Dear all,
This is a very valuable discussion, the most important reason being the need to get VO tools and standards cited _at all_, which is vital for our future funding and for the careers of the engineers and computer scientists! So, whilst, it will be important to get a standards form agreed, the priority should be to encourage all users to include any form of citation which serves the basic purpose of identifying the authors and providing a route to find the paper. Most astronomers will just take the form of their citation either from a previous citation or from ADS - sadly, if something isn't in ADS and they are not copying a previous citation, they will probably forget to cite a web document _unless we provide an example of how to cite it at the beginning_ - just an idea..
The other reason to get into ADS is because that gives the easiest way to link to one's own publications - and to get citation counts (I am sure that there are many other ways - I don;t want to start a debate - I am justs pointing out what happens in most cases in reality).
best wishes
Anita
Dr. A.M.S. Richards, AstroGrid Astronomer,
Jodrell Bank Centre for Astrophysics, Alan Turing Building,
University of Manchester, M13 9PL
+44 (0)161 275 4124
and
MERLIN/VLBI National Facility, Jodrell Bank Observatory,
Cheshire SK11 9DL, U.K. +44 (0)1477 571321 (tel) 571618 (fax)
On Mon, 16 Jun 2008, [ISO-8859-1] Séverin Gaudet wrote:
> In the current IVOA Report and Roadmap document undergoing final revision in
> the TCG, there is a TCG topic proposed for discussion called "Standards
> numbering nomenclature"
> (http://www.ivoa.net/cgi-bin/twiki/bin/view/IVOA/TCGStandardsNumberingNomenclature
> ). This mail thread supports the need for that discussion.
>
> Séverin
>
>
> On Jun 16, 2008, at 3:00 PM, Norman Gray wrote:
>
>>
>> Igor, hello.
>>
>> On 2008 Jun 16, at 22:38, Igor Chilingarian wrote:
>>
>>> 1) IVOA Recommendation.
>>
>>> 2) IVOA Note.
>>
>> I agree that in most formal circumstances, it would only be appropriate to
>> cite a Recommendation, and either of the forms of citation mentioned in
>> this thread would be able to make clear the nature of the document.
>> However, there doesn't seem to be any need to forbid other documents, even
>> Notes, from being cited, if the citing author thinks it appropriate.
>>
>>> I like Norman's idea of using a version number in the bibcode, however
>>> there may be some drawbacks connected to the possible hierarchical nature
>>> of version numbers, i.e. 0.9.3b or something like this.
>>
>> One of the peculiarities of the IVOA document process is that all version
>> numbers are constrained to be of the form n.nn (0 <= n <= 9). I happen to
>> think this prescription is a bit nuts (a version string is a tuple of
>> integers, not a real number), but in this case it has the fortunate
>> side-effect that an IVOA document version number is always four characters.
>>
>>> Why I decided to raise again this issue: the reason is simple (and stupid)
>>> -- I don't want to lose my citations / publications, neither wish my
>>> colleagues do so. And I do think that being a co-author of a IVOA standard
>>> is much more than to write yet-another-{A&A|MNRAS|ApJ|etc.}-paper and it
>>> requires much more efforts and much more resposibility.
>>
>> That sounds like an _excellent_ reason to me.
>>
>> Best wishes,
>>
>> Norman
>>
>>
>> --
>> Norman Gray : http://nxg.me.uk
>> Physics and Astronomy, University of Leicester
>>
>
>
>
Received on 2008-06-17Z10:49:02