Skip to main content
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
Re: [science-iwg] [location-iwg] DOIs for scientific software

Hi Amos,

I've nothing to add. Just two comments regarding the DOI.

If the Eclipse Foundation is minting a DOI then it's possible to construct the DOI following own rules - means: your suggestion using a  cryptographic hash / checksum from the repository in the DOI should work.

Using the DOI in a URL that refers / resolves to a landing page finally can be used to land either on a specific page set-up for this purposes or on the respective revision page of the repository that uses the .md file to contain information normally found on landing pages - means: your solution should work here, too. However, the implementation of the landing page is something that has to be discussed since it should fit into existing systems and processes in the Eclipse WGs.

Best,
Martin

On 21 Jul 2015 9:04 pm, "Amos Hayes" <ahayes@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Hi all. I'm a bit of a lurker but wanted to toss a comment in here. Getting academic credit for software, datasets, etc as well as publications is a great goal and one we struggle with too. Being able to unambiguously identify a digital object of any kind with a DOI is great.

But one of the great impacts of DOIs for datasets in particular is that they help others to be able to point to the same dataset and attempt to reproduce observations or augment findings, etc. One thing missing in many cases is a strong assurance that the dataset hasn't changed.

A given release of a software could also have an impact on results. Citing software with a DOI pointing at a repository, assigned version number is a good first step.

But in addition to pointing and trusting the repositories, a cryptographic hash/checksum would allow for some assurances that you were using the exact same tool as the citing author. An Eclipse software (and data? - I refer to other conversations about LocationTech Data) DOI solution should have that as a goal too I think (as Andrew noted when he mentioned including a pointer to commits). And it should ideally support more than just a single repository type or checksum scheme. Git makes this relatively easy due to the nature of git's SHA1 commit hash system. Something including the same for source tarballs and/or binary build checksums would need to happen for subversion, cvs, or other repositories I think.

Github has some info about making code in their system citable. They have it somewhat easy but still, it is an example of something out there:


Andrew, I'm happy to participate in discussions as you see fit. :)

--
Amos Hayes
Geomatics and Cartographic Research Centre
Carleton University, Canada

On 17 July 2015 at 09:58, Martin Hammitzsch <martin.hammitzsch@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Just to keep the thread going: I'd be interested in the Ottawa trip.
Anyone else?

Cheers,
Martin


On 9 July 2015 at 16:05, Andrew Ross <andrew.ross@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 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
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
_______________________________________________
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


_______________________________________________
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

Back to the top