organize essential attributes into IMRaD groups

[drpaulralph]

As a checklist user, I want the essential attributes to be organized by where they typically appear in papers rather than by the standard they're drawn from So I don't have to flip back and forth so much

[drpaulralph]

I've finished adding IMRaD tags to all the markdown files.

[drpaulralph]

Whatever you do though, make sure it doesn't break under any of these conditions: a standard doesn't have any tags a standard has some tags but not all of them a standard has an empty tag (no items under it) a standard has a badly-formed tag (e.g. )

[drpaulralph]

Has anyone had a chance to look into this? This is the last thing we have to do before launching the JSS pilot.

[Taher-Ghaleb]

Thanks, @cassandra-cupryk, for putting this together.

@drpaulralph: There is still an issue with the current prototype. We are expecting the IMRaD tags to exist in every standard. Right now, there are standards with missing tags. For example, the Benchmarking standard doesn't contain the intro and results tags, thus making the checklist not generating correctly (i.e., empty page). Would these missing tags be populated later before we merge the changes, please? Thanks.

[drpaulralph]

@Taher-Ghaleb, see above where I said "make sure it doesn't break [if] a standard has some tags but not all of them..." For example, The benchmarking standard doesn't have any essential attributes that would go under intro or results. We could have all five tags in each standard even when they're empty, but I intentionally left empty tags in some standards and missing tags in others to make sure the system could handle these cases. We have to be careful not to build a fragile system, and I'm not sure if it's a good idea to have empty tags in the standards - we don't want people to see that and thing something is missing. Does this help?

[Taher-Ghaleb]

Thanks, @drpaulralph.

Right, that makes sense and I agree with you. Even though the current implementation assumes all IMRaD tags exist (even if empty), we will fix it to consider the nonexistence of some tags.

[Taher-Ghaleb]

Hi @drpaulralph,

a standard doesn't have any tags a standard has a badly-formed tag (e.g. )

What is the appropriate actions in these cases? Do we just treat the attributes as "other"?

Thanks.

[drpaulralph]

Yes, treat then as other if there’s no tag or an ill-formed tag.

On Sun, Jul 25, 2021 at 3:59 PM Taher Ghaleb @.***> wrote:

Hi @drpaulralph https://github.com/drpaulralph,

a standard doesn't have any tags a standard has a badly-formed tag (e.g. )

What is the appropriate actions in these cases? Do we just treat the attributes as "other"?

Thanks.

— You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/acmsigsoft/EmpiricalStandards/issues/45#issuecomment-886243542, or unsubscribe https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AICXNKMTURMLPQQYKS7GXKTTZRNHBANCNFSM5ACSVGAQ .

-- Sent from my mobile

[Taher-Ghaleb]

Hi @drpaulralph,

I think this issue is fixed. Much thanks to @cassandra-cupryk for dedicating time to test and spot bugs throughout the changes.

Please take a look at https://cassandra-cupryk.github.io/EmpiricalStandards and let us know if there are any concerns. By the way, in the cases where a standard has unrecognized tags, no tags at all, or untagged attributes, a warning message appears for testers (i.e., &y).

Thank you.