Latest blog posts
Martin Eve
2023 September 28

Feedback on Automatic Digital Preservation and Self-Healing DOIs

Thank you to everyone who responded with feedback on the Op Cit proposal. This post clarifies, defends, and amends the original proposal in light of the responses that have been sent. We have endeavoured to respond to every point that was raised, either here or in the document comments themselves. We strongly prefer for this to be developed in collaboration with CLOCKSS, LOCKSS, and/or Portico, i.e. through established preservation services that already have existing arrangements in place, are properly funded, and understand the problem space.

...Find out more
Lucy Ofiesh
2023 September 27

2023 board election slate

I’m pleased to share the 2023 board election slate. Crossref’s Nominating Committee received 87 submissions from members worldwide to fill seven open board seats. We maintain a balance of eight large member seats and eight small member seats. A member’s size is determined based on the membership fee tier they pay. We look at how our total revenue is generated across the membership tiers and split it down the middle. Like last year, about half of our revenue came from members in the tiers $0 - $1,650, and the other half came from members in tiers $3,900 - $50,000.

...Find out more
Ginny Hendricks
2023 September 12

News: Crossref and Retraction Watch

https://doi.org/10.13003/c23rw1d9 Crossref acquires Retraction Watch data and opens it for the scientific community Agreement to combine and publicly distribute data about tens of thousands of retracted research papers, and grow the service together 12th September 2023 —– The Center for Scientific Integrity, the organisation behind the Retraction Watch blog and database, and Crossref, the global infrastructure underpinning research communications, both not-for-profits, announced today that the Retraction Watch database has been acquired by Crossref and made a public resource.

...Find out more
Amanda French
2023 September 07

Open Funder Registry to transition into Research Organization Registry (ROR)

Today, we are announcing a long-term plan to deprecate the Open Funder Registry. For some time, we have understood that there is significant overlap between the Funder Registry and the Research Organization Registry (ROR), and funders and publishers have been asking us whether they should use Funder IDs or ROR IDs to identify funders. It has therefore become clear that merging the two registries will make workflows more efficient and less confusing for all concerned.

...Find out more
  • Menu
search

Documentation

Dissertations

Dissertation records capture information about dissertations or theses.

When registering dissertations, DO:

  • include all relevant funding, [license/schema-library//documentation/principles-practices/best-practices/license/), and [relationship/schema-library//documentation/principles-practices/best-practices/relationship/) metadata
  • include contributors metadata, including ORCID iDs and affiliation metadata
  • include an [abstract]((/documentation/principles-practices/best-practices#abstracts)
  • include identifiers associated with the dissertation - if a DAI has been assigned, it should be deposited in the identifier element with the id_type attribute set to "dai". If an institution has its own numbering system, it should be deposited in item_number, and the item_number_type should be set to "institution"

Do not:

  • use the dissertation model for versions of a dissertations published in a book or journal

Review our Dissertation Markup Guide for XML and metadata help.

Page owner: Patricia Feeney   |   Last updated 2021-November-10