This year, Crossref’s Nominating Committee assumed the task of developing a slate of candidates to fill six open board seats. We are grateful that in the midst of a challenging year, we received over 70 expressions of interest from all around the world, a 40% increase from last year’s response. It was an extraordinary pool of applicants and a testament to the strength of our membership community.
There are six seats open for election (two large, four small), and the Nominating Committee is pleased to present the following slate.
The Initiative for Open Abstracts (I4OA) launched this week. The initiative calls on scholarly publishers to make the abstracts of their publications openly available. More specifically, publishers that work with Crossref to register DOIs for their publications are requested to include abstracts in the metadata they deposit in Crossref. These abstracts will then be made openly available by Crossref. 39 publishers have already agreed to join I4OA and to open their abstracts.
Just when you thought 2020 couldn’t go any faster, it’s Peer Review week again! Peer Review is such an important part of the research process and highlighting the role it plays is key to retaining and reinforcing trust in the publishing process. Â
Frankfurt Book Fair (#FBM20) will be online this year since people are really not traveling right now. Â This special edition of #FBM20 will have an extensive digital program in which we will be participating. So you can hang out with us from anywhere in the world!Â
To see the submission queue, log in to the admin tool, and click Show My Submission Queue on the opening page (or click Submissions, then Show System Queue). At the top of the page, you will see at the submissions that are being actively processed at the moment. They are listed individually by submission ID number, along with file name, file type, percent completed, and timestamps.
The submissions that queueing to be processed are displayed at the bottom of the page. They are grouped by depositor ID (admin tool username). Click + under Details (on the left, next to your depositor ID) to expand a list of your deposits waiting to be processed. You will also see the submission ID, filename, and position in the queue.
It typically takes only a few minutes for a submission to be picked up for processing and then for the processing to be completed. Processing may take longer depending on overall system traffic, and submission size and complexity. If you’re concerned about your submission processing time, or are planning a large update and would like to coordinate with us about timing, please contact us.
All files uploaded to our system are initially placed in a submission queue. When your deposit or query file has been processed, we’ll generate a submission log containing the final status of your submission. You should review these logs to make sure your content was registered or updated successfully. Logs are delivered through these channels:
Email - we send you an XML-formatted log for every file uploaded to our system. The log is sent to the email address you provided when using the web deposit form or Simple Text Query, or included in the <email_address> field in your deposit XML.
If you didn’t receive a submission log email, you can use the admin tool to search for past deposits:
Log in to the admin tool with your Crossref username and password
Click the Submissions tab, then the Administration sub-tab
Click Search at the bottom of the screen, and you’ll see a list of all past deposits for your account, from newest to oldest.
Click on the Submission ID number to the left of any deposit to access the Submission details, including the submission log for that deposit, or click on the file icon to view the file that was submitted.
After step 3 above, you can also narrow your search by entering parameters into any of the following fields on the Submissions administration sub-tab page:
Select a date range using the Last Day, Last Three Days, or Last Week buttons, or enter a custom date range to search for older deposits
If your account submits metadata deposits for multiple prefixes, you can use the Registrant field to narrow your search to just the deposits for a single prefix.
Click Find next to Registrant
In the pop-up window, enter the member name associated with the prefix and click Submit
Select the appropriate member name/prefix and the pop-up window will close. You’ll see a code for that prefix entered in the Registrant field
Select a deposit type from the Type drop-down menu to limit your search to just one type of deposit.
Metadata will limit results to full metadata deposits. This is the most common type.
DOI references will limit results to resource deposits, including references, Similarity Check full-text URLs, funding metadata, and license metadata
Conflict Undo will limit results to text files that were deposited to resolve conflicts
Check the Has Error box to only search for deposits with errors.
Check the Has Conflict box to only search for deposits with conflicts.
View the history of a DOI
Find the deposit history of an individual DOI using the admin tool, including all deposit files and submission logs.
To view a DOI history report:
Log in to the admin tool using your Crossref username and password
Click the Report tab
Type or paste a DOI into the box
Click Show to view its report.
The report lists every successful deposit or update of the DOI being searched. View the submission details (including log and submitted XML) by clicking on the submission number:
Use HTTPS to retrieve logs
In addition to the submission report you receive by email, you can also retrieve the results of submission processing or the contents of a submission at any time through this URL:
doi_batch_id is the DOI batch ID you supplied in the XML deposit file (not recommended)
file_name is the name of the file that you submitted (recommended)
type is the type of data requested (this field is mandatory)
Use result to retrieve submission results (deposit log)
Use contents to retrieve the XML file
You can track a submission by its doi_batch_id or by its file_name, but file_name is recommended. To use this feature effectively, make sure each tracking ID (doi_batch_id or file_name) is unique as only the first match is returned.
The main difference between using doi_batch_id and file_name is that doi_batch_id is inserted into the database after the submission has been parsed. Using file_name is preferable because submissions in the queue or in process can be tracked before deposit. Non-parse-able submissions can also be tracked using this method.
Interpret submission logs
Submission logs contain important information about the DOIs and metadata you have submitted to our system. They let you know if your content is registered successfully, and if not, what issues need to be addressed.
Your logs are by default emailed to the address provided in your registration XML or entered in our web form. You may also use the admin tool to search for past deposits or retrieve them by polling.
This is an example of a deposit containing errors. In the example, note that the <success_count> and <record_count> do not match. A status of “Failure” indicates the record was rejected and the DOI was not registered or updated. The <record_diagnostic> for each registration failure contains an error message. Each error within a deposit should be corrected and the deposit resubmitted. Learn more about error and warning messages.
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<doi_batch_diagnostic status="completed" sp="cr5.crossref.org">
<submission_id>394260418</submission_id>
<batch_id>314668373.xml</batch_id>
<record_diagnostic status="Failure">
<doi>10.5555/11111</doi>
<msg>Record not processed because submitted version: 20070904093839 is less or equal to previously submitted version (DOI match)</msg>
</record_diagnostic>
<record_diagnostic status="Failure" msg_id="4">
<doi>10.5555/44444</doi>
<msg>Record not processed because submitted version: 20070904093839 is less or equal to previously submitted version (DOI match)</msg>
</record_diagnostic>
<record_diagnostic status="Success">
<doi>10.5555/55555</doi>
<msg>Successfully added</msg>
</record_diagnostic>
<batch_data>
<record_count>3</record_count>
<success_count>1</success_count>
<warning_count>0</warning_count>
<failure_count>2</failure_count>
</batch_data>
</doi_batch_diagnostic>
Example of a log with XML validation error
This is an example of a submission log for a deposit with an error that prevented all DOIs from being processed. This happens when there are XML formatting issues, or if the uploaded item is not XML. Note that <record_count> and <failure_count> both equal 1. This will be true no matter how many DOIs were actually included in the submission.
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<doi_batch_diagnostic status="completed" sp="ds3.crossref.org">
<submission_id>394260418</submission_id>
<batch_id>314668373.xml</batch_id>
<record_diagnostic status="Failure" msg_id="29">
<doi />
<msg>Deposited XML is not well-formed or does not validate: Error on line 1: Content is not allowed in prolog.</msg>
</record_diagnostic>
<batch_data>
<record_count>1</record_count>
<success_count>0</success_count>
<warning_count>0</warning_count>
<failure_count>1</failure_count>
</batch_data>
</doi_batch_diagnostic>
Example of a log with warnings
This is an example of a submission log with warnings. Warnings almost always indicate that DOIs have been successfully deposited and were flagged as a conflict with a previously deposited DOI.
This is an example of a submission log from a deposit containing references. Each reference in the deposit will be included in the log, identified by the citation key included in the deposit.
