Dear maintainers,
Thank you for your GitHub Action! I just tested in one of my repositories, cffreference, and also added it to the CITATION.cff of the repository.
Thereby, the question which is the subject of this issue occurred.
The tool cffreference is designed to extract the citation information of a given input CITATION.cff in order to append them to an output CITATION.cff. The application has also a preview mode for showing the lines which would be added in the own references section. I already suggested the tool in the main repository of the CFF project.
When running it over your CITATION.cff, I was unsure whether the word conceptdoi in line 21 was chosen intentionally. I cited your repository with exactly this spelling but I would like to let you know that this unusual spelling of "concept DOI" might cause unintended confusion and could, hence, require some extra documentation in a future release in order to reason this design choice.
Dear maintainers,
Thank you for your GitHub Action! I just tested in one of my repositories,
cffreference, and also added it to theCITATION.cffof the repository.Thereby, the question which is the subject of this issue occurred.
The tool
cffreferenceis designed to extract the citation information of a given inputCITATION.cffin order to append them to an outputCITATION.cff. The application has also a preview mode for showing the lines which would be added in the ownreferencessection. I already suggested the tool in the main repository of the CFF project.When running it over your
CITATION.cff, I was unsure whether the word conceptdoi in line 21 was chosen intentionally. I cited your repository with exactly this spelling but I would like to let you know that this unusual spelling of "concept DOI" might cause unintended confusion and could, hence, require some extra documentation in a future release in order to reason this design choice.