Adding first draft of guidelines for bibliographic metadata using the codemeta schema#487
Adding first draft of guidelines for bibliographic metadata using the codemeta schema#487gavinpringle wants to merge 47 commits intoEVERSE-ResearchSoftware:mainfrom
Conversation
Final first draft
❌ Deploy Preview for everse-rsqkit-testing failed.
|
|
Adding first draft of new page describing bibliographic metadata using the codemeta schema. |
| - **Stick to Standards**: Use the CodeMeta schema. It keeps your file compatible with different platforms. | ||
| - **Keep It Current**: Update the file whenever your software changes. New version? New contributor? Make sure it's reflected. | ||
| - **Check for Errors**: Use a JSON validator to catch any mistakes, e.g., {% tool "jasonldvalidator" %}. | ||
| - **Use Persistent Identifiers**: Add a DOI for long-term reference. Zenodo is a good place to get one. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
But where? on software? On people?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I changed "Add a DOI for long-term reference. Zenodo is a good place to get one" to read "Add a Digital Object Identifier (DOI) for the software release itself for long-term citation (e.g., from Zenodo). Ensure ORCID iDs are included for all people", and also changed "Use the Person schema and include Open Researcher and ORCID iDs for authors and contributors." to read "Use the Person schema and include ORCID iDs (the persistent identifier for people) for all authors and contributors".
I'm not sure what you mean by 'where'? If you mean, where does the DOI/ORCID ID go, then I feel it's clear from the example.
|
@gavinpringle thanks for generating the first draft, sorry it took me a while to come to this. I have a question: This page is on bibliographic metadata. However, it does not state how to use the referencePublication of for a particular software, which is kind of the point, right? Shouldn't do this? |
Removed point to Stick to Standards as it is redundant; Changed the validator from JSON to JSON-LD; added a second author and contributor to the example.
I've made a clear distinction between persistent IDs for software (DOI) and people (ORCID ID)
gavinpringle
left a comment
gavinpringle
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I've addressed all comments, bar one: i'm unclear about 'But where?'
Added the missing and all important referencePublication to the example, and added a 'Link to the Paper' in the What to Focus On subsection.
Fixed example url to something that does not fail: www.journal-of-mathemtics.com -> www.example.com
changed example url to one that does not fail
fixed typo in example url
Personally, i like my example as the user can quickly copy the text and change the entries accordingly, whereas the content in your given URL is a splash of options that takes time to parse. |
Removed problematic url example in referencePublication
|
@shoaibsufi @anenadic This PR is ready to be merged (there are some changes that I will upload after is merged). |
2 participants
First draft
Before creating a pull request:
data/or_includesfolder orconfig.yamlfile - please make sure you have discussed this with the maintainers in the relevant issue.Fixes #issue_number (add the relevant issue number).
Changes proposed in this pull request:
Notes for reviewers: