LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 16.5

Help for CODE4LIB Archives


CODE4LIB Archives

CODE4LIB Archives


CODE4LIB@LISTS.CLIR.ORG


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

CODE4LIB Home

CODE4LIB Home

CODE4LIB  September 2009

CODE4LIB September 2009

Subject:

Re: Implementing OpenURL for simple web resources

From:

Mike Taylor <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

Code for Libraries <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Thu, 17 Sep 2009 00:13:20 +0100

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (145 lines)

>> One of the other things I've come to realise is that although it is
>> nice to be able to access material that is referenced, the reference
>> primarily recognises the work of others, and puts your work into
>> context - access is only a secondary concern. It is perfectly
>> possible and OK to reference material that is not generally
>> available, as a reader I may not have access to certain material,
>> and over time material is destroyed so when referencing rare or
>> unique texts it may become absolutely impossible to access the
>> referenced source.
>>
>> I think for research publications there is a genuine and growing
>> issue - especially when we start to consider the practice of
>> referencing datasets which is just starting to become common
>> practice in scientific research. If the dataset grows over time,
>> will it be possible to see the version of the dataset used when
>> doing a specific piece of research?
>
> You might find the WebCite service [1] to be of some use. Of course it
> cannot work retroactively, so it is best if researchers use it
> in the first place.

... or  maybe not.  Seems WebCite is unreliable in several ways.  Here
is a copy of a message that I sent them in July.  No reply.  A real
shame, as their service or something like it is badly needed.

--

Dear WebCitation.org,

First of all, if this is sent to the wrong address, will you please
forward it for me?  For reasons that will become clear below,
[log in to unmask] is the only email address I could find on your
web-site, so that is where I am sending this message.

I want to start by saying how very necessary a service like WebCite
is, and how much I want WebCitation.org to be it.  As a publishing
scientist who also writes a lot of substantial blog posts, I need to
be able to cite my own and others' web pages in formal publications,
and a deposit-a-snapshot service is a big step towards making that
possible in many more journals.  For that reason, my colleagues and I
have written favourably about WebCite, here
(http://svpow.wordpress.com/2009/06/11/blogs-papers-and-the-brave-new-digital-world-matts-thoughts/)
and more so here
(http://svpow.wordpress.com/2009/06/13/blogs-papers-etc-some-more-random-thoughts-from-mike-this-time/).

Back at the start of July I was putting the finishing touches to a
manuscript on the inevitability that electronically published works
will be recognised as valid for the purposes of zoological
nomenclature -- something that is explicitly ruled out by the current
draft of the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature.  My
manuscript quotes and otherwise cites seven web pages, so before
submitting it to the Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature, I went to
deposit snapshots of those pages -- only to find that the service was
down (see first attachment).  I found that rather disturbing, as an
archive that comes and goes can hardly be considered permanent; these
worries were amplified by the wholly uninformative message
"Webcitation.org is undergoing maintenance and will be back shortly".
No hint of how long the outage would last: minutes, hours, days?
Days, as it happens, but I waited, and on July 9 I archived the seven
pages.  They were:

http://palaeo-electronica.org/iczn.htm
       http://www.webcitation.org/5i9L7Heuu
http://chinleana.blogspot.com/2009/05/here-we-go-again-darwinius-iczn-and.html
       http://www.webcitation.org/5i9LKuYTC
http://svpow.wordpress.com/2009/06/13/blogs-papers-etc-some-more-random-thoughts-from-mike-this-time/
       http://www.webcitation.org/5i9LQWsoo
http://svpow.wordpress.com/2009/06/11/blogs-papers-and-the-brave-new-digital-world-matts-thoughts/
       http://www.webcitation.org/5i9Lacleu
http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/loom/2009/05/20/does-darwinius-exist/
       http://www.webcitation.org/5i9LkvRwz
http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/loom/2009/05/21/does-darwinius-exist-revisited-the-official-word-isnot-yet/
       http://www.webcitation.org/5i9Lto7tj
http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/loom/2009/05/21/darwinius-named-at-last/
       http://www.webcitation.org/5i9LwV6rs

I verified that the new archive URLs worked: they did.  I submitted
the manuscript on July 10, handled reviewers' comments, had it
accepted, and today was sent the proof PDF for final checking.  I am
cautious enough that I re-tested the archive URLs, and found to my
astonishment and dismay that all seven failed to work.  I checked that
the URLs in the proof PDF matched those in the submitted manuscript;
they did.  What has happened to them?

The extraordinary thing is that, as it turns out, the archived pages
have not simply been discarded: they have been moved to new URLs!  I
discovered this by searching at webcitation.org for the URLs of the
original pages, and found that they have changed as follows:

OLD                                     NEW
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.webcitation.org/5i9L7Heuu    http://www.webcitation.org/5i9L7Helc
http://www.webcitation.org/5i9LKuYTC    http://www.webcitation.org/5i9LKuXhY
http://www.webcitation.org/5i9LQWsoo    http://www.webcitation.org/5i9LQWszo
http://www.webcitation.org/5i9Lacleu    http://www.webcitation.org/5hSmMI5k0
http://www.webcitation.org/5i9LkvRwz    http://www.webcitation.org/5i9LkvRhY
http://www.webcitation.org/5i9Lto7tj    http://www.webcitation.org/5i9Lto7Dk
http://www.webcitation.org/5i9LwV6rs    http://www.webcitation.org/5i9LwV71E

The pattern makes no sense to me: in some of these URLs (e.g. the
first) only the last two characters have changed.  Yet in the fourth,
all but the very first character of the key has changed.

How can this have happened?  And why?  And is there any reason to
think it won't happen again?

My instinct was simply to give up on WebCite and instruct the BZN to
remove all the WebCite URLs from the paper, but my colleague Matt
Wedel (copied on this email) persuaded me that I should instead try to
get the problem fixed.  So I went to WebCitation.org and clicked the
Contact Us link at the bottom of the page, only to find that the
Contact page is itself broken (see second attachment).  As with the
first site failure, the error message is not particularly helpful:
"Your request returned the following error: Invalid snapshot ID
contact requested".  This is the reason that I am sending my message
to you, the owner of the only email address on the site.

Despite everything, I really want to use WebCite in the references for
this paper if I can.  As I said at the beginning, this kind of service
is important and increasingly necessary; I am keen, if I can, to
increase its exposure by using it in an internationally distributed
and widely read journal.  Is there a way I can do so?

What I can not do is request the BZN to change the "permanent links"
from the old to new versions -- it should be clear that this would
constitute an admission that the archiving scheme is broken, which in
turn would undermine the very arguments I make in the paper regarding
the persistence of electronic resources.

Instead, I must ask you, if you possibly can, to reinstate the old
URLs -- http://www.webcitation.org/5i9L7Heuu, etc.  If you're able to
do this within 24 hours, then I can return the proof to BZN without
requiring changes to the references.  Unfortunately, the journal's
printing deadlines mean that I can not delay the return of the proofs
for long, so if this isn't possible within the stated time, I think I
will have no option but to request the removal of the WebCite links --
something we're all keen to avoid.

Do please let me know the upshot of this as soon as you're able.  I
appreciate that you're busy -- as I am -- but deadlines imposed
elsewhere constrain us.

Thanks for your attention,

Mike Taylor.

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

Advanced Options


Options

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password


Search Archives

Search Archives


Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe


Archives

July 2019
June 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
May 2004
April 2004
March 2004
February 2004
January 2004
December 2003
November 2003

ATOM RSS1 RSS2



LISTS.CLIR.ORG

CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager