Additional update to core dictionary
Herbert J. Bernstein
yaya at bernstein-plus-sons.com
Thu Mar 24 13:08:33 GMT 2011
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
yaya at dowling.edu
=====================================================
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 <bm at 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 at iucr.org
>> 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
> comcifs at iucr.org
> http://scripts.iucr.org/mailman/listinfo/comcifs
>
More information about the comcifs
mailing list