[REVIEW]: Hexatomic: An extensible, OS-independent platform for deep multi-layer linguistic annotation of corpora #4825
Comments
editorialbot
added
ANTLR
HTML
Java
review
Track: 4 (SBCS)
|
Hello humans, I'm @editorialbot, a robot that can help you with some common editorial tasks. For a list of things I can do to help you, just type: For example, to regenerate the paper pdf after making changes in the paper's md or bib files, type: |
|
|
Wordcount for |
|
Review checklist for @reckartConflict of interest
Code of Conduct
General checks
Functionality
Documentation
Software paper
|
|
@sdruskat Hi :) As part of reviewing the submission, I'd like to ask a couple of questions as I go along. Here are some initial ones:
I have downloaded the MacOS build from https://github.com/hexatomic/hexatomic/releases/tag/v1.0.1 and tried to run it, but the application crashes with this dialog:
Is this a known issue? |
There are the community guidelines in the GitHub repository itself:
Documentation:
Please let us know if you're missing anything.
There is a brief "how to create a corpus from scratch" in the user documentation.
All dependencies and their licenses are listed
I'll also supply a list of dependencies with licenses in a new comment.
Hi @reckart, thanks for flagging this. We're tracking the bug in hexatomic/hexatomic#409, and it'd be great if you helped us complete the missing info in the bug so that we can reproduce and fix this bug. Thanks 🙏! |
|
Dependencies and licenses:
|
|
I would recommend including a NOTICE file at the top-level of the repo or at least at the level of the bundles mentioning any embedded third-party-copyrighted stuff, e.g. https://github.com/hexatomic/hexatomic/blob/develop/bundles/org.corpus_tools.hexatomic.core/icons/fontawesome/LICENSE And/or add the respective licenses and mentions to the top-level license file. The license overview provided above did not include a mention of fontawesome - are other resource licenses missing as well? |
This sounds like a good idea, thanks.
We'll check and add any further missing licenses. |
ajstewartlang
removed
the
waitlisted
Review checklist for @hsangConflict of interest
Code of Conduct
General checks
Functionality
Documentation
Software paper
|
|
The website structure of https://hexatomic.github.io is confusing. In the left sidebar, it says that is has documentation but then is only about sustainability and tooling, no actual tool documentation. There is a link to the actual documentation on the bottom of the page, but it is not easy to find - the user may have to scroll down to be able to see it. It would be better if the documentation was hosted properly at https://hexatomic.github.io - the information about how the project was planned and conducted could be integrated into the documentation as a subsection or appendix. Ah, and if you actually follow the link at the bottom of the page, one get to a page which says "no idea how you got here, this is not linked anywhere":
|
|
When I press "new salt project" after opening the application, nothing happens. |
|
After importing a folder with text documents, clicking on a document does nothing. Double-clicking starts renaming of the document. I would expect that either single-click or double-click would open the document for editing. Instead, one has to right-click on the document to choose some editor. |
|
There seems to be no way to edit the graph in the graph editor. I have opened a document and the only thing I seem to be able to do with the mouse is to drag tokens around. |
The documentation has a short description of what it aims to do. However, IMHO Hexatomic has a very specific type of user interaction via commands and a quite specific way of treating documents and annotations that likely has a very specific target audience which may like Hexatomic better than the other many annotation tools out there. From the documentation introduction, it is not clear though which are the main selling points of Hexatomic and when/why a user should prefer it over other tools. |
There are no readily usable examples either coming with the application or being easily downloadable and importable from the website. The authors state:
Having a few importable examples in the different supported formats and highlighting different aspects of how the tool can be used would be more helpful |
|
Done! archive is now 10.5281/zenodo.7778709 |
|
@editorialbot generate pdf |
|
@editorialbot recommend-accept |
|
|
|
👋 @openjournals/sbcs-eics, this paper is ready to be accepted and published. Check final proof 👉📄 Download article If the paper PDF and the deposit XML files look good in openjournals/joss-papers#4281, then you can now move forward with accepting the submission by compiling again with the command |
editorialbot
added
the
recommend-accept
|
@ajstewartlang Just to confirm, it is you who would need to accept the submission with the above-mentioned editorialbot command, not us, right? |
|
@sdruskat - one of the @openjournals/sbcs-eics needs to action this. |
Thanks for the quick reply, makes sense :). |
|
@editorialbot recommend-accept |
|
|
|
👋 @openjournals/sbcs-eics, this paper is ready to be accepted and published. Check final proof 👉📄 Download article If the paper PDF and the deposit XML files look good in openjournals/joss-papers#4303, then you can now move forward with accepting the submission by compiling again with the command |
|
@editorialbot accept |
|
|
Ensure proper citation by uploading a plain text CITATION.cff file to the default branch of your repository. If using GitHub, a Cite this repository menu will appear in the About section, containing both APA and BibTeX formats. When exported to Zotero using a browser plugin, Zotero will automatically create an entry using the information contained in the .cff file. You can copy the contents for your CITATION.cff file here: CITATION.cff
If the repository is not hosted on GitHub, a .cff file can still be uploaded to set your preferred citation. Users will be able to manually copy and paste the citation. |
|
🐦🐦🐦 👉 Tweet for this paper 👈 🐦🐦🐦 |
|
🐘🐘🐘 👉 Toot for this paper 👈 🐘🐘🐘 |
|
🚨🚨🚨 THIS IS NOT A DRILL, YOU HAVE JUST ACCEPTED A PAPER INTO JOSS! 🚨🚨🚨 Here's what you must now do:
Any issues? Notify your editorial technical team... |
|
Congratulations @sdruskat! 🥳 Big thanks to @ajstewartlang @reckart! 😊 |
|
🎉🎉🎉 Congratulations on your paper acceptance! 🎉🎉🎉 If you would like to include a link to your paper from your README use the following code snippets: This is how it will look in your documentation: We need your help! The Journal of Open Source Software is a community-run journal and relies upon volunteer effort. If you'd like to support us please consider doing either one (or both) of the the following:
|
Yay 🎉! Thanks @ajstewartlang, @reckart and @oliviaguest. I was watching live as the acceptance went on, very exciting! |
|
Thanks a lot, we will party like we just published a paper 🥳 |
|
Congratulations @thomaskrause @sdruskat 🎉 Thanks @ajstewartlang @oliviaguest 👍 |
Submitting author: @sdruskat (Stephan Druskat)
Repository: https://github.com/hexatomic/hexatomic
Branch with paper.md (empty if default branch): JOSS-paper
Version: v1.4.2
Editor: @ajstewartlang
Reviewers: @reckart
Archive: 10.5281/zenodo.7778709
Status
Status badge code:
Reviewers and authors:
Please avoid lengthy details of difficulties in the review thread. Instead, please create a new issue in the target repository and link to those issues (especially acceptance-blockers) by leaving comments in the review thread below. (For completists: if the target issue tracker is also on GitHub, linking the review thread in the issue or vice versa will create corresponding breadcrumb trails in the link target.)
Reviewer instructions & questions
@hsang & @reckart, your review will be checklist based. Each of you will have a separate checklist that you should update when carrying out your review.
First of all you need to run this command in a separate comment to create the checklist:
The reviewer guidelines are available here: https://joss.readthedocs.io/en/latest/reviewer_guidelines.html. Any questions/concerns please let @ajstewartlang know.
✨ Please start on your review when you are able, and be sure to complete your review in the next six weeks, at the very latest ✨
Checklists
📝 Checklist for @reckart
📝 Checklist for @hsang
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: