[esip-semantictech] [Esip-citationguidelines] SWEET citation

[Hampapuram Ramapriyan]

Looks good to me.

 

From: Esip-citationguidelines [mailto:esip-citationguidelines-bounces at lists.esipfed.org] On Behalf Of Ruth Duerr via Esip-citationguidelines
Sent: Thursday, June 27, 2019 4:05 PM
To: esip-semanticweb; Esip-citationguidelines
Subject: [Esip-citationguidelines] SWEET citation

 

Hi all,

 

Believe it or not I need to cite the SWEET ontology.  Here is the only recommendation I’ve found for citing an ontology (in Dutta, B. (2018). Theoretical analysis and propositions for “ontology citation.” In Proc. of the Int. Conf. on Exploring the Horizons of Library and Information Sciences: From Libraries to Knowledge Hubs, 7-9 August, 2018 Bangalore, India, pp. 451-458. ISBN 978-93-5311-726-9. Available at https://arxiv.org/pdf/1809.01462):

 

Table 1. The proposed template for referring an ontology

 

Creator. (Date). Acronym: full name of the ontology. Version(revision), URI [Ontology file format] 

Where,

·  Creator refers to the main authors of an ontology (and not the contributors). In the

case of ontology, it is often the case that besides the creators, there are people who contribute to the ontology in various forms (e.g., participate in the meetings, gives feedback, evaluate the ontology, point to the possible bugs in an ontology, create/assist in preparing the ontology documentation, etc.). We suggest mentioning only the author names. All the author names should be provided. It is suggested to render the author name(s) in the form of surname, first name. In case of unavailability of any personal author name, provide the group name, i.e. the name of the organization (or institution) produced the ontology.

·  The Date is the date of publication (release date) of an ontology. It is suggested to provide the complete date of publication of a particular version of an ontology. The suggested date format is YYYY-MM-DD.

·  The name of an ontology. The name of an ontology may consist of two parts: acronym and full name of an ontology. In the case of ontology, the use of the acronym is very common. Most of the ontologies are known by their acronym (e.g., SUMO for Suggested Upper Merged Ontology, DOLCE for Descriptive Ontology for Linguistic and Cognitive Engineering, BFO for Basic Formal Ontology, MOD for Metadata for Ontology Description and publication). Following the acronym, provide the full name of the ontology. As indicated above, the acronym and the full name of an ontology should be separated by a colon “:”.

·  Version(revision) is an important information for providing access to a particular version of an ontology. An ontology goes through several revisions and editions, time to time gets updated. As indicated, the version number should be mentioned first and following this, the revision number (if any) of an ontology should be provided within a circular bracket “()”.

·  URI, the URI of an ontology, preferably the URI pointing to an ontology file. However, in case of availability of an ontology in multiple file formats, it is suggested to provide the base URI of the ontology.

·  Ontology file format. Provide the file formats within the square bracket “[]”. Also, use commas “,” to separate the multiple file formats (e.g., [rdf/xml, owl/xml, obo, n3]).
Example:

 

 

 

 

That would make the SWEET citation something like:

 

Raskin, Rob. (2002?). SWEET: Semantic Web for Earth and Environmental Terminology. 2 (3.0), https://github.com/ESIPFed/sweet [ttl]

 

Does that seem fine to everyone?  

 

Ruth



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.esipfed.org/pipermail/esip-semanticweb/attachments/20190627/7d3d290d/attachment-0001.htm>