Hi helix84,

Thanks for linking to Jira DS-3472. Very helpful. Mark Diggory recommended 
providing configurable options. As far as I know this hasn’t been a focus for 
development yet. Correct?

I don’t think DS-3472 addresses our worries about how other systems use or fail 
to use multiple values stored as identifier.uri ... any thoughts anyone?

Jere

Sent from my iPhone

> On Oct 31, 2018, at 7:18 PM, helix84 <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> See also the previous discussion of this issue in Jira:
> 
> https://jira.duraspace.org/browse/DS-3472
> 
> 
> Regards,
> ~~helix84
> 
> Compulsory reading: DSpace Mailing List Etiquette
> https://wiki.duraspace.org/display/DSPACE/Mailing+List+Etiquette
> 
>> On Wed, Oct 31, 2018 at 10:42 PM Jere Odell <[email protected]> wrote:
>> 
>> I would like to ping Mark Wood's questions on this thread one more time ... 
>> Mark and I use very different language for describing what we want to do ... 
>> as a repository manager I want to:
>> 
>> 1. automatically register DOIs (the manually process is tedious)
>> 2. store those DOIs in metadata fields that are meaningful to both machines 
>> and to people (but, yes, machines are probably more important, in this case)
>> 3. do the above without modifying dspace such that future upgrades are a 
>> pain in the neck.
>> 
>> I agree with the few repository managers that responded that DOIs are best 
>> stored in dc.identifier.doi ... and that external DOIs (those that we do not 
>> register) should be stored in another field (version.isrelationof, for 
>> example) ... but this is the human readable solution. I assume that those 
>> that responded with this arrangement are registering DOIs manually or are at 
>> the very least not using dspace to make the registration.
>> 
>> It makes sense to me (sort of) as Mark says: "A system which creates 
>> identifiers for its own purposes must know which identifiers it controls." 
>> ... which means for now, dspace should store these in dc.identifier.uri. But 
>> ...
>> 
>> Can anyone confirm that we are not creating downstream headaches for systems 
>> that seek to make sense of the multiple values stored in dc.identifier.uri? 
>> Or ... as Mark says:
>> 
>> "What is the appropriate, standardized or generally accepted mapping of "DOI 
>> for this version of a resource" for interchange among heterogeneous systems?"
>> 
>> AND
>> 
>> "[N]on-brittle external systems will [parse the different types of 
>> identifiers] anyway to protect themselves from unknown practices at sites 
>> that they harvest.  Do we know of any systems which do not?"
>> 
>> Any thoughts on these questions?
>> 
>> Jere Odell
>> IUPUI
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>> On Thursday, October 11, 2018 at 12:36:08 PM UTC-4, Mark Wood wrote:
>>> 
>>>> On Thursday, October 11, 2018 at 11:59:56 AM UTC-4, Jere Odell wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> I think there's mismatch between how librarians think metadata should be 
>>>> applied and how DSpace can auto-register (DataCite) DOIs. If Mark and 
>>>> Claudia are correct, DSpace generates DOIs in dc.identifier.uri and 
>>>> [cannot/is not currently able to] register DOIs from other Dublin Core 
>>>> fields ... such as dc.identifier.doi.
>>>> 
>>>> If I understand correctly, DSpace was designed to issue one persistent 
>>>> identifier ... the handle. DOIs were a more recent request and, for now, 
>>>> if we want to auto-generate DOIs we have to store them in 
>>>> dc.identifier.uri. Is that correct?
>>>> 
>>>> If so, that puts those of us that want to assign DOIs to our DSpace 
>>>> records in a difficult spot ... we must choose between a) manual methods 
>>>> of registering the DOI or b) rely on a less-than-optimal metadata practice.
>>>> 
>>>> Am I missing something?
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Perhaps it is I who is missing something.  How, specifically, is this 
>>> less-than-optimal practice?  Some points to consider:
>>> 
>>> o  There actually is no such field as identifier.uri in Qualified Dublin 
>>> Core.  So what would an aggregator do with it?  It has no meaning outside 
>>> of DSpace.  It should be mapped to something standardized, when exposed to 
>>> harvesters.  Screen-scraping harvesters should know they are on shaky 
>>> ground and carefully examine the values that they find.
>>> 
>>> o  Resolvable URLs for DOIs and for general Handles use distinct 
>>> authorities (hdl.handle.net vs. dx.doi.org).  They are easily distinguished 
>>> by humans and by machines.
>>> 
>>> o  If a raw Handle has the prefix "10." then it is a DOI, otherwise it is 
>>> not.
>>> 
>>> o  How a repository stores a metadata value, and how it presents it, are 
>>> separate questions.  What is the appropriate, standardized or generally 
>>> accepted mapping of "DOI for this version of a resource" for interchange 
>>> among heterogeneous systems?
>>> 
>>> o  A system which creates identifiers for its own purposes must know which 
>>> identifiers it controls.  Others must know which identifiers they do not 
>>> control.  I presume that this is why the DOI identifier providers use one 
>>> field and the stock submission form uses another.
>>> 
>>> I would have preferred that different types of identifiers were stored 
>>> separately, so we don't have to parse them to know what they are.  But that 
>>> isn't difficult, and non-brittle external systems will do that anyway to 
>>> protect themselves from unknown practices at sites that they harvest.  Do 
>>> we know of any systems which do not?
>> 
>> --
>> All messages to this mailing list should adhere to the DuraSpace Code of 
>> Conduct: https://duraspace.org/about/policies/code-of-conduct/
>> ---
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
>> "DSpace Community" group.
>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an 
>> email to [email protected].
>> To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
>> Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/dspace-community.
>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

-- 
All messages to this mailing list should adhere to the DuraSpace Code of 
Conduct: https://duraspace.org/about/policies/code-of-conduct/
--- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"DSpace Community" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/dspace-community.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to