Improve check for page numbers

[bernhard-kleine]

JabRef version 4.1 and all that followed

Since a couple of journals in the biomedical community have started to add letters to their page numbers, like American J Physiol, Current Biol and many others, it is no longer valid to label these page "numbers" as errorneous. That check should be modified.

[tobiasdiez]

The purpose of the check is to find erroneous prefixes like pp. and this still makes sense even for alpha-numeric pages. The biblatex documentation (in the description of the command rangelen) contains a list of valid examples of the pages field. We should support all those formats and recognize them as valid input.

[bernhard-kleine]

I donot see in the biblatex description a format like (R for review) R40-R120 as in e.g. Current Biology. Or e2347-e2358 as in the Amer J Physiol; here e stands for endocrinology ..... Any section of the AJP journal has its own letter preceding page numbers. These are all regarded by Jabref as errorneous. The reality here is more advanced then the rules or the examples of biblatex.

[tobiasdiez]

As wished in http://discourse.jabref.org/t/pages-field-allow-use-of-en-dash/1199, the parser should also accept ranges separated by --.

[1160200515]

Can you leave a screenshot or a more detailed explanation? My team and I want to improve this issue.But I didn't reproduce this problem.

[bernhard-kleine]

If you take the DOI:10.1016/j.cub.2008.07.040 than you can see that the page range is: R795--R804. This raises the error "should have a valid page range".