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

Analysis of work required to use new ScienceWire API #171

Closed
peetucket opened this issue Apr 17, 2017 · 4 comments
Closed

Analysis of work required to use new ScienceWire API #171

peetucket opened this issue Apr 17, 2017 · 4 comments

Comments

@peetucket
Copy link
Member

Clarivate (the new company that provides the Web of Science/ScienceWire API) has updated their API and is requesing that we use it. The new API documentation is attached, and it appears that

  1. There is a new authentication mechanism - you post a username/password to get an authentication key you use for a session.

  2. The calls have a different data structure both for the request and the response.

  3. The response no longer includes a PMID for publications. There is a separate call to determine if a publication has a PMID (though you check multiple publications at once). This implies we would have an extra call beyond what we do now.

We should do a bit more analysis to estimate the work needed to update sul_pub to work with the new API and to see if this would cause any problems with current functionality.

@peetucket
Copy link
Member Author

updated API documentation:

WoSWS20150707.pdf

@peetucket
Copy link
Member Author

I have a username/password combo we can use for the new API (will not post in ticket). I have tested with a single query and it works.

@dazza-codes
Copy link
Contributor

The WoS temporary auth credential is available in shared_configs, see

@dazza-codes
Copy link
Contributor

Peter's initial code to explore the new WoS API is in the rialto-search branch, i.e.

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

No branches or pull requests

2 participants