[Port dspace-7_x] Fixes Incorrect operation of the keyword selection field with < and , on the Submission page

[VictorHugoDuranS]

Hi @tdonohue , I'm @jtimal partner, I like to share this PR with you:

References

• Fixes Incorrect operation of the keyword selection field with < and , on the Submission page #2679
• Ported to 8.x in Fixes incorrect operation of the keyword selection field with < and , on the Submission page #3247

Description

I changed the current validation for tag component in on keyup function for validate the keys "ENTER", "," and ";" for add the tags to Chips template.

Instructions for Reviewers

I added validation for the keys "," and ";" add the labels to the chip template because the current functionality splits the value using the keys mentioned above so I think it is the correct way to validate as it causes an error if we don't validate by those keys incorrectly separating those values, i attach an example:

Grabacion.de.pantalla.2024-06-07.a.la.s.6.43.42.p.m.mov

With validation I simplified the separation of values.

List of changes in this PR:

• Change the validation considering the keys "," and ";" using the properties keyCode and key of the keyup event

To review and check:
Create a new item or edit item
Enter a keyword with the symbol , or <

Checklist

• My PR is small in size (e.g. less than 1,000 lines of code, not including comments & specs/tests), or I have provided reasons as to why that's not possible.
• My PR passes ESLint validation using yarn lint
• My PR doesn't introduce circular dependencies (verified via yarn check-circ-deps)
• My PR includes TypeDoc comments for all new (or modified) public methods and classes. It also includes TypeDoc for large or complex private methods.
• My PR passes all specs/tests and includes new/updated specs or tests based on the Code Testing Guide.
• If my PR includes new libraries/dependencies (in package.json), I've made sure their licenses align with the DSpace BSD License based on the Licensing of Contributions documentation.
• If my PR includes new features or configurations, I've provided basic technical documentation in the PR itself.
• If my PR fixes an issue ticket, I've linked them together.

[tdonohue]

@VictorHugoDuranS : This is currently failing unit tests (specs). I'd also appreciate it if you could start to create PRs against the main branch. We've started to find that it is much easier to backport PRs from main to dspace-7_x because main has more strict lint rules. For the same reason, it has become more difficult to forward-port from dspace-7_x to main....so, I'd recommend creating PRs against main instead of dspace-7_x.