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

Improve pdf content parser for DOIs #11782

Merged
merged 8 commits into from
Sep 18, 2024
Merged

Improve pdf content parser for DOIs #11782

merged 8 commits into from
Sep 18, 2024

Conversation

Siedlerchr
Copy link
Member

@Siedlerchr Siedlerchr commented Sep 17, 2024

I noticed that the extracted DOI was in the wrong format when I used PDF importer for one of the papers in the chocolate bib
doi.org/10.1017/S0007114507795296

Mandatory checks

  • Change in CHANGELOG.md described in a way that is understandable for the average user (if applicable)
  • Tests created for changes (if applicable)
  • Manually tested changed features in running JabRef (always required)
  • Screenshots added in PR description (for UI changes)
  • Checked developer's documentation: Is the information available and up to date? If not, I outlined it in this pull request.
  • Checked documentation: Is the information available and up to date? If not, I created an issue at https://github.com/JabRef/user-documentation/issues or, even better, I submitted a pull request to the documentation repository.

Copy link
Contributor

@github-actions github-actions bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Your code currently does not meet JabRef's code guidelines.
We use Checkstyle to identify issues.
The tool reviewdog already placed comments on GitHub to indicate the places. See the tab "Files" in you PR.
Please carefully follow the setup guide for the codestyle.
Afterwards, please run checkstyle locally and fix the issues.

You can check review dog's comments at the tab "Files changed" of your pull request.

Copy link
Contributor

@github-actions github-actions bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Your code currently does not meet JabRef's code guidelines.
We use Checkstyle to identify issues.
The tool reviewdog already placed comments on GitHub to indicate the places. See the tab "Files" in you PR.
Please carefully follow the setup guide for the codestyle.
Afterwards, please run checkstyle locally and fix the issues.

You can check review dog's comments at the tab "Files changed" of your pull request.

@Siedlerchr Siedlerchr added the status: ready-for-review Pull Requests that are ready to be reviewed by the maintainers label Sep 17, 2024
koppor and others added 2 commits September 18, 2024 14:56
Co-authored-by: Carl Christian Snethlage <50491877+calixtus@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Carl Christian Snethlage <50491877+calixtus@users.noreply.github.com>
@koppor koppor added this pull request to the merge queue Sep 18, 2024
Copy link
Contributor

github-actions bot commented Sep 18, 2024

The build for this PR is no longer available. Please visit https://builds.jabref.org/main/ for the latest build.

Merged via the queue into main with commit 604896c Sep 18, 2024
25 of 27 checks passed
@koppor koppor deleted the fixDOIParsingPdfImport branch September 18, 2024 13:16
@Siedlerchr
Copy link
Member Author

I could not get checkstyle happy with the text blocks...always complaining about empty lines

Siedlerchr added a commit that referenced this pull request Sep 20, 2024
…xArxivHtmlImport

* 'fixArxivHtmlImport' of github.com:JabRef/jabref:
  Fix focus for keywords and crossref fields (#11792)
  Fix ai chat not on fx thread (#11796)
  [AI] Add more uses statements (#11788)
  Update djl api dependency (#11787)
  Improve pdf content parser for DOIs (#11782)
  minor refactor to JabRefDialogService (#11767)
  Add more OS-dependent context to panel freeze dev documentation. (#11781)
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
status: ready-for-review Pull Requests that are ready to be reviewed by the maintainers
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants