Dear Software Developers Team,
In the course of Becca Grose's placement with us, the issue of author accreditation for the database came up. I've done some research by investigating how other online databases are accredited, and I think we can make some improvements so that the database can be cited properly and each contributor has their work recognised.
I've put together a document that represents best practice. It looks long but it isn't, it's mainly screenshots. I've tried to make it as clear as possible. Can you have a look and tell me what you think? In terms of what you think is best, and how feasible implementing these changes will be? Let me know if there's anything you need clarification on.
Thanks very much!
With warmest wishes,
Updated by Alexander Watzinger about 1 year ago
- Target version set to Wishlist
- Priority changed from High to Low
- Status changed from New to Acknowledged
Thank you very much Victoria for this idea and the detailed document.There seem to be multiple issues involved and I will begin with the current implementation in OpenAtlas:
- The user who creates an entry will be saved as the creator
- Every user who later updates an entry will be tracked as modifier. Note that the change itself isn't recorded, it could even be that nothing changed and someone just clicked the update button.
One OpenAtlas project, MEDCON, was already archived in ARCHE and you can see what it looks like here: https://arche.acdh.oeaw.ac.at/browser/oeaw_detail/66765. In this case it is possible to credit multiple people and which is worked out in detail in the curation process. Another location for accreditation would be for example your own project site where you already began with this: http://www.connectedclerics.com/.
These are location where people are credited for the whole project and the implementation is done manually (e.g. at the curation process in ARCHE) and are not directly related to the database.
The same goes for the database disclaimer, it would have to be implemented individually where it is used, e.g. at ARCHE (where licensing and similar is already a substantial part of the system) or the planned presentation site where I created an issue (#1314) for that.
Entry Specific Accreditation¶
The information tracked with the software (see above) has definitely it's uses but seems not really be suited for this purpose e.g. there is only one creator and the information cannot be changed. So we would either have to expand the existing feature (e.g. make editing and more creators possible) or would have to implement new features. I will put it up for discussion on our next development meeting and also added some people as watcher for this issue.
Once solved we could implement citation options in e.g. the planned presentation site too.
Updated by Alexander Watzinger 12 months ago
- Target version deleted (
- Status changed from Acknowledged to In Progress
- Tracker changed from Feature to Question
Sorry, we discussed this at a team meeting but I lost track of this issue. So to summarize the detailed explanation before:
We think the right place for accreditation would be where the results are shown e.g. at the frontend, a project report or at the project description when archived. Furthermore we suggest a more global approach e.g. The data of case study XYZ was acquired by person A and person B.
Please let me know if this would work for you.