[ESIP-all] Fwd: [rda-datacitation-wg] Data citation metrics question
reiff at rice.edu
Mon Feb 25 12:05:24 EST 2019
My field prefers DOI’s these days as more persistent
> On Feb 25, 2019, at 10:58 AM, Arctur, David K via ESIP-all <esip-all at lists.esipfed.org> wrote:
> Passing along this question…
> Begin forwarded message:
> From: Matthew Fry <mfry at ceh.ac.uk <mailto:mfry at ceh.ac.uk>>
> Subject: [rda-datacitation-wg] Data citation metrics question
> Date: February 25, 2019 at 10:40:35 AM CST
> To: "rda-datacitation-wg at rda-groups.org <mailto:rda-datacitation-wg at rda-groups.org>" <rda-datacitation-wg at rda-groups.org <mailto:rda-datacitation-wg at rda-groups.org>>
> Dear data citation aficionados
> There was a question going around our water group about DOIs vs uris for citation. Clearly many data journals strongly recommend DOIs but does anyone know if they are mandatory or just recommended?
> And for an organisation capable of maintaining persistent identifiers, do they hold any intrinsic benefits over DOIs, e.g. in relation to the gathering of statistics around citations, e.g. h-index?
> It seems crossref / datacite / scholix support other forms:
> https://www.crossref.org/community/linking-data/ <https://www.crossref.org/community/linking-data/>
> https://support.datacite.org/docs/connecting-research-outputs <https://support.datacite.org/docs/connecting-research-outputs>
> Matt Fry
> Water Resources Systems Group
> Centre for Ecology and Hydrology
> Maclean Building
> Crowmarsh Gifford
> OX10 8BB
> Web: www.ceh.ac.uk/staff/mfry <http://www.ceh.ac.uk/staff/mfry>
> Email: mfry at ceh.ac.uk <mailto:hydata at ceh.ac.uk>
> Tel: +44 (0)1491 692287
> If you have received this message by mistake, please delete it and do not copy it to anyone else.
> For further information about NERC see our web site at www.nerc.ac.uk <http://www.nerc.ac.uk/>. For further information about CEH see our web site at www.ceh.ac.uk <http://www.ceh.ac.uk/>
> This email and any attachments are intended solely for the use of the named recipients. If you are not the intended recipient you must not use, disclose, copy or distribute this email or any of its attachments and should notify the sender immediately and delete this email from your system.
> UK Research and Innovation has taken every reasonable precaution to minimise risk of this email or any attachments containing viruses or malware but the recipient should carry out its own virus and malware checks before opening the attachments. UK Research and Innovation does not accept any liability for any losses or damages which the recipient may sustain due to presence of any viruses.
> Opinions, conclusions or other information in this message and attachments that are not related directly to UK Research and Innovation business are solely those of the author and do not represent the views of UK Research and Innovation.
> Full post: https://www.rd-alliance.org/group/data-citation-wg/post/data-citation-metrics-question <https://www.rd-alliance.org/group/data-citation-wg/post/data-citation-metrics-question>
> Manage my subscriptions: https://www.rd-alliance.org/mailinglist <https://www.rd-alliance.org/mailinglist>
> Stop emails for this post: https://www.rd-alliance.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/62219 <https://www.rd-alliance.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/62219>
> ESIP-all mailing list
> ESIP-all at lists.esipfed.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the ESIP-all