Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Preferred Citation for Repo #36

Open
poldham opened this issue Dec 6, 2019 · 2 comments
Open

Preferred Citation for Repo #36

poldham opened this issue Dec 6, 2019 · 2 comments

Comments

@poldham
Copy link

poldham commented Dec 6, 2019

Dear All,

I am working on a report that discusses DUO and uses the images from the repo. At the moment I am just providing the link to the repo. Is there a preferred citation for the repo (e.g. adding a Zenodo doi for the repo itself) or anything else such as publications on DUO that should be used?

Many thanks and all the best,

Paul

@mcourtot
Copy link
Collaborator

mcourtot commented Dec 6, 2019

Hi @poldham, thanks for the enquiry; we've been using the repository link alongside the ontology PURL, http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/duo.owl

If shareable we'd love to read your feedback on the resource. Feel free to submit additional tickets should you find missing features!

Cheers,
Melanie

@poldham
Copy link
Author

poldham commented Dec 6, 2019

HI @mcourtot, OK I've also got PURL as well in the write up. Also to mention that the duo.csv in src is actually really useful for showing a table summary of the ontology for non-specialists as is the link to the live EGA example. For something like EGA I think for the future it would be good to get some kind of sense of how many datasets are marked up with DUO to get an idea of scale of dissemination.... but I guess that is for the future. My piece including DUO should become available sometime in the new year and will be happy to share when it does. All the Best, Paul

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants