5 ms·
This is indeed something that needs to be solved. I think the current path in the schol comms community leans towards having contributors (with different roles)
by sdruskat 5y ago
This is indeed something that needs to be solved. I think the current path in the schol comms community leans towards having contributors (with different roles) as well as authors.
Also, summary authors ("the <project> contributors") is one way to relatively elegantly circumvent this, and something you could do in a CFF file for example (these are being picked up by Zenodo).
- angrais 5y agoWhy not simply cite the original creators? Then if major features changed amongst versions then the key contributors? Original creators (whose idea the software is) should be first author.
- Athas 5y agoAs I understand it, an important point of software citations is to help academic researchers who are (unfortunately) measured by citation metrics. Will whatever tools the bean counters are using connect "the <project> contributors" citations properly to people? I don't see how they could.
- pwdisswordfish8 5y agoWhen citing collective written works (like conference paper collections), the editors’ names are usually listed. I don’t see why not do the same here: cite the maintainers’ names when citing the whole, and also specific authors when citing particular fragments.