Added CORE rankings, filters, and workshop N/A labels

[mahade315]

• Added core ranking from https://portal.core.edu.au/conf-ranks/, for workshops added N/A
• Made filter using that

[imranur-rahman]

Thank you for your contribution! We were thinking about adding this feature for a while. However, if I remember correctly, the last time @sivanahamer and I had this conversation, I (or we?) had concerns whether the different SE conference tracks (e.g., SEIP, SEET) should have the same core ranking as the research track of the conference. @sivanahamer thoughts?

[sivanahamer]

Hi!
Thanks for the PR! I remember the following discussion points about this feature:

1. confrankings do not include journals. As SE, many journals rank higher than conferences in many cases, and since we can have special editions of journals, we want a way to account for that.
2. As Imran mentioned, there was also the issue of what to do for co-located events and tracks outside of the main research track. I had never checked the official docs of conf rankings until just now, but saw that they talk about this in the section titled "Multiconference". It seems that only the research track is assigned a rank in our case, unless a track has another entry (e.g., there is no ICSE-SEIP ranking).

I have some comments about the implementation of the feature:

1. Would it not be easier not to have to manually enter N/A every time a new entry is added? This can be done automatically.
2. I am adding comments on some extra changes I noticed that were made outside the feature and should be removed.

Going back to the feature, I think, really, at the end of the day, what a feature like this is just looking to have an extra filter for "top venues" rather than be an exhaustive list of core rankings. Based on that, maybe we should add four tags:

1. Top 5 general (so conf + journal)
2. Top 10 general (conf + journal)
3. A* (only research track)
4. A (only research track)

Although for the top 5 and 10, should we also just do the research track?

We should also document this decision in the README.md or somewhere, and include a reference you can click on in the filter for more information.

[sivanahamer]

Why are the spaces being added/removed?

[sivanahamer]

Note, the list is not exhaustive of these changes. But any changes outside the feature should be in a separate PR. Changes in this file should only be related to the feature and changes outside of that should be in a separate PR.

[mahade315]

Thank you for the valuable feedback on this pull request.

I acknowledge that there are formatting inconsistencies that need to be addressed. However, before proceeding with these corrections, I believe it would be beneficial to establish consensus on the fundamental approach: whether we should incorporate CORE rankings into the system, and if so, what implementation strategy would best serve the project's objectives.

Once we have reached agreement on the design direction, I will be happy to make the necessary adjustments accordingly.

Thank you for your consideration.

[sivanahamer]

Extra line being generated in entries

[sivanahamer]

This seems to have been modified adding extra spaces outside of the feature

[sivanahamer]

Also, tagging #9, where we discussed this before