On Saturday, September 15, 2018, Jacqueline Kazil <jackieka...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I just got caught up on the thread. This is a really great discussion. > Thank you for all the contributions. > > Before we get into the details, let's go back to the main use case we are > trying to solve. > *As a user, I am writing an academic paper and I need to cite Python. * > > Let's throw reproducibility out the window for now (<--- something I never > thought I would say), because that should be captured in the code, not in > the citations. > > So, if we don't need the specific version of Python, then maybe creating > one citation is all we need. > And that gives it some good Google juice as well. > https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&q=python+van+Rossum * https://www.semanticscholar.org/search?q=Python%20van%20Rossum https://www.mendeley.com/research-papers/?query=Python+van+Rossum https://www.zotero.org/search/q/Python/type/group With an e.g. {Zotero,} group, it would be easy to cite the Python citation with the greatest centrality. https://networkx.github.io/documentation/stable/reference/algorithms/centrality.html A DOI URN/URI/URL really is easiest to aggregate the edges of/for. - [ ] Link to the new citation(s) page in the Python docs from the SciPy citing page https://www.scipy.org/citing.html NP. YW! > Thoughts? > > (Once we nail down one or many, I think we can then move into the details > of the content of the citation.) > > -Jackie > > On Thu, Sep 13, 2018 at 12:47 AM Wes Turner <wes.tur...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> There was a thread about adding __cite__ to things and a tool to collect >> those citations awhile back. >> >> "[Python-ideas] Add a __cite__ method for scientific packages" >> http://markmail.org/thread/rekmbmh64qxwcind >> >> Which CPython source file should contain this __cite__ value? >> >> ... On a related note, you should ask the list admin to append a URL to >> each mailing list message whenever this list is upgraded to mm3; so that >> you can all be appropriately cited. >> >> On Thursday, September 13, 2018, Wes Turner <wes.tur...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> Do you guys think we should all cite Grub and BusyBox and bash and libc >>> and setuptools and pip and openssl and GNU/Linux and LXC and Docker; or >>> else it's plagiarism for us all? >>> >>> #OpenAccess >>> >>> On Wednesday, September 12, 2018, Stephen J. Turnbull < >>> turnbull.stephen...@u.tsukuba.ac.jp> wrote: >>> >>>> Chris Barker via Python-Dev writes: >>>> >>>> > But "I wrote some code in Python to produce these statistics" -- >>>> > does that need a citation? >>>> >>>> That depends on what you mean by "statistics" and whether (as one >>>> should) one makes the code available. If the code is published or >>>> "available on request", definitely, Python should be cited. If not, >>>> and by "statistics" you mean the kind of things provided by Steven >>>> d'Aprano's excellent statistics module (mean, median, standard >>>> deviation, etc), maybe no citation is needed. But anything more >>>> esoteric than that (even linear regression), yeah, I would say you >>>> should cite both Python and any reference you used to learn the >>>> algorithm or formulas, in the context of mentioning that your >>>> statistics are home-brew, not produced by one of the recognized >>>> applications for doing so. >>>> >>>> > If so, maybe that would take a different form. >>>> >>>> Yes, it would. But not so different: eg, version is analogous to >>>> edition when citing a book. >>>> >>>> > Anyway, hard to make this decision without some idea how the >>>> > citation is intended to be used. >>>> >>>> Same as any other citation, (1) to give credit to those responsible >>>> for providing a resource (this is why publishers and their metadata of >>>> city are still conventionally included), and (2) to show where that >>>> resource can be obtained. AFAICS, both motivations are universally >>>> applicable in polite society. NB: Replication is an important reason >>>> for wanting to acquire the resource, but it's not the only one. >>>> >>>> I think underlying your comment is the question of *what* resource is >>>> being cited. I can think of three offhand that might be characterized >>>> as "Python". First, the PSF, as a provider of funding. There is a >>>> conventional form for this: a footnote on the title or author's name >>>> saying "The author acknowledges [a] <purpose of grant such as travel> >>>> grant [grant identifier if available] from the Python Software >>>> Foundation." I usually orally mention them in presentations, too. >>>> That one's easy; *everybody* should *always* do that. >>>> >>>> The rest of these, sort of an ideal to strive for. If you keep a >>>> bibliographic database, and there are now quite a few efforts to crowd >>>> source them, it's easier to go the whole 9 yards than to skimp. But >>>> except in cases where we don't need to even mention the code, probably >>>> we should be citing, for reasons of courtesy to readers as well as >>>> authors, editors, and publishers (as disgusting as many publishers are >>>> as members of society, they do play a role in providing many resources >>>> ---we should find ways to compete them into good behavior, not >>>> ostracize them). >>>> >>>> The second is the Python *language and standard library*. Then the >>>> Language Reference and/or the Library Reference should be cited >>>> briefly when Python is first mentioned, and in the text introducing a >>>> program or program fragment, with a full citation in the bibliography. >>>> I tentatively suggest that the metadata for the Language Reference >>>> would be >>>> >>>> Author: principal author(s) (Guido?) et al. OR python.org OR >>>> Python Contributors >>>> Title: The Python Language Reference >>>> Version: to match Python version used (if relevant, different >>>> versions each get full citations), probably should not be >>>> "current" >>>> Publisher: Python Software Foundation >>>> Date: of the relevant version >>>> Location: City of legal address of PSF >>>> URL: to version used (probably should not be the default) >>>> Date accessed: if "current" was used >>>> >>>> The Library reference would be the same except for Title. >>>> >>>> The third is a *particular implementation*. In that case the metadata >>>> would be >>>> >>>> Author: principal author(s) (Guido) et al. OR python.org OR >>>> Python Contributors >>>> Title: The cPython Python distribution >>>> Python Version: as appropriate (if relevant, different versions each >>>> get full citations), never "current" >>>> Distributor Version: if different from Python version (eg, >>>> additional >>>> Debian cruft) >>>> Publisher: Distributor (eg, PSF, Debian Project, Anaconda Inc.) >>>> Date: of the relevant version >>>> Location: City of legal address of distributor >>>> >>>> If downloaded: >>>> >>>> URL: to version used (including git commit SHA1 if available) >>>> Date accessed: download from distributor, not installation date >>>> >>>> If received on physical medium: use the "usual" form of citation for a >>>> collection of individual works (even if Python was the only thing on >>>> it). Probably the only additional information needed would be the >>>> distributor as editor of the collection and the name of the >>>> collection. >>>> >>>> In most cases I can think of, if the implementation is cited, the >>>> Language and Library References should be cited, too. >>>> >>>> Finally, if Python or components were modified for the project, the >>>> modified version should be preserved in a repository and a VCS >>>> identifier provided. This does not imply the repository need be >>>> publicly accessible, of course, although it might be for other reasons >>>> (eg, in a GSoC project,wherever or if hosted for free on GitHub). >>>> >>>> I doubt that "URNs" like DOI and ISBN are applicable, but if available >>>> they should be included in all cases as well. >>>> >>>> Steve >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Python-Dev mailing list >>>> Python-Dev@python.org >>>> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev >>>> Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/ >>>> wes.turner%40gmail.com >>>> >>> _______________________________________________ >> Python-Dev mailing list >> Python-Dev@python.org >> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev >> Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/ >> jackiekazil%40gmail.com >> > > > -- > Jacqueline Kazil | @jackiekazil > > >
_______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com