PKP Bugzilla – Bug 6625
Add DOI year cutoff OR Crossref XML year cutoff
Last modified: 2014-03-06 02:13:19 PST
See http://pkp.sfu.ca/support/forum/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=7447&p=28841#p28841 for discussion. I favour the DOI year cutoff method (that is, allow JMs to specify a year before which DOIs are not generated) since, as Piotreba points out, there may be other reasons besides paying Crossref why DOIs may not be necessary before a given year. However, the Crossref XML export plugin should handle this gracefully.
One more additional comment, somewhat culled from the forum thread: also allow for instances where individual articles may not need or want a DOI assigned to them.
We are introducing DOI to our institution this year and this is a feature our magazines love to see.
Maybe what I will say now it's a little "out of topic" but what looks like a natural requirement is an "exclude this" feature to avoid assign DOIs to thesis, reviews, whatever...
Bozana, I read somewhere that you are working on this but I'm not able to find the issue in the bugtrack. Do you want me to create a bug?
I found the post :-)
Just to make it perfectly clear, common scenarios are magazines:
a) start today to publish it's new issue with DOIs but still didn't submit the articles's archive",
b) publish elements like "thesis, books reviews, editorial notes..." that include it's own DOI (thesis?) or don't need it at all.
Better if I open a new bug, isn't it?
The origin of this bug:
This post is also connected: http://pkp.sfu.ca/support/forum/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=11260
Ah me crazy -- Marc already inserted it... Sorry!!! :-\
Marc, for excluding content from DOI generation, would it make sense to do this by section? (This would mean adding a new option on the Section form: "Exclude from DOI generation")
I thought we could insert 2 checkboxes in the objects metadata -- a possibility to define if this object (e.g. issue) and its sub-objects (e.g. articles) should be excluded from the DOI assignment.
Maybe to consider the sections as well.
Both solutions (section and article) will work for our magazines.
At least for now. :-)
From a user perspective I think is better to go with one or the other but both... could be confusing to have two different places to configure similar stuff.
I imagine it as a checkbox in the issue construction form. When you build the TOC, you decide which articles will have DOI (with all checked by default).
Any case, Bozana has more elements so her opinion is essential.