Discussion List Archives

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

Re: Additional update to core dictionary

Dear Colleagues,

   I have no objection to the proposed tag as defined, but
suggest that the name

_journal_article_doi

might more clearly reflect the intent, especially as we move increasingly 
to online publication of articles rather than having our papers on true 
and wonderful paper.  I admit to being torn between my desire to save 
trees and my love for finding real papers in library stacks, but the 
handwriting on the facebook wall is clear -- paper publishing is being 
replaced by electronic publishing and, sadly, the term "paper" rather than 
"article" is less and less appropriate.  This is just a suggestion.

As for deferring providing a tag for datasets and other supplemental 
material, that is probably wise, but it might be sensible to start a 
discussion among the IUCr, CSD and the PDB.  The PDB already has an 
_entry.pdbx_DOI tag to record the DOI's of their entries, and it would be 
good if whatever cross-referencing solution was eventually achieved had as 
much commonality between coreCIF and mmCIF as possible.

Regards,
   Herbert
=====================================================
  Herbert J. Bernstein, Professor of Computer Science
    Dowling College, Kramer Science Center, KSC 121
         Idle Hour Blvd, Oakdale, NY, 11769

                  +1-631-244-3035
                  [email protected]
=====================================================

On Thu, 24 Mar 2011, James Hester wrote:

> I see no problem with Brian adding in _journal_paper_doi as described below.
>
> James.
>
> On Thu, Mar 24, 2011 at 9:28 PM, Brian McMahon <[email protected]> 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
>> [email protected]
>> http://scripts.iucr.org/mailman/listinfo/comcifs
>>
>
>
>
> -- 
> T +61 (02) 9717 9907
> F +61 (02) 9717 3145
> M +61 (04) 0249 4148
> _______________________________________________
> comcifs mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://scripts.iucr.org/mailman/listinfo/comcifs
>

Reply to: [list | sender only]