In fact, our plan is to mint DOI's via Zenodo to replace handles minted by ASU Libraries in the future.
Michael ____________________ C. Michael Barton Director, Center for Social Dynamics & Complexity Professor of Anthropology, School of Human Evolution & Social Change Head, Graduate Faculty in Complex Adaptive Systems Science Arizona State University voice: 480-965-6262 (SHESC), 480-965-8130/727-9746 (CSDC) fax: 480-965-7671 (SHESC), 480-727-0709 (CSDC) www: http://www.public.asu.edu/~cmbarton, http://csdc.asu.edu > On Nov 21, 2016, at 7:20 AM, Helmut Kudrnovsky <[email protected]> wrote: > > Michael Barton wrote >> Markus and Co. >> >> This is something CoMSES Net (Network for Computational Modeling in Social >> and Ecological Sciences: >> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.comses.net&d=CwIGaQ&c=AGbYxfJbXK67KfXyGqyv2Ejiz41FqQuZFk4A-1IxfAU&r=vxOW6PLS28MPea_dWUwPfRf71TAIziRDuFqWJimQN1I&m=fxAwSdFUptqrNZhLpoUeV51d4MElroWSZqBOxXCcNhw&s=2XqftSPoWzzKpQBZsef2l78EzFJ7V-qFsxgPlEbR98I&e= >> ) has been working with for >> some years now. We maintain a software code library, where researchers can >> publish model code. We also provide for the option of code peer review, >> which can happen when code is submitted to the library for review along >> with a paper sent to a journal, or independent of any paper review. Code >> that has passed peer review is currently assigned a “handle” from >> handle.net<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__handle.net-26gt-3B&d=CwIGaQ&c=AGbYxfJbXK67KfXyGqyv2Ejiz41FqQuZFk4A-1IxfAU&r=vxOW6PLS28MPea_dWUwPfRf71TAIziRDuFqWJimQN1I&m=fxAwSdFUptqrNZhLpoUeV51d4MElroWSZqBOxXCcNhw&s=UGR-DI_wHshdnJafI6Bq9052kj0tJtFttN95PJGI9c0&e= >> . >> Handle.net<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__handle.net-26gt-3B&d=CwIGaQ&c=AGbYxfJbXK67KfXyGqyv2Ejiz41FqQuZFk4A-1IxfAU&r=vxOW6PLS28MPea_dWUwPfRf71TAIziRDuFqWJimQN1I&m=fxAwSdFUptqrNZhLpoUeV51d4MElroWSZqBOxXCcNhw&s=UGR-DI_wHshdnJafI6Bq9052kj0tJtFttN95PJGI9c0&e= >> >> is the organization that oversees the digital identifier ecosystem. DOI’s >> are commercial instances and handles are open source instances, but both >> are ultimately under the purview of >> handle.net<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__handle.net-26gt-3B&d=CwIGaQ&c=AGbYxfJbXK67KfXyGqyv2Ejiz41FqQuZFk4A-1IxfAU&r=vxOW6PLS28MPea_dWUwPfRf71TAIziRDuFqWJimQN1I&m=fxAwSdFUptqrNZhLpoUeV51d4MElroWSZqBOxXCcNhw&s=UGR-DI_wHshdnJafI6Bq9052kj0tJtFttN95PJGI9c0&e= >> . >> With a new grant from NSF, CoMSES Net is now part of a new national data >> infrastructure network in the US. One of our plans is to transition from >> handles to DOI’s because these are more widely recognized. >> >> Given all this, we’ve had to think quite a bit about how to ‘publish’ >> model code and assign identifiers. As Vaclav points out there are >> significant issues with versioning. What happens with a new version? We’ve >> adopted a conceptual position that we are not a versioning repository >> primarily, but a place where authors can publish ‘finished’ code used in a >> research project or product. We are trying to treat this like a library >> and journal environment in that sense. We allow for minor revisions to >> correct errors (including as a response to reviews). But if a new product >> (e.g., a research paper) uses a new version of model code, we consider >> that a new digital object published, which could get a new handle/DOI >> distinct from a version of a model used for an earlier product. This >> remains something that is complicated to implement in practice. But the >> concept involves the reason for giving out the handle/DOI in the first >> place. >> >> Currently, only about 10% of published model based science makes code >> available for review or reuse. We think it is increasingly important that >> researchers share the code that is an important component to scientific >> practice in the same way they share research protocols and results—and are >> increasingly encouraged to share data. But sharing code takes effort, and >> even researchers with the best intentions may find it difficult to find >> the time or energy to make code available. So we are trying to create >> incentives that will have some value in the academic/research world, >> including citable products. All models published in the CoMSES Net library >> have automatically generated citations. Those that have passed peer >> review, verifying some degree of software quality, are also given >> permanent identifiers (handles/DOIs), with the idea that researchers can >> put them on their CVs where they at least have the possibility of gaining >> them some recognition for the work carried out. That is, we consider a DOI >> as an incentive for sharing code and a bit of a lever to get others to >> cite that code if they use it. >> >> We are still trying to work out how best to handle improvements (bug >> fixes) to a model vs. new models. We are moving our library to a Git >> environment, but are still working out how to implement our concept of >> “published” snapshots of code in a library/journal in versions and >> releases in Git. We do have a roadmap and are working on it, but we don’t >> yet have a solution in place. >> >> Where is all this leading? We need to ask what is the value to assigning >> DOIs to GRASS code, how might they benefit GRASS developers, and how might >> they be used by GRASS software users? I don’t see that they provide the >> kind of incentives that CoMSES Net is envisioning for computational model >> developers. Most DOIs are assigned to finished products as digital >> objects. From that perspective, GRASS could get a DOI, but not its >> component modules. But what about each version of GRASS? GRASS has formal >> releases, but not its components. Some code is in the released code base >> and other is in addons. There is ongoing development in the SVN. GRASS is >> a digital object of course, as are its component code modules, but it is a >> dynamic, living one and not a static one. Perhaps there are other benefits >> to working out the complications of where and when to assign DOIs in the >> GRASS ecosystem. But it will be good to start with a discussion of why and >> for whom we would do it. >> >> (I’m copying Allen Lee from the CoMSES Net leadership team as he has >> thought a lot about this and might have other things to add.) >> >> Cheers >> Michael > > some kind of related: > > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__ivory.idyll.org_blog_2016-2Dusing-2Dzenodo-2Dto-2Darchive-2Dgithub.html&d=CwIGaQ&c=AGbYxfJbXK67KfXyGqyv2Ejiz41FqQuZFk4A-1IxfAU&r=vxOW6PLS28MPea_dWUwPfRf71TAIziRDuFqWJimQN1I&m=fxAwSdFUptqrNZhLpoUeV51d4MElroWSZqBOxXCcNhw&s=ACWKZ0nzJky9D7hlnBU6flBzCk55BFWCmCbo7wV6UBk&e= > > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__zenodo.org_&d=CwIGaQ&c=AGbYxfJbXK67KfXyGqyv2Ejiz41FqQuZFk4A-1IxfAU&r=vxOW6PLS28MPea_dWUwPfRf71TAIziRDuFqWJimQN1I&m=fxAwSdFUptqrNZhLpoUeV51d4MElroWSZqBOxXCcNhw&s=vtzV_W3cp5WYp-O8pUNtup92VVKHv73gaWTqeihxJWY&e= > > > > > > > > ----- > best regards > Helmut > -- > View this message in context: > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__osgeo-2Dorg.1560.x6.nabble.com_Introducing-2DDOI-2Dfor-2Dsoftware-2Ddocumentation-2Dand-2Ddata-2Din-2Dthe-2DGRASS-2Dproject-2Dtp5296235p5296759.html&d=CwIGaQ&c=AGbYxfJbXK67KfXyGqyv2Ejiz41FqQuZFk4A-1IxfAU&r=vxOW6PLS28MPea_dWUwPfRf71TAIziRDuFqWJimQN1I&m=fxAwSdFUptqrNZhLpoUeV51d4MElroWSZqBOxXCcNhw&s=6JOIwjz9cSQaMT28L4dz6rClrqSvZTuYJqZNt1vDlK0&e= > > Sent from the GRASS-PSC mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > _______________________________________________ > grass-psc mailing list > [email protected] > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__lists.osgeo.org_mailman_listinfo_grass-2Dpsc&d=CwIGaQ&c=AGbYxfJbXK67KfXyGqyv2Ejiz41FqQuZFk4A-1IxfAU&r=vxOW6PLS28MPea_dWUwPfRf71TAIziRDuFqWJimQN1I&m=fxAwSdFUptqrNZhLpoUeV51d4MElroWSZqBOxXCcNhw&s=guZH59FlD0IYS2uVWrRZMpP4FKd1jnLg_9nj2iw_BHk&e= _______________________________________________ grass-psc mailing list [email protected] http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/grass-psc
