Comments on: Search and Cite for Science Bloggers http://www.sciencebase.com/science-blog/search-and-cite-for-science-bloggers.html Science Blog from Freelance Science Writer David Bradley Thu, 09 Feb 2012 08:25:37 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: David Bradley http://www.sciencebase.com/science-blog/search-and-cite-for-science-bloggers.html/comment-page-3#comment-342051 David Bradley Tue, 19 Feb 2008 07:29:13 +0000 http://www.sciencebase.com/science-blog/search-and-cite-for-science-bloggers.html#comment-342051 Thanks for your thoughts Santy, this is certainly going to require a lot more thought than my initial post. Yes, you're probably right, most publishers do honour the DOI system asap, but I've found that in the journals I use and cite there are two major publishers in the niche who do not. That could change at any time, of course, and maybe already have, I didn't check this week! db Thanks for your thoughts Santy, this is certainly going to require a lot more thought than my initial post. Yes, you’re probably right, most publishers do honour the DOI system asap, but I’ve found that in the journals I use and cite there are two major publishers in the niche who do not. That could change at any time, of course, and maybe already have, I didn’t check this week!

db

]]> By: Santy http://www.sciencebase.com/science-blog/search-and-cite-for-science-bloggers.html/comment-page-3#comment-342048 Santy Tue, 19 Feb 2008 07:26:18 +0000 http://www.sciencebase.com/science-blog/search-and-cite-for-science-bloggers.html#comment-342048 Hi David, I think there are three pieces that are missing or you may want to consider further in your paperID proposal: - the work that Institutional Repositories are doing to standardise unique identification of scholarly objects and scholarly creators (most of them from the academic world) - the peer-review process's peculiarities - OpenURL revolvers have not solved the "appropriate copy" dilemma totally, in part due to issues intrinsically associated to the use of namespaces of identifiers in network-based APIs Also, according CrossRef logs, most of the major publishers and medium-sized publishers, including Inderscience, do assign DOIs to their papers as soon as they go online (they do not wait until the printing stage) I m aware that CrossRef can takes minutes or hours but not more than a couple of days, to publish new DOIs. Most of the DOI lookup faults are due to publisher-side errors. BTW, The "widget-based" CrossRef Citation Plugin released to the public by Geoff (in the breaks of the ticTOCs meeting :-) ) is still being improved. CrossRef is still working fixing some bugs reported for initial users (e.g. DB access is timing out when locating DOIs in Lucene lookups, the "Changed server name" option (under "Options" > "CrossRef Citation Plugin") seems to neither have effect nor persistence.) Santy Hi David,

I think there are three pieces that are missing or you may want to consider further in your paperID proposal:

- the work that Institutional Repositories are doing to standardise unique identification of scholarly objects and scholarly creators (most of them from the academic world)

- the peer-review process’s peculiarities

- OpenURL revolvers have not solved the “appropriate copy” dilemma totally, in part due to issues intrinsically associated to the use of namespaces of identifiers in network-based APIs

Also, according CrossRef logs, most of the major publishers and medium-sized publishers, including Inderscience, do assign DOIs to their papers as soon as they go online (they do not wait until the printing stage) I m aware that CrossRef can takes minutes or hours but not more than a couple of days, to publish new DOIs. Most of the DOI lookup faults are due to publisher-side errors.

BTW, The “widget-based” CrossRef Citation Plugin released to the public by Geoff (in the breaks of the ticTOCs meeting :-) ) is still being improved. CrossRef is still working fixing some bugs reported for initial users (e.g. DB access is timing out when locating DOIs in Lucene lookups, the “Changed server name” option (under “Options” > “CrossRef Citation Plugin”) seems to neither have effect nor persistence.)

Santy

]]> By: David Bradley http://www.sciencebase.com/science-blog/search-and-cite-for-science-bloggers.html/comment-page-3#comment-339081 David Bradley Fri, 15 Feb 2008 18:43:06 +0000 http://www.sciencebase.com/science-blog/search-and-cite-for-science-bloggers.html#comment-339081 So, you think it might work Will? db So, you think it might work Will?

db

]]> By: Will http://www.sciencebase.com/science-blog/search-and-cite-for-science-bloggers.html/comment-page-3#comment-339018 Will Fri, 15 Feb 2008 17:24:42 +0000 http://www.sciencebase.com/science-blog/search-and-cite-for-science-bloggers.html#comment-339018 A successful PaperID system would mean libraries do not have to face the absurdity of paying for object metadata without getting access to that object (would you pay for the words: 'Harry Potter, JK Rowling' without getting the book?). Good luck with it. A successful PaperID system would mean libraries do not have to face the absurdity of paying for object metadata without getting access to that object (would you pay for the words: ‘Harry Potter, JK Rowling’ without getting the book?). Good luck with it.

]]> By: David Bradley http://www.sciencebase.com/science-blog/search-and-cite-for-science-bloggers.html/comment-page-3#comment-336725 David Bradley Wed, 13 Feb 2008 18:31:27 +0000 http://www.sciencebase.com/science-blog/search-and-cite-for-science-bloggers.html#comment-336725 You're probably right Mitch...it may splice into the e-labbook concept better than the actual publication process, per Jean-Claude's external wiki-key-timestamps for lab-book entries. Good move with ChemRank, I guess everyone realised it had been buried in spam. Using Connotea should pull it out of the cr*pflood nicely and give you the chance to build it into a great resource. db You’re probably right Mitch…it may splice into the e-labbook concept better than the actual publication process, per Jean-Claude’s external wiki-key-timestamps for lab-book entries.

Good move with ChemRank, I guess everyone realised it had been buried in spam. Using Connotea should pull it out of the cr*pflood nicely and give you the chance to build it into a great resource.

db

]]> By: Mitch http://www.sciencebase.com/science-blog/search-and-cite-for-science-bloggers.html/comment-page-2#comment-336707 Mitch Wed, 13 Feb 2008 18:13:43 +0000 http://www.sciencebase.com/science-blog/search-and-cite-for-science-bloggers.html#comment-336707 Unfortunately from experience, users don't like having to recreate a paper database from scratch. I'm speaking really early into the game on this one, but I'm recoding the chemrank site I made last year to only use Connotea's database. Since Connotea allows users to submit hard URLs or DOIs, piggybacking on Connotea's own indexing system may be viable. Mitch Unfortunately from experience, users don’t like having to recreate a paper database from scratch.

I’m speaking really early into the game on this one, but I’m recoding the chemrank site I made last year to only use Connotea’s database. Since Connotea allows users to submit hard URLs or DOIs, piggybacking on Connotea’s own indexing system may be viable.

Mitch

]]> By: David Bradley http://www.sciencebase.com/science-blog/search-and-cite-for-science-bloggers.html/comment-page-2#comment-336606 David Bradley Wed, 13 Feb 2008 16:43:56 +0000 http://www.sciencebase.com/science-blog/search-and-cite-for-science-bloggers.html#comment-336606 @JCB I think there is a lot of potential in this little idea of PaperID, although as I've said elsewhere I've not quite worked out the ins and outs of how to get it started as a viable and realistic supplant to DOI/OpenURL that would be controlled at the author, as opposed to publisher, end of the publication process db @JCB I think there is a lot of potential in this little idea of PaperID, although as I’ve said elsewhere I’ve not quite worked out the ins and outs of how to get it started as a viable and realistic supplant to DOI/OpenURL that would be controlled at the author, as opposed to publisher, end of the publication process

db

]]> By: David Bradley http://www.sciencebase.com/science-blog/search-and-cite-for-science-bloggers.html/comment-page-2#comment-336593 David Bradley Wed, 13 Feb 2008 16:37:40 +0000 http://www.sciencebase.com/science-blog/search-and-cite-for-science-bloggers.html#comment-336593 baoilleach, I just installed and ran the plugin, so I had a better idea of what it can do. I tried a Science paper I wrote about a few weeks ago, and it found two ScienceDirect entries, so it doesn't bode well...nor could it find the PNAS paper I'm writing about for spectroscopynow.com given author name... Another annoyance is where it slots into the Wordpress GUI sidebar, I'd prefer it above the fold while I'm writing a post. db baoilleach, I just installed and ran the plugin, so I had a better idea of what it can do. I tried a Science paper I wrote about a few weeks ago, and it found two ScienceDirect entries, so it doesn’t bode well…nor could it find the PNAS paper I’m writing about for spectroscopynow.com given author name…

Another annoyance is where it slots into the WordPress GUI sidebar, I’d prefer it above the fold while I’m writing a post.

db

]]> By: baoilleach http://www.sciencebase.com/science-blog/search-and-cite-for-science-bloggers.html/comment-page-2#comment-336576 baoilleach Wed, 13 Feb 2008 16:28:41 +0000 http://www.sciencebase.com/science-blog/search-and-cite-for-science-bloggers.html#comment-336576 Unfortunately, it's only as good as the data the journal publishers have deposited with CrossRef. It seems that even CrossRef don't have the author list in some cases. See comments by Geoffrey and Chuck of CrossRef on my <a href="http://baoilleach.blogspot.com/2008/02/which-is-worse-pubmed-metadata-or.html" rel="nofollow">blog post</a>. Unfortunately, it’s only as good as the data the journal publishers have deposited with CrossRef. It seems that even CrossRef don’t have the author list in some cases. See comments by Geoffrey and Chuck of CrossRef on my blog post.

]]> By: Jean-Claude Bradley http://www.sciencebase.com/science-blog/search-and-cite-for-science-bloggers.html/comment-page-2#comment-336540 Jean-Claude Bradley Wed, 13 Feb 2008 15:45:16 +0000 http://www.sciencebase.com/science-blog/search-and-cite-for-science-bloggers.html#comment-336540 David, We're always willing to experiment new ways of packaging and indexing experimental info. In terms of DOI and author generation, that is pretty much what I see Nature Precedings doing and we've used it a few times to do that. I assume a DOI refers to a specific version of a document (although Precedings does allow uploading of multiple versions I am not sure if you get a new DOI every time). For experiment pages, we still don't have a "final version" for most of them - I am working with students in the next few weeks to get to that point. Of course if we discover errors down the road we will correct them and the wiki version tracking system will keep a record of that. We would like to get the associated raw data off our server as well though to get third-party time stamps. Maybe ChemSpider can help with some of that down the road (reaction monitoring spectra for example). David,
We’re always willing to experiment new ways of packaging and indexing experimental info. In terms of DOI and author generation, that is pretty much what I see Nature Precedings doing and we’ve used it a few times to do that. I assume a DOI refers to a specific version of a document (although Precedings does allow uploading of multiple versions I am not sure if you get a new DOI every time). For experiment pages, we still don’t have a “final version” for most of them – I am working with students in the next few weeks to get to that point. Of course if we discover errors down the road we will correct them and the wiki version tracking system will keep a record of that. We would like to get the associated raw data off our server as well though to get third-party time stamps. Maybe ChemSpider can help with some of that down the road (reaction monitoring spectra for example).

]]>