docs: fix citation metadata and the broken weights-license link - #5
Merged
Conversation
CITATION.cff did not validate against the CFF 1.2.0 schema, so tools that
read it (including GitHub's "Cite this repository" box) had nothing usable:
- `year` is not a top-level key; `date-released` is.
- `publisher` must be an entity object, not a string.
Both are fixed and the file now validates with cffconvert. While there, add
the metadata that citation and archival tooling expects: version,
date-released (from the v1.0.0 tag), repository-code, the preprint DOI under
`identifiers`, keywords and an abstract. `license` becomes
PolyForm-Noncommercial-1.0.0 to match pyproject.toml -- the previous
CC-BY-NC-SA-4.0 is the *weights* license, which is a separate artifact.
README:
- `[CC-BY-NC-SA-4.0](WEIGHTS_LICENSE)` 404s; the file is WEIGHTS_LICENSE.md.
- The three medrxiv.org/...v1 links are version-pinned and go stale at v2.
Point them at the DOI instead, which always resolves to the latest version.
- Add the DOI to the BibTeX entry, which had no persistent identifier at all.
Drop `pages={2026--06}`, a date fragment in a page field that renders as
"pp. 2026-06". Publisher is openRxiv, not Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory
Press -- the 10.64898 prefix is openRxiv's. These oddities come from Google
Scholar's stale medRxiv template.
- Escape the umlaut in Raetsch -> R{\"a}tsch, matching CITATION.cff and
Crossref.
- Add PyPI to Resources; it was only reachable via a badge.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Why
CITATION.cffnever validated against the CFF 1.2.0 schema, so anything that reads it — including GitHub's Cite this repository box — had nothing usable. Two violations, found withcffconvert:yearis not a valid top-level key; the schema expectsdate-released.publishermust be an entity object, not a string — so"Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press"was invalid regardless of its content.Separately, the README's weights-license link 404s, and neither citation file carried the preprint DOI.
What changed
CITATION.cff— fixes both schema violations, then adds the metadata citation and archival tooling expects:version,date-released(from thev1.0.0tag),repository-code, the DOI underidentifiers,keywords,abstract.licensebecomesPolyForm-Noncommercial-1.0.0to matchpyproject.toml; the previousCC-BY-NC-SA-4.0is the weights license, a separate artifact, now noted in a comment.README.md[CC-BY-NC-SA-4.0](WEIGHTS_LICENSE)→WEIGHTS_LICENSE.md. The old target does not exist, so the link 404s.medrxiv.org/content/...v1links →https://doi.org/10.64898/2026.06.19.26356060. The version-pinned URLs go stale at v2; the DOI always resolves to the current version.doiandurl— it previously had no persistent identifier. Dropspages={2026--06}, a date fragment in a page field that renders as "pp. 2026–06". Publisher corrected toopenRxiv; the10.64898prefix is openRxiv's, not CSHL's10.1101. These oddities come from Google Scholar's stale medRxiv template.Raetsch→R{\"a}tsch, matchingCITATION.cffand Crossref.Verification
CITATION.cffvalidates against cff-version 1.2.0 (cffconvert); APA and BibTeX render correctly.10.64898/2026.06.19.26356060, posted 2026-06-22, publisher openRxiv, author list matches.No code, packaging or CI changes.
🤖 Generated with Claude Code