Re: [jats-list] Why is archiving JATS with a DOI not common?

Subject: Re: [jats-list] Why is archiving JATS with a DOI not common?
From: "Alf Eaton eaton.alf@xxxxxxxxx" <jats-list-service@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2022 20:24:37 -0000
> Is there any DOI registrant that resolves a DOI to the JATS XML of the
article with PubMed ID 29618526? (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29618526/)

> This is an article published by the Royal Society which is a customer of
Atypon. As a DOI registrant, the Royal Society resolves their
doi:10.1098/rsif.2017.0387 to their website from which a PDF can be
downloaded (and the article is also encoded in HTML).  But as best I can
tell, the Royal Society makes zero effort to have that DOI, or any other
DOI that it manages, resolve to a JATS XML file or package.

Hi Castedo - that's a good example to pick!

Fetching the metadata for that DOI, via the DOI registrar Crossref, finds a
bunch of useful URLs in the response Link header (and in the JSON, if you
remove the -I flag from the request):

curl -L -I -H 'Accept: application/json'
https://doi.org/10.1098/rsif.2017.0387

<http://dx.doi.org/10.1098/rsif.2017.0387>; rel="canonical", <
https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/pdf/10.1098/rsif.2017.0387>;
version="vor"; type="application/pdf"; rel="item",
<https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/full-xml/10.1098/rsif.2017.0387>;
version="vor"; type="application/xml"; rel="item", <
https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/pdf/10.1098/rsif.2017.0387>;
version="vor"; rel="item",
<https://royalsociety.org/journals/ethics-policies/data-sharing-mining/>;
version="tdm"; rel="license"

One of those is, indeed, the full text "version of record" JATS XML:

https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/full-xml/10.1098/rsif.2017.0387

Best wishes,
Alf

Current Thread