[OSM-Science] [OSM-talk] correct (scholarly) attribution?

[Jennings Anderson]

This is interesting — putting this out to the science list.

Most research says something like “downloaded the planet file as of <date> and then did <type of data analysis>"

But actually citing the database as a source… Perhaps something like: 

OpenStreetMap Contributors (2019). OpenStreetMap Data [For a specific region if appropriate]. Retrieved May 16, 2019. https://planet.openstreetmap.org/ <https://planet.openstreetmap.org/>

(Or a different URL to wherever you got an extract from)

That’s just one proposed format that I think captures all of the necessary information for a complete citation (website-like)

-Jennings

> On May 16, 2019, at 11:30 AM, Frederik Ramm <frederik at remote.org> wrote:
> 
> Hi,
> 
> if someone writes a scientific paper and wants to reference an OSM data
> set they used, what would be the correct way to do that? Typically such
> mentions contain author and name of the work, and publication place and
> year. Or maybe the web-like "retrieved on ..."?
> 
> Bye
> Frederik
> 
> -- 
> Frederik Ramm  ##  eMail frederik at remote.org  ##  N49°00'09" E008°23'33"
> 
> _______________________________________________
> talk mailing list
> talk at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/science/attachments/20190516/d4f95fd2/attachment.html>