 |
 |
Thanks Jonathan and Kevin. It looks like Dryad might be the way to go for us in the short term. Longer term we will need to manage and make datasets available for non-publications as well. Having metadata exposed to tools like SFX seem pretty beneficial, especially if it gets data within our repository indexed and exposed automatically within other databases. So, integrating DOI technology into our locally hosted data management workflow sounds like a good thing. I will investigate further how we could become a DOI registry agency ourselves. I agree with Jonathan that metadata lookups for a DOI need to be standardized. It seems like the point of having a DOI in the first place is for standard resource resolution and lookup across institutions and repositories. Thanks again! Rick -- ---------------------------------------------------------- Rick Johnson Unit Manager, Digital Library Applications and Local Programming Unit Library Information Systems University of Notre Dame Michiana Academic Library Consortium Notre Dame, IN USA 46556 http://www.library.nd.edu 574-631-1086 ------------------------------------------------------------ ________________________________________ From: Code for Libraries [[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Jonathan Rochkind [[log in to unmask]] Sent: Wednesday, April 13, 2011 1:20 PM To: [log in to unmask] Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] DOI's for bioinformatic/bioscience So, yeah, I learned a little bit about this recently, the overall DOI environment is a bit confusing to understand exactly what the options and trade-offs are. So there are various DOI top-level registrars that can register DOIs. (I don't know if "registrar" is actually the name DOI uses for em, it's what I'm calling them). For scholarly publications, CrossRef is the one that's typically used. But to register a DOI through CrossRef, a "publisher" needs to have a relationship/membership with CrossRef, which has some non-trivial expenses and obligations (such as being _required_ by CrossRef to look up DOIs for any works cited in the published work, and include those in the published work). And I'm not entirely sure what tools CrossRef gives you for managing your DOIs. I am not sure how an individual dude who wants a few DOIs would best go about getting them through CrossRef, might be worth asking CrossRef is there is any feasible way to do this. Any DOI registration through any registrar will get DOI forwarding resolution. That is, for instance, http request to http://dx.doi.org/something gets redirected to your destination URL. Any DOI through any registrar gets this. When you register a DOI through CrossRef, you also get a 'metadata lookup' service, where a person or machine armed with a DOI can look up article metadata such as author, title, journal, etc., from a CrossRef service. This is not part of the central DOI architecture, but something through CrossRef. Some library-sector software (such as SFX) is set up to do these metadata lookups from CrossRef on any DOI -- if the DOI wasn't registered through CrossRef, they won't get any info back. Now, in addition to CrossRef, there are some other registrars. One I know about is DateCite. And as Keven mentions, the EZID service is a pretty slick front-end that allows you to register and maintain DateCite DOIs. While DataCite was set up for assigning DOIs to data sets, as far as I know nothing in any policies (of DOI foundation, DataCite, or EZID) prevents you from using DateCite DOIs in general or EZID-managed DataCite DOIs in particular for any kind of information resource you want, including scholarly articles, or whatever. EZID may still be free at the moment in it's testing phase, but eventually, I am told by EZID, that there WILL be a cost charged. However, I think the cost model, tools provided, and obligatory requirements (none) of EZID/DataCite compared to CrossRef may be more amenable/feasible for a small project. However, using EZID/DataCite you won't get the CrossRef metadata lookup that some library-sector applications (like SFX) use. DataCite is, I hear, planning on adding their own metadata lookup service. But the library applications will still only be using the CrossRef one unless they are updated, and the DataCite one may use an entirely different data schema/vocabulary than CrossRef -- this metadata lookup thing is not something actually standardized for DOI in general, in terms of either API or response schema. Or discovering a metadata lookup service to use for a given DOI. (I tend to think DOI probably ought to work on some standardization and auto-discovery here, personally. ). On 4/13/2011 11:57 AM, Kevin S. Clarke wrote: > On Wed, Apr 13, 2011 at 10:56 AM, Rick Johnson<[log in to unmask]> wrote: > >> We have a professor here who would like to create DOI's for some digital objects related to bioinformatics/bioscience with doi.org. Has anyone had experience with the process of registering DOI's and what is involved in the process of maintaining/updating DOI information if necessary? > Hi, > > I work on the Dryad data repository [1] which registers DOIs for data > packages (from the biosciences even). We register our DOIs through > DataCite [2] and CDL's EZID service [3]. It's built into our workflow > so that we mint a DOI on submission and then register it with DataCite > (via EZID) after curation and acceptance. CDL's EZID service provides > us with a web service through which we can programmatically register > our DOIs (it allows minting, too, but we do this internally). > > This same interface can be used update/maintain DOI information (what > the DOI resolves to and the related DataCite metadata set). In > addition to the Web service interface, EZID also offers a plain Web > interface as well that a person can use to register/update/maintain > the minted DOIs. DOIs for data packages registered through DataCite > are resolvable via dx.doi.org (though we've found there is a slight > delay). I don't know the details about the fee for using EZID (or > doi.org for that matter) -- basically, I can answer more questions > about the technical end, but the administrative end is out of my range > of experience. > > But, my first thought is: "Are the digital objects the professor wants > a DOI for associated with a publication?" If so, Dryad might be a > good place for him/her to deposit the data (fwiw, we take other > artifacts related to the raw data as a complete "data package" -- so, > for instance, R code used to manipulate the data). Depositing the > data into Dryad would give him/her a DOI that can be used to reference > the data in future publications. It also generates a larger pool of > bioscience data, rather than a lot of smaller pools (which have to be > searched across). > > The caveats are that Dryad only takes data associated with a > publication and that we're a repository for the biosciences (but that > doesn't sound like a problem in this case). I guess the other would > be anything deposited into Dryad is released using a Creative Commons > Zero waiver (I don't know if that would be a problem for this > particular user or not, but it shouldn't be -- yay, Open Data). > > Hope that helps, > Kevin > > > [1] http://datadryad.org/ > [2] http://datacite.org/ > [3] http://n2t.net/ezid >