-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 447
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
OPS Support for Citation Style Languages Plugin #6700
Comments
Hi Dulip @withanage , Alec already opened an issue for citationStyleLanguage Plugin for OMP here: A colleague of mine wants to start working on the port for OMP starting with version 3.3.0 Shall we split the work, so that we focus on OMP? @asmecher Where should we discuss the update? Best regards, NIls |
Hi @isgrim , Thanks a lot ! Please go ahead with the OMP in the other issue #6201 and create a PR. If there are clarifications needed, that can be discussed there. I have removed OMP from this ticket and can take care of the OPS side. |
We are porting to OPS, soon we will send the PR. |
Hi! We have a preliminary version of the OPS plugin at https://github.com/lepidus/citationStyleLanguage/tree/stable-3_3_0 Adaptations are lacking so that references are generated in a format suitable for a preprint and not as a journal article. I imagine it might also be necessary to update the styles https://github.com/pkp/citationStyleLanguage/tree/main/citation-styles Can someone from PKP or community with greater familiarity with this subject help us with these points? CC @NateWr and @asmecher |
@diegoabadan, were these changes made in order to convert the plugin so that the modified version only works with OPS? I would recommend making the changes so that the plugin works with both OJS and OPS -- see e.g. the usage stats plugin, which has a few conditional areas for each application: https://github.com/pkp/usageStats/blob/main/UsageStatsPlugin.inc.php |
I'll ask a few of our friendly librarians what they think about citations for preprints rather than articles! |
Hi Alec!
We are modifying it to work on both OJS and OPS! :)
Thanks! |
Hi Everyone, I've done some research and come up with what I think are the correct citation formats for preprints in the various styles. As is always the case with citations, there is some room for interpretation. I've done my best with the information available, but I'll note that some style guides don't seem to have articulated a format for preprints yet. Those that have seem to style preprints very similar to online reports, so where I was unsure I've generally gone with a report format. I used the sample article below and followed the lead of the citation styles in Zotero (which aligned with the report-like format for the preprint citations). For each citation I've included a description of the format along with an example from the sample article (with a reduced number of authors for simplicity). I would love another set of eyes on these if someone else would like to weigh-in. Sample article https://preprints.scielo.org/index.php/scielo/preprint/view/2968 ACM Format: Example: ACS Format: Example: APA Format: Example: Chicago author date Format: Example: Harvard Format: Example: IEEE Format: Example: MLA Format: Example: Turabian Format: Example: Vancouver Format: Example: Associação Brasileira de Normas Técnicas - ABNT Format: Example: |
Thanks, @kshuttle! |
Thanks, @kshuttle and Alec! We are working on this issue for Scielo. |
While trying to accomplish what was put on the comment above, we faced a problem with the citation-style files. Some of them need to be upgraded, something that has already been issued on #5629. Should we send a PR to accomplish this? |
@JhonathanLepidus yes, thank you! |
@JhonathanLepidus it seems like there are several PRs. Can you add a comment here with links to each of the related PRs, and identify which ones are for which branches? |
@NateWr , sure. These are the PRs related to this issue: To add support of the CSL plugin to OPS:To fix the DOI getting in OPS 3.3.0:To upgrade the citation-style files in the CSL plugin |
Thanks @JhonathanLepidus! I've left some comments on those PRs. It all looks really good, mostly style/convention changes. 👍 Once those changes are in place I'll check out the code locally and do some tests. |
Thanks @JhonathanLepidus, this looks good! I checked it out on Before merge, we need to get this added as a submodule to OPS and make sure the tests are running. To do this, there are a couple steps:
Let me know if you have any questions about this part. The submodules and testing takes a little bit of work to get right the first time. |
@NateWr I couldn't understand this part in step 2:
I added the submodule to my fork using the same command in step 2, but I didn't get it if I can move to step 3 or need to do something else before it. Update: We created the branches citationStyleLanguage/i6700-cslOps (containing all our work until now) and ops/i6700-cslOps in our repositories. In the OPS repo we added this commit, which adds the CSL plugin submodule. We checked our citationStyleLanguage/i6700-cslOps branch, instead of PKP's citationStyleLanguage/main branch. Can you give us feedback if this is right? |
Yes, that looks great, @JhonathanLepidus! The only problem that I noticed is that the name of your branch in the commit message ( You can fix this in OPS by renaming your last commit:
Once you've done that, open new PRs with your branches and the OPS tests should run against that. |
@NateWr , in fact I named the branches wrongly, but I edited the commit message to match them and opened a PR: pkp/ops#251 The PR to the main branch still valid, since the branch |
Thanks @JhonathanLepidus. I've gone ahead and opened a PR against OJS too, so that we can run the tests there. That will help catch any unintended regressions. I think these are all of the PRs. PRs: Tests only: |
Good! What about the PR to add compatibility with OPS 3.3.0 and the one to upgrade style files in 3.3.0? Should they be closed, since it's a big change to a stable version? |
pkp/pkp-lib#6700 Add support for OPS
I've merged the updates to
At this time, we don't want to add them to the If you're happy with the merge to |
Thank you, Nate. Scielo can wait for 3.4. Among other customers is not a strong demand. |
Add compatibility for CSL Plugin up from 3.3
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: