Kia ora Stuart!

I think the answer to your question is "no, the identifier is not a valid
DOI".

As evidence, I offer this URI which is supposed return information about
the Registration Agency which registered that DOI:
https://doi.org/doiRA/10063/1710

As you know, DOIs are a proper subset of Handles; and functionally, the DOI
system relies on the Handle system as its infrastructure for URI
resolution. I believe that when you resolve the URI <
https://doi.org/10063/1710>, the DOI resolver is simply resolving the
identifier as a Handle, and not first validating that the Handle is
actually a valid DOI. I'd regard that as a bug in the DOI's resolver,
personally.

Cheers!

Conal


On Fri, 17 Aug 2018 at 09:37, Stuart A. Yeates <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> We have a DSpace instance that is configured to issue handle.net
> identifiers to all items, so links such as:
>
> https://researcharchive.vuw.ac.nz/handle/10063/1710
> http://researcharchive.vuw.ac.nz/handle/10063/1710
> https://hdl.handle.net/10063/1710
> http://hdl.handle.net/10063/1710
>
> all take a web browser to the same content. The following URLs also take
> web
> browsers to the same content:
>
> https://doi.org/10063/1710
> http://doi.org/10063/1710
> https://dx.doi.org/10063/1710
> http://dx.doi.org/10063/1710
>
> The lookup at https://www.doi.org/index.html resolves the doi "10063/1710"
> to the same content.
>
> I have two questions:
>
> (a) is 10063/1710 a valid/legal doi for this item ?
> (b) are the doi.org URLs above valid/legal for this item?
>
> The documentation on the https://www.doi.org/ and https://handle.net/
> websites is surprisingly quiet on these issues...
>
> [We've been assuming the answer to these questions is 'yes' but yesterday
> this was questioned by a colleague, so I'm looking for definitive answers]
>
> cheers
> stuart
> --
> ...let us be heard from red core to black sky
>


-- 
Conal Tuohy
http://conaltuohy.com/
@conal_tuohy
+61-466-324297