SFU Sprint Report #4: Crossref Integration
At the SFU Sprint in Vancouver last month, a small group of Crossref staff, PKP staff, and some library community members met to review the latest OJS (3.1.2) Crossref plugin. Just ten days prior, PKP and Crossref had a meeting to discuss the formation of a working group that would help address some of the issues OJS users have engaging with their Crossref membership.
The SFU Sprint produced an initial set of recommendations/proposed deliverables for the working group over the next year (or more). Two key areas were identified:
- A technical review of the plugin code and user experience within OJS for Crossref members.
- An OJS metadata/export review.
OJS has a number of discrete plugins related to Crossref. Some include:
- the DOI plugin
- the Crossref plugin
- the reference linking plugin
- the funding data plugin (leveraging the Crossref Funder Registry)
But, within the Crossref plugin UI there is no way to tell which Crossref features are available to a user in that installation. There’s no overview on which Crossref-related features are enabled. The experience is disjointed. Some plugins have settings. Others are either “on” or “off” with little documentation about what they add or where.
The sprint group proposed something of an “audit” of the PKP Crossref plugin(s) code in order to flush out potential issues and usability problems. It would involve a review from Crossref technical staff to determine how the Crossref submission plugin could be optimized. It might also involve a UI/UX review from Crossref staff and PKP staff. The audit would result in a list of recommendations that would go back to the working group where PKP and Crossref could negotiate deliverables and responsibilities from the research.
Acknowledging the metadata expertise of Crossref staff, we propose a concurrent review of metadata both within OJS and via export by an individual chosen by Crossref. The review would identify gaps or inadequacies in OJS metadata as compared to the Crossref schema and metadata manager fields. This goes hand-in-hand with a review PKP is currently engaged in with metadata. It is likely that this would take less time. The review would be submitted back to the working group with recommendations for improvements. The working group could then negotiate deliverables.
Intent moving forward is to kick off the working group once membership is determined.
[Thank you Susan Collins (Crossref), Jeanette Hatherill (University of Ottawa), Shayn Smulyan (Crossref), Davin Baragiotta (Érudit), and Mike Nason (University of New Brunswick/PKP) for your contributions to this sprint group.]