In The August Issue:

CrossRef Member Update

Ed Pentz, Executive Director ( )
August 1, 2007

Member Update (144 KB PDF)

Message from the Executive Director

Welcome to the August Member Update. The agenda for the Annual Meeting on November 1st in London is now available and registration for the meeting has opened ( Amazingly this will be the 8th Annual Meeting for the organization and we are approaching the meeting having repaid all the original start up loans - making us debt free - and we are in the process of developing some important new strategic services. The topic of this year's meeting is "Trust, authority, and quality in academic publishing today." We have a great line up of speakers so we hope to see many members there.

At its recent quarterly meeting the board made a number of important decisions (full details on the board meeting are below) and I wanted to highlight a few. As of August 1, 2007 the Backfile Deposit Fee will go down to $0.12 until the end of 2008. This is a 30% decrease from the current $0.17 and we hope this reduction will encourage even more backfile deposits.

The board approved a pilot of a new service called CrossCheck that will enable publishers to verify the originality of content as part of the editorial process. Also, II'm happy to report that the Contributor/Author ID project is moving forward to the next phase of development and there will be an update at the Annual Meeting.

The CrossTech blog is starting to see more activity - A recent topic that has come up is embedding standard metadata in PDF files so this is something we will be looking at in more detail.

II don't often mention non-CrossRef projects in this update but I have included an update on Project COUNTER and I encourage everyone to take a look. Project COUNTER is an important and very successful industry initiative based on collaboration among libraries and publishers.

Remember that you can keep up-to-date with the latest CrossRef news and information on the CrossRef Blog -

As always please feel free to contact me with any issues/concerns/problems at

Upcoming Meetings

Registration is now open for the 2007 Annual Meeting, Thursday, 1 November 2007, London, UK at the Royal College of Surgeons, Lincoln Inn Fields. The topic of this year's meeting is "Trust, authority, and quality in academic publishing today." The agenda and registration form are available online -

Speakers include:

Alex Frost - Vice President for Research Initiatives, Sermo
Dr. Ben Goldacre - Medical Doctor who writes the Bad Science column in the Guardian
Richard Kidd - Project Manager, Royal Society of Chemistry
Sally Morris - Editor-in-Chief, Learned Publishing, ALPSP
Kieron O'Hara - Senior Research Fellow, School of Electronics and Computer Science, University of Southampton

DOI names in Use

The benefits of CrossRef's cross-disciplinary reference linking service are shown by the following article.  If you look at the references there are a number of instances where there are only CrossRef links (a number of which are to JSTOR) and no links to Medline:

Curlin, F et al. "Do Religious Physicians Disproportionately Care for the Underserved?" Annals of Family Medicine 5:353-360 (2007) doi:10.1370/afm.677 []

The number of books deposited with CrossRef has grown rapidly. Springer is the leader at the moment with over 13,000 books and series registered at the chapter level.  Here's an example:

MAK Kahlil. "Reactive Chlorine Compounds in the Atmosphere". Reactive Halogen Compounds in the Atmosphere. pp 155-190. 1999. ISBN 978-3-540-64090-5 doi:10.1007/10628761 []

And in a great example of CrossRef Forward Linking working across books and journals the book chapter above was cited by an AGU journal - look on the right side of the page for the book chapter under "Referenced by" and there is a link to:

Simmonds, P. G. (2006) Global trends, seasonal cycles, and European emissions of dichloromethane, trichloroethene, and tetrachloroethene from the AGAGE observations at Mace Head, Ireland, and Cape Grim, Tasmania. Journal of Geophysical Research 111(d18)

Services Update

CrossCheck Pilot - At the 2006 CrossRef Annual Meeting, members were asked to rank potential new strategic initiatives for CrossRef, and a cross-publisher plagiarism detection (PD) service emerged as one of the top priorities. During the past several months, CrossRef staff and a committee of members, including several publishers on the Board of Directors, reviewed the technical, policy, and business feasibility of creating such a service. The CrossCheck pilot now underway is a direct outcome of this research process and is intended to inform the development of the service based on the hands-on experience of participating publishers.

CrossRef is piloting CrossCheck to enable participating CrossRef members to effectively use content verification systems. CrossCheck will operate by working with existing PD vendors on a non-exclusive basis. CrossRef will implement CrossCheck by working with iParadigms, the leading provider of online PD service (, but the model is generalizable to other service partners.

The initial pilot is limited and we hope to launch a production service by the end of the year. A press release with more information has gone out and there is a page on the CrossRef website with more details

Key Statistics

Participating Publishers: 2,406 ( )
Voting Members: 459 ( )
Affiliates: 40 ( )
Agents: 8 ( )
Library Affiliates: 1,254 ( )

Dashboard Targets


Jan-Jun '07

Jan-Jun '06

06/'07 change
















Match %





Current Deposits





Backfile Deposits





Total Deposits





Total Records





# DOI Resolutions





# Members





# Depositing prefixes





# Linking prefixes





# Journals





# Book Titles





# Conference Titles





The total number of queries was 74.5 million against a budget of 72.5 million for the first half of the year.  The matching rate was a fantastic 41% against a budget of 27% which lead to 30.4 million matches against a budget of 27.5 million.  Even though queries in 2007 dropped 1% from the same period in 2006 the number of matches was up 28% and the matching rate was up 29%.  DOI resolutions were also very strong at 86.9 million against a budget of 80 million and up 27% from 2006.

Current deposits were strong in the 2nd quarter and for the first half of the year there were 975,000 deposits against a budget of 950,000 which is 14% above 2006.  Backfile deposits remained strong at just over 2 million against a budget of 1 million.  Backfile deposits do seem to be continuing at a high rate into July but backfile deposit were 5% lower in 2007 compared with 2006.     

The number of members, participating publishers, depositors and linkers are all growing.  In particular the number of linkers and forward linkers has seen good growth due to staff efforts. 

Comparing 2006 to 2007 it is interesting to note that the number of book titles has grown at a very high rate (52%).

In summary, while we do expect backfile deposits to drop off at the moment everything is in very good shape and it is good to see continuing year on year increases in key statistics.

Deposit and query stats are regularly updated at  

Financial Update

Invoices - please make sure you are up-to-date with payment of all your CrossRef invoices. If payment becomes more than 90 days overdue your access to the CrossRef system may be suspended.

2007 2nd Quarter Financials

Income Statement

2007 2nd Qtr.

2007 Year-to-Date

2007 Full Year






















  Operating Income














Interest Income (Expense)







Inc. Tax Provision/Translation







  Net Income







PILA activities during the 2nd quarter of 2007 covering the months of April, May and June, led to the following financial highlights:

  • $907,000 of revenues was slightly over budget.
  • $887,000 of operating expenses---unfavorable to budget (by $40,000 or 4.7%)---mostly due to unbudgeted contractor fees due to major database work to set up the Denver data center.
  • $559,000 of cash used during the quarter (after the payment of $600,000 in membership loan repayment along with accrued interest) was favorable as compared against the budgeted cash used of $665,000. 
  • PILA staff prepared the Latest Estimate for the full year 2007, highlighted by:
    • Revenues and expenses were expected to be slightly over budget while operating income was forecasted to be slightly over budget.
    • Cash balances at December 31, 2007 were forecasted at $1,131,000---slightly under budget.  This projected cash balance includes the full repayment of member loans.  

Now that the startup loans have been repaid PILA needs to look at issues around long term sustainability of the organization – our “will” at Tim Berners-Lee discussed at the 2006 Annual Meeting.  This will require long term financial planning and may involve building up a reserve to provide stability for PILA over an extended period of time.  Therefore, the Treasurer and Executive Director are undertaking a strategic financial review with the goal of developing a long term financial plan for the board to discuss at its January 2008 meeting.  

    Update on Board Decisions from July 2007


    1. To reappoint the current auditors;
    2. To approve the audited financials;
    3. To approve the recommendations in the CrossCheck report, which were:

    a.   Approve principles of CrossCheck Terms and Conditions of Participation - details to be finalized by CrossCheck Committee and Executive Committee

    b.   Approve principles of verification process for CrossCheck participation-  details to be finalized by CrossCheck Committee and Executive Committee

    c.   Approve principles of CrossCheck fees - details to be finalized by M&F and Executive Committee

    d.   Approve principles of terms with iParadigms and costs for publishers - details to be finalized by CrossCheck Committee and Executive Committee

    e.   Final production service terms to be recommended by CrossCheck Committee to Executive Committee.

    1. To reduce the back file deposit fee to $0.12 from August 1, 2007 through December 31, 2008, and publicize the reduction as a temporary change;
    2. To approve a $2 conflict penalty fee to be imposed when a member assigns new DOIs to content that already has a DOI, with the stipulation that the conditions and process for assessing the fee be further defined.


    1. Since the sense of the Board (there was no formal motion) was that the ContributorID project could go to the next stage (development of a phase 2 project plan), a working group to be lead by Geoff Bilder is to be formed. 
    2. In connection with the Transfer project, CrossRef is to create an alerting service.
    3. Staff is to look into the possibility of doing a survey to get member feedback about one month before the annual meeting.
    4. The Technical Working Group is to look into the issue of article numbers and page numbers.

    Business Development Update

    New Members - During the second quarter of 2007, CrossRef gained 22 new publisher members:

    Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)
    College Art Association
    Periodica Polytechnica Budapest University of Technology and Economics
    Specjalisci Dermatolodzy
    RMIT Publishing
    JRAAS Limited
    Royal Irish Academy
    Chinese Geoscience Union
    American Cancer Society
    Ferrata Storti Foundation (Haematologica)
    Institute of Public Finance
    Croatian Medical Journal
    Bangladesh Journals Online (JOL)
    J. Ross Publishing
    Cancer Intelligence
    Salem Press
    University of Zagreb, Department of Mathematics
    Geological Society of London
    Anatomische Gesellschaft
    Korean Association of Medical Journal Editors (KAMJE)
    ORNL Environmental Sciences Division
    CRESR (Sheffield Hallam University)

    In addition, five new affiliates joined CrossRef during this period:

    Green Data
    Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Cientifico e Tecnologico (CNPQ)
    Data Conversion Laboratory
    The Sheridan Group

    Please be sure to check for regular updates.

    New ad campaign

    In an effort to increase end-user awareness of CrossRef and DOI-based linking, CrossRef has released a lively new animated ad that we would like to encourage our members to link to: Any member who would like to post the ad on their own site can obtain the file upon request to

    CrossRef Advisory Board Update

    The new CrossRef Advisory Board (or CAB) is scheduled to hold its first meeting in New York City on November 14, 2007. Members of the CrossRef Board of Directors will be invited to attend.

    CAB’s official mandate, as revised and approved by the Executive Committee, now reads as follows: The CrossRef Advisory Board (or CAB) will consist of members of the academic, library, corporate, and vendor community who have demonstrated expertise and vision on new directions in scholarly publishing. CAB is intended to serve as an an open forum for discussion with the CrossRef staff and Board of Directors about the behavior of researchers, and their evolving publishing and communication needs. Discussion will cover a broad range of issues in scholarly communications today, with a special focus on topics that pertain to then-current strategic initiatives at CrossRef. Such topics may include (but are not strictly limited to) ongoing technical developments at CrossRef; citation linking and indexing; identifier registries; institutional repositories and the changing role of libraries; document versioning and authentication; and metadata use, quality, and standards.

    CAB so far consists of the following individuals (other members may be added in future):

    Kate McCain, Drexel University
    Herbert Van De Sompel, Los Alamos
    MacKenzie Smith, MIT
    Roy Tennant, OCLC
    Dale Flecker, Harvard University
    Stephen Abram, SirsiDynix
    Phil Bourne, Protein Data Bank
    Michael Jubb, Research Information Network UK
    Clifford Lynch, CNI
    Jon Udell, Microsoft


    CrossRef was featured on the programs of several industry meetings in May-June, including UKSG, the JSTOR Publisher Meeting, SSP, CSE, SCONUL and the O'Reilly Tools of Change. Look for Geoff Bilder next at SSP's Top Management Roundtable, Sept 6-7 in Philadelphia (

    COUNTER - 5 years on

    It is now 5 years since the formation of COUNTER and 4 years since the launch of the first COUNTER Code of Practice in 2003 enabled libraries around the world to compare and contrast the usage for different journals and databases across different subjects from different publishers. There are now over 60 vendors providing COUNTER compliant usage reports for over 10000 full-text journals, as well as for a growing number of online databases, books and reference works. A new discipline of usage bibliometrics has developed and a great deal of work is underway to try to establish ‘value metrics’ associated with usage, in which the COUNTER compliant statistics play an increasingly important role..

    COUNTER does more than just set the standards for usage reports; we are cooperating with a number of organizations to develop a range of usage-related research and services.  In 2006 COUNTER carried out research, sponsored by JISC (the UK Joint Information Systems Committee) on the effects of publisher platforms on usage and we are currently collaborating with the UK Serials Group on the possible development of a new Journal Usage Factor metric.  COUNTER has also worked with NISO on SUSHI (Standardised Usage Harvesting Initiative) to develop a protocol to facilitate the automated harvesting and consolidation of usage statistics from different vendors.

    Future objectives

    While COUNTER has greatly improved the reliability and usability of online vendor usage statistics, there is still much for us to do, not only to help vendors further improve their usage reports and to help librarians to make sense of them, but also to keep the COUNTER codes up to date with changes in the online delivery of information. Our future objectives fall into three broad categories. First, to improve further the reliability of the core COUNTER data and extend scope of the Code of Practice beyond journals, databases and books. Second, to continue to increase the number of COUNTER compliant vendors. Third, to work with other industry organizations to facilitate the implementation of COUNTER and develop metrics based on the COUNTER data that are of practical value to both librarians and vendors. 

    However, we can only achieve any of this with the support of our membership and we urge all publishers of online content and librarians who use online content to participate in COUNTER as full members.

    Become a member of COUNTER now and support this important work. You will be in very distinguished company – a full list of current COUNTER members is available on our website at

    Benefits of COUNTER membership include:

    • COUNTER is owned by its members, who can influence the direction of COUNTER not only by their votes at the Annual General Meeting, but also in other ways, such as participation in member surveys and focus groups
    • Regular bulletins on the progress of COUNTER
    • Advice on the implementation of COUNTER
    • For vendors, no charge for the compliance process and a discounted price for the annual audit

    The following annual membership rates apply for 2007:

    Publisher £530 ($800)
    Intermediary £530 ($800)
    Library £265 ($400)
    Library Consortium £355 ($530)
    Industry Organization £265 ($400)
    Library Affiliate £106 ($160)

    To apply to become a member of COUNTER simply go to the COUNTER website, where you will find the online application form at

    Peter Shepherd


    In a short note about an academic working paper Salon has an article by Andrew Leonard linking peer review and the Weekly World News - "Academic reputation, alien news service, slain by World Wide Web" - The Article references a working paper by Harvard economist Glenn Ellison - Is Peer Review in Decline? - To quote from the abstract "Several observations are consistent with the hypothesis that the Internet improves the ability of high-profile authors to disseminate their research without going through the traditional peer-review process." However, I thought the Salon article summed things up well:

    "There are several conclusions to be drawn from the conflicting interpretations of data. One is that economists spend an inordinate amount of time analyzing academic publication patterns. Another is that whether you are a hoity-toity elite economics journal or a trashy tabloid, the Internet is going to beat you over the head with a big stick."

    The Wall Street Journal has an interesting debate about Web 2.0, trust and authority between Andrew Keen and David Weinberger authors respectively of "The Cult of the Amateur" and "Everything is Miscellaneous" - Basically, Keen argues "Web 2.0 bad" and Weinberger "Web 2.0 good" but this captures some fundamental issues confronting the scholarly communications world.