"Related publication" metadada field: not clear representation of PID

[vkush]

Currently if you add a "Relation publication" metadata you can add "Citation" (text field) and also a PID (Identifier type + Identifier). Additionally, to make it clickable, you have to add a "URL" for this PID. But final result can be confused:

• on the upper dataset area you see "Related publications: Identifier-type: Identifier (as clickable)", like "handle: 21.XXXXX/xxx/xxxx-xxxx" (clickable)
• on the metadata section below you see "Related publication: Identifier-type: Identifier (non-clickable) URL (clickable)", like "handle: 21.XXXXX/xxx/xxxx-xxxx (non-clickable) https://hdl.handle.net/21.XXXXX/xxx/xxxx-xxxx (clickable)
• usually citation of the article also includes some PID (usually at the end of citation text), so you have then in the "Related publications" some PID from the "Citation" text field and additionally a hand-created PID (Identifier-type + Identifier with URL) -> so, too much Identifiers (PIDs).

As a solution could be usage of html tag <a> directly on the "Citation" text field of the "Related publication" metadata field, without Identifier fields. Or you can use Identifier fields, but then you have to delete PID from the typical citation text (because it will be added by Dataverse then).

[dalito]

We also observed this.

Also having two redundant ways to enter the information is also not ideal especially since the consistency of the three fields is not validated.

For most use cases entering the "URL" should be enough. Both, "identifier Type" and "Identifier" can be derived from the URL for most identifier types and used to fill the fields "identifier types" and "identifier" automatically. In similar way the URL could be derived from "identifier Type" and "Identifier". However, adding such convenience features would require custom JavaScript.