Lightrun Answers was designed to reduce the constant googling that comes with debugging 3rd party libraries. It collects links to all the places you might be looking at while hunting down a tough bug.
And, if you’re still stuck at the end, we’re happy to hop on a call to see how we can help out.
Minimal fields (to enable software citation & author credit)
See original GitHub issueDuring the codemeta workshop in Portland a few of us sat down and tried to work through what is the absolute minimal set of fields to enable software citation and author credit. I’m afraid I’ve managed to loose my note from this discussion but I believe we settled on the following (pulling field names from https://github.com/codemeta/codemeta/blob/master/crosswalk.csv):
AuthorId
SoftwareIdentifier
Version
We discussed the fact that Version might not always be available and that datePublished would be a worse-but-better-than-nothing-alternative.
Thoughts on this?
Issue Analytics
- State:
- Created 7 years ago
- Comments:21 (7 by maintainers)
Top Results From Across the Web
Top Related Medium Post
Top Related StackOverflow Question
Troubleshoot Live Code
Top Related Reddit Thread
Top Related Hackernoon Post
Top Related Tweet
Top Related Dev.to Post
Top Related Hashnode Post
This is a great thread, but I think the codemeta project should defer to the Software Citation Implementation group to advise on this issue: https://github.com/force11/force11-sciwg (Thanks @danielskatz @mfenner and others) . Deciding precisely what metadata fields must be associated with a use case seems beyond the scope of codemeta.
I don’t think we should be proscriptive; a DOI or other global identifier would be best; a github URI to a tagged release is probably next best, and then a github URI to a repo (which loses version info).