On 6/14/05, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >>>>> On Tue, 14 Jun 2005 08:42:59 +1000 (EST), > >>>>> Gordon K Smyth (GKS) wrote: > > > On Tue, June 14, 2005 12:49 am, Thomas Lumley said: > >> On Mon, 13 Jun 2005, Gordon K Smyth wrote: > >> > >>> This is just a note that R would get a lot more citations if the > >>> recommended citation was an article in a recognised journal or from a > >>> recognised publisher. > >>> > >> > >> This is unfortunately true, but R is *not* an article or a book, it is a > >> piece of software. I don't think I'm the only person who thinks it is > >> counterproductive in the long run to encourage users to cite an article > >> that they probably haven't read instead of citing the software they > >> actually used. > >> > >> Jan's suggestion of the Journal of Statistical Software might provide a > >> solution, since JSS *does* publish software. > >> > >> -thomas > > > In the biology world, it is common to publish an article > > announcing a software project, and to cite that. The referees of > > the article are expected to try out and comment on the software. > > This gives the authors credit, and ensures that both the article > > and the software have been peer refereed, at least to a limited > > extent. > > How do you cite books in this world, or to but the question in another > way: How do you make sure a book is peer-reviewd? After all it is > quite easy to become a "publisher" and publish ones own books. Many > university departments I know are registered ISBN publishers > (including our department). Must be hard to distinguish "real" books > from others, I guess.
Fritz - That's silly. As someone pointed out, the issue is with the publisher, not the citation. If R-Core were a generally well-known and regarded publishing house such as Springer or Microsoft, it would not be a problem. But it's still a nebulous entity to MANY people, and so many people fail to understand this open source stuff. It's seriously discouraged by most journals to cite technical reports, for example. And perhaps, R could be considered more of a long-ish technical report than a book? Though perhaps Peter D. could be considered the "editor"? (these questions are not those that I need to ask, obviously!) (just yesterday, I was asked by a reasonably intelligent colleague, with respect to corporate packaging of R: "So they (corporate packagers) just pick some version and package it, right?" and my flabbergasted response was: "and so, what the heck do you think they (corporate packagers) do with SAS, S-PLUS, and SPSS, and why do you think it's different...?"). best, -tony "Commit early,commit often, and commit in a repository from which we can easily roll-back your mistakes" (AJR, 4Jan05). A.J. Rossini [EMAIL PROTECTED] ______________________________________________ R-devel@r-project.org mailing list https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
