The first question is: what are they trying to accomplish by having DOIs?

Do they have a long-term plan for persistence of their content? Financial
plan?

If they're looking for persistent identifiers, I don't understand (a
priori), why DOI is better, as an identifier scheme, than any other
'persistent identifier scheme' (ARK [1], PURL, Handle, etc[2]). (Though I
really like CrossRef and the things they're doing.)

[1] http://www.cdlib.org/inside/diglib/ark/
[2] http://www.persistent-identifier.de/english/204-examples.php

-Jodi

On Tue, Nov 17, 2009 at 11:44 PM, Bucknell, Terry <
[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> You should be able to find all the information you need about CrossRef fees
> and rules at:
>
> http://www.crossref.org/02publishers/20pub_fees.html
>
> and
>
> http://www.crossref.org/02publishers/59pub_rules.html
>
> Information about the system of registering and maintaining DOIs is at:
>
> http://www.crossref.org/help/
>
> Note that as well as registering DOIs for the articles in LLT, LLT would be
> obliged to link to the articles cited by LLT articles (for cited articles
> that have DOIs too). Looking at the LLT site, it looks like they would have
> to change their 'abstract' pages to 'abstract plus cited refs', or change
> the way that their PDFs are created so that they include DOI links for cited
> references. (Without this the whole system would fail: publishers would
> expect traffic to come to them, but wouldn't have to send traffic
> elsewhere).
>
> I'd agree that DOIs are in general a Good Thing (and for e-books / e-book
> chapters, and reference work entries as well as e-journal articles). The
> CrossRef fees are deliberately set so as not to exclude single-title
> publishers. Here's an example of a single-title, university-based e-journal
> in the UK that provides DOIs, so it must be a CrossRef member:
> http://www.bioscience.heacademy.ac.uk/journal/.
>
>
> Terry Bucknell
> Electronic Resources Manager
> University of Liverpool
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Code for Libraries [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of
> Jonathan Rochkind
> Sent: 17 November 2009 23:20
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] Assigning DOI for local content
>
> So I have no actual experience with this.
>
> But you have to pay for DOI's.  I've never done it, but I don't think
> you neccesarily have to run your own purl server -- CrossRef takes care
> of it.  Of course, if your documents are going to be moving all over the
> place, if you run your own purl server and register your purls with
> CrossRef, then when a document moves, you can update your local purl
> server; otherwise, you can update CrossRef, heh.
>
> It certainly is useful to have DOIs, I agree.  I would suggest they
> should just contact cross-ref and get information on the cost, and what
> their responsibilities are, and then they'll be able to decide.  If the
> 'structure of their content' is journal articles, then, sure DOI is
> pretty handy for people wanting to cite or link to those articles.
>
> Jonathan
>
> Ranti Junus wrote:
> > Hi All,
> >
> > I was asked by somebody from a college @ my institution whether they
> > should go with assigning DOI for their journal articles:
> > http://llt.msu.edu/
> >
> > I can see the advantage of this approach and my first thought is more
> > about whether they have resources in running their purl server, or
> > whether they would need to do it through crossref (or any other
> > agency.) Has anybody had any experience about this?
> >
> > Moreover, are there other factors that one should consider (pros and
> > cons) about this? Or, looking at the structure of their content,
> > whether they ever need DOI? Any ideas and/or suggestions?
> >
> >
> > Any insights about this is much appreciated.
> >
> >
> > thanks,
> > ranti.
> >
> >
>