Discussion List Archives

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Additional update to core dictionary

I see no problem with Brian adding in _journal_paper_doi as described below.


On Thu, Mar 24, 2011 at 9:28 PM, Brian McMahon <bm@iucr.org> wrote:
> Colleagues
> Assuming James also approves the recent "fast-track" changes, I'll
> be happy to work on releasing quickly a new minor upgrade version
> of the core CIF dictionary.
> With your indulgence, I would like to take the opportunity to add
> at the same time
>        _journal_paper_doi
> as a new member of the JOURNAL category, expressing the digital
> object identifier (DOI) assigned to the article published from
> the data in the current CIF, e.g.
>        _journal_paper_doi              '10.1107/S010876739101067X'
> Traditionally, these _journal_ items have been taken to be in
> the gift of the IUCr journals staff, and have not gone through
> the usual formal review process. They are not individually
> defined in the core dictionary, though perhaps they should be.
> I would not expect any particular concern over the proposed new
> item; it's just another piece of bibliographic housekeeping.
> However, there is the possibility of creating new data names to
> record DOIs for other associated publications or data sets,
> now that it is starting to become common practice to register such
> identifiers for data sets. We have considered this possibility
> carefully in the Acta office, and have come to the conclusion that
> such definitions would be premature. There is as yet no established
> code of practice for assigning DOIs to data sets in a way that
> records their relationship to other data sets or publications.
> CrossRef, the body that has managed DOIs centrally for the
> publishing industry, is now partnered by DataCite, which seeks
> to perform the same role for research data sets. We feel that it
> would be best to track any protocols these bodies establish for
> cross-linking before seeking to emulate them with suitable
> CIF data names.
> On the other hand, if any of you feel differently about this,
> or have specific data names that you wish to suggest, please
> feel free to do so.
> Best wishes
> Brian
> _______________________________________________
> comcifs mailing list
> comcifs@iucr.org
> http://scripts.iucr.org/mailman/listinfo/comcifs

T +61 (02) 9717 9907
F +61 (02) 9717 3145
M +61 (04) 0249 4148

Reply to: [list | sender only]