IJCK R2C9

[bryanwweber]

A reference should not be a required mapping of an experimental dataset. If the intention is to
make the community to adopt the ChemKED file structure, it might be easier to do so if
experimentalists can use the structure internally as well, i.e. to read, store, and share non-
published internal data.

[bryanwweber]

Ref: #3 (comment)

From Kyle:

I agree with the reviewer here—reference shouldn't be required. We already started discussing some related topics in pr-omethe-us/PyKED#69 and privately; my suggestion is that we drop it as a required field, but validate it as we do now if given. I've started an issue on that here: pr-omethe-us/PyKED#76

[bryanwweber]

This is also related to pr-omethe-us/PyKED#39

[bryanwweber]

In my opinion, we should keep the reference as required, since the only required subfields are authors and year, and users should be able to fill in those no matter what (and it may even help them keep track of which data is which). However, as we've discussed in pr-omethe-us/PyKED#39, I think being able to selectively disable aspects of the validation would be very valuable. I added a response to the reviewer that reflects this viewpoint, but please feel free to make changes!

[kyleniemeyer]

I actually think we can remove some of the second paragraph of your response—now that only year and authors are required in reference, there is nothing to validate in there, so validation would just be of the units etc.

[bryanwweber]

Ok I'll take a look

[bryanwweber]

LGTM now, feel free to close