 |
 |
Interesting insight Conal, I wasn't aware of that service. https://doi.org/10063/1710 redirects to http://researcharchive.vuw.ac.nz/handle/10063/1710 using a 302 redirect, implying that the server knows where the DOI resides by RFC 7231 https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7231 If 10063/1710 were not a valid DOI, the DOI server should use 303 (if it redirects) and a 400 or 404 if it doesn't. cheers stuart -- ...let us be heard from red core to black sky On Fri, 17 Aug 2018 at 13:27, Conal Tuohy <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > 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 >