[Ref-Links] Re: [Discuss-DOI] Re: [Ref-Links] Re[2]: [Ref-Links] DOIs used for reference linking

[dsidman@wiley.com]

I'm re-sending the attached message because due to a system problem at my 
end, it never made it to the "Ref-Links@doi.org" listserve, although it did 
make it to the "discuss-doi" listserve.
  
David Sidman
Wiley
 
---------------------- Forwarded by David Sidman/prt/Wiley on 04/08/99 08:48 
AM ---------------------------


	David Sidman
	04/06/99 11:10 AM
	
To: "discuss-doi@doi.org"@wileyu
cc: "Ref-Links@doi.org"@wileyu 
Subject: Re: [Discuss-DOI] Re: [Ref-Links] Re[2]: [Ref-Links] DOIs used for 
reference linking  

Mark,
  
I'm chiming in here as one who has long wished for a DOI-based solution due 
to what I think are some inherent advantages.  Let me assert some of these, 
then explain why I think that a central lookup database solves the reference 
linking problem in the simplest manner as well as the one most likely to 
succeed in practical terms:
  
The DOI obviates the need for URLs, formulas and algorithms (which are 
inherently publisher-specific and subject to very dynamic change over time) 
because its very purpose is to provide one central level of indirection for 
same.  I.e., the very creation and maintenance of DOIs in the DOI directory 
was designed to handle that problem once, in one place, under a neutral 
(non-profit) organization which publishers would commit to supporting, in a 
permanent manner, and based on an underlying technology which is as scalable 
as the Internet itself has proved to be (possibly because it was developed by 
the same people).
  
Because of this, the DOI is all that any person, system, or embedded 
reference needs to know to create permanent, reliable, accurate links.  
He/she/it will always be able to get from the DOI to the (current) publisher 
of the content, even if the original publisher has been bought be another, or 
has moved the content to a different server, or has otherwise changed the way 
they assign URLs.  This alone simplifies reference linking tremendously, 
because it avoids the need for vast numbers of independent systems to be 
updated continually, or for even vaster numbers of embedded references 
(within other content itself) to have to be actively maintained.
  
The only missing link so far in the scenario I've described is:  "How does 
anyone FIND OUT the DOI for a given piece of content?"  I.e., once they know 
the DOI they're home free, but how do they discover it?  This is where the 
DOI metadata database comes in.  If in the same step in which publishers 
register their DOIs, they also register a minimal amount of metadata about 
the objects, then a simple lookup database would exist which would allow 
people and systems to look up the DOIs based on a simple query.
  
One might argue that maintenance of a central database like this is unlikely 
to be supported faithfully, but if doing so is part and parcel of the 
registration/maintenance of the DOIs themselves, and can be executed in the 
same operational process, quality-assured in the same pass, etc., then I 
think it has an excellent chance of succeeding.  Furthermore, publishers will 
have this metadata available for registration anyway, because internally they 
will need it to tag and manage their own DOIs, prior to registering the DOIs 
in the DOI directory.  How else could they control (internally) what their 
various DOIs stand for, who (internally) are the various content "owners" 
responsible for keeping the corresponding URLs up to date, etc.?
  
In any case, all "link processor" type approaches still need maintenance in a 
central place, but in this case it's maintenance of a set of programs, rules 
and algorithms.  As hard as it might be to maintain a central database, I 
think it's much harder to maintain a central application, or set of 
algorithms.  This may seem simple at first on the assumption that citation 
data can be converted into URLs, but in the real world I think this will be 
much more fragile - especially over time, as all the individual publishers' 
rules change dynamically.  For example, this might require that the central 
algorithm not only needs to keep up with the new rules, but also to keep 
track of considerations like:  "Well, from March 2000 to July 2001, Publisher 
X used such-and-such a URL-construction algorithm, but then changed it to 
such-and-such other algorithm in July 2001 but only for its genetics 
journals, which in January 2002 it then sold to Publisher Y, so all 
references after that date can only be pointed to based on the new 
publisher's algorithm at that time..."  To try and construct reliable 
references based on this kind of consideration would be extremely difficult.
  
To me, then, a database approach, coupled with the DOI as a (permanent) 
identifier-plus-routing-mechanism, and operated under a publisher-neutral 
framework such as the IDF, is the most elegantly-engineered and 
likely-to-succeed approach, with the fewest "moving parts," and the least 
complicated business issues.  (The latter alone could thwart any solution 
even if it did "work" in a technical sense.)  I think that the only 
challenges (not to underestimate them!) are:  1) for the IDF to make real, 
concrete progress on actually building a database that delivers these 
benefits in a very near-term timeframe; 2) to keep everyone in the IDF 
community clearly focused on why these goals will benefit the entire 
community of users, libraries, A&I services, etc. as well as other publishers 
- so that parochial business interests don't undermine something that I truly 
believe would be a win/win for everyone.
  
  
David Sidman
Director, New Publishing Technologies
John Wiley & Sons 
dsidman@wiley.com




"discuss-doi-admin/@doi.org" on 04/05/99 05:30:35 PM
To: "Ref-Links@doi.org"@wileyu
cc: "discuss-doi@doi.org"@wileyu 
Subject: [Discuss-DOI] Re: [Ref-Links] Re[2]: [Ref-Links] DOIs used for 
reference linking

Greetings Ed,
On Fri, 2 Apr 1999, epentz@harcourtbrace.com (Ed Pentz) wrote:
Thank you for your reply. I did look at the IDEAL links page when preparing  
my paper (and I admire it because it includes extra functionality which I  
haven't added to the APS link manager, for instance for locating tocs).
> The APS Link Manager is very similiar to the IDEAL Links
> system.  While we allow, amongst other things, traditional
> citation data (ISSN, volume, first page) to be used for links
> to IDEAL, we also accept DOIs (see attached idealink.pdf).
> Using DOIs or traditional citation data isn't an either/or
> situation.
That of course is true. The question is what new thing does a DOI based  
solution bring to the table.
> With reference links there will always be two
> things - the traditional citation plus a URL (either a DOI or
> an "intelligent" code or a DOI made up of an intelligent
> code).
Agreed.
> The main drawbacks I see with Mark's distributed, algorithmic
> (my label) linking proposal are:
Good label....
> *every linker needs to know the algorithm of every linkee -
> this means work is distributed and the algorithm metadata
> must be distributed.  (non-trivial for the likes of ISI and
> for publishers with a multidisciplinary set of journals).
> This is really how things happen now and there is agreement
> it's not scaleable.
This I don't agree with. While it is true that the linkers do need to be  
able to know aobut each other and share algorithms, I think a lightweight  
solution like Eric Hellman's SLinkS can provide a simple, centralized way to  
share the necessary metadata (CODENs/ISSNs and volumes/years online, URL  
template based on traditional metadata). Once you have a publisher's  
template, you can construct all of your links dynamically. Checking for  
validity, if desired could also be done, but this is a logically independent  
step. I think this is more scalable than every publisher in the world  
contributing to a single database that must be maintained and updated  
(perhaps daily). Publishers locking themselves into a single system is quite  
dangerous. In addition there is the question of who should control the  
centralized server.
> *the linker needs to take a journal title abbreviation from
> a citation, identify the publisher and then apply the
> algorithm (including any non-standard journal abbreviation,
> ISSN or Coden)
Right, we do this cleanup/tagging anyway as part of our production process.  
Personally, I would like to see the burden of this step put more onto the  
authors by having their citations checked and linked at submission time, but  
I digress. This step is logically independent of the DOI intiative or any  
other linking solution.
> *the linker has no way of knowing if the cited article is
> available online unless they have metadata about the online
> availability of the journals. (at the moment, even with the
> IDEAL Links system, we have to send article metadata to
> those linking to IDEAL so they know what's there and get
> ISSNs)
Alternatively, something lightweight like SLiknkS could provide the  
necessary metadata which is a much smaller data set than the metadata for  
every article. Publishers don't put articles online willy-nilly, but in  
well-defined blocks (for instance starting with a particular volume or  
year).
> Some things need to happen before the DOI system can work as
> a scaleable solution, but the idea is that publishers will
> take citations and batch submit them to a central service to
> be matched to DOIs.  This requires a metadata database and a
> matching service - both seen as a critical applications by
> IDF members.  In this scenario the publisher, or linker,
> doesn't need to know anything about the cited journal or its
> publisher.  It could be very easy to submit citations and
> get back DOIs that can be used for linking.
This is an important service, but fundamentally separate from the linking  
phase. Once a citation is validated, then if you have the algortihm, you can  
apply it dynamically without storing any additional information. A  
competing proposal would be PubRef which could provide the service, but it  
wouldn't require the DOI part. Or Sompel's SFX server. DOI's have the effect  
of having to require keeping around the DOI in a database (since most are  
not algorithmically derivable it would seem) and adding an additional  
indirection into the loop (any publisher who uses URL's in the DOI service  
that don't also incorporate indirection is asking for a maintenance  
nightmare).
> With the DOI there is nothing stopping a publisher
> incorporating their algorithmic identifiers into a DOI.
> Academic Press is using is own article identifier as the
> DOI, which means that the DOI is integrated with our
> internal databases and systems.  We found it fairly easy to
> implement DOIs and create metadata incorporating those DOIs.
Except that this seems to violate all of the DOI rhetoric about not  
creating intelligent identifiers -- if you are going to add intelligence to  
DOI's, then you are removing some of their nominal advantages. In any case,  
if publishers start doing this, then you can algorithmically create the  
DOI's, but then, why not go directly to a publisher's linking service? You  
would still need to know how a publisher encodes their metadata in the DOI,  
again requiring the need for an SLinkS like service (perhaps as part of the  
DOI server).
It would seem that publishers are all converging on implementing link  
manager like solutions (APS, AIP, Academic Press, IOP, Elsevier, Springer,  
EDP Sciences, Japan Journal of Applied Physics, and others have all  
implemented or are actively developing them). Incorporating them into an  
SLinkS type of service with the necesary metadata would allow for robust,  
scalable linking. Validation of citations during production is a separate  
issue that may require a centralized repository of metadata, but this is  
fundamentally a separate issue logically independent of the DOI initiative.
Best Regards,
Mark
The American Physical Society
------------------------------------------------------
Discuss-DOI maillist  -  Discuss-DOI@doi.org
http://www.doi.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss-doi






------------------------------------------------------
Ref-Links maillist  -  Ref-Links@doi.org
http://www.doi.org/mailman/listinfo/ref-links