Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

resourceTypeGeneral — DataCite Metadata Schema 4.5 documentation #5

Open
utterances-bot opened this issue Aug 24, 2022 · 13 comments
Open

Comments

@utterances-bot
Copy link

resourceTypeGeneral — DataCite Metadata Schema 4.5 documentation

https://datacite-metadata-schema.readthedocs.io/en/4.4/appendices/appendix_1/resourceTypeGeneral.html

Copy link

wendycr commented Aug 24, 2022

Our definition of book is for a physical object but in our context it will primarily be electronic. Should we revise the definition?

Copy link

wendycr commented Aug 24, 2022

some examples are code and others are links (from 4.4). Is there any reason for this? Should this be consistent or is there a logic for the difference?

Copy link

wendycr commented Aug 24, 2022

Should Dublin Core mapping for instrument be PhysicalObject rather than NA? It has the inanimate problem in the definition

Copy link

wendycr commented Aug 24, 2022

OutputManagementPlan - Examples and Usage Notes: Includes data, software, and Text materials -- The word Text was accidentally included in this

Copy link

wendycr commented Aug 24, 2022

PeerReview has both code and a link which means the layout seems a little inconsistent

Copy link

wendycr commented Aug 24, 2022

consider looking for a different example for Text - to me it looks like book (has an ISBN)

Copy link

Thank you @wendycr, I would also speak in favor of having at least one example per type in code.

Copy link

There seems to be a blank space in front of the resourceType "Research Paper" in the Preprint example.

Copy link

Should a master thesis read as follows?:
Master thesis
Or should it be defined as text?:
Master thesis
Perhaps, it would be worth considering to rename the resourceTypeGeneral "Dissertation" to "Academic thesis"? Then, it can clearly also include other types of theses of lower (and higher) academic levels.

Copy link

Sorry, this was not displayed correctly. Thus, I had to enter a couple of blankspaces that would need to be removed.
Should a master thesis read as follows?:
< resourceType resourceTypeGeneral="Dissertation">Master thesis< /resourceType >
Or should it be defined as text?:
< resourceType resourceTypeGeneral="Text">Master thesis< /resourceType >
Perhaps, it would be worth considering to rename the resourceTypeGeneral "Dissertation" to "Academic thesis"? Then it can clearly also include other types of theses of lower (and higher) academic levels.

Copy link

Personally, I find the current example for resourceTypeGeneral "PeerReview" for a couple of reasons not ideal. Firstly, it does not seem to list resourceTypeGeneral "PeerReview" in the metadata (apologies, if I just did not spot it and it was indeed there). Secondly, it lists the resourceType "Scholarly Article". Where with other rTGs the rT represents a specification, here it seems to be more of an addition to me instead. E.g., rT “Census Data” is a specification for rTG “Dataset”, but rT “Scholarly Article” to me is rather a reference than a specification to me for the rTG "PeerReview" (it appears to be a peer review of a scholarly article; but in my understanding a peer review is not a scholarly article itself). Perhaps, my reading of the example is all wrong, but I stumbled over these two aspects.

Copy link

Perhaps, it would be worth considering adding a new resourceTypeGeneral "JournalIssue". Especially for special issues with a highlighted topic area this might be useful; as issues are not entire journals, and no mere articles, either. This might currently lead to inconsistencies from one use case to the next.

@KellyStathis
Copy link
Collaborator

Thanks @errortryagain for these comments! I think these are in scope for us to consider for 5.0 when we look at the resource types more broadly. For now, I have adjusted the extra space in the Preprint example—thank you for catching it!

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants