Changes between Version 1 and Version 2 of CitationVocabulary


Ignore:
Timestamp:
09/19/13 06:17:07 (11 years ago)
Author:
joe
Comment:

linked in a few things

Legend:

Unmodified
Added
Removed
Modified

  • CitationVocabulary

    v1 v2  
    22 
    33 
    4 (these notes were made late at night, September 18th, 2014 after 3 days of meetings ... might not be fully coherent, especially not without the context of the "Data Citation Principles" proposal we were discussing -Joe H.) 
     4(these notes were made late at night, September 18th, 2014 after 3 days of meetings ... might not be fully coherent, especially not without the context of the [http://www.force11.org/node/4432 "Data Citation Principles" proposal] we were discussing -Joe H.) 
    55 
    66 
    … …  
    1919        example : http://daac.ornl.gov//LBA/guides/CD10_EddyFlux_Tapajos.html 
    2020 
    21 4. There is the information contained in #3.  (the DataCite metadata, plus whatever other metadata that community may deem useful) 
     214. There is the information contained in #3.  (the [http://schema.datacite.org/ DataCite metadata], plus whatever other metadata that community may deem useful) 
    2222 
    23235. There is the whole process as a more abstract concept. 
    … …  
    3030 
    3131 
    32 If we know what 'potato' is, and we know what 'pancakes' are, we're likely to make an assumption that when someone says 'potato pancakes' they mean something closer to matafan, boxty or a potato fritter rather than latkes.[!2] 
     32If we know what 'potato' is, and we know what 'pancakes' are, we're likely to make an assumption that when someone says 'potato pancakes' they mean something closer to [http://www.recipestap.com/le-matafan-a-french-savoyard-staple matafan], [http://www.chow.com/recipes/28172-boxty-irish-potato-pancake boxty] or a potato fritter rather than [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Potato_pancake latkes].[!2] 
    3333 
    3434Because of the different definitions for 'citation', it's likely that most people will assume 1, 2 or 5, and might get those from context.  I believe it's unlikely that they're going to know we're talking about 3 or 4 from the 'Data Citation Principles' document. 
    … …  
    4141        Data Description (maybe capitalized we suggest that it's got a more formal definition? ... although I don't want to get into the 'publication' vs. 'Publication' discussions all over again) 
    4242        Front Matter 
    43         Bibliographic Record (the 'BR' in 'FRBR') 
     43        Bibliographic Record (the 'BR' in '[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Functional_Requirements_for_Bibliographic_Records FRBR]') 
    4444 
    4545 
    … …  
    4747 
    4848        in 3/4, we only have attributes about the data, and the publication of the data (eg, when it was released) 
    49         in 1/2, we also have information about the linkage itself.  (subsetting of the data being cited and the CITO relationships) 
     49        in 1/2, we also have information about the linkage itself.  (subsetting of the data being cited and the [http:/purl.org/spar/cito CITO] relationships) 
    5050 
    5151-Joe 
    … …  
    5454[!1] I had three when I started writing this, but then realized I had to differentiate 1&2 and 3&4.  And now I just added a 6th.  Blah. 
    5555 
    56 [!2] Not all of you have seen my various pancake presentations ... see http://vso1.nascom.nasa.gov/pancakes/ or for the 5 min video : http://igniteshow.com/videos/polysemous-terms-did-everyone-understand-your-message 
     56[!2] Not all of you have seen my various [http://vso1.nascom.nasa.gov/pancakes/  pancake presentations] ... see or for the [http://igniteshow.com/videos/polysemous-terms-did-everyone-understand-your-message 5 min video]  
    5757 
    5858