typeshed, dotted lookup, ScholarlyArticle semantic graphs with classes,
properties, and URIs
Would external metadata (similar to how typeshed is defined in a 'shadow
naming scheme' (?)) be advantageous
for dotted name lookup of citation metadata?
> Typeshed contains external type annotations for
... a schema:Dataset may be part of a Creative work.
https://schema.org/Dataset
https://schema.org/isPartOf
https://schema.org/ScholarlyArticle
#LinkedReproducibility #nbmeta
On Wednesday, July 4, 2018, Wes Turner wrote:
> https://schema.org/CreativeWork
> https://schema.org/Code
>
https://schema.org/CreativeWork
https://schema.org/Code
https://schema.org/SoftwareApplication
CreativeWork has a https://schema.org/citation field with a range of
{CreativeWork, Text}
There's also a https://schema.org/funder attribute with a domain of
CreativeWork and a range of
On Sun, Jul 1, 2018 at 9:45 AM David Mertz wrote:
> ..
> There's absolutely nothing in the idea that requires a change in Python,
> and Python developers or users are not, as such, the relevant experts.
>
This is not entirely true. If some variant of __citation__ is endorsed by
the community,
> -Original Message-
> From: Python-ideas list=sdamon@python.org> On Behalf Of Nick Timkovich
> Sent: Sunday, July 1, 2018 12:02 PM
> To: Matt Arcidy
> Cc: python-ideas
> Subject: Re: [Python-ideas] Add a __cite__ method for scientific packages
>
> From
On Fri, Jun 29, 2018 at 8:58 PM, Matt Arcidy wrote:
> It seems like the very small percentage of academic users whose careers
> depend on this cannot resolve the political issue of forming a standards
> body.
>
> I don't see how externalizing the standard development will help. Kudos
> for
I think a __citation__ *method* is a bad idea. This yells out "attribute"
to me. A function or two that parses those attributes in some manner is a
better idea... And there's no reason that function or two need to be
dunders. There's also no reason they need to be in the standard library...
There
On 28 June 2018 at 01:19, Nathaniel Smith wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 27, 2018 at 2:20 PM, Andrei Kucharavy
> wrote:
> > To remediate to that situation, I suggest a __citation__ method
> associated
> > to each package installation and import. Called from the __main__,
> > __citation__() would scan
On 29 June 2018 at 12:14, Nathaniel Smith wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 28, 2018 at 2:25 PM, Andrei Kucharavy
> wrote:
>> As for the list, reserving a __citation__/__cite__ for packages at the same
>> level as __version__ is now reserved and adding a citation()/cite() function
>> to the standard library
scipy itself at it's center? Wouldn't
>>> those engaging in science or in academia be better stewards of this than
>>> systems programmers? Since you're not asking for anything that can't be
>>> done in a third party module, and there is a third party module that most
&
On Fri, Jun 29, 2018, 8:14 PM Andrei Kucharavy
wrote:
> Not all packages are within the numpy/scipy universe - Pandas and Seaborn
are notable examples.
Huh?! Pandas is a thin wrapper around NumPy. To be fair, it is a wrapper
that adds a huge number of wrapping methods and classes. Seaborn in
pends on scipy or even numpy.
> However, it does all depend on Python.
>
> Although perhaps that argues for a cross-language solution :)
>
> I still think it would be very nice to have an official standard for
> citation information in Python packages as codified in a PEP. That would
&g
ns to ship with standard python at all.
> > >
> > >> -Original Message-----
> > >> From: Python-ideas > >> list=sdamon@python.org> On Behalf Of Steven D'Aprano
> > >> Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2018 8:17 PM
> > >> To: pyth
, June 29, 2018 12:16 AM
> To: Alex Walters
> Cc: Steven D'Aprano ; python-ideas@python.org
> Subject: Re: [Python-ideas] Add a __cite__ method for scientific packages
>
> For me, it's about setting a standard that is endorsed by the
> language, and setting expectations
o ship with standard python at all.
>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Python-ideas > list=sdamon@python.org> On Behalf Of Steven D'Aprano
>> Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2018 8:17 PM
>> To: python-ideas@python.org
>> Subject: Re: [Python-ideas]
o: python-ideas@python.org
> Subject: Re: [Python-ideas] Add a __cite__ method for scientific packages
>
> On Thu, Jun 28, 2018 at 05:25:00PM -0400, Andrei Kucharavy wrote:
>
> > As for the list, reserving a __citation__/__cite__ for packages at the
same
> > level as __version_
On Thu, Jun 28, 2018 at 2:25 PM, Andrei Kucharavy
wrote:
>> This is indeed a serious problem. I suspect python-ideas isn't the
>> best venue for addressing it though – there's nothing here that needs
>> changes to the Python interpreter itself (I think), and the people who
>> understand this
On Thu, Jun 28, 2018 at 05:25:00PM -0400, Andrei Kucharavy wrote:
> As for the list, reserving a __citation__/__cite__ for packages at the same
> level as __version__ is now reserved and adding a citation()/cite()
> function to the standard library seemed large enough modifications to
> warrant
One more thing. There's precedent for this: when you start an interactive
Python interpreter it tells you how to get help, but also how to get
copyright, credits and license information:
$ python3
Python 3.6.6 (v3.6.6:4cf1f54eb7, Jun 26 2018, 19:50:54)
[GCC 4.2.1 Compatible Apple LLVM 6.0
That's a lot of responses, thanks for the interest and the suggestions!
Are there other languages or software communities that do something like
> this? It would be nice not to have to invent this wheel. Eventually a PEP
> and an implementation should be presented, but first the idea needs to be
> Are there other languages or software communities that do something like
this? It would be nice not to have to invent this wheel.
While I do not use R regularly, I understand their community is largely
academic-driven, and citations are strongly encouraged as seen in their
documentation:
I think this is a fine idea, but could be achieved by convention, like
__version__, rather than by fiat.
And it’s certainly not a language feature.
So Nathaniel’s right — the thing to do now is work out the convention,
and then advocate for it.
-CHB
On 28/06/2018 00:00, Nathan Goldbaum wrote:
> This is an interesting proposal. Speaking as a developer of scientific
> software packages it would be really cool to have support for something
> like this in the language itself.
>
> The software sustainability institute in the UK have written
On Wed, Jun 27, 2018 at 05:20:01PM -0400, Andrei Kucharavy wrote:
[...]
> To remediate to that situation, I suggest a __citation__ method associated
> to each package installation and import. Called from the __main__,
> __citation__() would scan __citation__ of all imported packages and return
>
On Wed, 27 Jun 2018 17:19:35 -0700
Nathaniel Smith wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 27, 2018 at 2:20 PM, Andrei Kucharavy
> wrote:
> > To remediate to that situation, I suggest a __citation__ method associated
> > to each package installation and import. Called from the __main__,
> > __citation__() would
On Wed, Jun 27, 2018 at 2:20 PM, Andrei Kucharavy
wrote:
> To remediate to that situation, I suggest a __citation__ method associated
> to each package installation and import. Called from the __main__,
> __citation__() would scan __citation__ of all imported packages and return
> the list of all
This is an interesting proposal. Speaking as a developer of scientific
software packages it would be really cool to have support for something
like this in the language itself.
The software sustainability institute in the UK have written several blog
posts advocating the use of CITATION files
While I'm not personally in need of citations (and never felt I was) I can
easily understand the point -- sometimes citations can make or break a
career and having written a popular software package should be acknowledged.
Are there other languages or software communities that do something like
Over the last 10 years, Python has slowly inched towards becoming the most
popular scientific computing language, beating or seriously challenging
Matlab, R, Mathematica and many specialized languages (S, SAS, ...) in
numerous applications.
A large part of this growth is driven by amazing
29 matches
Mail list logo
