[Esip-preserve] How to cite the works of the committee
Robert R. Downs
rdowns at ciesin.columbia.edu
Fri Aug 31 12:11:45 EDT 2012
Either way is fine by me as well.
Thanks,
Bob
On 8/31/2012 12:10 PM, Curt Tilmes wrote:
> I'm fine with it either way.
>
> Curt
>
> On 8/31/12 11:22 AM, Mark A. Parsons wrote:
>> I don't mind sharing the love :-) It was a group effort. I may have
>> put most of the words on the wiki, but there was a lot of discussion
>> and ideas flying around both online and off.
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> -m.
>> On 31 Aug 2012, at 9:13 AM, Curt Tilmes wrote:
>>
>>> I was really suggesting "edited by M.A. Parsons." for the citations
>>> -- others contributed (mostly you), but you were really the editor.
>>>
>>> For the guidelines, I think of Rama/Ruth as the editors. (though
>>> as you note -- they are really the authors..)
>>>
>>> Curt
>>>
>>> On 8/31/12 10:40 AM, Mark A. Parsons wrote:
>>>> OK, balancing the credit and authority thing, editors may be the
>>>> way to go. I definitely wrote the document not just edited, but
>>>> that is a nice balance. So as a final proposal I suggest:
>>>>
>>>> Federation of Earth Science Information Partners (ESIP). 2012.
>>>> Data Citation Guidelines for Data Providers and Archives. edited by
>>>> M. A. Parsons, B. Barkstrom, R. Downs, R. Duerr, C. Tilmes and the
>>>> ESIP Data Preservation and Stewardship Committee. ESIP Commons.
>>>> [DOI or ARK].
>>>>
>>>> Federation of Earth Science Information Partners (ESIP). 2012.
>>>> Interagency Data Stewardship Guidelines . edited by H. K.
>>>> Ramapriyan, R. Duerr, and the ESIP Data Preservation and
>>>> Stewardship Committee. 2012. ESIP Commons. [DOI or ARK].
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> How's that?
>>>>
>>>> Cheers,
>>>>
>>>> -m.
>>>> On 31 Aug 2012, at 8:02 AM, Curt Tilmes wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Even with ESIP as the author, the formal citation could note
>>>>> editor(s) by name..
>>>>>
>>>>> Curt
>>>>>
>>>>> On 8/31/12 9:45 AM, Mark A. Parsons wrote:
>>>>>> Yeah that's a good third option. ESIP as the author with
>>>>>> acknowledgements of the committee and individuals. The Committee
>>>>>> is responsible for maintaining the documents.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -m.
>>>>>> On 31 Aug 2012, at 7:16 AM, Kenneth S. Casey wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Mark -
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> When a document is written by a committee, but discussed and
>>>>>>> approved by an entire organization, shouldn't it have the entire
>>>>>>> organization as the author? Wouldn't it have more impact that
>>>>>>> way? When AGU, for example, publishes a position statement, who
>>>>>>> is listed as the author? I can't say I know for certain but I
>>>>>>> think it is the whole organization "AGU" not the writing
>>>>>>> committee or the chair/most active players of the writing
>>>>>>> committee. In this case it would be ESIP, I would think.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> With that said, I've certainly seen it done the other way (the
>>>>>>> way proposed below) so I don't have any heartache here... just
>>>>>>> wanted to get that thought out there for consideration.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Ken
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Aug 31, 2012, at 8:04 AM, Mark A. Parsons wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I followed Bob's suggestion and reviewed the change log and the
>>>>>>>> email traffic. Parsons, Barkstrom, Downs, Duerr, and Tilmes.
>>>>>>>> were the main players.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Do y'all want to be listed as authors (in that order plus the
>>>>>>>> committee) or should we just use the Committee as the author
>>>>>>>> and include an acknowledgments section that says something like:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> These guidelines were the results of broad community discussion
>>>>>>>> and input. Major contributors were Mark Parsons, National Snow
>>>>>>>> and Ice Data Center (NSIDC); Bruce Barkstrom, unaffiliated;
>>>>>>>> Robert Downs, Center for International Earth Science
>>>>>>>> Information Network (CIESIN); Ruth Duerr, NSIDC; and Curt
>>>>>>>> Tilmes, NASA Goddard Space Flight Center.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I will defer to Rama and others on the stewarship guidelines. I
>>>>>>>> only had a reviewing and advising role on that one.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> -m.
>>>>>>>> On 30 Aug 2012, at 2:49 PM, Robert R. Downs wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Mark -
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> If the committee becomes the designated author, a common way
>>>>>>>>> to provide attribution for individual contributions to a
>>>>>>>>> document that designates a fluid committee as the author is to
>>>>>>>>> include the names and affiliations of contributors in an
>>>>>>>>> acknowledgement section. If that approach is taken, most of
>>>>>>>>> the contributors could be identified from the revision history
>>>>>>>>> of the wiki and from the email trail. Similarly, most of those
>>>>>>>>> individuals' affiliations, at the time of their contributions,
>>>>>>>>> might be found in their email addresses. When listing
>>>>>>>>> contributors, it also is common to ask each if she or he wants
>>>>>>>>> to be included on the list as some may prefer to contribute
>>>>>>>>> anonymously.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Bob
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 8/30/2012 4:00 PM, Mark A. Parsons wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> Good idea, Bob. Not all contributors made direct edits,
>>>>>>>>>> though. For example, Bruce Barkstrom, had lots of input on
>>>>>>>>>> the mailing list, but I don't think he made many direct
>>>>>>>>>> edits. There were also valuable comments form the community
>>>>>>>>>> (including yourself) during the review that I incorporated.
>>>>>>>>>> It's always difficult to sort out authorship after the fact.
>>>>>>>>>> I guess I lean to making the committee the author.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> -m.
>>>>>>>>>> On 30 Aug 2012, at 1:24 PM, Mark A. Parsons wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Dear ESIP Preservationists and Stewards,
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Our committee has published two documents on the new ESIP
>>>>>>>>>>> commons:
>>>>>>>>>>> - Data Citation Guidelines for Data Providers and Archives
>>>>>>>>>>> - Interagency Data Stewardship Guidelines
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> The question now is to how to cite documents. In particular,
>>>>>>>>>>> who should have the credit and accountability of authorship?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Since both documents have been approved by the ESIP
>>>>>>>>>>> assembly, we could just use ESIP as the author. That's vague
>>>>>>>>>>> but sounds authoritative. We could be more specific and use
>>>>>>>>>>> the Preservation and Stewardship Committee, but the
>>>>>>>>>>> membership is fluid so that's not particularly specific.
>>>>>>>>>>> With both documents, I think there was a clear lead author
>>>>>>>>>>> or two so one could use a name or two plus the committee.
>>>>>>>>>>> For example, we might have something like:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Ramapriyan, H. K. and the ESIP Data Preservation and
>>>>>>>>>>> Stewardship Committee. 2012. Interagency Data Stewardship
>>>>>>>>>>> Guidelines . ESIP Commons. [DOI or ARK].
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> or
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Parsons, M.A., R. Duerr, C. Tilmes and the ESIP Data
>>>>>>>>>>> Preservation and Stewardship Committee. 2012. Data Citation
>>>>>>>>>>> Guidelines for Data Providers and Archives. ESIP Commons.
>>>>>>>>>>> [DOI or ARK].
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> From a credit and general authority perspective I don't
>>>>>>>>>>>> like naming specific individuals, but there's value in
>>>>>>>>>>>> being specific from an accountability perspective. Plus it
>>>>>>>>>>>> will always be tricky to decide who exactly should be
>>>>>>>>>>>> named. The citation guidelines, for example, were
>>>>>>>>>>>> definitely a group effort.
>>>>>>>>>>> Thoughts?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> -m.
>>>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>>>> Esip-preserve mailing list
>>>>>>>>>>> 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
>>>>>>>>>> http://www.lists.esipfed.org/mailman/listinfo/esip-preserve
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>> Esip-preserve mailing list
>>>>>>>>> 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
>>>>>>>> http://www.lists.esipfed.org/mailman/listinfo/esip-preserve
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> [NOTE: The opinions expressed in this email are those of the
>>>>>>> author alone and do not necessarily reflect official NOAA,
>>>>>>> Department of Commerce, or US government policy.]
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Kenneth S. Casey, Ph.D.
>>>>>>> Technical Director
>>>>>>> NOAA National Oceanographic Data Center
>>>>>>> 1315 East-West Highway
>>>>>>> Silver Spring MD 20910
>>>>>>> 301-713-3272 ext 133
>>>>>>> http://www.nodc.noaa.gov/
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> <facebook.png><RSS.png>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> Esip-preserve mailing list
>>>>>> Esip-preserve at lists.esipfed.org
>>>>>> http://www.lists.esipfed.org/mailman/listinfo/esip-preserve
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Curt Tilmes, Ph.D.
>>>>> U.S. Global Change Research Program
>>>>> 1717 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Suite 250
>>>>> Washington, D.C. 20006, USA
>>>>>
>>>>> +1 202-419-3479 (office)
>>>>> +1 443-987-6228 (cell)
>>>>> globalchange.gov
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Esip-preserve mailing list
>>>>> Esip-preserve at lists.esipfed.org
>>>>> http://www.lists.esipfed.org/mailman/listinfo/esip-preserve
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Curt Tilmes, Ph.D.
>>> U.S. Global Change Research Program
>>> 1717 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Suite 250
>>> Washington, D.C. 20006, USA
>>>
>>> +1 202-419-3479 (office)
>>> +1 443-987-6228 (cell)
>>> globalchange.gov
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Esip-preserve mailing list
>>> Esip-preserve at lists.esipfed.org
>>> http://www.lists.esipfed.org/mailman/listinfo/esip-preserve
>>
>
>
More information about the Esip-preserve
mailing list