prism:doi
The new PRISM spec (v. 2.0) was published this week, see the press release. (Downloads are available here.)
This is a significant development as there is support for XMP profiles, to complement the existing XML and RDF/XML profiles. And, as PRISM is one of the major vocabularies being used by publishers, I would urge you all to go take a look at it and to consider upgrading your applications to using it.
One caveat. There's a new element prism:doi (PRISM Namespace, 4.2.13) which sits alongside another new element prism:url (PRISM Namespace, 4.2.55). Unfortunately the prism:doi element is shown to take DOI proxy URL as its value - and not the DOI string itself, e.g.
- Model #1
<prism:doi rdf:resource=”http://dx.doi.org/10.1030/03054”/> - Model #2
<prism:doi>http://dx.doi.org/10.1030/03054</prism:doi>"
To satisfy Model #1 above a URI form for DOI would be required. And this is not the service URI denoted by the proxy. It would either have to be:
- Model #1 - Registered URI Form
<prism:doi rdf:resource=”info:doi/10.1030/03054”/> - Model #1 - Unregistered URI Form
<prism:doi rdf:resource=”doi:10.1030/03054”/>
Any comments? Some guidelines from CrossRef would be useful - although maybe further discussion is required. It is, of course, a constant bugbear that "doi:" remains an unregistered URI scheme.

Comments
What's wrong with info:doi? There is a registered namespace, so just use it! Elsewise you only create more confusion and incompatibilities. However if you import data, you should always look for URLs like http://dx.doi.org/10.1030/03054 and convert them to the right URI form info:doi/10.1030/03054. You need to clean data anyway.
Posted by: Jakob | February 24, 2008 03:03 PM
Hi Jakob:
Note that the "info" URI scheme was developed as a bootstrap mechanism to get legacy namespaces represented on the Web. It was not intended to limit individual namespaces in their own registrations. Indeed the RFC is very specific about this:
"The registration of a public namespace in the "info" Registry SHALL
NOT preclude further development of services associated with that
namespace that MAY qualify the namespace for additional publication
elsewhere within the URI allocation."
There are many issues involved in registering a toplevel URI scheme - branding being just one of them.
Cheers,
Tony
Posted by: Tony Hammond | February 25, 2008 07:33 AM