Discussing the inclusion of producer and creator terms

[sdruskat]

Given that CodeMeta as extension of Schema.org will have both producer and creator available no matter what (whether creator is included in the schema or not), the terms' inclusion/exclusion in the CodeMeta schema as per master is IMHO discussable:

• producer is included in the schema, but semantically tied in Schema.org to media production (records, tv shows, etc.). IMHO, this is a role that doesn't exist under this name in software development. Something that comes close would be product owner perhaps? But arguably, this should then be a custom CodeMeta term that adds to Schema.org.
• creator in turn has been removed from the schema, but IMHO would be a valid term for software development (e.g., git committers (vs. authors) could be understood as creators). However, given the definition of creator in Schema.org, there should be another custom term in the CodeMeta schema if this is deemed a valuable addition at all.

I'd be interested in the project's opinions :).

[proycon]

In our codemeta descriptions, we in CLARIAH project are using the producer
property to indicate the Organization (usually a university or research
institute) that produces the software. Or better said, it represents organization which
employs the actual developers of the software, and which, hopefully, also
ensures there is a certain amount of continuity for a software project if a developer
were to leave.
(https://github.com/CLARIAH/clariah-plus/blob/main/requirements/software-metadata-requirements.md#8-a-producer-should-be-expressed)

Similarly, we use the schema:provider property when describing Software as a
Service, to indicate the organization that hosts/deploys the software service
in their infrastructure. Producer and provider need not be the same.

In accordance with the commit you referenced, we don't use creator but we use
author (for main authors) as well as contributor.