> On Dec. 26, 2013, 1:57 a.m., Christoph Feck wrote:
> > Hm, you broke the comment :)
>
> Luis Silva wrote:
> What do you mean? It all works fine here.
>
> Christoph Feck wrote:
> Yes, because the compiler does not read comments.
>
> Thomas Lübking wrote:
> Aside this, the approach seems too naive?
> DOIs have a defined structure, leading "doi: 10" (ignoring the case and
> making colon and whitespace optional) and in general the "problematic" tokens
> will have a massive digit overhead - so this could be used as additional test
> ( < 25 && looksLikeIndex())
>
> Luis Silva wrote:
> @Christoph: Just (finally) understood what you meant with "breaking the
> comment". I uploaded a new patch that (hopefully) fixes the issue in the
> correct way.
> @Thomas: The approach was meant to be naive. In this simple form, this
> patch takes care of all index-like cases as well as most other short garbage
> titles without further parsing. What would be the point of actually knowing
> if a very short title was actually a doi or an index?
>
> Thomas Lübking wrote:
> echo "The Lord of the Rings" | wc -m
> 22
>
> And that's not a short title - not to mention the typical Stephen King
> ("It") or other languages that use hanzi, kanji or hanja and will never met
> your arbitrary 25 glyph requirement.
> Though many academic papers (in western cultures at least) in fact have
> clumsy long titles, that doesn't hold for other document types.
>
> OTOH, if the "title" (=index) is some (md5, sha*) hash of the text, that
> will easily outnumber 25 glyphs.
>
> So the more honest solution seems to just omit the title field altogether.
>
> The alternative (don't know how expensive the document scan is) would be
> to check whether the title field seems like reasonable text, what could
> invoke the digit ratio, the longest non-digit sequence ("0x12a21f56ea5") and
> maybe whether there's any digitless word at all.
>
> Albert Astals Cid wrote:
> Honestly I don't even know why there is the rule for needing a space,
> looking at my shelf of books i can see "Cryptonomicon", "Azogue", "Portico",
> "Hyperion", "Endymion", "1984", and then I have stopped. Please, don't try to
> be that much clever, i can understand if you want to rule out stuff like
> "Microsoft Word - something.doc", but imho you're being already too broad
> with the rule of "it includes microsoft". What about if i have a manual about
> "Microsoft Visual Basic"?
>
> Honestly omiting or mangling the title is a very bad thing to do. If you
> have a sensible thing to run over the 1500 test pdf files i have here i'm
> happy to help.
>
> Christoph Feck wrote:
> Would it make sense to refactor the code to use the (PDF supplied)
> document title, and, if for whatever reason it is believed to be wrong,
> append the extracted text that is believed to be a better title?
>
> Luis Silva wrote:
> I can see the point Albert is making that when a pdf has a short (but
> valid) pdftitle and an unparseable first page the resulting extracted title
> will be gibberish. I also agree that mangling the title just because it
> seemed to be small is unacceptable. I must admit that I did not think about
> the cases of hanzi, kanji or hanja for which this patch would systematically
> force the parsing of the first page of the document.
> The issue here is when the pdftitle does not match the real document
> title. In my database of academic papers (700+) this happens a lot. Most of
> my other documents are either prints to pdf, documents generated from their
> latex source or Word documents converted to pdf most (90%) of which lack a
> pdftitle and so have to be parsed anyway. From my experience this is a
> typical situation, at least amongst academics. Of course, the best operating
> solution must cater for the most common personas, not just academics, but in
> your experience, what would that be?
I'm with Christoph here, not sure what he use case for this is, but would it be
possible to add the extra information instead of replacing it? Maybe even in a
second field? Like "title" and "thingwethinkmaybethetitle"?
- Albert
-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/114632/#review46156
-----------------------------------------------------------
On Jan. 6, 2014, 5:47 p.m., Luis Silva wrote:
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/114632/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
>
> (Updated Jan. 6, 2014, 5:47 p.m.)
>
>
> Review request for Baloo and Vishesh Handa.
>
>
> Repository: kfilemetadata
>
>
> Description
> -------
>
> A good portion of scientific papers in my collection had a doi or an index
> number in the title. These are in general short string chains, shorter than
> the real title.
> I improve extraction of titles from pdf's by setting a minimum size below
> which parsing of the first page is forced.
> The cut-off size is arbitrarily set to 25 characters (three "big words").
>
>
> Diffs
> -----
>
> src/extractors/popplerextractor.cpp
> b056581f51d10b632799586eed3cc15ac539fe80
>
> Diff: https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/114632/diff/
>
>
> Testing
> -------
>
> This improved the title extraction on my pdf collection of scientific papers
> by quite a lot.
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Luis Silva
>
>
>> Visit http://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-devel#unsub to unsubscribe <<
