resourceTypeGeneral — DataCite Metadata Schema 4.5 documentation

[utterances-bot]

resourceTypeGeneral — DataCite Metadata Schema 4.5 documentation

https://datacite-metadata-schema.readthedocs.io/en/4.4/appendices/appendix_1/resourceTypeGeneral.html

[wendycr]

Our definition of book is for a physical object but in our context it will primarily be electronic. Should we revise the definition?

[wendycr]

some examples are code and others are links (from 4.4). Is there any reason for this? Should this be consistent or is there a logic for the difference?

[wendycr]

Should Dublin Core mapping for instrument be PhysicalObject rather than NA? It has the inanimate problem in the definition

[wendycr]

OutputManagementPlan - Examples and Usage Notes: Includes data, software, and Text materials -- The word Text was accidentally included in this

[wendycr]

PeerReview has both code and a link which means the layout seems a little inconsistent

[wendycr]

consider looking for a different example for Text - to me it looks like book (has an ISBN)

[errortryagain]

Thank you @wendycr, I would also speak in favor of having at least one example per type in code.

[errortryagain]

There seems to be a blank space in front of the resourceType "Research Paper" in the Preprint example.

[errortryagain]

Should a master thesis read as follows?:
Master thesis
Or should it be defined as text?:
Master thesis
Perhaps, it would be worth considering to rename the resourceTypeGeneral "Dissertation" to "Academic thesis"? Then, it can clearly also include other types of theses of lower (and higher) academic levels.

[errortryagain]

Sorry, this was not displayed correctly. Thus, I had to enter a couple of blankspaces that would need to be removed.
Should a master thesis read as follows?:
< resourceType resourceTypeGeneral="Dissertation">Master thesis< /resourceType >
Or should it be defined as text?:
< resourceType resourceTypeGeneral="Text">Master thesis< /resourceType >
Perhaps, it would be worth considering to rename the resourceTypeGeneral "Dissertation" to "Academic thesis"? Then it can clearly also include other types of theses of lower (and higher) academic levels.

[errortryagain]

Personally, I find the current example for resourceTypeGeneral "PeerReview" for a couple of reasons not ideal. Firstly, it does not seem to list resourceTypeGeneral "PeerReview" in the metadata (apologies, if I just did not spot it and it was indeed there). Secondly, it lists the resourceType "Scholarly Article". Where with other rTGs the rT represents a specification, here it seems to be more of an addition to me instead. E.g., rT “Census Data” is a specification for rTG “Dataset”, but rT “Scholarly Article” to me is rather a reference than a specification to me for the rTG "PeerReview" (it appears to be a peer review of a scholarly article; but in my understanding a peer review is not a scholarly article itself). Perhaps, my reading of the example is all wrong, but I stumbled over these two aspects.

[errortryagain]

Perhaps, it would be worth considering adding a new resourceTypeGeneral "JournalIssue". Especially for special issues with a highlighted topic area this might be useful; as issues are not entire journals, and no mere articles, either. This might currently lead to inconsistencies from one use case to the next.

[KellyStathis]

Thanks @errortryagain for these comments! I think these are in scope for us to consider for 5.0 when we look at the resource types more broadly. For now, I have adjusted the extra space in the Preprint example—thank you for catching it!

[KellyStathis]

Working on these now, creating internal issues to track in some cases:

• "Our definition of book is for a physical object but in our context it will primarily be electronic. Should we revise the definition?" - https://github.com/datacite/features/issues/120
• "some examples are code and others are links (from 4.4). Is there any reason for this? Should this be consistent or is there a logic for the difference?" - updating in 4.7 draft, no issue
• "Should Dublin Core mapping for instrument be PhysicalObject rather than NA? It has the inanimate problem in the definition" - the Dublin Core definition for PhysicalObject is "An inanimate, three-dimensional object or substance." - I think this doesn't quite capture what an instrument is, suggest leaving as n/a
• "OutputManagementPlan - Examples and Usage Notes: Includes data, software, and Text materials -- The word Text was accidentally included in this" - already fixed
• "PeerReview has both code and a link which means the layout seems a little inconsistent" - fixing in 4.7 draft
• "consider looking for a different example for Text - to me it looks like book (has an ISBN)" - fixing for 4.7 draft