Alec Smecher

@touhidurabir, thanks, I've reviewed the PRs here and they look good. Could you... - Rebase the PRs as necessary to resolve conflicts, - Ensure that tests are passing, - Ensure...

All merged, thanks! Closing.

@MrRob100, that's right, it should be JATS XML. The JATS4R recommendations for peer review provides best practices on this; see: https://jats4r.niso.org/peer-review-materials/ Let me know if you've got any specific questions...

@MrRob100, I would suggest getting as close as you can to the JATS4R recommendations, but omitting any data that is not available. These are recommendations, and not subject e.g. to...

@touhidurabir, all merged, thanks! Closing this issue.

Hey @touhidurabir -- please hold off on this one until @Devika008 has had a chance to review things.

@touhidurabir, I think you're probably referring to [this change](https://github.com/pkp/pkp-github-actions/issues/60), which got merged last week; did it resolve the problem?

I've added reviews to [ojs](https://github.com/pkp/ojs/pull/4367#pullrequestreview-2208619936) and [pkp-lib](https://github.com/pkp/pkp-lib/pull/10211#pullrequestreview-2208635274), thanks, @touhidurabir!

Thanks, @touhidurabir, I've added a review to [the pkp-lib PR](https://github.com/pkp/pkp-lib/pull/10211#pullrequestreview-2228783482). There are a couple small things to look at, but once you're satisfied, please port to OMP and OPS and...

All merged -- thanks, @touhidurabir!