Where communities thrive


  • Join over 1.5M+ people
  • Join over 100K+ communities
  • Free without limits
  • Create your own community
People
Repo info
Activity
    Kyle Niemeyer
    @kyleniemeyer
    @ashleysa that is certainly an interesting idea, but that hierarchy might not be recognizable by most (or supported by the journal!). Looks like PeerJ just has a standard flat list of authors, so not sure if that approach would be compatible.
    I also agree that beyond whoever takes the lead being first author (either @cboettig or me, I guess), trying to order based on contribution (or need) becomes tricky and perhaps not fair/equitable. For my own case, other than the coveted lead author position, I don’t think position will matter too much—it’s a paper, and potentially one with good impact.
    Ashley E. Sands
    @ashleysa
    It's still just a flat list -- the two sets are smushed together like one normal author list -- you determine the order like any other article. It would depend on your community if you knew how to "read" the ordering -- but sounds like most communities here it doesn't matter. But again, don't want to force a crazy idea on anyone.
    Daniel S. Katz
    @danielskatz
    we’re going across communities, so we need to fall back to the least common elements, which is either alphabetical or significant
    Matt Jones
    @mbjones
    on another topic -- was the unit test framework using the json-ld library in ruby loading the context without error before?
    it currently is failing, seemingly because of a CORS header error on the context file
    Matt Jones
    @mbjones
    NM, I figured it out -- some syntax typos had been introduced in the schema during a PR -- all passing again
    Ashley E. Sands
    @ashleysa
    @cboettig So I think we've laid out all the authorship potentials. @danielskatz has a good point on alphabetical for simplicity (and because it seems to make sense to all research communities). Does that feel okay for @mbjones and @kyleniemeyer? If so, I'm okay with it.
    Kyle Niemeyer
    @kyleniemeyer
    Yes, I agree that authorship should be alphabetical, other than the first author (whoever that is)
    Carl Boettiger
    @cboettig
    Lots of people have made lots of different kind of contributions to the paper and broader ideas here. None of us believe these contributions are either exactly equal nor do we believe that they can be meaningfully rank-ordered in a single dimension. Thus I would prefer any decision that does not imply that we believe either of these fictions. I am perfectly fine with a hybrid order that is not alphabetical but also not a strictly ordered list from 1-17.
    Kyle Niemeyer
    @kyleniemeyer
    Well said, @cboettig—at this point, does anybody prefer a model other than lead + alphabetical?
    Sorry, I sent that message before finishing it
    ... Ok, this is an iOS gitter app problem... What
    Kyle Niemeyer
    @kyleniemeyer
    alright, I give up for now.
    Kyle Niemeyer
    @kyleniemeyer
    sorry for the jumble of messages, the iOS app was giving me problems last night… randomly sending messages before I finished typing with apparently no ability to edit
    I don’t think I have anything more to contribute on the authorship discussion :smile:
    Abigail Cabunoc Mayes
    @acabunoc
    oh yeah, i on iOS if you close the app it sends your current message
    Kyle Niemeyer
    @kyleniemeyer
    @acabunoc or blink, or look away, I think.
    Abigail Cabunoc Mayes
    @acabunoc
    hahahhahaa
    Daniel S. Katz
    @danielskatz
    FYI - saw this on twitter, in case you haven’t seen it before: http://rrr.cs.st-andrews.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/guidelines-software-identification.pdf
    Neil Chue Hong
    @npch
    @danielskatz That’s the model previously called “Jisc” in the CodeMeta crosswalk (but actually the RRR project from STFC/St Andrews).
    Daniel S. Katz
    @danielskatz
    Great. After missing the first day, I never did catch up on the actual table.
    Daniel S. Katz
    @danielskatz
    I remember starting the codemeta paper in a google doc, but I thought the intro section at least was brought into latex by Matt or Carl. But we now seem to be in .Rmd
    Am I misremembering? Are we just going to do this in Rmd?
    Kyle Niemeyer
    @kyleniemeyer
    yeah, I moved it directly from the google doc to Rmd, which Carl or Matt wanted to use…
    Matt Jones
    @mbjones
    Maybe Carl expressed that preference. Its certainly accessible to a larger group, but I am happy with either.
    Daniel S. Katz
    @danielskatz
    I could just be misremembering
    Abigail Cabunoc Mayes
    @acabunoc
    I accidentally commit directly to master and didn't make a PR. I apologize for my poor open source ettiquette
    Kyle Niemeyer
    @kyleniemeyer
    @acabunoc I think only a few people have commit access, so if you do your contributions are generally trustworthy 😋
    (but in general most changes will come in via PR)
    Abigail Cabunoc Mayes
    @acabunoc
    thanks @kyleniemeyer :)
    Rafael C Jimenez
    @rajido
    Hello codeMeta followers! Just wanted to let you know yesterday at WSSSPE4 we had a group meeting to talk about codeMeta. We had few existing contributors like Alice Allen, Carole Goble and Kyle Niemeyer and few new people like me interested to contribute and push forward this initiative. You can find the notes and actions of our meeting in the following doc … https://docs.google.com/document/d/1UxlHIoBRgVWB8NAXYf4Q0yS7PAqa-EYwFfsNuTKSPbs/edit?usp=sharing
    Abigail Cabunoc Mayes
    @acabunoc
    thanks @rajido -- it's good to see things moving along!
    Matt Jones
    @mbjones
    thanks @rajido -- I'm reading through all of the tickets created too. Great stuff.
    Morane Gruenpeter
    @moranegg
    Hello everyone, I'm an intern at software heritage and the goal of my internship is building the Semantic Web of FOSS projects by collecting existing metadata, reconciliating them to some extent, and integrating them into the Software Heritage archive. As I was researching existing efforts around Metadata Standards I found your project. first, I think it's great what your doing and the crosswalk table is a real help in my research.. wanted to see if you mind me joining in your channel and asking some questions here?
    Daniel S. Katz
    @danielskatz
    That seems like a great idea
    Morane Gruenpeter
    @moranegg
    :-) well in the ocean of metadata it is a complicated idea, but let's see how deep is the rabbit hole..
    Morane Gruenpeter
    @moranegg
    In the crosswalk.csv I've noticed you have Debian Package Metadata and you don't have debtags, was it on purpose? or nobody listed debtags yet?
    Daniel S. Katz
    @danielskatz
    I expect @mbjones or @cboettig will answer when it gets a little later on the west coast
    Morane Gruenpeter
    @moranegg
    well another question came up: is there a reason why DOAP isn't in the crosswalk.csv?
    Daniel S. Katz
    @danielskatz
    I’m fairly sure we’ve talked about it, but I don’t know the answer.
    @all, any comments for @moranegg ?
    Morane Gruenpeter
    @moranegg
    Anyway, thanks for your responses..
    Kyle Niemeyer
    @kyleniemeyer
    I’m not sure if @mbjones, @cboettig, or @gothub have been in here in a while… if they don’t respond, a more reliable way to get their attention is by filing an issue on the GitHub repo
    Daniel S. Katz
    @danielskatz
    +1
    Eoghan Ó Carragáin
    @eocarragain
    @all Do zenodo and figshare now support code meta, such that the DataCite metadata is correctly populated etc.?
    Any other examples of adoption? Thanks
    Matt Jones
    @mbjones
    pretty cool!