Re: [jats-list] about elocation-id and fpage

[Alexander Schwarzman <aschwarzman@xxxxxxxxx>]

Dear Mr. Kubota:

I would like to second Bruce: I would not recommend using both
'elocation-id' and 'fpage' -- because doing so reduces the chances of
successful resolution of citations to the articles published on your
platform .

If I am not mistaken, when depositing to CrossRef, JATS's
'elocation-id' should be mapped to CrossRef's
item_number[@item_number_type="article-id"], e.g.,

<publisher_item>
  <item_number item_number_type="article-id">e1001311</item_number>
</publisher_item>

From:
http://www.crossref.org/schema/info/CrossRefSchemaDocumentation4.1.0.pdf,
p. 119:

"In certain cases it may be deemed inappropriate to 'misuse' the
first_page element to provide a value that has meaning in an online
only publication and does not convey an form of page number. In these
circumstances the attribute <item_number
item_number_type="article-number"> will instruct the CrossRef system
to treat the value of item_number in the same manner as first_page.
***This value then becomes a critical part of the query process. If
both <item_number item_number_type="article-number"> and first_page
are present, first_page will take precedence.***"
(Emphasis mine -- SS)

If the article metadata contains both 'elocation-id' and 'fpage' then,
inevitably, citing publications will use one, the other, or both. The
CrossRef deposit schema model 'citation_t' for a citation contains
only one relevant element, namely, 'first_page'. When the the citing
publication uses 'elocation-id', it is going to be mapped into
'first_page'. Since you are going to deposit (I assume) both the
'item_number' and the 'first_page', and since the 'first_page' takes
precedence, the resolution prospects for the citing publication that
happens to use 'elocation-id' may be jeopardized: I doubt that if the
matching on 'first_page' fails then CrossRef's algorithm would attempt
to match the value against item_number[@item_number_type="article-id"]
(again, assuming that you had deposited it there in the first place).

As Bruce noted, using 'elocation-id' throughout and not using page
numbers is considered best practice. One of the advantages of this
approach is that you will need to deposit the article's metadata to
CrossRef only once -- at the AOP stage.

However, if the authoritative article version is going to use page
number, then my advice is to dispense with 'elocation-id' altgether
and not use it at all. Instead, identify the AOP version only by the
DOI, and then add the page numbers later. By doing so, you are
avoiding the risk of someone citing an AOP version using the
'elocation-id'. You are also saving yourself a trouble of depositing
'elocation-id' as 'item_number'.

Of course, there is a price to pay -- you'll have to deposit the
article's metadata to CrossRef twice: first, at the AOP stage; and
then the second time when the page numbers become known.

Sincerely,

Alexander ('Sasha') Schwarzman
Content Technology Architect
OSA - The Optical Society
2010 Massachusetts Ave., NW
Washington, DC 20036  USA
Direct: +1.202.416.1979
Email: aschwarzman@xxxxxxx
http://www.osa.org


On Fri, Jun 29, 2012 at 7:14 PM, d9d?g0e#.d8 <kubota@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Dear Bruce,
>
> Thank you for you message.
> I understand what you wrote.
> I remember the discussion in CrossRef TWG.
>
>> 1. Use only a DOI for the AOP version, and then traditional pagination for
>> the print version.
>
> We build DOI-name with the value in elocation-id field so we can
> correlate AOP version with print version with DOI. I will consider it.
>
>> 2. Use an elocation-id for the AOP version, and continue to use only the
>> elocation-id in the print version. This strategy is used by many
publishers
>> including the American Physical Society. Of course the elocation-id should
>> be supplemented with a DOI.
>
> This is not hard to accept because for journals where they regard
> print version as the authenticated version, the key bibliographic
> element is page number, not article id. But some journals (e.g.
> journals in physics) adopt this method.
>
> Also I would like to consider using other fields like <article-id>.
>
>>
>> Note that when using elocation-ids (or article IDs, as they are more
>> commonly called), there are best-practices promoted by NFAIS. Please see
>> section 7 of the document
>> http://www.nfais.org/files/file/Best_Practices_Final_Public.pdf.
>
> Thank you for the information.
>
> I would like to hear the practices of journal publishers.
>
> Best wishes,
> Soichi Kubota
>
> 2012/6/27 Bruce Rosenblum <bruce@xxxxxxxxx>:
>> Dear Soichi,
>>
>> It is not a best-practice to have both an article ID and also page
numbers.
>> That's in part because secondary publishers will only index the article
>> using one or the other, but if researchers cite the article sometimes with
>> the article ID and other times by page number then it will cause great
>> difficulty in creating a link to the item. There was also a somewhat
heated
>> discussion about publishers trying to use both elocation-ids and page
>> numbers on the CrossRef TWG list several years back and the general
>> consensus was that using both was not a good idea.
>>
>> There are several alternate solutions to this problem:
>>
>> 1. Use only a DOI for the AOP version, and then traditional pagination for
>> the print version.
>>
>> 2. Use an elocation-id for the AOP version, and continue to use only the
>> elocation-id in the print version. This strategy is used by many
publishers
>> including the American Physical Society. Of course the elocation-id should
>> be supplemented with a DOI.
>>
>> Note that when using elocation-ids (or article IDs, as they are more
>> commonly called), there are best-practices promoted by NFAIS. Please see
>> section 7 of the document
>> http://www.nfais.org/files/file/Best_Practices_Final_Public.pdf.
>>
>> Best regards,
>>
>> Bruce
>>
>> At 07:11 PM 6/26/2012, =?ISO-2022-JP?B?GyRCNVdKXUVEQVQwbBsoQg==?= wrote:
>>>
>>> Dear all,
>>>
>>> My name is Soichi Kubota from Japan Science and Technology Agency.
>>> We operate an electronic journal platform, on which a number of
>>> Japanese societies publish their journals.
>>>
>>> I would like to discuss about "ahead of print" article XML.
>>>
>>> First, an "ahead of print" version article is published online with
>>> only an article id.
>>> And then the final version (with full bibliographic information, such
>>> as volume number, issue number, pages) is also published online
>>> afterward.
>>>
>>> We use "elocation-id".element to identify article with no pages of
>>> "ahead of print" version article.
>>> Then it will have page numbers when it become final version which
>>> corresponds to print version.
>>> So the XML file of the final version should have both elocation-id and
>>> fpage/lpage.
>>> It is similar to the situation one journal may have both print
ISSN/online
>>> ISSN.
>>>
>>> But JATS dtd prohibits coexistence of elocation-id and
>>> fpage/lpage/page-range.
>>> I think they need not to be prohibited.
>>>
>>> I would like JATS dtd to permit the coexistence of elocation-id and
>>> fpage/lpage/page_range.
>>>
>>> I would also be grateful if you give us how you correlate AOP version
>>> with print version in one XML.
>>> Thank you.
>>>
>>> Best wishes,
>>> Soichi Kubota
>>> ---
>>> Japan Science and Technology Agency
>>> Group of Electronic Journals
>>> Soichi Kubota
>>> email: kubota@xxxxxxxxx
>>
>>
>> -------------------------------------------------------------------
>> This email message and any attachments are confidential. If you are not
the
>> intended recipient, please immediately reply to the sender or call
>> 617-932-1932 and delete the message from your email system. Thank you.
>> -------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Bruce D. Rosenblum
>> Inera Inc.
>> 19 Flett Road
>> Belmont, MA 02478
>> 617-932-1932 (office)
>> bruce@xxxxxxxxx