VEP-015: relationship_type#References

[Henneken, Edwin]

I agree with Anne. In their Metadata Schema 4.5 document, DataCite uses
pretty much the same language for "References" as proposed here

DataCite Definition: indicates B is used as a source of information for A
URL:
https://datacite-metadata-schema.readthedocs.io/en/4.5/appendices/appendix-1/relationType/#references

So, yes, you could use it for "cited-reference" if you wish.

DataCite provides a nice page on the use of the relationship types Cited,
IsCitedBy, References and IsReferenceBy:
https://support.datacite.org/docs/contributing-citations-and-references

But, due to its more general nature, I think using "Cited" is to be
preferred over "References" when the relationship is for a
"citation-reference".

>From the ADS point of view, if we get metadata for a work to be indexed and
it has a RelatedIdentifier section, we don't want to be guessing what the
precise meaning/role of a specific relationType is; different values
for relationType
result in different actions within the ADS indexing workflow.

All the best
Edwin

*Edwin Henneken *(he | him | his)

NASA Astrophysics Data System

Center for Astrophysics | Harvard & Smithsonian

60 Garden Street | MS 83 | Cambridge, MA 02138


ads.harvard.edu | @adsabs <https://twitter.com/adsabs> | *ui.adsabs.harvard.edu
<https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/>*

*cfa.harvard.edu <https://cfa.harvard.edu/>* | Facebook
<http://cfa.harvard.edu/facebook> | Twitter <http://cfa.harvard.edu/twitter>
| YouTube <http://cfa.harvard.edu/youtube> | Newsletter
<http://cfa.harvard.edu/newsletter>


On Tue, Mar 5, 2024 at 7:00 AM Anne Catherine Raugh via semantics <
semantics at ivoa.net> wrote:

> "References" is actually a problematic term for DataCite, largely because
> there is also the term "Cites" to confuse the issue. Both are used for
> citation-reference relationships, depending on the whim of the metadata
> author. "References" is also used for other relationships when one
> resources mentions another (in acknowledgements, for example, or as part of
> a "For further information" reading list).
>
> If the intention is for all relationships of this new type "reference" to
> be interpreted as a "citation-reference", then you should probably say so
> explicitly. It seems unlikely that other sorts of relationships would be
> relevant to the IVOA case, and perhaps it might encourage citation of
> results where appropriate.
>
> -Anne.
>
>
> On Tue, Mar 5, 2024 at 3:39 AM Markus Demleitner via semantics <
> semantics at ivoa.net> wrote:
>
>> Dear Semantics, dear Registry,
>>
>> We have a new VEP on the Registry's vocabulary of relationship types,
>> VEP-015: https://github.com/ivoa-std/VEPs/blob/main/VEP-015.txt.
>>
>> Here is its text:
>>
>>   Vocabulary: http://www.ivoa.net/rdf/voresource/relationship_type
>>   Author: gilles.landais at unistra.fr
>>   Date: 2022-12-15
>>
>>   New Term: References
>>   Action: Addition
>>   Label: references
>>   Description: This resource used the related resource as a source of
>> information.
>>
>>   Used-in: The registry record ivo://edu.gavo.org/hd/gavo_addpms (and
>> most
>>     other IVOA document records; cf.
>>     <
>> http://dc.zah.uni-heidelberg.de/wirr/q/ui/fixed?field0=restype&operator0=%3D&operand0=doc%3Adocument
>> >)
>>
>>   Rationale: This term is proposed to replace the deprecated term
>> "related-to"
>>     in the registry relationships. In VizieR, "related-to" refers VO
>> resources
>>     which are linked by their biliographic references.
>>
>>     For instance, a VizieR catalogue V is attached to a bibliographic
>> reference.
>>     This article includes in the section "References" citations to other
>>     articles A1, A2, ... some of them have a VizieR catalogue V1,V2,...
>>     The proposed relation makes the relation between V and V1,V2,...
>>
>>     "References"  is a term used in DataCite schema.
>>
>> Do the WGs have opinions on this?  I'd suggest comments should be
>> addressed to the Registry mailing list.
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>>           Markus
>>
>>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.ivoa.net/pipermail/semantics/attachments/20240305/532c5700/attachment.htm>