Support for multiple authors

[nuest]

Hi! Great initiative you have here! 👏

Is there a way to link a grant to multiple authors? AFAICS no. Wondering if you have thought about that, and would be happy to contribute some development time if you're interested to realize such a feature. Right now I'm unsure how to add our collaborative proposal, but I'd really like to :-)

[ethanwhite]

Thanks @nuest! That would be a great addition and I'd be happy to review a PR.

Right now we aren't actually doing much with the author information. It's always been my plan to have a "Grants By Author" page similar to those for Funder and Program, but I haven't gotten around to it. Therefore, for multi-authored grants at the moment it's just a single string. E.g., https://raw.githubusercontent.com/weecology/ogrants/master/_grants/hamlington_peter_2019.md

A first step would be making converting the author and ORCID values to lists and the properly displaying the one or more author names in the list wherever grants are displayed. A second step would be to add a "Grants By Author" page and populated it by matching ORCIDs.

Thanks so much for offering to help out and let me know if I can help as you go.

[nuest]

Thanks for the positive reply, and for sketching out the required steps.

I don't know when I'll be able to take a closer look, unless I'm accepted to the eLife Innovation Sprint - then I know when I'd like to work with you on this or other ideas.

I'll get in touch when I see some downtime coming up!

[ethanwhite]

Sounds great! Thanks @nuest!

[nuest]

@ethanwhite Just a short update: I don't think I'll be able to contribute in a meaningful way before the sprint.

[But I'm happy to flesh out the task more before the event. Do you plan to start a project or label for the occasion?]

I think the steps to tackle this issue are mostly clear.

• Decide on naming convention for file names of multi-author grants
• converting the author and ORCID values to lists and properly display the one or more author names in the list wherever grants are displayed
• Add a "Grants By Author" page and populated it by matching ORCIDs.

[ethanwhite]

Thanks. That looks right to me.

@ha0ye is running the sprint so he's the person to chat with more about organizational stuff and what his plans are.

[ha0ye]

Ooh, that does remind me to bug @ethanwhite about adding me to the ogrants maintainer team.

@nuest - no worries! I intend to do some outline planning during August, but am not aiming for a fully-proscriptive feature list, since I would like to be inclusive of the ideas that contributers at the sprint will have.

[ethanwhite]

Ooh, that does remind me to bug @ethanwhite about adding me to the ogrants maintainer team.

Done.

[jcolomb]

hey folk, just came via orion podcast about the sprint and heard about this issue.

There is two related project you may find useful:

• https://github.com/jam-schema/ : we try here to create an author list standard in yaml, that can be used by pandoc to create other outputs (including jatsxml)
• https://github.com/marton-balazs-kovacs/tenzing : this project aim at creating a simplified spreadsheet standard for author contribution, and transform it into text via an R-shiny app.
• also there is a very prototyped app to create jams or tenzing from orcid number lists: https://colomb.shinyapps.io/contributorlist_creator/ (this one does not count as a project :) )

eventually, the tenzing spreadsheet might be transformed into jams yaml and then to jatsxml via pandoc (once everything is ready :) )

[jcolomb]

Just looked a bit more into the project and realiseyou ask people to have a doi first, you could get author information directly from crossref and change "author" entry into a "depositor", and not care about this anymore ?
(meaning you do not need to show depositor, just get the list of authors from crossref and show it someway)

would be nice to get the crossref data fetch via a github action that could be run on new PR ?

[ethanwhite]

Hi @jcolomb! Thanks for you interest. Those tools definitely look useful. While we'd certainly prefer DOIs we don't require them or support them for grants submitted through our webform, so we can't rely on crossref at the moment even though that's definitely a great idea. I'm happy to support a shift to a standarized schema, especially if there's a sense of general community movement in that direction.