[Esip-citationguidelines] [EXTERNAL] EOS article for discussion tomorrow

[Hampapuram Ramapriyan]

I have changed from “permission to comment “ to permission to edit”. Please feel free to edit as you wish or reject altogether!
Rama.

From: Hampapuram Ramapriyan
Sent: Friday, February 18, 2022 1:54 PM
To: Sarah Ramdeen <sarah.ramdeen at gmail.com>; Lesley Wyborn <lesley.wyborn at anu.edu.au>; Mark Parsons <parsonsm.work at icloud.com>; Daniel S. Katz <dskatz at illinois.edu>; Esip-citationguidelines <esip-citationguidelines at lists.esipfed.org>
Subject: RE: [Esip-citationguidelines] [EXTERNAL] EOS article for discussion tomorrow

Resending, cutting out large parts of earlier messages to reduce size from over 30 MB.
Rama.

From: Hampapuram Ramapriyan
Sent: Friday, February 18, 2022 1:48 PM
To: Sarah Ramdeen <sarah.ramdeen at gmail.com<mailto:sarah.ramdeen at gmail.com>>; Lesley Wyborn <lesley.wyborn at anu.edu.au<mailto:lesley.wyborn at anu.edu.au>>; Mark Parsons <parsonsm.work at icloud.com<mailto:parsonsm.work at icloud.com>>; Daniel S. Katz <dskatz at illinois.edu<mailto:dskatz at illinois.edu>>; Esip-citationguidelines <esip-citationguidelines at lists.esipfed.org<mailto:esip-citationguidelines at lists.esipfed.org>>
Subject: RE: [Esip-citationguidelines] [EXTERNAL] EOS article for discussion tomorrow

All,
I have taken a shot at a figure. All of you should have permission to comment. Here is the link - https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1cLY265_iM77zzlgW34WrRa7Wcv17_yfqL49JqX7tohg/edit#slide=id.p
Please let me know what you think. As I said, I am not a good artist, but I wanted to put down at least approximately what I had in mind.
Thanks.
Rama.

From: Sarah Ramdeen <sarah.ramdeen at gmail.com<mailto:sarah.ramdeen at gmail.com>>
Sent: Wednesday, February 16, 2022 10:30 AM
To: Hampapuram Ramapriyan <hampapuram.ramapriya at ssaihq.com<mailto:hampapuram.ramapriya at ssaihq.com>>
Cc: Lesley Wyborn <lesley.wyborn at anu.edu.au<mailto:lesley.wyborn at anu.edu.au>>; Mark Parsons <parsonsm.work at icloud.com<mailto:parsonsm.work at icloud.com>>; Daniel S. Katz <dskatz at illinois.edu<mailto:dskatz at illinois.edu>>; Esip-citationguidelines <esip-citationguidelines at lists.esipfed.org<mailto:esip-citationguidelines at lists.esipfed.org>>
Subject: Re: [Esip-citationguidelines] [EXTERNAL] EOS article for discussion tomorrow

Rama - a mixture of a flowchart and some images?  Do you mean for the entire project or just the narrowing of the original objects from 24 possible to 9 clusters, to 5/6 object types, to the current focus on data?

Brief timeline from reviewing the meeting notes (which might help scope what should be included).  As I was not part of this group from the beginning, I may be oversimplifying or missing some aspects, so grain of salt....

  *   ESIP created data citation guidelines<https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fdoi.org%2f10.6084%2fm9.figshare.8441816.v1&c=E,1,u9ag-BK7CKLTKdd6HQIsVeC5XwM7eT9P1L7wdp3C3PZjyYuO4vEYhiHYgeYTdLbg9iGHD44nhgnnqXWvfpZZhz36zN7GNogXXFC2AEfKw0ri9bc,&typo=1>
  *   In 2018 this group "recognized a need to update citation guidelines wrt to PIDs and Enabling FAIR project.. CODATA says: Citation = reference for credit and access. BUT, it’s also used for all kinds of other things (impact, provenance, evaluation etc) and is citation the way to do that?" (meeting notes<https://docs.google.com/document/d/18ooEixbchKp-qgAG7qtnebKrWDYsutt4d2eX3HsaWls/edit?usp=sharing>, page 39)

     *   "Central question(s): Can we define general guidelines for citation of all research objects? Do we need to separate credit and access? "

  *   Did some preliminary work with scenarios<https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Rh-M4WV9kqcxGWuYYC6R39cBaKxwoW9F3KS7y_sZpNw/edit?usp=sharing> and mapping metadata<https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1XCo1eVxyLarCjQsn2bkHvNd9zDFC3RLj-6zAZ1Fu6Jg/edit?usp=sharing> standards (for machines)
  *   Group really kicked off in 2019 - with plans to develop use case and object matrix (Credit/Different object types)

     *   Created a matrix with research objects and the roles needed for reproducibility (with at least 24 different objections/concepts)
     *   This was narrowed to 9 clusters of object types

  *   Mark presented a poster on the topic at AGU<https://docs.google.com/viewer?url=https://agu.confex.com/agu/fm19/mediafile/Handout/Paper612014/AGU%2520-%2520iPosterSessions.com.pdf>
  *   In 2020, began considerations on CRediT (meeting notes<https://docs.google.com/document/d/18ooEixbchKp-qgAG7qtnebKrWDYsutt4d2eX3HsaWls/edit?usp=sharing>, page 26)

     *   "Begin to work through the credit use case — how do the CRedIT, ISO and other attribution descriptions apply to the different research artifacts?"

  *   Work begins to narrow to 5/6 object types (Data, Software, Physical Artifacts/Samples, Semantics, and Instruments [instruments sometimes switched with Education Objects])
  *   Activities/evidence begins to indicate CRediT doesn't work

     *   Identifying activities from object types for each CRediT role
     *   Determining where the role would be cited (citations, acknowledgements, other documentation/metadata)
     *   Ranking each role as important or not to this community

  *   Given the amount of work needed, decide to focus on one object type - Data
  *   Inspiration for paper - based on the growing support for CRediT and its lack of fit for our world, what is the next step, where do we want to go next?
Thanks!
Sarah

On Wed, Feb 16, 2022 at 8:08 AM Hampapuram Ramapriyan via Esip-citationguidelines <esip-citationguidelines at lists.esipfed.org<mailto:esip-citationguidelines at lists.esipfed.org>> wrote:
Yes – I would like it to be a flow diagram that shows the process we used to narrow down our considerations to data as the research artifact and authorship as the focus. I can’t claim artistic proficiency though.
Rama.


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.esipfed.org/pipermail/esip-citationguidelines/attachments/20220221/1aded91d/attachment-0001.htm>