Replies: 3 comments 1 reply
-
Thanks for the proposal, I generally agree If you know codemeta, can you briefly tell us if it does a better job at using identifiers? Can we let |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
Well, I'm not a CodeMeta expert, but it supports indeed generic "identifiers", at least for people. For example, still in my random case, here is a comparison between one of my projects ⋆ |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
@wiztigers I think it makes a lot of sense, and in being optional it won't risk to alienate people with over formal boilerplate. So I'd say we are talking about Maybe also the fields in " #218 (organization) is relevant as well and the discussion already mentioned using URIs. Care to make a PR? |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
-
Hi,
I (random public research engineer & dev) just filled in my first
publiccode.yml
file, and one thing in particular kinda triggered me : I find the lack of identifiers for software, persons and organizations disturbing.Maybe I'm biaised because of practices in research, but :
All these identifiers are very useful for disambiguation, and vastly more sustainable than emails or affiliations.
Anyway, here comes my proposal :
Proposal
Anywhere (ie. in the same scope) you must give a mandatory name to a person, group or object, an optional list of URI should be added to the standard (proposed key:
uri
). This list should receive persistent identifiers avoiding any ambiguity regarding this person, group or object.Have a nice day ! ʕᵔᴥᵔʔ
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
All reactions