Remove DOIs for back issues

[piotreba]

Hello,


I am importing some back issues into the system. These issues (or rather articles) were not assigned DOIs, nor they will be, but we have DOI configured in the system and they will be assigned to current and future articles. Of course when I see on the properties of these back articles (reading tools/indexed metadata) there are DOIs assigned to them. Is there a way to remove DOIs for particular articles?



Thanks,

Peter.

[jmacgreg]

Hi Peter,

Before I submit a bug report for this (or come up with a possible workaround), could you explain why those articles shouldn't now have a DOI? AFAIK, this won't or shouldn't interfere with any part of the publication or article-finding process; and you can always register the DOIs with eg. Crossref, or presumably with whomever your DOI resolver is. Further information would be helpful.

cheers,
James

[lightshadow306]

Hi Peter,

Before I submit a bug report for this (or come up with a possible workaround), could you explain why those articles shouldn't now have a DOI? AFAIK, this won't or shouldn't interfere with any part of the publication or article-finding process; and you can always register the DOIs with eg. Crossref, or presumably with whomever your DOI resolver is. Further information would be helpful.

cheers,
James

If you deposit all doi meta for all back issues then , we have pay a lot of money to crossref. For example, our journal start from 1970. We can put all back issues after 1999 on line . But if we assign every article of back issues a doi and deposit on crossref , then we have to pay $0.3 (or 0.5., I forgot it) * article numbers before 2009. And we can not offer the money.

[piotreba]

As I wrote we have already got DOI from CrossRef, and the main reason the back issues prefferably will not have DOIs assigned is money. Besides DOI I noticed that another problem in reading tools/indexing data is point no. 15 - Rights. The back issues were not lincensed in the same way the current issues are or will be. Maybe there should be at least more control over what to display in the indexing data (of the reading tools)? Or some more control on the article/journal section level over items like DOIs, licenses? I think such a unification is a serious limitation.

[jmacgreg]

Hi all,

Regarding what to deposit to Crossref -- since the Crossref XML has to be manually deposited, it should be easy enough to delete any unnecessary article information from year x onwards before depositing the XML; but I agree that this is something that could be managed more usefully within OJS itself. I've posted a bug report here: http://pkp.sfu.ca/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=6625. Please feel free to CC yourself to that for future updates, and also add comments as you see fit, either on the report or here.

Cheers,
James

[piotreba]

Also in reading tools/How to cite item there is DOI visible in some reference styles, what is unacceptable if some article (in this case back one) shouldn't have DOI assigned....

[piotreba]

Once more I have to post about DOIs. I tried to remove DOIs manually from the DB. BUT, when I viewed the DB some time later I noticed almost all DOIs were present again! I think it is a result of viewing the articles by readers, somehow DOIs are automatically inserted into the DB??!! Many bibliography managing software retrieve DOIs from the net to update references and I wouldn't like to assign DOIs to anything in the OJS that in reality doesnot have this ID assigned.

[jmacgreg]

Hi piotreba,

Thank you for your additional comment. I have added it to the bug report.

Cheers,
James

[piotreba]

Hello all


I updated OJS to the latest (2.3.7) version but there is still problem with DOIs of back issues which should not have them assigned. I remove some DOIs in the database, but after reassigning them in the journal admin they were back again.





Will this issue be repair soon? I some would like to present DOIs on the page (in fact the DOI is displayed in the indexing data) he cannot do that.




Peter