Assessment:Citations: Difference between revisions

Latest revision as of 14:56, 17 January 2018

Current Projects

The Citations Working Group is currently not active. Citations Working Group work is archived using the Open Science Framework.

Get Involved

If you have any questions please contribute to the discussion through the DLF AIG Google Group or contact Elizabeth Joan Kelly at ejkelly at loyno.edu.

Past Projects

The DLF AIG Citations Working Group formed in the Fall of 2014 following the successful launch of the larger DLF AIG at the 2014 DLF forum. Volunteers interested in developing best practices for creating and displaying citations for digital library assets were solicited through the Digital Library Assessment Google Group. The citations working group was tasked with answering the following questions:

What should a citation consist of?
How can we best support appropriate citations?
To what extent do common citation formats support this?
What are the limitations of current digital library software systems for displaying citation information?
What are best practices for displaying citation information for reference manager software capture?

The Citations Working Group was further split up to accomplish the following goals:

Draft citation standards, based on what can and can't be incorporated into APA, Chicago, and MLA, that incorporate the necessary elements for digitized special collections and institutional repository content
Explore how best to display citation information in page markup so reference managers like Mendeley, Zotero, and EndNote Web can easily parse the pages to import complete citation information
Compile information on the technical issues for displaying citations from major software systems

The first goal involving draft citation standards was completed for DLF 2015. An initial draft was circulated to the DLF Assessment group using Google Docs from March 6 through April 3, 2015. At that point comments and edits that were grammar and/or punctuation-related as well as suggestions to clarify text were resolved, and a new document was moved to for further editing. Additional comments were invited through April 24, 2015. The resulting white paper, "Guidelines for citing library-hosted, unique digital assets" (DOI 10.17605/OSF.IO/98TAS) is available here.

Abstract of "Guidelines for Citing Library-hosted, Unique Digital Assets"

These draft guidelines were developed in response to a call for steps forward made by the Digital Library Federation (DLF) Assessment subgroup on Benefits. One of the areas identified for development included the establishment of best practices and guidelines for citing digital libraries. Most if not all major citation styles do not provide direction for citing digital objects, and it is difficult for the administrators of digital repositories to use traditional citation metrics to track the use of their digital objects in scholarly output. Scholarly literature has recently begun to focus on challenges and best practices for citing data sets. In addition, some citation styles, as well as individual institutions, provide guidelines for citing special collections materials. Much of this work can be drawn upon in order to format citations for digitized special collection and cultural heritage materials (e.g. rare books, manuscript materials, images, moving images, etc.) and institutional repository content. These guidelines attempt to address the following questions:

What should a citation consist of?
How can we best support appropriate citations?
To what extent do common citation formats support this?

This document outlines suggested citation guidelines in an attempt to fill in gaps when the citation style does not give guidelines for a type of source—in this case, institutional repository and digitized cultural heritage objects.

White Paper Author and Contributors

Elizabeth Joan Kelly, Loyola University New Orleans (author), ejkelly at loyno.edu

Acknowledgements

The following people provided valuable feedback, edits, and comments on the various drafts of this document:

Geoffrey Bilder
Bianca Crowley
Jody DeRidder
Kevin Hawkins
Stacy Konkiel
Martha Kyrillidou
Bill Landis
Elliot D. Williams

This document was presented and discussed at the 2015 Digital Library Federation Forum as part of the session "Collaborative Efforts to Develop Best Practices in Assessment: A Progress Report" on Monday, October 26 at 1:30pm Pacific Time. The session was available via live-streaming during the conference, and the recording is archived online at the University of British Columbia.

Back to the Assessment home page

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
+__TOC__
+== Current Projects==
-== What should a citation consist of? ==
+The Citations Working Group is currently not active. Citations Working Group work is archived using the [https://osf.io/fd6uh/ Open Science Framework].
-The [http://datapub.cdlib.org/datacitation/ California Digital Library's Datapub blog] has a good summary of data citation basics, which document the following "core" and "recommended" components of dataset citations:
+== Get Involved==
-'''Minimal components of a data citation:'''
-Creator (Year) Title. Publisher. Identifier
+If you have any questions please contribute to the discussion through the [https://groups.google.com/forum/#!forum/digital-library-assessment DLF AIG Google Group] or contact Elizabeth Joan Kelly at [mailto:ejkelly@loyno.edu ejkelly at loyno.edu].
-'''Core Elements'''
+== Past Projects==
-*Creator(s): Individual(s) or organization responsible for creating the dataset.
+The DLF AIG Citations Working Group formed in the Fall of 2014 following the successful launch of the larger DLF AIG at the 2014 DLF forum. Volunteers interested in developing best practices for creating and displaying citations for digital library assets were solicited through the Digital Library Assessment Google Group. The citations working group was tasked with answering the following questions:
-*Year: Year the dataset was published, not necessarily created.
-*Title: Should be as descriptive as possible.
-*Publisher: Organization that provides access to the dataset (e.g. Dryad, Zenodo).
-*Identifier: Persistent, unique identifier (e.g. a DOI).
-'''Additional Elements'''
+# What should a citation consist of?
+# How can we best support appropriate citations?
+# To what extent do common citation formats support this?
+# What are the limitations of current digital library software systems for displaying citation information?
+# What are best practices for displaying citation information for reference manager software capture?
-*Location / Availability: The web address of the dataset is essential when the identifier can’t be used to reach the dataset.
+The Citations Working Group was further split up to accomplish the following goals:
-*Version / Edition: Version of the dataset used in the present publication.  Needed to reproduce analysis of versioned dynamic datasets.
+# Draft citation standards, based on what can and can't be incorporated into APA, Chicago, and MLA, that incorporate the necessary elements for digitized special collections and institutional repository content
-*Access Date: Date of access for analysis in the present publication. Needed to reproduce  analysis of continuously updated dynamic datasets.
+# Explore how best to display citation information in page markup so reference managers like Mendeley, Zotero, and EndNote Web can easily parse the pages to import complete citation information
-*Format / Material Designator: e.g. database, CD-ROM.
+# Compile information on the technical issues for displaying citations from major software systems
-*Feature Name: A description of the subset of the dataset used.  May be a formal title or a list of variables  (e.g. concentration, optical density).
-*Verifier: Used to confirm that two datasets are identical.  Most commonly a UNF or MD5 checksum.
-*Series: Used if the dataset is part of series of releases (e.g. monthly, yearly).
-*Contributor: e.g. editor, compiler
+The first goal involving draft citation standards was completed for DLF 2015. An [https://docs.google.com/document/d/1o_ROgzDKdBJKtWdl80Dh_bQKVg-y33EdXgc5cK64Y70/ initial draft] was circulated to the DLF Assessment group using Google Docs from March 6 through April 3, 2015. At that point comments and edits that were grammar and/or punctuation-related as well as suggestions to clarify text were resolved, and [https://docs.google.com/document/d/1b9G72sjkL35uYQGEcGiL_WcUjm0qdlE2zoVYdgKjldA/ a new document] was moved to for further editing. Additional comments were invited through April 24, 2015. The resulting white paper, ''' "Guidelines for citing library-hosted, unique digital assets" (DOI 10.17605/OSF.IO/98TAS) is available [https://osf.io/98tas/ here]. '''
-'''''Digitized Special collections bring more to the table, however. '''' For example, many institutions prefer to include citation information for:
+== Abstract of "Guidelines for Citing Library-hosted, Unique Digital Assets" ==
-* the containing collection and holding institution.
-* Series/subseries/box/folder information
-* other?
-==Questions to Address==
+These draft guidelines were developed in response to a call for steps forward made by the Digital Library Federation (DLF) Assessment subgroup on Benefits. One of the areas identified for development included the establishment of best practices and guidelines for citing digital libraries. Most if not all major citation styles do not provide direction for citing digital objects, and it is difficult for the administrators of digital repositories to use traditional citation metrics to track the use of their digital objects in scholarly output. Scholarly literature has recently begun to focus on challenges and best practices for citing data sets. In addition, some citation styles, as well as individual institutions, provide guidelines for citing special collections materials. Much of this work can be drawn upon in order to format citations for digitized special collection and cultural heritage materials (e.g. rare books, manuscript materials, images, moving images, etc.) and institutional repository content. These guidelines attempt to address the following questions:
+# What should a citation consist of?
 # How can we best support appropriate citations?
 # To what extent do common citation formats support this?
-# What are the limitations of current digital library software systems, for displaying citation information?
-# What are best practices for displaying citation information for reference manager software capture?
+This document outlines suggested citation guidelines in an attempt to fill in gaps when the citation style does not give guidelines for a type of source—in this case, institutional repository and digitized cultural heritage objects.
+== White Paper Author and Contributors ==
+* Elizabeth Joan Kelly, Loyola University New Orleans (author), [mailto:ejkelly@loyno.edu ejkelly at loyno.edu]
+'''Acknowledgements'''
+The following people provided valuable feedback, edits, and comments on the various drafts of this document:
+* Geoffrey Bilder
+* Bianca Crowley
+* Jody DeRidder
+* Kevin Hawkins
+* Stacy Konkiel
+* Martha Kyrillidou
+* Bill Landis
+* Elliot D. Williams
-Reference resource:  ANSI/NISO Standard Z39.29-2005 (R2010) <em>[http://www.niso.org/apps/group_public/download.php/12969/Z39_29_2005_R2010.pdf Bibliographic References]</em>
+This document was presented and discussed at the 2015 Digital Library Federation Forum as part of the session  "Collaborative Efforts to Develop Best Practices in Assessment: A Progress Report" on Monday, October 26 at 1:30pm Pacific Time. The session was available via live-streaming during the conference, and the recording is archived online at the [https://open.library.ubc.ca/cIRcle/collections/55474/items/1.0220854 University of British Columbia].
-We have formed a working group on these issues, that we hope will have progress to share at the next [http://www.diglib.org/forums/2015forum/ DLF Forum]!
+----
-If you are interested in helping us develop best practices and guidelines for measuring benefits of digital libraries, please join our
+[http://wiki.diglib.org/Assessment Back to the Assessment home page]
-[https://groups.google.com/forum/#!forum/digital-library-assessment Digital Library Assessment Google Group] and speak up!  :-)