You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
After inspection wrong CL imports related to bad citations, I found that many of them are almost correct, the problem with those citations it that it has a dot after the volume number, one solution is to lean on opinionated by creating citation fixes, the problem with this is that it will take a lot of effort just to remove a dot.
Here are some examples:
139. So. 925 -- > 139 So. 925
144. Pac. 93 --> 144 Pac. 93
149. So. 573 --> 149 So. 573
174. S.E. 235 --> 174 S.E. 235
205. N. W. 661 --> 205 N. W. 661
I propose to update the default volume regex: "(?P<volume>\d+)" to allow an optional dot after the volume number.
Do you see it feasible? Or which path should be taken for these citations?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
After inspection wrong CL imports related to bad citations, I found that many of them are almost correct, the problem with those citations it that it has a dot after the volume number, one solution is to lean on opinionated by creating citation fixes, the problem with this is that it will take a lot of effort just to remove a dot.
Here are some examples:
I propose to update the default volume regex:
"(?P<volume>\d+)"
to allow an optional dot after the volume number.Do you see it feasible? Or which path should be taken for these citations?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: