[REVIEW]: osrm: Interface Between R and the OpenStreetMap-Based Routing Service OSRM

editorialbot commented 2 years ago

Submitting author: !--author-handle-->@rCarto@elbeejay<!--end-editor-- Reviewers: @JosiahParry, @mikemahoney218, @wcjochem Archive: 10.5281/zenodo.7228376

Status

Status badge code:

HTML: <a href="https://joss.theoj.org/papers/66682b47d145b791fe2e8aa292b84cc2"><img src="https://joss.theoj.org/papers/66682b47d145b791fe2e8aa292b84cc2/status.svg"></a>
Markdown: [![status](https://joss.theoj.org/papers/66682b47d145b791fe2e8aa292b84cc2/status.svg)](https://joss.theoj.org/papers/66682b47d145b791fe2e8aa292b84cc2)

Reviewers and authors:

Please avoid lengthy details of difficulties in the review thread. Instead, please create a new issue in the target repository and link to those issues (especially acceptance-blockers) by leaving comments in the review thread below. (For completists: if the target issue tracker is also on GitHub, linking the review thread in the issue or vice versa will create corresponding breadcrumb trails in the link target.)

Reviewer instructions & questions

@JosiahParry & @mikemahoney218, your review will be checklist based. Each of you will have a separate checklist that you should update when carrying out your review. First of all you need to run this command in a separate comment to create the checklist:

@editorialbot generate my checklist

The reviewer guidelines are available here: https://joss.readthedocs.io/en/latest/reviewer_guidelines.html. Any questions/concerns please let @elbeejay know.

✨ Please start on your review when you are able, and be sure to complete your review in the next six weeks, at the very latest ✨

Checklists

📝 Checklist for @JosiahParry

📝 Checklist for @mikemahoney218

📝 Checklist for @wcjochem

rCarto commented 2 years ago

Hi @JosiahParry , I've added a short definition of isochrones in README, paper and function doc. I understand that these definitions could be useful to non-specialists but I won't go further, isochrone maps are quite standard objects in analyses using travel times. I've also addressed the error handling issues you raised.

JosiahParry commented 2 years ago

Checklist complete.

elbeejay commented 2 years ago

Big thanks to our reviewers @JosiahParry, @mikemahoney218, @wcjochem for providing thoughtful and constructive review comments to this submission. @rCarto has been able to make revisions in response to those reviews, and I think we've achieved some consensus on the final state of the code and manuscript. So again, thank you to our reviewers; this process obviously doesn't exist without you.

@rCarto there are a few more steps we will go through before we can get osrm published. First, I will be having the bot check the references in the paper, then I will go through the paper and software once myself to see if there are any typos and things that slipped through the review process. Once that is done I will ping you and ask you to complete a few small tasks (archiving and getting a DOI) so that we can proceed to publication.

elbeejay commented 2 years ago

@editorialbot generate pdf

elbeejay commented 2 years ago

@editorialbot check references

editorialbot commented 2 years ago

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

editorialbot commented 2 years ago

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

OK DOIs

- 10.1145/2093973.2094062 is OK
- 10.1111/cobi.13326 is OK
- 10.1080/00131881.2017.1339285 is OK
- 10.1080/23754931.2021.1895875 is OK
- 10.1016/j.simpat.2022.102526 is OK
- 10.14295/transportes.v29i2.2385 is OK
- 10.2373/1864-810X.21-04-05 is OK
- 10.1080/23754931.2018.1519458 is OK
- 10.5604/01.3001.0014.5601 is OK
- 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2018.10.008 is OK
- 10.1108/IJHMA-02-2018-0017 is OK
- 10.3390/ijerph18073813 is OK
- 10.1016/j.trd.2021.102964 is OK
- 10.1038/s41598-022-09919-x is OK
- 10.3390/ijgi8090400 is OK
- 10.1007/s41060-022-00328-x is OK
- 10.1016/j.ajo.2020.08.038 is OK
- 10.1177/23998083211040519 is OK
- 10.1016/j.ufug.2021.127097 is OK
- 10.32614/RJ-2018-053 is OK
- 10.21105/joss.01926 is OK

MISSING DOIs

- None

INVALID DOIs

- None

elbeejay commented 2 years ago

@rCarto after looking through the package and paper once more, I have a few suggestions:

Delete stale branches in repository "mapiso" and "nearest"
Line 22: I suggest replacing the word "fitted" with "suited"
Line 25: I believe "interfaces" should be the singular "interface" here
Line 48: I would add a clause, something like "uses OSRM, however it exposes"
Line 50: I believe it should be "to give access" and then "and handle spatial" in the next line
Line 54: Consider "shipped with the package, and contains a sample of" rather than "it is" as written
Line 79: You can drop "through it" and have the sentence read "The route is 12.3 kilometers long and takes 21.1 minutes to drive."
I apologize for not noting this earlier, but it would be good to have captions for each figure that provide a brief description of its contents. I realize they are described in the text and the code to produce them is immediately above each figure, but I think it may help readability and allow someone to quickly peruse the figures of the paper and know what they are looking it.

Let me know if you have any questions, feel free to implement any of these suggestions (or none of them). Just let me know when you are finished making any final changes and I will let you know what the next steps are.

rCarto commented 2 years ago

@elbeejay , I've modified the paper following your suggestions. All is ok on my side, I'll wait for your instructions.

@elbeejay , @wcjochem , @JosiahParry and @mikemahoney218 Your careful reading of the paper/doc/code and your precise suggestions helped me raise the package to a much higher quality level. So, thank you very much for your work on this review!

elbeejay commented 2 years ago

Great, thanks for making those changes. At this time, @rCarto if you could do the following:

[x] Make a tagged release of your software, and list the version tag of the archived version here.
[x] Archive the reviewed software in Zenodo or a similar service (e.g., figshare, an institutional repository)
[x] Check the archival deposit (e.g., in Zenodo) has the correct metadata. This includes the title (should match the paper title) and author list (make sure the list is correct and people who only made a small fix are not on it). You may also add the authors' ORCID.
[x] Please list the DOI of the archived version here.
[x] Release the revised software on CRAN (last release was quite a while ago, would be nice to have a CRAN release associated with the JOSS version)

Then we will have the metadata and archiving all set, and I'll be able to recommend this for publication in JOSS. Thanks!

rCarto commented 2 years ago

[x] Tagged release of osrm on GitHub: v4.0.0 - https://github.com/riatelab/osrm/releases/tag/v4.0.0
[x] DOI of the archived version on Zenodo: 10.5281/zenodo.7228376 -
[x] CRAN Release: https://cran.r-project.org/package=osrm

elbeejay commented 2 years ago

@editorialbot set v4.0.0 as version

editorialbot commented 2 years ago

Done! version is now v4.0.0

elbeejay commented 2 years ago

@editorialbot set 10.5281/zenodo.7228376 as archive

editorialbot commented 2 years ago

Done! Archive is now 10.5281/zenodo.7228376

elbeejay commented 2 years ago

Looks good @rCarto. Thanks again to @JosiahParry, @mikemahoney218, @wcjochem for taking the time to provide their reviews. At this time I will be recommending that we accept and publish this submission in JOSS. The paper and metadata will be looked over once by an Editor-in-Chief prior to publication.

elbeejay commented 2 years ago

@editorialbot recommend-accept

editorialbot commented 2 years ago

Attempting dry run of processing paper acceptance...

editorialbot commented 2 years ago

:wave: @openjournals/ese-eics, this paper is ready to be accepted and published.

Check final proof :point_right::page_facing_up: Download article

If the paper PDF and the deposit XML files look good in https://github.com/openjournals/joss-papers/pull/3637, then you can now move forward with accepting the submission by compiling again with the command @editorialbot accept

editorialbot commented 2 years ago

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

OK DOIs

- 10.1145/2093973.2094062 is OK
- 10.1111/cobi.13326 is OK
- 10.1080/00131881.2017.1339285 is OK
- 10.1080/23754931.2021.1895875 is OK
- 10.1016/j.simpat.2022.102526 is OK
- 10.14295/transportes.v29i2.2385 is OK
- 10.2373/1864-810X.21-04-05 is OK
- 10.1080/23754931.2018.1519458 is OK
- 10.5604/01.3001.0014.5601 is OK
- 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2018.10.008 is OK
- 10.1108/IJHMA-02-2018-0017 is OK
- 10.3390/ijerph18073813 is OK
- 10.1016/j.trd.2021.102964 is OK
- 10.1038/s41598-022-09919-x is OK
- 10.3390/ijgi8090400 is OK
- 10.1007/s41060-022-00328-x is OK
- 10.1016/j.ajo.2020.08.038 is OK
- 10.1177/23998083211040519 is OK
- 10.1016/j.ufug.2021.127097 is OK
- 10.32614/RJ-2018-053 is OK
- 10.21105/joss.01926 is OK

MISSING DOIs

- None

INVALID DOIs

- None

kthyng commented 1 year ago

Hi @rCarto! Things are looking ready to go except — please go through your references and fix up the capitalization. For example, "r" is not capitalized several places, but please go through each carefully to be sure they all look perfect.

kthyng commented 1 year ago

oh and you can preserve capitalization in your .bib file with {} around characters/strings.

rCarto commented 1 year ago

@editorialbot generate pdf

editorialbot commented 1 year ago

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

rCarto commented 1 year ago

Hello @kthyng , I think references are fixed now.

kthyng commented 1 year ago

Ok looks good!

kthyng commented 1 year ago

@editorialbot accept

editorialbot commented 1 year ago

Doing it live! Attempting automated processing of paper acceptance...

editorialbot commented 1 year ago

🐦🐦🐦 👉 Tweet for this paper 👈 🐦🐦🐦

editorialbot commented 1 year ago

🚨🚨🚨 THIS IS NOT A DRILL, YOU HAVE JUST ACCEPTED A PAPER INTO JOSS! 🚨🚨🚨

Here's what you must now do:

Check final PDF and Crossref metadata that was deposited :point_right: https://github.com/openjournals/joss-papers/pull/3654
Wait a couple of minutes, then verify that the paper DOI resolves https://doi.org/10.21105/joss.04574
If everything looks good, then close this review issue.
Party like you just published a paper! 🎉🌈🦄💃👻🤘

Any issues? Notify your editorial technical team...

kthyng commented 1 year ago

Congratulations on your new publication @rCarto! Many thanks to editor @elbeejay and reviewers @JosiahParry, @mikemahoney218, and @wcjochem for your time, hard work, and expertise!!

editorialbot commented 1 year ago

:tada::tada::tada: Congratulations on your paper acceptance! :tada::tada::tada:

If you would like to include a link to your paper from your README use the following code snippets:

Markdown:
[![DOI](https://joss.theoj.org/papers/10.21105/joss.04574/status.svg)](https://doi.org/10.21105/joss.04574)

HTML:
<a style="border-width:0" href="https://doi.org/10.21105/joss.04574">
  <img src="https://joss.theoj.org/papers/10.21105/joss.04574/status.svg" alt="DOI badge" >
</a>

reStructuredText:
.. image:: https://joss.theoj.org/papers/10.21105/joss.04574/status.svg
   :target: https://doi.org/10.21105/joss.04574

This is how it will look in your documentation:

We need your help!

The Journal of Open Source Software is a community-run journal and relies upon volunteer effort. If you'd like to support us please consider doing either one (or both) of the the following:

Volunteering to review for us sometime in the future. You can add your name to the reviewer list here: https://joss.theoj.org/reviewer-signup.html
Making a small donation to support our running costs here: https://numfocus.org/donate-to-joss

mikemahoney218 commented 1 year ago

Congrats @rCarto !

rCarto commented 1 year ago

Thank you very much to editors and reviewers. This was a very pleasant process.

openjournals / joss-reviews