[
Date Prev][
Date Next][
Thread Prev][
Thread Next][
Date Index][
Thread Index]
[
List Home]
|
Re: [science-iwg] [location-iwg] DOIs for scientific software
|
Martin,
(x-posted to Science & LT)
Thank you again for the great work you've done pushing this forward!
Ottawa is obviously super easy for me since I live here. I'd be happy to
play host and show whomever can come around the city. Timing it so I'm
actually here is important of course. :-)
I would like to hear from those that are interested. Thanks!
Andrew
On 09/07/15 05:19, Martin Hammitzsch wrote:
Hi Everyone,
You may remember our discussion on minting DOIs to software releases /
packages hosted by the Science and LocationTech WGs:
- http://dev.eclipse.org/mhonarc/lists/science-iwg/msg00815.html
- http://dev.eclipse.org/mhonarc/lists/science-iwg/msg00819.html
Summarized I understand that many of us would be interested in a
concept how the Eclipse Foundation and Community could implement a
working solution.
So far we come up with a document draft collecting general ideas,
thoughts and questions:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/10GNuXtjJNOJZ9AVzfeZP_cybYILjsh6KQ6f-htQH190/edit?usp=sharing
Another document summarized how and why the Eclipse Foundation could
make use of DataCite DOIs and which steps could be the next ones to
address the details:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1WoQxo8C81S62CgVWjTVqLwpuB8WuQKYMJnd6PRHkBeE/edit?usp=sharing
I suggest that one of the next steps should be a meeting in Ottawa
with the National Science Library to present the idea, to discuss
options, to touch contractual matters, and to get support for drafting
a detailed concept.
Please let us know what you think.
Best,
Martin
On 18 April 2015 at 12:01, Philip Wenig <philip.wenig@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Hi folks,
we will work out a draft how this could be implemented the next weeks. It
will figure out the scope, the benefits for the Science and LocationTech WGs
as well as the costs and obligations it would have.
We also try to cover all mentioned thoughts and criticism as well as the
upcoming ones.
Best,
Philip
Am 17.04.2015 um 23:11 schrieb Martin Hammitzsch:
Hi Andrew,
Regarding the metadata I agree. It's something we might use as a first
starting point together with a related landing page that more or less shows
the metadata in a convenient way plus additional information such as metrics
and some interactive elements like links or a web based code repository
browser.
Unfortunately, the DOI thing isn't that easy. Either Eclipse becomes a DOI
minting agency itself or an existing partnership with a partner who already
is a registered agency supports this idea. Thus the DOI infrastructure
provided by the partner already exists, is maintained, and finally can be
used for minting DOIs, for maintaining the metadata, and for properly
redirecting the DOI to the landing page.
Furthermore, an agency is a member of the International DOI Foundation
(IDF), as far as I know, and has to commit to certain regulations, e.g. if
an agency shuts down services than the other member/agencies have to sort
out how DOI labeled digital objects are taken over by the other members. So
if the Eclipse Foundation wants to mint DOIs itself it finally means the
foundation is part of a kind of social commitment and has to consider
further implications. So having the opportunity to get support by a partner
who already takes care of all of this in the role of a DOI minting agency
would possibly be highly beneficial in a first phase.
And last but not least, the IDF membership and the minting of DOIs costs
money, as far as I know.
So the one thing is the technical implementation and the set-up of some
additional processes that possibly can be put on top as a kind of simple
layer realising the idea without touching what already exists and is working
for the WGs.
The other thing is the DOI related stuff, that should be well thought out
since this is another world we depend on if we want to assign DOIs to
software releases. Unfortunately, this is the currency in sciences. However,
we may also consider the use of the Handle system at first, which is the
foundation of the DOI system. As far as I know, its no problem to make use
of the Handle system at no cost. This would allow a first proof of concept.
Just some further thoughts ... I am not an expert in this library and
publisher driven DOI world.
Best,
Martin
On 17 Apr 2015 21:58, "Andrew Ross" <andrew.ross@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Dear Philip, Martin, and All
I like the idea FWIW. And it sounds quite reasonable to implement.
Part of the meta data could be a git commit and direct link to the code
repository.
I suspect the team/community could determine the meta data fields without
too much trouble.
How would the DOI be generated? I'm wondering if this is something we can
automate and simply give to all releases and maybe even all builds.
Kind regards,
Andrew
On 16/04/15 08:04, Philip Wenig wrote:
Hi folks,
Martin gave an excellent talk about the publication of software at the
EGU meeting yesterday. Scientists get reward for papers but not for
software. Papers are cited, software not. That's a drawback for a scientific
career. As we know, software has become crucial in scientific research
nowadays. Hence, I'd like to share some of Martin's ideas with you:
* Certain Science/LocationTech WG releases/packages get a DOI
* The DOI points to a landing page with appropriate metadata to cite the
release/package
* The release/package can be cited and will be ranked on Google Scholar
and other systems
= This could be an incentive for more scientists to publish their
software under the umbrella of the Science and LocationTech WG.
What's your opinion?
Best,
Philip
PDF of Martin's presentation:
https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1tulhwtEK9l1yGaAX1YWsMR7OrQAwWDee4N2M1Yy7bIo/edit?pli=1#slide=id.gada00e2fc_0_866
_______________________________________________
location-iwg mailing list
location-iwg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit
https://locationtech.org/mailman/listinfo/location-iwg
