@jpvanacken Sorry for the delay. I think you can fit most of the important info in most of the styles, and styles are usually defined by the media you publish in.

I personally like to use IEEE w/ URL to make sure I can fit in a DOI + URL in the reference.

In general I think a PID is actually more important for citing versions than a link to the repo, but - as usual in research matters - "it depends" :).

The two main reasons behind that being:

1. Software work is important for research and should be creditable and credited (e.g., towards better career paths, getting recognition, etc.)
2. Reproducibility: (Proper) software citation identifies the different parts of a computational process that has led to research results. In order to reproduce results, these parts must be known, e.g., down to software versions being used, etc.

@jpvanacken Sure can, I think (and so do larger parts of the research software community) that software used in/for research should be cited on par with papers, etc. This is currently not always part of practice.

Some issues around how this would work have been solved (peerj.com/articles/cs-86/), currently solutions are being worked on (force11.org/group/software-cit).

I'm working specifically on making software citation work for dependencies (i.e. software citing software, like papers cite papers).

Hi, I'm pursuing a Phd (CS, Software Engineering) at the German Aerospace Center (DLR) & Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin. I'm also a (RSE) in linguistics.

💻 My research is on , and .

I also teach computational basics to researchers (), promote RSE () and am a Special Collaborator of the (SSI).

I'm based in Berlin, Germany.

Scholar Social

Scholar Social is a microblogging platform for researchers, grad students, librarians, archivists, undergrads, academically inclined high schoolers, educators of all levels, journal editors, research assistants, professors, administrators—anyone involved in academia who is willing to engage with others respectfully.