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