[PRE REVIEW]: TessPy: a python package for geographical tessellation

[editorialbot]

Submitting author: !--author-handle-->@siavash-saki<!--end-author-handle-- (Siavash Saki) Repository: https://github.com/siavash-saki/tesspy Branch with paper.md (empty if default branch): master Version: v0.0.3 Editor: Pending Reviewers: Pending Managing EiC: Kristen Thyng

Status

Status badge code:

HTML: <a href="https://joss.theoj.org/papers/d50e3e5b9bb892a3ee5cb91519e4ba12"><img src="https://joss.theoj.org/papers/d50e3e5b9bb892a3ee5cb91519e4ba12/status.svg"></a>
Markdown: [![status](https://joss.theoj.org/papers/d50e3e5b9bb892a3ee5cb91519e4ba12/status.svg)](https://joss.theoj.org/papers/d50e3e5b9bb892a3ee5cb91519e4ba12)

Author instructions

Thanks for submitting your paper to JOSS @siavash-saki. Currently, there isn't an JOSS editor assigned to your paper.

@siavash-saki if you have any suggestions for potential reviewers then please mention them here in this thread (without tagging them with an @). In addition, this list of people have already agreed to review for JOSS and may be suitable for this submission (please start at the bottom of the list).

Editor instructions

The JOSS submission bot @editorialbot is here to help you find and assign reviewers and start the main review. To find out what @editorialbot can do for you type:

@editorialbot commands

[editorialbot]

Hello human, I'm @editorialbot, a robot that can help you with some common editorial tasks.

For a list of things I can do to help you, just type:

@editorialbot commands

For example, to regenerate the paper pdf after making changes in the paper's md or bib files, type:

@editorialbot generate pdf

[editorialbot]

Couldn't check the bibtex because branch name is incorrect: https://github.com/siavash-saki/tesspy/tree/master/paper

[editorialbot]

Couldn't check the bibtex because branch name is incorrect: https://github.com/siavash-saki/tesspy/tree/master/paper

[editorialbot]

:warning: An error happened when generating the pdf.

[kthyng]

@editorialbot set master as branch

[editorialbot]

Done! branch is now master

[kthyng]

@editorialbot check repo

[editorialbot]

I'm sorry human, I don't understand that. You can see what commands I support by typing:

@editorialbot commands

[kthyng]

@editorialbot check repository

[editorialbot]

Software report:

github.com/AlDanial/cloc v 1.88  T=1.58 s (44.4 files/s, 111630.5 lines/s)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Language                     files          blank        comment           code
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
JSON                             3              0              0         141583
JavaScript                      13           2405           2470           9222
HTML                            19            885             57           8162
SVG                              1              0              0           2671
Python                           9            285            483            813
CSS                              4            191             35            759
Jupyter Notebook                 8              0           4798            584
Markdown                         3             66              0            149
TeX                              1              9              0            117
reStructuredText                 6             72             44             79
DOS Batch                        1              8              1             26
YAML                             1              1              4             18
make                             1              4              7              9
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SUM:                            70           3926           7899         164192
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

gitinspector failed to run statistical information for the repository

[editorialbot]

Wordcount for paper.md is 1018

[kthyng]

@editorialbot query scope

[editorialbot]

Submission flagged for editorial review.

[kthyng]

Hi @siavash-saki and thanks for your submission! I have pinged the editorial board to check it out to make sure it is in scope in terms of substantial scholarly effort. This will take 1-2 weeks. Thanks!

[danielskatz]

@editorialbot generate pdf

[editorialbot]

:warning: An error happened when generating the pdf.

[danielskatz]

@siavash-saki - where an author doesn't have an orcid, please remove the line from your paper. After you have done this, please use @editorialbot generate pdf to try to regenerate the pdf - editorialbot commands need to be the first line in a new comment

[danielskatz]

@editorialbot check references

[editorialbot]

Reference check summary (note 'MISSING' DOIs are suggestions that need verification):

OK DOIs

- 10.5281/zenodo.3483425 is OK

MISSING DOIs

- 10.1016/j.tra.2016.01.014 may be a valid DOI for title: Optimizing charging station locations for urban taxi providers
- 10.3390/rs12020229 may be a valid DOI for title: 3D Modeling of Discontinuity in the spatial distribution of apartment prices using voronoi diagrams
- 10.21105/joss.00215 may be a valid DOI for title: OSMnx: A Python package to work with graph-theoretic OpenStreetMap street networks
- 10.1080/10095020.2016.1146440 may be a valid DOI for title: Tessellations in GIS: Part I—putting it all together
- 10.1016/s0022-1694(00)00144-x may be a valid DOI for title: Geostatistical approaches for incorporating elevation into the spatial interpolation of rainfall
- 10.1016/j.compenvurbsys.2008.06.005 may be a valid DOI for title: Topology matters: Network topology affects outcomes from community ecology neutral models
- 10.1145/2030112.2030126 may be a valid DOI for title: Urban computing with taxicabs

INVALID DOIs

- None

[danielskatz]

In addition, you could work on the possibly missing DOIs that editorialbot suggests, but note that some may be incorrect. Please feel free to make changes to your .bib file, then use the command @editorialbot check references to check again, and the command @editorialbot generate pdf when the references are right to make a new PDF. editorialbot commands need to be the first entry in a new comment.

[siavash-saki]

@editorialbot generate pdf

[editorialbot]

:point_right::page_facing_up: Download article proof :page_facing_up: View article proof on GitHub :page_facing_up: :point_left:

[siavash-saki]

@danielskatz Thanks for the hints. I fixed the orcid and the DOIs.

[danielskatz]

@editorialbot check references

[editorialbot]

Reference check summary (note 'MISSING' DOIs are suggestions that need verification):

OK DOIs

- 10.1016/j.tra.2016.01.014 is OK
- 10.3390/rs12020229 is OK
- 10.21105/joss.00215 is OK
- 10.5281/zenodo.3483425 is OK
- 10.1080/10095020.2016.1146440 is OK
- 10.1016/s0022-1694(00)00144-x is OK
- 10.1016/j.compenvurbsys.2007.11.002 is OK
- 10.1145/2030112.2030126 is OK

MISSING DOIs

- None

INVALID DOIs

- None

[danielskatz]

👋 @siavash-saki - I'm sorry to say that after discussion amongst the JOSS editors, we have decided that this submission does not meet the substantial scholarly effort criterion for review by JOSS.

Some additional comments include

• The "statement of need does not tell me why I should use THIS package, only that tessellations are useful. As the author points out, this is inspired by momepy, so what does THIS package offer?
• The code is pretty straightforward and uses other libraries for the tessellations.

Please see https://joss.readthedocs.io/en/latest/submitting.html#other-venues-for-reviewing-and-publishing-software-packages for other suggestions for how you might receive credit for your work.

[danielskatz]

@whedon reject

[editorialbot]

My name is now @editorialbot

[danielskatz]

@editorialbot reject

[editorialbot]

Paper rejected.

[siavash-saki]

@danielskatz Thank you very much for reviewing the paper.

Is there any way to improve TessPy (based on your comments) so that you can reconsider it for JOSS?

[danielskatz]

Not beyond the comments already provided, and adding more to the software.

[siavash-saki]

@editorialbot check repository

[editorialbot]

Software report:

github.com/AlDanial/cloc v 1.88  T=1.04 s (68.5 files/s, 170779.4 lines/s)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Language                     files          blank        comment           code
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
JSON                             3              0              0         141583
JavaScript                      13           2405           2470           9222
HTML                            19            885             57           8162
SVG                              1              0              0           2671
Python                           9            379            517           1232
CSS                              4            191             35            759
Jupyter Notebook                 9              0           5203            620
Markdown                         3             63              0            153
TeX                              1             18              0            150
reStructuredText                 6             72             44             79
DOS Batch                        1              8              1             26
YAML                             1              1              4             18
make                             1              4              7              9
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SUM:                            71           4026           8338         164684
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

gitinspector failed to run statistical information for the repository

[editorialbot]

Wordcount for paper.md is 1110

[siavash-saki]

@editorialbot generate pdf

[editorialbot]

:point_right::page_facing_up: Download article proof :page_facing_up: View article proof on GitHub :page_facing_up: :point_left:

[siavash-saki]

@editorialbot check references

[editorialbot]

Reference check summary (note 'MISSING' DOIs are suggestions that need verification):

OK DOIs

- 10.1016/j.tra.2016.01.014 is OK
- 10.3390/rs12020229 is OK
- 10.21105/joss.00215 is OK
- 10.21105/joss.01807 is OK
- 10.48718/7jjr-1c66 is OK
- 10.5281/zenodo.3483425 is OK
- 10.1080/10095020.2016.1146440 is OK
- 10.1016/s0022-1694(00)00144-x is OK
- 10.1016/j.compenvurbsys.2007.11.002 is OK
- 10.1145/2030112.2030126 is OK

MISSING DOIs

- None

INVALID DOIs

- None

[siavash-saki]

@danielskatz Thank you and the editorial board for carefully reviewing our submission.

• In the last months, we worked on the TessPy package and added significantly to it.
• In addition, regarding the reviewers' comments, we significantly improved the paper:
  • The statement of need is now clarified and explains why and when TessPy is useful and how it is needed when starting many spatial analyses.
  • A short example of usage is added to demonstrate the application of TessPy.
  • Related packages, such as momepy, are mentioned and the difference is now clarified.

With this revision, we hope that the manuscript is now suitable for publication in JOSS.

Should I submit the paper again from scratch, or can we reopen this one again?

[danielskatz]

Please resubmit, and mention this issue when you do.

[siavash-saki]

@danielskatz Ok, great, Thanks!