[REVIEW]: Potnia: A Python library for the conversion of transliterated ancient texts to Unicode

[editorialbot]

Submitting author: @etour-unimelb (Emily Tour)
Repository: https://github.com/AncientNLP/potnia.git
Branch with paper.md (empty if default branch): main
Version: v0.3.0
Editor: @arfon
Reviewers: @afrubin, @claresloggett
Archive: Pending

Status

Status badge code:

HTML: <a href="https://joss.theoj.org/papers/7641150c49e996a21fa0f4dc3aadb258"><img src="https://joss.theoj.org/papers/7641150c49e996a21fa0f4dc3aadb258/status.svg"></a>
Markdown: [![status](https://joss.theoj.org/papers/7641150c49e996a21fa0f4dc3aadb258/status.svg)](https://joss.theoj.org/papers/7641150c49e996a21fa0f4dc3aadb258)

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

@afrubin & @claresloggett, 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:

@editorialbot generate my checklist

The reviewer guidelines are available here: https://joss.readthedocs.io/en/latest/reviewer_guidelines.html. Any questions/concerns please let @arfon 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

@afrubin, please create your checklist typing: @editorialbot generate my checklist

@claresloggett, please create your checklist typing: @editorialbot generate my checklist

[editorialbot]

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:

@editorialbot commands

For example, to regenerate the paper pdf after making changes in the paper's md or bib files, type:

@editorialbot generate pdf

[editorialbot]

Software report:

github.com/AlDanial/cloc v 1.98  T=0.03 s (2040.5 files/s, 185451.4 lines/s)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Language                     files          blank        comment           code
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
YAML                            20            348            648           2362
Python                          22            220            220            450
TeX                              2             30              0            297
Markdown                         3             94              0            210
reStructuredText                 7            147             92            167
TOML                             1              7              1             37
Text                             1             13              0             30
DOS Batch                        1              8              1             26
Bourne Shell                     2              4              2             19
make                             1              4              7              9
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SUM:                            60            875            971           3607
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Commit count by author:

   135	Robert Turnbull
    58	Emily Tour
    38	Kabir Manandhar Shrestha
     7	etour-unimelb
     1	dependabot[bot]

[editorialbot]

Reference check summary (note 'MISSING' DOIs are suggestions that need verification):

✅ OK DOIs

- 10.1162/coli_a_00481 is OK
- 10.1109/MAHC.2024.3351948 is OK
- 10.1515/zac-2020-0018 is OK
- 10.5281/zenodo.10021513 is OK
- 10.5281/zenodo.5090923 is OK
- 10.18653/v1/P19-1303 is OK
- 10.1145/3593431 is OK
- 10.1073/pnas.2003794117 is OK
- 10.36824/2020-graf-cacc is OK
- 10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.07.415 is OK
- 10.1108/eb026567 is OK
- 10.1080/00437956.1953.11659466 is OK
- 10.21105/joss.04886 is OK

🟡 SKIP DOIs

- No DOI given, and none found for title: Image and Interpretation: Using Artificial Intelli...
- No DOI given, and none found for title: A Dataset of Mycenaean Linear B Sequences
- No DOI given, and none found for title: Sefaria: A Living Library of Jewish Texts Online
- No DOI given, and none found for title: Transliterating English in Arabic
- No DOI given, and none found for title: Documents in Mycenaean Greek
- No DOI given, and none found for title: Cuneify
- No DOI given, and none found for title: UnicodeConverter
- No DOI given, and none found for title: Anatolian Hieroglyphics (Luwian) generation
- No DOI given, and none found for title: The Ras Shamra Tablet Inventory
- No DOI given, and none found for title: Cuneiform Digital Library Initiative
- No DOI given, and none found for title: DIN 31635: Transliteration of the Arabic alphabet

❌ MISSING DOIs

- None

❌ INVALID DOIs

- None

[editorialbot]

Paper file info:

⚠️ Wordcount for paper.md is 1628

✅ The paper includes a Statement of need section

[editorialbot]

License info:

✅ License found: Apache License 2.0 (Valid open source OSI approved license)

[arfon]

@afrubin, @claresloggett – This is the review thread for the paper. All of our communications will happen here from now on.

Please read the "Reviewer instructions & questions" in the first comment above. Please create your checklist typing:

@editorialbot generate my checklist

As you go over the submission, please check any items that you feel have been satisfied. There are also links to the JOSS reviewer guidelines.

The JOSS review is different from most other journals. Our goal is to work with the authors to help them meet our criteria instead of merely passing judgment on the submission. As such, the reviewers are encouraged to submit issues and pull requests on the software repository. When doing so, please mention https://github.com/openjournals/joss-reviews/issues/7725 so that a link is created to this thread (and I can keep an eye on what is happening). Please also feel free to comment and ask questions on this thread. In my experience, it is better to post comments/questions/suggestions as you come across them instead of waiting until you've reviewed the entire package.

We aim for the review process to be completed within about 4-6 weeks but please make a start well ahead of this as JOSS reviews are by their nature iterative and any early feedback you may be able to provide to the author will be very helpful in meeting this schedule.

[editorialbot]

👉📄 Download article proof 📄 View article proof on GitHub 📄 👈