Re: [jats-list] Versions of an article

[Bruce Rosenblum <bruce@xxxxxxxxx>]

Alf,

I absolutely do believe that you can assign DOIs to preprints, and in 
fact I encourage it if the preprints will be made accessible.

However I've seen the case of the F1000 example you've cited below, 
and I think F1000 will create lots of problems when services try to 
look up DOIs to their articles that have not been cited by DOI. Yes, 
I know F1000 wants everyone to cite their articles by DOI, but the 
reality is that lots of authors still don't understand DOI and lots 
of editorial styles don't properly account for it, and so whether 
F1000 likes it or not, they will find at least some citations to 
their articles lacking a DOI. Once the DOI is gone from the citation, 
and you have two or more DOIs with the same authors, article title, 
journal name, and year, any system that accepts only a single DOI 
match on a lookup (which I believe is most systems doing DOI 
matching) will fail to retrieve a DOI. This may ultimately cause some 
F1000 citations to be left uncounted, which I do not believe is the 
goal of their editors.

If you want to do assign a unique DOI to each version (and remember, 
I'm still not in favor of doing this), at least look at what eLife 
has done where:

        http://dx.doi.org/10.7554/eLife.00459

points to an article, and then lots of DOIs have been registered as 
components of that article, e.g. 
http://dx.doi.org/10.7554/eLife.00459.001. Making each version of the 
article a component of a parent DOI is a model that can work.

Bruce

At 03:25 PM 5/9/2013, Alf Eaton wrote:
> That's an interesting point to debate, and I think it mostly depends
> on how much the content is likely to change between versions (in this
> particular case it's article preprints, which could change
> considerably between versions).
>
> For example, F1000 Research mint DOIs only for each version of an article:
> http://dx.doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.2-79.v1
> http://dx.doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.2-79.v2
> They still have a generic non-versioned URL for the article (as well
> as the versioned URLs), but not an article-level DOI.
>
> Dryad's guidelines <http://wiki.datadryad.org/DOI_Usage>, on the other
> hand, recommend to have both a generic, over-arching DOI for all
> versions of a dataset, as well as one DOI for each specific version of
> the dataset. This seems like the most appropriate option, as it allows
> someone to choose to cite either the whole "work" (possibly while
> specifying a particular point in time) or a specific version, as they
> prefer.
>
> There are also inevitably going to be different DOIs for the same
> "work", if a preprint is published on one service (and assigned a
> DOI), then published in its final form somewhere else and assigned a
> new DOI by the different publisher. You could argue that preprints
> shouldn't be assigned DOIs, but then you have to a) define when
> something is a "preprint" and b) tell people that they're not allowed
> to cite "unpublished" work using a DOI.
>
> Alf
>
> On 9 May 2013 18:11, Bruce Rosenblum <bruce@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > Alf,
> >
> > This isn't an answer to your question, but a comment about DOI. You should
> > assign a DOI to a work, not a manifestation. If you assign a DOI to each
> > version of an article, many applications will fail to link because you'll
> > have multiple DOIs that have the same metadata. It's better to assign one
> > DOI and then have the landing page show each version of the article.
> >
> > Bruce
> >
> >
> > At 12:59 PM 5/9/2013, Alf Eaton wrote:
> >>
> >> Does anyone have any experience with marking up links to previous
> >> versions of an article in JATS, and also marking up the version number
> >> of the current article?
> >>
> >> The previous versions of the article will all have their own URLs and
> >> DOIs, so I was thinking that the "related-article" element would make
> >> sense. There doesn't seem to be an existing @related-article-type
> >> attribute meaning "previous version", but HTTP link relations[1]
> >> include "predecessor-version" and "successor-version", which could be
> >> re-usable.
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >> Alf
> >>
> >> [1] http://www.iana.org/assignments/link-relations/link-relations.xml
> >
> >
> > -------------------------------------------------------------------
> > 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

-------------------------------------------------------------------
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