[Taxacom] e-publication of EarlyView: clarification needed

Richard Pyle deepreef at bishopmuseum.org
Thu Sep 13 14:34:35 CDT 2012


> I'd argue that the DOI is the definitive identifier.

I tend to agree -- which is why we treat DOIs differently when displaying
them on the ZooBank website than we do other identifiers (DOIs are include
din the identifier links at top, as well as in a special metadata field for
the article).  However, most end-users care less about what it the
"definitive" identifier, and which link gets them to the PDF with minimal
cost.

> We need to separate identifiers from access. If
> we insist on multiplying identifiers we just make more mess.

While identifiers and access are two completely different things, we'd be
doing only have the job if we addressed only one of them.  The "mess"
already exists (i.e., the identifiers already exist).  The best way to clean
that mess up is to establish cross-links among the myriad identifiers -- at
least until the [biodiversity] world gets past this awkward period where
multiple identifiers are being generated for the same object.

By the way, we struggled for a long time about adding to the "mess" with
ZooBank identifiers.  But the bottom line is, from the perspective of ICZN,
there simply is no choice.  In theory, at least, the content in ZooBank
needs to persist for centuries.  The only way to ensure that actionable
identifiers persist for as long as ZooBank persists, is for ZooBank to mint
its own.  It's not a decision that came easily.  But it also led top the
realization that the "mess" already exists ,  and will likely continue to
exist for some time, so better to focus on mechanisms for dealing with that
mess.

> There are multiple ways to access the article, including the DOI,
> the links to BHL that you gave (direct and indirect), as well as
> BioStor http://biostor.org/reference/52084 which extracts
> articles from BHL (the BioStor page includes the DOI).

Cool!  I just added the BioStor link to the ZooBank record.

> One way to tackle this is if BHL and BioStor provided a way to
> query by DOI, so they could tell the user whether they have
> a version of that content. This would be straightforward for
> BioStor, not so much for BHL as it has no notion of articles
> (albeit this is being worked on).

So, you mean use "10.1080/00222939808677978", but make it actionable through
multiple resolution services? One, of course, being
"http://dx.doi.org/[DOI]", but perhaps other services like
"http://biovidersitylibrary.org/DOI/[DOI]" or
"http://biostor.org/DOI/[DOI]"?

If that's what you mean, then I think that would be a WONDERFUL idea!

> But let's keep identifiers and access separate...

Yes, but let's not deal with one to the exclusion of the other.

And while we're at it, if you replace "access" with "resolution", then
you've just made the point I have been trying to make for years.

Aloha,
Rich


This message is only intended for the addressee named above.  Its contents may be privileged or otherwise protected.  Any unauthorized use, disclosure or copying of this message or its contents is prohibited.  If you have received this message by mistake, please notify us immediately by reply mail or by collect telephone call.  Any personal opinions expressed in this message do not necessarily represent the views of the Bishop Museum.




More information about the Taxacom mailing list