[OWW-SC] page DOIs
Ilya Sytchev
ilyas at MIT.EDU
Tue Sep 18 18:04:42 EDT 2007
The following may be useful to clarify the purpose of DOI. The DOI
system was established to provide persistent identifiers for digital
content because URLs were "never meant to be an identifier but only to
designate the location of objects"
(http://www.press.umich.edu/jep/04-02/davidson.html). In other words,
DOIs were designed to be generic enough so that they could be used on
top of any system, including but not limited to DNS/Internet. The DOI
system provides a level of indirection between the identifier and the
object it identifies. This is very useful for keeping URLs current -
when location of an object changes, you just need to update the URL
associated with the object's DOI.
Besides resolution services, the DOI proxies/resolvers (which are
operated by the Registration Agencies and are currently web-based) also
maintain some structured metadata (like author, date, title, etc) for
every object. This is useful for more efficient searching, for example.
To obtain the real DOIs for OWW content, we'd need to register each DOI
with a DOI Registration Agency. This apparently requires an yearly fee
(just like the Internet domain registration fee) and possibly, a
one-time fee for the DOI prefix (http://www.medra.org/en/terms.htm,
http://www.crossref.org/02publishers/20pub_fees.html).
There's more information about DOI system available here:
http://openwetware.org/wiki/Identifiers#DOI
Also, a pretty good article here:
http://www.contentdirections.com/materials/PRQ-CDIPracticalGuide.htm
Drew Endy wrote:
> DOIs are readily recognized by published, academics, and grant
> reviewers. This is largely because publishers give DOI numbers on
> the header or footer or a paper, right next to the volume, date, and
> page number data, specific to that particular journal and article.
> Because most every journal is listing DOIs, they have become a common
> form of reference. From an appearances perspective, I have had no
> problem citing materials published in DSpace via their DOI number.
> For example, I've cited technical reports published in the the
> synthetic biology DSpace archive as references in Nature articles.
> So, there's some good amount of social acceptance as to what a DOI
> number is (whether it is warranted or not by the infrastructure
> backside is a different matter).
>
> One thing that I like about our setting up a DOI server is that it
> would basically let folks start to build "journals" or "series" on
> top of OWW.
>
> So far as costs... it looks like that there are some options.
>
> First, we could partner with a university who already has a DOI
> allocation for some experimental work. But, note that we likely want
> to give a DOI to every edit / page on OWW, so this may not be practical?
>
> But, check this out:
>
> "Can DOIs be made available at no charge? Yes.
>
> (a) IDF is willing to allocate a DOI prefix free of charge to
> organizations for limited experimental non-commercial uses. Please
> contact us if you wish to apply for this."
>
> From,
> http://www.doi.org/handbook_2000/maintenance.html
>
> Or, it looks like we can get an affiliate membership for $5k annually:
> http://www.doi.org/handbook_2000/governance.html
>
>
>
>
>
> On Sep 18, 2007, at 3:25 PM, Julius B. Lucks wrote:
>
>> I guess DOI's are one incarnation of URN's with domain-specificity
>> to e-publications. It seems really silly that the DOI registration
>> is not more permanent, which more likely than not has something to
>> do with revenues rather than implementing a successful URN scheme.
>>
>> I'll have to read up more on DOI's to be able to discuss this more
>> in a semi-informed manner. For now, I don't see any problem with
>> what you proposed, although it doesn't seem to be any different
>> than just giving oww url's with an oldid parameter. Perhaps
>> masking these url's with other url's won't change the reviewers
>> opinions once they figure out what is going on. It seems like we
>> need something more on the lines of a culture change where people
>> find it acceptable to reference wiki pages. Then we can use
>> whatever name archiving scheme we want.
>>
>> Can anyone share recent experience on reviewers not accepting oww
>> url's as references?
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Julius
>>
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>> -----------------
>> Please Reply to My Permanent Address: julius at younglucks.com
>> http://www.openwetware.org/wiki/User:Julius_B._Lucks
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>> ------------------
>>
>>
>>
>> On Sep 18, 2007, at 3:11 PM, Austin Che wrote:
>>
>>>> What is the big cost associated with DOI's? Is it registration
>>>> of the
>>>> numbers, hardware costs, or both? Perhaps if we don't
>>>> automatically
>>>> register every page, but only pages that people request to be
>>>> registered, we could keep the cost down. Also, what organization
>>>> would we contact to possibly get DOI registration donated to us? I
>>>> wouldn't mind pursuing this, as I think it is a very important
>>>> issue
>>>> for us in terms of 'legitimizing' oww content.
>>> Here are the registration agencies.
>>> http://doi.org/registration_agencies.html
>>>
>>> I don't know anything else about DOIs. The 25K/year number was
>>> from Sri or Jason.
>>> Some lower numbers are on this page: http://www.medra.org/en/
>>> terms.htm
>>>
>>> I actually really don't understand the purpose of DOIs. As stated
>>> on that page, "If the access to the service is not renewed, the
>>> persistence of DOIs is guaranteed for at least 5 years after the
>>> payment of the last annual fee. In order to maintain the
>>> persistence of DOIs after ceasing the use of service, the payment
>>> of 0,1 euros for each document is required." so even DOIs aren't
>>> guarenteed to be permanent. And if the OWW site goes down, why
>>> would it matter if you could resolve a DOI anyway as the content
>>> is no longer there. Thus I see no technical benefits for linking
>>> to a OWW page via some indirect doi linking.
>>>
>>> --
>>> Austin Che <austin at csail.mit.edu> (617)253-5899
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> OpenWetWare Steering Committee Mailing List
>>> sc at openwetware.org
>>> http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/oww-sc
>> _______________________________________________
>> OpenWetWare Steering Committee Mailing List
>> sc at openwetware.org
>> http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/oww-sc
>
> _______________________________________________
> OpenWetWare Steering Committee Mailing List
> sc at openwetware.org
> http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/oww-sc
More information about the OWW-SC
mailing list