[open-bibliography] DOIs and openbiblio

Wed Feb 2 11:51:48 UTC 2011

Hi Ian,

The very brief answer to this is that DOI is (mostly) Handle + governance/business framework (although this is over-simplifying a little). Handle gives the technical mechanism, the framework (involving the International DOI Foundation with its arrangements of Registration Agencies etc.) gives the sustainability. With continued growth and the introduction of new domains and Registration Agencies in the last year or two (research data through DataCite, movie/TV metadata through EIDR), the sustainability path seems to be working so far....

Organisations such as DataCite and EIDR have invested in DOI, because they accept the value proposition of the 'middleman'. Of course, in doing so, they also become part of the middleman, strengthening the value proposition.

I realise I have somewhat answered a question you didn't quite ask - but I think this aspect can't be ignored!

Cheers,

Paul

On 2 Feb 2011, at 10:22, ianibbo at gmail.com wrote:

> Must admit I've always been everso slightly confused by the
> relationship between DOI's and the Global Handle Registry. The IDF
> seems very keen to say that DOI's are more than just Handles, but
> every time I read http://www.doi.org/factsheets/DOIHandle.html I'm
> left with the feeling that the "much more" could be easily
> (transparently?) replaced with something open and equally usable.
> 
> I'd be interested in knowing what could be provided using just Handles
> and skipping the DOI middle-man. I'd certainly be careful not to throw
> the handle baby out with the DOI bathwater.
> 
> all very vague on this tho, and would really love someone to fill in
> my gaps with it.
> 
> Ian.
> 
> On 2 February 2011 09:24, Adrian Pohl <adrian.pohl at okfn.org> wrote:
>> Hello,
>> 
>> Isabel Holroyd of biab online asked me how the DOI system[1] should be
>> assessed in the light of the Principles on Open Bibliographic Data or
>> Open Knowledge in general.
>> 
>> In my opinion, this question isn't that easy to answer because on one
>> side DOIs aren't open in the sense that not anybody can provide DOIs
>> but on the other side they are open in the sense that anybody can use,
>> aggregate and disseminate already published DOIs. And it is this open
>> use and reuse of bibliographic data the openbiblio principles adress.
>> So, I believe, you can't deduce a recommendation to use or not use
>> DOIs from the principles. As I am not that familiar with the DOI
>> system, there might be other problems with it - e.g. with long-term
>> availibility of a free resolving mechanism or other.
>> 
>> What do you think?
>> 
>> All the best
>> Adrian
>> 
>> [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_object_identifier
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> open-bibliography mailing list
>> open-bibliography at lists.okfn.org
>> http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/open-bibliography
>> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Ian Ibbotson
> W: http://ianibbo.me
> E: ianibbo at gmail.com
> skype: ianibbo
> twitter: ianibbo
> 
> _______________________________________________
> open-bibliography mailing list
> open-bibliography at lists.okfn.org
> http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/open-bibliography
> 

--------------------------------------------
Paul Walk
Deputy Director
UKOLN (University of Bath)
http://www.ukoln.ac.uk/
p.walk at ukoln.ac.uk
+44(0)1225383933
--------------------------------------------