Information about how to cite PeriodO

[rybesh]

Somewhere—not sure where—we should provide some information about how we would like PeriodO to be cited, if someone uses our data. Right now all we have is this in our VoID file (which is hardly discoverable):

To the extent allowed by law, the contributors have dedicated the PeriodO dataset to the public domain by waiving all of their rights to the work worldwide under copyright law, including all related and neighboring rights. You can copy, modify, and distribute this dataset, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission. However, if you desire our respect and cooperation, then you will clearly attribute your use of our work and share your own work in kind (even though you are not required to in any way).

However we don't actually say how to “clearly attribute your use of our work”.

[ptgolden]

I'll make an 'About' page where this can go

[ptgolden]

And it could possibly be generated by the void file that's part of the server

[ptgolden]

@atomrab I'm going to include the following language:

To cite a period contained in PeriodO, you should cite the original authority in which that period is published. To cite PeriodO as a whole, please cite the following publication: ...

What paper should I say to cite? https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110607208-016 or https://doi.org/10.1007/s00799-015-0164-0 seem like the best candidates.

[atomrab]

There is also https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2041-5370.2016.12037.x, which is less technically detailed but perhaps more accessible to the non-info-science crowd. But this and the other two are really about the project, rather than the dataset. What do you do if you want to cite the PeriodO representation of a period? Cite the original authority but also provide a link to PeriodO, "as represented at nt2.net/XXXX"? There are editorial notes and other local idiosyncrasies that I can imagine people wanting to cite.

[rybesh]

How about:

To cite a period found in PeriodO, you should cite the original source authority that defined the period:

Library of Congress Subject Headings, LC Linked Data Service, s.v. “China--History--Rebellion of the Three Feudatories, 1673-1681,” accessed July 20, 2020, http://id.loc.gov/authorities/subjects/sh95008524.html.

If you wish to credit PeriodO for helping you find the period's original source:

Library of Congress Subject Headings, LC Linked Data Service, s.v. “China--History--Rebellion of the Three Feudatories, 1673-1681,” http://id.loc.gov/authorities/subjects/sh95008524.html, found in PeriodO, s.v. “Rebellion of the Three Feudatories, 1673-1681,” accessed July 15, 2020, http://n2t.net/ark:/99152/p06c6g3hq7j.

To cite an editorial note added to an period by PeriodO curators, use the permalink for the period:

PeriodO, s.v. “Rebellion of the Three Feudatories, 1673-1681,” accessed July 15, 2020, http://n2t.net/ark:/99152/p06c6g3hq7j.

To cite an editorial note added to an authority by PeriodO curators, use the permalink for the authority:

PeriodO, s.v. “Library of Congress. Library of Congress Subject Headings. 2015.” accessed July 15, 2020, http://n2t.net/ark:/99152/p06c6g3.

To cite the PeriodO dataset as a whole, use the permalink for the dataset:

PeriodO: a gazetteer of periods for linking and visualizing data, accessed July 15, 2020, http://n2t.net/ark:/99152/p0.

Finally, if you wish to cite the PeriodO project please cite one of our publications, ideally one that is open access:

Rabinowitz, Adam, Ryan Shaw, Sarah Buchanan, Patrick Golden, and Eric Kansa. “Making Sense of the Ways We Make Sense of the Past: The Periodo Project.” Bulletin of the Institute of Classical Studies 59, no. 2 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2041-5370.2016.12037.x.

[atomrab]

This looks very good to me. I don't suppose we have headers in the new client that Zotero can read? Otherwise, we're good to go.

[rybesh]

We don't, but that would be cool. What do you think @ptgolden ?

[ptgolden]

Thanks Ryan, that's great.

I could figure out a way to embed metadata for Zotero (https://www.zotero.org/support/dev/exposing_metadata#using_an_open_standard_for_exposing_metadata)

[ptgolden]

However, what would we embed? It would be pretty trivial to embed the latter uses cases as web pages (our editorial notes or our dataset), but the first two would be more difficult. We could do the first case (a period in an authority) to some extent by modeling it as an encyclopedia entry. In the second case, though, there's no "found in" field in Zotero. We could add that to the "extra" field, but there's no way to get it to show up in a citation.

My concern is that we might be nudging people to do what you suggest for citing the editorial note rather than citing the period in the original source when they add to Zotero the "period from PeriodO".

[atomrab]

Yeah, I suppose that's true. Let's table this for now.

On Thu, Jul 16, 2020 at 12:08 PM Patrick Golden notifications@github.com wrote:

However, what would we embed? It would be pretty trivial to embed the latter uses cases as web pages (our editorial notes or our dataset), but the first two would be more difficult. We could do the first case (a period in an authority) to some extent by modeling it as an encyclopedia entry. In the second case, though, there's no "found in" field in Zotero. We could add that to the "extra" field, but there's no way to get it to show up in a citation.

My concern is that we might be nudging people to do what you suggest for citing the editorial note rather than citing the period in the original source when they add to Zotero the "period from PeriodO".

— You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/periodo/periodo-client/issues/157#issuecomment-659547137, or unsubscribe https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ABEFPA36PEPNH4ZXPJ7FMATR34XXBANCNFSM4FBVMDNQ .