You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
As a young scientists I would like that my contribution to a publication is distinguishable from my cowriters contribution, e.g. that it is clear who contributed to the code, data, analysis etc.
[general use case, not specific to CERN]
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Contributor roles are good. But maybe the publication can be thought as a container. There could be an overall PID for the whole package. And in the package, all components (such as data, software, data representations like figures, the text itself) could have a PID too with own metadata. This way it would be easy to tell who contributed to what part of the project and how the paper was built. So, a young professional could prove his/her value.
IMO a mixture of PIDs, contributor roles, and what researchobject.org does. The latter acts as the container. You could associate a PID to it (in the spec it is URI in a more general sense). It relates to items in the package (data, software, figures, text, etc.) and those relations could be qualified with authors, contributor roles, degree of contribution, etc.
I think it is fair to say that in terms of credit and attribution that is the current practice, i.e. the data underlying the paper is not citing directly, but rather the article itself.
As a young scientists I would like that my contribution to a publication is distinguishable from my cowriters contribution, e.g. that it is clear who contributed to the code, data, analysis etc.
[general use case, not specific to CERN]
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: