On 17.05.2019 18:33, Greg Troxel wrote:
Frederik Ramm writes:
Hi,
if someone writes a scientific paper and wants to reference an OSM data
set they used, what would be the correct way to do that? Typically such
mentions contain author and name of the work, and publication place and
year. Or maybe the web-like "retrieved on ..."?
I vote for not retrieved on but the date the data was extracted from the
main database, looking like "openstreetmap.org vector map data,
OpenStreetMap Contributors, extracted -MM-DD HHMM UTC".
My impression is that the publication date is for things where a journal
publishes them, and perhaps self-published blog posts, but for something
that is continuously modified, it doesn't really make sense.
It's also good to give a second citation to a journal article that gives
an overview the project, and surely that exists by now. But I think the
most important thing is an unambiguous pointer to both OSM and the epoch
of data.
I'd like to agree here, and to add a 'it depends': on what the paper is about.
A core issue in a scientific paper is about the repeatability of the described
experiment.
Thus when the core message is that the author has measured 123456 km of
motorways in country X,
she should describe the precise source and version of the data set used, and
the method of counting.
Probably not in the literature reference, but in an appropriate section of the
main text.
When, on the other hand, the paper is about the sociology of repetitive
vandalism patterns,
the precise date of the database extract might be less relevant, and appropriate case studies would
need to be cited.
tom
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
