4 ms·

> […] All paths were map-matched to the open street map network (www.openstreetmap.org). OpenStreetMap. Weird sloppiness there.

jltsiren 5y ago
It may be intentional. Nature journals generally discourage using technical terminology, jargon, and abbreviations, unless there are good reasons for them. In the same spirit, brand names should be avoided as well, especially if the spelling is weird.
- jeroenhd 5y ago
  This could be an explanation, was the brand name not immediately followed by the domain name of the project. The capitalization also implies a direct reference to OSM. The paper also references several Google services by name. I think it might even be inaccurate to describe something as "the open street map network", because "the" implies there is only one network of street maps that are open. Alternatives like "All paths were map-matched to the street map network provided by ..." or "All paths were map-matched to an open street map, specifically ..." would probably be more correct if the goal is to avoid the brand name. I see no reason to discourage brand names if their products are specifically directly to the research in question. Avoiding brands is a lot easier in other fields of science, but even there attributing data sources should be acceptable (or even required). It looks to me like the this is the result of sloppiness or an overzealous editor.
  - Freak_NL 5y ago
    I've always followed the basic principles that you shouldn't allow brand names to dictate weird capitalization and such (so IOS instead of iOS, Yahoo instead of Yahoo!, and AC/DC instead of actually putting a lightning bolt character between the two types of electrical current), but even then you would either end up with 'OpenStreetMap' or 'Openstreetmap'.
da39a3ee 5y ago
I'm finding it oddly sloppy as well. > consistently longer than the shortest-distance path computed using the standard Dijkstra algorithm The algorithm used to compute shortest-distance is entirely irrelevant, unless there's some doubt about the correctness of the algorithm! > In this Article, Does Nature CS mandate that article is capitalized? It looks very odd.
- Someone 5y ago
  Not entirely irrelevant. Without that statement there could be doubts about the correctness of the algorithm used.

jltsiren 5y ago

It may be intentional. Nature journals generally discourage using technical terminology, jargon, and abbreviations, unless there are good reasons for them. In the same spirit, brand names should be avoided as well, especially if the spelling is weird.

jeroenhd 5y ago
This could be an explanation, was the brand name not immediately followed by the domain name of the project. The capitalization also implies a direct reference to OSM. The paper also references several Google services by name. I think it might even be inaccurate to describe something as "the open street map network", because "the" implies there is only one network of street maps that are open. Alternatives like "All paths were map-matched to the street map network provided by ..." or "All paths were map-matched to an open street map, specifically ..." would probably be more correct if the goal is to avoid the brand name. I see no reason to discourage brand names if their products are specifically directly to the research in question. Avoiding brands is a lot easier in other fields of science, but even there attributing data sources should be acceptable (or even required). It looks to me like the this is the result of sloppiness or an overzealous editor.
- Freak_NL 5y ago
  I've always followed the basic principles that you shouldn't allow brand names to dictate weird capitalization and such (so IOS instead of iOS, Yahoo instead of Yahoo!, and AC/DC instead of actually putting a lightning bolt character between the two types of electrical current), but even then you would either end up with 'OpenStreetMap' or 'Openstreetmap'.

da39a3ee 5y ago

I'm finding it oddly sloppy as well. > consistently longer than the shortest-distance path computed using the standard Dijkstra algorithm The algorithm used to compute shortest-distance is entirely irrelevant, unless there's some doubt about the correctness of the algorithm! > In this Article, Does Nature CS mandate that article is capitalized? It looks very odd.

Someone 5y ago
Not entirely irrelevant. Without that statement there could be doubts about the correctness of the algorithm used.