your proposed solution of escaping #with %23, however, doesn't work.188BET靠谱吗Zotero doesn't import the file regardless of whether one uses #or %23.Prefixing file://doesn't influence this behaviour.

    188BET靠谱吗I also ought to point out that this is not a Zotero export bug!188BET靠谱吗The Zotero RDF/XML is of my own making to import references form another software.
  • Well, it wasn't really proposed — I tested it and it worked when I changed it from #to %23.If you're on Windows, the path handling might be different.

    And I'm aware that this is your generated RDF.I'm just pointing out that we were also generating similarly incorrect RDF.We're working on a fix.
  • Sorry for the wrong assumptions.The fix currently doesn't work on OSX 10.14.Will give it another try before renaming all the files and keep you updated.
Sign Inor Registerto comment.