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

PLOS Search (research articles) #153

Closed
wants to merge 37 commits into
base: master
from

Conversation

Projects
None yet
5 participants
@nelas
Contributor

nelas commented Apr 20, 2013

Plugin functionality: this plugin uses the query to find the top 5 related research articles from PLOS Journals, the most influential nonprofit open access publisher. It lists the title, authors, journal and year of publication providing a direct link to content. The more_at link points to PLOS' search page with results for the same query.

Plugin data source (API): PLOS Search API. It needs an API key to work.

Example queries: A simple example query is plos dinosaurs and the results are below, five scientific articles involving dinosaurs:

plos_dino

The API provides more complex queries, so you can search for papers about dinosaurs that have metabolism in the title: plos dinosaurs title:metabolism

dino_meta_plos

Plugin Audience: mainly scientists, but since all articles are open access it is useful for everybody.

Have you done any cross-browser testing? No, just ran on Firefox 20.0 and Chromium 25.0.1364.160.

Any issue you're having? What should be the default behaviour if the query returns 0 articles? Should it show the zeroclickinfo box and report that it found no result or it should simply not appear?

@majuscule

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@majuscule

majuscule Apr 21, 2013

Member

Hi nelas!

Thanks for starting this spice. I'd never heard of PLOS before, but it looks like an excellent resource and a great addition to duckduckgo. Let me answer your question first: if there are no results found, it's best to return without triggering a ZCI. There's no reason to take up space on a results page just to say that we couldn't find something. I would also remove the "Found x results in x seconds." It's fun to see sometimes, but our end users just experienced that x second wait firsthand ;-). I would also remove the "Data provided by PLOS" fine print text. We usually use a cannonical header style in the form "user query (Spice)". So in this case, "research articles:dinasaurs title:metabolism (PLOS)".

It'd be extra cool if we could get links to these sources. I notice that the API is returning an id field that looks like it might correspond to a URL on the PLOS website. Do you know if this is the case or if there would be any other way to make this happen?

Finally, I think it might be nice to wrap this inside an list to show bulletpoints for each result.

Please let me know what you think of these ideas :-)

dylan

Member

majuscule commented Apr 21, 2013

Hi nelas!

Thanks for starting this spice. I'd never heard of PLOS before, but it looks like an excellent resource and a great addition to duckduckgo. Let me answer your question first: if there are no results found, it's best to return without triggering a ZCI. There's no reason to take up space on a results page just to say that we couldn't find something. I would also remove the "Found x results in x seconds." It's fun to see sometimes, but our end users just experienced that x second wait firsthand ;-). I would also remove the "Data provided by PLOS" fine print text. We usually use a cannonical header style in the form "user query (Spice)". So in this case, "research articles:dinasaurs title:metabolism (PLOS)".

It'd be extra cool if we could get links to these sources. I notice that the API is returning an id field that looks like it might correspond to a URL on the PLOS website. Do you know if this is the case or if there would be any other way to make this happen?

Finally, I think it might be nice to wrap this inside an list to show bulletpoints for each result.

Please let me know what you think of these ideas :-)

dylan

@moollaza

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@moollaza

moollaza Apr 21, 2013

Member

I just wanted to add that also we should probably remove the bolding on the text because we save that for exact matches in results. Otherwise this plugin looks awesome (nicely done @nelas ) and I agree with your suggestions @nospampleasemam

Btw I noticed in the last result, it returned a value of "undefined" in the string -- we prefer to simply not show anything rather than show its "undefined".

Also, @nelas I really appreciate that you used the PR template!

Member

moollaza commented Apr 21, 2013

I just wanted to add that also we should probably remove the bolding on the text because we save that for exact matches in results. Otherwise this plugin looks awesome (nicely done @nelas ) and I agree with your suggestions @nospampleasemam

Btw I noticed in the last result, it returned a value of "undefined" in the string -- we prefer to simply not show anything rather than show its "undefined".

Also, @nelas I really appreciate that you used the PR template!

@nelas

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@nelas

nelas Apr 21, 2013

Contributor

Hi @nospampleasemam and @moollaza! Comments inline:

if there are no results found, it's best to return without triggering a ZCI.

Cool! I'll change this.

I would also remove the "Found x results in x seconds."

This was only an extra candy :p

I would also remove the "Data provided by PLOS" fine print text.

This is to follow PLOS API display policy. They ask to show "Data Provided by PLOS" next to the results. Maybe it can be placed floating to the right so that the results are the first thing you read, any suggestions?

We usually use a cannonical header style

Ok! I will fix this.

It'd be extra cool if we could get links to these sources.

This is already happening :) Each citation is a clickable direct link to the article.

might be nice to wrap this inside an list to show bulletpoints for each result.

It is a list, I just think citations looked better without the bullet points, just white space and padding. I'll give it another try, maybe an ordered list makes more sense in this case.

we should probably remove the bolding on the text

Ah, I didn't know. Normally the title is the most important part to be read, so I'll make it stand in front with font size or maybe as a regular link color? I switched the <a> color to regular black text color..

it returned a value of "undefined" in the string

Thanks for getting this, I had not noticed it! Probably this data is missing (and it shouldn't, since the articles need to have a journal), so I can add a fallback for this just in case and notify them.

appreciate that you used the PR template!

hehe :)

Great, thanks for the comments! I'll push some commits later this week. Let me know if you have more suggestions!

Contributor

nelas commented Apr 21, 2013

Hi @nospampleasemam and @moollaza! Comments inline:

if there are no results found, it's best to return without triggering a ZCI.

Cool! I'll change this.

I would also remove the "Found x results in x seconds."

This was only an extra candy :p

I would also remove the "Data provided by PLOS" fine print text.

This is to follow PLOS API display policy. They ask to show "Data Provided by PLOS" next to the results. Maybe it can be placed floating to the right so that the results are the first thing you read, any suggestions?

We usually use a cannonical header style

Ok! I will fix this.

It'd be extra cool if we could get links to these sources.

This is already happening :) Each citation is a clickable direct link to the article.

might be nice to wrap this inside an list to show bulletpoints for each result.

It is a list, I just think citations looked better without the bullet points, just white space and padding. I'll give it another try, maybe an ordered list makes more sense in this case.

we should probably remove the bolding on the text

Ah, I didn't know. Normally the title is the most important part to be read, so I'll make it stand in front with font size or maybe as a regular link color? I switched the <a> color to regular black text color..

it returned a value of "undefined" in the string

Thanks for getting this, I had not noticed it! Probably this data is missing (and it shouldn't, since the articles need to have a journal), so I can add a fallback for this just in case and notify them.

appreciate that you used the PR template!

hehe :)

Great, thanks for the comments! I'll push some commits later this week. Let me know if you have more suggestions!

@yegg

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@yegg

yegg Apr 22, 2013

Member

@moollaza @nospampleasemam if these suggestions (bold, no missing message, etc.) are not prominent in the docs, we should add them :)

Member

yegg commented Apr 22, 2013

@moollaza @nospampleasemam if these suggestions (bold, no missing message, etc.) are not prominent in the docs, we should add them :)

@moollaza

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@moollaza

moollaza Apr 22, 2013

Member

@yegg added to assana. Thanks!

Member

moollaza commented Apr 22, 2013

@yegg added to assana. Thanks!

@majuscule

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@majuscule

majuscule Apr 22, 2013

Member

Cool! Just so you guys know, I shot PLOS an email, explaining our use case and asking if they would consider our alternate attribution style - as well as showcasing our integration with the PLOS API products (which they mention on their API FAQ).

Looking forward to the updates!

Member

majuscule commented Apr 22, 2013

Cool! Just so you guys know, I shot PLOS an email, explaining our use case and asking if they would consider our alternate attribution style - as well as showcasing our integration with the PLOS API products (which they mention on their API FAQ).

Looking forward to the updates!

@nelas

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@nelas

nelas Apr 22, 2013

Contributor

I had a few minutes today and updated the styles. What do you think? This is how it looks when passing the mouse over one citation.

plos_ddg

Contributor

nelas commented Apr 22, 2013

I had a few minutes today and updated the styles. What do you think? This is how it looks when passing the mouse over one citation.

plos_ddg

@moollaza

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@moollaza

moollaza Apr 25, 2013

Member

@nelas looks pretty good. Not sure if I love the blue highlight on the lower, black text but that's a small detail. Is the font size on the titles increased or are the details just a smaller font? I believe the latter, small text is a better choice.

Member

moollaza commented Apr 25, 2013

@nelas looks pretty good. Not sure if I love the blue highlight on the lower, black text but that's a small detail. Is the font size on the titles increased or are the details just a smaller font? I believe the latter, small text is a better choice.

@nelas

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@nelas

nelas Apr 25, 2013

Contributor

Updated font sizes and changed the colour. Now it looks more like the original, but better I guess. Does it need to look clickable? (hovering shows underline already)

citation

Also, ZCI now only shows up if there are results and only write journal names if they are defined.

My last two commits are showing "Failure: The Travis build failed". Maybe I messed up something.. :/

Contributor

nelas commented Apr 25, 2013

Updated font sizes and changed the colour. Now it looks more like the original, but better I guess. Does it need to look clickable? (hovering shows underline already)

citation

Also, ZCI now only shows up if there are results and only write journal names if they are defined.

My last two commits are showing "Failure: The Travis build failed". Maybe I messed up something.. :/

@moollaza

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@moollaza

moollaza Apr 26, 2013

Member

@nelas sorry I meant I didn't like the blue underline on the black text below, I still liked the blue text and blue underline on the title! That way it looks clickable. Sorry for the confusion.

To be clear I think it should look like #3,4,5 in the above image, and then on hover, just add the highlight to the title.

Does that make sense?

Re Travis, ignore that, its something new we're currently working on, you did nothing wrong.

Thanks again!

Member

moollaza commented Apr 26, 2013

@nelas sorry I meant I didn't like the blue underline on the black text below, I still liked the blue text and blue underline on the title! That way it looks clickable. Sorry for the confusion.

To be clear I think it should look like #3,4,5 in the above image, and then on hover, just add the highlight to the title.

Does that make sense?

Re Travis, ignore that, its something new we're currently working on, you did nothing wrong.

Thanks again!

@nelas

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@nelas

nelas Apr 27, 2013

Contributor

An useful feature is to have the article abstract easily accessible. When skimming through literature the title is the most important, but sometimes it is not enough to decide if we want to read the article or not. So being able to have a look at the abstract on the fly is great to decide whether it is worth it to open the link.

Screenshot below shows how I implemented this, with a clickable "[+]" to toggle the abstract. It only shows if there is an abstract. Item 4 shows the opened state after clicking (default is hidden) and item 5 just before clicking, with hover info.

abs_views

Additional features also shown above are the inclusion of volume/issue of the journal (a standard for scientific citations) and article stats on hovering the link (not really necessary, but kind of cool; specially because PLOS was one of the first to display this type of data publicly).

I tried my best not to clutter the visuals. Opinions?

Contributor

nelas commented Apr 27, 2013

An useful feature is to have the article abstract easily accessible. When skimming through literature the title is the most important, but sometimes it is not enough to decide if we want to read the article or not. So being able to have a look at the abstract on the fly is great to decide whether it is worth it to open the link.

Screenshot below shows how I implemented this, with a clickable "[+]" to toggle the abstract. It only shows if there is an abstract. Item 4 shows the opened state after clicking (default is hidden) and item 5 just before clicking, with hover info.

abs_views

Additional features also shown above are the inclusion of volume/issue of the journal (a standard for scientific citations) and article stats on hovering the link (not really necessary, but kind of cool; specially because PLOS was one of the first to display this type of data publicly).

I tried my best not to clutter the visuals. Opinions?

@moollaza

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@moollaza

moollaza Apr 30, 2013

Member

@nelas here's my thoughts on those features:

Hover info - I do like showing the number of views, but I'm not sure how relevant that is to the user -- is that meant to be an indicator of how _good_ the article will be? (because many others have looked at it?)

Regarding the implementation -- are you using the title tag? I see its in a black box, so I couldn't quite tell. If the styling was modified to look that way, I think it would be best to just use the default title tag styling for the sake of visual consistency with respect to the other plugins that also utilize title tags.

Abstract Toggle - I'm a little torn as to whether or not we should use this feature. Although I do personally like it - we try to keep the plugins as simple as possible. The idea is that the ZCI result should give you exactly what you're looking for without clicking (hence the name ZeroClick) and if you're going to click it should usually be to pass the user along to the source or the result. How do you feel about putting the abstract in the title tag? I think it keeps things simple.

Also, I noticed there's a decent amount of inline styling in your code, would you mind moving that to a spice.css file? We really prefer separating the JS from the CSS. It will also make things easier because we're going to be launching Spice v2 very soon and with the new system we've moved towards a combination of Javascript with Handlebars.js templates (HTML) and CSS. Someone (either us or yourself) will need to convert this plugin to a Spice2 implementation, so having the CSS separated will just speed up the process.

Member

moollaza commented Apr 30, 2013

@nelas here's my thoughts on those features:

Hover info - I do like showing the number of views, but I'm not sure how relevant that is to the user -- is that meant to be an indicator of how _good_ the article will be? (because many others have looked at it?)

Regarding the implementation -- are you using the title tag? I see its in a black box, so I couldn't quite tell. If the styling was modified to look that way, I think it would be best to just use the default title tag styling for the sake of visual consistency with respect to the other plugins that also utilize title tags.

Abstract Toggle - I'm a little torn as to whether or not we should use this feature. Although I do personally like it - we try to keep the plugins as simple as possible. The idea is that the ZCI result should give you exactly what you're looking for without clicking (hence the name ZeroClick) and if you're going to click it should usually be to pass the user along to the source or the result. How do you feel about putting the abstract in the title tag? I think it keeps things simple.

Also, I noticed there's a decent amount of inline styling in your code, would you mind moving that to a spice.css file? We really prefer separating the JS from the CSS. It will also make things easier because we're going to be launching Spice v2 very soon and with the new system we've moved towards a combination of Javascript with Handlebars.js templates (HTML) and CSS. Someone (either us or yourself) will need to convert this plugin to a Spice2 implementation, so having the CSS separated will just speed up the process.

@nelas

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@nelas

nelas May 3, 2013

Contributor

@moollaza hei!

I'm using the title tag for hoverings, it is just my desktop style that makes them a black box.

The number of views is not a good indicator of how good an article is. Just how popular... and since recently we had no idea of how popular an article could be. This is why it is cool, but I also fail to see how it might help the user decide; the abstract is more important.

Abstract: breaking the click limits was my fear with the toggle, but when I tried putting it in the title tag it felt a bit cumbersome to read it. I will give it another shot.

Ah! I did not know about the spice.css! Will be a pleasure to transfer, I suffered a bit with the inline styling.

Contributor

nelas commented May 3, 2013

@moollaza hei!

I'm using the title tag for hoverings, it is just my desktop style that makes them a black box.

The number of views is not a good indicator of how good an article is. Just how popular... and since recently we had no idea of how popular an article could be. This is why it is cool, but I also fail to see how it might help the user decide; the abstract is more important.

Abstract: breaking the click limits was my fear with the toggle, but when I tried putting it in the title tag it felt a bit cumbersome to read it. I will give it another shot.

Ah! I did not know about the spice.css! Will be a pleasure to transfer, I suffered a bit with the inline styling.

@nelas

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@nelas

nelas May 3, 2013

Contributor

So, this is how a long abstract looks as a title tag:

abstract

Not so nice. I'm now inclined to drop the abstract..

Contributor

nelas commented May 3, 2013

So, this is how a long abstract looks as a title tag:

abstract

Not so nice. I'm now inclined to drop the abstract..

@moollaza

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@moollaza

moollaza May 4, 2013

Member

@nelas glad to hear that you too cringe at the sight of inline styling 👍

I agree on the title tag abstract looking bad. I think we can go ahead and skip the abstract altogether for now. If any users raise a concern about it we can revisit the idea.

How does that sound?

Member

moollaza commented May 4, 2013

@nelas glad to hear that you too cringe at the sight of inline styling 👍

I agree on the title tag abstract looking bad. I think we can go ahead and skip the abstract altogether for now. If any users raise a concern about it we can revisit the idea.

How does that sound?

@nelas

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@nelas

nelas May 4, 2013

Contributor

@moollaza sounds done ;)

Contributor

nelas commented May 4, 2013

@moollaza sounds done ;)

@moollaza

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@moollaza

moollaza May 6, 2013

Member

@nelas hey just playing around with the plugin a little more and I have a few more thoughts:

  1. lets switch the <ol> to a <ul> - we use bulleted lists in all our other plugins and never really use numbered lists

  2. I know its nice to see the authors and the journal number, but with respect to relevancy I don't feel like having that information there makes a large difference to the user. Unless they're searching for a particular author's entries. Chances are if they're doing a search for a topic they're not going to care much about the authors.

  3. In light of that, I'm wondering if we should rather just have the date beside the title in brackets, perhaps in smaller font (because I still feel the date is highly relevant) and that way we can show more results instead of taking up space with something the user doesn't really need. Perhaps putting the authors in the tittle tag might be nice. Its not nearly as much text so it won't look as awful as the abstract.

Sorry for all the changes, just trying to see if we can maximize the benefit to the user.

What do you think about those changes?

Member

moollaza commented May 6, 2013

@nelas hey just playing around with the plugin a little more and I have a few more thoughts:

  1. lets switch the <ol> to a <ul> - we use bulleted lists in all our other plugins and never really use numbered lists

  2. I know its nice to see the authors and the journal number, but with respect to relevancy I don't feel like having that information there makes a large difference to the user. Unless they're searching for a particular author's entries. Chances are if they're doing a search for a topic they're not going to care much about the authors.

  3. In light of that, I'm wondering if we should rather just have the date beside the title in brackets, perhaps in smaller font (because I still feel the date is highly relevant) and that way we can show more results instead of taking up space with something the user doesn't really need. Perhaps putting the authors in the tittle tag might be nice. Its not nearly as much text so it won't look as awful as the abstract.

Sorry for all the changes, just trying to see if we can maximize the benefit to the user.

What do you think about those changes?

@nelas

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@nelas

nelas May 18, 2013

Contributor

@moollaza sorry for the absence!

  1. Ok!
  2. and 3. I think displaying the authors is highly relevant for academics. Even if you are not turned on by a title, once you know the article was written by an important author on your field you will want to read it. But, your suggestion to put in the title tag actually looks good and functional! Have a look:

hoverplos

So:

  1. I included the year in brackets after the title. Do you think the font-size should be reduced?
  2. I also included the year in the title tag just to make the citation complete, it looks strange without it. Even though it is repeating the info.
  3. How many articles do you think the plugin should show now? 10?
Contributor

nelas commented May 18, 2013

@moollaza sorry for the absence!

  1. Ok!
  2. and 3. I think displaying the authors is highly relevant for academics. Even if you are not turned on by a title, once you know the article was written by an important author on your field you will want to read it. But, your suggestion to put in the title tag actually looks good and functional! Have a look:

hoverplos

So:

  1. I included the year in brackets after the title. Do you think the font-size should be reduced?
  2. I also included the year in the title tag just to make the citation complete, it looks strange without it. Even though it is repeating the info.
  3. How many articles do you think the plugin should show now? 10?
@moollaza

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@moollaza

moollaza May 18, 2013

Member

@nelas I think that looks great! Styling can remain as it is. I think 5 results is best. If its really necessary we could show more in a div that expands (like HackerNews does).

Also, did you happen to email PLOS about the "Data Provided by Plos" requirement for their API? We tend to never add extra attribution like that to the results because we have the more at link which suggests the source and where they can go for further results.

Would you mind reaching out to them to see if they'll make an exception for our use case? We also do note the source in the plugin MetaData which is visible in the source code and the Goodies page...

Member

moollaza commented May 18, 2013

@nelas I think that looks great! Styling can remain as it is. I think 5 results is best. If its really necessary we could show more in a div that expands (like HackerNews does).

Also, did you happen to email PLOS about the "Data Provided by Plos" requirement for their API? We tend to never add extra attribution like that to the results because we have the more at link which suggests the source and where they can go for further results.

Would you mind reaching out to them to see if they'll make an exception for our use case? We also do note the source in the plugin MetaData which is visible in the source code and the Goodies page...

@nelas

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@nelas

nelas May 20, 2013

Contributor

@moollaza I think @nospampleasemam sent an email to them about the API policy. I was going to post a message to their discussion group someday, so I can raise the question there when I do.

Contributor

nelas commented May 20, 2013

@moollaza I think @nospampleasemam sent an email to them about the API policy. I was going to post a message to their discussion group someday, so I can raise the question there when I do.

@moollaza

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@moollaza

moollaza Jun 29, 2013

Member

@nelas sorry for the delays with respect to you plugin!

We've been very busy that last few months working on the new Spice v2 platform. We've made significant changes and updated our documentation (mostly) in Spice2.md.

If you're still willing to to work on this plugin I would ask that you please upgrade it to the new Spice v2 style and then we can get this released!

For now I think it's best to remove the "Data Provided by Plos" attribution so we can move forward. We really don't add extra attribution and it has not been a problem with any other plugins or API's. We do have the "More at" link and the metadata which indicate the source.

Again, apologies for all the delays!

Member

moollaza commented Jun 29, 2013

@nelas sorry for the delays with respect to you plugin!

We've been very busy that last few months working on the new Spice v2 platform. We've made significant changes and updated our documentation (mostly) in Spice2.md.

If you're still willing to to work on this plugin I would ask that you please upgrade it to the new Spice v2 style and then we can get this released!

For now I think it's best to remove the "Data Provided by Plos" attribution so we can move forward. We really don't add extra attribution and it has not been a problem with any other plugins or API's. We do have the "More at" link and the metadata which indicate the source.

Again, apologies for all the delays!

@nelas

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@nelas

nelas Jul 22, 2013

Contributor

Hey! I also had no time to work on it during the past month. I'm checking the new version now and will give it a try!

Contributor

nelas commented Jul 22, 2013

Hey! I also had no time to work on it during the past month. I'm checking the new version now and will give it a try!

@moollaza

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@moollaza

moollaza Jul 22, 2013

Member

Excellent! Thanks a lot @nelas

Member

moollaza commented Jul 22, 2013

Excellent! Thanks a lot @nelas

@jagtalon

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@jagtalon

jagtalon Sep 27, 2013

Member

Hey, @nelas! Just checking in. :) If you have any questions about making a Spice 2 plugin--any questions at all--don't hesitate to ask us.

Member

jagtalon commented Sep 27, 2013

Hey, @nelas! Just checking in. :) If you have any questions about making a Spice 2 plugin--any questions at all--don't hesitate to ask us.

@jagtalon

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@jagtalon

jagtalon Oct 17, 2013

Member

I'm closing this for now; you can always make a new pull request in the future. :) I'm saving it in a branch called ideas/plos if anyone's interested.

Member

jagtalon commented Oct 17, 2013

I'm closing this for now; you can always make a new pull request in the future. :) I'm saving it in a branch called ideas/plos if anyone's interested.

@jagtalon jagtalon closed this Oct 17, 2013

@jagtalon

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@nelas

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@nelas

nelas Oct 17, 2013

Contributor

Hi @jagtalon! Unfortunately I took too long. Just sat down now and did it. Should I open a new pull request then?

Contributor

nelas commented Oct 17, 2013

Hi @jagtalon! Unfortunately I took too long. Just sat down now and did it. Should I open a new pull request then?

@jagtalon

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@jagtalon

jagtalon Oct 18, 2013

Member

Oh, what?! Awesome! Yes, you definitely should! 👍

Member

jagtalon commented Oct 18, 2013

Oh, what?! Awesome! Yes, you definitely should! 👍

@nelas nelas referenced this pull request Oct 19, 2013

Merged

PLOS Search ported to Spice2 #265

@nelas

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@nelas

nelas Oct 19, 2013

Contributor

A new pull request has been opened at #265. Please continue the discussion there.

Contributor

nelas commented Oct 19, 2013

A new pull request has been opened at #265. Please continue the discussion there.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment