The Crossref Nominating Committee is inviting expressions of interest to join the Board of Directors of Crossref for the term starting in 2021. The committee will gather responses from those interested and create the slate of candidates that our membership will vote on in an election in September. Expressions of interest will be due Friday, June 19, 2020.
The role of the board at Crossref is to provide strategic and financial oversight of the organization, as well as guidance to the Executive Director and the staff leadership team, with the key responsibilities being:
After 20 years in operation, and as our system matures from experimental to foundational infrastructure, it’s time to review our documentation.
Having a solid core of education materials about the why and the how of Crossref is essential in making participation possible, easy, and equitable.
As our system has evolved, our membership has grown and diversified, and so have our tools - both for depositing metadata with Crossref, and for retrieving and making use of it.
To help better support the discovery, sale and analysis of books, Jennifer Kemp from Crossref and Mike Taylor from Digital Science, present seven reasons why publishers should collect chapter-level metadata.
Book publishers should have been in the best possible position to take advantage of the movement of scholarly publishing to the internet. After all, they have behind them an extraordinary legacy of creating and distributing data about books: the metadata that supports discovery, sales and analysis.
Hello, I’m Paul Davis and I’ve been part of the Crossref support team since May 2017. In that time I’ve become more adept as a DOI detective, helping our members work out whodunnit when it comes to submission errors.
If you have ever received one of our error messages after you have submitted metadata to us, you may know that some are helpful and others are, well, difficult to decode. I’m here to help you to become your own DOI detective.
Administrative metadata provides information about the origin and maintenance of a research object. This includes a link to accessing its full-text. Administrative metadata includes information needed to support the preservation of a research object, including archiving arrangements. For example, a particular application and operating system may be required in order to access a digital file.
Learn more about the three main types of metadata: descriptive (bibliographic), administrative, and structural.
Include the URL for access to full-text, so that readers can access your content. Learn more about creating a landing page.
Add funder information, including the funder’s unique identifier from the Funder Registry, and help build connections between funders and research outputs.
Linking research funding and published outcomes
Funding data is used by funders to track the publications that result from their grants, including use of facilities, equipment, salary awards, and so on.
Publishers can contribute by depositing the funding acknowledgements from their publications as part of their standard metadata. The deposit should include funder names, funder IDs, and associated grant numbers.
Funding data can be searched using our interfaces for people or our APIs for machines. This data clarifies the scholarly record, and makes life easier for researchers who may need to comply with requirements to make their published results publicly available.
How to collect and register funding data
Ask authors to submit the names of their funder(s) and grant numbers when they submit their manuscript, or extract funding information from the text of accepted manuscripts
Deposit with Crossref funder name(s), ID(s) and grant ID(s) for each DOI.
You can register funding data as a stand-alone deposit (useful for backfiles) or as part of your standard metadata deposit (for current content)
Make use of our metadata retrieval tools to check the metadata we hold for your publications (and to retrieve metadata for your own analysis)
Check your progress using Participation Reports (beta) to see the percentage of your deposits that have funding data (and other key metadata elements) registered.
Copyright is a type of intellectual property, which allows the copyright owner to protect against others copying or reproducing their work. Copyright arises automatically when a work that qualifies for protection is created. Scholarly communications relies on researchers sharing, adapting, and building on the work of others, so a license (an official permission or permit) is needed in order for copyrighted content to be used in these ways.
Including license information (or access indicators) in your deposit is very helpful in letting readers know how they can access and use your content, for example, in text and data mining. You can include access indicators in metadata deposits.
Note that free-to-read is an access indicator, separate from the license. It’s used to show that a work is available at no charge for a limited time, but would normally be behind a paywall.
Access indicators may be included in a metadata deposit, submitted as a resource deposit, or uploaded as a .csv file, and may be included with CrossMark metadata where applicable. The ai namespace must be included in the schema declaration, for example:
This guidance for members on how to register better license metadata with Crossref is to help academic institutions identify content written by their researchers, and how this content may be used, particularly in an automated, machine-readable way.
Institutions need to know which article version may be exposed on an open repository, and from what date. It is no longer sufficient simply to describe in words how they may calculate the embargo end-date, for example, by referring them to a general set of terms and conditions that apply to all of your content across its whole lifecycle – they need to know whether this version of this article can be exposed on their repository and, if so, from what specific date, and what repository readers can then do with the content they find there.
The Crossref schema contains all the fields you need to specify this unambiguously. By doing so, you can also be more confident that institutions will have the information they need to respect your terms and conditions.
A single Crossref DOI can be associated with metadata relating to multiple versions of a work: the author’s accepted manuscript (AAM), version of record (VoR), or a version intended for text and data mining (TDM). Each of these versions can have their own license conditions attached to them. To reflect this, works in Crossref can have multiple license elements. Each license element can contain a URL to a license, the article version to which the license applies, and the license start date. Together, these can describe nuanced license terms across different versions of the work.
An analysis done by Jisc of Crossref metadata found that while 48% of journal articles published in 2017 had license information, the licenses most often referred to the text and data mining version of the work, and licenses were still being used inconsistently for the version of record (VoR) or accepted manuscript (AM).
A major concern is that many members link to their general terms and conditions rather than to licenses that apply at specific times to specific versions of a work. For example, a member may set its policies out in a general terms and conditions page, and link to it in the license metadata:
On the terms and conditions page, the member could spell out, for example, the license that applies to the VoR, the restrictions that apply to the AAM during its embargo period, and details of how the AAM may be used after its embargo period. A repository manager would then have to go through the terms and conditions, and manually calculate the embargo end date, in order to determine whether the work could be deposited to a repository. This is a prohibitively onerous process for institutions, and risks content being used outside the terms of member policies because of human error.
It would be helpful if members could instead set out specific licenses for each stage in each article’s lifecycle, for each of its versions. If the licensing terms for a version will change (for example, because it may be exposed on a repository after an embargo period), then a separate license should be used, with the start_date element indicating when the new license comes into effect. Using start dates for this license information is best practice in general, as it can validate immediate open access, which is at the heart of many institutional and funder policies. This is set out in more detail in the examples below.
Example: Green OA with Creative Commons license
In this example, a work is published on 1 January 2019. Under the member’s policy, the VoR is under access controls. The AAM is under embargo for a six-month period and then becomes open access under a CC BY NC ND license.
By using a Creative Commons license with a start date, the embargo end date can be unambiguously deduced from the metadata.
Example: Green OA with member-defined post-embargo license
Linking to a Creative Commons license is optimal whenever possible, as this is an unambiguously open license and so will be readily recognizable as identifying the post-embargo period. It is also a standard license which makes it more easily machine-readable. However, if you need to define your own open license, you can instead link to that in the metadata along with the appropriate start date.
Repository managers will still be able to unambiguously distinguish works that can be made available after an embargo period, albeit involving a brief manual check, provided the license identifies itself explicitly as referring specifically to the post-embargo period.
It would not be suitable to provide a single URL containing license terms for both the pre-embargo and post-embargo period, for example:
This would not allow institutions to unambiguously determine the embargo end date and license, and so should be avoided.
Example: Gold OA
In the case of gold OA, the licenses are simple: both the AAM and the VoR have an open license (in this example, CC BY) that starts no later than the date of publication. The start date could optionally be omitted entirely, since the license terms will apply for the article’s lifetime.
Having clear, unambiguous license metadata helps institutions use the content within your terms and conditions. For example, an institution could use Crossref to find works published by researchers at their organisation (provided you have also populated the affiliations of all the (co-)authors), and check programmatically for the presence and with-effect dates of any open license(s). This would show whether (and if so when) the work can be exposed on their repository.
How to populate your Crossref metadata with license information
There are multiple ways that members can add license information to the metadata they deposit/have deposited with Crossref:
Example license information as part of a resource deposit
<!-- license updates with dates / free to read info included-->
<ai:license_ref applies_to="vor" start_date="2011-01-11">https://www.crossref.org/vor-license</ai:license_ref>
<ai:license_ref applies_to="am" start_date="2012-01-11">https://www.crossref.org/am-license</ai:license_ref>
<ai:license_ref applies_to="tdm" start_date="2012-01-11">https://www.crossref.org/tdm-license</ai:license_ref>
<!-- license updates with just license URL included-->
Article numbers or IDs
Journal articles and other scholarly works often have an ID such as an article number, eLocator, or e-location ID instead of a page number. In these cases, do not use the <first_page> tag to capture the ID - instead, use the <item_number> tag with the item_number_type attribute value set to article_number.
You can include identifiers that are not explicitly defined in our deposit schema section within the optional <publisher_item> section. <publisher_item> is also used to capture article or e-location IDs. This option should only be used for identifiers that identify the item being registered. Use relationships to capture identifiers for related items.
Every publication in the Crossref system is assigned a unique publication ID. These are used mostly for internal purposes, but may be useful when retrieving data in bulk or identifying a specific title. Publication IDs may be retrieved using OAI-PMH, or from the browsable title list.
Find publication IDs using an OAI-PMH request
An OAI-PMH ListSets request will return titles and publication IDs for journals, books, conference proceedings, and series-level data:
J (journal) is the default set, set=B must be specified to retrieve book or conference proceeding titles, and S for series-level titles. Sets may be further limited by member prefix. Learn more about OAI-PMH.
The publication ID is listed within the <setspec> element, after the set and member prefix. For example, within the following set, 24 is the publication ID for Journal of Clinical Psychology:
<setName>Journal of Clinical Psychology</setName>
Find publication IDs using the browsable title list
The browsable title list includes the publication ID next to each title in the search results. Select the icon to reveal the ID. For most purposes, publication IDs are always preceded by the publication type (J, B, or S for journal, book, or series).
Digital preservation is a combination of policies, strategies, and actions that ensure persistent access to digital content over time. It includes archiving arrangements. The Digital Preservation Coalition’s Digital Preservation Handbook gives a good introduction to practicalities and best practices in archiving arrangements.
Under the Crossref member obligations, you are asked to make best efforts to have your content archived by an archiving organization, and you are encouraged to include information about your designated archive in your metadata. This helps us work with archives to ensure your DOIs continue to resolve to your content, even if your organization ceases.
The archives listed in our deposit schema section are: