[Esip-preserve] data citation guidelines for ESIP approval

[Mark A. Parsons]

Yeah, I would prefer that too, but I couldn't find a correct example for every case. So to be consistent I stayed fictional. We do include a real example in the intro.

Cheers,

-m. 


On 29 Dec 2011, at 7:28 AM, Lenhardt, W. Christopher wrote:

> Maybe you considered this and rejected already, but what about using 'real world' examples of data citations?  I remember in Turabian's guide to citations I found the real examples, much more illustrative.
> 
> We do have data citations out there!
> 
> --Chris
> 
> On Dec 29, 2011, at 8:32 AM, Mark A. Parsons wrote:
> 
> I called the FOO agency's data center. FUBAR is a different acronym :-)
> 
> -m.
> 
> Sent from my iPad. Pardon my brevity.
> 
> On Dec 29, 2011, at 6:13 AM, "Lynnes, Christopher S. (GSFC-6102)" <christopher.s.lynnes at nasa.gov<mailto:christopher.s.lynnes at nasa.gov>> wrote:
> 
> If you are looking to distinguish between the agency and the data center, then FUU may confuse the issue:  most of us geeks expect to complete the series "Foo, …" with "Bar".  "FUU" thus looks like an attempt to say "this entity is just a very slightly different manifestation of FOO".
> 
> On Dec 28, 2011, at 6:38 PM, Ruth Duerr wrote:
> 
> Hi Mark,
> 
> The updates look pretty good.  I do have two suggestions though:
> 
> - In citation in the Archive and/or Distributor section the phrase "The FOO Agency FOO Data Center" on first glance looks strange, as if two concepts were being strung together.  Perhaps it should be something like "The FOO Agencies' FUU Data Center" to make the relationship more clear? Or perhaps a real example like NASA's NSIDC DAAC or something?
> -  Lastly, on the last line of the page it says "UUIDs, or other locators" - UUIDs are not locators they are actual identifiers.  I agree that there are good reasons for having both universally unique identifiers as well as unique locators at the file level (despite the effort required to maintain the locators - something that actual identifiers do not require); but I think we need to be careful to distinguish the two in the text.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Ruth
> 
> On Dec 28, 2011, at 3:39 PM, Mark A. Parsons wrote:
> 
> Hi all,
> 
> The plan is for the ESIP Assembly to vote on the adoption of the data citation guidelines next week after Curt and/or I introduce them (I'll have a poster too).
> 
> I have made what I hope is a final revision based on the National Academy workshop I attended last summer and the new DCC guidelines. The new DCC guidelines are the best out there to date, although I don't fully agree with everything. It is well referenced and they kind of scooped us, but I think our guidelines are more specific to Earth science and are alo more specifically aapplicable.
> 
> Anyway, give them one last look to make sure their OK, and I hope they are approved next week.
> http://wiki.esipfed.org/index.php/Interagency_Data_Stewardship/Citations/provider_guidelines
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> -m.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Esip-preserve mailing list
> Esip-preserve at lists.esipfed.org<mailto:Esip-preserve at lists.esipfed.org>
> http://www.lists.esipfed.org/mailman/listinfo/esip-preserve
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Esip-preserve mailing list
> Esip-preserve at lists.esipfed.org<mailto:Esip-preserve at lists.esipfed.org>
> http://www.lists.esipfed.org/mailman/listinfo/esip-preserve
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Esip-preserve mailing list
> Esip-preserve at lists.esipfed.org<mailto:Esip-preserve at lists.esipfed.org>
> http://www.lists.esipfed.org/mailman/listinfo/esip-preserve