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

["Castedo Ellerman castedo@xxxxxxxxxxx" <jats-list-service@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On 4/29/22 07:26, David Haber wrote:
> After reading your question a few times more, are you asking why the 
> specific XML component or format of a given article does not have its 
> own unique DOI?

More or less, yes, that is what I was wondering, thank you.

> So, perhaps a publisher HTML version would have a DOI, maybe the PDF 
> would have a DOI, perhaps an ePub would have a DOI, and maybe the XML? 
> And all these dois would be unique?
>
> If that is your question, then the reason is that the article is the 
> unit of measure in scholarly publishing, and those other versions are 
> just that, versions or different formats. The content is not unique to 
> the format so therefore would not get a separate doi. It is true that 
> different formats may display a piece of an article differently (or 
> maybe not at all) but that does not make the format unique because the 
> DOI represents the entire published object and all its formats because 
> that is the unique piece we as publishers are shepherding to the world.

I have some clarifications to ask on a few of the terms you've used. I 
ask specifically about the DOI 10.1016/j.tpb.2018.03.006. Here are three 
ways I can resolve that DOI to three different digital objects:

1) Via doi.org I am sent to a web page where Elsevier requests $25 to 
view a PDF file.

2) In Zotero I can enter the doi and I get a free PDF (which is labeled 
Author manuscript)

3) I can enter the DOI on PubMed Central and freely see an HTML page 
(also labeled Author manuscript)

I assume 1) resolves to different content than 2) and 3) because 
Elsevier wants $25.

So we have one DOI which is representing two different sets of content 
here? Or does the DOI represent only the $25 article and not the author 
manuscript?

What is the unit of measure in scholarly publishing in this case?

Is the Author manuscript provided by PubMed Central and Zotero part of 
the entire published object or not part?

Is the PubMed Central web page content here not a published object?

Thank you,
B  Castedo