These are chat archives for cltk/cltk

18th
May 2016
James Tauber
@jtauber
May 18 2016 09:45
I'm excited about the concept behind the Journal of Open Source Software http://joss.theoj.org as a way to get software like CLTK treated like peer-reviewed journal articles. There didn't seem to be any linguistic or digital humanities experience on the editorial board but I submitted pyuca as a bit of an experiment and so far it looks like it will be accepted. I hope that paves the way for more Greek and linguistic stuff.
I notice CLTK already has a DOI. I'm going to start doing that for more of my projects.
@kylepjohnson I see you overcome the per-release DOI with a "template" for citation
Patrick J. Burns
@diyclassics
May 18 2016 09:52
Agreed—it looks like a great option. Even better that you now have some experience with the journal.
James Tauber
@jtauber
May 18 2016 09:55
I just love their approach that if your scholarly contribution is the software itself, why do we make people write a separate article for journal peer-review. Anyway, it's early days for JOSS and I have no idea how much traction it will get overall much less in digital humanities.
But I'm quite interested in getting more published output :-)
Kyle P. Johnson
@kylepjohnson
May 18 2016 15:34
Cool, I'll definitely look into this!
I do use a different DOI for each release. That website (I forget the name) does all the work for me
James Tauber
@jtauber
May 18 2016 15:56
zenodo? that's what I used
James Tauber
@jtauber
May 18 2016 17:10
i think the DOI system basically forces you to use a different DOI per release
Kyle P. Johnson
@kylepjohnson
May 18 2016 20:41
That's what kinda bugs me about Zenodo, that every little point release gets a new DOI. I don't care that much, but measures of influence by many sites like are by DOI-citation