[
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/jobs/2026-03-05-technical-support-specialist/",
"title": "Technical Support Specialist",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2026-03-05",
"lastmod_ts": 1772668800,
"section": "Jobs",
"tags": [],
"description": " Applications for this position closed on March 26th, 2026. Do you want to work directly with Crossref members and metadata users to help progress open science worldwide? Come and join the world of open scholarly infrastructure and metadata as our next Technical Support Specialist.\nType: Full-time, Monday-Friday Location: Remote and global, availability from 13:00 to 15:00 UTC Monday through Friday to ensure sufficient overlap with the rest of the team. This is full-time remote role; we require synchronous work during this two-hour window of time. Remuneration: 45-50K USD or local equivalent. We pay salaries in the currency of the country in which you’re based. We arrive at the local USD-equivalent salary by determining the average 5-year USD exchange rate, to stabilise currency fluctuations. Benefits: Check out our Employee Handbook for more details on paid time off, unlimited sick time, paid parental and medical leaves, and more. Reports to: Head of Participation and Support, Isaac Farley Timeline: Advertise in March and offer by end of April. About the role Reporting to our Head of Participation and Support, the full time Technical Support Specialist is an important role in our Membership team.\n",
"content": " Applications for this position closed on March 26th, 2026. Do you want to work directly with Crossref members and metadata users to help progress open science worldwide? Come and join the world of open scholarly infrastructure and metadata as our next Technical Support Specialist.\nType: Full-time, Monday-Friday Location: Remote and global, availability from 13:00 to 15:00 UTC Monday through Friday to ensure sufficient overlap with the rest of the team. This is full-time remote role; we require synchronous work during this two-hour window of time. Remuneration: 45-50K USD or local equivalent. We pay salaries in the currency of the country in which you’re based. We arrive at the local USD-equivalent salary by determining the average 5-year USD exchange rate, to stabilise currency fluctuations. Benefits: Check out our Employee Handbook for more details on paid time off, unlimited sick time, paid parental and medical leaves, and more. Reports to: Head of Participation and Support, Isaac Farley Timeline: Advertise in March and offer by end of April. About the role Reporting to our Head of Participation and Support, the full time Technical Support Specialist is an important role in our Membership team.\nWe’re looking for a Technical Support Specialist to provide first-line help to our international community of publishers, librarians, funders, researchers, and developers on a range of services that help them deposit and retrieve metadata to help them find, link, cite, and assess scholarly content. You’ll be working closely with nine other technical and membership support colleagues to provide support and guidance for people with a wide range of technical experience. The strongest candidates may have a technical background; they’ll also have interest and initiative to grow their technical skills while communicating the complexity of our products and services in straightforward and easy-to-understand terms. You’ll help our community both create and retrieve metadata records with tools ranging from simple user interfaces to APIs and integrations.\nCrossref is a distributed team serving members and users around the world. We are seeking candidates to foster a strong team. We work a flexible schedule; for training and synchronous problem-solving, we also ask that candidates have availability between 13:00 and 15:00 UTC. The majority of the work performed will be in English, but we’ll also prioritize candidates who can communicate in Spanish and/or Portuguese.\nKey responsibilities Replying to and solving community queries using the Zendesk support system. Using our various tools and APIs plus knowledge of our XML schema to find the answers to these queries, or pointing users to support materials that will help them. Liaising with colleagues on particularly tricky tickets (flagging bugs across the organization and advocating for feature developments that support the community); generally, escalating as necessary. Working efficiently but also kindly and with empathy with our very diverse, global community. About you We are looking for a proactive candidate with a unique blend of customer service skills, analytical trouble-shooting skills, and a passion to help others. You’ll have an interest in data and technology and will be a quick learner of new technologies. You’ll be able to build relationships with our community members and serve their very diverse needs - from assisting those with basic queries to really digging into some knotty technical queries. Because of this, you’ll also be able to distill those complex and technically challenging queries into easy-to-follow guidance.\nYou’ll need:\nStrong written and spoken English skills The ability to clearly communicate complex technical information to technical and non-technical users, using open questions to get to the bottom of things when queries don’t seem to make sense Quick learner of new technologies; can rapidly pick up new processes and systems; and, have interest and initiative to grow your own technical skills Extremely organized and can bring order to chaos, independently manage multiple priorities Ability to balance a very diverse role, wearing many different hats and providing a wide range of support Proactive in asking questions and making suggestions for improvements Process-driven but able to cope with occasional ambiguity and lack of clarity - open to feedback and adaptable when things change quickly A truly global perspective - we have over 24,000 member organizations from 167 countries across numerous time zones Nice to have:\nExperience helping customers and solving problems in creative and unique ways Experience with or interest in XML, metadata, and Crossref as well as scholarly research and information science Experience with Zendesk and Gitlab or similar support and issue management software Experience with Discourse, similar community forums, and/or past community building Familiarity with REST APIs and metadata retrieval and analysis Strong analytical and problem-solving skills About the team Our technical support team, part of Crossref’s Membership group, a distributed team with colleagues across Africa, Asia, Europe, and the US, is critical to the ongoing success and day-to-day operations of the organisation. We’re at the forefront of Crossref’s growth, building relationships with new communities in new markets in new ways. We’re aiming for a more open approach to having conversations with people all around the world - including within our growing community forum, which the right candidate will help us expand.\nThis is a remote role. We ask that candidates have availability between 13:00 and 15:00 UTC. You can be based anywhere in the world where we can employ staff, either directly or through an employer of record. We’ll also prioritize candidates with an overlap in their working hours in South America (most likely candidates based in North America, South America, and Europe) to balance our existing team. Our main working language is English, but there might be opportunities in this job to use other languages (most notably Spanish and/or Portuguese) if you are able.\nAbout Crossref We’re a non-profit membership organisation that exists to make scholarly communications better. We rally the community; tag and share metadata; run an open infrastructure; play with technology; and make tools and services—all to help put research in context.\nWe envision a rich and reusable open network of relationships connecting research organisations, people, things, and actions; a scholarly record that the global community can build on forever, for the benefit of society. We are working towards this vision of a ‘Research Nexus’ by demonstrating the value of richer and connected open metadata, incentivising people to meet best practices, while making it easier to do so. “We” means 24,000+ members from 166+ countries, 170+ million records, and nearly 2 billion monthly metadata queries from thousands of tools across the research ecosystem. We want to be a sustainable source of complete, open, and global scholarly metadata and relationships.\nTake a look at our strategic agenda to see the planned work that aims to achieve the vision. The sustainability area aims to make transparent all the processes and procedures we follow to run the operation long-term, including our financials and our ongoing commitment to the Principles of Open Scholarly Infrastructure (POSI). The governance area describes our board and its role in community oversight.\nIt also takes a strong team – because reliable infrastructure needs committed people who contribute to and realise the vision, and thrive doing it. We are a distributed group of 50+ dedicated people who take our work seriously, but don\u0026rsquo;t take ourselves seriously - we like to play quizzes, measure coffee intake, and create 100s of custom slack emojis. We do this through fair policies and working practices, a balanced approach to resourcing, and accountability to each other.\nWe can offer the successful candidate a challenging and fun environment to work in. Together we are dedicated to our global mission and we are constantly adapting to ensure we get there. Take a look at our organisation chart, the latest Annual Meeting recordings, and our financial information.\nThinking of applying? We especially encourage applications from people with backgrounds historically under-represented in research and scholarly communications. You can be based anywhere in the world where we can employ staff, either directly or through an employer of record.\nWe will invite selected candidates to an initial call to discuss the role. Following that, shortlisted candidates will be invited to an interview. You will receive all information in advance, and the interview will include some questions and/or exercises you’ll have a chance to prepare for. All interviews will be held remotely on Zoom.\nApplications closed on March 26th, 2026.\nAnticipated salary for this role is 45-50k USD-equivalent, paid in local currency. Crossref offers competitive compensation, benefits, flexible work arrangements, professional development opportunities, and a supportive work environment. Check out our Employee Handbook for more details on paid time off, unlimited sick time, paid parental and medical leaves, and more.\nEqual opportunities commitment Crossref is committed to a policy of non-discrimination and equal opportunity for all employees and qualified applicants for employment without regard to race, colour, religion, sex, pregnancy or a condition related to pregnancy, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, national origin, ancestry, age, physical or mental disability, genetic information, veteran status, uniform service member status, or any other protected class under applicable law. Crossref will make reasonable accommodations for qualified individuals with known disabilities in accordance with applicable law.\nThanks for your interest in joining Crossref. We are excited to hear from you! ",
"headings": ["About the role","Key responsibilities","About you","About the team","About Crossref","Thinking of applying?","Equal opportunities commitment","Thanks for your interest in joining Crossref. We are excited to hear from you!"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/jobs/2025-11-13-communications-manager/",
"title": "Communications Manager",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2025-11-12",
"lastmod_ts": 1762905600,
"section": "Jobs",
"tags": [],
"description": " Applications for this position closed on December 9, 2025. Are you keen to connect with the community of knowledge-sharing organisations world-wide, to drive greater visibility of research and improve trust in science? Come and join the world of open scholarly infrastructure as our new Communications Manager.\nLocation: Remote and global with at least two-hour overlap with UK working hours Type: Full-time (alternative schedules and job-shares can be considered) Remuneration: 72-76k USD or local equivalent. Note this is a general guide (as there is no universal currency) and local currency analysis will take place before the final offer. Benefits: Check out our Employee Handbook for more details on paid time off, unlimited sick time, paid parental and medical leaves, and more. Reports to: Director of Community, Kora Korzec Timeline: Advertise and recruit in November/December and offer in December/January About the role The Communications Manager will play a crucial role in ensuring the success of Crossref’s programs and initiatives. It’s a new role in the Community Team, and we think it’s going to be a busy one, with interfaces across the entire organisation. You will be responsible for communicating nuanced messages to diverse audiences globally – from scholarly publishers, to research performing institutions, to researchers, research funders, and probably more.\n",
"content": " Applications for this position closed on December 9, 2025. Are you keen to connect with the community of knowledge-sharing organisations world-wide, to drive greater visibility of research and improve trust in science? Come and join the world of open scholarly infrastructure as our new Communications Manager.\nLocation: Remote and global with at least two-hour overlap with UK working hours Type: Full-time (alternative schedules and job-shares can be considered) Remuneration: 72-76k USD or local equivalent. Note this is a general guide (as there is no universal currency) and local currency analysis will take place before the final offer. Benefits: Check out our Employee Handbook for more details on paid time off, unlimited sick time, paid parental and medical leaves, and more. Reports to: Director of Community, Kora Korzec Timeline: Advertise and recruit in November/December and offer in December/January About the role The Communications Manager will play a crucial role in ensuring the success of Crossref’s programs and initiatives. It’s a new role in the Community Team, and we think it’s going to be a busy one, with interfaces across the entire organisation. You will be responsible for communicating nuanced messages to diverse audiences globally – from scholarly publishers, to research performing institutions, to researchers, research funders, and probably more.\nKey responsibilities Communications Management - management of communications across Crossref programs and audiences; leading on development, execution and evaluation of communication campaigns; creation and solicitation of content resonating with the Crossref community in support of key messages and developments, supporting consistency of our messages, tone of voice, and company style across Crossref communications.\nMultichannel communications – determination and management of an appropriate mix of channels and tactics in support of organisational priorities, including programs and services developments, and strategic initiatives, across multiple channels from emails, newsletters and landing pages, to discussion forums, and social media.\nSocial media management – ensure Crossref is approachable and engaging on relevant social media – including curation and delivery of timely messages, responsiveness, pro-active identification and amplifying relevant messages across the community, facilitating participation of wider Crossref team in relevant communities and conversations on social media, including relevant community fora; identifying emerging topics for community engagement, escalating and coordinating responses internally to issues raised by the community on social media such as for technical support; setting up and adjusting internal policies to ensure adequate guidance for staff engaging with the community in the changing landscape of social media.\nMonitoring and evaluation – monitors engagement and statistics for channels in use, proposes appropriate action to improve engagement, and develops sensitivity and responses to community sentiment and perception of Crossref and our programs.\nAbout you We’re looking for someone with experience of carrying out communications across cultures, who’s able to articulate complex ideas clearly and accessibly. If you are a skilled campaigns manager this role will suit you. It helps if you are enthusiastic about social media management and have an established presence on some of the leading networks (mind you we mostly use LinkedIn, Bluesky, and Mastodon these days). Please note that there are many opportunities to shape this new role for the right person, so whether you feel strong in content planning and creation, designing marketing automations, or more technical product and service communication, you can count on utilising those skills as our Communications Manager.\nFamiliarity with the knowledge-sharing industry would be a plus but is not essential. However, we’d love for you to engage with our resources to learn a little about scholarly metadata before you consider applying – especially to get excited by our research nexus vision.\nYou will need:\nCollaborative attitude Content planning, creation, and curation experience in service of a consistent narrative Demonstrable communications planning and execution experience for diverse audiences and across variety of communications channels Track record of social media management Excellent writing skills in English demonstrated with a sample of content you created for websites or electronic publications Ability to organise own work and independently manage multiple priorities Deep understanding and commitment to equity and inclusivity and ideas on applying these values in the design of effective communications Experience in evaluating communications and driving engagement improvements Curiosity and readiness to ask questions and learn Nice-to-have:\nEmail communications and marketing automation management experience Confidence in public speaking in-person and online, including delivery of webinars/workshops Experience with web-analytics and reporting (we’re using Matomo but experience with other tools will be relevant and transferable) Product/service marketing communications Experience of managing press inquiries Experience of working in global or multicultural settings Ability to communicate in languages other than English About Crossref \u0026amp; the team The role is based within the Community team, with one experienced Events and Communications Manager already embedded, and a group of Community Engagement Managers. We work collaboratively within the team, as well as across a variety of programs. We adopt an approachable, community-appropriate tone and style in our communications. In addition to the predominant online events, we organise a number of face-to-face opportunities to engage with our community, so the post-holder will have their share of travel (accordingly with our latest thinking on travel and sustainability).\nOur primary aim is to engage colleagues from the member organisations and other stakeholders to be actively involved in capturing documentation of the scholarly progress and making it transparent. This contributes to co-creating a robust research nexus.\nWe’re a nonprofit membership organisation that exists to make scholarly communications better. We rally the community; tag and share metadata; run an open infrastructure; play with technology; and make tools and services—all to help put research in context.\nWe envision a rich and reusable open network of relationships connecting research organisations, people, things, and actions; a scholarly record that the global community can build on forever, for the benefit of society. We are working towards this vision of a ‘Research Nexus’ by demonstrating the value of richer and connected open metadata, incentivising people to meet best practices, while making it easier to do so. “We” means 23,000+ members from 160+ countries, 170+ million records, and nearly 2 billion monthly metadata queries from thousands of tools across the research ecosystem. We want to be a sustainable source of complete, open, and global scholarly metadata and relationships.\nTake a look at our strategic agenda to see the planned work that aims to achieve the vision. The sustainability area aims to make transparent all the processes and procedures we follow to run the operation long-term, including our financials and our ongoing commitment to the Principles of Open Scholarly Infrastructure (POSI). The governance area describes our board and its role in community oversight.\nIt also takes a strong team – because reliable infrastructure needs committed people who contribute to and realise the vision, and thrive doing it. We are a distributed group of 50 dedicated people who take our work seriously, but don’t take ourselves seriously - we like to play quizzes, measure coffee intake, and create 100s of custom slack emojis. We do this through fair policies and working practices, a balanced approach to resourcing, and accountability to each other.\nWe can offer the successful candidate a challenging and fun environment to work in. Together we are dedicated to our global mission and we are constantly adapting to ensure we get there. Take a look at our organisation chart, the latest Annual Meeting recordings, and our financial information here.\nThinking of applying? We especially encourage applications from people with backgrounds historically under-represented in research and scholarly communications. You can be based anywhere in the world where we can employ staff, either directly or through an employer of record.\nPlease remember to include a brief cover letter as well as CV with your application.We would welcome a brief description of a selected project of yours that demonstrates skills required for this job. We also suggest that if you include links to examples of your work that you might describe in either the cover letter or CV these need to be publicly available. We won’t be able to request permissions for accessing unpublished materials during the recruitment process.\nWe will invite selected candidates to an initial call to discuss the role. Following that, shortlisted candidates will be invited to an interview. You will receive all information in advance, and the interview will include some questions and/or exercises you’ll have a chance to prepare for. All interviews will be held remotely on Zoom.\nClick here to apply!\nApplications close on December 9th, 2025.\nAnticipated salary for this role is approximately 72-76k USD-equivalent, paid in local currency. Crossref offers competitive compensation, benefits, flexible work arrangements, professional development opportunities, and a supportive work environment. Check out our Employee Handbook for more details on paid time off, unlimited sick time, paid parental and medical leaves, and more.\nEqual opportunities commitment Crossref is committed to a policy of non-discrimination and equal opportunity for all employees and qualified applicants for employment without regard to race, colour, religion, sex, pregnancy or a condition related to pregnancy, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, national origin, ancestry, age, physical or mental disability, genetic information, veteran status, uniform service member status, or any other protected class under applicable law. Crossref will make reasonable accommodations for qualified individuals with known disabilities in accordance with applicable law.\nThanks for your interest in joining Crossref. We are excited to hear from you! ",
"headings": ["About the role","Key responsibilities","About you","About Crossref \u0026amp; the team","Thinking of applying?","Equal opportunities commitment","Thanks for your interest in joining Crossref. We are excited to hear from you!"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/members-area/",
"title": "Hello, members",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2025-03-02",
"lastmod_ts": 1740873600,
"section": "Hello, members",
"tags": [],
"description": "Welcome to the Crossref members\u0026rsquo; area Haven\u0026rsquo;t joined us yet? You need to be a member of Crossref in order to get a DOI prefix so you can create Crossref DOIs and register content. Membership allows you to connect your content with a global network of online scholarly research, currently over 25,000 other member organisations from 167 countries. It’s so much more than just getting a DOI.\n",
"content": "Welcome to the Crossref members\u0026rsquo; area Haven\u0026rsquo;t joined us yet? You need to be a member of Crossref in order to get a DOI prefix so you can create Crossref DOIs and register content. Membership allows you to connect your content with a global network of online scholarly research, currently over 25,000 other member organisations from 167 countries. It’s so much more than just getting a DOI.\nPlease note: You don’t need to be a member to just use others’ metadata - if that\u0026rsquo;s all you need, read more about our open metadata retrieval tools.\nApply to become a Crossref member If you haven\u0026rsquo;t joined Crossref yet, you can read more about membership and apply to join here. New member? Register for the webinar \u0026lsquo;Getting started at Crossref\u0026rsquo;. Here we\u0026rsquo;ll cover how to register your content, understand member obligations, and navigate the tools and processes that connect your work to the scholarly community worldwide.\nStart registering your content Follow our new member setup guide.\nGet help You can get help from our detailed support docs, request support from our small team, or head to the community forum to ask others (there is a specific category for new members).\nSome key documentation that you might be interested in:\nHow to construct your DOIs Helper tools to manually register your metadata records Manage your records in our Content Registration system Verify your registration Understand the reports that we send by email Add references to your metadata Been a member for a while? Take a look at the quality of your metadata on your Crossref Participation Report.\nDon\u0026rsquo;t forget to include references in the content you register with us Make sure you are including funding information in your metadata - find identifiers for Funders via our Open Funder Registry (OFR). Take a look at these extra services that are available to you:\nSimilarity Check Cited by Crossmark And finally, remember that one of your member obligations is to include DOIs in your reference lists - find out more about Reference Linking.\nMaintaining your membership There are several things you need to do in order to maintain your membership.\nPay your invoices - more on our billing FAQs page. Keep the metadata of your existing records up to date - more on maintaining your metadata. Plan any platform migrations carefully - read our platform migration guide. Let us know if any of your contact details change Continue to meet your member obligations - you can find a reminder of these here. Respond to the reports we send you and fix any errors - more on reports. Get more involved Sign up to our bi-monthly newsletter or our Spanish language newsletter. You can read the latest English issue here and the latest Spanish issue here. Vote in our board elections - more about our board and governance Attend a webinar or event - our latest events Join an advisory group or working group - find out more Help and advise other members on our community forum Cancel your membership By committing to our membership terms, you’ve committed to the long-term stewardship of your metadata and content. However, there are sometimes reasons why members need to cancel. It\u0026rsquo;s important that you tell us if you wish to cancel - otherwise we\u0026rsquo;ll continue to send you annual membership fee invoices and you\u0026rsquo;ll continue to be responsible for them. Find out more.\n",
"headings": ["Welcome to the Crossref members\u0026rsquo; area","Haven\u0026rsquo;t joined us yet?","Apply to become a Crossref member","New member?","Start registering your content","Get help","Been a member for a while?","Maintaining your membership","Get more involved","Cancel your membership"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/jobs/2023-04-24-contract-member-support/",
"title": "Contract Member Support",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2023-04-24",
"lastmod_ts": 1682294400,
"section": "Jobs",
"tags": [],
"description": "Request for services: Member Support Contractor Location: Remote\nWe’re looking for contractors able to work remotely and help us to welcome new members from around the world. There is no set schedule and contractors would bill their hours monthly.\nCrossref receives over 200 new applications every month from organisations who produce scholarly and professional materials and content.\nKey responsibilities Manage queries from applicants and members via our Zendesk support desk and potentially other channels. Follow the administrative process for new applicants, such as: Check the details in application forms that come via our website. Set them up in our Customer Relationship Management (CRM) System (CRM). We use SugarCRM. Send them an invoice for the first year of membership, and once this is paid\u0026hellip; Set up and share their DOI prefix and account credentials. Ensure that the information in our CRM is kept clean and up-to-date. Work closely with the Member Experience team and our finance colleagues. About you Organized with an eye for details Happy with data entry and maintenance Comfortable following processes and taking on new systems Friendly and clear communication skills (in English) About Crossref Crossref makes research objects easy to find, cite, link, assess, and reuse. We’re a not-for-profit membership organisation that exists to make scholarly communications better. We rally the community; tag and share metadata; run an open infrastructure; play with technology; and make tools and services—all to help put research in context. It’s as simple—and as complicated—as that.\n",
"content": "Request for services: Member Support Contractor Location: Remote\nWe’re looking for contractors able to work remotely and help us to welcome new members from around the world. There is no set schedule and contractors would bill their hours monthly.\nCrossref receives over 200 new applications every month from organisations who produce scholarly and professional materials and content.\nKey responsibilities Manage queries from applicants and members via our Zendesk support desk and potentially other channels. Follow the administrative process for new applicants, such as: Check the details in application forms that come via our website. Set them up in our Customer Relationship Management (CRM) System (CRM). We use SugarCRM. Send them an invoice for the first year of membership, and once this is paid\u0026hellip; Set up and share their DOI prefix and account credentials. Ensure that the information in our CRM is kept clean and up-to-date. Work closely with the Member Experience team and our finance colleagues. About you Organized with an eye for details Happy with data entry and maintenance Comfortable following processes and taking on new systems Friendly and clear communication skills (in English) About Crossref Crossref makes research objects easy to find, cite, link, assess, and reuse. We’re a not-for-profit membership organisation that exists to make scholarly communications better. We rally the community; tag and share metadata; run an open infrastructure; play with technology; and make tools and services—all to help put research in context. It’s as simple—and as complicated—as that.\nSince 2000 we have grown from strength to strength and now have over 15,000 members across 140 countries, and thousands of tools and services relying on our metadata.\nHow to respond A statement of interest that includes:\nExamples of similar work (and/or your CV) References from previous work Hourly rate Please send your response, statement of interest, and resume to: jobs@crossref.org.\nCrossref is committed to a policy of non-discrimination and equal opportunity for all employees and qualified applicants for employment without regard to race, color, religion, sex, pregnancy or a condition related to pregnancy, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, national origin, ancestry, age, physical or mental disability, genetic information, veteran status, uniform service member status, or any other protected class under applicable law. Crossref will make reasonable accommodations for qualified individuals with known disabilities, in accordance with applicable law.\n",
"headings": ["Request for services: Member Support Contractor","Key responsibilities","About you","About Crossref","How to respond"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/jobs/2023-02-08-contract-software-development/",
"title": "Request for Services - Software Development Contracting",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2023-02-08",
"lastmod_ts": 1675814400,
"section": "Jobs",
"tags": [],
"description": " Applications for this position is closed. Request for services: Software Development Contracting Location: Remote\nDuration: Until completion of the specified software.\nProject summary Our new generation of REST API features requires us to build the \u0026ldquo;Metadata Rendering Framework\u0026rdquo;. This is a subsystem that coordinates the rendering of bibliographic metadata in a variety of formats. We are looking for a contract software developer to help us build this.\nThe Rendering Framework should maintain a set of rendered metadata objects in S3. It should trigger content to be re-rendered when any relevant change occurs in the database. It should also provide a simple REST API interface for retrieving these S3 objects. The code that renders each already exists, so complex data modeling is not required, though an understanding of the metadata is necessary.\n",
"content": " Applications for this position is closed. Request for services: Software Development Contracting Location: Remote\nDuration: Until completion of the specified software.\nProject summary Our new generation of REST API features requires us to build the \u0026ldquo;Metadata Rendering Framework\u0026rdquo;. This is a subsystem that coordinates the rendering of bibliographic metadata in a variety of formats. We are looking for a contract software developer to help us build this.\nThe Rendering Framework should maintain a set of rendered metadata objects in S3. It should trigger content to be re-rendered when any relevant change occurs in the database. It should also provide a simple REST API interface for retrieving these S3 objects. The code that renders each already exists, so complex data modeling is not required, though an understanding of the metadata is necessary.\nThis module will be implemented with our existing source Kotlin codebase. It will integrate with other pre-existing software components written in Kotlin, Java and Clojure.\nHigh-level specifications are included here for scoping purposes. We expect an iterative approach and we will supply feedback and guidance. Code will be reviewed by Crossref developers.\nDeliverables You will report to the Head of Software Development and collaborate with a member of the Product Team.\nThe initial scope of the project should result in the following deliverables. This may evolve as we iterate on the work. There may also be subsequent projects for which specs and deliverables will be defined and agreed upon by both parties.\nExtensible rendering framework built. Initial implementations / integrations for four initial data formats (application/citeproc+json, application/vnd.crossref.member+json, application/vnd.crossref.matching.grant+json, application/vnd.crossref.matching.citation+json). Full tests as part of our existing BDD / Cucumber suite. Code must meet our standards (SONAR).\nSkills Understanding of bibliographic metadata formats such as Citeproc-JSON. Experience with Kotlin and Spring Boot. Experience with Clojure. Experience writing BDD tests with Cucumber. Open source software development practices. Timeline We would like responses by 15th February. Work can commence immediately. Because of the nature of software projects we do not expect an estimate, but we expect this may take of the order of weeks.\nTo respond Please send a CV and a cover letter (each no longer than 2 pages) to share how you meet the requirements of the contract role, and a rate sheet or fee schedule to jobs@crossref.org.\nAbout Crossref Crossref is a non-profit membership organisation that exists to make scholarly communications better. We make research objects easy to find, cite, link, assess, and reuse. We’re passionate about providing open foundational infrastructure for the scholarly communications ecosystem - and we’re continuously evolving our tools and services in response to emerging needs.\nCrossref is at its core a community organisation with 17,500 members across 148 countries (and counting)! We’re committed to lowering barriers for global participation in the research enterprise, we’re funded by members and subscribers, and we engage regularly with them in multiple ways from webinars to working groups.\nCrossref operates and continuously develops an impressive portfolio of services, products and features to support scholarly communication and infrastructure organisations to contribute to, maintain and preserve robust documentation of the scholarly process. From registration forms and APIs, to complex systems of linking scholarly works with references or citations, and metadata retrieval, our busy Product Team continuously develops and refines these metadata tools.\nSpecification outline The following is an indicative specification for scoping purposes. We expect the code to be iteratively specified by a BDD suite.\nBackground The Item Graph is the database that powers the next generation of Crossref services. \u0026ldquo;Items\u0026rdquo; in the graph are things such as Works, Members, Funders, etc. Items are also used to represent reified relationships (such as citations which themselves have metadata).\nThe Item Tree Retriever is an existing module that can retrieve subgraphs from the Item Graph in connection with an Item. For example, for a Work it would retrieve citations and other assertions. It works in a generic way, following links to a given depth, using a given strategy.\nEach Item may have a number of natural representations. For example, a Work could be rendered into Citeproc-JSON for end-user consumption or a specialized representation for a search index. A Member will be rendered into our existing JSON format. We have prior code to run these translations in some cases, detailed below.\nThe Content Rendering Framework will be a module that translates Item Trees into content representations and keeps track of them.\nMedia Types The Content Rendering Framework will have a registry of Media Types (aka MIME types, per IANA vocabulary), in the vocabulary of MIME types. The initial deliverable will include:\napplication/citeproc+json application/vnd.crossref.member+json application/vnd.crossref.matching.grant+json application/vnd.crossref.matching.citation+json Representation Storage The Content Rendering Framework will store rendered representations of Items in S3 object storage. It will support the storing and retrieval of rendered content by Item ID and Media Type. It will maintain an ETag value for stored versions so we easily detect when there is a change to the rendered representation.\nRenderer The Renderer will render Item Trees into requested Media Types. It will dispatch to relevant rendering code.\nTrigger The Content Rendering Framework will keep track of Items\u0026rsquo; rendered representations. For every representation it will indicate whether it is considered \u0026lsquo;stale\u0026rsquo;, i.e. potentially in need of re-rendering.\nIt will watch the Property and Relationship Assertion tables. When an assertion is made in connection with an Item, that Item is marked as being stale and needing re-rendering. For example, when the title of an Work changes, it should be marked for re-rendering. When a member name changes, every Work that\u0026rsquo;s connected to it should be marked for re-rendering.\nA continual process will re-render stale Representations. It will compare the ETag of the content with the stored item and only update it if the re-render resulted in a change.\nThis process will be based on an SQS queue. This process will be a configured profile of the running service, allowing us to scale out rendering on demand.\nCollections A Collection is a named set of Items. For example, \u0026ldquo;the set of Works\u0026rdquo;, \u0026ldquo;the set of Members\u0026rdquo;, etc. When Items are ingested, the ingester code can mark Items as belonging to a given set.\nA Collection is also associated with a configuration that indicates the set of content types that items should be rendered to.\nVarious modules that are responsible for ingesting Items will indicate that Items they ingest belong to a given set.\nVersions API functionality A simple REST API endpoint will list the list of versions for each Item for a given format, allowing users to see the history of a rendered item.\nA similar endpoint will be available for Collections, which will provide a list updates for all Items in that collection.\n",
"headings": ["Request for services: Software Development Contracting","Project summary","Deliverables","Skills","Timeline","To respond","About Crossref","Specification outline","Background","Media Types","Representation Storage","Renderer","Trigger","Collections","Versions API functionality"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/jobs/2022-09-30-contract-technical-support/",
"title": "Technical Support Contractor",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2023-01-05",
"lastmod_ts": 1672876800,
"section": "Jobs",
"tags": [],
"description": " Applications for this contractor position closed 2022-12-31. Request for services: contract technical support Come and work with us as an independent Technical Support Contractor. It’ll be fun!\nLocation: Remote\nAbout the contractor role The Technical Support Contractor will work closely with our Member Experience team, part of Crossref’s Outreach team, an eighteen-strong distributed team with members across Africa, Asia, Europe, and the US. We’re at the forefront of Crossref’s growth, building relationships with new communities in new markets in new ways. We’re aiming for a more open approach to having conversations with people all around the world - including within our growing community forum, which the right candidate will help us expand, in multiple languages. We’re looking for a Technical Support Contractor to provide front-line help to our international community of publishers, librarians, funders, researchers and developers on a range of services that help them deposit, find, link, cite, and assess scholarly content.\n",
"content": " Applications for this contractor position closed 2022-12-31. Request for services: contract technical support Come and work with us as an independent Technical Support Contractor. It’ll be fun!\nLocation: Remote\nAbout the contractor role The Technical Support Contractor will work closely with our Member Experience team, part of Crossref’s Outreach team, an eighteen-strong distributed team with members across Africa, Asia, Europe, and the US. We’re at the forefront of Crossref’s growth, building relationships with new communities in new markets in new ways. We’re aiming for a more open approach to having conversations with people all around the world - including within our growing community forum, which the right candidate will help us expand, in multiple languages. We’re looking for a Technical Support Contractor to provide front-line help to our international community of publishers, librarians, funders, researchers and developers on a range of services that help them deposit, find, link, cite, and assess scholarly content.\nWe’re looking for an independent contractor able to work remotely. There is no set schedule and contractors bill hours monthly.\nScope of work Replying to and solving community queries using the Zendesk support system. Using our various tools and APIs to find the answers to these queries, or pointing users to support materials that will help them. Working with colleagues on particularly tricky tickets, escalating as necessary. Working efficiently but also kindly and with empathy with our very diverse, global community. About the team You’ll be working closely with nine other technical and membership support colleagues to provide support and guidance for people with a wide range of technical experience. You’ll help our community create and retrieve metadata records with tools ranging from simple user interfaces to robust APIs.\nAbout Crossref Crossref makes research objects easy to find, cite, link, assess, and reuse. We’re a not-for-profit membership organisation that exists to make scholarly communications better. We rally the community; tag and share metadata; run an open infrastructure; play with technology; and make tools and services—all to help put research in context. It’s as simple—and as complicated—as that.\nWe’re a small but mighty group working with over 17,000 members from 146 countries, and we have thousands of tools and services relying on our metadata. We take our work seriously but usually not ourselves.\nHow to respond We\u0026rsquo;ve extended the deadline: responses should be submitted by 31 December and should include:\nA statement of interest that includes:\nExamples of similar work (and/or your CV) References from previous work Hourly rate Please send your response, statement of interest, and resume to: jobs@crossref.org.\n",
"headings": ["Request for services: contract technical support","About the contractor role","Scope of work","About the team","About Crossref","How to respond"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/jobs/2022-11-21-community-engagement-manager/",
"title": "Community Engagement Manager",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2022-11-21",
"lastmod_ts": 1668988800,
"section": "Jobs",
"tags": [],
"description": " Applications for this position closed 2022-12-11. Community Engagement Manager Come and work with us as a Community Engagement Manager. It’ll be fun!\nJob title: Community Engagement Manager\nLocation: Remote and global (with regular working in European and some Asia Pacific time zones)\nRemuneration: €58,000 – €70,000, or local equivalent, depending on experience\nReports to: Head of Community Engagement and Communications\nApplication timeline: Advertise and recruitment in November/December, Start date Jan/Feb 2023\n",
"content": " Applications for this position closed 2022-12-11. Community Engagement Manager Come and work with us as a Community Engagement Manager. It’ll be fun!\nJob title: Community Engagement Manager\nLocation: Remote and global (with regular working in European and some Asia Pacific time zones)\nRemuneration: €58,000 – €70,000, or local equivalent, depending on experience\nReports to: Head of Community Engagement and Communications\nApplication timeline: Advertise and recruitment in November/December, Start date Jan/Feb 2023\nCrossref is a non-profit membership organisation that exists to make scholarly communications better. We make research objects easy to find, cite, link, assess, and reuse. We’re passionate about providing open foundational infrastructure for the scholarly communications ecosystem - and we’re continuously evolving our tools and services in response to emerging needs.\nIf you’ve got a passion for equity and diversity and would like to use your engagement and organisational skills to help strengthen our community and to help shed light on the inner workings behind the progress of science, this position may be for you. Read on and apply by December 11.\nCrossref is at its core a community organisation with 17,000 members across 146 countries (and counting)! We’re committed to lowering barriers for global participation in the research enterprise, we’re funded by members and subscribers, and we engage regularly with them in multiple ways from webinars to working groups.\nThe organisations in our community are involved in documenting the progress of scholarship. We provide infrastructure to preserve and curate metadata – that is data underpinning and describing scholarly outputs and processes (such as authorship, funding, modifications etc., and links between these works). Our community develops and promotes standards and best practices for such documentation in keeping with the changing world of scholarly infrastructure and communication.\nThe Community Engagement Manager’s key responsibility is management of our well-established Ambassadors program, which has a global reach and an important role in informing and engaging our membership. It’s been growing over the past five years and there’s an opportunity for the new manager to build upon its success, innovate and shape it for the future.\nKey responsibilities of the role: Strategically manage the Crossref Ambassadors program – you will build and weave together strong relationships with and between our volunteers, and develop activities and resources that help equip, mobilize and empower Ambassadors to engage their respective communities with Crossref’s messages and initiatives\nDesigning and coordinating activities that facilitate access to and understanding of Crossref’s membership and services, such as translations, community platforms, events, and other (as appropriate), in partnership with the other Community Engagement Manager, the Membership Team and other community partners, including the support for the nascent Publishers Learning and Community Exchange (PLACE) platform\nIdentifying and creating opportunities to listen to the sentiment and feedback of the Crossref’s community, sharing community insights with colleagues\nRepresenting Crossref and using the role to bring people together, attending and speaking at relevant industry events, online and in-person\nBuilding and managing relationships with community partners and collaborators worldwide to help progress Crossref’s mission\nCreating content – such as writing articles and blogs, creating slides and diagrams\nContribute to other outreach activities The role is based within the Community Engagement and Communications team. We work collaboratively across a variety of projects and programmes. We adopt an approachable, community-appropriate tone and style in our communications. We’re looking to re-engage with our community through face-to-face opportunities as well as online, so the post-holder will have their share of travel (accordingly with our latest thinking on travel and sustainability).\nOur primary aim is to engage colleagues from the member organisations and other stakeholders to be actively involved in capturing documentation of the scholarly progress and making it transparent. This contributes to co-creating a robust research nexus. As part of the wider Outreach department at Crossref, we seek to encourage adoption and development of best practices in scholarly publishing and communication with regards to metadata and permanence of scholarly record. Colleagues across the organisation are helpful, easy-going and supportive, so if you’re open minded and ready to work as part of the team and across different teams, you will fit right in. Watch the recording of our recent Annual Meeting to learn more about the current conversations in our community.\nAbout you As scientific community engagement is an emerging profession, practical experience in this area is more important to us than traditional qualifications. It’s best if you can demonstrate that you have most of these characteristics:\nCollaborative attitude\nCuriosity to explore complex concepts and to learn new skills and perspectives\nAbility to translate complex ideas into accessible narratives in English\n3+ years experience of community building and management and/or of planning, executing and evaluating participatory initiatives\nDemonstrable skills in group facilitation and stakeholder relationships management\nTrack record of programme development and improvement, working to budgets\nConfidence in public speaking in-person and online, including delivery of webinars/workshops\nEvent and project management experience\nTried and tested strategies for ensuring that your programs are equitable, diverse and inclusive\nAwareness of current trends in academic culture and scholarly communications\nIt would be a plus if you also have any of the following:\nUnderstanding of matters concerning metadata\nExperience or background in communications or campaign management\nExperience of working in a multicultural setting\nExperience of moderating an online discussion forum, blogging platform or similar\nAbility to communicate in a language other than English\nWhat it’s like working at Crossref We’re about 45 staff and now ‘remote-first’ although we have optional offices in Oxford, UK, and Boston, USA. We are dedicated to an open and fair research ecosystem and that’s reflected in our ethos and staff culture. We like to work hard but we have fun too! We take a creative, iterative approach to our projects, and believe that all team members can enrich the culture and performance of our whole organisation. Check out the organisation chart.\nWe are active supporters of ongoing professional development opportunities and promote self- learning at every opportunity. Crossref has a healthy financial situation and we only continue to grow. While we won’t have a clear hierarchical path for staff to follow, there are always evolving opportunities to progress and be challenged.\nThinking of applying? We encourage applications from excellent candidates wherever you might be in the world, especially from people with backgrounds historically under-represented in research and scholarly communications. Our team is fully remote and distributed across time zones and continents. This role will require regular working in European and Asia-Pacific Time zones. Our main working language is English, but there are many opportunities in this job to use other tongues if you’re able. If anything here is unclear, feel free to contact Kora Korzec, the hiring manager, on kkorzec@crossref.org.\nTo apply, please send a CV and a cover letter to share how you meet the requirements of the role to jobs@crossref.org. One of the best ways of offering evidence of your suitability is with an example of a relevant project you’re particularly proud of, whether from professional, voluntary or personal experience. If possible, we’d also love to see an example of content you’ve created – a link to a recording of your talk, blog post, infographic, or something else. As it’s essential for the role that you have access to reliable high speed internet connection, please indicate clearly in your letter whether that is the case.\nLastly, if you don’t meet the criteria we listed here, but are confident you’d be natural in delivering the key responsibilities of the role, please explain what strengths you would be bringing to this job.\nWe aim to start reviewing applications on December 12. Please strive to send your documents to jobs@crossref.org by then.\nThe role will report to Kora Korzec, Head of Community Engagement and Communications at Crossref, and she will review all applications along with Michelle Cancel, our HR Manager, and Ginny Hendricks, Director of Member \u0026amp; Community Outreach.\nWe intend to invite selected candidates to a brief first interview to talk about the role as soon as possible following review. Following those, shortlisted candidates will be invited to an interview taking place in early to mid-January. The interview will include some exercises you’ll have a chance to prepare for. All interviews will be held remotely.\nEqual opportunities commitment Crossref is committed to a policy of non-discrimination and equal opportunity for all employees and qualified applicants for employment without regard to race, colour, religion, sex, pregnancy or a condition related to pregnancy, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, national origin, ancestry, age, physical or mental disability, genetic information, veteran status, uniform service member status, or any other protected class under applicable law. Crossref will make reasonable accommodations for qualified individuals with known disabilities in accordance with applicable law.\nThanks for your interest in joining Crossref. We are excited to hear from you!\n",
"headings": ["Community Engagement Manager","Key responsibilities of the role:","Contribute to other outreach activities","About you","What it’s like working at Crossref","Thinking of applying?","Equal opportunities commitment"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/jobs/2022-12-22-contract-product-communications-support/",
"title": "Product Communications Support Contractor",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2022-10-28",
"lastmod_ts": 1666915200,
"section": "Jobs",
"tags": [],
"description": " Applications for this position is closed. Request for services: Contract for Product Communications Support Come and work with us as an independent Product Communications Support Contractor. It’ll be fun!\nLocation: Remote\nDuration of contract: 12 months\nAbout the contractor role We require services for product communications to support the Community Engagement and Communications team in liaising effectively with both Product and Outreach teams, to keep our community abreast of progress, and to encourage broad adoption of existing and new tools. You will be collaborating with Community Engagement and Communications colleagues to devise effective ways of engaging our members and other stakeholders with the ever-changing functionality of the tools we provide.\n",
"content": " Applications for this position is closed. Request for services: Contract for Product Communications Support Come and work with us as an independent Product Communications Support Contractor. It’ll be fun!\nLocation: Remote\nDuration of contract: 12 months\nAbout the contractor role We require services for product communications to support the Community Engagement and Communications team in liaising effectively with both Product and Outreach teams, to keep our community abreast of progress, and to encourage broad adoption of existing and new tools. You will be collaborating with Community Engagement and Communications colleagues to devise effective ways of engaging our members and other stakeholders with the ever-changing functionality of the tools we provide.\nIf you’d like to use engaging product communications to help organisations make scholarly outputs more discoverable, and support the integrity of the scholarly record, this freelance opportunity may be for you.\nScope of work Identify opportunities and create campaigns to highlight less well-known and changing functionality of existing products and services, and, working with product managers, create and manage associated communications and launch plans. Support the Events \u0026amp; Communications Manager in managing the content calendar, ensuring a balanced proportion of product communications in the context of overall outreach and engagement activities. Support Crossref in soliciting community feedback and—leveraging others’ insights across the organisation—tailor effective ways of engaging our diverse and global audiences. Translate complex technical information into written actionable and mobilising language, with deliverables such as keeping our slide library up to date with relevant stories, facts, and figures. Collaborate with subject-matter experts to update each \u0026lsquo;Service\u0026rsquo; page on our website, integrating them with project tracking tools to make these sections dynamic and current. Work with the full range of digital communications to engage our community. Note we use Act-On (email), Hugo (website/blog), Discourse (forum), Trello (org-wide roadmap), and Jira (product development and R\u0026amp;D). Deliverables Development and deployment of audience-centred communications resources to engage the Crossref community with relevant services and maximise usage as appropriate, in support of the Managed Member Journey (including but not limited to communications about metadata completeness, registering references, use of crossmark, relationships metadata). Campaigns plans and execution in support of launch of new and updated services, such as changes to Crossref APIs and grant registration form. User and audience research for service updates under development, such as Relationships API and new Participation Reports. Delivery of online showcase and support events for new and updated Crossref services. About the team The contractor will work closely with Kora Korzec, Head of Community Engagement and Communications, and will collaborate with the broader Outreach group on a variety of projects and programmes to augment our product communications, using a full range of digital communications and leverage event opportunities, to maximise adoption of tools and best practice. We adopt an approachable, community-appropriate tone and style in our communications. We’re looking to re-engage with our community through face-to-face opportunities as well as online, so some travel may be involved in this role (according to our our latest thinking on travel and sustainability).\nOur primary aim is to engage colleagues from the member organisations and other stakeholders to be actively involved in capturing documentation of the scholarly progress and making it transparent. This contributes to co-creating a robust research nexus. As part of the wider Outreach group at Crossref, we seek to encourage adoption and development of best practices in scholarly publishing and communication with regards to metadata and permanence of scholarly record. Colleagues across the organisation are helpful, easy-going and supportive, and you’d be expected to work collaboratively with different teams. You can also watch the recording of our recent Annual Meeting to learn more about the current conversations in our community.\nAbout Crossref Crossref is a non-profit membership organisation that exists to make scholarly communications better. We make research objects easy to find, cite, link, assess, and reuse. We’re passionate about providing open foundational infrastructure for the scholarly communications ecosystem - and we’re continuously evolving our tools and services in response to emerging needs.\nCrossref is at its core a community organisation with 17,500 members across 148 countries (and counting)! We’re committed to lowering barriers for global participation in the research enterprise, we’re funded by members and subscribers, and we engage regularly with them in multiple ways from webinars to working groups.\nCrossref operates and continuously develops an impressive portfolio of services, products and features to support scholarly communication and infrastructure organisations to contribute to, maintain and preserve robust documentation of the scholarly process. From registration forms and APIs, to complex systems of linking scholarly works with references or citations, and metadata retrieval, our busy Product Team continuously develops and refines these metadata tools.\nAbout You 3+ years of experience in technical customer service/marketing/product communications Collaborative attitude, pragmatic and proactive approach Excellent communications skills in English (we’re always happy to hear if you’re able to communicate in other languages too) Ability to translate complex technical information into accessible narratives in English Experience of content creation and leveraging diverse digital engagement and communications channels to get a message across Experience of organising and executing online events Demonstrable effective project management skills Good understanding of audience segmentation; experience of doing it would be even better Good working understanding of product development life cycle Experience working in academia or scholarly communications is nice to have but not required Experience conducting customer or user research (qualitative or quantitative) would be useful but not essential How to respond If you’ve got a passion for equity and diversity and would like to use your engagement and communications skills to help our community shed light on the inner workings behind the progress of science, we encourage you to read on and respond by February 5, 2023.\nPlease send a CV and a cover letter (each no longer than 2 pages) to share how you meet the requirements of the contract role, accompanied by a brief portfolio of relevant work, and a rate sheet or fee schedule to jobs@crossref.org. One of the best ways of offering evidence of your suitability in the letter is with an example of a relevant project, highlighting your contributions to that project that showcase relevant skills. Nota bene, if you’re including hyperlinks in any of your documents to things available online, please ensure these can be accessed by third parties, and give some context as to what was your role in creating it if not clearly stated on the material itself. As it’s essential for this work that you have access to reliable high speed internet connection, please indicate clearly in your letter whether that is the case.\nWe intend to start reviewing responses on February 6, 2023 and contact the selected profiles shortly after to start conversations.\n",
"headings": ["Request for services: Contract for Product Communications Support","About the contractor role","Scope of work","Deliverables","About the team","About Crossref","About You","How to respond"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/jobs/2022-08-02-site-reliability-engineer/",
"title": "Site Reliability Engineer",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2022-08-03",
"lastmod_ts": 1659484800,
"section": "Jobs",
"tags": [],
"description": " Applications for this position closed 2022-08-23. ## Come and work with us as a **Site Reliability Engineer**. Help us to build and run the infrastructure that underlies the global scholarly communications ecosystem.\nLocation: Remote. But we are looking for somebody in the UTC, UTC+1 Time zones (e.g., Ireland, UK, Scandinavia, Central Europe, West/Central Africa). Salary: Between 101K-125K EUR (or local equivalent) depending on experience and location. Benchmarked every two years. Excellent benefits. Reports to: Head of Infrastructure Services. Closing date: August 23rd, 2022. About the role Crossref is looking for a talented Site Reliability Engineer to help us optimize and evolve our infrastructure services.\n",
"content": " Applications for this position closed 2022-08-23. ## Come and work with us as a **Site Reliability Engineer**. Help us to build and run the infrastructure that underlies the global scholarly communications ecosystem.\nLocation: Remote. But we are looking for somebody in the UTC, UTC+1 Time zones (e.g., Ireland, UK, Scandinavia, Central Europe, West/Central Africa). Salary: Between 101K-125K EUR (or local equivalent) depending on experience and location. Benchmarked every two years. Excellent benefits. Reports to: Head of Infrastructure Services. Closing date: August 23rd, 2022. About the role Crossref is looking for a talented Site Reliability Engineer to help us optimize and evolve our infrastructure services.\nWe\u0026rsquo;re looking for a new member of our technology team who can bring experience, leadership, and help us solve some interesting operations and development challenges. Crossref operates the service that connects thousands of publishers, millions of articles and research content, and serves a diverse set of communities within scholarly publishing, research and beyond.\nYou will report to the head of infrastructure services and will work closely with one systems administrator and extensively with the software development, R\u0026amp;D, and product teams also.\nKey responsibilities The infrastructure services group is primarily responsible for Crossref\u0026rsquo;s infrastructure services. That is, central, crosscutting tools and systems that are used by our software development group as the common foundation we use for delivering services to our members and the broader research community. In other words- you will be building, deploying, monitoring and managing tools and services used by other developers.\nYou will be responsible for ensuring that these infrastructure services are reliable and responsive as well as making sure they are able to evolve quickly to support the new requirements and new services that Crossref is developing on behalf of its membership.\nYour challenge will be to accomplish this, whilst simultaneously helping to drive the modernization of our current software stack, infrastructure, and software engineering culture. The entire technology team is undertaking a migration from a mostly self-hosted, manually-managed, and manually-tested environment, to a cloud-based system and the SRE tools, processes and culture which that entails.\nWe currently use a blend of AWS, Docker, Terraform, self-hosted VMWare, Elastic Search, Kafka and more. Most of our codebases are written in Java, Clojure, and Python.\nThere are a lot of skills that we are looking for, but we don’t expect to find a purple unicorn. Our primary criterion is that you have a track record of being able to deliver projects using a variety of languages, frameworks and development paradigms.\nBut you get double bonus points if you have experience with:\nImmutable infrastructure. Virtualization and containerization of legacy code bases. Configuration management. Security infrastructure. Automation of development. Site monitoring and alerting. Web services software development. Transitioning on-premise datacentre to the cloud. In-depth knowledge of one or more cloud providers. And it would be very useful if you had a subset of the following skills:\nContainerisation using ECS/Docker. Core AWS Infrastructure including EC2, VPC, S3, RDS, IAM, Route53 and Cloudfront. Infrastructure configuration, management and orchestration tools (such as Terraform, Kubernetes, CloudFormation, Ansible, Salt, or equivalents). Java. High proficiency in at least one other language (e.g. Python, Clojure). Extensive experience with SQL, particularly PostgreSQL, MySQL or Oracle. Elasticsearch, Solr, Lucene, or similar. Distributed logging and monitoring frameworks. Continuous Integration, continuous delivery frameworks. Modern, HTTP-based API design and implementation. Experience with open source development. Experience with agile development methodologies. Experience with XML- particularly with mixed content models. And please note that this is not a back-office position. We believe that it is vital that the entire technical team develops an understanding of our members, the broader community and their needs. Without this kind of empathy, we cannot add value to our services. As such, you will also find yourself working closely with the product and outreach teams.\nLocation \u0026amp; travel requirements This is a remote position. The technology team currently has members working in the UK, Europe and the east coast of the US. As a remote-first organisation, we are not bound to a specific location.\nRemote workers should expect they will need to visit an office approximately 5 days a quarter along with the travel (possibly international) which that entails. If you work from an office you will be expected to travel internationally for ~ 5 days once a year. In either case, travel can increase should you have an interest in representing Crossref at community events.\nAbout Crossref Crossref makes research objects easy to find, cite, link, assess, and reuse. We’re a not-for-profit membership organisation that exists to make scholarly communications better. We rally the community; tag and share metadata; run an open infrastructure; play with technology; and make tools and services—all to help put research in context. It’s as simple—and as complicated—as that.\nSince January 2000 we have grown from strength to strength and now have over 12,000 members across 121 countries, and thousands of tools and services relying on our metadata.\nWe can offer the successful candidate a challenging and fun environment to work in. We’re fewer than 40 professionals but together we are dedicated to our global mission. We are constantly adapting to ensure we get there, and we don’t tend to take ourselves too seriously along the way.\nEqual opportunities commitment Crossref is an equal opportunity employer. We believe that diversity and inclusion among our staff is critical to our success as a global organisation, and we seek to recruit, develop and retain the most talented people from a diverse candidate pool.\nCrossref is committed to a policy of non-discrimination and equal opportunity for all employees and qualified applicants for employment without regard to race, color, religion, sex, pregnancy or a condition related to pregnancy, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, national origin, ancestry, age, physical or mental disability, genetic information, veteran status, uniform service member status, or any other protected class under applicable law. Crossref will make reasonable accommodations for qualified individuals with known disabilities, in accordance with applicable law.\nTo apply Send your CV and covering letter via email to:\nStewart Houten, Head of Infrastructure Services\njobs@crossref.org\n",
"headings": ["About the role","Key responsibilities","Location \u0026amp; travel requirements","About Crossref","Equal opportunities commitment","To apply"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/jobs/2022-07-29-human-resources-manager/",
"title": "Human Resources Manager",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2022-07-29",
"lastmod_ts": 1659052800,
"section": "Jobs",
"tags": [],
"description": " Applications for this position closed 2022-08-23. Join Crossref as our Human Resources Manager. It\u0026rsquo;ll be fun. No, really! Location: Remote Salary: Between 75K-90K USD (or currency equivalent) depending on experience and location. Benchmarked every two years. Excellent benefits. Reports to: Director of Finance \u0026amp; Operations Application timeline: We will begin to review applications the week of August 22nd About the position Human resources is often seen solely as an operational necessity, and it is, but at Crossref it is also pivotal to our culture and our journey toward a remote-first, global, and transparent community-led organisation. Sometimes it is even fun! We like to run staff activities online and occasionally in person, and we try to live by our commitments to diversity, equity, and inclusion.\n",
"content": " Applications for this position closed 2022-08-23. Join Crossref as our Human Resources Manager. It\u0026rsquo;ll be fun. No, really! Location: Remote Salary: Between 75K-90K USD (or currency equivalent) depending on experience and location. Benchmarked every two years. Excellent benefits. Reports to: Director of Finance \u0026amp; Operations Application timeline: We will begin to review applications the week of August 22nd About the position Human resources is often seen solely as an operational necessity, and it is, but at Crossref it is also pivotal to our culture and our journey toward a remote-first, global, and transparent community-led organisation. Sometimes it is even fun! We like to run staff activities online and occasionally in person, and we try to live by our commitments to diversity, equity, and inclusion.\nWe are looking for a Human Resources Manager with a collaborative style who will support and evolve the working experience for everyone at Crossref. Reporting to the Director of Finance and Operations, the Human Resources Manager is a central role within the organisation.\nThis position helps to recruit, retain, and support our 40+ staff across the world. As a remote-first organisation, this position helps to develop and implement practices that provide a consistent, equitable employment experience for our team. The ideal candidate should have experience working with staff in multiple countries.\nIn the day to day, this position helps recruit new staff, administers payroll and benefits, and troubleshoots employment issues for staff.\nWe are a small team and this position is a good fit for someone looking to work across a multinational organisation. This position sits on the finance \u0026amp; operations team, but works closely with every part of the organisation.\nKey responsibilities Recruiting new staff Support the new hire process, posting the job description, tracking and reviewing job applicants. Ensure a robust, inclusive recruitment process Support the interview process as needed Onboard all new hires Administering the employment experience Administer payroll (biweekly for US staff, monthly for EU, Indonesia, Ireland, Kenya, UK staff) Keep up to date with applicable employment law in countries and regions where we employ staff. As a US legal entity, we comply with US Federal employment laws. We comply with state laws where we have staff (currently 9 states in the US). We comply with regional or country level employment laws in France, Germany, Guernsey, Indonesia, Ireland, Kenya, and the UK. This list changes as staff are hired in additional locations. This position will work with additional contracted HR expertise in the UK, EU, and through the PEOs we work with in Indonesia and Kenya. Select and manage PEO contracts Administer renewal and open enrollment for US employee benefits including health, dental, FSA, HRA and vision; review communication materials; audit employee elections and respond to employee issues Administer pension and 401(k) programs, including non-discrimination testing and 5500 filings for US 401(k) Support annual financial and security audits Helping shape employment policies and supporting a healthy working culture Ensure that the policies on diversity, equity and inclusion are put into action Support the performance evaluation process by consulting with management, tracking information and updating documentation as needed Benchmark positions using compensation software and give advice to managers to ensure consistency in pay practices Maintain employee handbooks and processes identifying areas for enhancement and making recommendations for change Identify and administer required and optional training opportunities Contribute ideas to Crossref leadership to help us progress further on our journey to a global and remote-first organisation Lead the charge with our commitment to open and transparent operations, creating and updating content on our website regarding HR practices About you This role is for a hands-on manager who wants to help set direction and is comfortable handling day-to-day administration. You might not have all the skills we list below, but we encourage you to apply if this sounds like you:\nHas experience, roughly 5-7+ years, working in an HR role. Is experienced in and knowledgeable about contemporary best practices for diversity, equity, and inclusion Has experience working with remote-first teams across various countries/regions and international payroll and benefit programs Has managed payroll and benefits Experience working in the scholarly communications space is nice to have but not required Some experience managing a budget or providing a perspective on the financial impact of a decision Enjoy helping staff find solutions to problems they may have with their employment experience. For example, this could be helping to navigate issues with benefits, or developing policies that support working from home. Attention to detail and an organized approach ​​- Problem solving ability Excellent communicator Comfortable with digital tools and technology Location \u0026amp; travel requirements This is a remote position. The Finance \u0026amp; Operations team currently has members working on the east coast of the US, primarily in the Boston-area. As a remote-first organisation, we are not bound to a specific location.\nIn general, Crossref is committed to lowering its environmental impact by reducing unnecessary travel. We also recognize that some people may be unable to travel and the ability to travel is not a requirement for this position. That being said, if you are able to travel, it would be for no more than 5-10 days a year (possibly international).\nWhat it’s like working at Crossref We’re a little more than 40 staff and now ‘remote-first’ although we have optional offices in Oxford, UK, and Boston, USA. We are dedicated to an open and fair research ecosystem, and that’s reflected in our ethos and staff culture. We like to work hard, but we have fun too! We take a creative, iterative approach to our projects and believe that all team members can enrich the culture and performance of our whole organisation.\nWe are active supporters of ongoing professional development opportunities and promote self-learning at every opportunity. Crossref has a healthy financial situation, and we only continue to grow. While we won’t have a clear hierarchical path for staff to follow, there are always evolving opportunities to progress and be challenged.\nAbout Crossref Crossref makes research outputs easy to find, cite, link, and assess. We’re a not-for-profit membership organisation that exists to make scholarly communications better. We rally the community; tag and share metadata; run an open infrastructure; play with technology; and make tools and services—all to help put scholarly content in context. It’s as simple—and as complicated—as that.\nSince January 2000 we have grown from strength to strength and now have over 17,000 members across 146 countries, and thousands of tools and services relying on our metadata.\nTo apply Please send a cover letter and a CV via email by August 19th, 2022 to Lucy Ofiesh via jobs@crossref.org.\nEqual opportunities commitment Crossref is an equal opportunity employer. We believe that diversity and inclusion among our staff is critical to our success as a global organisation, and we seek to recruit, develop and retain the most talented people from a diverse candidate pool.\nCrossref is committed to a policy of non-discrimination and equal opportunity for all employees and qualified applicants for employment without regard to race, color, religion, sex, pregnancy or a condition related to pregnancy, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, national origin, ancestry, age, physical or mental disability, genetic information, veteran status, uniform service member status, or any other protected class under applicable law. Crossref will make reasonable accommodations for qualified individuals with known disabilities, in accordance with applicable law.\n",
"headings": ["Join Crossref as our Human Resources Manager. It\u0026rsquo;ll be fun. No, really!","About the position","Key responsibilities","Recruiting new staff","Administering the employment experience","Helping shape employment policies and supporting a healthy working culture","About you","Location \u0026amp; travel requirements","What it’s like working at Crossref","About Crossref","To apply","Equal opportunities commitment"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/jobs/2022-06-17-principal-rnd-developer/",
"title": "Principal R&D Developer",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2022-06-17",
"lastmod_ts": 1655424000,
"section": "Jobs",
"tags": [],
"description": " Applications for this position closed 2022-07-05. Come work at Crossref as a Principal R\u0026amp;D Developer. It\u0026rsquo;ll be fun! Help us research, prototype, and build new services for our members and the community.\nLocation: Remote. But we are looking for somebody in +/- 2 UTC Time zones (e.g. Brazil, Ireland, UK, Scandinavia, Central Europe, West/Central Africa) Salary: Between 80K-124K EUR (or equivalent) depending on experience and location. Benchmarked every two years. Benefits: Competitive. Reports to: Director of Technology and Research. Closing date: July 5, 2022 About the position We are hiring a Principal R\u0026amp;D Developer to help prototype and develop new web-based tools and services.\n",
"content": " Applications for this position closed 2022-07-05. Come work at Crossref as a Principal R\u0026amp;D Developer. It\u0026rsquo;ll be fun! Help us research, prototype, and build new services for our members and the community.\nLocation: Remote. But we are looking for somebody in +/- 2 UTC Time zones (e.g. Brazil, Ireland, UK, Scandinavia, Central Europe, West/Central Africa) Salary: Between 80K-124K EUR (or equivalent) depending on experience and location. Benchmarked every two years. Benefits: Competitive. Reports to: Director of Technology and Research. Closing date: July 5, 2022 About the position We are hiring a Principal R\u0026amp;D Developer to help prototype and develop new web-based tools and services.\nCrossref operates a service that connects thousands of scholarly publishers, millions of research articles, and research content and serves an increasingly diverse set of communities within scholarly publishing, research, and beyond.\nThe Crossref R\u0026amp;D team focuses on the kinds of research projects that have allowed Crossref to make transformational technology changes, launch innovative new services, and engage with entirely new constituencies. Some Illustrious projects that had their origins in the R\u0026amp;D group include:\nDOI Content Negotiation Similarity Check (originally CrossCheck) ORCID (originally Author DOIs) Crossmark The Open Funder Registry The Crossref REST API Linked Clinical Trials Event Data Grant registration ROR We\u0026rsquo;re looking for a developer who will thrive taking messy, vague, and often contradictory requirements and working with the community to refine those requirements into a practical implementation plan. This process involves a lot of listening, writing, and prototyping. And it also requires a lot of iteration.\nYou will report to the Director of Technology and Research and work on a team that includes the Head of Strategic Initiatives and another Principal R\u0026amp;D developer.\nAbout you There are a lot of skills that we are looking for, but we don\u0026rsquo;t expect to find a purple unicorn. Instead, our primary criterion is that you have a track record of working with communities to deliver innovative projects using a variety of tools, languages, frameworks, and development paradigms. We are looking for someone who:\nIs an expert in one or more programming languages (e.g. Python, Kotlin, Java, Clojure). Wants to learn new skills and work with a variety of technologies. Relishes working with metadata. Has experience delivering web-based applications using agile methodologies. Groks mixed-content model XML. Groks RDF. Groks REST. Understands relational databases (MySQL, Oracle). Is self-directed, a good manager of their own time, with the ability to focus. Enjoys working with a small, geographically dispersed team. Can see a solo project through or collaborate on a larger team. Has deployed and maintained Linux-based systems. Bonus points for: Experience with data science techniques and tools Experience with machine learning, deep learning, natural language processing Experience building tools for online scholarly communication. Experience with a variety of programming language paradigms (OO, Functional, Declarative). Experience contributing to open-source projects that are not their own. Experience with ElasticSearch, Solr, or Lucene. Experience with front-end development (HTML, CSS, React, Angular or similar). Has worked on standards bodies. Experience with public speaking or willingness to build this skill. Responsibilities The Principal R\u0026amp;D Developer will report to the Director of Technology \u0026amp; Research. They will be responsible for prototyping and developing new Crossref initiatives and applying new Internet technologies to further Crossref’s mission to make research outputs easy to find, cite, link, assess, and reuse.\nThe post will work with the Head of Strategic Initiatives, Head of Development, Head of Infrastructure, and Director of Product to develop and implement new services – taking ideas from concept to prototype and, where appropriate, create and deploy production services.\nThe Principal R\u0026amp;D Developer may represent Crossref at conferences and in industry activities and projects. They will also play an active role in developing industry and community technical standards and help develop technical guidelines for Crossref members.\nWorking with the Head of Development and the Head of Infrastructure, the Principal R\u0026amp;D Developer will ensure that new services are designed with a robust and sustainable architecture. The Principal R\u0026amp;D Developer will actively engage with technical representatives from Crossref’s membership, the library community, scholarly researchers, and broader Internet initiatives.\nAnd please note that this is not a back-office position. On the contrary, we believe that it is vital that the entire technical team develops an understanding of our members, the broader community, and their needs. Without this kind of empathy, we cannot add value to our services. As such, you will also find yourself working closely with the product and outreach teams.\nWhat it\u0026rsquo;s like working at Crossref We\u0026rsquo;re about 40 staff and now \u0026lsquo;remote-first\u0026rsquo; although we have optional offices in Oxford, UK, and Boston, USA. We are dedicated to an open and fair research ecosystem, and that\u0026rsquo;s reflected in our ethos and staff culture. We like to work hard, but we have fun too! We take a creative, iterative approach to our projects and believe that all team members can enrich the culture and performance of our whole organisation.\nWe are active supporters of ongoing professional development opportunities and promote self-learning at every opportunity. Crossref has a healthy financial situation, and we only continue to grow. While we won\u0026rsquo;t have a clear hierarchical path for staff to follow, there are always evolving opportunities to progress and be challenged.\nLocation \u0026amp; travel requirements This is a remote position. The R\u0026amp;D team currently has members working in the US (Brooklyn), Ireland (Dublin), and France (Nîmes). As a remote-first organisation, we are not bound to a specific location. Ideally, for this role, we are looking for someone based in time zones +/- 2 UTC.\nIn general, Crossref is committed to lowering its environmental impact by reducing unnecessary travel.\nWe also recognize that some people may be unable to travel and the ability to travel is not a requirement for this position.\nThat being said, if you are able to travel, it would be for no more than 7-14 days a year (possibly international).\nSalary Between 80K-124K EUR (or equivalent) depending on experience and location. Benchmarked every two years. Excellent benefits.\nTo apply Send a cover letter and a CV via email by July 5th, 2022 to:\nLindsay Russell\njobs@crossref.org\nEqual opportunities commitment Crossref is committed to a policy of non-discrimination and equal opportunity for all employees and qualified applicants for employment without regard to race, color, religion, sex, pregnancy or a condition related to pregnancy, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, national origin, ancestry, age, physical or mental disability, genetic information, veteran status, uniform service member status, or any other protected class under applicable law. Crossref will make reasonable accommodations for qualified individuals with known disabilities in accordance with applicable law.\n",
"headings": ["Come work at Crossref as a Principal R\u0026amp;D Developer. It\u0026rsquo;ll be fun!","About the position","About you","Bonus points for:","Responsibilities","What it\u0026rsquo;s like working at Crossref","Location \u0026amp; travel requirements","Salary","To apply","Equal opportunities commitment"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/jobs/2022-03-15-head-of-infrastructure/",
"title": "Head of Infrastructure Services",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2022-03-15",
"lastmod_ts": 1647302400,
"section": "Jobs",
"tags": [],
"description": " Applications for this position closed 2022-03-30. ## Come and work with us as **The Head of Infrastructure Services**. Help us build and run the infrastructure that underlies the global scholarly communications ecosystem.\nLocation: Remote. But we are looking for somebody in the UTC, UTC+1 Time zones (e.g., Ireland, UK, Scandinavia, Central Europe, West/Central Africa) Salary: Between 128-174K EUR (or equivalent) depending on experience and location. Benchmarked every two years. Benefits: Competitive. Reports to: Director of Technology and Research. Closing date: March 30, 2022 About the role Crossref is looking for a Head of Infrastructure to lead our infrastructure services team.\n",
"content": " Applications for this position closed 2022-03-30. ## Come and work with us as **The Head of Infrastructure Services**. Help us build and run the infrastructure that underlies the global scholarly communications ecosystem.\nLocation: Remote. But we are looking for somebody in the UTC, UTC+1 Time zones (e.g., Ireland, UK, Scandinavia, Central Europe, West/Central Africa) Salary: Between 128-174K EUR (or equivalent) depending on experience and location. Benchmarked every two years. Benefits: Competitive. Reports to: Director of Technology and Research. Closing date: March 30, 2022 About the role Crossref is looking for a Head of Infrastructure to lead our infrastructure services team.\nThis is a senior role, and it\u0026rsquo;s crucial to Crossref\u0026rsquo;s mission and future ability to deliver on our strategy. In addition, it is an opportunity to push an entire organisation\u0026rsquo;s infrastructure and way of working with it forward. And all in the service of helping scholarly researchers communicate more openly, efficiently, and effectively.\nWe\u0026rsquo;re looking for a new member of our technology team who can bring leadership experience and help steer us through some interesting operations, development, and cultural challenges. Crossref operates the service that connects thousands of scholarly publishers, millions of research articles, and research content and serves an increasingly diverse set of communities within scholarly publishing, research, and beyond.\nYou will report to the Director of Technology and Research and will lead a group of one developer and one system administrator. You will also work extensively with the software development, R\u0026amp;D, and product teams.\nKey responsibilities The infrastructure services group is primarily responsible for Crossref\u0026rsquo;s infrastructure services. That is, central, crosscutting tools and systems that are used by our software development group as the common foundation we use for delivering services to our members and the broader research community.\nIn other words- you will be leading the team that is responsible for building, deploying, and managing tools and services used by other developers.\nYou will be responsible for ensuring that these infrastructure services are reliable and responsive and making sure they can evolve quickly to support the new requirements and new services that Crossref is developing on behalf of its membership.\nYour challenge will be to accomplish this whilst simultaneously helping to drive the modernization of our current software stack, infrastructure, and software engineering culture. The entire technology team is migrating from a mostly self-hosted, manually-managed, and manually-tested environment to a cloud-based system and the SRE tools and processes.\nThis is both a cultural change and a technological one, so we are looking for someone experienced in helping teams navigate and adapt to new ways of thinking and doing things.\nWe currently use a blend of AWS, Docker, Terraform, self-hosted VMWare, Elastic Search, Kafka, and more. Most of our codebases are written in Java, Clojure, and Python, with growing Kotlin and Typescript codebases. All the code we write is open source.\nThere are a lot of skills that we are looking for, but we don\u0026rsquo;t expect to find a purple unicorn. Instead, our primary criterion is that you have a track record of leading teams through change and delivering projects using a variety of tools, languages, frameworks, and development paradigms.\nBut you get double bonus points if you have experience with:\nLeading DevOps, system administration, or SRE teams. Transitioning on-prem data center to the cloud. In-depth knowledge of one or more cloud providers. Immutable infrastructure. Virtualization and containerization of legacy code bases. Configuration management. Security infrastructure. Automation of development. Site monitoring and alerting. Web services software development. And it would be very useful if you had a subset of the following skills:\nContainerisation using ECS/Docker. Core AWS Infrastructure including EC2, VPC, S3, RDS, IAM, Route53, and Cloudfront. Infrastructure configuration, management, and orchestration tools (such as Terraform, Kubernetes, CloudFormation, Ansible, Salt, or equivalents). Java. High proficiency in at least one other language (e.g. Python, Clojure). Extensive experience with SQL, particularly PostgreSQL and Oracle. GitLab Elasticsearch, Solr, Lucene, or similar. Distributed logging and monitoring frameworks. Continuous Integration, continuous delivery frameworks. Modern, HTTP-based API design and implementation. Experience with open source development. Experience with agile development methodologies. Experience with XML- particularly with mixed content models. And please note that this is not a back-office position. On the contrary, we believe that it is vital that the entire technical team develops an understanding of our members, the broader community, and their needs. Without this kind of empathy, we cannot add value to our services. As such, you will also find yourself working closely with the product and outreach teams.\nWhat it\u0026rsquo;s like working at Crossref We\u0026rsquo;re about 40 staff and now \u0026lsquo;remote-first\u0026rsquo; although we have optional offices in Oxford, UK, and Boston, USA. We are dedicated to an open and fair research ecosystem, and that\u0026rsquo;s reflected in our ethos and staff culture. We like to work hard, but we have fun too! We take a creative, iterative approach to our projects and believe that all team members can enrich the culture and performance of our whole organisation. This means that while this is a senior role, it is also a hands-on role, like all roles at Crossref. Check out the organisation chart.\nWe are active supporters of ongoing professional development opportunities and promote self-learning at every opportunity. Crossref has a healthy financial situation, and we only continue to grow. While we won\u0026rsquo;t have a clear hierarchical path for staff to follow, there are always evolving opportunities to progress and be challenged.\nLocation \u0026amp; travel requirements This is a remote position. The technology team currently has members working in the US (Lynnfield, MA, New York City, NY), UK (Oxford, Sheffield), Jersey, Ireland (Dublin), and France (Nîmes). We are looking for somebody on the Eastern side of the Atlantic for this position. Ideally +/- 1-2 hours UTC.\nIn normal, non-pandemic circumstances (assuming they ever return), technology staff should expect they will need to travel 7-14 days a year (possibly international).\nTo apply Send a cover letter and a CV via email to:\nLindsay Russell\njobs@crossref.org\nPlease apply by 30th March 2022.\nEqual opportunities commitment Crossref is committed to a policy of non-discrimination and equal opportunity for all employees and qualified applicants for employment without regard to race, color, religion, sex, pregnancy or a condition related to pregnancy, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, national origin, ancestry, age, physical or mental disability, genetic information, veteran status, uniform service member status, or any other protected class under applicable law. Crossref will make reasonable accommodations for qualified individuals with known disabilities in accordance with applicable law.\nThanks for your interest in joining Crossref. We are excited to hear from you!\n",
"headings": ["About the role","Key responsibilities","What it\u0026rsquo;s like working at Crossref","Location \u0026amp; travel requirements","To apply","Equal opportunities commitment"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/jobs/2022-03-09-technical-community-manager/",
"title": "Technical Community Manager",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2022-03-09",
"lastmod_ts": 1646784000,
"section": "Jobs",
"tags": [],
"description": " Applications for this position closed March 2022. Join us as our brand new Technical Community Manager to expand the adoption and integration of ROR (Research Organisation Registry) throughout the global scholarly communications ecosystem. We are looking for a full-time Technical Community Manager to expand the adoption and integration of ROR throughout the global scholarly communications ecosystem.\nROR is a community-led initiative to develop an open, sustainable, usable, and unique identifier for every research organisation in the world. It is jointly managed by DataCite, Crossref, and California Digital Library. Each of these operating organisations provides input on decisions and strategies that support the growth and sustainability of ROR. Our goal is to address the problem of tracking affiliations in research communications. The Technical Community Manager will be a key driver of that change.\n",
"content": " Applications for this position closed March 2022. Join us as our brand new Technical Community Manager to expand the adoption and integration of ROR (Research Organisation Registry) throughout the global scholarly communications ecosystem. We are looking for a full-time Technical Community Manager to expand the adoption and integration of ROR throughout the global scholarly communications ecosystem.\nROR is a community-led initiative to develop an open, sustainable, usable, and unique identifier for every research organisation in the world. It is jointly managed by DataCite, Crossref, and California Digital Library. Each of these operating organisations provides input on decisions and strategies that support the growth and sustainability of ROR. Our goal is to address the problem of tracking affiliations in research communications. The Technical Community Manager will be a key driver of that change.\nThe Technical Community Manager will work closely with the small and committed core ROR team, staff from the three operating organisations, and the broader ROR community, to promote and support the adoption of ROR in systems used throughout research and scholarly communications workflows. This includes engaging with new and existing ROR adopters and other community stakeholders to understand their workflows and systems, and to guide their implementations and integrations.\nThis position will be employed by Crossref as a full-time staff member and included in all Crossref staff activities. It is fully remote, so location and hours are flexible but overlap with the US Pacific timezone will be necessary. As pandemic circumstances allow, we expect to resume a small amount of international travel for meetings and events.\nResponsibilities Build strategies to drive adoption and technical implementation Identify opportunities and challenges for adoption and integration of ROR in key research and scholarly communications systems and workflows Develop and implement strategies to encourage and support the adoption and integration of ROR into scholarly communication systems and workflows, including showcasing exemplars and promoting best practices Develop measures/benchmarks to assess and communicate adoption progress both internally and to the ROR community Lead technical community engagement efforts Organize regular meetings, webinars, and other events for new and current integrators Engage with the ROR community to develop and encourage integration best practices Build and maintain tools and documentation that meet the needs of key communities Engage with the ROR community to identify and build consensus around evolving needs Provide first-line support and troubleshooting help to adopters Cultivate and manage relationships with adopters Introduce ROR to potential adopters you have identified, such as specific publishers, funders, repositories, research institutions, and the service providers and developers that offer platforms to those organisations Maintain ongoing communications with adopters through regular check-ins to ensure their integration work is well-supported Consult with adopters to recommend ROR integration approaches for their particular system/use case, collaborating with other ROR team members as needed Communicate feedback about adopter needs to the ROR team Contribute to the development and implementation of overall ROR strategies Based on community needs, identify specifications for improvements and new features Collaborate with ROR team on product development strategy Work with ROR and Crossref teams to develop and implement strategies that support wider adoption Skills and experience Community management experience, particularly in an international environment. An understanding that community management needs a mix of interpersonal, technical, program management, program development, and communication skills. The CSCCE skills wheel is a good resource to explore. While we don’t ask for a specific number of years\u0026rsquo; experience, entry-level candidates are unlikely to be successful in the role. Sufficient technical skills to advise adopters on integrations, including experience with making and troubleshooting requests to RESTful APIs and familiarity with XML and JSON data structures (or technical aptitude and a desire to learn!) Deep knowledge of research and scholarly communications systems and workflows, and familiarity with the academic research environment Familiarity with research infrastructure and the open science landscape Familiarity with a not-for-profit environment and the transparency that entails Ability to work remotely with small distributed teams across global time zones Strong, compelling, and clear written, oral, and visual communication Self-motivated to succeed, take initiative, and seek continuous improvement Working at ROR \u0026amp; Crossref As a young start-up initiative, ROR is a dynamic place to work as we are growing quickly and laying the groundwork for long-term sustainability. We are a fun community (we do actually roar sometimes 🦁) but we also take our work seriously! ROR’s three operating organisations work closely together and everyone contributing to ROR balances the needs of ROR with those of their home organisation. We also work closely with ROR adopters and community stakeholders through working groups and advisory boards and aim for all of these activities to be open and transparent, in line with the Principles of Open Scholarly Infrastructure (POSI).\nROR has a Project Lead based at CDL and a Metadata Curation Lead contracted with Crossref. Our previous Adoption Lead has moved over to become our new full-time Technical Lead based at DataCite. We’re now reshaping the previous adoption role on the ROR team as this Technical Community Manager. This is a full-time role and you will be employed at Crossref. This means you will need to balance being part of two teams: ROR; and Crossref.\nCrossref is committed to supporting ongoing professional development opportunities and promoting self-learning for its 40+ people. Crossref—and ROR—are dedicated to an open and fair research ecosystem and that’s reflected in our ethos and staff culture.”\nThinking of applying? We especially encourage applications from people with backgrounds historically underrepresented in research and scholarly communications.\nThe role will be accountable to the ROR operations team and within Crossref will report to Ginny Hendricks who will review applications along with Project Lead Maria Gould and Technical Lead Liz Krznarich. Candidates who meet the qualifications will be invited to a 30-minute screening call. Those subsequently shortlisted will be invited to a 90-minute online interview which will include an exercise you’ll have a chance to prepare for.\nTo apply, please send a CV and covering letter explaining how your skills match ROR’s goals to jobs@ror.org, by 16th March 2022. Interviews will take place in late March/early April.\nEqual opportunities commitment Crossref and ROR are committed to a policy of non-discrimination and equal opportunity for all employees and qualified applicants for employment without regard to race, color, religion, sex, pregnancy or a condition related to pregnancy, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, national origin, ancestry, age, physical or mental disability, genetic information, veteran status, uniform service member status, or any other protected class under applicable law. Crossref and ROR will make reasonable accommodations for qualified individuals with known disabilities in accordance with applicable law.\nThanks for your interest in joining Crossref. We are excited to hear from you!\n",
"headings": ["Join us as our brand new Technical Community Manager to expand the adoption and integration of ROR (Research Organisation Registry) throughout the global scholarly communications ecosystem.","Responsibilities","Skills and experience","Working at ROR \u0026amp; Crossref","Thinking of applying?","Equal opportunities commitment"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/jobs/2021-12-08-head-community-engagement-communications/",
"title": "Head of Community Engagement and Communications",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2021-12-08",
"lastmod_ts": 1638921600,
"section": "Jobs",
"tags": [],
"description": " Applications for this position closed 2022-01-20. Join us as our brand new Head of Community Engagement and Communications and help advance open research Crossref is a not-for-profit membership organisation that exists to make scholarly communications better by providing metadata and services that make research objects easy to find, cite, link, assess, and reuse. We’re passionate about providing open foundational infrastructure for the scholarly communications ecosystem - and we’re continuously evolving our tools and services in response to emerging needs.\n",
"content": " Applications for this position closed 2022-01-20. Join us as our brand new Head of Community Engagement and Communications and help advance open research Crossref is a not-for-profit membership organisation that exists to make scholarly communications better by providing metadata and services that make research objects easy to find, cite, link, assess, and reuse. We’re passionate about providing open foundational infrastructure for the scholarly communications ecosystem - and we’re continuously evolving our tools and services in response to emerging needs.\nCrossref is at its core a community organisation. We’re committed to lowering barriers for global participation in the research enterprise, we’re funded by members and subscribers, and we engage regularly with them in multiple ways from webinars to working groups. The Head of Community Engagement and Communications (CEC) is an exciting and newly-created leadership position, which reflects an evolution of our former Marketing and Communications (‘marcomms’) approach to be more in line with our community-focused mission. We are looking for someone who understands that community-led not-for-profit organisations need a different approach — co-creating, listening, and facilitating conversations — rather than simply broadcasting.\nWith 16,000 members across 146 countries (and counting), this is a role where you’ll be driving communications strategy and building relationships from day one. You’ll combine big picture thinking about our engagement strategy with attention to detail in coordinating community programming, content creation, and communications. And you’ll ensure that we continue to work responsively in a manner that supports diverse, global participation.\nAs scientific community engagement is an emerging profession, practical experience in this area is more important to us than traditional qualifications. The successful person may in fact have a technical background in scholarly communications but can show strong community management and communications skills. We prefer candidates who can show some familiarity or affinity with the work of the CSCCE and knowledge of the dynamics of scholarly communications.\nKey responsibilities This is a senior role and it\u0026rsquo;s crucial to Crossref\u0026rsquo;s mission and future ability to deliver on our strategy. It provides the exciting opportunity to:\nLead a team of two community engagement managers and one communications and events manager, and guide their work with publishers, funders, infrastructure organisations, and research institutions. Work with internal and external data sources and partners to build out our country-level community engagement strategy and extend activities that lower barriers to participation in Crossref, measuring successful outcomes such as new members joining (new constituencies, new countries). Oversee our Sponsors program, which is the primary route to membership for emerging countries, and our Ambassadors program. You’ll be building relationships with key Sponsors and Ambassadors around the world, and ensuring we are working optimally together for our members’ benefit. Create and oversee product communications plans including messaging, roll-out schedules, and adoption campaigns, keeping in regular touch with product/outreach colleagues to plan for key developments and articulate how they will be of use and to which sectors of our community. Be or become an advocate for community engagement as a core set of skills in the work of open scholarly infrastructure organisations. Facilitate and participate in committees and advisory groups led by other initiatives, and bring insights back to share with colleagues to inform and adapt our own priorities and organisational strategy. Refresh our content strategy using your knowledge of the changing dynamics in research communications, and an understanding of our recent repositioning to work toward the Principles of Open Scholarly Infrastructure. You’ll lead the coordination of content for all our activities - including identifying opportunities to create together with the community and to curate and archive essential resources so that they remain discoverable and reusable long after their initial publication. Establish a program management approach to all interactions such as advisory groups, webinars, newsletters, social, blog, website, documentation, discussion forums, and conference participation, including developing our multilingual and multi-time-zone programming. Oversee the calendar of activities and plan ahead for key events such as our annual board election, annual report, conferences, and other community meetings. Data-driven, you’ll interrogate analytics (website, email, CRM, etc.) to understand and optimize the reach and effectiveness of engagement programs. Develop a library of creative resources and refine and add materials such as animations, diagrams, and slide libraries. Package them for different purposes such as onboarding, or different constituencies such as research funders, or different use cases such as API querying. Involve the community in co-creating such resources where possible, being mindful of serving an international audience. Some international travel will likely be appropriate when it’s safe to do so, for example to in-person meetings with colleagues, members, and sponsors. We’re looking for the right candidate—who can be based anywhere—while being aware that many of our engagement activities include the Asia Pacific timezones.\nYour skills and experience Interpersonal Ability to build trusted relationships with colleagues and community members\u0026mdash;even remotely\u0026mdash;including brokering outcomes where everyone gets what they need A truly global and inclusive perspective; we have 16,000 member organisations from 146 countries across all time zones and hundreds of languages A desire to bring people together, listening for emergent needs, and responsively providing training and other solutions A coaching style of leadership that is empathetic and unconcerned with hierarchy Technical Technical resourcefulness to get hands-on with our websites (built on Hugo, using markdown and Git, with Matomo for analytics) and our systems, managing our email and content platforms and their integrations A good understanding of APIs and metadata, unfazed by technical jargon or digging into metadata for reporting A strong creative edge and an appreciation for minimalist design with some experience of media production Program management Strategic thinking while loving the detail; ability to get from an ambiguous idea to achievable chunks of work Equally comfortable facilitating and chairing meetings and working groups as well as coaching other staff in leading their own Hands-on with event management and hosting from logistics to reporting back and follow-up Program development Demonstrable experience managing communities, including developing and guiding programming activities Formalizing collaborations as long-term partnerships including drafting MOUs, and overseeing relationships with and management of our Sponsors Knowledge of current priority topics within scholarly communications and publishing Understanding of mission-driven or community-led organisations and their sustainability and governance challenges Communication Concise writing and editing skills Experience with content planning, creation, and curation including archiving Experience with value message creation and product roll-out/adoption plans Always on the look-out for opportunities to present at external events, ability to create consistent stories that align with our strategy, and being comfortable speaking and presenting yourself Demonstrated experience with digital communications strategy including social media and community forums Languages other than English would be a plus What it’s like working at Crossref We’re about 40 staff and now ‘remote-first’ although we have optional offices in Oxford, UK, and Boston, USA. We are dedicated to an open and fair research ecosystem and that’s reflected in our ethos and staff culture. We like to work hard but we have fun too! We take a creative, iterative approach to our projects, and believe that all team members can enrich the culture and performance of our whole organisation. This means that while this is a senior role, like all roles at Crossref, it is also a hands-on one. Check out the organisation chart.\nWe are active supporters of ongoing professional development opportunities and promote self-learning at every opportunity. Crossref has a healthy financial situation and we only continue to grow. While we won’t have a clear hierarchical path for staff to follow, there are always evolving opportunities to progress and be challenged.\nThinking of applying? We especially encourage applications from people with backgrounds historically under-represented in research and scholarly communications.\nTo apply, please send a CV along with a covering letter to Ginny Hendricks at jobs@crossref.org.\nPlease strive to get applications in by the first week of January 2022. [EDIT 13th Jan: We are now keeping the role open until Thursday 20th January]\nThe role will report to Ginny, Director of Member \u0026amp; Community Outreach at Crossref, and she will review all applications along with Lindsay Russell, our HR Manager, and Lou Woodley, Executive Director of CSCCE. Candidates who have been shortlisted will be invited to a first interview which will include some exercises you’ll have a chance to prepare for. And then there will be follow-up meetings for the final candidates to meet the team - Rosa, Susan, and Vanessa. We aim to make an offer before the end of January.\nEqual opportunities commitment Crossref is committed to a policy of non-discrimination and equal opportunity for all employees and qualified applicants for employment without regard to race, colour, religion, sex, pregnancy or a condition related to pregnancy, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, national origin, ancestry, age, physical or mental disability, genetic information, veteran status, uniform service member status, or any other protected class under applicable law. Crossref will make reasonable accommodations for qualified individuals with known disabilities in accordance with applicable law.\nThanks for your interest in joining Crossref. We are excited to hear from you!\n",
"headings": ["Join us as our brand new Head of Community Engagement and Communications and help advance open research","Key responsibilities","Your skills and experience","Interpersonal","Technical","Program management","Program development","Communication","What it’s like working at Crossref","Thinking of applying?","Equal opportunities commitment"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/jobs/2021-12-03-member-support-specialist/",
"title": "Member Support Specialist",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2021-12-03",
"lastmod_ts": 1638489600,
"section": "Jobs",
"tags": [],
"description": " Applications for this position closed 2022-March-01. Come and work with us as one of our Member Support Specialists. It’ll be fun! ​​Do you want to help make scholarly communications better? Come and join the world of open scholarly infrastructure and be part of improving the creation of and access to knowledge for all. It’s a serious job but we don’t take ourselves too seriously.\nThis role serves our global membership in all countries but will be home-based in Indonesia or nearby\n",
"content": " Applications for this position closed 2022-March-01. Come and work with us as one of our Member Support Specialists. It’ll be fun! ​​Do you want to help make scholarly communications better? Come and join the world of open scholarly infrastructure and be part of improving the creation of and access to knowledge for all. It’s a serious job but we don’t take ourselves too seriously.\nThis role serves our global membership in all countries but will be home-based in Indonesia or nearby\nAbout Crossref We’re a not-for-profit membership organisation that exists to make scholarly communications better. We rally the community; tag and share metadata; run an open infrastructure; play with technology; and make tools and services—all to help put research in context.\nCrossref sits at the heart of the global exchange of research information, and our job is to make it possible—and easier—to find, cite, link, assess, and reuse research, from journals and books to preprints, data, and grants. Through partnerships and collaborations we engage with members in 146 countries (and counting) and it’s very important to us to make sure that everyone who wants to participate, can.\nWe are dedicated to an open and fair research ecosystem and that’s reflected in our ethos and staff culture. Read more about our strategy.\nWe like to work hard but we have fun too!\nAbout the role Member Support Specialist is a pivotal role in the Member Experience team. The \u0026ldquo;MemX team\u0026rdquo;, for short, is part of Crossref’s Outreach team, which is at the forefront of Crossref’s growth, building relationships with new communities in new markets in new ways and enhancing Crossref\u0026rsquo;s understanding of trends in scholarly communications. The Outreach team is currently 14 people dispersed across North America, East Africa, and Western Europe. Check out our organisation chart.\nThe Member Support Specialist is a full time global role reporting to Amanda Bartell (Head of Member Experience). The work is a mix of involved consultations with applicants together with detailed systems and administrative work. You’ll need to have an understanding of the academic and scientific communications process, great attention to detail, the ability to ask probing questions of applicants, and a logical, systematic approach.\nYou\u0026rsquo;ll be working primarily with new journal publishers to set them up as members, or to determine if they have other needs. Along with another Member Support Specialist (plus two contractors), you\u0026rsquo;ll take these publishers through our application process, setting them up carefully in our CRM and other systems, paying extremely close attention to data quality. Once they’re members, you’ll continue to work with them closely - answering their questions via email, social media, and our community forum. You’ll help them take on new Crossref services, navigate platform migrations, and understand how to set up service providers to work with us on their behalf. It’s a very diverse role and is a great opportunity to get wide-ranging experience within Crossref and the global open scholarly infrastructure and communications community.\nKey responsibilities Work with new applicants to understand their internal structures and help them understand the various membership options available to them. Own and drive the administrative process for new applicants - ensuring we have all the information we need to help them get started and setting them up accurately in our central systems. Broker conversations between members, sponsors, platforms, and service providers to ensure the member is able to fulfill their aims while still meeting Crossref membership obligations. Manage queries from applicants and members via email, social media, our community forum and other channels. Ensure that the data in our CRM system is kept clean and up-to-date. Work closely with the support and finance teams to solve problems and ensure a smooth experience for members. Location Indonesia or surrounding region\nWe’re about 40 staff and now ‘remote-first’, although we have optional offices in Oxford (UK) and Boston (USA).\nWhile we seek someone in Indonesia, they will need to be able to liaise with colleagues in Western Europe, East Africa, and North America. As Indonesia has emerged as the largest Open Access research-producing country in the world (which is reflected in Crossref’s huge membership there) there will be occasional opportunities to meet and engage with our members at conferences and other events in the region.\nAbout you We’re looking for a motivated person who will take initiative, highlight things that seem inefficient, and be able to dig into things with our diverse membership to really get to the bottom of their needs.\nYou\u0026rsquo;ll need to follow processes precisely and maintain accuracy while at the same time being comfortable with ambiguity; our community and environment is changing rapidly and we won’t always have a clear answer for everything. It keeps things interesting!\nIn addition\u0026hellip;\nAble to balance a very busy role while still paying close attention to detail and keeping member experience at the forefront. Experience in helping customers and solving problems in creative and unique ways. Strong written and verbal communication skills with the ability to communicate clearly - able to use open questions to get to the bottom of things when members may not seem to make sense. A truly global perspective - we have 16,000 member organisations from 146 countries across numerous time zones. Be comfortable taking the initiative to lead conversations with people at all levels. Quick learner of new systems and processes and can rapidly pick up new techniques. Extremely organized and attentive to detail. Experience with Zendesk or similar support system is ideal, as is familiarity with CRM systems such as Sugar. Familiar with the scholarly publishing process, with a bonus being some knowledge of XML and metadata. Thinking of applying? Even if you don’t think you have all the specific experience, we’re looking for someone with the right approach who is keen to jump in and learn. Practical experience is more important to us than traditional qualifications.\nWe are active supporters of ongoing professional development opportunities and promote self-learning at every opportunity. Crossref has a healthy financial situation and we only continue to grow. While we won’t have a clear hierarchical path for staff to follow, there are always evolving opportunities to progress and be challenged.\nWe especially encourage applications from people with backgrounds historically under-represented in research and scholarly communications.\nTo apply, please send your cover letter and resume to Lindsay Russell at jobs@crossref.org.\nEqual opportunities commitment Crossref is committed to a policy of non-discrimination and equal opportunity for all employees and qualified applicants for employment without regard to race, color, religion, sex, pregnancy or a condition related to pregnancy, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, national origin, ancestry, age, physical or mental disability, genetic information, veteran status, uniform service member status, or any other protected class under applicable law. Crossref will make reasonable accommodations for qualified individuals with known disabilities in accordance with applicable law.\n",
"headings": ["Come and work with us as one of our Member Support Specialists. It’ll be fun!","About Crossref","About the role","Key responsibilities","Location","About you","Thinking of applying?","Equal opportunities commitment"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/jobs/2021-04-30-contract-member-support/",
"title": "Member Support Contractor",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2021-04-30",
"lastmod_ts": 1619740800,
"section": "Jobs",
"tags": [],
"description": " Applications for this position are closed. Request for services: Member Support Contractor Location: Remote\nWe’re looking for contractors able to work remotely and help us to welcome new members from around the world. There is no set schedule and contractors would bill their hours monthly.\nCrossref receives over 220 new applications every month from organisations who produce scholarly and professional materials and content.\nKey responsibilities Manage queries from applicants and members via our Zendesk support desk and potentially other channels. Follow the administrative process for new applicants, such as: Check the details in application forms that come via our website. Set them up in our Customer Relationship Management (CRM) System (CRM). We use SugarCRM. Send them an invoice for the first year of membership, and once this is paid\u0026hellip; Set up and share their DOI prefix and account credentials. Ensure that the information in our CRM is kept clean and up-to-date. Work closely with the Member Experience team and our finance colleagues. About you Organized with an eye for details Happy with data entry and maintenance Comfortable following processes and taking on new systems Friendly and clear communication skills (in English) About Crossref Crossref makes research objects easy to find, cite, link, assess, and reuse. We’re a not-for-profit membership organisation that exists to make scholarly communications better. We rally the community; tag and share metadata; run an open infrastructure; play with technology; and make tools and services—all to help put research in context. It’s as simple—and as complicated—as that.\n",
"content": " Applications for this position are closed. Request for services: Member Support Contractor Location: Remote\nWe’re looking for contractors able to work remotely and help us to welcome new members from around the world. There is no set schedule and contractors would bill their hours monthly.\nCrossref receives over 220 new applications every month from organisations who produce scholarly and professional materials and content.\nKey responsibilities Manage queries from applicants and members via our Zendesk support desk and potentially other channels. Follow the administrative process for new applicants, such as: Check the details in application forms that come via our website. Set them up in our Customer Relationship Management (CRM) System (CRM). We use SugarCRM. Send them an invoice for the first year of membership, and once this is paid\u0026hellip; Set up and share their DOI prefix and account credentials. Ensure that the information in our CRM is kept clean and up-to-date. Work closely with the Member Experience team and our finance colleagues. About you Organized with an eye for details Happy with data entry and maintenance Comfortable following processes and taking on new systems Friendly and clear communication skills (in English) About Crossref Crossref makes research objects easy to find, cite, link, assess, and reuse. We’re a not-for-profit membership organisation that exists to make scholarly communications better. We rally the community; tag and share metadata; run an open infrastructure; play with technology; and make tools and services—all to help put research in context. It’s as simple—and as complicated—as that.\nSince 2000 we have grown from strength to strength and now have over 15,000 members across 140 countries, and thousands of tools and services relying on our metadata.\nTo apply Please send a cover letter and your CV to Lindsay Russell at jobs@crossref.org.\nCrossref is committed to a policy of non-discrimination and equal opportunity for all employees and qualified applicants for employment without regard to race, color, religion, sex, pregnancy or a condition related to pregnancy, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, national origin, ancestry, age, physical or mental disability, genetic information, veteran status, uniform service member status, or any other protected class under applicable law. Crossref will make reasonable accommodations for qualified individuals with known disabilities, in accordance with applicable law.\n",
"headings": ["Request for services: Member Support Contractor","Key responsibilities","About you","About Crossref","To apply"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/display-guidelines/",
"title": "Display guidelines",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2021-04-21",
"lastmod_ts": 1618963200,
"section": "Display guidelines",
"tags": [],
"description": "1 September 2022 These 2017 guidelines are not changing but we’ve added a recommendation to improve accessibility for Crossref links on landing pages. Please see our recent call for comments for more information. This page will be updated when the recommendation has been finalized.\nDisplay guidelines for Crossref DOIs - effective from March 2017 Cite as “Crossref Display Guidelines (March 2017)\u0026quot;, retrieved [date], https://doi.org/10.13003/5jchdy\nIt\u0026rsquo;s really important for consistency and usability that all members follow these guidelines. We rarely have to change them and usually only do so for very good reasons. Please note that this is for display of Crossref DOIs, not anyone else\u0026rsquo;s persistent links, as, for example, not all DOIs are made equal.\n",
"content": "1 September 2022 These 2017 guidelines are not changing but we’ve added a recommendation to improve accessibility for Crossref links on landing pages. Please see our recent call for comments for more information. This page will be updated when the recommendation has been finalized.\nDisplay guidelines for Crossref DOIs - effective from March 2017 Cite as “Crossref Display Guidelines (March 2017)\u0026quot;, retrieved [date], https://doi.org/10.13003/5jchdy\nIt\u0026rsquo;s really important for consistency and usability that all members follow these guidelines. We rarely have to change them and usually only do so for very good reasons. Please note that this is for display of Crossref DOIs, not anyone else\u0026rsquo;s persistent links, as, for example, not all DOIs are made equal.\nThe goals of the guidelines are to:\nMake it as easy as possible for users without technical knowledge to cut and paste or click to share Crossref DOIs (for example, using right-click to copy a URL). Get users to recognize a Crossref links as both a persistent link as well as a persistent identifier, even if they don\u0026rsquo;t know what a Crossref DOI is. Enable points 1 and 2 above by having all Crossref members display DOIs in a consistent way. Enable robots and crawlers to recognize Crossref DOIs as URLs. When linking to a research work, use its Crossref DOI link rather than its URL. If the URL changes, the publisher will update the metadata in Crossref with the new URL, so that the link will always take you to the correct location of the work.\nHow to display a Crossref link When displaying DOIs, it’s important to follow these display guidelines. Crossref DOIs should:\nalways be displayed as a full URL link in the form https://doi.org/10.xxxx/xxxxx not be preceded by doi: or DOI: not use dx in the domain name part of DOI links and we recommend HTTPS (rather than HTTP). Here is an example of canonical DOI display:\nShow image × Changes to guidelines in March 2017 These guidelines introduce two important changes that differ from the previous guidelines:\nwe have dropped the dx from the domain name portion of Crossref links we recommend you use the secure HTTPS rather than HTTP Note this change is backwards compatible, so DOIs such as http://dx.doi.org/ and http://doi.org/ which conform to older guidelines will continue to work indefinitely.\nWhere to apply the display guidelines Crossref links should be displayed as the full URL link wherever the bibliographic information about the content is displayed.\nAn obligation of membership is that Crossref persistent links must be displayed on members’ landing pages. We recommend that Crossref links also be displayed or distributed in the following contexts:\nTables of contents Abstracts Full-text HTML and PDF articles, and other scholarly documents Citation downloads to reference management systems Metadata feeds to third parties \u0026ldquo;How to Cite This\u0026rdquo; instructions on content pages Social network links Anywhere users are directed to a permanent, stable, or persistent link to the content. Crossref members should not use proprietary, internal, or other non-Crossref links in citation downloads, metadata feeds to third parties, nor in instructions to researchers on how to cite a document. The membership terms stipulate that Crossref persistent identifier links must be the default.\nCrossref links in reference lists and bibliographies Linking references in journal articles using Crossref DOIs is a condition of membership. This means including the link for each item in your reference list. We strongly encourage members to link references for other record types too. Because there are space constraints even in online references lists, Crossref DOIs can be displayed in several ways, depending on the publisher’s preference and publication style. We recommend the following options:\nuse the Crossref DOI URL as the permanent link. Example: Soleimani N, Mohabati Mobarez A, Farhangi B. Cloning, expression and purification flagellar sheath adhesion of Helicobacter pylori in Escherichia coli host as a vaccination target. Clin Exp Vaccine Res. 2016 Jan;5(1):19-25. https://doi.org/10.7774/cevr.2016.5.1.19 display the text Crossref with a permanent DOI link behind the text. Example: Galli, S.J., and M. Tsai. 2010. Mast cells in allergy and infection: versatile effector and regulatory cells in innate and adaptive immunity. Eur. J. Immunol. 40:1843–1851. Crossref. Learn more about how to link your references.\nShortDOI The DOI Foundation created the ShortDOI service as an open system that creates shortcuts to DOIs. DOIs can be long, so this service aimed to to the same thing as URL shortening services. ShortDOIs are not widely used and are not really actual DOIs themselves, which is confusing. We recommend simply creating shorter DOIs in the first place. Learn more about constructing your DOIs.\nFrequently Asked Questions (FAQs) about the March 2017 changes Can we make the display changes now or do we need to wait? These guidelines are now in effect. We set the date as March 2017, after giving our members six months\u0026rsquo; notice to make the changes.\nWhy does a Crossref DOI have to be displayed as a link on the page that it links to? Some members have reported resistance from colleagues to displaying the Crossref DOI on the landing page as a link (they say the link in that location appears superfluous as it appears to link to itself). However, the Crossref DOI must be displayed as a link, because it is both an identifier and a persistent link. It is also part of the membership terms agreed to when members join Crossref. It is easier for users when members display the DOI as a full link as they can copy it easily. Also, many users don’t know what a DOI is, but they know what a link is. We want to encourage the DOI to be used as a persistent link, and to be shared and used in other applications (such as reference management tools). A fully linked DOI enables this, wherever it appears.\nDo we need to redeposit our metadata to update the DOI display? No - there is no need to redeposit metadata. These guidelines cover how you display DOIs on your website, not how to register them with us.\nWhy not use doi: or DOI:? When Crossref was founded in 2000, we recommended that DOIs be displayed in the format doi:10.NNNN/doisuffix and many members still use doi:[space][doinumber], DOI: [space][doinumber], or DOI[space][doinumber]. At the time that the DOI system was launched in the late 1990s it was thought that doi: would become native to browsers and automatically resolve DOIs, like http:. This did not happen, and so doc:/DOI: is not a valid way of displaying or linking Crossref DOIs.\nAdvantages to changing the display to a resolvable URL (even on the page the DOI itself resolves to) include:\nA Crossref DOI is both a link and an identifier. Users will more easily recognize them as an actionable link, regardless of whether they know about the infrastructure behind it. Users who do not know how to right-click on the link and choose Copy link will still be able to easily copy the DOI URL Machines and programs (such as bots) will recognize the Crossref DOI as a link, thereby increasing discoverability and usage. Why not use dx as in http://dx.doi.org/? Originally the dx separated the DOI resolver from the International DOI Foundation (IDF) website but this changed a few years ago and the IDF recommends http://doi.org as the preferred form for the domain name in DOI URLs.\nWhy should we use HTTPS? Providing the central linking infrastructure for scholarly publishing is something we take seriously. Because we form the connections between publisher content all over the web, it’s important that we do our bit to enable secure browsing from start to finish. In addition, HTTPS is now a ranking signal for Google, which gives sites using HTTPS a small ranking boost.\nThe process of enabling HTTPS on publisher sites will be a long one, and given the number of members we have, it may take a while before everyone’s made the transition. But by using HTTPS we are future-proofing scholarly linking on the web.\nSome years ago we started the process of making our new services available exclusively over HTTPS. The Crossref API is HTTPS enabled, and Crossmark and our Assets CDN use HTTPS exclusively. In 2015 we collaborated with Wikipedia to make all of their DOI links HTTPS. We hope that we’ll start to see more of the scholarly publishing industry doing the same.\n",
"headings": ["Display guidelines for Crossref DOIs - effective from March 2017","Cite as","How to display a Crossref link","Changes to guidelines in March 2017","Where to apply the display guidelines","Crossref links in reference lists and bibliographies","ShortDOI","Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) about the March 2017 changes","Can we make the display changes now or do we need to wait?","Why does a Crossref DOI have to be displayed as a link on the page that it links to?","Do we need to redeposit our metadata to update the DOI display?","Why not use doi: or DOI:?","Why not use dx as in http://dx.doi.org/?","Why should we use HTTPS?"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/community/editors/",
"title": "For editors",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 5,
"lastmod": "2017-01-18",
"lastmod_ts": 1484697600,
"section": "Get involved",
"tags": [],
"description": "Your decisions influence what research is communicated and how. Demonstrate your editorial integrity with tools that help you assess a paper’s originality, and properly label and connect updates, corrections, and retractions.\nGet discovered Using our services provides a way for editors to maximize the discoverability of the content they publish.\nRegistering DOIs and metadata with us means that content can be found and used alongside that of our members. We also ask our members to link their references using the DOI as this makes sure that content will be linked persistently to the work it cites, so that links to your publications won’t deprecate over time and readers can find them long-term. You can encourage your authors to add DOIs to the reference lists of the papers they submit to you, and we have tools to help with that.\n",
"content": "Your decisions influence what research is communicated and how. Demonstrate your editorial integrity with tools that help you assess a paper’s originality, and properly label and connect updates, corrections, and retractions.\nGet discovered Using our services provides a way for editors to maximize the discoverability of the content they publish.\nRegistering DOIs and metadata with us means that content can be found and used alongside that of our members. We also ask our members to link their references using the DOI as this makes sure that content will be linked persistently to the work it cites, so that links to your publications won’t deprecate over time and readers can find them long-term. You can encourage your authors to add DOIs to the reference lists of the papers they submit to you, and we have tools to help with that.\nOther things that will help your content get discovered include collecting information on who funded the research behind the content you publish and the ORCID iDs of your authors, so that it can be found by readers searching on those criteria too. If you collect that information, make sure it’s being deposited with Crossref so that it can be used. Not sure if that\u0026rsquo;s the case? Let us know.\nIntegrity and ethics As an editor, we know you’re on the front-line to ensure the quality and integrity of what you publish. We provide the Similarity Check service which gives members a tool to help editors and publishers ensure that work is original (and references other work properly) by checking it against a growing database of academic publications and general web content. Questions about Similarity Check? Get in touch.\nEven with thorough processes in place, changes may happen to a work after it has been published which may affect how it should be interpreted or credited. Perhaps some supplementary information has been added or the work needs to be corrected or retracted. It’s important that your readers know these changes have happened to research they want to read or cite. Crossmark provides a way to communicate this information in a standard way across publishers so that researchers don’t miss it (even on a PDF), and also gives you a way to showcase additional publication information e.g. funding, license and peer review details.\nWant to find out more? Check out our webinars, blog or come and speak to us in person at an event - we’re eager to hear from you!\n",
"headings": ["Get discovered","Integrity and ethics"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/jobs/2024-09-07-director-programs-services/",
"title": "Director of Programs & Services",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2024-09-07",
"lastmod_ts": 1725667200,
"section": "Jobs",
"tags": [],
"description": "Develop services and initiatives that help progress open science worldwide.",
"content": " Applications for this position closed October 4, 2024. Do you want to drive the development of services and initiatives that help progress open science worldwide? Come and join the world of open scholarly infrastructure and metadata as our new Director of Programs \u0026amp; Services.\nLocation: Remote and global Type: Full-time Remuneration: 135K USD or local equivalent. Note this is a general guide (as there is no universal currency) and local currency analysis will take place before the final offer. Reports to: Chief Program Officer, Ginny Hendricks Timeline: Advertise and recruit September-October, offer in November About the role We have created a new role for a Director of Programs and Services to be a key member of the senior management team at Crossref to help deliver on our strategic agenda. The role is responsible for planning and driving the success of the tools and services that make up our primary programs such as metadata discovery, metadata sources, community integrations, and ensuring the integrity of the scholarly record—all programs that help us help our members meet the vision of an open and connected research nexus and enable a better open research ecosystem.\nThe successful candidate will be critical to Crossref’s transformation away from a more traditional software-focused structure and culture, and towards a more appropriate non-profit and community-guided structure, leading a global and collaborative approach to prioritizing and meeting our mission. While the work is similar to traditional product work (and we assume some candidates may have a background in that area) this role is newly envisioned in the context of the vast scale and growth in our membership and users and the need to bring them more closely into the process. Whatever your background, if the CSCCE Community Participation Model1 looks like something you have done or could do, we want to hear from you. Success in this role requires an intrinsically open approach, experience in enabling co-creation at scale, the ability to listen to and act on evolving member needs, and the practical capabilities to bring cross-organisation teams together to plan and establish clear processes to ensure a clear and measurable path to implementation and delivery of real-world impact for our community members.\nCSCCE Participation Model\nCenter for Scientific Collaboration and Community Engagement. (2020) The CSCCE Community Participation Model – A framework for member engagement and information flow in STEM communities. Woodley and Pratt.\nKey responsibilities Leadership and Management: Bring structure to our cross-organisational planning, working with the Operations group and members of the senior management team to translate our vision into concrete projects and deliverables. Develop a new program-wide approach and manage a team of seven to extend beyond traditional product management, promote the value and role of program design and project management. Be responsible for what Crossref can commit to; estimate, resource, and organize work across existing and new programs and projects and ensure everyone who needs to be is involved. Help enhance our culture, which is based on remote working and open communication. Create an open decision-making culture for program development at Crossref. Work with and establish strong links with all teams and all levels of the organisation. Program Strategy: Develop and deliver on our new vision for evolving product management, designing program and project approaches from design, management, delivery, and measurement. Develop and guide the team to optimally manage the key programs, which include: The integrity of the scholarly record (services and tools like Crossmark and Retraction) Metadata retrieval and discovery (REST API and developing our Search tool) Metadata sources (member metadata, improving registration forms, as well as incorporating new or partner data sources) Metadata development (activities like input and output schema evolution, implementing mapping and matching projects such as for funders and affiliations) Modern operations (membership automation, infrastructure optimization, cloud migration, as well as fee and resourcing projects) Integrations and interfaces (participation reports, main admin interface, as well as integrations with key platform partners like Open Journal Systems) Centre metadata and the community in everything we do. Oversee and support the metadata development process from consultation and design through to delivery and developing best practices. In support of the strategic agenda, conduct program design for any new programs, plan resources and milestones along the way, and determine and report on the expected outcomes. Contribute to the design and management of a new Research Nexus fund for community tools, data sources, and new initiatives. Work with the Operations group to ensure that all development work delivers value to our members. Build and maintain the roadmap, ensuring all areas of the organisation are involved in prioritization and plans and actively share these with our community stakeholders. Be responsible for the team in scoping and planning new feature development, running pilots and beta test phases, and facilitating internal project teams and external Working Groups to deliver on time. Community Focus: Work closely with the Community and Membership Directors to set development priorities based on user needs. Research community needs and engage people through Advisory Groups for each key area of our service as well as Working Groups for new initiatives. Develop introduction plans to roll out new features through open community consultation and co-creation. Be a visible part of Crossref in the community e.g. speaking at events, being directly accessible to members and setting expectations with the community, engaging on social media and the community forum, and blogging about our services and plans. Represent Crossref on others’ working groups and advising other community groups on strategic initiatives. About you We are looking for a proactive, communicative, analytical, and highly organized person to help take our product function to the next level of community co-creation and program management. The successful candidate will likely possess the following attributes and experience:\nCommunity-minded with a background in non-profit, social impact, open data, and/or open-source software. Driven by seeing real outcomes and impact for community members. Strong program design and implementation skills. Systems thinking and experience bringing large and dispersed groups together asynchronously. Willingness to adapt and be flexible based on new insights or data. A highly communicative and transparent way of working and sharing information. Curiosity and tendency to listen (you will never have all the answers). Strong written and public speaking skills. Experience engaging users and partners in product development processes. Experience with product methodologies and best practices in open-source software development. Adept at planning and launching features and services in an open and transparent way. Tech-savvy, comfortable with API use, metadata formats, and databases. Analytical, highly organized, and process-focused. Demonstrated experience improving operational processes and systems. Love of data, keen to track usage and participation trends to inform decisions and measure success. Experience working globally across time zones and with diverse groups stakeholders and cultures. Experience managing budgets, external consultants, and oversight of project management. About Crossref and the team We’re a not-for-profit membership organisation that exists to make scholarly communications better. We rally the community; tag and share metadata; run an open infrastructure; play with technology; and make tools and services—all to help put research in context.\nWe envision a rich and reusable open network of relationships connecting research organisations, people, things, and actions; a scholarly record that the global community can build on forever, for the benefit of society. We are working towards this vision of a ‘Research Nexus’ by demonstrating the value of richer and connected open metadata, incentivising people to meet best practices, while making it easier to do so. “We” means 20,000+ members from 160 countries, 160+ million records, and nearly 2 billion monthly metadata queries from thousands of tools across the research ecosystem. We want to be a sustainable source of complete, open, and global scholarly metadata and relationships.\nTake a look at our strategic agenda to see the planned work that aims to achieve the vision. The sustainability area aims to make transparent all the processes and procedures we follow to run the operation long-term, including our financials and our ongoing commitment to the Principles of Open Scholarly Infrastructure (POSI). The governance area describes our board and its role in community oversight.\nIt also takes a strong team – because reliable infrastructure needs committed people who contribute to and realise the vision, and thrive doing it. We are a distributed group of 46 dedicated people who like to play quizzes, talk about celery (sometimes cucumber), measure coffee intake, and create 100s of custom slack emojis. We enthusiastically support the Oxford comma but waver between use of American or British English. Occasionally we do some work to improve knowledge sharing worldwide— which we take a bit more seriously than ourselves. We do this through fair policies and working practices, a balanced approach to resourcing, and accountability to each other.\nWe can offer the successful candidate a challenging and fun environment to work in. Together we are dedicated to our global mission and we are constantly adapting to ensure we get there. Take a look at our organisation chart and view our Annual Reports and financial information here.\nHow to apply To apply, please submit a CV and cover letter, detailing how you fulfil the role description and personal specification to Perrett Laver’s application page quoting reference 7556. The deadline for applications is Friday, October 4, 2024.\nThis is a remote position and the successful candidate can be based most anywhere as long as they are prepared to adapt their hours to European and East Coast US time zones. A moderate amount of travel is expected.\nAnticipated salary for this role is approximately $135,000 USD, or equivalent amount paid in local currency. Crossref offers competitive compensation, a rich benefits package, flexible work arrangements, professional development opportunities, and a supportive work environment. As a non-profit organisation, we prioritize mission over profit.\nThe selection committee will together review all candidates’ applications and agree on a longlist for the role. Longlisted candidates will be invited to discuss the position with Perrett Laver in greater detail. The selection committee will subsequently meet to decide upon a final shortlist to be invited to the formal interview stage.\nProtecting your personal data is of the utmost importance to Perrett Laver and we take this responsibility very seriously. Any information obtained by our trading divisions is held and processed in accordance with the relevant data protection legislation. The data you provide us with is securely stored on our computerized database and transferred to our clients for the purposes of presenting you as a candidate and/or considering your suitability for a role you have registered interest in.\nPerrett Laver is a Data Controller and a Data Processor, and our legal basis for processing your personal data is ‘Legitimate Interests’. You have the right to object to us processing your data in this way. For more information about this, your rights, and our approach to Data Protection and Privacy, please see our Privacy Statement.\nEqual opportunities commitment Crossref is committed to a policy of non-discrimination and equal opportunity for all employees and qualified applicants for employment without regard to race, colour, religion, sex, pregnancy or a condition related to pregnancy, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, national origin, ancestry, age, physical or mental disability, genetic information, veteran status, uniform service member status, or any other protected class under applicable law. Crossref will make reasonable accommodations for qualified individuals with known disabilities in accordance with applicable law.\nThanks for your interest in joining Crossref. We are excited to hear from you! ",
"headings": ["About the role","Key responsibilities","Leadership and Management:","Program Strategy:","Community Focus:","About you","About Crossref and the team","How to apply","Equal opportunities commitment","Thanks for your interest in joining Crossref. We are excited to hear from you!"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/faq/",
"title": "FAQs",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2024-04-17",
"lastmod_ts": 1713312000,
"section": "FAQs",
"tags": [],
"description": "Here are answers to some general questions. If you don\u0026rsquo;t find answers here, please review our detailed documentation, or contact us for help.\nGeneral help Am I eligible for membership? How do I get a DOI for my paper? When (and how) do I pay for my DOIs? How do I find the DOI for a particular article? How do I handle title transfers? I\u0026rsquo;ve found a problem with your metadata - how do I get you to fix it? How do I update my contact information? Content Registration How do I register my content? What is my DOI suffix / is my suffix OK? What types of content can I register? I messed up - how do I correct my metadata record? What does this error message mean? I registered a DOI but it is not working - what do I do? Updating and maintaining metadata records My content has moved, how do I update my resource resolution URLs? How do I tell you about my title change? Do I need to create a new DOI if I’ve missed something or provided incorrect metadata? Can I delete records and/or DOIs? Crossref services I have questions about Crossmark I have questions about Similarity Check I have questions about Cited-by Multiple resolution What is multiple resolution? How do I update my multiple resolution URLs? I want my links to go to one place - how do I turn off multiple resolution? How does multiple resolution affect my resolution statistics? What if I want to do multiple resolution but sometimes want to direct people to a single URL? What if I want to use different URLs based on where the user is coming from - do you support country codes? Reports How do I access reports? I hate reports, can you stop emailing them to me? What does this email mean? I have questions about my DOI error report, resolution report, conflict report, Schematron report, or depositor report General help ",
"content": "Here are answers to some general questions. If you don\u0026rsquo;t find answers here, please review our detailed documentation, or contact us for help.\nGeneral help Am I eligible for membership? How do I get a DOI for my paper? When (and how) do I pay for my DOIs? How do I find the DOI for a particular article? How do I handle title transfers? I\u0026rsquo;ve found a problem with your metadata - how do I get you to fix it? How do I update my contact information? Content Registration How do I register my content? What is my DOI suffix / is my suffix OK? What types of content can I register? I messed up - how do I correct my metadata record? What does this error message mean? I registered a DOI but it is not working - what do I do? Updating and maintaining metadata records My content has moved, how do I update my resource resolution URLs? How do I tell you about my title change? Do I need to create a new DOI if I’ve missed something or provided incorrect metadata? Can I delete records and/or DOIs? Crossref services I have questions about Crossmark I have questions about Similarity Check I have questions about Cited-by Multiple resolution What is multiple resolution? How do I update my multiple resolution URLs? I want my links to go to one place - how do I turn off multiple resolution? How does multiple resolution affect my resolution statistics? What if I want to do multiple resolution but sometimes want to direct people to a single URL? What if I want to use different URLs based on where the user is coming from - do you support country codes? Reports How do I access reports? I hate reports, can you stop emailing them to me? What does this email mean? I have questions about my DOI error report, resolution report, conflict report, Schematron report, or depositor report General help Am I eligible for membership? If you publish scholarly content online or represent organisations who publish, you are eligible to become a member. You also must be able to commit to our member terms. How do I get a DOI for my paper? We don\u0026rsquo;t supply DOIs ad-hoc. If the publisher of your paper is a member, they\u0026rsquo;ll register your article on your behalf. When (and how) do I pay for my DOIs? Your Content Registration fees will be invoiced quarterly. Invoices can be paid through our payment portal. In addition to credit card payments we also accept wires and checks. Questions about logging in or billing in general can be emailed to our finance team. How do I find a DOI for a particular article? To look up a single DOI use our Metadata Search interface. If you want to look up metadata records or DOIs in volume, read more about metadata retrieval. How do I handle title transfers? If you\u0026rsquo;ve acquired a title from another member, you need to let us know about the transfer and provide confirmation from the disposing publisher. We\u0026rsquo;ll accept transfers posted to the Enhanced Transfer Alerting Service (ETAS). If you don\u0026rsquo;t participate in Transfer, your confirmation may be a forwarded email from the disposing publisher to the acquiring publisher acknowledging the transfer. See our title and record ownership transfer documentation for more details.\nI\u0026rsquo;ve found a problem within your metadata - how do I get you to fix it? While we aren\u0026rsquo;t able to correct the metadata provided by our members, report any metadata issues to our support staff and we\u0026rsquo;ll contact the responsible member and ask them to make corrections.\nHow do I update my contact information? Please contact our membership specialist with any changes to your contact information.\n",
"headings": ["General help","Content Registration","Updating and maintaining metadata records","Crossref services","Multiple resolution","Reports","General help","Am I eligible for membership?","How do I get a DOI for my paper?","When (and how) do I pay for my DOIs?","How do I find a DOI for a particular article?","How do I handle title transfers?","I\u0026rsquo;ve found a problem within your metadata - how do I get you to fix it?","How do I update my contact information?"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/community/funders/",
"title": "Funders",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 5,
"lastmod": "2020-12-01",
"lastmod_ts": 1606780800,
"section": "Get involved",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref connects grants to published research outputs persistently, openly and at scale. As a funder member, you can leverage your funding metadata to track your funding activities, increase transparency and accountability and meet your open science ambitions, all while helping shape the infrastructure that the global research community relies upon.\nFunders contribution to the research nexus Crossref’s work is guided by the research nexus vision: an interconnected open network of relationships connecting research organisations, people, things, and actions; a scholarly record that the global community can build on forever, for the benefit of society. Funders are a foundational node in that network, holding essential information that contextualises the entire research endeavor.\n",
"content": "Crossref connects grants to published research outputs persistently, openly and at scale. As a funder member, you can leverage your funding metadata to track your funding activities, increase transparency and accountability and meet your open science ambitions, all while helping shape the infrastructure that the global research community relies upon.\nFunders contribution to the research nexus Crossref’s work is guided by the research nexus vision: an interconnected open network of relationships connecting research organisations, people, things, and actions; a scholarly record that the global community can build on forever, for the benefit of society. Funders are a foundational node in that network, holding essential information that contextualises the entire research endeavor.\nFunders and open infrastructure By becoming a Crossref member, you will join 25,000 organisations globally in sharing open metadata, stregthening the research nexus and contributing to the open infrastructure the scholarly community depends on. Membership also positions you as an active participant in that infrastructure, ensuring your views, needs and contributions carry equal weitgh alongside every other member.\nCrossref Grant Linking System You can register your funding metadata with Crossref Grant Linking System. By doing so, you will create a persistent and machine-readable information layer that connects your grants to the more than 180 million research outputs and more than 25,000 members in the Crossref data ecosystem.\nCrossref Grant Linking System supports the sharing of open funding metadata and Crossref Grant DOIs, so funding flows transparently through the scholarly record\nWe make this information available via a funder search interface and via our public REST API so that it can be seamlessly integrated into downstream systems.\nThe benefits of registering research grants with Crossref Crossref grant DOIs and their related metadata increase the discoverability, traceability, transparency and interoperability of your funding information. Crossref\u0026rsquo;s Grant DOIs can be linked to research outputs through metadata, making it easier to track funding flows and demonstrate the impact of your support. By registering your funding metadata with Crossref you can:\n→ See where do your grantees publish in and whether their outputs are open access\n→ Connect grants to published research outputs, datasets and preprints via the Grant Linking System\n→ Increase funding transparency and accountability through open funding metadata\n→ Support evidence-based portfolio and policy decision making\nGet in touch If you have any questions about membership or registering grants, then our membership team can help. Our technical support specialists can also help with questions about the GLS, our APIs or grant registration.\nMore information\nCrossref Grant Linking System Metadata matching Metadata retrieval Grants metadata schema ",
"headings": ["Funders contribution to the research nexus","Funders and open infrastructure","Crossref Grant Linking System","The benefits of registering research grants with Crossref","Get in touch"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/community/preprints/",
"title": "Preprints",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2020-11-09",
"lastmod_ts": 1604880000,
"section": "Get involved",
"tags": [],
"description": "Our members want the flexibility to register content at different points in the publishing lifecycle, so we support them to register early versions such as preprints or working papers.\nOur custom support for preprints ensures that links to these outputs persist over time, that they are connected to the full history of the shared research results, and that the citation record is clear and up-to-date.\nPublishing preprints is about more than simply getting a DOI Crossref can help you to clearly label content as a preprint using a preprint-specific schema. It’s not advisable to register preprints as data, components, articles, or anything else, because a preprint is not any of those things. Our service allows you to ensure the relationships between preprints and any eventual article are asserted in the metadata, and accurately readable by both humans and machines.\n",
"content": "Our members want the flexibility to register content at different points in the publishing lifecycle, so we support them to register early versions such as preprints or working papers.\nOur custom support for preprints ensures that links to these outputs persist over time, that they are connected to the full history of the shared research results, and that the citation record is clear and up-to-date.\nPublishing preprints is about more than simply getting a DOI Crossref can help you to clearly label content as a preprint using a preprint-specific schema. It’s not advisable to register preprints as data, components, articles, or anything else, because a preprint is not any of those things. Our service allows you to ensure the relationships between preprints and any eventual article are asserted in the metadata, and accurately readable by both humans and machines.\nSince November 2016, members have registered hundreds of thousands of preprints. We have developed a notification feature to alert preprint creators of any matches with journal articles, so they can link them to the original preprint (requires a JSON viewer). These relationships in the Crossref metadata, available through our APIs, are relied upon by many parties who discover, track and evaluate the preprint journey.\nBenefits of our custom support for preprints Persistent identifiers for preprints to ensure successful links to the scholarly record over the course of time The preprint-specific metadata we ask for reflects researcher workflows from preprint to formal publication Support for preprint versioning by providing relationships between metadata for different iterations of the same document. Notification of links between preprints and formal publications that may follow (such as journal articles, monographs) Reference linking for preprints, connecting up the scholarly record to associated literature Auto-update of ORCID records to ensure that preprint contributors are acknowledged for their work Preprints include funding data so people can report research contributions based on funder and grant identification Discoverability: we make the metadata available for machine and human access, across multiple interfaces (including our REST API, OAI-PMH, and Metadata Search. What to be aware of when registering preprints Members registering preprints need to make sure they:\nRegister content using the posted content metadata schema (see examples in the posted content markup guide). Respond to our match notifications that an accepted manuscript (AM) or version of record (VOR) has been registered. You should designate a specific contact with us who will receive these alerts (it can be your existing technical contact). Clearly label the manuscript as a preprint, above the fold on the preprint landing page, and ensure that any link to the AAM or VOR is also prominently displayed above the fold. Other considerations:\nReferences will be flagged as belonging to a preprint in our Cited-by service The preprint is treated as one item only without components for its constituent parts Each version should be assigned a new DOI, and associate the versions via a relationship with type isVersionOf - learn more about relationships Preprints are not able to participate in Crossmark. Registering preprints: joining as a member Preprint owners who would like to use our preprint service should apply to join as a member. We have a dedicated fee structure for registering each preprint Learn more about our fees.\nRegistering preprints: existing members Are you an existing Crossref member who wants to assign preprint DOIs? Let’s talk about getting started or migrating any existing mis-labelled content over to the dedicated preprint deposit schema. You can also give us a specific contact who will receive match notifications that an author\u0026rsquo;s accepted manuscript or version of record (AAM or VOR) has been registered. Get in touch with our membership team and they’ll be able to walk you through the process.\nLearn more about registering preprints in our Education documentation.\n",
"headings": ["Publishing preprints is about more than simply getting a DOI ","Benefits of our custom support for preprints ","What to be aware of when registering preprints","Registering preprints: joining as a member","Registering preprints: existing members"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/community/publishers/",
"title": "For publishers",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2020-11-02",
"lastmod_ts": 1604275200,
"section": "Get involved",
"tags": [],
"description": "We work with thousands of publishers from all over the world. No matter what your size, subject area or business model, it doesn’t limit your ability to connect your content with the global network of online scholarly research. Each Crossref member gets to cast their vote to create a board that represents all types of organisations, and members can also stand for election to the board. We have elections each year and have designated seats for different sizes of members.\n",
"content": "We work with thousands of publishers from all over the world. No matter what your size, subject area or business model, it doesn’t limit your ability to connect your content with the global network of online scholarly research. Each Crossref member gets to cast their vote to create a board that represents all types of organisations, and members can also stand for election to the board. We have elections each year and have designated seats for different sizes of members.\nIf you publish one journal or thousands, you’re welcome to join our growing community.\nApply Find out more about what becoming a member involves. You may want to join Crossref directly, or you can also consider joining via one of our Sponsors, who can provide technical, billing, language and administrative support to members (some may charge extra for this).\nOur membership team can also help with any questions you may have about joining.\nParticipate Register your content Our members join us to register their content with us via human or machine interfaces. The metadata we collect supports a variety of record types, to effectively support the different scholarly content members want to register. By sending us metadata and identifiers related to your publications, you’re making it available to numerous systems and organisations that together help credit and cite the work, report impact of funding, track outcomes and activity, and more.\nBecause of this, providing robust, accurate metadata helps make your content more discoverable. You can easily track what metadata you have registered by visiting our Participation Reports and entering your organisation name. These reports give a clear picture of the metadata registered by a member and are open to all.\nLink references Crossref is all about rallying the scholarly community to work together. Because of this, reference linking is an obligation for all Crossref members and for all current journal content. Reference linking means hyperlinking to Crossref DOIs when you create your citation list. This makes it possible for readers to follow a DOI link from the reference list of a published work to the location of the full-text document on a member’s publishing platform, building a network infrastructure that enhances scholarly communications on the web.\nOther services From helping members check content for originality, finding out who has cited the work they have published, to providing a consistent way to show readers the latest status of an article (or any other research object), we’ve developed a growing range of services that support and enhance the specific needs of our members and how they work with their content.\nHow your metadata is used All of the metadata that Crossref collects helps our members’ content be more discoverable. We make it available in a variety of formats so that anyone can come to one place to get information from our thousands of diverse members. Information about your publications is being shared by and used in search engines, collaborative editing and authoring tools, discovery platforms, library databases, by publishers themselves and many, many other places.\nYou can contact our membership specialist with any questions or to get set up, or you can get in touch with our technical support specialists for any technical or troubleshooting questions.\n",
"headings": ["Apply","Participate","Register your content","Link references","Other services","How your metadata is used"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/membership/terms/member-terms-2025/",
"title": "2025 membership terms",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2025-05-07",
"lastmod_ts": 1746576000,
"section": "Become a member",
"tags": [],
"description": " This page shows the Crossref member terms that are in effect from 11th July 2025. Updated 11th July 2025\nThese Crossref Terms of Membership (these \u0026ldquo;Terms\u0026rdquo;) set forth the terms and conditions of membership in The Publishers International Linking Association, Inc. d/b/a Crossref (\u0026ldquo;Crossref\u0026rdquo;), a nonprofit corporation organized under the laws of New York, USA.\nBackground Crossref is a not-for-profit membership organisation that exists to make scholarly communications better. Its mission is to \"make research outputs easy to find, cite, link, assess, and reuse.\" To that end, Crossref: manages and maintains a database of information (\"Metadata\") that describes and identifies professional and scholarly materials and content (collectively, \"Content\") and persistent identifiers such as Digital Object Identifiers (\"Identifiers\") that point to or give context to the Content online; facilitates the deposit and retrieval of Metadata and Identifiers; enables linking among Content online through embedded reference citations; and offers other online information management tools. All of the above functions and offerings, including associated systems, hardware, software, and know-how, are referred to in these Terms as the \"Crossref Infrastructure and Services.\" Membership in Crossref is open to organisations that produce Content and otherwise meet the terms and conditions of membership established from time to time by Crossref, and to such other entities as Crossref may determine from time to time. Together with Crossref's Articles of Incorporation and Bylaws (collectively, the \"Crossref Governing Documents\"), these Terms govern membership in Crossref. By submitting a membership application, the applicant agrees to be bound by these Terms and, upon Crossref's approval of that application, and receipt of the first annual membership fee, the applicant becomes a \"Member\" of Crossref. Terms Member's Rights. Subject to these Terms, the Crossref Governing Documents, and Crossref's policies and procedures made available on Crossref's website (the \"Website\"), the Member shall: be entitled to use the Crossref Infrastructure and Services as set forth in these Terms; and have the governance rights afforded to Members in the Crossref Governing Documents. Member's Obligations. As a condition of its membership, the Member shall comply with these Terms, including this Section 2. Member Practices Member agrees to comply with the member practices, including activities and conduct, described on the Website. Metadata Deposits. The Member is responsible for depositing accurate Metadata for each Content item: produced by the Member, and/or for which the Member otherwise has rights to cause such Content to be included in the Crossref Infrastructure and Services. All Content described in the two bullet points above is referred to in these Terms as the Member's Content. Timely Metadata Deposits. Prior to, or as soon as reasonably practicable after, online publication of the Member's Content, the Member shall deposit with Crossref the Metadata corresponding to such Content. All deposits of Metadata shall comply with Crossref's technical documentation and schemas, including fields, parameters and other metadata criteria, set forth from time to time in support and best practice documentation on the Website. Rights to Content Required. The Member will not deposit or register Metadata for any Content for which the Member does not have legal rights to do so. The Member acknowledges that the unauthorized deposit or use of Metadata causes harm to Crossref, the Crossref Intrastructure and Services, and other Members, and compromises the integrity of the scholarly record. Registering Identifiers. The Member shall assign an Identifier to each of its Content items, for registration within the Crossref Infrastructure and Services. Reference Linking. Promptly upon becoming a Member, and throughout the Term, the Member shall embed the appropriate Identifier(s) within each reference citation appearing in the Member's Content. Use identifiers for all Linking. Throughout the Term, the Member shall use best efforts to maximize linking through Identifiers to other Content within the Crossref Infrastructure and Services from all Member's platforms, services and communications. Display Identifiers. With respect to each Identifier assigned to the Member's Content, the Member shall (i) display each Identifier in a location and format that comply with the Crossref Display Guidelines, as updated on the Website from time to time (the \"Display Guidelines\"), and (ii) ensure each Identifier is hyperlinked so as to be citable. Maintaining and Updating Metadata. The Member shall ensure that each Identifier assigned to the Member's Content continuously resolves to a landing response page (a \"Landing Page\") containing, at a minimum, (i) complete bibliographic information about the corresponding Content (including the Identifier), visible on the initial page, with reasonably sufficient information detailing how the Content can be cited and accessed, and/or (ii) a hyperlink leading to the Content itself, in each case in accordance with the Display Guidelines. The Identifier shall serve as the permanent URL link to the Response Page. The Member shall register the Response Page URL with Crossref, keep it up-to-date and active, and promptly correct any errors or variances communicated to the Member by Crossref. The Member shall be exclusively responsible for maintaining the accuracy of data associated with each Identifier relating to the Member's Content, and the validity and operation of the corresponding URL(s) containing the Response Page, and related pages. Some examples of failures to maintain and update Metadata as required by this Section 2(i) include: 1) publishing or communicating Identifiers without registering them with Crossref; 2) withdrawing content without posting a notification and updating the record's URL/metadata with Crossref; or 3) registering new Identifiers with the Member's own prefix for content that already had Identifiers registered by a prior publisher. Archives. The Member shall use best efforts to contract with a third-party archive or other content host (an \"Archive\") (a list of which can be found here) for such Archive to preserve the Member's Content and, in the event that the Member ceases to host the Member's Content, to make such Content available for persistent linking. The Member hereby authorizes Crossref, solely in the event an Archive becomes the primary location of the Member's Content, to contract directly with such Archive for the purpose of ensuring the persistence of links to such Content. The Member agrees that, in the event that the Content permanently ceases to be maintained by the Member, Crossref is entitled to redirect Identifiers to an Archive or a \"Defunct DOI\" page hosted by Crossref. Content-Specific Obligations. Should the Member choose to register different types of Content and Metadata, such as journal articles, book chapters, datasets, conference proceedings, preprints, components, data, peer review reports, versions, or relations, the Member shall comply with all obligations applicable to each specific record type as set forth on the Website from time to time. Fees. The Member shall pay the Fees described in this Section 3. These Terms refer to Annual Fees, service fees, and usage fees (including Content Registration Fees) collectively as \"Fees.\" Annual Fee. The Member is responsible to pay an annual membership fee (the \"Annual Fee\"). The Annual Fee for a Member's first year of membership is invoiced as a prorated amount for the Member's initial calendar year of membership, to be paid in full for membership. Thereafter, the Annual Fee is invoiced at the beginning of each calendar year. Payment terms are 45 days from the date of invoice. Content Registration Fees. Crossref charges Members a Content Registration fee (collectively, \"Content Registration Fees\") to deposit content with Crossref, as more fully described on the Website from time to time. Content Registration Fees are invoiced on a quarterly basis. Payment terms are 45 days from the date of invoice. Other Fees. The Member is responsible for any fees they may incur to transact with Crossref as a result of their chosen payment method, such as fees from the Member's bank or foreign exchange fees. Fees for Optional Services. From time to time Crossref charges Members service fees for various optional services offered by Crossref and elected by the Member. These are set forth on the Website and updated from time to time. Intellectual Property Rights. General License. Subject to these Terms, the Member hereby grants to Crossref and its agents a fully-paid, non-exclusive, worldwide license for any and all rights necessary to use, reproduce, transmit, distribute, display and sublicense Metadata and Identifiers corresponding to the Member's Content, in the reasonable discretion of Crossref in connection with the Crossref Infrastructure and Services, including all aspects of Reference Linking and Crossref's various other service offerings. Metadata Rights and Limitations. Except as set forth herein and without limiting Section 4(a) above, Crossref shall not use, or acquire or retain any rights in the deposited Metadata of a Member. Nothing in these Terms gives a Member any rights (including copyrights, database compilation rights, trademarks, trade names, and other intellectual property rights, currently in existence or later developed) to any Metadata belonging to another Member. Crossref Intellectual Property. The Member acknowledges that, as between itself and Crossref, Crossref has all right, title and interest in and to the Crossref Infrastructure and Services, including all related copyrights, database compilation rights, trademarks, trade names, and other intellectual property rights, currently in existence or later developed, with the exception of rights in the deposited Metadata as set forth in Section 4(b) or expressly provided elsewhere in writing. The Member shall not delete or modify any of Crossref's logos or notices of intellectual property rights on documents, online text or interfaces made available by Crossref. Distribution of Metadata by Crossref. Without limiting the provisions of Section 4 above, the Member understands and agrees that all Metadata and Identifiers registered with Crossref are made available for reuse without restriction through public APIs and search interfaces, which enhances discoverability of Content. Metadata and Identifiers may also be licensed to third party subscribers along with an agreement for Crossref to provide third parties with certain higher levels of support and service. Use of Marks. Crossref may use the Member's name(s) and mark(s) to identify the Member's status as a member of Crossref. The Member may identify itself as a Crossref member by placing the Crossref mark or Crossref badges (without modification) on its Website, by referencing the code provided on the Website. The Member may also identify use of Crossref Identifiers and Metadata, for example within reference lists, using the label \"Crossref.\" Maintenance of the Crossref Infrastructure and Services. Crossref shall use commercially reasonable efforts to maintain the Crossref Infrastructure and Services and to make it continually available for use by Members. Term. These Terms shall remain in effect until and unless superseded by updated Crossref Terms of Membership amended as set forth in Section 18 below. Termination of Membership; Effect. Termination of Membership; Suspension. A Member's Crossref membership may be terminated: By the Member for convenience upon written notice to Crossref; By the Member for cause (1) in the event of Crossref's material breach of these Terms, which breach remains uncured following 45 days' notice from the Member to Crossref (or is by its nature incapable of cure) or (2) in the event Crossref provides notice of a material amendment to these Terms pursuant to the provisions of Section 18 hereof, and the Member provides notice to Crossref within 60 days of such notice of the Member's objection to such amendment and its intention to terminate; By Crossref upon written notice to the Member, in accordance with the Crossref Governing Documents, including for (1) a misrepresentation in the Member's membership application or ongoing practices; (2) legal sanctions or judgments against the Member or its home country; (3) fraudulent or misleading use or creation of Identifiers or Metadata; (4) failure to pay Fees due (5) violation of the Crossref Governing Documents or any Crossref rules or (6) any other basis set forth in the Crossref Governing Documents. At Crossref's discretion, the Member's membership may be temporarily suspended in lieu of, or in advance of, termination. The procedures for suspension and termination shall be set forth in the Crossref Governing Documents. If the Member's membership of Crossref is through a sponsor, and the sponsor cancels their agreement with the member and informs Crossref. Effect of Suspension or Termination of Membership. A suspended or terminated Member shall not be entitled to a refund of any Fees that have been paid or waiver of any Fees that have accrued, except that a Member will be entitled to a refund of any prepaid fees representing the remaining portion of the then-current term of such Member's membership in the event of a termination for cause pursuant to Section 9(a)(ii) above. Suspension or termination of Membership shall have no adverse effect on Crossref's intellectual property rights in any Metadata or upon any related licenses then in effect. During suspension and following termination of its membership, an outgoing Member shall have no further obligation to deposit Metadata with Crossref or to assign Identifiers to its Content, and Crossref shall have no further obligation to register such Identifiers. With respect to Metadata deposited and Identifiers registered prior to such suspension or termination: (i) Crossref shall have the right to keep, maintain and use such Metadata and Identifiers within the Crossref Infrastructure and Services; and (ii) the obligations of the Member set forth in Sections 2(h) (i), and (j) of these Terms will survive. Enforcement. Crossref shall take reasonable steps to enforce these Terms, provided that Crossref shall not be obligated to take any action with respect to any Metadata that is the subject of an intellectual property dispute, but reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to remove or suspend access from, to or through such Metadata and/or its associated Content or to take any other action it deems appropriate. Governing Law. These Terms shall be interpreted, governed and enforced under the laws of New York, USA, without regard to its conflict of law rules. All claims, disputes and actions of any kind arising out of or relating to these Terms shall be settled in Boston, Massachusetts, USA. Disputes. Alternative Dispute Resolution. The Member shall promptly notify Crossref of any claim, dispute or action, whether against other Members or Crossref, related to these Terms or any Identifiers or Metadata. Pursuant to the Commercial Arbitration Rules of the American Arbitration Association, a single arbitrator reasonably familiar with the publishing (including online publishing) and internet industries shall settle all claims, disputes or actions of any kind arising from or relating to the subject matter of these Terms between Crossref and the Member. The decision of the arbitrator shall be final and binding on the parties, and may be enforced in any court of competent jurisdiction. Injunctive Relief. Notwithstanding Section 12(a), no party shall be prevented from seeking injunctive or preliminary relief in anticipation, but not in any way in limitation, of arbitration. The Member acknowledges that the unauthorized deposit or use of Metadata would cause irreparable harm to Crossref, the Crossref Infrastructure and Services, and/or other Members, that could not be compensated by monetary damages. The Member therefore agrees that Crossref may seek injunctive relief to remedy any actual or threatened unauthorized deposit or use of Metadata. Indemnification. To the extent authorized by law, the Member agrees to indemnify and hold harmless Crossref, its representatives, and their respective directors, officers and employees, from and against any and all liability, damage, loss, cost or expense, including reasonable attorney fees, costs, and other expenses, to the extent arising from or resulting from such Member's or its agent's or representative's acts or omissions, breach of these Terms, or violation of any third-party intellectual property right. Limitations of Liability. NEITHER PARTY SHALL BE LIABLE TO THE OTHER FOR ANY INDIRECT, SPECIAL, INCIDENTAL, PUNITIVE, CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES OR LOST PROFITS ARISING FROM OR RELATING TO THESE TERMS OR THE CROSSREF INFRASTRUCTURE AND SERVICES, EVEN IF IT HAS BEEN INFORMED IN ADVANCE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES. NEITHER PARTY SHALL BE LIABLE TO THE OTHER FOR (I) ANY LOSS, CORRUPTION OR DELAY OF DATA OR (II) ANY LOSS, CORRUPTION OR DELAY OF COMMUNICATIONS WITH OR CONNECTION TO ANY CROSSREF SERVICE OR ANY CONTENT. Taxes. The Member is responsible for all sales and use taxes imposed, if any, with respect to the services rendered or products provided to the Member hereunder, other than taxes based upon or credited against Crossref's income. Other Terms. Independent Contractors. These Terms will not create or be deemed to create any agency, partnership, employment relationship, or joint venture between Crossref and any Member. The Member shall not have any right, power or authority to enter into any agreement for or on behalf of, or incur any obligation or liability of, or to otherwise bind, Crossref. No Third-Party Beneficiaries. Except to the extent expressly set forth herein, neither party intends that these Terms shall benefit, or create any right or cause of action in or on behalf of, any person or entity other than Crossref and the Member. No Assignment. A Member may not assign, subcontract or sublicense these Terms without the prior written consent of Crossref, and any attempted assignment in violation of the foregoing shall be void. Notices. Written notice under these Terms shall be given as follows: If to Crossref: by emailing member@crossref.org, Attention: Membership team. If to a Member: To the name and email address designated by the Member as the Primary Contact (previously \"Business Contact\") in such Member's membership application. This information may be changed by the Member by giving notice to Crossref by email at member@crossref.org. The Member shall also designate a technical, primary, voting (if relevant), billing, and metadata quality contact, and advise Crossref of any changes to such information. Survival. Sections (and the corresponding subsections, if any) 2(g), (h), and (i), 4, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, and 16, and any other provisions that by their express terms or nature survive, and any rights to payment, shall survive the expiration or termination of these Terms. Headings. The headings of the sections and subsections used in these Terms are included for convenience only and are not to be used in construing or interpreting these Terms. Severability. If any provision of these Terms (or any portion thereof) is determined to be invalid or unenforceable, the remaining provisions of these Terms will not be affected thereby and will be binding upon the parties and will be enforceable, as though said invalid or unenforceable provision (or portion thereof) were not contained in these Terms. Entire Agreement. These Terms, together with any Addenda of Terms executed between Crossref and a Member, constitute and contain the entire agreement between Crossref and such Member with respect to the subject matter hereof, and supersede any prior or contemporaneous oral or written agreements. The \"Background\" section at the beginning of these Terms forms a part of these Terms and is incorporated by reference herein. Amendment. These Terms may be amended by Crossref, via updated Terms posted on the Website and emailed to each Member no fewer than sixty (60) days prior to effectiveness. By using the Crossref Infrastructure and Services after the effective date of any such amendment hereto, the Member accepts the amended Terms. These Terms may also be amended by mutual agreement of a given Member and Crossref by execution of an Addendum of Terms. Data Privacy. By providing Crossref with personal data which was provided to the Member by a natural person(s), including Member staff (the \"origin party\"), the Member guarantees that: the Member collected and processed the data in accordance with applicable law, including the General Data Protection Regulation; the Member acquired the origin party's informed consent to share the data with Crossref; the Member acquired the origin party's consent for the data to be transferred to the United States for processing. The Member further agrees that it will maintain appropriate mechanisms to ensure that it will provide natural person(s) whose personal data it provides to Crossref with a means to have access to, to correct, and to delete such data and understands that the burden is on the Member to communicate such corrections or deletions to Crossref. Crossref's Privacy Policy is located here. Compliance. Each of the Member and Crossref shall perform under this Agreement in compliance with all laws, rules, and regulations of any jurisdiction which is or may be applicable to its business and activities, including anti-corruption, copyright, privacy, and data protection laws, rules, and regulations. The Member warrants that neither it nor any of its affiliates, officers, directors, employees, or members is (i) a person whose name appears on the list of Specially Designated Nationals and Blocked Persons published by the Office of Foreign Assets Control, U.S. Department of Treasury (\"OFAC\"), (ii) a department, agency or instrumentality of, or is otherwise controlled by or acting on behalf of, directly or indirectly, any such person; (iii) a department, agency, or instrumentality of the government of a country subject to comprehensive U.S. economic sanctions administered by OFAC; or (iv) is subject to sanctions by the United Nations, the United Kingdom, or the European Union. ",
"content": " This page shows the Crossref member terms that are in effect from 11th July 2025. Updated 11th July 2025\nThese Crossref Terms of Membership (these \u0026ldquo;Terms\u0026rdquo;) set forth the terms and conditions of membership in The Publishers International Linking Association, Inc. d/b/a Crossref (\u0026ldquo;Crossref\u0026rdquo;), a nonprofit corporation organized under the laws of New York, USA.\nBackground Crossref is a not-for-profit membership organisation that exists to make scholarly communications better. Its mission is to \"make research outputs easy to find, cite, link, assess, and reuse.\" To that end, Crossref: manages and maintains a database of information (\"Metadata\") that describes and identifies professional and scholarly materials and content (collectively, \"Content\") and persistent identifiers such as Digital Object Identifiers (\"Identifiers\") that point to or give context to the Content online; facilitates the deposit and retrieval of Metadata and Identifiers; enables linking among Content online through embedded reference citations; and offers other online information management tools. All of the above functions and offerings, including associated systems, hardware, software, and know-how, are referred to in these Terms as the \"Crossref Infrastructure and Services.\" Membership in Crossref is open to organisations that produce Content and otherwise meet the terms and conditions of membership established from time to time by Crossref, and to such other entities as Crossref may determine from time to time. Together with Crossref's Articles of Incorporation and Bylaws (collectively, the \"Crossref Governing Documents\"), these Terms govern membership in Crossref. By submitting a membership application, the applicant agrees to be bound by these Terms and, upon Crossref's approval of that application, and receipt of the first annual membership fee, the applicant becomes a \"Member\" of Crossref. Terms Member's Rights. Subject to these Terms, the Crossref Governing Documents, and Crossref's policies and procedures made available on Crossref's website (the \"Website\"), the Member shall: be entitled to use the Crossref Infrastructure and Services as set forth in these Terms; and have the governance rights afforded to Members in the Crossref Governing Documents. Member's Obligations. As a condition of its membership, the Member shall comply with these Terms, including this Section 2. Member Practices Member agrees to comply with the member practices, including activities and conduct, described on the Website. Metadata Deposits. The Member is responsible for depositing accurate Metadata for each Content item: produced by the Member, and/or for which the Member otherwise has rights to cause such Content to be included in the Crossref Infrastructure and Services. All Content described in the two bullet points above is referred to in these Terms as the Member's Content. Timely Metadata Deposits. Prior to, or as soon as reasonably practicable after, online publication of the Member's Content, the Member shall deposit with Crossref the Metadata corresponding to such Content. All deposits of Metadata shall comply with Crossref's technical documentation and schemas, including fields, parameters and other metadata criteria, set forth from time to time in support and best practice documentation on the Website. Rights to Content Required. The Member will not deposit or register Metadata for any Content for which the Member does not have legal rights to do so. The Member acknowledges that the unauthorized deposit or use of Metadata causes harm to Crossref, the Crossref Intrastructure and Services, and other Members, and compromises the integrity of the scholarly record. Registering Identifiers. The Member shall assign an Identifier to each of its Content items, for registration within the Crossref Infrastructure and Services. Reference Linking. Promptly upon becoming a Member, and throughout the Term, the Member shall embed the appropriate Identifier(s) within each reference citation appearing in the Member's Content. Use identifiers for all Linking. Throughout the Term, the Member shall use best efforts to maximize linking through Identifiers to other Content within the Crossref Infrastructure and Services from all Member's platforms, services and communications. Display Identifiers. With respect to each Identifier assigned to the Member's Content, the Member shall (i) display each Identifier in a location and format that comply with the Crossref Display Guidelines, as updated on the Website from time to time (the \"Display Guidelines\"), and (ii) ensure each Identifier is hyperlinked so as to be citable. Maintaining and Updating Metadata. The Member shall ensure that each Identifier assigned to the Member's Content continuously resolves to a landing response page (a \"Landing Page\") containing, at a minimum, (i) complete bibliographic information about the corresponding Content (including the Identifier), visible on the initial page, with reasonably sufficient information detailing how the Content can be cited and accessed, and/or (ii) a hyperlink leading to the Content itself, in each case in accordance with the Display Guidelines. The Identifier shall serve as the permanent URL link to the Response Page. The Member shall register the Response Page URL with Crossref, keep it up-to-date and active, and promptly correct any errors or variances communicated to the Member by Crossref. The Member shall be exclusively responsible for maintaining the accuracy of data associated with each Identifier relating to the Member's Content, and the validity and operation of the corresponding URL(s) containing the Response Page, and related pages. Some examples of failures to maintain and update Metadata as required by this Section 2(i) include: 1) publishing or communicating Identifiers without registering them with Crossref; 2) withdrawing content without posting a notification and updating the record's URL/metadata with Crossref; or 3) registering new Identifiers with the Member's own prefix for content that already had Identifiers registered by a prior publisher. Archives. The Member shall use best efforts to contract with a third-party archive or other content host (an \"Archive\") (a list of which can be found here) for such Archive to preserve the Member's Content and, in the event that the Member ceases to host the Member's Content, to make such Content available for persistent linking. The Member hereby authorizes Crossref, solely in the event an Archive becomes the primary location of the Member's Content, to contract directly with such Archive for the purpose of ensuring the persistence of links to such Content. The Member agrees that, in the event that the Content permanently ceases to be maintained by the Member, Crossref is entitled to redirect Identifiers to an Archive or a \"Defunct DOI\" page hosted by Crossref. Content-Specific Obligations. Should the Member choose to register different types of Content and Metadata, such as journal articles, book chapters, datasets, conference proceedings, preprints, components, data, peer review reports, versions, or relations, the Member shall comply with all obligations applicable to each specific record type as set forth on the Website from time to time. Fees. The Member shall pay the Fees described in this Section 3. These Terms refer to Annual Fees, service fees, and usage fees (including Content Registration Fees) collectively as \"Fees.\" Annual Fee. The Member is responsible to pay an annual membership fee (the \"Annual Fee\"). The Annual Fee for a Member's first year of membership is invoiced as a prorated amount for the Member's initial calendar year of membership, to be paid in full for membership. Thereafter, the Annual Fee is invoiced at the beginning of each calendar year. Payment terms are 45 days from the date of invoice. Content Registration Fees. Crossref charges Members a Content Registration fee (collectively, \"Content Registration Fees\") to deposit content with Crossref, as more fully described on the Website from time to time. Content Registration Fees are invoiced on a quarterly basis. Payment terms are 45 days from the date of invoice. Other Fees. The Member is responsible for any fees they may incur to transact with Crossref as a result of their chosen payment method, such as fees from the Member's bank or foreign exchange fees. Fees for Optional Services. From time to time Crossref charges Members service fees for various optional services offered by Crossref and elected by the Member. These are set forth on the Website and updated from time to time. Intellectual Property Rights. General License. Subject to these Terms, the Member hereby grants to Crossref and its agents a fully-paid, non-exclusive, worldwide license for any and all rights necessary to use, reproduce, transmit, distribute, display and sublicense Metadata and Identifiers corresponding to the Member's Content, in the reasonable discretion of Crossref in connection with the Crossref Infrastructure and Services, including all aspects of Reference Linking and Crossref's various other service offerings. Metadata Rights and Limitations. Except as set forth herein and without limiting Section 4(a) above, Crossref shall not use, or acquire or retain any rights in the deposited Metadata of a Member. Nothing in these Terms gives a Member any rights (including copyrights, database compilation rights, trademarks, trade names, and other intellectual property rights, currently in existence or later developed) to any Metadata belonging to another Member. Crossref Intellectual Property. The Member acknowledges that, as between itself and Crossref, Crossref has all right, title and interest in and to the Crossref Infrastructure and Services, including all related copyrights, database compilation rights, trademarks, trade names, and other intellectual property rights, currently in existence or later developed, with the exception of rights in the deposited Metadata as set forth in Section 4(b) or expressly provided elsewhere in writing. The Member shall not delete or modify any of Crossref's logos or notices of intellectual property rights on documents, online text or interfaces made available by Crossref. Distribution of Metadata by Crossref. Without limiting the provisions of Section 4 above, the Member understands and agrees that all Metadata and Identifiers registered with Crossref are made available for reuse without restriction through public APIs and search interfaces, which enhances discoverability of Content. Metadata and Identifiers may also be licensed to third party subscribers along with an agreement for Crossref to provide third parties with certain higher levels of support and service. Use of Marks. Crossref may use the Member's name(s) and mark(s) to identify the Member's status as a member of Crossref. The Member may identify itself as a Crossref member by placing the Crossref mark or Crossref badges (without modification) on its Website, by referencing the code provided on the Website. The Member may also identify use of Crossref Identifiers and Metadata, for example within reference lists, using the label \"Crossref.\" Maintenance of the Crossref Infrastructure and Services. Crossref shall use commercially reasonable efforts to maintain the Crossref Infrastructure and Services and to make it continually available for use by Members. Term. These Terms shall remain in effect until and unless superseded by updated Crossref Terms of Membership amended as set forth in Section 18 below. Termination of Membership; Effect. Termination of Membership; Suspension. A Member's Crossref membership may be terminated: By the Member for convenience upon written notice to Crossref; By the Member for cause (1) in the event of Crossref's material breach of these Terms, which breach remains uncured following 45 days' notice from the Member to Crossref (or is by its nature incapable of cure) or (2) in the event Crossref provides notice of a material amendment to these Terms pursuant to the provisions of Section 18 hereof, and the Member provides notice to Crossref within 60 days of such notice of the Member's objection to such amendment and its intention to terminate; By Crossref upon written notice to the Member, in accordance with the Crossref Governing Documents, including for (1) a misrepresentation in the Member's membership application or ongoing practices; (2) legal sanctions or judgments against the Member or its home country; (3) fraudulent or misleading use or creation of Identifiers or Metadata; (4) failure to pay Fees due (5) violation of the Crossref Governing Documents or any Crossref rules or (6) any other basis set forth in the Crossref Governing Documents. At Crossref's discretion, the Member's membership may be temporarily suspended in lieu of, or in advance of, termination. The procedures for suspension and termination shall be set forth in the Crossref Governing Documents. If the Member's membership of Crossref is through a sponsor, and the sponsor cancels their agreement with the member and informs Crossref. Effect of Suspension or Termination of Membership. A suspended or terminated Member shall not be entitled to a refund of any Fees that have been paid or waiver of any Fees that have accrued, except that a Member will be entitled to a refund of any prepaid fees representing the remaining portion of the then-current term of such Member's membership in the event of a termination for cause pursuant to Section 9(a)(ii) above. Suspension or termination of Membership shall have no adverse effect on Crossref's intellectual property rights in any Metadata or upon any related licenses then in effect. During suspension and following termination of its membership, an outgoing Member shall have no further obligation to deposit Metadata with Crossref or to assign Identifiers to its Content, and Crossref shall have no further obligation to register such Identifiers. With respect to Metadata deposited and Identifiers registered prior to such suspension or termination: (i) Crossref shall have the right to keep, maintain and use such Metadata and Identifiers within the Crossref Infrastructure and Services; and (ii) the obligations of the Member set forth in Sections 2(h) (i), and (j) of these Terms will survive. Enforcement. Crossref shall take reasonable steps to enforce these Terms, provided that Crossref shall not be obligated to take any action with respect to any Metadata that is the subject of an intellectual property dispute, but reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to remove or suspend access from, to or through such Metadata and/or its associated Content or to take any other action it deems appropriate. Governing Law. These Terms shall be interpreted, governed and enforced under the laws of New York, USA, without regard to its conflict of law rules. All claims, disputes and actions of any kind arising out of or relating to these Terms shall be settled in Boston, Massachusetts, USA. Disputes. Alternative Dispute Resolution. The Member shall promptly notify Crossref of any claim, dispute or action, whether against other Members or Crossref, related to these Terms or any Identifiers or Metadata. Pursuant to the Commercial Arbitration Rules of the American Arbitration Association, a single arbitrator reasonably familiar with the publishing (including online publishing) and internet industries shall settle all claims, disputes or actions of any kind arising from or relating to the subject matter of these Terms between Crossref and the Member. The decision of the arbitrator shall be final and binding on the parties, and may be enforced in any court of competent jurisdiction. Injunctive Relief. Notwithstanding Section 12(a), no party shall be prevented from seeking injunctive or preliminary relief in anticipation, but not in any way in limitation, of arbitration. The Member acknowledges that the unauthorized deposit or use of Metadata would cause irreparable harm to Crossref, the Crossref Infrastructure and Services, and/or other Members, that could not be compensated by monetary damages. The Member therefore agrees that Crossref may seek injunctive relief to remedy any actual or threatened unauthorized deposit or use of Metadata. Indemnification. To the extent authorized by law, the Member agrees to indemnify and hold harmless Crossref, its representatives, and their respective directors, officers and employees, from and against any and all liability, damage, loss, cost or expense, including reasonable attorney fees, costs, and other expenses, to the extent arising from or resulting from such Member's or its agent's or representative's acts or omissions, breach of these Terms, or violation of any third-party intellectual property right. Limitations of Liability. NEITHER PARTY SHALL BE LIABLE TO THE OTHER FOR ANY INDIRECT, SPECIAL, INCIDENTAL, PUNITIVE, CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES OR LOST PROFITS ARISING FROM OR RELATING TO THESE TERMS OR THE CROSSREF INFRASTRUCTURE AND SERVICES, EVEN IF IT HAS BEEN INFORMED IN ADVANCE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES. NEITHER PARTY SHALL BE LIABLE TO THE OTHER FOR (I) ANY LOSS, CORRUPTION OR DELAY OF DATA OR (II) ANY LOSS, CORRUPTION OR DELAY OF COMMUNICATIONS WITH OR CONNECTION TO ANY CROSSREF SERVICE OR ANY CONTENT. Taxes. The Member is responsible for all sales and use taxes imposed, if any, with respect to the services rendered or products provided to the Member hereunder, other than taxes based upon or credited against Crossref's income. Other Terms. Independent Contractors. These Terms will not create or be deemed to create any agency, partnership, employment relationship, or joint venture between Crossref and any Member. The Member shall not have any right, power or authority to enter into any agreement for or on behalf of, or incur any obligation or liability of, or to otherwise bind, Crossref. No Third-Party Beneficiaries. Except to the extent expressly set forth herein, neither party intends that these Terms shall benefit, or create any right or cause of action in or on behalf of, any person or entity other than Crossref and the Member. No Assignment. A Member may not assign, subcontract or sublicense these Terms without the prior written consent of Crossref, and any attempted assignment in violation of the foregoing shall be void. Notices. Written notice under these Terms shall be given as follows: If to Crossref: by emailing member@crossref.org, Attention: Membership team. If to a Member: To the name and email address designated by the Member as the Primary Contact (previously \"Business Contact\") in such Member's membership application. This information may be changed by the Member by giving notice to Crossref by email at member@crossref.org. The Member shall also designate a technical, primary, voting (if relevant), billing, and metadata quality contact, and advise Crossref of any changes to such information. Survival. Sections (and the corresponding subsections, if any) 2(g), (h), and (i), 4, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, and 16, and any other provisions that by their express terms or nature survive, and any rights to payment, shall survive the expiration or termination of these Terms. Headings. The headings of the sections and subsections used in these Terms are included for convenience only and are not to be used in construing or interpreting these Terms. Severability. If any provision of these Terms (or any portion thereof) is determined to be invalid or unenforceable, the remaining provisions of these Terms will not be affected thereby and will be binding upon the parties and will be enforceable, as though said invalid or unenforceable provision (or portion thereof) were not contained in these Terms. Entire Agreement. These Terms, together with any Addenda of Terms executed between Crossref and a Member, constitute and contain the entire agreement between Crossref and such Member with respect to the subject matter hereof, and supersede any prior or contemporaneous oral or written agreements. The \"Background\" section at the beginning of these Terms forms a part of these Terms and is incorporated by reference herein. Amendment. These Terms may be amended by Crossref, via updated Terms posted on the Website and emailed to each Member no fewer than sixty (60) days prior to effectiveness. By using the Crossref Infrastructure and Services after the effective date of any such amendment hereto, the Member accepts the amended Terms. These Terms may also be amended by mutual agreement of a given Member and Crossref by execution of an Addendum of Terms. Data Privacy. By providing Crossref with personal data which was provided to the Member by a natural person(s), including Member staff (the \"origin party\"), the Member guarantees that: the Member collected and processed the data in accordance with applicable law, including the General Data Protection Regulation; the Member acquired the origin party's informed consent to share the data with Crossref; the Member acquired the origin party's consent for the data to be transferred to the United States for processing. The Member further agrees that it will maintain appropriate mechanisms to ensure that it will provide natural person(s) whose personal data it provides to Crossref with a means to have access to, to correct, and to delete such data and understands that the burden is on the Member to communicate such corrections or deletions to Crossref. Crossref's Privacy Policy is located here. Compliance. Each of the Member and Crossref shall perform under this Agreement in compliance with all laws, rules, and regulations of any jurisdiction which is or may be applicable to its business and activities, including anti-corruption, copyright, privacy, and data protection laws, rules, and regulations. The Member warrants that neither it nor any of its affiliates, officers, directors, employees, or members is (i) a person whose name appears on the list of Specially Designated Nationals and Blocked Persons published by the Office of Foreign Assets Control, U.S. Department of Treasury (\"OFAC\"), (ii) a department, agency or instrumentality of, or is otherwise controlled by or acting on behalf of, directly or indirectly, any such person; (iii) a department, agency, or instrumentality of the government of a country subject to comprehensive U.S. economic sanctions administered by OFAC; or (iv) is subject to sanctions by the United Nations, the United Kingdom, or the European Union. ",
"headings": ["Background","Terms"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/jobs/2024-09-07-director-technology/",
"title": "Director of Technology",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2024-09-07",
"lastmod_ts": 1725667200,
"section": "Jobs",
"tags": [],
"description": "Deliver next-level open infrastructure for global open science.",
"content": " Applications for this position closed October 4, 2024. Do you want to take the lead in delivering next-level infrastructure for global open science? Come and join the global world of open research metadata as our new Director of Technology.\nLocation: Remote and global Type: Full-time Remuneration: 160K USD or local equivalent. Note this is a general guide (as there is no universal currency) and local currency analysis will take place before the final offer. Reports to: Chief Operations Officer, Lucy Ofiesh Timeline: Advertise and recruit September-October, offer in November About the role Crossref is seeking a Director of Technology to play a key role in the leadership team and to develop and execute Crossref’s technical strategy. Reporting to the Chief Operations Officer, the Director of Technology will lead a talented team of software developers to build and maintain a robust, scalable, and innovative open scholarly infrastructure. As part of the leadership team, they will contribute to setting Crossref’s organisational strategy, develop and implement the organisation’s technology strategy, report to colleagues and the board, lead the technology team, and collaborate with other open scholarly infrastructure organisations.\nTechnology at Crossref helps us fulfil our vision of a rich and reusable open network of relationships connecting research organisations, people, things, and actions; a scholarly record that the global community can build on forever, for the benefit of society.\nWe maintain a database of 161+ million metadata records registered by our nearly 20,000 members over the past 25 years. Our system acts as the backbone for preserving the scholarly record. We offer a wide array of services to ensure that scholarly research metadata is registered, linked, and distributed. When members register their content with us, we collect both bibliographic and non-bibliographic metadata. We process it so that connections can be made between publications, people, organisations, and other associated outputs. We preserve the metadata we receive as a critical part of the scholarly record. We also make it available across a range of interfaces and formats so that the community can use it and build tools with it.\nTechnology is a critical enabler of our mission and scalability and modernisation are at the heart of our strategy. By transitioning to a fully cloud-based infrastructure and modernising our systems and services, we will enhance our ability to meet the evolving needs of our community and keep pace with the growth in the amount and complexity of our metadata, the rapid changes in scholarly research and communications, and the development of Open Research globally. When done right, our technology can:\nenable best practices in scholarly communications solve problems shared by our 20,000 global members. We act on behalf of our members to advance their interests strengthen Crossref as a comprehensive, reliable, and secure infrastructure upon which ourcommunity can build tools and services adapt to how the scholarly community evolves to keep pace with our scale of growth model openness, ensuring that our data and software are available for reuse or inspection as a public good whenever possible, and support collaborative community development of services when possible The Director of Technology will lead an experienced team of 11 people and work closely with the leadership and senior management teams. The right candidate will be experienced at managing a team, setting priorities, and defining practices.\nThis role will work closely with the Programs group to understand the community’s needs and design solutions. Although Crossref is not a traditional software company, we provide critical open infrastructure with a mission to deliver innovative, cloud-based solutions for our members and the broader scholarly communications community. To do that, we need to centre the community in our development and hire technology leadership that focuses on excellence in architecture and delivery.\nKey responsibilities Technology Leadership: Develop and execute a comprehensive technology strategy that aligns with Crossref’s mission and goals, fostering innovation and continuous improvement and building out the research nexus vision. Collaborate with the leadership team to integrate technology initiatives into the organisation’s overall strategy. Lead the modernization of Crossref’s systems and infrastructure. Identify and assess new technologies and trends to inform decision making and ensure Crossref remains at the forefront of scholarly infrastructure innovation. Report to the board of directors and collaborate with the leadership team to make recommendations to the board. Work closely with cross-functional teams, including product management, finance and operations, and membership and community outreach. Technical Operations and the Crossref System: Oversee the design, development, and maintenance of Crossref’s systems, services and technical infrastructure. Ensure high availability, security, and scalability of systems, including APIs, databases, and web services. Develop and manage technology budgets, vendor relationships, and effective resource allocation. Identify opportunities for process optimization, automation, and efficiency gains. Collaborate closely with stakeholders across the organisation to understand requirements and deliver technology solutions that meet their needs. Team Management and Mentorship: Lead and inspire a high-performing technology team, fostering a collaborative and inclusive culture that values diversity and professional growth. Lead the technology team in adopting best practices, methodologies, and industry standards to ensure high-quality, scalable, and secure systems. Provide strategic guidance, mentorship, and support to team members, encouraging their professional development and career advancement. Promote a culture of continuous learning, knowledge sharing, and cross-functional collaboration within the technology team and across the organisation. Collaboration and Community Engagement: Collaborate with adopters of the Principles of Open Scholarly Infrastructure and other open infrastructure organisations to enhance interoperability and data sharing. Engage with the scholarly community, attending conferences, workshops, sprints, and forums. Represent Crossref in technical discussions and contribute to open standards and protocols. Actively encourage community participation from the team and encourage co-creation and open-source contributions within the community. About you The ideal candidate will be a strategic thinker with experience in big data, architecting systems, implementing change and leading technology teams.\nKey professional experiences: Minimum of 10 years of progressive experience in technology leadership roles, with a proven track record of leading and managing high-performing teams. Proven ability to lead and manage change, foster innovation, and drive continuous improvement in technology initiatives. Proven track record of technology leadership in complex, mission-driven organisations. Strong understanding of open-source technologies, cloud computing, distributed systems architectures, APIs, and web services. Experience balancing technical excellence with practical business needs. Extensive knowledge of software development methodologies, project management, and technology stack selection. Demonstrated experience in metadata management, data integration, and interoperability standards within scholarly communications or related domains. Experience leading cybersecurity efforts and knowledge of best practices in cybersecurity. Familiarity with scholarly publishing, research workflows, and metadata standards (e.g., DOI, ORCID) is a plus. Bachelor’s or master’s degree in computer science, information technology, or a related field. Key Skills: Strong strategic thinking and problem-solving abilities. Excellent communication and collaboration skills with the ability to articulate technical concepts to non-technical audiences. People management. Financial management and budgeting. Passion for Crossref\u0026rsquo;s mission and commitment to open scholarly infrastructure and research integrity. About Crossref and the team We’re a not-for-profit membership organisation that exists to make scholarly communications better. We rally the community; tag and share metadata; run an open infrastructure; play with technology; and make tools and services—all to help put research in context.\nWe envision a rich and reusable open network of relationships connecting research organisations, people, things, and actions; a scholarly record that the global community can build on forever, for the benefit of society. We are working towards this vision of a ‘Research Nexus’ by demonstrating the value of richer and connected open metadata, incentivising people to meet best practices, while making it easier to do so. “We” means 20,000+ members from 160 countries, 160+ million records, and nearly 2 billion monthly metadata queries from thousands of tools across the research ecosystem. We want to be a sustainable source of complete, open, and global scholarly metadata and relationships.\nTake a look at our strategic agenda to see the planned work that aims to achieve the vision. The sustainability area aims to make transparent all the processes and procedures we follow to run the operation long-term, including our financials and our ongoing commitment to the Principles of Open Scholarly Infrastructure (POSI). The governance area describes our board and its role in community oversight.\nIt also takes a strong team – because reliable infrastructure needs committed people who contribute to and realise the vision, and thrive doing it. We are a distributed group of 46 dedicated people who like to play quizzes, talk about celery (sometimes cucumber), measure coffee intake, and create 100s of custom slack emojis. We enthusiastically support the Oxford comma but waver between use of American or British English. Occasionally we do some work to improve knowledge sharing worldwide— which we take a bit more seriously than ourselves. We do this through fair policies and working practices, a balanced approach to resourcing, and accountability to each other.\nWe can offer the successful candidate a challenging and fun environment to work in. Together we are dedicated to our global mission and we are constantly adapting to ensure we get there. Take a look at our organisation chart and view our Annual Reports and financial information here.\nHow to apply To apply, please submit a CV and cover letter, detailing how you fulfil the role description and personal specification to Perrett Laver’s application page quoting reference 7465. The deadline for applications is Friday, October 4, 2024.\nThis is a remote position and the successful candidate can be based most anywhere as long as they are prepared to adapt their hours to European and East Coast US time zones. A moderate amount of travel is expected.\nAnticipated salary for this role is approximately $160,000 USD, or equivalent amount paid in local currency. Crossref offers competitive compensation, a rich benefits package, flexible work arrangements, professional development opportunities, and a supportive work environment. As a non-profit organisation, we prioritize mission over profit.\nThe selection committee will together review all candidates’ applications and agree on a longlist for the role. Longlisted candidates will be invited to discuss the position with Perrett Laver in greater detail. The selection committee will subsequently meet to decide upon a final shortlist to be invited to the formal interview stage.\nProtecting your personal data is of the utmost importance to Perrett Laver and we take this responsibility very seriously. Any information obtained by our trading divisions is held and processed in accordance with the relevant data protection legislation. The data you provide us with is securely stored on our computerized database and transferred to our clients for the purposes of presenting you as a candidate and/or considering your suitability for a role you have registered interest in.\nPerrett Laver is a Data Controller and a Data Processor, and our legal basis for processing your personal data is ‘Legitimate Interests’. You have the right to object to us processing your data in this way. For more information about this, your rights, and our approach to Data Protection and Privacy, please see our Privacy Statement.\nEqual opportunities commitment Crossref is committed to a policy of non-discrimination and equal opportunity for all employees and qualified applicants for employment without regard to race, colour, religion, sex, pregnancy or a condition related to pregnancy, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, national origin, ancestry, age, physical or mental disability, genetic information, veteran status, uniform service member status, or any other protected class under applicable law. Crossref will make reasonable accommodations for qualified individuals with known disabilities in accordance with applicable law.\nThanks for your interest in joining Crossref. We are excited to hear from you! ",
"headings": ["About the role","Key responsibilities","Technology Leadership:","Technical Operations and the Crossref System:","Team Management and Mentorship:","Collaboration and Community Engagement:","About you","Key professional experiences:","Key Skills:","About Crossref and the team","How to apply","Equal opportunities commitment","Thanks for your interest in joining Crossref. We are excited to hear from you!"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/jobs/2024-05-21-metadata-manager/",
"title": "Metadata Manager",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2024-05-21",
"lastmod_ts": 1716249600,
"section": "Jobs",
"tags": [],
"description": " APPLICATIONS ARE CLOSED EFFECTIVE JUNE 11, 2024 Do you want to help make research communications better in all corners of the globe? Come and join the world of nonprofit open infrastructure as our new **Metadata Manager**. Location: Remote and global (with 3-hour overlap with UTC 15:00 -18:00) Type: Full-time Remuneration: Approx. 70-80K USD or local equivalent, depending on experience. Note this is a general guide (as there is no universal currency) and local currency analysis will take place before the final offer. Reports to: Head of Metadata, Patricia Feeney; this role is full time at Crossref and works closely with a cross-organisational team running ROR, with colleagues based at California Digital Library and DataCite. Timeline: Advertise and recruit in May-June/hire in July About the role We\u0026rsquo;re looking for a new full-time Metadata Manager. This role will be based at Crossref and responsibilities will be split between ROR (75%) and Crossref (25%). This role will be responsible for day-to-day metadata curation activities for the ROR registry, including coordinating ongoing registry updates, working with ROR’s curation advisors and other community stakeholders, and maintaining ROR’s curation policies and practices. This role will also collaborate with Crossref’s metadata team in developing and strengthening Crossref metadata.\n",
"content": " APPLICATIONS ARE CLOSED EFFECTIVE JUNE 11, 2024 Do you want to help make research communications better in all corners of the globe? Come and join the world of nonprofit open infrastructure as our new **Metadata Manager**. Location: Remote and global (with 3-hour overlap with UTC 15:00 -18:00) Type: Full-time Remuneration: Approx. 70-80K USD or local equivalent, depending on experience. Note this is a general guide (as there is no universal currency) and local currency analysis will take place before the final offer. Reports to: Head of Metadata, Patricia Feeney; this role is full time at Crossref and works closely with a cross-organisational team running ROR, with colleagues based at California Digital Library and DataCite. Timeline: Advertise and recruit in May-June/hire in July About the role We\u0026rsquo;re looking for a new full-time Metadata Manager. This role will be based at Crossref and responsibilities will be split between ROR (75%) and Crossref (25%). This role will be responsible for day-to-day metadata curation activities for the ROR registry, including coordinating ongoing registry updates, working with ROR’s curation advisors and other community stakeholders, and maintaining ROR’s curation policies and practices. This role will also collaborate with Crossref’s metadata team in developing and strengthening Crossref metadata.\nWe are a geographically distributed, remote-first team with flexible working hours.\nKey responsibilities For ROR\nCoordinate community-based curation processes:\nTriage incoming requests to prepare for community review and/or work with Crossref support colleagues to optimize triaging Oversee community review process to make sure requests are reviewed in a timely and accurate manner Optimize curation workflow as needed to improve experience for requesters and community curators Maintain guidance and documentation for community curators Schedule and facilitate regular curator meetings Onboard and offboard community curators Provide training and assign tasks to contract staff Coordinate ROR registry updates\nMaintain regular schedule of registry updates Identify which updates will be in a given release Prepare metadata for records being added or updated Work with curators handling metadata records Ensure metadata records pass validation/QA Work with curators handling metadata records Review and test release candidates Deploy changes to production via Github-based workflow Publish release notes and announce releases to users Publish data dump on Zenodo Gather data and generate reports on curation processes to track volume, turnaround times, types of requests, etc. Metadata management and QA:\nMaintain documentation of metadata policies and inclusion criteria, as well as schema documentation Analyze current registry data to identify opportunities for metadata QA and future improvements Work with ROR’s development team on schema updates and metadata clean-up Community engagement:\nRespond to support questions about data issues, curation policies, and release timelines Support strategic initiatives and integrations Provide updates at community calls and webinars Collect feedback from community to inform curation policies and process For Crossref:\nParticipate in community-led efforts to expand and refine Crossref metadata by assisting with working groups and other community interaction Help with input (XML) and output (JSON) metadata modeling and testing Help maintain documentation About you We don\u0026rsquo;t expect a successful candidate to tick all of these boxes right away! If you have any questions, please get in touch.\nQualities\nComfortable collaborating with colleagues or stakeholders in the community Comfortable being part of a distributed team Self-motivated to succeed and take initiative and seek continuous improvement Familiarity with scholarly research infrastructures and the open science landscape Skills\nStrong at written and verbal communication skills, able to communicate clearly,simply, and effectively Experience in metadata curation Experience in data analysis Working knowledge of a scripting language, such as Python Experience in workflow development and optimization Experience facilitating community groups/collaborations Experience with Github and Markdown Experience working with RESTful APIs and related web services/technologies Experience or familiarity with XML and JSON About the team The Crossref team is distributed across the world. The ROR team is based in the USA.\nWe work fully remotely, but try to meet in person at least once a year. This is a full-time position, but working hours are flexible. The applicant should expect they will need to travel internationally to work with colleagues for about 5-10 days a year. If you have any questions we would be happy to discuss.\nYou can be based anywhere in the world where we can employ staff, either directly or through an employer of record.\nAbout Crossref We’re a not-for-profit membership organisation that exists to make scholarly communications better. We rally the community; tag and share metadata; run an open infrastructure; play with technology; and make tools and services—all to help put research in context.\nCrossref sits at the heart of the global exchange of research information, and our job is to make it possible—and easier—to find, cite, link, assess, and reuse research, from journals and books, to preprints, data, and grants. Through partnerships and collaborations we engage with members in 148 countries (and counting) and it’s very important to us to nurture that community.\nWe’re about 46 staff and remote-first. This means that we support our teams working asynchronously and to flexible hours. Some international travel will likely be appropriate, for example to in-person meetings with colleagues and members, but in line with our travel policy. We are dedicated to an open and fair research ecosystem and that’s reflected in our ethos and staff culture. We like to work hard but we have fun too! We take a creative, iterative approach to our projects, and believe that all team members can enrich the culture and performance of our whole organisation. Check out the organisation chart.\nWe are active supporters of ongoing professional development opportunities and promote self-learning at every opportunity. Crossref has a healthy financial situation and we only continue to grow. While we won’t have a clear hierarchical path for staff to follow, there are always evolving opportunities to progress and be challenged.\nWE ARE NO LONGER ACCEPTING APPLICATIONS. Equal opportunities commitment Crossref is committed to a policy of non-discrimination and equal opportunity for all employees and qualified applicants for employment without regard to race, colour, religion, sex, pregnancy or a condition related to pregnancy, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, national origin, ancestry, age, physical or mental disability, genetic information, veteran status, uniform service member status, or any other protected class under applicable law. Crossref will make reasonable accommodations for qualified individuals with known disabilities in accordance with applicable law.\nThanks for your interest in joining Crossref. We are excited to hear from you! ",
"headings": ["APPLICATIONS ARE CLOSED EFFECTIVE JUNE 11, 2024","About the role","Key responsibilities","About you","About the team","About Crossref","WE ARE NO LONGER ACCEPTING APPLICATIONS.","Equal opportunities commitment","Thanks for your interest in joining Crossref. We are excited to hear from you!"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/jobs/2023-03-11-product-manager-2023-03-11/",
"title": "Product Manager",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2023-03-11",
"lastmod_ts": 1678492800,
"section": "Jobs",
"tags": [],
"description": " Applications for this position is closed. Product Manager Location: Remote and global (with minimum overlap with the US Eastern time zone)\nRemuneration: €80,000 – €105,000 or local equivalent, depending on experience\nReports to: Director of Product\nApplication timeline: We will receive applications until March 31st.\nCrossref is a not-for-profit membership organisation that exists to make scholarly communications better by providing metadata and services that make research objects easy to find, cite, link, assess, and reuse. We’re passionate about providing open foundational infrastructure for the scholarly communications ecosystem - and we’re continuously evolving our tools and services in response to emerging needs.\n",
"content": " Applications for this position is closed. Product Manager Location: Remote and global (with minimum overlap with the US Eastern time zone)\nRemuneration: €80,000 – €105,000 or local equivalent, depending on experience\nReports to: Director of Product\nApplication timeline: We will receive applications until March 31st.\nCrossref is a not-for-profit membership organisation that exists to make scholarly communications better by providing metadata and services that make research objects easy to find, cite, link, assess, and reuse. We’re passionate about providing open foundational infrastructure for the scholarly communications ecosystem - and we’re continuously evolving our tools and services in response to emerging needs.\nWe are a small team with a big impact, and we’re looking for a creative, technically-oriented Product Manager to join us in improving scholarly communications. Reporting to the Director of Product, Product Managers at Crossref are expected to work across multiple products and services based on organisational goals (/strategy) and manage projects across the different teams in the organisation and with community partners like the Public Knowledge Project.\nUnlike traditional SaaS Product Management, being community-led means the Product Manager is not always the expert in what they are developing, so the ability to plan, research, convene, listen, and facilitate consensus-based decisions, is a key factor to being successful in this role at Crossref.\nSome examples of the diverse set of tools, services, features and functionality we support include ORCID auto-update, simple API-driven tools to help members register records with us, API endpoints and interfaces to help the community retrieve and use the metadata we store, Crossmark and the Funder Registry, and we have more in the pipeline supported by our R\u0026amp;D, engineering, and infrastructure services teams. Does this sound like your sort of thing?\nKey responsibilities Manage all aspects of the life cycle for one or more key areas within the Crossref ecosystem Coordinate work across teams at Crossref by communicating ideas and writing project plans, gathering and assessing feedback and using that to drive decision-making Seek, absorb and articulate community input through advisory groups, convening meetings, and reviewing data. Integrate usability studies, user research, system investigations, and ongoing community feedback into requirements Influence the product development strategy by communicating priorities based on organisational needs and community feedback Define goals, methods and metrics for the adoption of features and functionality to track success Coordinate and direct working groups made up of community members and users Promote adoption directly with the community as well as develop relationships with key community influencers \u0026amp; strategic partners Working with R\u0026amp;D to test concepts internally and with the community to inform and support Crossref’s service(s) Evangelize areas of focus to rally people and resources behind ideas and ambitions critical to success About you You think in terms of the big picture, but can work closely with others to explain context and deliver on the details You can turn a range of inputs into solid action plans and achievable chunks of work You have an understanding and experience of complex workflow systems, writing clear specifications and working with APIs You care about open infrastructure and want to make scholarly communications better You do whatever it takes to make your product and community successful and love to problem solve, whether that means writing a QA plan, tracking down the root cause of a user’s frustration or working with our R\u0026amp;D team to spin up and test a POC in response to an idea You are passionate about understanding community needs, working transparently, eliciting advice and feedback openly and advising on community calls You communicate with empathy and exceptional precision You can convey and encapsulate strategic (and technical) concepts in presentations verbally, visually, and textually. You have experience working with developers. You are technical enough to discuss with engineers critical questions about architecture and product choices You are motivated to continually improve products based on community feedback You are self-motivated with a collaborative and can-do attitude and enjoy working with a small team across multiple time zones You’re comfortable facilitating and chairing meetings and working groups You maintain order in a dynamic environment, managing multiple priorities You have 5+ years of product management experience with internet technologies and/or equivalent experience in the research publishing arena What it’s like working at Crossref We’re about 45 staff and now ‘remote-first’ although we have optional offices in Oxford, UK, and Boston, USA. This means that we support our teams working asynchronously and to flexible hours. Some international travel will likely be appropriate when it’s safe to do so, for example to in-person meetings with colleagues and members, but in line with our travel policy. We are dedicated to an open and fair research ecosystem and that’s reflected in our ethos and staff culture. We like to work hard but we have fun too! We take a creative, iterative approach to our projects, and believe that all team members can enrich the culture and performance of our whole organisation. Check out the organisation chart.\nWe are active supporters of ongoing professional development opportunities and promote self-learning at every opportunity. Crossref has a healthy financial situation and we only continue to grow. While we won’t have a clear hierarchical path for staff to follow, there are always evolving opportunities to progress and be challenged.\nThinking of applying? We especially encourage applications from people with backgrounds historically under-represented in research and scholarly communications.\nClick here to apply. Please submit your CV/Resume and Cover Letter. We require both documents in order to be considered for the role.\nPlease strive to submit your application by March 31st, 2023.\nEqual opportunities commitment Crossref is committed to a policy of non-discrimination and equal opportunity for all employees and qualified applicants for employment without regard to race, colour, religion, sex, pregnancy or a condition related to pregnancy, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, national origin, ancestry, age, physical or mental disability, genetic information, veteran status, uniform service member status, or any other protected class under applicable law. Crossref will make reasonable accommodations for qualified individuals with known disabilities in accordance with applicable law.\nThanks for your interest in joining Crossref. We are excited to hear from you!\n",
"headings": ["Product Manager","Key responsibilities","About you","What it’s like working at Crossref","Thinking of applying?","Equal opportunities commitment"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/jobs/2021-09-28-accounts-payable-specialist/",
"title": "Accounts Payable Specialist",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2021-09-28",
"lastmod_ts": 1632787200,
"section": "Jobs",
"tags": [],
"description": " Applications for this position closed 2021-11-29. Come and work with us as our Accounts Payable Specialist. It’ll be fun! ​​Crossref makes research objects easy to find, cite, link, assess, and reuse. As an open infrastructure organisation, we ingest and distribute metadata from our 14000+ member organisations worldwide, ensuring community collaboration in everything that we do. Our work helps achieve open research and open metadata goals for the benefit of society. This is a time of considerable change for the Crossref community, and you can help shape our future.\n",
"content": " Applications for this position closed 2021-11-29. Come and work with us as our Accounts Payable Specialist. It’ll be fun! ​​Crossref makes research objects easy to find, cite, link, assess, and reuse. As an open infrastructure organisation, we ingest and distribute metadata from our 14000+ member organisations worldwide, ensuring community collaboration in everything that we do. Our work helps achieve open research and open metadata goals for the benefit of society. This is a time of considerable change for the Crossref community, and you can help shape our future.\nWe are a small team with a big impact, and we’re looking for a detail-oriented self-starter to join the team as Part-time Accounts Payable Specialist.\nAbout the Role Reporting to the Supervising Accountant, the Accounts Payable Specialist is a key role within the Finance team. The Accounts Payable Specialist is responsible for full-cycle Accounts Payable accounting for both USA and UK-based offices, assuring proper recording within the accounting system. This position is the lead contact for vendor relations and the internal expense reporting application. The position requires a skill set and personality type capable of performing a broad range of duties and responsibilities with minimal supervision and a high degree of accuracy and thoroughness.\nAbout You The successful candidate will possess the following:\nThe ability to organize work, set priorities, follow-up and work proactively and accurately Excellent oral, written, data entry, and communication skills The ability to work collaboratively and independently A self-starter and problem solver with exceptional attention to detail Able to adapt and succeed in a fluid and flexible environment Be motivated, self-directed, and detail-oriented Have experience in a multi-currency environment (GBP) Key Responsibilities Responsible for the full cycle AP function for both the UK and USA offices, including entering invoices into Intacct, obtaining payment approvals, and facilitating payment processing (checks/wires/direct debits/ACH’s) Responsible for managing corporate credit cards, including reviewing and reconciling to statements monthly Responsible for the Expensify expense reporting platform, including maintaining knowledge of updates and enhancements and troubleshooting Responsible for the yearly 1099/1096 filing and vendor reporting Act as backup for other Finance Team staff Responding to Zendesk inquires and assisting in collections as needed Assist with monthly and quarterly financial reporting Assist with audit Other ad hoc financial and operational projects Qualifications 2-5 years of accounting experience Solid experience using cloud-based/accounting applications (Intacct) Solid experience using Microsoft Excel and other tools (Gmail/google docs, etc.) Bachelors Degree in Accounting/Business or equivalent business experience preferred This position is full-time (30 hours). The Crossref team is geographically distributed in Europe, North America and Africa, and we fully support working from home. We have two small offices (Lynnfield, MA, USA and Oxford, UK) that are temporarily closed due to the pandemic. It would be good to have a minimum 3-hour overlap with the US Eastern time zone.\nTo Apply To apply, please send your cover letter and resume to Lindsay Russell at jobs@crossref.org. Even if you don’t think you have all of the right experience, we’re really excited to hear from you.\nCrossref is an equal opportunity employer. We believe that diversity and inclusion among our staff are critical to our success as a global organisation. Therefore, we seek to recruit, develop, and retain the most talented people from a diverse candidate pool.\nCrossref is committed to a policy of non-discrimination and equal opportunity for all employees and qualified applicants for employment without regard to race, color, religion, sex, pregnancy or a condition related to pregnancy, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, national origin, ancestry, age, physical or mental disability, genetic information, veteran status, uniform service member status, or any other protected class under applicable law. Crossref will make reasonable accommodations for qualified individuals with known disabilities in accordance with applicable law.\n",
"headings": ["Come and work with us as our Accounts Payable Specialist. It’ll be fun!","About the Role","About You","Key Responsibilities","Qualifications","To Apply"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/jobs/2021-06-15-technical-support-specialist/",
"title": "Technical Support Specialist",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2021-06-15",
"lastmod_ts": 1623715200,
"section": "Jobs",
"tags": [],
"description": " Applications for this position are closed. Technical Support Specialist Location: Remote (Africa, West Asia) Closing date: Thursday, 2021 July 15 About Crossref Crossref makes research objects easy to find, cite, link, assess, and reuse. As an open infrastructure organisation, we ingest and distribute metadata from our 14000+ member organisations worldwide, ensuring community collaboration in everything that we do. Our work helps achieve open research and open metadata goals, for the benefit of society. This is a time of considerable change for the Crossref community, and you can help shape our future.\n",
"content": " Applications for this position are closed. Technical Support Specialist Location: Remote (Africa, West Asia) Closing date: Thursday, 2021 July 15 About Crossref Crossref makes research objects easy to find, cite, link, assess, and reuse. As an open infrastructure organisation, we ingest and distribute metadata from our 14000+ member organisations worldwide, ensuring community collaboration in everything that we do. Our work helps achieve open research and open metadata goals, for the benefit of society. This is a time of considerable change for the Crossref community, and you can help shape our future.\nAbout the role Reporting to our Technical Support Manager, the full-time Technical Support Specialist is an important role in our Member Experience team, part of Crossref’s Outreach group, a fourteen-strong distributed team with colleagues across the US and Europe. We’re at the forefront of Crossref’s growth, building relationships with new communities in new markets in new ways. We’re aiming for a more open approach to having conversations with people all around the world - including within our growing community forum, which the right candidate will help us expand, in multiple languages.\nWe’re looking for a Technical Support Specialist to provide first-line help to our international community of publishers, librarians, funders, researchers, and developers on a range of services that help them deposit, find, link, cite, and assess scholarly content. You’ll be working closely with five other technical and membership support colleagues to provide support and guidance for people with a wide range of technical experience. The strongest candidates will not necessarily be from a technical background, but they’ll have interest and initiative to grow their technical skills while communicating the complexity of our products and services in straightforward and easy-to-understand terms. You’ll help our community both create and retrieve metadata records with tools ranging from simple user interfaces to APIs and integrations.\nCrossref is a distributed team serving members and users around the world. We are seeking candidates to bolster our team, in accordance with our 2025 strategic agenda, to work remotely from Africa or West Asia (where Crossref is administratively able to support employees). We work a flexible schedule; for training and synchronous problem-solving, we also ask that candidates have availability between 13.00 and 15:00 UTC.\nKey responsibilities Replying to and solving community queries using the Zendesk support system Using our various tools and APIs to find the answers to these queries, or pointing users to support materials that will help them Working with colleagues on particularly tricky tickets, escalating as necessary Working efficiently but also kindly and with empathy with our very diverse, global community About you We are looking for a proactive candidate with a unique blend of customer service skills, analytical trouble-shooting skills, and a passion to help others. You’ll have an interest in data and technology and will be a quick learner of new technologies. You’ll be able to build relationships with our community members and serve their very diverse needs - from assisting those with basic queries to really digging into some knotty technical queries. Because of this, you’ll also be able to distill those complex and technically challenging queries into easy-to-follow guidance.\nEssential\nThe ability to clearly communicate complex technical information to technical and non-technical users, using open questions to get to the bottom of things when queries don’t seem to make sense Quick learner of new technologies; can rapidly pick up new processes and systems; and, have interest and initiative to grow your own technical skills Extremely organized and can bring order to chaos, independently manage multiple priorities Able to balance a very diverse role, wearing a lot of different hats and providing a wide range of support Proactive in asking questions and making suggestions for improvements Process-driven but able to cope with occasional ambiguity and lack of clarity - open to feedback and adaptable when things change quickly A truly global perspective - we have over 15,000 member organisations from 140 countries across numerous time zones Nice to have\nExperience helping customers and solving problems in creative and unique ways Experience with or interest in XML, metadata, and Crossref as well as scholarly research and information science Experience with Zendesk and Gitlab or similar support and issue management software To apply To apply, please send your cover letter and resume to Lindsay Russell at jobs@crossref.org. Even if you don’t think you have all of the right experience, we’re really excited to hear from you.\nCrossref is an equal opportunity employer. We believe that diversity and inclusion among our staff is critical to our success as a global organisation, and we seek to recruit, develop and retain the most talented people from a diverse candidate pool.\nCrossref is committed to a policy of non-discrimination and equal opportunity for all employees and qualified applicants for employment without regard to race, color, religion, sex, pregnancy or a condition related to pregnancy, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, national origin, ancestry, age, physical or mental disability, genetic information, veteran status, uniform service member status, or any other protected class under applicable law. Crossref will make reasonable accommodations for qualified individuals with known disabilities, in accordance with applicable law.\n",
"headings": ["Technical Support Specialist","About Crossref","About the role","Key responsibilities","About you","To apply"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/jobs/2021-02-08-senior-software-developer/",
"title": "Senior Software Developer",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2021-02-08",
"lastmod_ts": 1612742400,
"section": "Jobs",
"tags": [],
"description": " Applications for this position are closed. Senior Software Developer Location: Remote Closing date: Friday 5th March 2021 Salary: Competitive\nCrossref makes research objects easy to find, cite, link, assess, and reuse. As an open infrastructure organisation, we ingest and distribute metadata from our 15,000+ member organisations worldwide, ensuring community collaboration in everything that we do. Our work helps achieve open research and open metadata goals, for the benefit of society. This is a time of considerable change for the Crossref community, and you can help shape our future.\n",
"content": " Applications for this position are closed. Senior Software Developer Location: Remote Closing date: Friday 5th March 2021 Salary: Competitive\nCrossref makes research objects easy to find, cite, link, assess, and reuse. As an open infrastructure organisation, we ingest and distribute metadata from our 15,000+ member organisations worldwide, ensuring community collaboration in everything that we do. Our work helps achieve open research and open metadata goals, for the benefit of society. This is a time of considerable change for the Crossref community, and you can help shape our future.\nThe software development team is responsible for maintaining, operating and building the services that enable the workflows of our members and the wider research community. We have a deep understanding not only of technology, but also the needs of our diverse community.\nYou will contribute primarily to our Java and Kotlin codebases, with the option of also contributing to our Clojure codebases. We don\u0026rsquo;t expect you to be an expert in all of these, but you should have in-depth knowledge of at least one compiled, JVM, or Functional language (Java, Clojure, Kotlin, Scala, C#, Go etc). You will build primarily back-end services and APIs.\nYou will specify, design and implement improvements, features and services. You will have a key voice in discussions about technical approaches and architecture. You will always keep an eye on software quality and ensure that the code you and your colleagues produce is maintainable, well tested, and of high quality.\nKey responsibilities Understand Crossref’s mission and how we support it with our services. Collaborate with external stakeholders when needed. Pursue continuous improvement across legacy and green-field codebases. Work flexibly in multi-functional project teams, especially in partnership with the Product team, to design and develop services. Ensure that solutions are reliable, responsive, and efficient. Produce well-scoped, testable, software specifications. Implement and test solutions using Kotlin, Java and other relevant technologies. Work closely with the Head of Software Development to solve problems, maintain and improve our services and execute technology changes. Provide code reviews and guidance to other developers regarding development practices and help maintain and improve our development environment. Identify vulnerabilities and inefficiencies in our system architecture and processes, particularly regarding cloud operations, metrics and testing. Communicate proactively with membership and technical support colleagues ensuring they have all the information and tools required to serve our users. Openly document and share development plans and workflow changes. Be an escalation point for technical support; investigate and respond to occasional but complex user issues; help minimize support demands related to our systems; be part of our on-call team responding to service outages. About you We don\u0026rsquo;t expect a successful candidate to tick all of these boxes right away!\nAn expert senior developer with experience in Java, Kotlin, Clojure or related languages. Experience in Spring or similar frameworks. Have a proven track record of picking up new technologies. Experienced with continuous integration, testing and delivery frameworks, and cloud operations concepts and techniques. Familiar with AWS, containerization and infrastructure management using tools like Terraform. Some experience with Python, JavaScript or similar scripting languages. Experience working on open source projects. Able to quickly understand, refactor and improve legacy code and fix defects. Experience with, or a working understanding of, XML and document-oriented systems such as Elastic Search. Experience building tools for online scholarly communication or related fields such as Library and information science, etc. Comfortable collaborating with colleagues or stakeholders in the community. Ability to create and maintain a project plan. Self-directed, a good manager of your own time, with the ability to focus. Comfortable being part of a distributed team. Curious and tenacious at learning new things and getting to the bottom of problems. Strong at written and verbal communication skills, able to communicate clearly, simply, and effectively. Outstanding at interpersonal relations and relationship management. Comfortable collaborating with colleagues across the organisation. Assuming that international travel ever becomes possible again, the applicant should expect they will need to travel internationally to work with colleagues for about 5-10 days a year. About the team The software development team is distributed. Most issue tracking and all new code is open source. We strongly believe in open scholarly infrastructure and openness at all stages of the software development lifecycle. As a membership organisation we keep closely in touch with our users, and encourage our developers to be familiar with our community. The Development, Product and Infrastructure teams are tightly knit and we work in 2 week sprints.\nTo apply This position is full time and, as for all Crossref employees, location is flexible. The Crossref team is geographically distributed in Europe and North America and we fully support working from home. It would be good to have a minimum 3-hour overlap with the UTC-0 time zone.\nTo apply, please send your cover letter and resume to Lindsay Russell at jobs@crossref.org. Even if you don’t think you have all of the right experience, we’re really excited to hear from you.\nCrossref is an equal opportunity employer. We believe that diversity and inclusion among our staff is critical to our success as a global organisation, and we seek to recruit, develop and retain the most talented people from a diverse candidate pool.\nCrossref is committed to a policy of non-discrimination and equal opportunity for all employees and qualified applicants for employment without regard to race, color, religion, sex, pregnancy or a condition related to pregnancy, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, national origin, ancestry, age, physical or mental disability, genetic information, veteran status, uniform service member status, or any other protected class under applicable law. Crossref will make reasonable accommodations for qualified individuals with known disabilities, in accordance with applicable law.\n",
"headings": ["Senior Software Developer","Key responsibilities","About you","About the team","To apply"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/jobs/2021-01-19-product-manager-2021-01-19/",
"title": "Product Manager",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2021-01-19",
"lastmod_ts": 1611014400,
"section": "Jobs",
"tags": [],
"description": " Applications for this position are closed. Product Manager Location: Remote\nCrossref makes research objects easy to find, cite, link, assess, and reuse. As an open infrastructure organisation, we ingest and distribute metadata from our 13000+ member organisations worldwide, ensuring community collaboration in everything that we do. Our work helps achieve open research and open metadata goals, for the benefit of society. This is a time of considerable change for the Crossref community, and you can help shape our future.\n",
"content": " Applications for this position are closed. Product Manager Location: Remote\nCrossref makes research objects easy to find, cite, link, assess, and reuse. As an open infrastructure organisation, we ingest and distribute metadata from our 13000+ member organisations worldwide, ensuring community collaboration in everything that we do. Our work helps achieve open research and open metadata goals, for the benefit of society. This is a time of considerable change for the Crossref community, and you can help shape our future.\nWe are a small team with a big impact, and we’re looking for a creative, technically-oriented Product Manager to join us in improving scholarly communications. Reporting to the Director of Product, Product Managers at Crossref are expected to work across multiple products and services. This role, at least initially, is focused around ‘scholarly stewardship’ and includes Similarity Check, Funder Registry and registering research grants, as well as others.\nKey responsibilities Manage all aspects of the product life-cycle for one or more key services or products within the Crossref ecosystem Seek, absorb and articulate community input through advisory groups, convening meetings, and reviewing data Influence product strategy focusing on business priorities and user experience Integrate usability studies, user research, system investigations, and ongoing community feedback into product requirements Define goals, methods and metrics for product adoption to track success Coordinate and direct working groups made up of community members and users Promote product adoption directly with the community as well as develop relationships with key community influencers and strategic partners Evangelize products and values to rally people and resources behind ideas and ambitions critical to success Advance the concepts of research integrity within the scholarly community About you You think in terms of the big picture, but deliver on the details You have a nose for great products and advocate for new features using qualitative and quantitative reasoning You can turn incomplete, conflicting, or ambiguous inputs into solid action plans You will, ideally, have an understanding and experience of complex workflow systems You care about open infrastructure and want to make scholarly communications better You do whatever it takes to make your product and community successful, whether that means writing a QA plan or track down the root cause of a user’s frustration You are passionate about understanding community needs, working transparently, eliciting advice and feedback openly and advising on community calls You communicate with empathy and exceptional precision You can convey and encapsulate strategic (and technical) concepts in presentations verbally, visually, and textually. You are comfortable working with developers. You are technical enough to discuss with engineers critical questions about architecture and product choices You obsess about continuous product improvement You are self-motivated with a collaborative and can-do attitude and enjoy working with a small team across multiple time zones You maintain order in a dynamic environment, managing multiple priorities You are committed to agile best practices You have 5+ years of product management experience with internet technologies and/or equivalent experience in the research publishing arena This position is full time and, as for all Crossref employees, location is flexible. The Crossref team is geographically distributed in Europe and North America and we fully support working from home. We have two small offices (Lynnfield, MA, USA and Oxford, UK) that are temporarily closed due to the pandemic. It would be good to have a minimum 3-hour overlap with the US Eastern time zone.\nTo apply, please send your cover letter, resume, and at least one sample of an effective product specification or epic/story development to Lindsay Russell at jobs@crossref.org. Even if you don’t think you have all of the right experience, we’re really excited to hear from you.\nCrossref is an equal opportunity employer. We believe that diversity and inclusion among our staff is critical to our success as a global organisation, and we seek to recruit, develop and retain the most talented people from a diverse candidate pool.\nCrossref is committed to a policy of non-discrimination and equal opportunity for all employees and qualified applicants for employment without regard to race, color, religion, sex, pregnancy or a condition related to pregnancy, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, national origin, ancestry, age, physical or mental disability, genetic information, veteran status, uniform service member status, or any other protected class under applicable law. Crossref will make reasonable accommodations for qualified individuals with known disabilities, in accordance with applicable law.\n",
"headings": ["Product Manager","Key responsibilities","About you"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/jobs/2020-11-26-senior-front-end-developer/",
"title": "Senior Front-end Developer",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2020-11-26",
"lastmod_ts": 1606348800,
"section": "Jobs",
"tags": [],
"description": " Applications for this position are closed About the role You will play a key role in the software development team, being the technical lead for the front-end components of a number of services that are critical to thousands of publishers in the global scholarly community. You will design and build infrastructure that serves our newer smaller members as well as large high-volume publishers.\nYou will contribute to our JavaScript and Java codebases, building new functionality using Vue.js and maintaining our React.js codebase.\n",
"content": " Applications for this position are closed About the role You will play a key role in the software development team, being the technical lead for the front-end components of a number of services that are critical to thousands of publishers in the global scholarly community. You will design and build infrastructure that serves our newer smaller members as well as large high-volume publishers.\nYou will contribute to our JavaScript and Java codebases, building new functionality using Vue.js and maintaining our React.js codebase.\nAs a technical lead on our front-end you will collaborate with the Product and Infrastructure teams to specify, design and implement our new features and services as part of our full stack. You will have a key voice in discussions about technical approaches to front-end architecture and how they relate to our back-end, infrastructure and operational considerations. You will always keep an eye on software quality and ensure that the code you and your colleagues produce is maintainable, well tested and of high standard.\nKey responsibilities Understand Crossref’s mission, our role in the scholarly community, and how we support it with our services. Understand and help to guide our data models, and translate them into usable, accessible interfaces. Pursue continuous improvement and quality. Work flexibly in multi-functional project teams to design and develop services and ensure that our systems are reliable, responsive, and efficient. Work closely with the Head of Software Development to solve strategic problems, maintain and improve our services and execute technology changes. Help to guide our legacy front-end migration strategy. Maintain expertise in front-end technologies. Provide code reviews and guidance to other developers regarding development practices and help maintain and improve our development environment. Identify vulnerabilities and inefficiencies in our system architecture and processes, particularly regarding cloud operations, metrics and testing. Communicate proactively with membership and technical support colleagues ensuring they have all the information and tools required to serve our users. Openly document and share development plans and workflow changes. Be an escalation point for technical support; investigate and respond to occasional but complex user issues; help minimize support demands related to our systems; be part of our on-call team responding to service outages. About you We don\u0026rsquo;t expect a successful candidate to tick all of these boxes right away!\nAn interest in scholarly communication and open infrastructure. An expert senior developer with experience in JavaScript and other front-end technologies, preferably Vue.js, and have a proven track record of picking up new technologies. Familiarity with Java-based back-end technology. A focus on the particular needs of our diverse users. Experienced with continuous integration, testing and delivery frameworks, and cloud operations concepts and techniques. Experience with Python, preferably including Jupyter notebooks. Experience with static site generators such as Hugo. Experience working on open source code. Familiar with AWS, Docker and infrastructure management using Terraform. Able to quickly pick up, understand and improve legacy code. Self-directed, a good manager of your own time, with the ability to focus. Curious and tenacious at learning new things and getting to the bottom of problems. Strong at written and verbal communication skills, able to communicate clearly, simply, and effectively. Outstanding at interpersonal relations and relationship management. Comfortable collaborating with colleagues across the organisation. Assuming that international travel ever becomes possible again, the applicant should expect they will need to travel internationally to work with colleagues for about 5-10 days a year. You can find more about our latest plans from our recent LIVE Annual event: https://doi.org/10.13003/5gq8v1q.\nThis position is full time and, as for all Crossref employees, location is flexible - you can work remotely with a 2 to 3-hour overlap with UTC-0. We provide a competitive benefits package.\nAbout the team Our colleagues are spread across Europe and North America. The software development team can be found in the US east-coast, the UK, Ireland and France.\nWe build and maintain services for the Crossref community. Our DOI registration, metadata pipeline, reference matching, search and querying play a part in the operations of 15,000 members, who have registered the metadata for over 100 million content items. Our systems have evolved over our 20 year history, and we\u0026rsquo;re continuing to proactively update them. New code and services are written in modern Java, Clojure and JavaScript and run in AWS, making use of Kafka and Elastic Search.\nIssue tracking and all new code is open source. We strongly believe in open scholarly infrastructure and openness at all stages of the software development lifecycle. As a membership organisation we keep closely in touch with our users, and encourage our developers to be familiar with our community. The Development, Product and Infrastructure teams are tightly knit and we work in 2 week sprints.\nAbout Crossref Crossref makes research objects easy to find, cite, link, assess, and reuse. We’re a not-for-profit membership organisation that exists to make scholarly communications better. We rally the community; tag and share metadata; run an open infrastructure; play with technology; and make tools and services—all to help put research in context. It’s as simple—and as complicated—as that.\nSince January 2000 we have grown from strength to strength and now have over 12,000 members across 120 countries and thousands of tools and services relying on our metadata.\nCrossref is committed to a policy of non-discrimination and equal opportunity for all employees and qualified applicants for employment without regard to race, color, religion, sex, pregnancy or a condition related to pregnancy, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, national origin, ancestry, age, physical or mental disability, genetic information, veteran status, uniform service member status, or any other protected class under applicable law. Crossref will make reasonable accommodations for qualified individuals with known disabilities, in accordance with applicable law.\n",
"headings": ["About the role","Key responsibilities","About you","About the team","About Crossref"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/jobs/2020-11-17-contract-technical-support/",
"title": "Technical Support Contractor",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2020-11-17",
"lastmod_ts": 1605571200,
"section": "Jobs",
"tags": [],
"description": " Applications for this position are closed. Request for services: Technical Support Contractor Location: Remote\nClosing date: Wednesday 2021 May 12 About the role The Technical Support Contractor will work closely with our Member Experience team, part of Crossref’s Outreach team, a fifteen-strong distributed team with members across the US and Europe. We’re at the forefront of Crossref’s growth, building relationships with new communities in new markets in new ways. We’re aiming for a more open approach to having conversations with people all around the world - including within our growing community forum, which the right candidate will help us expand, in multiple languages. We’re looking for a Technical Support Contractor to provide front-line help to our international community of publishers, librarians, funders, researchers and developers on a range of services that help them deposit, find, link, cite, and assess scholarly content.\n",
"content": " Applications for this position are closed. Request for services: Technical Support Contractor Location: Remote\nClosing date: Wednesday 2021 May 12 About the role The Technical Support Contractor will work closely with our Member Experience team, part of Crossref’s Outreach team, a fifteen-strong distributed team with members across the US and Europe. We’re at the forefront of Crossref’s growth, building relationships with new communities in new markets in new ways. We’re aiming for a more open approach to having conversations with people all around the world - including within our growing community forum, which the right candidate will help us expand, in multiple languages. We’re looking for a Technical Support Contractor to provide front-line help to our international community of publishers, librarians, funders, researchers and developers on a range of services that help them deposit, find, link, cite, and assess scholarly content.\nWe’re looking for contractors able to work remotely. There is no set schedule and contractors bill their hours monthly.\nKey responsibilities Replying to and solving community queries using the Zendesk support system. Using our various tools and APIs to find the answers to these queries, or pointing users to support materials that will help them. Working with colleagues on particularly tricky tickets, escalating as necessary. Working efficiently but also kindly and with empathy with our very diverse, global community. This position is for an independent contractor.\nAbout the team You’ll be working closely with six other technical and membership support colleagues to provide support and guidance for people with a wide range of technical experience. You’ll help our community create and retrieve metadata records with tools ranging from simple user interfaces to robust APIs.\nAbout Crossref Crossref makes research objects easy to find, cite, link, assess, and reuse. We’re a not-for-profit membership organisation that exists to make scholarly communications better. We rally the community; tag and share metadata; run an open infrastructure; play with technology; and make tools and services—all to help put research in context. It’s as simple—and as complicated—as that. Since January 2000 we have grown from strength to strength and now have over 15,000 members across 140 countries, and thousands of tools and services relying on our metadata.\nTo apply Please send a cover letter, and your resume to: jobs@crossref.org.\nCrossref is committed to a policy of non-discrimination and equal opportunity for all employees and qualified applicants for employment without regard to race, color, religion, sex, pregnancy or a condition related to pregnancy, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, national origin, ancestry, age, physical or mental disability, genetic information, veteran status, uniform service member status, or any other protected class under applicable law. Crossref will make reasonable accommodations for qualified individuals with known disabilities, in accordance with applicable law.\n",
"headings": ["Request for services: Technical Support Contractor","About the role","Key responsibilities","About the team","About Crossref","To apply"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/jobs/2020-09-07-senior-software-developer/",
"title": "Senior Software Developer",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2020-09-01",
"lastmod_ts": 1598918400,
"section": "Jobs",
"tags": [],
"description": " Applications for this position are closed About the role You will play a key role in the software development team, being the technical lead for a number of services that are critical to thousands of publishers in the global scholarly community. You will design and build infrastructure that serves our newer smaller members as well as large high-volume publishers.\nYou will contribute to our Clojure and Java codebases. You don\u0026rsquo;t need to know both, but you should be strong in at least one, and have experience with similar languages.\n",
"content": " Applications for this position are closed About the role You will play a key role in the software development team, being the technical lead for a number of services that are critical to thousands of publishers in the global scholarly community. You will design and build infrastructure that serves our newer smaller members as well as large high-volume publishers.\nYou will contribute to our Clojure and Java codebases. You don\u0026rsquo;t need to know both, but you should be strong in at least one, and have experience with similar languages.\nAs a technical lead you will collaborate with the Product and Infrastructure teams to specify, design and implement our new features and services. You will have a key voice in discussions about technical approaches and architecture. You will always keep an eye on software quality and ensure that the code you and your colleagues produce is maintainable, well tested and of high quality.\nKey responsibilities Understand Crossref’s mission and how we support it with our services. Pursue continuous improvement. Work flexibly in multi-functional project teams to design and develop services and ensure that our systems are reliable, responsive, and efficient. Work closely with the Head of Software Development to solve problems, maintain and improve our services and execute technology changes. Provide code reviews and guidance to other developers regarding development practices and help maintain and improve our development environment. Identify vulnerabilities and inefficiencies in our system architecture and processes, particularly regarding cloud operations, metrics and testing. Communicate proactively with membership and technical support colleagues ensuring they have all the information and tools required to serve our users. Openly document and share development plans and workflow changes. Be an escalation point for technical support; investigate and respond to occasional but complex user issues; help minimize support demands related to our systems; be part of our on-call team responding to service outages. About you We don\u0026rsquo;t expect a successful candidate to tick all of these boxes right away!\nAn expert senior developer with experience in Java and/or Clojure, and have a proven track record of picking up new technologies. Experienced with continuous integration, testing and delivery frameworks, and cloud operations concepts and techniques. Some experience with Python. Experience working on open source projects. Familiar with AWS, containerization and infrastructure management using tools like Terraform. Able to quickly pick up, understand and improve legacy code. Experience with, or a working understanding of, XML and document-oriented systems such as Elastic Search. Experience building tools for online scholarly communication. Self-directed, a good manager of your own time, with the ability to focus. Curious and tenacious at learning new things and getting to the bottom of problems. Strong at written and verbal communication skills, able to communicate clearly, simply, and effectively. Outstanding at interpersonal relations and relationship management. Comfortable collaborating with colleagues across the organisation. Assuming that international travel ever becomes possible again, the applicant should expect they will need to travel internationally to work with colleagues for about 5-10 days a year. About the team Our colleagues are spread across Europe and North America. The software development team can be found in the US east-coast, the UK, Ireland and France.\nWe build and maintain services for the Crossref community. Our DOI registration, metadata pipeline, reference matching, search and querying play a part in the operations of 12,000 publishers, who have registered the metadata for over 100 million content items. Our systems have evolved over our 20 year history, and we\u0026rsquo;re continuing to proactively update them. New code and services are written in modern Java and Clojure and run in AWS, making use of Kafka and Elastic Search.\nIssue tracking and all new code is open source. We strongly believe in open scholarly infrastructure and openness at all stages of the software development lifecycle. As a membership organisation we keep closely in touch with our users, and encourage our developers to be familiar with our community. The Development, Product and Infrastructure teams are tightly knit and we work in 2 week sprints.\nAbout Crossref Crossref makes research objects easy to find, cite, link, assess, and reuse. We’re a not-for-profit membership organisation that exists to make scholarly communications better. We rally the community; tag and share metadata; run an open infrastructure; play with technology; and make tools and services—all to help put research in context. It’s as simple—and as complicated—as that.\nSince January 2000 we have grown from strength to strength and now have over 12,000 members across 120 countries and thousands of tools and services relying on our metadata.\nCrossref is committed to a policy of non-discrimination and equal opportunity for all employees and qualified applicants for employment without regard to race, color, religion, sex, pregnancy or a condition related to pregnancy, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, national origin, ancestry, age, physical or mental disability, genetic information, veteran status, uniform service member status, or any other protected class under applicable law. Crossref will make reasonable accommodations for qualified individuals with known disabilities, in accordance with applicable law.\n",
"headings": ["About the role","Key responsibilities","About you","About the team","About Crossref"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/jobs/2020-06-22-senior-software-developer/",
"title": "Senior Software Developer",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2020-07-10",
"lastmod_ts": 1594339200,
"section": "Jobs",
"tags": [],
"description": " Applications for this position are closed About the role You will play a key role in the software development team, being the technical lead for a number of services. You will contribute directly to the systems that form a critical part of thousands of scholarly publishers\u0026rsquo; workflows, and help us to better serve our newer smaller members in the global academic community.\nAs a technical lead you will collaborate with the Product and Infrastructure teams to specify, design and implement our new features and services. You will have a key voice in discussions about technical approaches and architecture. You will always keep an eye on software quality and ensure that the code you produce and review is maintainable, well tested and of high quality.\n",
"content": " Applications for this position are closed About the role You will play a key role in the software development team, being the technical lead for a number of services. You will contribute directly to the systems that form a critical part of thousands of scholarly publishers\u0026rsquo; workflows, and help us to better serve our newer smaller members in the global academic community.\nAs a technical lead you will collaborate with the Product and Infrastructure teams to specify, design and implement our new features and services. You will have a key voice in discussions about technical approaches and architecture. You will always keep an eye on software quality and ensure that the code you produce and review is maintainable, well tested and of high quality.\nKey responsibilities Understand Crossref’s mission and how we support it with our services. Pursue continuous improvement. Work flexibly in multi-functional project teams to scope, specify design and develop services and ensure that our systems are reliable, responsive, and efficient. Work closely with the Head of Software Development to solve problems, maintain and improve our services and execute technology changes. Provide code reviews and guidance to other developers regarding coding practices and help maintain and improve our development environment. Identify vulnerabilities and inefficiencies in our system architecture and development processes, particularly regarding cloud operations, metrics and testing. Communicate proactively with membership and technical support colleagues ensuring they have all the information and tools required to serve our users. Openly document and share development plans and workflow changes. Be an escalation point for technical support; investigate and respond to occasional but complex user issues; help minimize support demands related to our systems; be part of our on-call team responding to service outages. About you We don\u0026rsquo;t expect a successful candidate to tick all of these boxes right away!\nAn expert senior developer with experience in Java or Clojure, and have a proven track record of picking up new technologies. Experienced with continuous integration, testing and delivery frameworks, and cloud operations concepts and techniques. Some experience with Python. Experience working on open source projects. Familiar with AWS, containerization and infrastructure management using tools like Terraform. Able to quickly pick up, understand and improve legacy code. Experience with, or a working understanding of, XML and document-oriented systems such as Elasticsearch. Experience building tools for online scholarly communication. Self-directed, a good manager of your own time with the ability to focus. Curious and tenacious at learning new things and getting to the bottom of problems. Strong at written and verbal communication skills, able to communicate clearly, simply, and effectively. Outstanding at interpersonal relations and relationship management, and comfortable working with other developers, product management, outreach, membership, and technical support teams. Assuming that international travel ever becomes possible again, the applicant should expect they will need to travel internationally to work with colleagues for about 5-10 days a year. About the team Like the rest of Crossref, the software development team is distributed. We can be found in the US east-coast, the UK, Ireland and France. We build and maintain the services for the Crossref community. Our metadata pipeline, reference matching, search and querying play a part in the operations of 12,000 publishers, who have registered the metadata for over 100 million content items. Our systems have evolved over our 20 year history, and we\u0026rsquo;re continuing to proactively update them. New code and services are written in modern Java and Clojure and run in AWS ECS, making use of Kafka and Elasticsearch.\nIssue tracking and all new code is open source. We strongly believe in open scholarly infrastructure and openness at all stages of the software development lifecycle. As a membership organisation we keep closely in touch with our users, and encourage our developers to be familiar with our community. The Development, Product and Infrastructure teams are tightly knit and we work in 2 week sprints.\nAbout Crossref Crossref makes research objects easy to find, cite, link, assess, and reuse. We’re a not-for-profit membership organisation that exists to make scholarly communications better. We rally the community; tag and share metadata; run an open infrastructure; play with technology; and make tools and services—all to help put research in context. It’s as simple—and as complicated—as that. Since January 2000 we have grown from strength to strength and now have over 12,000 members across 120 countries and thousands of tools and services relying on our metadata.\nCrossref is committed to a policy of non-discrimination and equal opportunity for all employees and qualified applicants for employment without regard to race, color, religion, sex, pregnancy or a condition related to pregnancy, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, national origin, ancestry, age, physical or mental disability, genetic information, veteran status, uniform service member status, or any other protected class under applicable law. Crossref will make reasonable accommodations for qualified individuals with known disabilities, in accordance with applicable law.\n",
"headings": ["About the role","Key responsibilities","About you","About the team","About Crossref"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/jobs/2019-12-20-product-manager/",
"title": "Product Manager",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2019-12-20",
"lastmod_ts": 1576800000,
"section": "Jobs",
"tags": [],
"description": " Applications for this position are closed Crossref makes scholarly content easy to find, cite, link, assess and reuse by collecting and sharing metadata from our 11000+ member organisations worldwide. Our services and value now extend well beyond persistent identifiers and reference linking, and our connected open infrastructure benefits our membership as well as all those involved in scholarly research. This is a time of considerable change at Crossref and you can help shape our future.\n",
"content": " Applications for this position are closed Crossref makes scholarly content easy to find, cite, link, assess and reuse by collecting and sharing metadata from our 11000+ member organisations worldwide. Our services and value now extend well beyond persistent identifiers and reference linking, and our connected open infrastructure benefits our membership as well as all those involved in scholarly research. This is a time of considerable change at Crossref and you can help shape our future.\nWe are a small team with a big impact, and we’re looking for a creative, technically-oriented Product Manager to join us in improving scholarly communications.\nKey responsibilities Manage all aspects of the product life cycle for one or more key services or products within the Crossref ecosystem Articulate and influence product strategy focusing on business objectives and user experience Integrate usability studies, user research, system analysis and community feedback into product requirements Define objectives, methods and metrics for product adoption to track success Co-ordinate and direct working groups made up of external stakeholders Promote product adoption externally as well as liaise with and maintain relations with key market stakeholders \u0026amp; strategic partners Evangelize products and value stories internally to rally people and resources behind ideas and ambitions critical to success About you You can think in terms of the big picture, but deliver on the details You have a nose for great products and advocate for new features using qualitative and quantitative reasoning You will, ideally, have an understanding and experience of complex workflow systems You do whatever it takes to make your product and team successful, whether that means writing a QA plan or hunting down the root cause of a user’s frustration You can turn incomplete, conflicting, or ambiguous inputs into solid action plans You communicate with empathy and exceptional precision You’re comfortable working with developers. You are technical enough to ask engineers good questions about architecture and product decisions alike You obsess about continuous product improvement You are self-driven with a collaborative and can-do attitude and enjoy working with a small team across multiple time zones You maintain order in a dynamic environment, independently managing multiple priorities You champion agile best practices You are adept at communicating technical systems to non-technical audiences through writing, small group settings, and conference talks 5+ years of product management experience with internet technologies and/or equivalent experience in the research publishing arena You can find more about our plans by viewing our latest annual report - a Fact File for 2019. Crossref Annual Report \u0026amp; Fact File 2018-19, https://doi.org/10.13003/y8ygwm5.\nThis position is full time and, as for all Crossref employees, location is flexible - you can work remotely or be based out of either of our Crossref offices (Lynnfield, MA and Oxford, UK), with a minimum 3-hour overlap with US Eastern time zone. We provide a competitive benefits package.\nTo apply, please send your cover letter, resume, and at least one sample of an effective product specification or epic/story development to Lindsay Russell at jobs@crossref.org.\n",
"headings": ["Key responsibilities","About you"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/jobs/2019-08-22-infrastructure-services-developer/",
"title": "Infrastructure Services Software Developer",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2019-08-21",
"lastmod_ts": 1566345600,
"section": "Jobs",
"tags": [],
"description": " Applications for this position are closed Come and work with us as an Infrastructure Services Software Developer. It’ll be fun! Location: Wherever the best candidate is. Salary: Competitive. Benchmarked every two years. Benefits: Competitive. Reports to: Head of Infrastructure Services. About the role Crossref is looking for a talented developer to help us optimize and evolve our infrastructure services.\nWe\u0026rsquo;re looking for a new member of our technology team who can bring experience, leadership, and help us solve some interesting operations and development challenges. Crossref operates the service that connects thousands of publishers, millions of articles and research content, and serves a diverse set of communities within scholarly publishing, research and beyond.\n",
"content": " Applications for this position are closed Come and work with us as an Infrastructure Services Software Developer. It’ll be fun! Location: Wherever the best candidate is. Salary: Competitive. Benchmarked every two years. Benefits: Competitive. Reports to: Head of Infrastructure Services. About the role Crossref is looking for a talented developer to help us optimize and evolve our infrastructure services.\nWe\u0026rsquo;re looking for a new member of our technology team who can bring experience, leadership, and help us solve some interesting operations and development challenges. Crossref operates the service that connects thousands of publishers, millions of articles and research content, and serves a diverse set of communities within scholarly publishing, research and beyond.\nYou will report to the head of infrastructure services and will work in a group of two developers and one system administrator. You will also work extensively with the software development, R\u0026amp;D, and product teams as well.\nKey responsibilities The infrastructure services group is primarily responsible for Crossref\u0026rsquo;s infrastructure services. That is, central, crosscutting tools and systems that are used by our software development group as the common foundation we use for delivering services to our members and the broader research community. In other words- you will be building, deploying and managing tools and services used by other developers.\nYou will be responsible for ensuring that these infrastructure services are reliable and responsive as well as making sure they are able to evolve quickly to support the new requirements and new services that Crossref is developing on behalf of its membership.\nYour challenge will be to accomplish this, whilst simultaneously helping to drive the modernization of our current software stack, infrastructure, and software engineering culture. The entire technology team is undertaking a migration from a mostly self-hosted, manually-managed, and manually-tested environment, to a cloud-based system and the SRE tools, processes and culture which that entails.\nWe currently use a blend of AWS, Docker, Terraform, self-hosted VMWare, Elastic Search, Kafka and more. Most of our codebases are written in Java, Clojure, and Python.\nThere are a lot of skills that we are looking for, but we don’t expect to find a purple unicorn. Our primary criterion is that you have a track record of being able to deliver projects using a variety of languages, frameworks and development paradigms.\nBut you get double bonus points if you have experience with:\nImmutable infrastructure. Virtualization and containerization of legacy code bases. Configuration management. Security infrastructure. Automation of development. Site monitoring and alerting. Web services software development. Transitioning on-prem datacenter to the cloud. In-depth knowledge of one or more cloud providers. And it would be very useful if you had a subset of the following skills:\nContainerisation using ECS/Docker. Core AWS Infrastructure including EC2, VPC, S3, RDS, IAM, Route53 and Cloudfront. Infrastructure configuration, management and orchestration tools (such as Terraform, Kubernetes, CloudFormation, Ansible, Salt, or equivalents). Java. High proficiency in at least one other language (e.g. Python, Clojure). Extensive experience with SQL, particularly MySQL and Oracle. Elasticsearch, Solr, Lucene, or similar. Distributed logging and monitoring frameworks. Continuous Integration, continuous delivery frameworks. Modern, HTTP-based API design and implementation. Experience with open source development. Experience with agile development methodologies. Experience with XML- particularly with mixed content models. And please note that this is not a back-office position. We believe that it is vital that the entire technical team develops an understanding of our members, the broader community and their needs. Without this kind of empathy, we cannot add value to our services. As such, you will also find yourself working closely with the product and outreach teams.\nLocation \u0026amp; travel requirements Crossref has offices in the US (Lynnfield, Massachusetts) and the UK (Oxford). We also support remote work. The technology team currently has members working in the US (Lynnfield, MA, New York City, NY), UK (Oxford), Ireland (Dublin), and France (Dinan).\nRemote workers should expect they will need to visit an office approximately 5 days a quarter along with the travel (possibly international) which that entails. If you work from an office you will be expected to travel internationally for ~ 5 days once a year. In either case, travel can increase should you have an interest in representing Crossref at community events.\nAbout Crossref Crossref makes research objects easy to find, cite, link, assess, and reuse. We’re a not-for-profit membership organisation that exists to make scholarly communications better. We rally the community; tag and share metadata; run an open infrastructure; play with technology; and make tools and services—all to help put research in context. It’s as simple—and as complicated—as that.\nSince January 2000 we have grown from strength to strength and now have over 12,000 members across 120 countries, and thousands of tools and services relying on our metadata.\nWe can offer the successful candidate a challenging and fun environment to work in. We’re fewer than 40 professionals but together we are dedicated to our global mission. We are constantly adapting to ensure we get there, and we don’t tend to take ourselves too seriously along the way.\nTo apply Send cover letter and a CV via email to:\nJoe Aparo, Head of Infrastructure Services\njobs@crossref.org\n",
"headings": ["Come and work with us as an Infrastructure Services Software Developer. It’ll be fun!","About the role","Key responsibilities","Location \u0026amp; travel requirements","About Crossref","To apply"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/jobs/2019-08-19-member-support-specialist-0819/",
"title": "Member Support Specialist",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2019-08-19",
"lastmod_ts": 1566172800,
"section": "Jobs",
"tags": [],
"description": " Applications for this position are closed Come and work with us as our Member Support Specialist. It’ll be fun! Location: Flexible - Crossref has members globally and offices in Oxford, UK and Lynnfield, MA, USA but being office-based is not necessary. Reports to: Amanda Bartell, Head of Member Experience Salary and benefits: Competitive Do you want to make scholarly communications better? Are you a customer support specialist or editorial assistant who’s keen to have more in-depth conversations with publishers across the globe?\n",
"content": " Applications for this position are closed Come and work with us as our Member Support Specialist. It’ll be fun! Location: Flexible - Crossref has members globally and offices in Oxford, UK and Lynnfield, MA, USA but being office-based is not necessary. Reports to: Amanda Bartell, Head of Member Experience Salary and benefits: Competitive Do you want to make scholarly communications better? Are you a customer support specialist or editorial assistant who’s keen to have more in-depth conversations with publishers across the globe?\nAbout Crossref Crossref makes research objects easy to find, cite, link, assess, and reuse. We’re a not-for-profit membership organisation that exists to make scholarly communications better. We rally the community; tag and share metadata; run an open infrastructure; play with technology; and make tools and services—all to help put research in context.\nAbout the role This busy role is a real mix of involved member consultations and detailed systems and administrative work. You’ll need to have an understanding of the academic publishing community, great attention to detail, the ability to ask probing questions of applicants and a logical, systematic approach to work. You’ll be working with publishers to really understand their approach and workflows, and then recommending the best Crossref membership option for them. You’ll take them through our application process, setting them up carefully in our CRM and other systems paying extremely close attention to detail. Once they’re members, you’ll continue to work with them closely - answering their questions via email, Twitter and our community forum. You’ll help them take on new Crossref services, navigate platform migrations, and understand how to set up service providers to work with us on their behalf. It’s a very diverse role and is a great opportunity to get wide-ranging experience within Crossref and scholarly communications.\nThis is a pivotal role in the Member Experience team, part of Crossref’s Outreach team, a fourteen-strong team split between offices in Boston and Oxford, plus dispersed team members across the US and Europe. We’re at the forefront of Crossref’s growth, building relationships with new communities in new markets in new ways. We’re embarking on a new onboarding program for the thousands of publishers that join as members every year and currently rolling out an educational program for existing members and users. And we’re aiming for a more open approach to having conversations with people all around the world, in multiple languages.\nKey responsibilities Work with new applicants to understand their internal structures and help them understand the various membership options available to them. Own and drive the administrative process for new applicants - ensuring we have all the information we need to help them get started and setting them up correctly in our central systems. Support existing members in meeting the obligations necessary for taking on new services and get them set up for these services. Broker conversations between publishers, platforms and service providers to ensure the member is able to fulfill their aims while still meeting their membership obligations. Manage queries from applicants and members via email, Twitter, our community forum and other channels. Ensure that the information in our CRM is kept clean and up-to-date. Work closely with the billing team. About you We’re looking for a smart, savvy person who’s able to work with our global, diverse membership to really get to the bottom of their needs. You’ll need to adapt quickly within a changing environment while still maintaining accuracy. You’ll be a quick learner of new technologies and enjoy improving systems and processes, but you’ll also be able to build relationships with our members and serve their very diverse needs - from handholding those with basic queries to really digging into some knotty organisational relationships.\nAble to balance a very busy role while still paying close attention to detail and keeping member experience at the forefront of everything you do. Experience in helping customers and solving problems in creative and unique ways. Strong written and verbal communication skills with the ability to communicate clearly - able to use open questions to get to the bottom of things when members don’t seem to make sense. A truly global perspective - we have 10,000 member organisations from 118 countries across numerous time zones. Quick learner of new technologies and can rapidly pick up new programs and systems. Extremely organized and attentive to detail. Bachelor\u0026rsquo;s degree. Experience with Zendesk or similar support system ideal. Familiar with the publishing industry with knowledge of XML, metadata, scholarly research or information science a bonus. Other spoken languages will help. To apply If you’d like to join the Crossref team, and contribute to our mission, please send a cover letter and your CV to jobs@crossref.org. We can\u0026rsquo;t wait to read all about you!\n",
"headings": ["Come and work with us as our Member Support Specialist. It’ll be fun!","About Crossref","About the role","Key responsibilities","About you","To apply"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/jobs/2019-07-15-director-of-finance/",
"title": "Director of Finance & Operations",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2019-07-15",
"lastmod_ts": 1563148800,
"section": "Jobs",
"tags": [],
"description": " Applications for this position closed August 2019. Location: Flexible - Crossref has members globally and offices in Oxford, UK and Lynnfield, MA, USA but being office-based is not necessary. Reports to: Ed Pentz, Executive Director Salary and benefits: Competitive\nApplications for this position will close on 9 August 2019. In a nutshell Crossref faces an exciting future as we grow further internationally beyond our existing 120 countries and our staff becomes increasingly distributed. We\u0026rsquo;re seeking a globally-minded and resourceful person with the skills, vision, and drive to help us achieve our mission. That means putting our community first and making it easier to work with us across the board - from implementing modern systems that work for all our members\u0026rsquo; many languages and currencies, to providing personable support. This is not just your average finance role; everyone at Crossref wears many hats, can articulate our value and purpose, and has a naturally collaborative and communicative nature. Come and show your financial prowess and operational flair at Crossref. It\u0026rsquo;ll be a challenge. But it\u0026rsquo;ll be fun!\n",
"content": " Applications for this position closed August 2019. Location: Flexible - Crossref has members globally and offices in Oxford, UK and Lynnfield, MA, USA but being office-based is not necessary. Reports to: Ed Pentz, Executive Director Salary and benefits: Competitive\nApplications for this position will close on 9 August 2019. In a nutshell Crossref faces an exciting future as we grow further internationally beyond our existing 120 countries and our staff becomes increasingly distributed. We\u0026rsquo;re seeking a globally-minded and resourceful person with the skills, vision, and drive to help us achieve our mission. That means putting our community first and making it easier to work with us across the board - from implementing modern systems that work for all our members\u0026rsquo; many languages and currencies, to providing personable support. This is not just your average finance role; everyone at Crossref wears many hats, can articulate our value and purpose, and has a naturally collaborative and communicative nature. Come and show your financial prowess and operational flair at Crossref. It\u0026rsquo;ll be a challenge. But it\u0026rsquo;ll be fun!\nAbout the role Reporting to the Executive Director, the Finance and Operations Director is a key member of Crossref\u0026rsquo;s leadership team and has strategic and managerial responsibility for all aspects of Crossref\u0026rsquo;s finances, HR, legal, and governance. You will work closely with the Executive Director, the senior leadership team, the Finance and Operations Team and the board to instil a culture of transparency, collaboration, and dynamic leadership across the organisation - and to ensure that all activities support Crossref\u0026rsquo;s mission and strategic priorities and foster continuous improvement and innovation while mitigating operational risks.\nAs part of the leadership team at Crossref you will contribute to our strategic planning and help define and develop our organisation\u0026rsquo;s culture. This role is responsible for planning, preparing, monitoring, reporting, and analyzing all aspects of the organisation\u0026rsquo;s finance functions, providing guidance and support with financial reporting, budgets, forecasts, investment portfolios, payroll, and benefits. The role also manages all commercial insurance policies (general liability, Directors and Officers, cybersecurity, etc.). You will provide key metrics, insights, and recommendations on all financial, HR, legal, and governance matters to the senior team, Executive Director, Treasurer, and board.\nKey responsibilities Financial planning and Leadership Provide leadership in the development and continuous evaluation of short and long-term strategic financial objectives; Provide timely and accurate analysis of budgets, financial reports and financial trends in order to assist the Executive Director, the board and other staff directors in performing their responsibilities; Evaluate and advise on the financial impact of long range planning, new partnerships/alliances, and the introduction of new programs/strategies; Establish and maintain strong relationships with staff directors to identify their needs; Provide strategic financial input and leadership on decision making issues affecting the organisation; i.e., evaluation of potential alliances, new services, and investments; Work with external audit firm overseeing financial statements and internal control audits; Maintain positive and effective banking relationships, and oversee all treasury related functions; Manage the relationship with external counsel and oversee work on contracts, legal compliance, and governance matters. organisational management and leadership Provide clear, accurate reporting and forecasting of Crossref’s performance in the context of its strategic direction and long term mission. Attend and present at board meetings and support the Executive Director in developing effective relationships with board members; provide support to the Treasurer; Provide financial analyses and reports for Executive Director, Treasurer, and board and adhere to all regulatory reporting requirements and deadlines; Manage a team of six staff including the Controller (Head of Finance), Head of Accounting, and HR Manager; Lead the finance/accounting team to ensure timely and accurate reporting, forecasting, budgeting, risk management, tax returns, government forms, and financial audits; Work with insurance company to ensure we are compliant; Oversee and provide data for the efficient operation of financial systems and internal financial controls. You will ensure compliance with all relevant regulations such as GAAP, 501c (6) organisations, IRS, and local and state reporting requirements; Work with the Directors to translate strategy and communicate financial information and develop long term growth plans and financial projections; Serve as staff representative on the board’s audit and any ad hoc finance committees, contributing and providing reports as needed; Provide leadership of the HR functions, managing benefits and compensation and all regulatory compliance, oversee the payroll process, administration of the 401K plan and overseas plans; Serve as Secretary of the Corporation (as defined in the Bylaws); Oversee the annual board of directors election. About you 15+ years in progressively responsible financial or operational leadership roles with proven leadership in nonprofit finance, administration and operations; A strategic thinker with a rich understanding of how finances affect the needs and goals of a mission driven nonprofit organisation and how to manage costs while driving revenue growth; A strong leader with the ability to coach, mentor and develop staff into a well- functioning team, assessing strengths and weaknesses that will help you lead and guide team; Experience working with an international organisation and dealing with financial issues across multiple countries A strong team player with a commitment to creating a positive and engaging work environment; Demonstrated ability to balance financial goals against organisational mission; Knowledge of nonprofit financial environment, policies and procedures; Knowledge of US GAAP and accounting theories and practices; Experience working with an international organisation and dealing with financial issues across multiple countries Knowledge of databases and accounting systems with strong general ledger, AP, AR, payroll, income tax and working knowledge of banking and investment; A self-directed leader that is a good manager of your own time with the ability to focus despite competing demands on your time; Strong written and verbal communication skills, able to communicate clearly, simply, and effectively; Outstanding interpersonal relations and relationship management, and comfortable working with other teams; Travel required to board meetings and Director face-to-face meetings. Process \u0026amp; timeline Prospective candidates interested in applying should contact our search partners Perrett Laver. For an informal discussion about the role, contact Daniel Flynn to hear more or address any questions you may have by August 9th, 2019.\nCompleted applications comprised of CV and cover letter can be uploaded at http://www.perrettlaver.com/candidates quoting reference number 4216 or sent to Daniel Flynn directly at Daniel.Flynn@perrettlaver.com. The deadline for applications will be Friday, August 9.\nAbout Crossref Crossref makes research objects easy to find, cite, link, assess, and reuse. We’re a not-for-profit membership organisation that exists to make scholarly communications better. We rally the community; tag and share metadata; run an open infrastructure; play with technology; and make tools and services—all to help put research in context. It’s as simple—and as complicated—as that.\nSince January 2000 we have grown from strength to strength and now have over 12,000 members across 120 countries, and thousands of tools and services relying on our metadata.\nWe can offer the successful candidate a challenging and fun environment to work in. We’re fewer than 40 professionals but together we are dedicated to our global mission. We are constantly adapting to ensure we get there, and we don’t tend to take ourselves too seriously along the way.\n",
"headings": ["In a nutshell","About the role","Key responsibilities","Financial planning and Leadership","organisational management and leadership","About you","Process \u0026amp; timeline","About Crossref"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/community/datacite/",
"title": "DataCite",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2019-07-05",
"lastmod_ts": 1562284800,
"section": "Get involved",
"tags": [],
"description": "The basics ‘One size fits all’ never quite works, does it? This is why there are different DOI Registration Agencies to serve the needs of different interest groups. Crossref and DataCite constitute two of these Registration Agencies, but we overlap more than most in terms of our missions and our communities.\nWe understand why it might be confusing trying to decide who to join, or whether to join both. We want to help, so that you can get the services that are the best fit for your organisation and the type of content you want to register.\n",
"content": "The basics ‘One size fits all’ never quite works, does it? This is why there are different DOI Registration Agencies to serve the needs of different interest groups. Crossref and DataCite constitute two of these Registration Agencies, but we overlap more than most in terms of our missions and our communities.\nWe understand why it might be confusing trying to decide who to join, or whether to join both. We want to help, so that you can get the services that are the best fit for your organisation and the type of content you want to register.\nCrossref makes research outputs easy to find, cite, link, assess, and reuse. We’re a not-for-profit membership organisation that exists to make scholarly communications better. We rally the community; tag and share metadata; run an open infrastructure; play with technology; and make tools and services—all to help put research in context. It’s as simple—and as complicated—as that. DataCite’s mission is to be the world\u0026rsquo;s leading provider of persistent identifiers for research. Through our portfolio of services, we provide the means to create, find, cite, connect, and use research. We seek to create value and develop community-driven, innovative, open, integrated, useable, and sustainable services for research. If you’ve been following the work we’ve been doing, you’ll know that we’ve been making joint announcements for some time. We also collaborate on numerous initiatives that aim to provide foundational infrastructure for research outputs.\nWho to join Here are some things to think about, to help you decide which organisation is the right one for you.\nWhat type of organisation are you? Thinking about how you classify your organisation can be helpful; what type of organisation/department/initiative/project are you? Do you see your organisation as one that sits within a certain community?\nCrossref members are organisations who publish content, or register research grants. These include publishers, research institutions, university presses, societies and funders. In order to become a member, register content and deposit metadata and DOIs, you’ll need to meet the criteria set out in our governing by-laws. Membership in Crossref is open to organisations that produce professional and scholarly materials and content. In addition, applicants should be able to meet the terms and conditions of membership.\nWith DataCite, membership is open to all organisations that share their mission. DataCite’s members work with data centers, stewards, libraries, archives, universities, publishers and research institutes that host repositories and who have responsibility for managing, holding, curating, and archiving data and other research outputs. Members agree with the DataCite statutes. You can see current DataCite members here.\nSpecific services It’s not just about ‘getting a DOI’. Crossref and DataCite have expertise and services that support and enhance the specific needs of our communities and how they work with their content.\nCrossref provides services like:\nReference Linking: Reference linking enables researchers to follow a link from the reference list to other full-text documents, helping them to make connections and discover new things. Cited-by: Cited-by shows how work has been received by the wider community; displaying the number of times it has been cited, and linking to the citing content. Similarity Check: A service provided by Crossref and powered by iThenticate—Similarity Check provides editors with a user-friendly tool to help detect plagiarism. DataCite provides services like:\nDOI Fabrica: DOI management platform, perfect for manual DOI creation or for human curation of automatically-created DOIs. Register your first DOI in less than a minute. Link checker: Automatically checks your DOIs to make sure they are still resolving correctly. Data metrics badge: Embed citation metrics for any DataCite DOI on your own website. Importantly, both organisations make the metadata you register available via APIs. This metadata is used by thousands of different tools and services. So if you’re registering content with an organisation that isn’t the best fit for your content, then you might wonder why it isn’t appearing in specific databases e.g. Google Dataset Search for data, Dimensions for articles. This is why we have specific metadata schemas for different record types, to fit the communities we work with, so that an organisation can work with us to get access to all of the data they’re interested in, in a standard format and in one place.\nYour role What role do you have in relation to the content being registered?\nDo you follow a publishing workflow? I.e. are there editorial processes involved in selecting and stewarding the content e.g. issuing updates like corrections. We know there are lots of definitions of a publisher so it’s hard to be exact, but this might help you think about how you work. If this sounds like you then you should explore joining Crossref. Or are you depositing content? This could be different types of research outputs using different kinds of platforms, e.g. researchers posting content to an institutional repository. In that case, the DataCite community is a good fit for you. Joining both We’re also working with an increasing number of organisations who have record types that are best served by being members of both organisations, such as a university that has both a publishing program and an institutional repository.\nThe Center for Open Science provides a good example of a member who works with both of our organisations to meet the needs of their community:\n“We hear from lots of users about how important Digital Object Identifiers (DOIs) are to their work. DOIs ensure persistent links to content and enhance discoverability of one’s research. At the behest of our users, we began issuing DOIs in 2015, first to public registrations, then to public projects in September 2016, and recently to preprints in July 2017. In all, over 22,000 DOIs were registered for content on the OSF. The DOIs issued on the OSF have historically been registered with DataCite, through the California Digital Library’s EZID. Earlier this year, we learned that EZID’s services are evolving, and COS was faced with the choice of a new registration agency for DOIs. This has given us the opportunity to explore how best to support our users and the diverse research outputs they share via OSF. Ultimately, COS decided to pursue registering DOIs with two separate agencies to provide users with services tailored to their needs: registering DOIs for preprints with Crossref and DOIs for projects and registrations with DataCite.”\nAvoid assigning multiple DOIs to one research object For identifiers and metadata to work to their full potential, both Crossref and DataCite require that only one identifier be assigned to a research object. Multiple persistent and identifiers for an object reduce the chance of it being identified and discovered, and can split usage, citation information over multiple instances of a work.\nIf a persistent identifer for an object already exists, you should continue to use that identifier for the content and not reassign another identifier for that object under a different prefix.\nWe’re also happy to discuss specific needs directly. Contact the Crossref membership team or DataCite support with information on what you’re trying to achieve and we’ll help you!\n",
"headings": ["The basics","Who to join","What type of organisation are you?","Specific services","Your role","Joining both","Avoid assigning multiple DOIs to one research object"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/jobs/2019-05-23-director-of-product/",
"title": "Director of Product",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2019-05-23",
"lastmod_ts": 1558569600,
"section": "Jobs",
"tags": [],
"description": " Applications for this position closed on 10th June 2019. Come and work with us as our Director of Product. It’ll be fun! Location: Flexible - Crossref has offices in Oxford, UK and Lynnfield, MA, USA but being office-based is not a requirement.\nReports to: Ed Pentz, Executive Director\nSalary and benefits: Competitive\nAbout the role The Director of Product is a key member of the senior leadership team at Crossref and responsible for the strategy, delivery, adoption, and success of the Crossref service. The role centers around a deep understanding of community needs balanced with technical credibility and credentials.\n",
"content": " Applications for this position closed on 10th June 2019. Come and work with us as our Director of Product. It’ll be fun! Location: Flexible - Crossref has offices in Oxford, UK and Lynnfield, MA, USA but being office-based is not a requirement.\nReports to: Ed Pentz, Executive Director\nSalary and benefits: Competitive\nAbout the role The Director of Product is a key member of the senior leadership team at Crossref and responsible for the strategy, delivery, adoption, and success of the Crossref service. The role centers around a deep understanding of community needs balanced with technical credibility and credentials.\nKey responsibilities The director manages and leads the product team (3 Product Managers, 1 UX Designer), planning and managing the development of new services and the enhancement of existing ones. The role will also work closely with:\nThe Technology \u0026amp; Research team to agree on architecture and development approaches, and technical resource allocation. The Outreach team including technical support, to research and gather insights and ensure projects stay community-led; openly communicating through planning and running projects, working groups, and collaborations. Product strategy Create and maintain the product strategy, which supports and advances the organisation\u0026rsquo;s strategic agenda. Work with the Technology \u0026amp; Research team to ensure that all software development work is product-focused. Build and maintain the product roadmap, ensuring all areas of the organisation are up-to-date on plans and timelines. Be responsible for the product team\u0026rsquo;s work in scoping and planning new feature development, running pilots and beta test phases, and facilitating internal project teams and external Working Groups to deliver on time. Develop introduction plans to roll out and embed new features with Outreach, Support, Billing, and Technology maintenance. Maintain a balance between developing new things and maintaining existing features and services. Community focus Research community needs and engage people through Advisory Groups for each key area of our service as well as Working Groups for new initiatives. Work closely with the Outreach Director to set development priorities based on user needs. Enable members and users to comment on and contribute to our roadmap so that they can plan for their own adoption of new features. Be an evangelist for Crossref as open scholarly infrastructure and its services at conferences and events, engage on social media and the community forum, and blog about our services and plans. Leadership and management Manage and develop three Product Managers and one UX/UI Designer. Reinforce and promote the value and role of product management within Crossref. Ensure that the product team culture reflects and exemplifies the Crossref culture (dedicated, open, transparent). Contribute to developing Crossref\u0026rsquo;s overall strategy as part of the senior leadership team of staff directors. Report to the board regularly. Write papers for consideration by the leadership team, board committees, and the board. About you We are looking for an experienced product person and strategic thinker to join the senior leadership team and contribute to the ongoing success of the organisation. Our transparency principle, What you see, what you get, means that using open methodologies is a must. We are also looking for someone with:\nUnderstanding of current trends in scholarly communications. Strong technical understanding, ability to establish credibility with software developers. A background in product management for mission-driven organisations and/or open-source tech. Experience planning and launching new features and services with buy-in from a community of users. Experience working globally across time zones and within multicultural groups both internally and externally. Experience working remotely and managing remote staff. Leadership and management experience. Experience overseeing and improving internal processes and systems. Ability to be a hands-on technical product manager when needed. Experience developing wireframes and product specifications. Awareness of new approaches to product management and development methodologies. Creativity, being resourceful as needed for a small non-corporate organisation. Collaboration skills and the confidence to accomplish goals while engaging the community. Excellent communication with strong writing and public speaking skills. Experience managing budgets, external consultants, and oversight of project management. Process \u0026amp; timeline Please email a cover letter and CV to jobs@crossref.org by June 10th, 2019.\nAbout Crossref Crossref makes research objects easy to find, cite, link, assess, and reuse. We’re a not-for-profit membership organisation that exists to make scholarly communications better. We rally the community; tag and share metadata; run an open infrastructure; play with technology; and make tools and services—all to help put research in context. It’s as simple—and as complicated—as that.\nSince January 2000 we have grown from strength to strength and now have over 12,000 members across 120 countries, and thousands of tools and services relying on our metadata.\nWe can offer the successful candidate a challenging and fun environment to work in. We’re fewer than 40 professionals but together we are dedicated to our global mission. We are constantly adapting to ensure we get there, and we don’t tend to take ourselves too seriously along the way.\n",
"headings": ["Come and work with us as our Director of Product. It’ll be fun!","About the role","Key responsibilities","Product strategy","Community focus","Leadership and management","About you","Process \u0026amp; timeline","About Crossref"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/jobs/2019-03-01-member-support-specialist/",
"title": "Member Support Specialist",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2019-03-01",
"lastmod_ts": 1551398400,
"section": "Jobs",
"tags": [],
"description": " Applications for this position are closed as of 2019-04-15 Come and work with us as our Member Support Specialist. It’ll be fun! Are you a customer support specialist looking to expand your technical skills? Maybe you’re an editorial assistant keen to improve scholarly communications?\nLocation: Flexible. Either office-based (Lynnfield, MA or Oxford, UK) or remote/home-based in North America or Europe Reports to: Amanda Bartell, Head of Member Experience Salary and benefits: Competitive About the role This role is focused on Similarity Check, one of our key services which helps our members promote editorial integrity. It’s a very diverse role and is a great opportunity to get wide-ranging experience within Crossref and scholarly communications. You’ll be working closely with three other technical support staff, our membership coordinator, our billing team, and the product manager for this service - plus publishers across the globe. You’ll be helping members understand their technical obligations for participating in Similarity Check, navigate the application process, and learn how to use the service. You’ll make sure that our support materials meet the needs of the members, and be the “voice of the user” in conversations with the developers and partners who run the service.\n",
"content": " Applications for this position are closed as of 2019-04-15 Come and work with us as our Member Support Specialist. It’ll be fun! Are you a customer support specialist looking to expand your technical skills? Maybe you’re an editorial assistant keen to improve scholarly communications?\nLocation: Flexible. Either office-based (Lynnfield, MA or Oxford, UK) or remote/home-based in North America or Europe Reports to: Amanda Bartell, Head of Member Experience Salary and benefits: Competitive About the role This role is focused on Similarity Check, one of our key services which helps our members promote editorial integrity. It’s a very diverse role and is a great opportunity to get wide-ranging experience within Crossref and scholarly communications. You’ll be working closely with three other technical support staff, our membership coordinator, our billing team, and the product manager for this service - plus publishers across the globe. You’ll be helping members understand their technical obligations for participating in Similarity Check, navigate the application process, and learn how to use the service. You’ll make sure that our support materials meet the needs of the members, and be the “voice of the user” in conversations with the developers and partners who run the service.\nThis is an important new role in the Member Experience team, part of Crossref’s Outreach team, a fourteen-strong team split between offices in Boston and Oxford, plus dispersed team members across the US and Europe. We’re at the forefront of Crossref’s growth, building relationships with new communities in new markets in new ways. We’re embarking on a new onboarding program for the thousands of publishers that join as members every year and currently rolling out an educational program for existing members and users. And we’re aiming for a more open approach to having conversations with people all around the world, in multiple languages.\nKey responsibilities Support Similarity Check users and applicants via email, Twitter and other channels. Own and drive the administrative process for members taking on the service.\u2028Support members in meeting the technical obligations for participating in the service.\u2028Manage the onboarding process, working with our Education Manager and the Product Manager to ensure that documentation and other support materials meet member needs. Providing support for members using the Similarity Check service through iThenticate. Provide support for queries about Similarity Check billing.\u2028Analyze, communicate and triage support issues to the product manager and technology providers to inform future development.\u2028Work closely with the technology providers’ support team to proactively communicate with members about technical issues, outages, and planned maintenance etc. Provide wider technical and membership support for other services as required. About you We\u0026rsquo;re looking for a smart, savvy person who can wear many hats, has a truly global outlook, a collaborative style, and an inner drive to make things better. You’ll be a quick learner of new technologies, and ideally have an understanding of editorial processes. You’ll have a unique blend of analytical troubleshooting skills, customer service skills, and a passion to help others. You’ll be able to build relationships with our members and serve their very diverse needs - from hand holding those with basic queries to really digging into some knotty technical queries. You are:\nIdeally familiar with manuscript submission and review process. Able to balance a very diverse role, wearing a lot of different hats and providing a wide range of support.\u2028Experience helping customers and solving problems in creative and unique ways.\u2028Able to communicate technical issues to a non-technical audience and use open questions to get to the bottom of things when members don’t seem to make sense. Strong written and verbal communication skills with the ability to communicate clearly. A truly global perspective - we have 10,000 member organisations from 118 countries across numerous time zones. Quick learner of new technologies and can rapidly pick up new programs and systems. Extremely organized and attentive to detail\u2028Bachelor\u0026rsquo;s degree.\u2028Experience with Zendesk and Jira or similar support and issue management software will be helpful.\u2028Knowledge of XML, metadata, scholarly research or information science a bonus. Other languages a bonus, particularly Russian. About Crossref Crossref makes research objects easy to find, cite, link, assess, and reuse. We’re a not-for-profit membership organisation that exists to make scholarly communications better. We rally the community; tag and share metadata; run an open infrastructure; play with technology; and make tools and services—all to help put research in context. It’s as simple—and as complicated—as that.\nSince January 2000 we have grown from strength to strength and now have over 11,000 members across 118 countries, and thousands of tools and services relying on our metadata.\nTo apply If you’d like to join the Crossref team, and contribute to our mission, please send a cover letter and your CV to jobs@crossref.org. We can\u0026rsquo;t wait to read all about you!\n",
"headings": ["Come and work with us as our Member Support Specialist. It’ll be fun!","About the role","Key responsibilities","About you","About Crossref","To apply"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/services/metadata-retrieval/user-stories/",
"title": "Who relies on Crossref metadata?",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 5,
"lastmod": "2019-02-24",
"lastmod_ts": 1550966400,
"section": "Find a service",
"tags": ["Metadata", "APIs", "Metadata retrieval", "REST API", "Research Nexus"],
"description": "Over 100 million unique scholarly works are distributed into systems across the research enterprise 24/7 via our metadata APIs, at a rate of around 607 million queries a month. This is a collection of brief user stories from some of the people who rely on Crossref metadata.\nWe use Crossref metadata to… Add funding info from publications to researchers’ portfolios, and report the publications as arising from the grant; to validate the data provided by universities; and we use the license and embargo period information to help understand the open access status of publications.\n",
"content": "Over 100 million unique scholarly works are distributed into systems across the research enterprise 24/7 via our metadata APIs, at a rate of around 607 million queries a month. This is a collection of brief user stories from some of the people who rely on Crossref metadata.\nWe use Crossref metadata to… Add funding info from publications to researchers’ portfolios, and report the publications as arising from the grant; to validate the data provided by universities; and we use the license and embargo period information to help understand the open access status of publications.\n\u0026ndash; Gavin Reddick, Researchfish\nLink references on our journal platforms, pull citations statistics for our Article-Level Metrics and ensure we are publishing unique science. Crossref metadata is vital to our everyday operations and the discovery of the research we publish.\n\u0026ndash; Polina Grinbaum, PLOS\nEnhance and correct the metadata delivered to us, just with a correct DOI.\n\u0026ndash; Ulf Kronman, National Library of Sweden\nVerify and correct references, retrieve Funder Registry IDs, and include Cited-by links in published content, and so much more. As a small publisher, discoverability is of utmost importance, and Crossref is a discoverability hub. The inclusion of metadata in Crossref strengthens the content we publish.\n\u0026ndash; Rob O’Donnell, Rockefeller University Press\nKnow about our possible ‘universe’ of articles.\n\u0026ndash; Christian Herzog, Daniel Hook, Simon Porter, Dimensions, Digital Science\nConnect authors with research articles similar to their own, and help them decide where to submit their manuscripts for the best chance of success.\n\u0026ndash; Damian Pattinson, ResearchSquare\nIndex preprints alongside traditional journal publications and we plan to: provide another means to access and discover preprints; help explore the role of preprints in the publishing ecosystem; support their inclusion in processes such as grant reporting and credit attribution systems.\n\u0026ndash; Michael Parkin, Europe PMC\nLook across the world at research outputs and understand how institutions and communities are making them more accessible. We\u0026rsquo;re using Crossref metadata as the central reference point to handle objects from different sources and to have a consistent set of metadata on things like publication date that covers the full set.\n\u0026ndash; Cameron Neylon, Centre for Culture and Technology, Curtin University\nAllow researchers to immediately interact with the readers of their works, if the publishers provide ORCID iDs of authors in their Crossref metadata.\n\u0026ndash; Alexander Naydenov, PaperHive\nCheck for the availability of articles associated with our data packages, and to verify some of our metadata. Being able to do this programmatically has revolutionized our data publication workflow.\n\u0026ndash; Elizabeth Hull, Dryad\nRetrieve Cited-by counts for a DOI so we can include them as part of the ‘basket of metrics’ we provide to our researchers. They can then understand the performance of their publications in context, and see the correlation between actions and results.\n\u0026ndash; David Sommer, Kudos\nEnable authors to search and add references to their papers.\n\u0026ndash; Alberto Pepe, Authorea\nEnrich the metadata of our hosted preprints and link them to the manuscript or version of record. We also perform various analyses regarding the completeness and discoverability of our records.\n\u0026ndash; Mark Hahnel, Figshare\nStreamline research communication in a global, interconnected and evolving scholarly domain in order to support researchers even better and facilitate research in general.\n\u0026ndash; Henning Schoenenberger, Springer Nature\nIdentify articles unambiguously as we preserve scholarly literature in our system. Also, in the rare instances when we ‘trigger’ journals for open access, we want the reference-linking functionality to work, and we work with Crossref to point the URLs to our site for resolution.\n\u0026ndash; Craig van Dyck, CLOCKSS\nHelp Unpaywall identify and disambiguate over 20 million Open Access articles, and it is absolutely essential to our work. We 😍❤️🤗 Crossref!\n\u0026ndash; Jason Priem, ImpactStory\nYou don\u0026rsquo;t have to sign up to anything in order to use our REST API. That means we don\u0026rsquo;t necessarily know who is using it, although we see millions of hits every day. If you are using it in your projects and would like to share, please let us know and we\u0026rsquo;ll feature you on this page.\n",
"headings": ["We use Crossref metadata to…"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/jobs/2018-10-05-senior-software-developer/",
"title": "Senior Software Developer",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2018-10-05",
"lastmod_ts": 1538697600,
"section": "Jobs",
"tags": [],
"description": " Applications for this position are closed Come and work with us as our Senior Software Developer. It’ll be fun! Location: Flexible. Either office-based (Lynnfield, MA or Oxford, UK) or remote/home-based in North America or Europe Reports to: Chuck Koscher, Director of Technology Salary and benefits: Competitive About the role This role provides a technology cornerstone to our development team responsible for the ongoing development, maintenance, and operation of our Content Registration system. Metadata is critically important to Crossref’s mission to make research communications better, and the registration system is where it all starts. You will report to the director of technology, joining a team of three developers and one system administrator. You will also work extensively with all other teams across our small but impactful organisation.\n",
"content": " Applications for this position are closed Come and work with us as our Senior Software Developer. It’ll be fun! Location: Flexible. Either office-based (Lynnfield, MA or Oxford, UK) or remote/home-based in North America or Europe Reports to: Chuck Koscher, Director of Technology Salary and benefits: Competitive About the role This role provides a technology cornerstone to our development team responsible for the ongoing development, maintenance, and operation of our Content Registration system. Metadata is critically important to Crossref’s mission to make research communications better, and the registration system is where it all starts. You will report to the director of technology, joining a team of three developers and one system administrator. You will also work extensively with all other teams across our small but impactful organisation.\nOur stack is mainly a backend system written in Java on Spring and utilizing SQL on MySQL and Oracle. We’re still running our own hardware but are moving to AWS and already use S3, RDS, and other Amazon services. You will be responsible for ensuring that the Content Registration system is reliable and responsive as well as making sure it is able to evolve quickly to support the new requirements and new services that we are developing for its membership and metadata subscribers. As such, you will need to work closely with product management and the strategic initiatives teams.\nThis position also provides programming and workflow guidance to the entire team by guiding concept formulation, design, and implementation. Our processes are built on Jira, SVN, Zendesk, and Git and we’re starting to use agile methods. We communicate via Slack and Google apps. You will help improve our quality control initiatives, review methodologies and help develop a culture of continuous testing and deployment.\nYour challenge will be to accomplish this, whilst simultaneously driving the modernization of our current software stack, infrastructure, and software engineering culture.\nKey responsibilities Understand Crossref’s mission and how it that applies to the Content Registration service. Work in multi-functional project teams to scope, specify design and develop services and ensure that the Content Registration system is reliable, responsive, and efficient. Work very closely with the Director of Technology to solve problems, maintain and improve the registration service. Recommend and execute technology changes, for example upgrading to Java 8, or other tools and off-the-shelf solutions that might improve operations, visibility or monitoring. Provide guidance to other developers regarding coding practices and help maintain and improve our development environment. Identify vulnerabilities and inefficiencies in our system architecture and development processes, particularly regarding DevOps procedures, unit and regression testing. Communicate proactively with membership and technical support colleagues ensuring they have all the information and tools required to serve our users. Openly document and share development plans and workflow changes. Be an escalation point for technical support; investigate and respond to occasional but complex user issues; help minimize support demands related to the Content Registration system; be part of our on-call team responding to service outages. About you You are:\nAn expert Java developer with a solid understanding of Spring and with a lot of SQL and MySQL experience at the application level and with infrastructure level issues dealing with JDBC, connection pooling, table optimization, index construction, charset, and driver issues. Proficient in one other language and expert scripting skills. Experienced with full backend stack (Java, Spring, MySQL, Tomcat) continuous testing/delivery frameworks, and DevOps concepts and techniques. Experience with or a working understanding of XML and document-oriented systems such as MongoDB, Solr, and Elasticsearch. Experience with AWS services, containerization with tools like Docker and infrastructure management using tools like Terraform. Very much self- directed, must be a good manager of your own time and have ability to focus even when other things compete for your time. Curious and tenacious at learning new things and getting to the bottom of problems. Strong at written and verbal communication skills, able to communicate clearly, simply, and effectively. Outstanding at interpersonal relations and relationship management, and comfortable working with other developers, product management, outreach, membership, and technical support teams. If remote, able to travel occasionally to meet with colleagues at either Lynnfield MA or Oxford UK office. About Crossref Crossref makes research objects easy to find, cite, link, assess, and reuse. We’re a not-for-profit membership organisation that exists to make scholarly communications better. We rally the community; tag and share metadata; run an open infrastructure; play with technology; and make tools and services—all to help put research in context. It’s as simple—and as complicated—as that.\nSince January 2000 we have grown from strength to strength and now have over 11,000 members across 118 countries, and thousands of tools and services relying on our metadata.\nTo apply If you’d like to join the Crossref tea, and contribute to our mission, please send a cover letter and your resume to jobs@crossref.org. We can\u0026rsquo;t wait to read all about you!\n",
"headings": ["Come and work with us as our Senior Software Developer. It’ll be fun!","About the role","Key responsibilities","About you","About Crossref","To apply"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/jobs/2018-02-01-support-manager/",
"title": "Support Manager",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2018-02-01",
"lastmod_ts": 1517443200,
"section": "Jobs",
"tags": [],
"description": " Applications for this position are closed as of 2018-04-01 Come and work with us as our Support Manager. It\u0026rsquo;ll be fun! - **Location:** Remote/home-based: anywhere from the Pacific to Eastern timezones\n- **Reports to:** Head of Member Experience\n- **Benefits:** Competitive\nAbout Crossref Crossref makes research objects easy to find, cite, link, assess, and reuse. We’re a not-for-profit membership organisation that exists to make scholarly communications better. We rally the community; tag and share metadata; run an open infrastructure; play with technology; and make tools and services—all to help put research in context. It’s as simple—and as complicated—as that.\n",
"content": " Applications for this position are closed as of 2018-04-01 Come and work with us as our Support Manager. It\u0026rsquo;ll be fun! - **Location:** Remote/home-based: anywhere from the Pacific to Eastern timezones\n- **Reports to:** Head of Member Experience\n- **Benefits:** Competitive\nAbout Crossref Crossref makes research objects easy to find, cite, link, assess, and reuse. We’re a not-for-profit membership organisation that exists to make scholarly communications better. We rally the community; tag and share metadata; run an open infrastructure; play with technology; and make tools and services—all to help put research in context. It’s as simple—and as complicated—as that.\nSince January 2000 we have grown from strength to strength and now have almost 10,000 members across 114 countries and thousands of tools and services relying on our metadata.\nAbout the team We have big ambitions in the member and community outreach group. We’re thirteen-strong, (soon to be sixteen), and split between Boston, New York, London, and Oxford. We are at the forefront of Crossref’s growth, building relationships with new audiences in new markets in new ways. We cover member experience and support, marketing communications, outreach, business development, and metadata education. We’re embarking on a new onboarding program for the thousands of (mostly research publishers) that join as members every year. There are plans for an educational program for existing members and users. And we’re aiming for a more open approach to having conversations with people all around the world, in multiple languages. We are fortunate to have strong product management, finance, and technology teams to work closely with to achieve our objectives.\nAbout the role This is a key role in the Member Experience section of our Member and Community Outreach team. In this role you’ll be working closely with two Support Specialists to handle the most technical support queries, ensure that the member experience team has the tools and processes to effectively support members and users, work closely with the DevOps and Product teams on bug fixes and new developments to support users, and communicate with members and users on service issues, both 1:1 and in public through e.g. Twitter and GitHub.\nKey responsibilities Handling the most technical support queries Answering member and user queries\u0026mdash;using Zendesk, Twitter, Discourse, and GitHub\u0026mdash;owning the problem through to resolution. Being the escalation point for other members of the support team, handling the most complex customer support issues. Managing and adjusting publication title information within our metadata system. Monitoring conflict reports and working with members to resolve. Monitoring DOI crawler reports and contacting publishers who do not maintain their DOIs. Tools and processes Managing the support systems, setting KPIs and ensuring regular reporting is accurate and actionable. Identifying peaks and troughs in support queries and finding ways to smooth them out. Implementing support through new channels as we move to a philosophy of \u0026ldquo;open support\u0026rdquo;. Ensuring that the member experience and outreach teams have everything they need to work efficiently and effectively. Assisting other Crossref staff in understanding metadata and schema issues. Bug fixes and new developments Identifying problems/opportunities resulting from customer issues. Working closely with the technical team on issues impacting members, running regular technical review meetings with the development team. Feeding into service development conversations to ensure support overhead is kept to a minimum. Leading or participating in community working groups. Communicating with members on support issues Managing outbound communications regarding service outages through multiple channels. Monitoring and responding to external or internal reporting systems that indicate the health of the DOI and Crossref systems. Suggesting measures to improve visibility into quality conditions and ways to better assist members in working with us. About you This important role in the Member Experience team provides support to our diverse member and user base with very different levels of technical knowledge and many different languages. It’s also the key bridge between our community and our own technical teams. You’ll need:\nExperience in providing technical support/troubleshooting with the ability to organize and prioritize a very busy helpdesk. Critical thinking and problem solving skills, with a high level of attention to detail and be comfortable digging into unfamiliar and complex technical issues. We need someone who is a problem-solver\u0026mdash;curious and tenacious at learning new things and getting to the bottom of problems. Strong written and verbal communication skills with the ability to communicate clearly, simply and effectively. Able to communicate technical issues to less technical audiences and use open questions to get to the bottom of things when the question doesn\u0026rsquo;t seem to make sense. Strong interpersonal and relationship management skills. A passionate customer service orientation with experience in managing multiple stakeholders. Ability to work with colleagues in different teams and at different levels. Experience with XML-based publishing systems (ideal) or just XML with exposure to metadata vocabularies. A philosophy of transparency in everything you do with strong experience providing support publicly e.g. through discussion forums, technical repositories, and social media. To apply If you are considering joining Crossref and contributing to our mission, please send your cover letter and resume to: Amanda Bartell\n",
"headings": ["Come and work with us as our Support Manager. It\u0026rsquo;ll be fun!","About Crossref","About the team","About the role","Key responsibilities","Handling the most technical support queries","Tools and processes","Bug fixes and new developments","Communicating with members on support issues","About you","To apply"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/jobs/2018-01-05-rnd-programmer/",
"title": "R&D Programmer",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2018-01-05",
"lastmod_ts": 1515110400,
"section": "Jobs",
"tags": [],
"description": " Applications for this position are closed as of 2018-02-28 Come work at Crossref as an R\u0026amp;D Programmer. It\u0026rsquo;ll be fun! - **Location:** Based in Oxford, UK. Remote work possible\n- **Reports to:** Director of Strategic Initiatives\n- **Benefits:** Competitive\nAbout the position We are hiring an R\u0026amp;D Programmer to help prototype and develop new web-based tools and services.\nWe are looking for someone who: Is expert in one or more programming languages (Java, Clojure, Python, Ruby). Wants to learn new skills and work with a variety of technologies. Relishes working with metadata. Has experience delivering web-based applications using agile methodologies. Enjoys working with a small, geographically dispersed team. Groks mixed-content model XML. Groks RDF. Groks REST. Can see a solo project through or collaborate in a larger team. Has deployed and maintained Linux based systems. Understands relational databases (MySQL, Oracle). Tests first. Bonus points for: Experience building tools for online scholarly communication. Experience with a variety of programming language paradigms (OO, Functional, Declarative). Experience with ElasticSearch, Solr or Lucene. Having contributed to open source projects. Experience with front-end development (HTML, CSS, React, Angular or similar). Having worked on standards bodies. Experience with public speaking. Responsibilities The R\u0026amp;D Programmer will report to the Director of Strategic Initiatives. They will be responsible for prototyping and developing new Crossref initiatives and applying new Internet technologies to further Crossref’s mission to make research outputs easy to find, cite, link, assess, and reuse.\n",
"content": " Applications for this position are closed as of 2018-02-28 Come work at Crossref as an R\u0026amp;D Programmer. It\u0026rsquo;ll be fun! - **Location:** Based in Oxford, UK. Remote work possible\n- **Reports to:** Director of Strategic Initiatives\n- **Benefits:** Competitive\nAbout the position We are hiring an R\u0026amp;D Programmer to help prototype and develop new web-based tools and services.\nWe are looking for someone who: Is expert in one or more programming languages (Java, Clojure, Python, Ruby). Wants to learn new skills and work with a variety of technologies. Relishes working with metadata. Has experience delivering web-based applications using agile methodologies. Enjoys working with a small, geographically dispersed team. Groks mixed-content model XML. Groks RDF. Groks REST. Can see a solo project through or collaborate in a larger team. Has deployed and maintained Linux based systems. Understands relational databases (MySQL, Oracle). Tests first. Bonus points for: Experience building tools for online scholarly communication. Experience with a variety of programming language paradigms (OO, Functional, Declarative). Experience with ElasticSearch, Solr or Lucene. Having contributed to open source projects. Experience with front-end development (HTML, CSS, React, Angular or similar). Having worked on standards bodies. Experience with public speaking. Responsibilities The R\u0026amp;D Programmer will report to the Director of Strategic Initiatives. They will be responsible for prototyping and developing new Crossref initiatives and applying new Internet technologies to further Crossref’s mission to make research outputs easy to find, cite, link, assess, and reuse.\nThe post will work with the Director of Strategic Initiatives and the Director of Technology to research, develop and implement new services – taking ideas from concept to prototype and, where appropriate, create and deploy production services.\nThe R\u0026amp;D Programmer may represent Crossref at conferences and in industry activities and projects. They will play also an active role in developing industry and community technical standards and help develop technical guidelines for Crossref members.\nWorking with the Director of Strategic Initiatives and Director of Technology, the R\u0026amp;D Programmer will ensure that new services are designed with a robust and sustainable architecture. The R\u0026amp;D Programmer will actively engage with technical representatives from Crossref’s membership, the library community, scholarly researchers and broader Internet initiatives.\nLocation \u0026amp; travel requirements Crossref has offices in the US (Lynnfield, Massachusetts) and the UK (Oxford). We also support remote work. This position is in the R\u0026amp;D team, which is currently split between the UK and France.\nRemote workers should expect they will need to visit an office approximately 5 days a quarter along the travel (possibly international) which that entails.\nIf you work from an office you will be expected to travel internationally for ~ 5 days once a year.\nThe position In either case, travel can increase should you have an interest in representing Crossref at industry events.\nSalary Competitive depending on skills and expertise. Excellent benefits.\nTo apply Send cover letter and a CV via email to:\nGeoffrey Bilder\ngbilder@crossref.org\nAbout Crossref Crossref is a not-for-profit membership organisation representing members of all stripes (commercial publishers, scientific societies, university presses, open access, etc.). Crossref currently has just over 30 staff in the US and UK and France, yet it combines the small, intimate atmosphere of a technical startup, with the financial stability and strong international presence of a major commercial organisation. We do important stuff, but we have a lot of fun doing it.\nPlease contact Geoffrey Bilder with any questions.\n",
"headings": ["Come work at Crossref as an R\u0026amp;D Programmer. It\u0026rsquo;ll be fun!","About the position","We are looking for someone who:","Bonus points for:","Responsibilities","Location \u0026amp; travel requirements","Salary","To apply","About Crossref"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/jobs/2017-12-19-tech-pm/",
"title": "Product Manager - APIs",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2017-12-20",
"lastmod_ts": 1513728000,
"section": "Jobs",
"tags": [],
"description": " Applications for this position are closed as of 2018-05-04 Come work with us as a Product Manager for APIs. It\u0026rsquo;ll be fun! - **Location:** Oxford, UK; Lynnfield, MA; or remote\n- **Reports to:** Director of Product Management\n- **Benefits:** Competitive\nSummary Crossref makes research objects easy to find, cite, link, assess, and reuse.\nWe’re a not-for-profit membership organisation that exists to make scholarly communications better. We rally the community; tag and share metadata; run an open infrastructure; play with technology; and make tools and services—all to help put research in context.\n",
"content": " Applications for this position are closed as of 2018-05-04 Come work with us as a Product Manager for APIs. It\u0026rsquo;ll be fun! - **Location:** Oxford, UK; Lynnfield, MA; or remote\n- **Reports to:** Director of Product Management\n- **Benefits:** Competitive\nSummary Crossref makes research objects easy to find, cite, link, assess, and reuse.\nWe’re a not-for-profit membership organisation that exists to make scholarly communications better. We rally the community; tag and share metadata; run an open infrastructure; play with technology; and make tools and services—all to help put research in context.\nIt’s as simple—and as complicated—as that.\nWe are a small team that makes a big impact, and we’re looking for a creative, technically-oriented Product Manager to join us in improving scholarly communications, building “roads” to make the next big research discovery possible.\nKey responsibilities Manage all aspects of the product life cycle for Crossref’s suite of APIs through product requirements, feature prioritization, implementation, and measurement Articulate and influence product strategy focusing on business objectives and user experience Represent the voice of the Crossref API users in the continued improvement of these APIs and bring back the insight to our engineering and outreach teams Identify, grow, and manage our developer relations program for the community of Crossref API users About you You can think in terms of the big picture, but deliver on the details You have a nose for great products, and advocate for new features with qualitative and quantitative reasoning You do whatever it takes to make your product and team successful, whether that means writing a QA plan or hunting down the root cause of a user’s frustration You can break down large projects into granular milestones and track progress on them You can turn incomplete, conflicting, or ambiguous inputs into solid action plans You communicate with empathy and exceptional precision You’re comfortable working with developers. You are technical enough to ask engineers good questions about architecture and product decisions alike Beyond just shipping new products, you obsess about continuous product improvement You can maintain order in a dynamic environment, independently managing multiple priorities You are self-driven with a collaborative and can-do attitude and enjoy working with a small team across multiple time zones You champion agile development best practices and are able to teach, mentor, and coach teams in adopting this methodology. You have experience with JSON and can develop a simple application in any modern language such as Python, Clojure, etc. Bonus: you have experience developing APIs and/or web applications that use APIs Salary: Competitive depending on skills and expertise. Excellent benefits.\nTo apply To apply, please send your cover letter, resume, and at least one sample of an effective product specification or epic/story development to Jennifer Lin.\nAbout Crossref Crossref is a not-for-profit membership organisation representing members of all stripes (commercial publishers, scientific societies, university presses, open access, etc.). Crossref currently has just over 30 staff in the US and UK and France, yet it combines the small, intimate atmosphere of a technical startup, with the financial stability and strong international presence of a major commercial organisation. We do important stuff, but we have a lot of fun doing it.\nPlease contact Jennifer Lin with any questions.\n",
"headings": ["Come work with us as a Product Manager for APIs. It\u0026rsquo;ll be fun!","Summary","Key responsibilities","About you","To apply","About Crossref"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/labs/projects-using-the-crossref-rest-api/metadata-api-users/",
"title": "REST API users",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2014-11-03",
"lastmod_ts": 1414972800,
"section": "",
"tags": [],
"description": "\rOpen Tree of Life (NSF) http://blog.opentreeoflife.org/ Maintained by: Jim Allman @jimallman Using: Work queries https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B2bYcKWIUAETSf2.png Enriched Biodiversity http://bdj.pensoft.net/articles.php?id=1125 @rmounce Journalhub showcase journal http://journalhub.io/journals/acta-dermatovenerol-apa Maintained by: Jure Using: Citation linking and json DOI query Also elife lens and metypeset PLOS Extensions to Wikimedia Visual Editor http://cdn.substance.io/ve/ Maintained by: http://www.adamhyde.net/plos/ Using: Work queries Kudos http://growkudos.com Maintained by: Lou Peck, David Sommer, Leigh Dodds Using: Work queries doimgr https://github.com/dotcs/doimgr Maintained by: dotcs Using: Work queries, work filtering bibby https://github.com/jdherman/bibby Maintained by: Jon Herman, Cornell Using: Conneg, work queries CHORUS Search http://search.chorusaccess.org Maintained by: propulsion.io Using: Funder work queries, filters, faceting CHORUS Dashboards http://dashboard.chorusaccess.org Maintained by: propulsion.io Using: Funder work queries, filters Crossref Search [http://search.crossref.org][1] Maintained by: Karl Ward Crossref Funder Search http://search.crossref.org/funding Maintained by: Karl Ward PLoS Enhanced Citations Experiment Maintained by: Adam Becker, PLoS Using: Work queries and filters PLoS ALM / Crossref DET**** http://det.labs.crossref.org Maintained by: Martin Fenner Using: Work queries, update and publication date filters PKP OJS Crossref Plugin Maintained by: Juan, James, Bozana, PKP Using: deposits (xml deposits) Crossref Crossmark Statistics Maintained by: Joe Wass Using: Work queries, date filters, significant update filters, update policy filter Crossref Metadata Participation Maintained by: Joe Wass Using: Publisher routes, publisher feature coverage values pdfextract Maintained by: Karl Ward Using: Work queries, work metadata transforms Cambia patent to scholarly literature citation matching Maintained by: Doug Ashton Using: Work queries, deposits (patent citation deposits) ",
"content": "\rOpen Tree of Life (NSF) http://blog.opentreeoflife.org/ Maintained by: Jim Allman @jimallman Using: Work queries https://pbs.twimg.com/media/B2bYcKWIUAETSf2.png Enriched Biodiversity http://bdj.pensoft.net/articles.php?id=1125 @rmounce Journalhub showcase journal http://journalhub.io/journals/acta-dermatovenerol-apa Maintained by: Jure Using: Citation linking and json DOI query Also elife lens and metypeset PLOS Extensions to Wikimedia Visual Editor http://cdn.substance.io/ve/ Maintained by: http://www.adamhyde.net/plos/ Using: Work queries Kudos http://growkudos.com Maintained by: Lou Peck, David Sommer, Leigh Dodds Using: Work queries doimgr https://github.com/dotcs/doimgr Maintained by: dotcs Using: Work queries, work filtering bibby https://github.com/jdherman/bibby Maintained by: Jon Herman, Cornell Using: Conneg, work queries CHORUS Search http://search.chorusaccess.org Maintained by: propulsion.io Using: Funder work queries, filters, faceting CHORUS Dashboards http://dashboard.chorusaccess.org Maintained by: propulsion.io Using: Funder work queries, filters Crossref Search [http://search.crossref.org][1] Maintained by: Karl Ward Crossref Funder Search http://search.crossref.org/funding Maintained by: Karl Ward PLoS Enhanced Citations Experiment Maintained by: Adam Becker, PLoS Using: Work queries and filters PLoS ALM / Crossref DET**** http://det.labs.crossref.org Maintained by: Martin Fenner Using: Work queries, update and publication date filters PKP OJS Crossref Plugin Maintained by: Juan, James, Bozana, PKP Using: deposits (xml deposits) Crossref Crossmark Statistics Maintained by: Joe Wass Using: Work queries, date filters, significant update filters, update policy filter Crossref Metadata Participation Maintained by: Joe Wass Using: Publisher routes, publisher feature coverage values pdfextract Maintained by: Karl Ward Using: Work queries, work metadata transforms Cambia patent to scholarly literature citation matching Maintained by: Doug Ashton Using: Work queries, deposits (patent citation deposits) ",
"headings": ["Open Tree of Life (NSF)","Enriched Biodiversity","Journalhub showcase journal","PLOS Extensions to Wikimedia Visual Editor","Kudos","doimgr","bibby","CHORUS Search","CHORUS Dashboards","Crossref Search","Crossref Funder Search","PLoS Enhanced Citations Experiment","PLoS ALM / Crossref DET****","PKP OJS Crossref Plugin","Crossref Crossmark Statistics"," Crossref Metadata Participation","pdfextract","Cambia patent to scholarly literature citation matching"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/strategy/archive-2018/",
"title": "Strategic agenda 2018-2020",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2019-10-31",
"lastmod_ts": 1572480000,
"section": "Strategic agenda and roadmap",
"tags": [],
"description": " This is our strategic agenda from 2018-2020 and it\u0026rsquo;s now archived, please visit the main strategy page for the most up-to-date version. Crossref makes research objects easy to find, cite, link, assess, and reuse.\nWe’re a not-for-profit membership organisation that exists to make scholarly communications better. We rally the community; tag and share metadata; run an open infrastructure; play with technology; and make tools and services\u0026mdash;all to help put scholarly content in context.\n",
"content": " This is our strategic agenda from 2018-2020 and it\u0026rsquo;s now archived, please visit the main strategy page for the most up-to-date version. Crossref makes research objects easy to find, cite, link, assess, and reuse.\nWe’re a not-for-profit membership organisation that exists to make scholarly communications better. We rally the community; tag and share metadata; run an open infrastructure; play with technology; and make tools and services\u0026mdash;all to help put scholarly content in context.\nIt’s as simple\u0026mdash;and as complicated\u0026mdash;as that.\nRally\nGetting the community working together to make scholarly communications better\nTag\nStructuring, processing, and sharing metadata to reveal relationships between research outputs\nRun\nOperating a shared, open infrastructure that is community-governed and evolves with changing needs\nPlay\nEngaging in debate and experimenting with technology to solve our members’ problems\nMake\nCreating tools and services to enable connections and give context\nThe strategic landscape Scholarly communications is changing, and putting research outputs into context is becoming more complicated. Our membership is part of a community that values and exchanges metadata between themselves as well as with a broader community.\nSome of our existing members no longer classify themselves as “publishers”, and some of our newer members have never classified themselves as “publishers”. Governments, funders, institutions, and researchers—parties who once had tangential involvement in scholarly publishing—are taking a more direct role in shaping how research is registered, certified and disseminated. Additionally, low income (but emerging) countries increasingly see it as a strategic imperative that they own and manage a research communication system that reflects their regional research priorities.\nResearchers are increasingly insisting that new kinds of research outputs, like data, software, preprints, and peer reviews form a critical part of the scholarly record. New players (e.g. sharing networks, alt-metrics services, and Current Research Information Systems) are becoming critical elements of the research landscape. New technologies like ML and AI promise to change the way in which research is produced, assessed, and consumed.\nFor Crossref and its membership to stay sustainable in this new environment, we need to adapt, do and encourage new things. But we have limited resources. So in order to adapt and do new things, we also need to also make sure that we are currently doing the right things efficiently. Hence, our strategic plan is a combination of consolidation and expansion:\nSimplify and enrich existing services Adapt to expanding constituencies Improve our metadata Collaborate and partner Simplify and enrich existing services The characteristics of our members and users continue to diversify—to scholar publishers, library publishers, and other emerging organisations. Furthermore, the use of our APIs has grown significantly in recent years as Crossref becomes better known as a source of metadata. Users are therefore asking for a more predictable service-based option in addition to the public options. We have and will continue to develop service-level guarantees in order to meet this growing demand, which will strengthen Crossref\u0026rsquo;s position as a way for the wider community to centrally access information from 10,000+ publishers.\nA focus on user experience will allow us to make it easier for all of them to participate in Crossref as fully as possible, irrespective of their depth of need or their level of technical skill.\nWe are also focusing our efforts on ensuring there is broad support for systems in accessing Crossref metadata so that reuse reaches its fullest potential across the entire research ecosystem. This necessary evolution of Crossref services will ensure that we can support the changing needs and priorities of all involved in research.\nWe do not want to add resources infinitum so we must make sure that we are performing our existing functions efficiently. To this end, we are streamlining processes to improve member experience, modernize infrastructure, and upgrade tools and data provision capabilities. These activities will achieve efficiencies for members, metadata users, as well as staff.\nRecently completed Similarity Check service transition Metadata Manager for journal articles Reference-matching improvements (phase 1) Transition from GitHub and Jira to GitLab In focus Pending publication (in Beta) Event Data Incident response process refinements Automated monitoring \u0026amp; status updates Support documentation re-write and migration to website API ElasticSearch migration Enhanced JATS support DevOps automation Research organisations Registry (ROR) Scheduled 2020 REST API improvements Similarity Check v2 Address technical debt Pending Metadata Plus sync\nCloud migration for Content Registration infrastructure\nCrossmark reports\nConsolidated Member Center\nSelf-repairing DOIs\nJoint DataCite \u0026amp; Crossref Search (with FREYA)\nStandard Crossref DOI display/status widget\nR\u0026amp;D Image manipulation detection Auto-classification of journal types Citation classification Improve our metadata Metadata provided by our members is the foundation of all our services. Crossref membership is a collective benefit. The more metadata a member is able to put in—and the greater adherence to best practice—the easier it is for other members and community users downstream to find, cite, link, assess, and reuse their content. Furthermore, the more discoverable and more trusted is the content. Better quality metadata improves the system for each member and all of Crossref\u0026rsquo;s other members and stakeholders.\nExisting Crossref members may have joined Crossref when only providing minimal bibliographic metadata was required for reference linking. But, increasingly, Crossref is becoming a hub which the community relies on to get both complete bibliographic metadata and non-bibliographic metadata (e.g. funding information, license information, clinical trial information, etc.) We need to help our existing members meet the new metadata expectations. Our objectives are to better communicate what metadata best practice is, equip members with all the data and tools they need to meet best practice and achieve closer cooperation from service providers.\nWe will focus on expanding the links between scholarly objects to all their associated research outputs. We will also expand support for new record types to ensure that they integrated into the scholarly record and can be discovered. At the other extreme, some new Crossref members have little technical infrastructure for creating and maintaining quality metadata. We need to help provide them with tools to ensure that we don’t dilute the Crossref system with substandard and/or incomplete metadata.\nBut metadata quality is a strategic focus across the entire Crossref membership. While we improve this across our entire membership by implementing stronger validation measures internally in our deposit processes, we will also employ mechanisms that engage the broader community to fill in gaps and correct metadata with a clear provenance trail of every metadata assertion in the Crossref system.\nRecently completed Metadata Manager for journal articles Reference-matching improvements (phase 1) Improvements to OJS integration (with PKP) Research grants deposit In focus Metadata \u0026lsquo;health checks\u0026rsquo; Support documentation re-write and migration to website Research organisations Registry (ROR) support Data citations Improving JATS support Research grants retrieval Conference IDs Metadata Practitioners Interest Group Scheduled 2020 Metadata schema enhancements Multiple resolution improvements (\u0026amp; decommission co-access) Pending Metadata Principles and Best Practices New Service Providers program Emerging Publisher Education Coalition Crossmark reports Revised relations taxonomy Improvement for bulk updates of metadata Standard Crossref DOI display/status widget R\u0026amp;D Participation reports (phase 2) Automating metadata extraction, preflight checking Metadata profiling Public feedback channel for metadata quality issues Adapt to expanding constituencies Members are at the heart of the Crossref community. Scholarly publishers are geographically expanding at a rapid pace and we currently have members in 140 countries. With that comes the need to increasingly and proactively work with emerging regions as they start to share research outputs globally. To this end, we will expand our geographic support through concerted efforts in international outreach, working with government education/science ministries and local Sponsors and Ambassadors, and developing as much localized content as we can.\nFurthermore, funders and research institutions are increasingly involved in the scholarly publishing process. As the research landscape changes, we need to respond and ensure our relevance by evolving in a way that better reflects these shifts. Our overarching objective is to expand our value proposition to convince these new constituents of Crossref’s relevance, getting them into our system and using our infrastructure.\nRecently completed In focus Sponsors program LIVE local educational events Research managers outreach Forum introduction (community.crossref.org) Ambassador program Multi-language webinars Scheduled 2020 Funder outreach Emerging Publisher Education Coalition Law journals Pending Non-English language documentation Non-English language interfaces DOI linking in mainstream media R\u0026amp;D Collaborate and partner Crossref faces a tension. We want to—where possible—take advantage of existing organisations, services, tools and technologies. We aim to do more, more efficiently, by focusing on expanding existing infrastructure and organisations rather than creating things from scratch. We don’t want to reinvent the wheel.\nSo that our alliances with others have the greatest impact, we align our strategic plans for scholarly infrastructure with others, and ensure that the community has the most up-to-date and accurate information.\nThis is part and parcel of our role as an community-wide infrastructure provider as we achieve our mission by supporting the entire research ecosystem. But at the same time, we take care not to introduce risky dependencies for the entire community. Hence, the bulk of our collaborations are with open initiatives.\nSome are led and driven by Crossref. Others are not.\nRecently completed ROR Registry launch In focus Value proposition for DOI Foundation Persistent identifier infrastructure through FREYA project Advocacy for richer metadata through Metadata 2020 Use of persistent identifiers in references with Wikimedia Research organisations Registry (ROR) with Digital Science, CDL, and DataCite Distributed usage logging (DUL) with COUNTER Data citation with Scholix, RDA, STM Association, DataCite, and Make Data Count OJS development with Public Knowledge Project Open Funder Registry with Elsevier Similarity Check with Turnitin Joint value proposition with DataCite Foundational infrastructure with ORCID and DataCite PIDapalooza festival of open persistent identifiers Scheduled 2020 Pending Emerging Publisher Education Coalition with DOAJ, COPE, and INASP Joint search with DataCite R\u0026amp;D DOIs for static website generators Reference implementation for open platforms ",
"headings": ["This is our strategic agenda from 2018-2020 and it\u0026rsquo;s now archived, please visit the main strategy page for the most up-to-date version.","The strategic landscape","Simplify and enrich existing services","Adapt to expanding constituencies","Improve our metadata","Collaborate and partner","Simplify and enrich existing services","Recently completed","In focus","Scheduled","2020","Pending","R\u0026amp;D","Improve our metadata","Recently completed","In focus","Scheduled","2020","Pending","R\u0026amp;D","Adapt to expanding constituencies","Recently completed","In focus","Scheduled","2020","Pending","R\u0026amp;D","Collaborate and partner","Recently completed","In focus","Scheduled","2020","Pending","R\u0026amp;D"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/dashboard/",
"title": "Dashboard",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 3,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Dashboard",
"tags": [],
"description": " The dashboard is currently unavailable as we\u0026rsquo;re working to improve the way the data is presented. Apologies for any inconvenience.\n",
"content": " The dashboard is currently unavailable as we\u0026rsquo;re working to improve the way the data is presented. Apologies for any inconvenience.\n",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/operations-and-sustainability/membership-operations/member-practices/",
"title": "Member Practices",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2025-05-12",
"lastmod_ts": 1747008000,
"section": "Operations & sustainability",
"tags": [],
"description": "We often refer to a member being “in good standing”, and that means meeting their membership obligations set out in the membership terms, such as displaying DOIs correctly and as links everywhere, linking references, only registering works for which they have the appropriate rights, and paying fees on time.\nWe have been working with the community to understand what is considered good member practices in relation to the integrity of the scholarly record (ISR).\n",
"content": "We often refer to a member being “in good standing”, and that means meeting their membership obligations set out in the membership terms, such as displaying DOIs correctly and as links everywhere, linking references, only registering works for which they have the appropriate rights, and paying fees on time.\nWe have been working with the community to understand what is considered good member practices in relation to the integrity of the scholarly record (ISR).\nIn March 2025, the Crossref Board voted to create a more specific set of standards for what constitutes reasons to revoke membership \u0026lsquo;for cause\u0026rsquo;”\u0026rsquo; and what \u0026lsquo;harm to the Crossref community\u0026rsquo; means in practice. Clause 2) a) of our July 2025 membership terms asks members to comply with Member Practices, i.e. this page. This Member Practices page will be fleshed out by a dedicated community group of research integrity experts (currently being formed) and will be used to guide decisions about suspending and revoking/terminating membership ‘for cause’.\nAs ever, Crossref’s first response to problems with member activity will always be to work closely with the member to solve these problems where possible, and suspension or revocation remains an absolute last resort. The responsibility for revoking membership remains a Board decision, but we need more guidance and clearer processes, especially given the range and volume of members (over 25,000 organisations from 167 countries and over 200 new members joining each month) so we need help to hone the processes, and ensure that we are playing our part in preserving the integrity of the scholarly record.\n",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/services/services-chinese/",
"title": "Crossref Services - Simplified Chinese",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 3,
"lastmod": "2021-02-26",
"lastmod_ts": 1614297600,
"section": "Find a service",
"tags": [],
"description": "Find a service Content Registration Similarity Check Reference Linking Crossmark Metadata Search Metadata APIs Cited-by Content Registration ",
"content": "Find a service Content Registration Similarity Check Reference Linking Crossmark Metadata Search Metadata APIs Cited-by Content Registration ",
"headings": ["Find a service"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/community/initiatives/",
"title": "Initiatives",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2021-01-07",
"lastmod_ts": 1609977600,
"section": "Get involved",
"tags": [],
"description": "Our communities\u0026rsquo; work to solve problems and support research doesn\u0026rsquo;t stand still. Many people come to Crossref for help either to lead, advise, host, or support new strategic ideas and initiatives.\nSome of them are key to our mission and stand to provide value to our members and the wider research ecosystem. We’ve identified some as special programs so that we can devote more time and attention to them. This support can take a variety of formats: promoting, prototyping, chairing or board/working group participation, adopting, co-developing, resourcing, financing, or advising - all while listening and learning too.\n",
"content": "Our communities\u0026rsquo; work to solve problems and support research doesn\u0026rsquo;t stand still. Many people come to Crossref for help either to lead, advise, host, or support new strategic ideas and initiatives.\nSome of them are key to our mission and stand to provide value to our members and the wider research ecosystem. We’ve identified some as special programs so that we can devote more time and attention to them. This support can take a variety of formats: promoting, prototyping, chairing or board/working group participation, adopting, co-developing, resourcing, financing, or advising - all while listening and learning too.\nStrategic programs we’ve taken on in the past include ORCID, preprints, and CHORUS. And of course we still support them, but that support has become part of our regular practices and processes and those initiatives have graduated to become fully-embedded services or separate organisations.\nWe’re currently focusing our time and effort on three special programs: Research Organisation Registry (ROR); the Crossref Grant Linking System; and data citation (including Scholix and Make Data Count). You can read more about all of these by following the links at the side of the page, and let us know if you have any questions about how you or your organisation can get involved.\nIt can be hard to keep track of everything, so if we’ve missed something you or your new idea is keen to develop with Crossref support, then do get in touch.\n",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/board-and-governance/elections/2025-slate/",
"title": "Board election 2025 candidates",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 2,
"lastmod": "2025-09-15",
"lastmod_ts": 1757894400,
"section": "Board & governance",
"tags": [],
"description": "Help elect the incoming class of 2026 Crossref board members",
"content":["Help","elect","the","incoming","class","of","2026","Crossref","board","members"],
"headings": ["Tier 1, Small and mid-sized members (electing one seat)","Tier 2, Large members (electing four seats)","Tier 1, Small and mid-sized members (electing one seat)","Rebecca Wambua, Chairperson, Distance, Open and e-Learning Practitioners\u0026rsquo; Association of Kenya (DOLPA)","Kenya\n","Personal statement ","Organisation statement","Oscar Donde, Journal Chief Editor, Pan Africa Science Journal","Kenya\n","Personal statement ","Organisation statement","Nwachukwu Egbunike, Head, Pan-Atlantic University Press","Nigeria\n","Personal statement ","Organisation statement","Tier 2, Large members (electing four seats)","Damian Bird, Publishing \u0026amp; Operations Director, CABI","United Kingdom\n","Personal statement ","Organisation statement","Rose L\u0026rsquo;Huillier, Senior Vice President Researchers \u0026amp; Librarians Solutions, Elsevier","Netherlands ","Personal statement ","Organisation statement","John Sivo, Senior Business Process and Data Governance Manager, IEEE","United States\n","Personal statement ","Organisation statement","Nick Lindsay, Director for Journals and Open Access, The MIT Press","United States\n","Personal statement ","Organisation statement","Anjalie Nawaratne, VP Data Transformation / Chief Business Architect, Springer Nature","Netherlands\n","Personal statement ","Organisation statement"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/board-and-governance/elections/2024-slate/",
"title": "Board election 2024 candidates",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 2,
"lastmod": "2024-09-16",
"lastmod_ts": 1726444800,
"section": "Board & governance",
"tags": [],
"description": "Help elect the incoming class of 2025 Crossref board members",
"content":["Help","elect","the","incoming","class","of","2025","Crossref","board","members"],
"headings": ["Tier 1, Small and mid-sized members (electing two seats)","Tier 2, Large members (electing two seats)","Tier 1, Small and mid-sized members (electing two seats)","Katharina Rieck, Open Science Manager, Austrian Science Fund (FWF)","Austria\n","Personal statement ","organisation statement","Lisa Schiff, Associate Director, Publishing, Archives, \u0026amp; Digitization, California Digital Library","United States\n","Personal statement ","organisation statement","Ejaz Khan, Editor in Chief \u0026amp; Professor, Health Services Academy, Pakistan Journal of Public Health","Pakistan\n","Personal statement ","organisation statement","Karthikeyan Ramalingam, Editorial Manager \u0026amp; Associate Dean, MM Publishers","India\n","Personal statement ","organisation statement","Tier 2, Large members (electing two seats)","Aaron Wood, Head, Product \u0026amp; Content Management, American Psychological Association","United States\n","Personal statement ","organisation statement","Dan Shanahan, Publishing Director, Public Library of Science (PLOS)","United States\n","Personal statement ","organisation statement","Amanda Ward, Director of Open Research, Taylor and Francis","United Kingdom\n","Personal statement ","organisation statement"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/board-and-governance/elections/2023-slate/",
"title": "Board election 2023 candidates",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 2,
"lastmod": "2023-08-21",
"lastmod_ts": 1692576000,
"section": "Board & governance",
"tags": [],
"description": "From 87 applications, our Nominating Committee put forward the following 11 candidates to fill the seven seats open for election to the Crossref Board of Directors. We will elect two large member seats and five small/midsized member seats. Please read their candidate statements below.\nIf you are a voting member of Crossref your ‘voting contact’ will receive an email the week of September 25th. Please follow the instructions in that email which includes links to the relevant election process and policy information.\n",
"content":["From","87","applications,","our","Nominating","Committee","put","forward","the","following","11","candidates","to","fill","the","seven","seats","open","for","election","to","the","Crossref","Board","of","Directors.","We","will","elect","two","large","member","seats","and","five","small/midsized","member","seats.","Please","read","their","candidate","statements","below.\nIf","you","are","a","voting","member","of","Crossref","your","‘voting","contact’","will","receive","an","email","the","week","of","September","25th.","Please","follow","the","instructions","in","that","email","which","includes","links","to","the","relevant","election","process","and","policy","information.\n"],
"headings": ["Tier 1, Small and mid-sized members (electing five seats)","Tier 2, Large members (electing two seats)","Tier 1, Small and mid-sized members (electing five seats)","Wendy Patterson, Scientific Director, Beilstein-Institut","Germany\n","Personal statement ","organisation statement","Olu Joshua, Director, Lujosh Ventures Limited","Nigeria\n","Personal statement ","organisation statement","Kihong Kim, President, Korean Council of Science Editors","South Korea\n","Personal statement ","organisation statement","Mike Schramm, Managing Director, NISC Ltd","South Africa\n","Personal statement ","organisation statement","Marin Dacos, Senior Advisor, OpenEdition","France\n","Personal statement ","organisation statement","Dr. Ivan Suazo, Vice Rector of Research, Universidad Autónoma de Chile","Chile\n","Personal statement ","organisation statement","Vincas Grigas, Head of Scholarly Journals, Vilnius University","Lithuania\n","Personal statement ","organisation statement","Tier 2, Large members (electing two seats)","Scott Delman, Director of Publications, Association for Computing Machinery (ACM)","United States\n","Personal statement ","organisation statement","James Phillpotts, Director of Content Transformation \u0026amp; Standards, Oxford University Press","United Kingdom\n","Personal statement ","organisation statement","Dan Shanahan, Publishing Director, Public Library of Science (PLOS)","United States\n","Personal statement ","organisation statement","Ashley Towne, Journals Director, University of Chicago Press","United States\n","Personal statement ","organisation statement"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/board-and-governance/elections/2022-slate/",
"title": "Board election 2022 candidates",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 2,
"lastmod": "2022-09-16",
"lastmod_ts": 1663286400,
"section": "Board & governance",
"tags": [],
"description": "If you are a voting member of Crossref your ‘voting contact’ will receive an email the week of September 19th. Please follow the instructions in that email which includes links to the relevant election process and policy information.\nFrom about 40 applications, our Nominating Committee put forward the following seven candidates to fill the five seats open for election to the Crossref Board of Directors. Please read their candidate statements below.\n",
"content":["If","you","are","a","voting","member","of","Crossref","your","‘voting","contact’","will","receive","an","email","the","week","of","September","19th.","Please","follow","the","instructions","in","that","email","which","includes","links","to","the","relevant","election","process","and","policy","information.\nFrom","about","40","applications,","our","Nominating","Committee","put","forward","the","following","seven","candidates","to","fill","the","five","seats","open","for","election","to","the","Crossref","Board","of","Directors.","Please","read","their","candidate","statements","below.\n"],
"headings": ["Tier 1, Small and mid-sized members","Tier 2, Large members","Tier 1, Small and mid-sized members (electing one seats)","Damian Pattinson, eLife, UK\n","Personal statement ","organisation statement","Déclaration personnelle du candidat","Déclaration organisationnelle","Declaração pessoal do candidato","Declaração da organização","Declaración personal del candidato","Declaración de la organización","후보자의 개인 소개","단체 소개","Oscar Donde, Pan Africa Science Journal, Kenya\n","Personal statement\n","organisation statement","Déclaration personnelle du candidat","Déclaration organisationnelle","Declaração pessoal do candidato","Declaração da organização","Declaración personal del candidato","Declaración de la organización","후보자의 개인 소개","단체 소개","Tier 2, Large members (electing four seats)","Christine Stohn, Clarivate, US\n","Personal statement ","organisation statement ","Déclaration personnelle de la candidate","Déclaration organisationnelle","Declaração pessoal da candidata","Declaração da organização","Declaración personal de la candidata","Declaración de la organización","후보자의 개인 소개","단체 소개","Rose L\u0026rsquo;Huillier, Elsevier, Netherlands\n","Personal statement","organisational statement ","Déclaration personnelle de la candidate","Déclaration organisationnelle","Declaração pessoal da candidata","Declaração da organização","Declaración personal de la candidata","Declaración de la organización","후보자의 개인 소개","단체 소개","Nick Lindsay, The MIT Press, US\n","Personal statement","organisational statement ","Déclaration personnelle du candidat","Déclaration organisationnelle","Declaração pessoal do candidato","Declaração da organização","Declaración personal del candidato","Declaración de la organización","후보자의 개인 소개","단체 소개","Anjalie Nawaratne, Springer Nature, UK\n","Personal statement","organisational statement ","Déclaration personnelle de la candidate","Déclaration organisationnelle","Declaração pessoal da candidata","Declaração da organização","Declaración personal de la candidata","Declaración de la organización","후보자의 개인 소개","단체 소개","Allyn Molina, Wiley, US\n","Personal statement","organisational statement ","Déclaration personnelle de la candidate","Déclaration organisationnelle","Declaração pessoal da candidata","Declaração da organização","Declaración personal de la candidata","Declaración de la organización","후보자의 개인 소개","단체 소개"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/board-and-governance/elections/2021-slate/",
"title": "Board election 2021 candidates",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 2,
"lastmod": "2021-08-11",
"lastmod_ts": 1628640000,
"section": "Board & governance",
"tags": [],
"description": "If you are a voting member of Crossref your ‘voting contact’ will receive an email in late September, please follow the instructions in that email which includes links to the relevant election process and policy information.\nFrom 61 applications, our Nominating Committee put forward the following eight candidates to fill the five seats open for election to the Crossref Board of Directors. Please read their candidate statements below.\nTier 1, Small and mid-sized members Member organisation Candidate standing Title Org type Country California Digital Library, University of California Lisa Schiff Associate Director, Publishing, Archives, and Digitization Library US Center for Open Science Nici Pfeiffer Chief Product Officer Researcher service US Melanoma Research Alliance Kristen Mueller Senior Director, Scientific Program Research funder US Morressier Sebastian Rose Head of Data Data repository Germany NISC Mike Schramm Managing Director Publisher South Africa Tier 2, Large members Member organisation Candidate standing Title Org type Country AIP Publishing Penelope Lewis Chief Publishing Officer Society US American Psychological Association (APA) Jasper Simons Chief Publishing Officer Society US Association for Computing Machinery Scott Delman Director of Publications Society US Tier 1, Small and mid-sized members (electing three seats) ",
"content":["If","you","are","a","voting","member","of","Crossref","your","‘voting","contact’","will","receive","an","email","in","late","September,","please","follow","the","instructions","in","that","email","which","includes","links","to","the","relevant","election","process","and","policy","information.\nFrom","61","applications,","our","Nominating","Committee","put","forward","the","following","eight","candidates","to","fill","the","five","seats","open","for","election","to","the","Crossref","Board","of","Directors.","Please","read","their","candidate","statements","below.\nTier","1,","Small","and","mid-sized","members","Member","organisation","Candidate","standing","Title","Org","type","Country","California","Digital","Library,","University","of","California","Lisa","Schiff","Associate","Director,","Publishing,","Archives,","and","Digitization","Library","US","Center","for","Open","Science","Nici","Pfeiffer","Chief","Product","Officer","Researcher","service","US","Melanoma","Research","Alliance","Kristen","Mueller","Senior","Director,","Scientific","Program","Research","funder","US","Morressier","Sebastian","Rose","Head","of","Data","Data","repository","Germany","NISC","Mike","Schramm","Managing","Director","Publisher","South","Africa","Tier","2,","Large","members","Member","organisation","Candidate","standing","Title","Org","type","Country","AIP","Publishing","Penelope","Lewis","Chief","Publishing","Officer","Society","US","American","Psychological","Association","(APA)","Jasper","Simons","Chief","Publishing","Officer","Society","US","Association","for","Computing","Machinery","Scott","Delman","Director","of","Publications","Society","US","Tier","1,","Small","and","mid-sized","members","(electing","three","seats)",""],
"headings": ["Tier 1, Small and mid-sized members","Tier 2, Large members","Tier 1, Small and mid-sized members (electing three seats)","Lisa Schiff, University of California, USA\n","organisation statement","Personal statement ","Déclaration de l’organisation","Déclaration personnelle","Declaração da organização","Declaração pessoal","Declaración de la organización","Declaración personal","단체소개서","자기소개서","Nici Pfeiffer, Center for Open Science, USA\n","organisation statement","Personal statement\n","Déclaration de l’organisation","Déclaration personnelle","Declaração da organização","Declaração pessoal","Declaración de la organización","Declaración personal","단체소개서","자기소개서","Kristen Mueller, Melanoma Research Alliance, USA\n","organisation statement","Personal statement\n","Déclaration de l’organisation","Déclaration personnelle","Declaração da organização","Declaração pessoal","Declaración de la organización","Declaración personal","단체소개서","자기소개서","Sebastian Rose, Morressier, Germany\n","organisation statement","Personal statement ","Déclaration de l’organisation","Déclaration personnelle","Declaração da organização","Declaração pessoal","Declaración de la organización","Declaración personal","단체소개서","자기소개서","Mike Schramm, NISC, South Africa\n","organisation statement","Personal statement ","Déclaration de l’organisation","Déclaration personnelle","Declaração da organização","Declaração pessoal","Declaración de la organización","Declaración personal","단체소개서","자기소개서","Tier 2, Large members (electing two seats)","Penelope Lewis, AIP Publishing, USA\n","organisation statement","Personal statement ","Déclaration de l’organisation","Déclaration personnelle","Declaração da organização","Declaração pessoal","Declaración de la organización","Declaración personal","단체소개서","자기소개서","Jasper Simons, American Psychological Association (APA), USA\n","organisation statement","Personal statement ","Déclaration de l’organisation","Déclaration personnelle","Declaração da organização","Declaração pessoal","Declaración de la organización","Declaración personal","단체소개서","자기소개서","Scott Delman, Association for Computing Machinery (ACM), USA\n","organisation statement","Personal statement ","Déclaration de l’organisation","Déclaration personnelle","Declaração da organização","Declaração pessoal","Declaración de la organización","Declaración personal","단체소개서","자기소개서"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/crossref-annual-meeting/archive/",
"title": "Annual meetings archive",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 2,
"lastmod": "2020-09-01",
"lastmod_ts": 1598918400,
"section": "Crossref Annual Meeting",
"tags": [],
"description": "An archive of every annual Crossref meeting since 2002, now called Crossref LIVE. Jump to a year to review the programs and speakers, and link to some recordings and slides.\n2025 2024 2023 2022 2021 2020 2019 2018 2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002 2001 2025 annual meeting Please see information from #Crossref2025 below, and cite the outputs as `#Crossref2025 Annual Meeting and Board Election, 22-23 October 2025 retrieved [date], [https://doi.org/10.13003/431937misogo](https://doi.org/10.13003/431937misogo).\nIf you attended any portion of the meeting, please take our survey to help inform furture events: Day 1, Day 2\n",
"content": "An archive of every annual Crossref meeting since 2002, now called Crossref LIVE. Jump to a year to review the programs and speakers, and link to some recordings and slides.\n2025 2024 2023 2022 2021 2020 2019 2018 2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002 2001 2025 annual meeting Please see information from #Crossref2025 below, and cite the outputs as `#Crossref2025 Annual Meeting and Board Election, 22-23 October 2025 retrieved [date], [https://doi.org/10.13003/431937misogo](https://doi.org/10.13003/431937misogo).\nIf you attended any portion of the meeting, please take our survey to help inform furture events: Day 1, Day 2\nPosts on BlueSky #Crossref2025 Posts on LinkedIn #Crossref2025 Agenda Day 1 🦩 Time (UTC) Topic 12:00 Celebrating 25th Anniversary of Crossref Hello to Crossref Satellite Event Nairobi, Kenya Welcome and agenda – Ed Pentz Timeline: 25 Years of Crossref Speakers - Urooj Nizami (PKP, Simon Fraser University) – Stronger Together: How PKP and Crossref support a shared scholarly community - Todd Carpenter (NISO) - Abel Packer (SciELO) – Crossref and the evolution of Latin America scholarly communication metadata - Lisa Schiff (California Digital Library, Pre-elections Board Chair) 13:00 Annual meeting \u0026amp; business – 2025 Board election 13:40 Crossref then and now - Membership – Presentation - Roadmap update – Presentation - RCFS – Presentation 14:10 Community highlights - Agon Memeti (University of Tetova) – Analyzing Abstract Coverage and Authorship Patterns in Crossref-Registered University of Tetova Journal Articles (2024) - Charlie Rapple (Kudos) – Scholarly publishing and the Sustainable Development Goals: What you need to know - Antoine Drouin (Fonds de Recherche du Québec) – Diving into Crossref as a Funder: A Tale of Swift Adoption - Pia Kretschmar (SCOAP3) – SCOAP3 Open Science elements - Barbara Rivera (Barcelona Declaration) – Open Research Information 15:15 Metadata updates – Patricia Feeney, Head of Metadata 15:30 Data Science - Dominika Tkaczyk (Director of Technology) – Introduction to Data Science team - Alex Bédard-Vallée (Data Scientist) – Internal environment for efficient data processing - Jason Portenoy (Data Scientist) – Metadata matching service and strategies 16:00 Closing remarks Day 2 🦩 Time (UTC) Topic 07:00 Celebrating 25th Anniversary of Crossref Welcome and agenda – Ed Pentz Timeline: 25 years of Crossref - Soichi Kubota (J-STAGE, JST) – Presentation - Leena Shah (DOAJ) – Presentation - Susan Murray (AJOL) – Presentation 08:00 Tools and services demonstrations New Participation Reports demo – Patrick Vale Record Registration Form demo – Lena Stoll Data storytelling with Crossref REST API – Luis Montilla 08:45 Project and programs updates - Johannsen Obanda – Ambassador Program update - Amanda Bartell – Integrity of the Scholarly Record (ISR) - Dominika Tkaczyk – A few words about technology 09:10 Community highlights - Hans de Jonge (NWO) – Manuscript submission systems and metadata completeness - Audrey Kenni (Pan African Medical Journal) – PAMJ’s Journey to Visibility with Crossref - Nurul Ain Mohd Noor (Universiti Malaysia Terengganu) – My Crossref Journey - Achal Agrawal (PostPub) – The Unreasonable Effectiveness of Author-Affiliation Co-Occurrence - Ratna Galuh Manika Trisista (Universitas Islam Jakarta) – Our Better Metadata Story 10:00 Panel discussion: Research Nexus in the real world Ginny Hendricks (Crossref, Facilitator), Dominika Tkaczyk (Crossref), Bianca Kramer (Barcelona Declaration on Open Research Information), David Oliva Uribe (UNESCO), Amber Osman (Cofounder XploreOpen), Mariángela Nápoli (CONICET-IICE UBA-FFYL; Crossref Ambassador in Pakistan), Kazuhiro Hayashi (National Institute of Science and Technology Policy, Science Council of Japan) 04:00 Closing remarks: Ed Pentz 2024 annual meeting October 29 | Online | Twitter Hashtag: #Crossref2024\nPlease see information from #Crossref2024 below, and cite the outputs as #Crossref2024 Annual Meeting and Board Election, 29 October 2024 retrieved [date], https://doi.org/10.13003/1KJ1GBDA9B:\nYouTube recording Slides Posters Board election results Session I\nTime Topic 0:00 Welcome \u0026amp; Crossref updates 1:20 Strategic programs \u0026amp; annual meeting 31:49 Demos 59:08 Updates from the Community I 1:01:12 - Michael Parkin, EMBL-EBI- [Slides] 1:09:14 - Hans de Jonge, Dutch Research Council NWO - [Slides] 1:23:22 - Fred Atherden, eLife - [Slides] 1:32:02 - Brietta Pike, CSIRO - [Slides] 1:54:12 Panel discussion - Opportunities and challenges of the open scholarly infrastructure 3:10:37 Reflections break-outs (ISR, RCFS, Research Nexus, Reflections) Slides Session II\nTime Topic 0:00 Welcome and introduction 1:38 Beyond the basics: Crossref API Workshop 25:08 Metadata Schema 56:10 Resourcing Crossref for Future Sustainability (RCFS) 1:43:30 The state of Crossref 2:13 Board Election 2:32 Updates from the Community II 2:35:16 - Alice Wise, CLOCKSS- [Slides] 2:48:03 - Mark Williams, Sciety - [Slides] 2:58:34 - Arianna Garcia, AmeliCA/Redalyc - [Slides] 3:27:00 Reflections break-outs (ISR, RCFS, Research Nexus, Reflections) 3:32:21 Closing Remarks 2023 annual meeting October 31 | Online | Twitter Hashtag: #Crossref2023\nPlease see information from #Crossref2023 below, and cite the outputs as #Crossref2023 Annual Meeting and Board Election, October 31, 2023 retrieved [date], https://doi.org/10.13003/h3yygefpyf\nYouTube recording Google slides or pdf slides #Crossref2023 Mastodon stream #Crossref2023 Twitter stream Posters from community guest speakers Board election results 2022 annual meeting October 26 | Online | Twitter Hashtag: #CRLIVE22\nTheme: The Research Nexus, the importance of relationships in metadata and community stories of building the research nexus together.\nPlease check out the materials from LIVE22 below, and cite the outputs as Crossref Annual Meeting LIVE22, October 26, 2022 retrieved [date], [https://doi.org/10.13003/i3t7l9ub7t]:\nYouTube recording Recording transcript Zoom Q\u0026amp;A transcript Google slides or pdf slides Twitter thread #CRLIVE22 Posters from community guest speakers Board election results\n2021 annual meeting 9 November | Online | Twitter Hashtag: #CRLIVE21\nPlease check out the materials from LIVE21 below, and cite the outputs as Crossref Annual Meeting LIVE21, November 9, 2021 retrieved [date], [https://doi.org/10.13003/s0slxfq]:\nYouTube recording Recording transcript Zoom Q\u0026amp;A transcript Google slides or pdf slides Board election results\n2020 annual meeting 10 November | Online | Twitter Hashtag: #CRLIVE20\nCrossref turned 20 in 2020 and despite the challenges in the world lately, it felt like a natural milestone to take our annual meeting, LIVE20, online.\nPlease check out the materials from LIVE20 below, and cite the outputs as Crossref Annual Meeting LIVE20, November 10, 2020, retrieved [date], https://doi.org/10.13003/5gq8v1q:\nYouTube recording Recording transcript Zoom Q + A transcript Google slides or pdf slides Board election results\n2019 annual meeting 13 - 14 November, 2019 | Tobacco Theater, Amsterdam | Twitter Hashtag: #CRLIVE19\nTheme: Have your say where and it included an afternoon of scene-setting talks from Ed on our strategy and trends, and Ginny on research into the value of Crossref.\nDay 1 - Recording\nRecorded sessions from November 13, 2019\nSlides Ed Pentz and Ginny Hendricks - \u0026quot;Welcome\u0026quot;, \u0026quot;Perceived value of Crossref\u0026quot;, \u0026quot;Strategic scene-setting\u0026quot; (PDF) Catriona Maccallum of Hindawi - “In our own words: Hindawi” (PDF) Todd Toler of Wiley - “Crossref’s Value in an era of Open Science” (PDF) Anna Danilova of Ukrinformauka - “Cooperation of SA “Ukrinformnauka” with Crossref (PDF) Christian Gutknecht of the Swiss National Science Foundation - “Crossref from a funder perspective” (PDF) Ludo Waltman of CWTS at Leiden University - “Researcher and metadata user view” (PDF) Day 2 - Recording\nRecorded sessions November 14, 2019\nSlides Slides for Workshop 1 Slides for Workshop 2 Slides for Workshop 2 Slides for the Workshop 'rollup' Get the feel of the event by listening to talks from the session entitled “In their own words\u0026hellip;” from: Todd Toler of Wiley, Catriona Maccallum of Hindawi, Anna Danilova of Ukrinformauka, Christian Gutknecht of the Swiss National Science Foundation, and Ludo Waltman of CWTS at Leiden University. The podcast also includes some of our guest’s comments about the value of Crossref.\nPlease note there will be no in-person event around the November 2020 annual election, which will instead be announced virtually. We want to take stock of the feedback from LIVE19, gather more from others throughout 2020, and following up on the value research outputs we\u0026rsquo;ll be ready to report progress in 2021. Please check to see if there will be a LIVE local near you instead.\n2018 annual meeting 13 - 14 November, 2018 | Toronto Reference Library, Canada | Twitter Hashtag: #CRLIVE18\nTheme: How good is your metadata? where Crossref staff and invited speakers inspired us with their metadata tales of woe and wonder. It was two full days packed with a mixture of plenary sessions, the results of our members\u0026rsquo; newly elected board members, and interactive activities.\nCrossrefLIVE18.sched.com agenda #CRLIVE18 Twitter stream Recordings from Day 1 Recordings from Day 2 2017 annual meeting 14 - 15 November, 2017 | 8:00AM - 5:45PM | Hotel Fort Canning, Singapore | Twitter Hashtag: #CRLIVE17\nTheme: We focused on the theme of Metadata + Relations + Infrastructure = Context. We had our fullest program yet, with the broadest representation yet - researchers, editors, journal and book people, publishing execs, librarians, and funders. We talked a lot about relationships: between metadata; between research outputs; and between the scholarly community.\nAgenda Tuesday, November 14\n08:00 Registration 09:00 Ed Pentz: Year in Review \u0026amp; Strategy Introduction Video Recording 09:30 Jennifer Lin: Metadata for the Scholarly Map Video Recording 10:00 Theodora Bloom: Handling the Dynamic Nature of Scholarly Communications Video Recording 10:30 Break 11:00 Amanda Bartell, Susan Collins, Ginny Hendricks: How to Win at Being a Crossref Membern Video Recording Vanessa Fairhurst, Rachael Lammey: Reaching our International Community Video Recording Madeleine Watson and Patricia Feeney: Relations, Translations, \u0026amp; Versions - Oh My! Video Recording Madeleine Watson and Chuck Koscher: This New Metadata Manager Will Change Your Life Video Recording 12:30 Lunch 13:30 Yin-Leng Theng: ARIA: A Scholarly Metrics Information System for Universities Video Recording Mark Patterson: I4OC: The Initiative for Open Citations Video Recording Nicholas Bailey: What does data science tell us about social challenges in scholarly publishing? Video Recording Jennifer Kemp and Madeleine Watson: Exploring relationships with Event Data Video Recording 15:00 Break 15:30 P Showraiah, Venkatraman Anandalkshmn, Brandon Koh, Alisha Ramos: Singapore Three Minute Thesis (3MT) competition finalists Video Recording 15:45 Casey Greene: Research and Literature Parasites in a Culture of Sharing Video Recording 16:25 John Chodacki: Metadata 2020: What Could Richer Metadata Enable? Video Recording 16:45 Lisa Hart Martin: Annual Meeting \u0026amp; Board Election 17:15 Ed Pentz, P Showraiah, Jean Christophe \u0026amp; We Are CONfidence: Drinks Reception \u0026amp; Entertainment\nWednesday, November 15 08:30 Coffee 09:00 Geoffrey Bilder: Information Trust: Metadata = provenance; provenance = key to trust Video Recording 09:30 Doreen Liu: Scholarly Publishing in Asia today Video Recording 10:00 Trevor Lane: Introduction to COPE \u0026amp; Research Integrity Video Recording 10:20 Miguel Escobar Varela: Digital Humanities in Singapore: some thoughts for the future Video Recording 10:40 Break 11:10 Geoffrey Bilder: You\u0026rsquo;ll never guess who uses Crossref metadata the most Video Recording 11:30 Drop-in: Trevor Lane: Bring Your Ethics Issues to Discuss with COPE Drop-in: Gareth Malcolm and Madeleine Watson: our Similarity Check Questions Answered Drop-in: Jennifer Lin: Bring your Crossmark questions around updates and corrections 12:30 Lunch 13:30 Jennifer Kemp: Introducing the Crossref Plus service Video Recording 13:50 Alan Rutledge: Anatomy of a personalized research recommendation engine Video Recording 14:00 Kuansan Wang: Democratize access to scholarly knowledge with AI Video Recording 14:15 Lenny Teytelman: Call to Reduce Random Collisions with Information Video Recording 14:45 Break 15:15 Ed Pentz: Crossref Strategic Outlook Video Recording 15:40 Paul Peters: The OI Project: Disambiguating affiliation names Video Recording 15:55 Adam Hyde: Developing an open source publishing ecosystem founded on community collaboration Video Recording 16:15 Liz Allen: New models of publishing research outputs: the importance of infrastructure Video Recording 16:40 Ed Pentz: Wrap-up \u0026amp; Key Takeaways\n2016 annual meeting 2 November, 2016 | 8:30AM - 6PM | The Royal Society, London, UK | Twitter Hashtag: #LIVE16\nTheme: Smart alone, brilliant together\nAgenda 08:30 – 10:00 Registration and Breakfast 10:00 – 10:30 Dario Taraborelli, Wikimedia: Citations for the sum of all human knowledge (as linked open data) Video Recording 10:30 – 11:00 Ian Calvert, Digital Science: \u0026ldquo;You don\u0026rsquo;t have metadata Video Recording 11:00 – 11:30 Break 11:30 – 11:50 Ed Pentz: Crossref’s outlook \u0026amp; key priorities Video Recording 11:50 – 12:10 Ginny Hendricks: A vision for membership Video Recording 12:10 – 12:30 Lisa Hart Martin: The meaning of governance Video Recording 12:30 – 13:00 Business meeting \u0026amp; Election results, with Crossref\u0026rsquo;s Chair and Treasurer. Moderators: Lisa Hart Martin 13:00 – 14:00 Join your colleagues for a hot lunch 14:00 – 14:20 Geoffrey Bilder: The case of the missing leg Video Recording 14:20 – 14:40 Jennifer Lin: New territories in the Scholarly Research Map Video Recording 14:40 – 15:00 Chuck Koscher: Relationships and other notable things Video Recording 15:00 – 15:30 Break 15:30 – 16:00 Carly Strasser, Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation: Funders and Publishers as Agents of Change Video Recording 16:00 – 16:30 April Hathcock, New York University: Opening Up the Margins Video Recording 16:30 – 16:45 Closing Remarks 16:45 – 18:00 Reception\nGet a flavor of the event by listening to three of the most popular talks from 2016. The podcast also includes some of our guest\u0026rsquo;s comments about the talks, including Crossref\u0026rsquo;s Geoffrey Bilder on our plans for a new organisation identifier registry, Dario Taraborelli from the Wikimedia Foundation, and April Hathcock of New York University.\n2015 annual meeting 18 November, 2015 | 8:30AM - 5PM | The Taj Hotel, Boston, MA, USA | Twitter Hashtag: #crossref15\nAgenda 08:30 Registration and Breakfast\n09:00 (Optional) Taxonomies Interest Group\n09:00 (Optional) Business Meeting\n09:30 Registration and Breakfast\n09:55 Welcome\n10:00 Marc Abrahams, Improbable Research : Improbable research, the Ig Nobel Prizes, and you: Presentation | Video Recording\n10:45 Juan Pablo Alperin, Public Knowledge Project and Crossref: Two P\u0026rsquo;s in a Cross Presentation | Video Recording\n11:30 Break\n12:00 Ed Pentz: Executive Update Presentation | Video Recording\n12:20 Ginny Hendricks: Outreach \u0026amp; Brand Presentation | Video Recording\n12:45 Lunch\n13:45 Jennifer Lin: Products \u0026amp; Services Presentation | Video Recording\n14:15 Chuck Koscher: The Metadata Engine Presentation | Video Recording\n14:35 Geoffrey Bilder: Strategic Initiatives Presentation | Video Recording\n15:00 Break\n15:30 Scott Chamberlain, rOpenSci: Thinking programmatically Video Recording\n16:15 Martin Eve, Birbeck, University of London: Open Access \u0026amp; The Humanities Presentation | Video Recording\n17:00 Ed Pentz: Closing Remarks\n17:05 Champagne Reception\n2014 annual meeting 12 November, 2012 | 8:30AM - 6:30PM | The Royal Society, London, UK | Twitter Hashtag: #crossref14\nAgenda 8:30 - 10:00 Registration and Breakfast 9:15 - 9:45 Corporate Annual Meeting for Members and Board Election (Ian Bannerman, Chair, Board of Directors, Bernard Rous, Treasurer, Ed Pentz, Executive Director, Lisa Hart, Secretary) 10:00 - 10:20 Ed Pentz, Executive Director: Main Open Meeting, Introduction and CrossRef Overview Presentation | Video Recording 10:20 - 10:40 Chuck Koscher, Director of Technology: System Update Presentation | Video Recording 10:40 - 11:00 Geoffrey Bilder, Director of Strategic Initiatives: Strategic Initiatives Update Video Recording 11:00 - 11:30 Break 11:30 - 12:15 Branding, Carol Anne Meyer, Business Development and Marketing: CrossRef Flash Update Presentation | Video Recording Rachael Lammey, Product Manager: CrossCheck \u0026amp; CrossRef Text and Data Mining Presentation | Video Recording Kirsty Meddings, Product Manager: CrossMark \u0026amp; FundRef Presentation | Video Recording Karl Ward, R\u0026amp;D Programmer: CrossRef Metadata Search Presentation | Video Recording Ed Pentz, Executive Director: ORCID Presentation | Video Recording 12:15 - 13:15 Lunch 13:15 - 14:15 Keynote: Laurie Goodman, PhD., GigaScience: Ways and Needs to Promote Rapid Data Sharing Presentation | Video Recording 14:15-14:45 Break 14:45-16:00 Moderator: Carol Anne Meyer, Business Development and Marketing: Improving Peer Review Panel Adam Etkin, PRE: Securing Trust \u0026amp; Transparency in Peer Review Presentation | Video Recording bioRxiv: the preprint server for biology: Richard Sever, Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press Presentation | Video Recording Mirjam Curno, Frontiers: Frontiers’ Collaborative Peer Review Presentation | Video Recording Janne-Tuomas Seppänen, Peerage of Science: Do it once, do it well – questioning submission and peer review traditions Presentation | Video Recording 16:00-17:00 Richard A. Jefferson, Cambia: Innovation Cartography: Creating impact from scholarly research requires maps not metrics Video Recording 17:00-17:15 Wrap Up 17:15-18:15 Cocktail reception\n2013 annual meeting 13 November, 2013 | 8:30AM - 5PM | The Charles Hotel, Cambridge, MA, USA | Twitter Hashtag: #crossref13\nAgenda 8:30 - 10:00 Registration and Breakfast 9:15 - 9:45 Corporate Annual Meeting for Members and Board Election –– Bernie Rous, Treasurer, Board of Directors –– Ed Pentz, Executive Director –– Lisa Hart, Secretary 10:00 - 10:20 Ed Pentz, Executive Director: Main Open Meeting: Introduction and CrossRef Overview Video recording \u0026amp; presentation 10:20 - 10:40 Chuck Koscher, Director of Technology: System Update Video recording \u0026amp; presentation 10:40 - 11:00 Geoffrey Bilder, Director of Strategic Initiatives : Strategic Initiatives Update Video recording \u0026amp; presentation 11:00 - 11:30 Break 11:30 - 12:15 CrossRef Flash Update –– Carol Anne Meyer, Business Development and Marketing: Branding Video recording \u0026amp; presentation –– Rachael Lammey, Product Manager: CrossCheck \u0026amp; CrossMark Video recording \u0026amp; presentation –– Kirsty Meddings, Product Manager: FundRef Video recording \u0026amp; presentation –– Karl Ward, R\u0026amp;D Programmer: CrossRef Metadata Search Video recording \u0026amp; presentation –– Ed Pentz, Executive Director: ORCID Video recording \u0026amp; presentation 12:15 - 13:15 Lunch 13:15 - 14:15 Keynote: Heather Piwowar, co-founder Impactstory: Building skyscrapers with our scholarship Video recording \u0026amp; presentation 14:15 - 14:45 Kristen Fisher Ratan, PLOS: Agile Publishing: responding to the changing requirements in scholarly communication Video recording \u0026amp; presentation 14:45 - 15:15 Break 15:15 - 16:00 Walter Warnick, Director of the U.S. Department of Energy Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI): How CrossRef has Accelerated Science and Its Promise for the Future: A Federal Perspective Video recording \u0026amp; presentation 16:00 - 16:45 CLOCKSS and Portico, Randy S. Kiefer, CLOCKSS and Kate Wittenberg, PORTICO: Archiving Publishing Panel: United on Preservation Video recording \u0026amp; presentation 16:45 - 17:00 Wrap Up\n2012 annual meeting 14 November, 2012 | 8:30AM - 6:30PM | The Royal Society, London, UK | Twitter Hashtag: #crossref12\nAgenda 8:30 - 10:00 Registration and Breakfast 9:15 - 9:45 Corporate Annual Meeting for Members and Board Election –– Linda Beebe, Chair, Board of Directors –– Ian Bannerman, Treasurer, Board of Directors –– Lisa Hart, Secretary –– Ed Pentz, Executive Director 10:00 - 10:20 Ed Pentz, Executive Director: Main Open Meeting, Introduction and CrossRef Overview Presentation | Video Recording 10:20 - 10:40 Chuck Koscher, Director of Technology: System Update Video Recording 10:40 - 11:00 Geoff Bilder, Director of Strategic Initiatives: Strategic Initiatives Update Presentation | Video Recording 11:00 - 11:30 Break 11:30 - 12:00 Laure Haak, ORCID: The Role of ORCID in the Research Community Presentation | Video Recording 12:00 - 13:00 Lunch 13:00 - 14:00 Jason Scott, Archive Team: CITIES ON THE EDGE OF NEVER: Life in the Trenches of the Web in 2012 Video Recording 14:00-15:00 Carol Anne Meyer, Business Development and Marketing: Global Publishing Panel: Perspectives of using CrossRef from publishers in Lithuania, Brazil, South Korea and China ––Eleonora Dagiene, Vilnius Gediminas University Press Presentation | Video Recording ––Edilson Damasio, Universidade Estadual de Maringá – UEM - Eduem Presentation | Video Recording ––Choon Shil Lee, Sookmyung Women’s University, KAMJE Presentation | Video Recording ––Yan Shuai, Tsinghua University Press (TUP) Presentation | Video Recording 15:00 - 15:30 FundRef: In response to the need to standardize the collection and display of funding information for scholarly publications, CrossRef officially launched the FundRef project in March of 2012. Four funding agencies and seven publishers are working together to carry out a pilot project, with the goal of developing and demonstrating a community-wide solution. The pilot group plans to issue recommendations for full integration of funding information in early 2013. ––Fred Dylla, American Institute of Physics (AIP) Presentation | Video Recording ––Kevin Dolby, Wellcome Trust Presentation | Video Recording 15:30 - 16:00 Break 16:00 - 16:30 Rachael Lammey, Product Manager: CrossCheck and CrossMark Update Presentation | Video Recording 16:30 - 17:00 Virginia Barbour, PLOS, Committee on Publications Ethics (COPE): Plagiarism as seen from the editors’ perspective Presentation | Video Recording 17:00 - 17:15 Wrap Up 17:15 - 18:30 Cocktail Reception\n2011 annual meeting 15 November, 2011 | 8:30AM - 6:30PM | The Charles Hotel, Cambridge, MA, USA | Twitter Hashtag: #crossref11\nAgenda 8:30 - 10:00 Registration and Breakfast9:00 - 9:45 Corporate Annual Meeting for Members and Board Election–– Linda Beebe, Chair, Board of Directors–– Ian Bannerman, Treasurer, Board of Directors–– Ed Pentz, Executive Director10:00 - 10:20 Main Open Meeting, Introduction and Crossref Overview, Ed Pentz, Executive DirectorPresentation | Video Recording10:20 - 10:40 System Update, Chuck Koscher, Director of Technology Presentation | Video Recording10:40 - 11:00 Strategic Initiatives Update, Geoff Bilder, Director of Strategic Initiatives Video Recording11:00 - 11:30 Break11:30 - 11:45 Crossref Member Obligations (including Display Guidelines), Carol Anne Meyer, Business Development and Marketing Presentation | Video Recording11:45 - 12:15 CrossMark Update Evan Owens, American Institute of Physics [Presentation] | Video RecordingKirsty Meddings, Product Manager Presentation | Video Recording12:15 - 12:45 ORCID Update, Howard Ratner, Nature Publishing Group Presentation | Video Recording12:45 - 13:15 DataCite: the Perfect Complement to Crossref, James Mullins, Purdue University Presentation | Video Recording13:15 - 14:15 Lunch14:15 - 15:15 Sex and the Scientific Publisher: How Journals and Journalists Collude (despite their best intentions) to Mislead the Public, Ellen Ruppel Shell, Boston University Center for Science \u0026amp; Medical Journalism Presentation | Video Recording15:15-15:45 The Persistence of Error: A Study of Retracted Articles on the Internet, Phil Davis, Publishing Consultant Presentation | Video Recording\n16:15 Break 16:15-16:45 Results from global journal editor survey on detecting plagiarism, Helen (Y.H) ZHANG, JZUS (Journal of Zhejiang University-SCIENCE) Video Recording 16:45 - 17:15 The Good, the Bad and the Ugly: What Retractions Tell Us About Scientific Transparency, Ivan Oransky, Retraction Watch Presentation | Video Recording 17:15 - 17:30 Wrap up 17:30 - 18:30 Cocktail Reception 2010 annual meeting 16 November, 2010 | 8:30AM - 6PM | One Great George Street, London, UK | Twitter Hashtag: #crossref10\nCredibility in Scholarly Communications\nAgenda 8:30 - 9:30 Registration and Breakfast 9:00 - 9:45 Corporate Annual Meeting for Members and Board Election –– Bob Campbell, Chair, Crossref Board of Directors –– Linda Beebe, Treasurer, Crossref Board of Directors Video Presentation –– Ed Pentz, Executive Director Video Presentation 10:00 - 10:15 Main Open Meeting, Introduction and Crossref Overview, Ed Pentz, Executive Director Video Presentation 10:15 - 10:30 System Update, Chuck Koscher, Director of Technology Video Presentation 10:30 - 10:45 Strategic Initiatives Update, Geoff Bilder, Director of Strategic Initiatives Video Presentation 10:45 - 11:00 CrossCheck Kirsty Meddings, Product Manager Video Presentation 11:00 - 11:30 Break 11:30 - 11:35 Transparency in Funding Sources, H. Frederick Dylla, American Institute of Physics Video Presentation 11:35 - 12:10 CrossMark Prototype Demo, Carol Anne Meyer, Business Development and Marketing Video Presentation 12:10 - 12:30 ORCID Update, Howard Ratner, Nature Publishing Group Video Presentation 12:30 - 1:30 Lunch 13:30 - 14:30 Making sense of science and evidence, Tracey Brown, Sense About Science Video Presentation 14:30 - 15:00 Which scientists can we trust? Christine Ottery, Science Journalist Video Presentation 15:00 - 15:30 Break 15:30 - 16:00 Scholarly eBooks - Improving discoverability and usage, Carol Anne Meyer, Business Development and Marketing Manager Video Presentation 16:00 - 17:00 Publishing Data alongside Analysis: a case study from OECD, Toby Green, Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) Video Presentation Communicating Data: New Roles for Researchers, Publishers and Libraries, MacKenzie Smith, Massachusetts Institute of Technology Libraries Video Presentation 17:00 - 17:15 Wrap up 17:15 - 18:00 Cocktail Reception\n2009 annual meeting 10 November, 2009 | 8:30AM - 5PM | The Charles Hotel, Cambridge, MA, USA Twitter Hashtag: #crossref09\nAgenda 8:30 - 9:00 Registration and Breakfast 9:00 - 10:00 Corporate Annual Meeting, Board Election and Strategy Overview Bob Campbell, Chair, Crossref Board of Directors Linda Beebe, Treasurer, Crossref Board of Directors Presentation Ed Pentz, Executive Director Presentation 10:00 - 10:20 System Update, Chuck Koscher, Director of Technology Presentation 10:20 - 10:50 Break 10:50 - 11:15 Strategic Initiatives Update, Geoff Bilder, Director of Strategic Initiatives Presentation 11:15 - 12:00 Crossref DOIs in Use and Branding Guidelines, Carol Anne Meyer, Marketing and Business Development Manager Presentation 12:00 - 13:15 Lunch 13:15 - 14:15 Trust, Communication and Academic Publication, Professor Onora O\u0026rsquo;Neill, Faculty of Philosophy, University of Cambridge (Baroness O\u0026rsquo;Neill of Bengarve) 14:15 - 15:30 CrossCheck: Views from the Field. Kirsty Meddings, Product Manager Presentation Panelists: Phillip E. Canuto, Executive Editor, Cleveland Clinic Journal of Medicine Presentation Cathy Griffin, Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery Presentation Howard Ratner, Nature Publishing Group Presentation 15:30 - 16:00 Break 16:00 - 16:45 Plagiarism in the Academy: Now What Do We Do?, T. Scott Pluchak Director, Lister Hill Library of the Health Sciences, University of Alabama at Birmingham Presentation 16:45 - 17:00 Wrap up\n2008 annual meeting 18 November, 2008 | 9AM - 6PM | Lenox Hotel, Boston, MA\nTheme: Towards the Future of Scientific Communication\nAgenda 9:00 - 10:00 Registration and coffee/tea 9:30 - 10:00 Corporate Annual Meeting, Board Election, and Strategy Overview - Bob Campbell, Chair, Crossref Board of Directors; Linda Beebe, Treasurer, Crossref Board of Directors; Ed Pentz, Executive Director 10:00 - 10:20 Intro to Annual Member Meeting and Crossref Mission, Ed Pentz, Executive Director 10:20 - 10:40 System Update, New Services, MyCrossref, Chuck Koscher, Crossref Technology Director 10:40 - 11:00 CrossCheck Update, Ed Pentz, Executive Director 11:00 - 11:30 Coffee and tea break 11:30 - 12:15 New Strategic Initiatives, Geoff Bilder, Director of Strategic Initiatives 12:15 - 13:30 Lunch 13:30 - 14:15 Karen Hunter, Senior Vice President within the Global Academic and Customer Relations at Elsevier on Opportunities for Cooperation 14:15 - 15:10 Jonathan Zittrain, author of and Co-Founder and Faculty Co-Director Berkman Center for Internet \u0026amp; Society on The Future of the Internet and How to Stop It 15:10 - 15:30 Coffee and tea break 15:30 - 16:15 John Wilbanks, VP of Science at Creative Commons, on Building a Knowledge Network 16:15 - 17:15 Natalie Angier, Pulitzer Prize-winning author of, most recently, The Canon, will provide a fun and lively look at science literacy and how publishers aid and abet the cause 17:15 - 17:30 Wrap up 17:30 - 18:30 Cocktail reception\n2007 annual meeting 1 November, 2007 | 9AM - 6:30PM | The Royal College of Surgeons of England, London, UK\nAgenda 9:00 - 9:30 Registration and new member coffee 9:30 - 10:00 Corporate Annual Meeting, Board Election, and Strategy Overview Anthony Durniak, Chair, Crossref Board of Directors Bob Campbell, Vice-Chairman, Crossref Board of Directors Ed Pentz, Executive Director 10:00 - 10:20 System Update, New Services, Chuck Koscher, Crossref Technology Director 10:20 - 10:40 Strategic Initiatives Update, Geoff Bilder, Crossref Director of Strategic Initiatives 10:40 - 11:00 Coffee and tea break 11:00 - 11:40 Dr. Kieron O\u0026rsquo;Hara. Electronic Publishing and Public Trust in Science. Senior Research Fellow, School of Electronics and Computer Science, University of Southampton. 11:40 - 12:20 Alex Frost. Sermo as a model for online information sharing: relations to open science, open review, and post-publication review.Vice President for Research Initiatives, Sermo 12:20 - 13:30 Lunch 13:30 - 14:10 Dr. Ben Goldacre. On Popular Misunderstanding of Science. Medical Doctor who writes the Bad Science column in the Guardian. 14:10 - 14:50 Richard Kidd. Project Prospect - Introducing Semantics into Chemical Science Publishing. Project Manager, Royal Society of Chemistry. 14:50 - 15:10 Coffee and tea break 15:10 - 15:50 Pritpal S Tamber. Faculty of 1000 Medicine: Post Publication Peer Recommendation. Managing Director, Faculty of 1000 Medicine. 15:50 - 16:30 Edward Wates. Trustworthiness: Does the publisher have a role to play? UK Journal Production Director, Blackwell Publishing. 16:30 - 17:30 Sally Morris. Quality and Trust in Scholarly Publishing. Editor-in-Chief, Learned Publishing, ALPSP. Audience questions and discussion. 17:30 - 18:30 Cocktail reception\n2006 annual meeting 1 November, 2006 | 9AM-6PM | The Charles Hotel, Cambridge, MA, USA\nBuilding on Success\nAgenda 9:30 - 10:00 Registration and new member coffee 10:00 - 10:30 Corporate Annual Meeting, Board Election, and Strategy Overview, Anthony Durniak, Chair, Crossref Board of Directors; Robert Campbell, Treasurer, Crossref Board of Directors; Ed Pentz, Executive Director 10:30 - 10:50 System Update, New Services, and Data Quality Initiative Chuck Koscher, Crossref Technology Director 10:50 - 11:10 Board Committee Updates, with introduction by Amy Brand, Director of Business and Product Development; Howard Ratner, Chair, CWS Committee; Bernard Rous, Chair, Institutional Repositories Committee 11:10 - 11:30 Coffee and tea break 11:30 - 12:15 KEYNOTE: Tim Berners-Lee, Director of the World Wide Web Consortium Identifying and describing things on the web 12:15 - 13:40 Lunch Changes in Research and their Impact on Publishing 13:40 - 14:20 DOIs for Biological Databases, Phil Bourne, Protein Data Bank 14:00 - 14:40 Developments in Author Identification, Niels Weertman, Scopus; Taking the guesswork out of author searching, James Pringle, ISI; Smith, Lee, and Hirano T: How and Why to Find Authors 14:40 - 15:00 Coffee and tea break 15:00 - 15:40 The Future of Archiving, starting with the present, Michael Keller, Stanford 15:40 - 17:30 \u0026ldquo;Building on Success\u0026rdquo; (moderated session) 15:40 - 16:00 Introduction by Tony Durniak, Chair of Crossref 16:00 - 17:00 Panel of Crossref members discussing possible future Crossref developments: Terry Hulbert, Institute of Physics Publishing; Richard Cave, Public Library of Science; Michael Krot, JSTOR; Carol Richman, Sage; Greg Suprock, Nature Publishing Group; Mark Doyle, American Physical Society 17:00 - 17:30 Audience questions and discussion; wrap up 17:30 - 18:30 Cocktail reception\n2005 annual meeting 15 November, 2005 | 9:30AM - 6PM | IOP, Portland Place, London, UK\nAgenda 09:30 - 10:00 Registration, new members coffee 10:00 - 10:45 Corporate annual meeting, board election 10:45 - 11:30 Operational and strategic overview; Crossref Search update 11:30 - 12:00 System report and new services 12:00 - 13:00 Lunch 13:15 - 14:45 Digital preservation panel (Lynne Brindley, Johan Steenbakkers, Eileen Fenton) 14:45 - 15:15 Coffee break 15:15 - 15:45 Book DOI case study 15:45 - 16:15 Developments in academic search tools 16:15 - 16:45 Innovation in scientific publishing (Vitek Tracz) 16:45 - 17:00 Closing remarks 17:00 - 18:00 Cocktail reception\n2004 annual meeting 9 November, 2004 | 10AM - 6PM | The Charles Hotel, Cambridge, MA, USA\nAgenda 9:30 - 10:00 Registration, \u0026ldquo;New Members Coffee\u0026rdquo;, an opportunity for new members to meet staff, Board members and other members 10:00 - 10:45 Corporate Annual Meeting/Board Election and Reports from Chair, Treasurer, and Executive Director 10:45 - 11:30 Operational \u0026amp; Strategic Overview (The year in review; reports from committees) 11:30 - 12:00 System Review \u0026amp; New Developments (Multiple Resolution, Stored Queries, Forward Linking) 12:00 - 12:30 Crossref Search Update and Discussion 12:30 - 13:30 Lunch at Rialto Restaurant (in Charles Hotel) 13:45 - 14:30 A Crossref Case Study: DOIs and the secondary publisher - a match made in heaven? (Andrea Powell) 14:30 - 15:00 Changing Routes to Content and Content Preservation in the Digital Age (Dale Flecker, Harvard University) 15:00 - 15:30 Coffee Break 15:30 - 16:00 The California Digital Library\u0026rsquo;s eScholarship Program (Catherine Candee, CDL) 16:00 - 16:30 The Semantic Web Initiative and its Implications for Publishing (Eric Miller, MIT) 16:30 - 17:00 Intellectual Property Issues in Publishing Today (Allan Ryan Jr., Harvard Business School Publishing) 17:00 Closing remarks 17:00 - 18:00 Cocktail reception at Noir (in Charles Hotel lobby)\n2003 annual meeting 16 September, 2003 | 9AM - 4PM | IEE, Savoy Place, London, UK\nAgenda 8:30 - 9:00 Registration, \u0026ldquo;New Members Coffee\u0026rdquo;, an opportunity for new members to meet staff, Board members and \u0026ldquo;older\u0026rdquo; members 9:00 - 10:00 Corporate Annual Meeting/Board Election 10:00 - 12:30 Member Only Session 10:00 - 10:20 Revised Membership Agreement and Business Development Review 10:20 - 10:40 Crossref Search Recap and Crossref Financial Review 10:40 - 11:05 Forward Linking 11:05 - 11:25 Coffee Break 11:25 - 11:50 Technical Update 11:50 - 12:30 Strategic Discussion 12:30 - 13:30 Lunch 13:30 - 16:00 Open session, all welcome 13:30 - 13:50 IDF Update (Norman Paskin) 13:50 - 14:10 The library perspective: \u0026ldquo;The value of Crossref in an open access world\u0026rdquo; (Fred Friend, UCL) 14:10 - 14:40 Developments at the British Library: \u0026ldquo;Preserving our Digital Heritage: the British Library Strategy and Plan for the 21st Century\u0026rdquo; (Richard Boulderstone) 14:40 - 15:00 Coffee break 15:00 - 15:30 DOI Case Study: Nature Publishing Group (Howard Ratner) 15:30 - 16:00 Publisher Case Study: Blackwell Publishing (Jill Cousins): \u0026ldquo;Information Objects Are Hot, Documents Are Not\u0026rdquo;\n2002 annual meeting 25-26 September, 2002 | Fairmont Copley Plaza Hotel, Boston, MA, USA\nAgenda, 25 September, 2002 8:30 - 9:00 Registration, Coffee 9:00 - 10:00 Corporate Annual Meeting Call to Order - Eric Swanson, Chair, Board of Directors, Crossref Appointment of Inspector of Elections Opening Remarks - Eric Swanson, John Wiley \u0026amp; Sons Report from Executive Director - Ed Pentz, Executive Director, Crossref New Business 10:00 Close of Corporate Annual Meeting 10:00 -10:45 Main Session - Overview of New System - Chuck Koscher, Technical Director, Crossref, and Representatives from Atypon 10:45 - 11:00 Coffee Break 11:00 - 12:00 Crossref Search Prototype Demo and Feedback Forum - Ed Pentz, Executive Director, Crossref 12:00 - 13:30 Lunch 13:30 - 16:00 Open Session 13:15 - 13:45 Introduction to New System, Chuck Koscher, Crossref, and representatives from Atypon 13:45 - 14:30 Speaker, Jim Neale, Columbia University, member Crossref Library Advisory Board. \u0026ldquo;What does the academic community want from Crossref?\u0026rdquo; 14:30 - 14:45 Coffee Break 14:45 - 15:15 Speaker, Jerry Cowhig, IOPP, Publisher Case Study 15:15 - 16:00 Panel, \u0026ldquo;The Article Economy\u0026rdquo;, with Wes Crews, Infotrieve, and Simon Inger, consultant, Simon Inger \u0026amp; Associates, on behalf of Ingenta; and Wes Crews, Infotrieve\nAgenda, 26 September, 2002 Implementation Workshop \u0026ndash; Chuck Koscher, Crossref Implementing Reference Linking \u0026ndash; Mark Doyle, The American Physical Society Deposit Schema 2.0 \u0026ndash; Bruce D. Rosenblum, Inera Incorporated\nPlease contact our community team with any questions.\n",
"headings": ["2025 2024 2023 2022 2021","2020 2019 2018 2017 2016","2015 2014 2013 2012 2011","2010 2009 2008 2007 2006","2005 2004 2003 2002 2001","2025 annual meeting","Agenda","Day 1 🦩","Day 2 🦩","2024 annual meeting","2023 annual meeting","2022 annual meeting","2021 annual meeting","2020 annual meeting","2019 annual meeting","2018 annual meeting","2017 annual meeting","Agenda","2016 annual meeting","Agenda","2015 annual meeting","Agenda","2014 annual meeting","Agenda","2013 annual meeting","Agenda","2012 annual meeting","Agenda","2011 annual meeting","Agenda","2010 annual meeting","Agenda","2009 annual meeting","Agenda","2008 annual meeting","Agenda","2007 annual meeting","Agenda","2006 annual meeting","Agenda","2005 annual meeting","Agenda","2004 annual meeting","Agenda","2003 annual meeting","Agenda","2002 annual meeting","Agenda, 25 September, 2002","Agenda, 26 September, 2002"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/board-and-governance/elections/2020-slate/",
"title": "Board election 2020 candidates",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 2,
"lastmod": "2020-09-01",
"lastmod_ts": 1598918400,
"section": "Board & governance",
"tags": [],
"description": "If you are a voting member of Crossref your ‘voting contact’ will receive an email in late September, please follow the instructions in that email which includes links to the relevant election process and policy information.\nFrom 72 applications, our Nominating Committee proposed the following eight candidates to fill the six seats open for election to the Crossref Board of Directors.\nTier 1, Small and mid-sized members Member organisation Candidate standing Country Beilstein-Institut Wendy Patterson Germany Korean Council of Science Editors Kihong Kim South Korea OpenEdition Marin Dacos France Scientific Electronic Library Online (SciELO) Abel Packer Brazil The University of Hong Kong Jesse Xiao Hong Kong Tier 2, Large members Member organisation Candidate standing Country AIP Publishing Jason Wilde USA Oxford University Press James Phillpotts UK Taylor \u0026amp; Francis Liz Allen UK ",
"content":["If","you","are","a","voting","member","of","Crossref","your","‘voting","contact’","will","receive","an","email","in","late","September,","please","follow","the","instructions","in","that","email","which","includes","links","to","the","relevant","election","process","and","policy","information.\nFrom","72","applications,","our","Nominating","Committee","proposed","the","following","eight","candidates","to","fill","the","six","seats","open","for","election","to","the","Crossref","Board","of","Directors.\nTier","1,","Small","and","mid-sized","members","Member","organisation","Candidate","standing","Country","Beilstein-Institut","Wendy","Patterson","Germany","Korean","Council","of","Science","Editors","Kihong","Kim","South","Korea","OpenEdition","Marin","Dacos","France","Scientific","Electronic","Library","Online","(SciELO)","Abel","Packer","Brazil","The","University","of","Hong","Kong","Jesse","Xiao","Hong","Kong","Tier","2,","Large","members","Member","organisation","Candidate","standing","Country","AIP","Publishing","Jason","Wilde","USA","Oxford","University","Press","James","Phillpotts","UK","Taylor","\u0026amp;","Francis","Liz","Allen","UK",""],
"headings": ["Tier 1, Small and mid-sized members","Tier 2, Large members","Jason Wilde, AIP Publishing, USA\n","organisation statement","Personal statement ","Déclaration de l’organisation","Déclaration personnelle","Declaração da organização","Declaração pessoal","Declaración de la organización","Declaración personal","단체소개서","자기소개서","Wendy Patterson, Beilstein-Institut, Germany\n","organisation statement","Personal statement\n","Déclaration de l’organisation","Déclaration personnelle","Declaração da organização","Declaração pessoal","Declaración de la organización","Declaración personal","단체소개서","자기소개서","Kihong Kim, Korean Council of Science Editors, South Korea\n","organisation statement","Personal statement\n","Déclaration de l’organisation","Déclaration personnelle","Declaração da organização","Declaração pessoal","Declaración de la organización","Declaración personal","단체소개서","자기소개서","Marin Dacos, OpenEdition, France\n","organisation statement","Personal statement ","Déclaration de l’organisation","Déclaration personnelle","Declaração da organização","Declaração pessoal","Declaración de la organización","Declaración personal","단체소개서","자기소개서","James Phillpotts, Oxford University Press, UK\n","organisation statement","Personal statement ","Déclaration de l’organisation","Déclaration personnelle","Declaração da organização","Declaração pessoal","Declaración de la organización","Declaración personal","단체소개서","자기소개서","Abel Packer, Scientific Electronic Library Online (SciELO), Brazil\n","organisation statement","Personal statement ","Déclaration de l’organisation","Déclaration personnelle","Declaração da organização","Declaração pessoal","Declaración de la organización","Declaración personal","단체소개서","Liz Allen, F1000, Taylor \u0026amp; Francis, UK\n","organisation statement","Personal statement ","Déclaration de l’organisation","Déclaration personnelle","Declaração da organização","Declaração pessoal","Declaración de la organización","Declaración personal","단체소개서","자기소개서","Jesse Xiao, The University of Hong Kong Libraries, Hong Kong\n","organisation statement","Personal statement ","Déclaration de l’organisation","Déclaration personnelle","Declaração da organização","Declaração pessoal","Declaración de la organización","단체소개서","자기소개서"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/about/history/",
"title": "History",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 2,
"lastmod": "2020-02-02",
"lastmod_ts": 1580601600,
"section": "About us",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref was born of the radical changes in the 1990s brought on by the spread of the Internet and development of the World Wide Web and other technologies (HTML, SGML, XML). Everything started moving online, including research and scholarly communications.\nOur roots go back to 1996 when the Enabling Technologies Committee of the Association of American Publishers put out a call for a persistent identifier system for online content and the Corporation for National Research Initiatives (CNRI) answered the call with the Handle system. A couple of years of work and discussions led to the founding of the International DOI Foundation to develop and govern the DOI (Digital Object Identifier) System which was the application of the Handle System to the digital content space.\n",
"content": "Crossref was born of the radical changes in the 1990s brought on by the spread of the Internet and development of the World Wide Web and other technologies (HTML, SGML, XML). Everything started moving online, including research and scholarly communications.\nOur roots go back to 1996 when the Enabling Technologies Committee of the Association of American Publishers put out a call for a persistent identifier system for online content and the Corporation for National Research Initiatives (CNRI) answered the call with the Handle system. A couple of years of work and discussions led to the founding of the International DOI Foundation to develop and govern the DOI (Digital Object Identifier) System which was the application of the Handle System to the digital content space.\n1999 was the year things came together enabling the formation of Crossref. It was a big year: there was the Y2K/Millennium bug\u0026ndash;an example of infrastructure causing problems\u0026ndash;and there was the launch of Napster signaling massive disruption for the music industry. On more positive notes, 1999 also saw the release of version 1.0 of the Bluetooth specification which enables connectivity across millions of devices, and the formation of the WIFI Alliance which is a nonprofit association tasked with promoting the adoption and development of wireless technologies across all vendors. Bluetooth and WIFI have been incredibly successful standards backed up by non-profit organisations that foster collaboration, adoption and development to benefit a wide range of stakeholders. Remind you of anyone in the scholarly communications space?\nWith respect to Crossref’s formation, things really kicked off in 1999. A prototype project by Academic Press, Wiley, and the DOI-X project, created the technical foundations for reference linking based on centralized metadata and the assignment of Digital Object Identifiers (DOIs). The prototype system was demonstrated at the Frankfurt Book Fair in 1999. Publishers quickly rallied around and in December 1999 a working group of 12 organisations met and decided to form Crossref as an independent, not-for-profit organisation. Crossref was incorporated in January 2000 - as Publishers International Linking Association, Inc. (PILA). The Crossref system, the first collaborative reference linking system, went live in June 2000.\nCrossref has grown steadily over the years - from the original 12 founding members to the over 17,000 organisations who are currently members of Crossref. To see more details of Crossref’s history and developments over the years please see our Annual Reports.\nIn celebration of Crossref\u0026rsquo;s 10th Anniversary in 2009, Crossref commissioned The Formation of Crossref: A Short History. A Japanese translation is also available.\n",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/board-and-governance/elections/2019-slate/",
"title": "Board election 2019 candidates",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 2,
"lastmod": "2019-08-23",
"lastmod_ts": 1566518400,
"section": "Board & governance",
"tags": [],
"description": "If you are a voting member of Crossref your ‘voting contact’ will receive an email in late September, please follow the instructions in that email which includes links to the relevant election process and policy information.\nFrom 52 applications, our Nominating Committee proposed the following seven candidates to fill the five seats open for election to the Crossref Board of Directors.\nMember organisation Candidate standing Country Clarivate Analytics Nandita Quaderi USA eLife Melissa Harrison UK Elsevier Chris Shillum Netherlands IOP Publshing Graham McCann UK Springer Nature Reshma Shaikh UK The Royal Society Stuart Taylor UK Wiley Todd Toler USA ",
"content": "If you are a voting member of Crossref your ‘voting contact’ will receive an email in late September, please follow the instructions in that email which includes links to the relevant election process and policy information.\nFrom 52 applications, our Nominating Committee proposed the following seven candidates to fill the five seats open for election to the Crossref Board of Directors.\nMember organisation Candidate standing Country Clarivate Analytics Nandita Quaderi USA eLife Melissa Harrison UK Elsevier Chris Shillum Netherlands IOP Publshing Graham McCann UK Springer Nature Reshma Shaikh UK The Royal Society Stuart Taylor UK Wiley Todd Toler USA Nandita Quaderi, Clarivate Analytics, USA\nThe Web of Science Group provides the tools and resources researchers, publishers, institutions and research funders need to monitor, measure, and make an impact in the world of research. Like Crossref, we want to “make scholarly communications better.”\nGuided by the legacy of Dr Eugene Garfield, inventor of the world’s first citation index, our goal is to provide guaranteed quality, impact and neutrality through world-class research literature and meticulously captured metadata and citation connections. We devised and curate the largest, most authoritative citation database available, with over 1 billion cited reference connections indexed from high quality peer reviewed journals, books and proceedings from 1900 to the present.\nOur products include ScholarOne, which provides comprehensive workflow management systems for scholarly journals, books and conferences; Publons, the home of the peer review community; and Kopernio, a free web browser plug-in which enables one-click access to full text PDFs. We too “make tools and services – all to help put scholarly content in context.”\nThe existing Crossref Board is comprised of publishers, libraries, non-profit organisations looking to increase access, and technology providers. As an entirely publisher-independent organisation, we would complement the current membership, and as a hugely diverse organisation ourselves, we would add to the diverse nature of the board. Our presence on the Crossref board would enhance our organisations’ shared goals of revealing meaningful connections among research, collaborators, and data as we strive to enable researchers to accelerate discovery, evaluate impact, and benefit society worldwide.\nPersonal statement Firstly, as a former researcher myself, I would bring a deep understanding of the challenges academics and institutions face in the research communication process. In my post-academia career, I have consistently championed excellence in diversity, accessibility, and open science.\nAfter receiving my PhD in Molecular Genetics, and completing a post-doctoral fellowship in Italy, I ran a Wellcome Trust-funded developmental biology lab at Kings College London. This experience provided me with a nuanced understanding of the technological infrastructures supporting research, peer review, and publishing.\nCrossref’s commitment to a culture of openness and transparency mirrors my own post-academic pursuit of universally accessible research, making sure that our industry provides places where people can come to find trusted, high-quality content. I managed the Open Access journal portfolios at Nature Research and BMC. I have experience successfully transitioning journals from hybrid to OA models, leading new OA journals from conception to launch, and promoting open research among my teams and the wider community.\nIn my current role as Editor in Chief for the Web of Science, I have overall editorial responsibility for the content on Web of Science and oversee the team of in-house editors that select content for the Web of Science Core Collection. My team’s principles are objectivity, selectivity and collection dynamics; we look to promote and protect the Web of Science’s reputation for excellence, while remaining publisher-independent and innovating to meet the needs of the community.\nAs a woman of Bangladeshi heritage in STEM, in all my roles I have worked to build environments where diversity, equality, and gender parity are championed and valued. At the Web of Science Group, I have been honoured to facilitate insightful discussions for International Women’s Day, taking parts in events to encourage women in STEM. I am part of the Women@Clarivate group, an initiative to help women across our parent company grow in their careers.\nI love metadata, love data, and love science. If I were elected to the Crossref board, I would help to increase the impact of existing Crossref initiatives. I aim to bring fresh ideas, based on the diversity and experience of the Web of Science Group to the board. I would promote diversity, open science and excellence in research.\nMelissa Harrison, eLife, UK\neLife is an open-access publishing initiative launched by three major biomedical funders, the Howard Hughes Medical Institute, the Max Planck Society and the Wellcome Trust (and joined more recently by the Wallenberg Foundation). eLife publishes a single open-access journal that covers important new findings in the life and biomedical sciences, designs and builds new open-source products and infrastructure to support publishing, and works with the scientific community to advocate for improvement in the way that science is evaluated and communicated. An important aspect of the work at eLife is our commitment to sharing our findings and resources as effectively as possible, so that others can reuse, build on and improve on our work. eLife is often early to engage or propose new ideas related to openness and improving scientific communication and several eLife staff are involved in community initiatives including OASPA, FORCE11, DORA and JATS4R as well as open-source technology collaborations such as COKO and The Substance Consortium.\neLife has served one term on the Board of Crossref and we would be delighted to continue to serve on the board because of Crossref’s role in providing sustainable and shared infrastructure supporting critical aspects of research communication.\nMelissa Harrison (http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3523-4408)\nPersonal statement\nI am Head of Production Operations at eLife, where I manage the production process as well as content and metadata delivery to other services. I have served as eLife’s alternate representative on the Crossref Board for the past three years.\nI have worked in publishing for over 20 years in a variety of organisations:, beginning with small independent publishers, followed by the Royal College of Psychiatrists and then the BMJ Group. I also worked for an Indian production services vendor before joining eLife in 2012. I, therefore, have substantial and in-depth knowledge of publishing and the importance of high-quality metadata. I chair JATS4R and actively serve on subgroups in the Metadata2020 and FORCE11 communities. As a member of multiple communities, I have a broad perspective on the opportunities for improvement in general publishing infrastructure and processes. Like Crossref, eLife is also committed to open source technologies and re-use. I initiated the development of an open source tool to convert JATS XML to Crossref and PubMed XML and eLife is working collaboratively on community open source tools to support the complete publishing process.\nThe services and infrastructure that Crossref provide are of great value to the publishing community and there are many opportunities to develop them. There is also an expanding range of organisations, including institutions and funders, that Crossref has the potential to serve. With my broad experience in publishing and community engagement, I can offer understanding and insight into the opportunities and challenges faced by Crossref and would relish the chance to continue to represent eLife as part of the Crossref Board.\nAlternate statement: Mark Patterson (orcid.org/0000-0001-7237-0797) is the Executive Director of eLife. Previously, Mark was the Director of Publishing at PLOS where he worked for 9 years and helped to launch several of the PLOS Journals including PLOS Biology and PLOS ONE. Mark began his career as a researcher in yeast and human genetics before moving into scientific publishing in 1994 first as the Editor of Trends in Genetics and later as one of the launch editors for NPG’s Nature Reviews Journals. Mark has served as the representative for eLife on the Crossref Board for the past three years (in which role he has chaired the Nominations Committee for two years and currently serves on the Audit Committee), and is one of the founding directors of the Open Access Scholarly Publishers Association.\nChris Shillum, Elsevier, Netherlands\nAt Elsevier, we believe that to meet the ever-growing needs of researchers and scholars, the information system supporting research must be founded upon the principles of source neutrality, interoperability and transparency, placing researchers under full control of their information. As the fastest-growing open access publisher, we provide authors with a choice of publication models, and are investing in tools to support Open Science such as SSRN and Mendeley Data.\nToday, a vibrant array of companies, non-profits, universities, and researchers provide scholarly tools and information resources. Common standards and shared infrastructure play a vital role enabling innovation and fostering competition towards finding ever better ways for researchers and their institutions to manage the unprecedented amount of knowledge and data that is available to today. As an industry leader, Elsevier has a strong track record of supporting many of the standards and infrastructure services we rely on today: We were charter members of the International DOI Foundation, have been involved with Crossref since its start, and are founding members of ORCID and CHORUS.\nAs the largest financial contributor to Crossref, we are proud of the role we play in sustaining this vital shared resource, and as a large organisation, we are also able to commit significant staff time to the development of new initiatives such as Funding Data, Access and Licensing Indicators and Distributed Usage Logging. We continue to support the maintenance and enhancement of the Crossref Funder Registry as a free service to the community.\nPersonal statement\nI am an industry veteran, having spent 25 years in scholarly publishing, starting my career during the exciting first wave of the move to online publishing. As well as my day job, where I currently look after Identity and Platform Strategy for Elsevier, I am fortunate to have served in leadership positions at the International DOI Foundation, Crossref, ORCID and NISO. Over the years, I’ve gained experience in most aspects of scholarly communication technology, as well as expertise in strategic management, financial planning and industry collaboration. I am passionate about the role that industry organisations such as Crossref play in enabling innovation and accelerating the development of new ways to help researchers and scholars; I consider it both a privilege and a responsibility to use my skills to help develop, lead and guide such organisations. Philippe Terheggen, Elsevier’s designated alternate, is Manager Director of our STM Journals publishing group.\nCrossref is at a pivotal moment in its development, as it seeks to expand its constituency, develop new services and embrace the opportunities of new technology such as AI, whilst at the same time updating its aging core infrastructure. It’s also vital that Crossref maintains the support of its members by delivering value for money and operating its services as efficiently as possible. Crossref will need experienced, disciplined leadership with representation from all sectors of the community to successfully navigate the complex challenges ahead. Should I be fortunate enough to be re-elected to the board, I believe I have the right combination of experience, technical, and strategic skills to help Crossref make the best decisions for its members, its future, and for the community of researchers and scholars that we all serve.\nGraham McCann, IOP Publishing, UK\nIOP Publishing is one of the world’s leading scholarly publishers. It has partnered with Crossref since it was founded and shares its mission to make research outputs easy to find, cite, link to and assess.IOP Publishing is a subsidiary of the Institute of Physics, a leading scientific society promoting physics for the benefit of all. Through its worldwide membership of more than 50,000, the Institute works to advance physics research, application and education, and engages with policy makers and the public to develop awareness and understanding of physics. The revenue generated by IOP Publishing is used by the Institute to support science and scientists in both the developed and developing world.IOP Publishing would be proud to continue representing publishers on the Board of Crossref and further its work to solve industry-wide problems and help shape the future of research.\nPersonal statement Graham McCann is currently Chair of Crossref’s Membership and Fees Committee, which has responsibility for reviewing the value that members receive from Crossref services. He has more than 25 years’ experience in STM publishing, initially in editorial development and then in product management. Currently, Graham manages IOP Publishing’s electronic content and customer-facing platforms for journals and books. Graham is involved in a number of new industry initiatives and integrations. As a continuing member of the Board, he would be particularly keen to support a refresh of Crossref’s core DOI registration technologies. With his mix of publishing and technical experience and expertise, Graham is well placed to help advise Crossref on development of their services and he remains committed to Crossref’s goal of supporting both researchers and science as a whole.\nReshma Shaikh, Springer Nature, UK\nSpringer Nature is one of the founding members of Crossref and has been a very active and loyal board member since. We understand that Crossref needs tangible support from the membership and as a large organisation we take the responsibility to deliver such support. We admire the role Crossref plays in both operating the basic infrastructure of content linking for academic communities while also playing a leading role in the development of new identifier and metadata initiatives. Supporting innovative projects to (further) develop open science is a major reason for Springer Nature to be active in Crossref. Springer Nature is committed to work together with Crossref and its membership to implement new processes and functionalities.\nAs a network of 12,667 members from 118 countries, Crossref represents a truly global movement to ensure the world’s knowledge is understood and consumed within the context it was intended. The organisation’s success and increasing impact derive from its commitment to openness and transparency while staying true to its original mission of metadata at the center of all it does.\nThe world of academic publishing is currently going through the largest disruption since the invention of the Open Access business model. The use of technology and the ubiquity of startups in this space will continue to challenge the status quo for the foreseeable future. In these times, organisations such as Crossref, with an established reputation as one of the original pan publishing organisations and one that is digital by birth, have a responsibility to help shepherd the industry as it goes through its transformation, while also ensuring it keeps itself relevant. The vision of Metadata 2020 and the desire to ensure Funders are able to really understand the impact of their funding, are important goals that require strong execution and oversight.\nAs a technology transformation specialist, I have used Agile and Lean principles, combined with bundles of creativity to persuade companies to try things differently and embrace Digital. While at Springer Nature, I have directed large automation programmes, championed innovation and led departments of 170+ people over three different locations, set up digital and data capabilities and reinvented an innovative global content delivery platform. Having worked in North America, Europe and Asia and with an Asian background, I believe that I can offer the board a diversity of background, knowledge and experience.\nStuart Taylor, The Royal Society, UK\nThe Royal Society is the national academy of science for the UK. We provide science policy advice to government, we recognise excellence with Fellowships, medals and awards and we fund research. We are also a publisher of journals and although modest in scale (ten journals) we launched the world’s first science journal in 1665. Our publishing is financially strong and we are entirely independent of any commercial publishing organisation. We are very active in the learned society publishing sector and have a seat at the table at many of the key groups and committees. We are in close contact with many of the learned society publishers and we understand and share the issues and challenges they see in the evolving publishing system. Most recently we have been instrumental in setting up the Society Publishers’ Coalition in response to Plan S. Our journal publishing workflow is based on full text JATS XML, we use a continuous publication model and were the first publisher to make ORCID iD mandatory for submitting authors. We seek to adapt and innovate constantly particularly in terms of open science. Two of our ten journals are fully open access with CC-BY licence, we operate open peer review on four journals, we have mandatory open data on all journals, we permit text and data mining for both commercial and non-commercial purposes and we support zero embargo green open access. We have been strongly supportive of Crossref from the outset and we use Crossmark, funder registry IDs and Crossref similarity checking. We are also participants in the i4OC open references project. We also support preprints by encouraging our authors to share early versions of their work and by appointing a dedicated preprints editor for our flagship biology journal.\nPersonal statement Dr Stuart Taylor is the Publishing Director at the Royal Society. He has responsibility for the Royal Society’s publishing operation which consists of a staff of 30 who publish the Society’s ten journals. He joined the Society in 2006 after working as a Publisher at Blackwell Science (now Wiley) in Oxford where he was responsible for postgraduate book and journal acquisitions in clinical medicine. He is a keen advocate of open science and believes that the scholarly communication system should genuinely serve science and do so far more effectively and efficiently than it does at present. He is a member of FORCE11, is also on the Board of Directors of the Open Access Scholarly Publishers’ Association (OASPA) and works in several other open science groups. He is a strong supporter of cross-stakeholder collaborative solutions in general and Crossref in particular as the single most ambitious and successful of them. He would welcome the opportunity to input into Crossref’s strategy and decision making. He feels it is essential that the voice of the smaller and scholar-led publishers is represented as they face some very distinct challenges as the publishing landscape continues to evolve. Crossref is in a unique position with the trust, breadth of influence and technical competence to continue be a key actor at the centre of the rapidly developing scholarly communication system.\nHe has an MA in chemistry and a DPhil in psychopharmacology from the University of Oxford, and has published 25 peer reviewed scientific papers in neuroscience. He has also published a number of articles on journal publishing and scholarly communication. In 2015, he organised a four day conference as part of the Royal Society’s celebration of 350 years of science publishing entitled The Future of Scholarly Scientific Communication. He has served on the Crossref Board previously (2010 - 2013).\nORCID iD: http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0862-163X\nTodd Toler, Wiley, USA\nFounded in 1807, John Wiley and Sons (Wiley) publishes on behalf of more academic, professional and scholarly societies and associations than any other publisher.\nWiley was a founding member of Crossref, as was Blackwell, which merged with Wiley in 2007. We see Crossref as a core component of the research publishing ecosystem and are committed to helping Crossref as an organisation meet its goals and objectives. Overall, Wiley strives to take a leadership role in scholarly publishing, and through initiatives such as CHORUS and ORCID (among others) we work with stakeholders across the industry to help develop infrastructure that supports researchers and scholarly publishing globally.\nWe are a global company, with major publishing centres in in the United States, the United Kingdom, Germany, Australia, China, and Japan. Wiley colleagues are actively engaged in numerous industry membership associations, such as the International Association of Scientific, Technical and Medical Publishers (STM), the Association of Learned and Professional Society Publishers (ALPSP), the Publishers Association (PA) and the American Association of Publishers (AAP). Wiley is also a co-chair of Project DARE, which is working to address skills gaps in the Asia-Pacific region.\nWe recognize that the market for scholarly publishing is changing rapidly, creating opportunities to develop new ways to describe, share, and disseminate research advances; we are committed to supporting the transition to Open Science in all manifestations, and to managing the transition in a sustainable manner for all stakeholders.\nPersonal statement I am currently Vice President, Product Strategy \u0026amp; Partnerships, for Wiley’s Research business, where I work across business units to help develop the strategic direction for Wiley’s products and services for researchers. In addition, I also represent Wiley in strategic external relations with industry and trade groups, government organisations and scientific communities.\nI am currently Wiley’s alternate on the STM board, am a founding member of RA-21 (working towards standards of seamless, secure access to scholarly content) and frequently meet with industry peers on a wide variety of matters related to improving scholarly communications standards and infrastructure.\nI have been at Wiley for 12 years, originally joining the company as its first ever Director of User Experience in 2007. I’ve also held the titles of Director \u0026amp; Publisher, Wiley Online Library and Vice President of Digital Product Management. My background and expertise is in the field of interaction design, instructional design, product management, and digital strategy. I love working in the field of research communication and feel we are only at the beginning of what’s possible for the field. I am particularly passionate about the future of linked data and reproducible science, and am currently working on a next-generation journal workflow for Wiley that is committed to open data, open web standards, and open annotation.\nCrossref is the most successful example in our industry of what’s possible through collaboration and infrastructure sharing. It provides vital technology and serves as an important forum to navigate a rapidly evolving technology landscape for content providers and other stakeholders across a wide variety of business models. I would be honored to serve on the board, and my alternate would be Duncan Campbell, Senior Director, Global Sales Partnerships, who has previously sat on the Crossref board representing Wiley since 2015.\n",
"headings": ["Nandita Quaderi, Clarivate Analytics, USA\n","Personal statement ","Melissa Harrison, eLife, UK\n","Personal statement\n","Chris Shillum, Elsevier, Netherlands\n","Personal statement\n","Graham McCann, IOP Publishing, UK\n","Personal statement ","Reshma Shaikh, Springer Nature, UK\n","Stuart Taylor, The Royal Society, UK\n","Personal statement ","Todd Toler, Wiley, USA\n","Personal statement "]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/board-and-governance/elections/2018-slate/",
"title": "Board election 2018 candidates",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 2,
"lastmod": "2018-08-15",
"lastmod_ts": 1534291200,
"section": "Board & governance",
"tags": [],
"description": "If you are a voting member of Crossref your ‘voting contact’ will receive an email in late September, please follow the instructions in that email which includes links to the relevant election process and policy information.\nFrom 26 applications, our Nominating Committee proposed the following seven candidates to fill the five seats open for election to the Crossref Board of Directors.\nMember organisation Candidate standing Country African Journals Online Susan Murray South Africa American Psychological Association Jasper Simons USA Association for Computing Machinery Scott Delman USA California Digital Library Catherine Mitchell USA Hindawi Paul Peters UK SAGE Richard Fidczuk USA Wiley Duncan Campbell USA ",
"content": "If you are a voting member of Crossref your ‘voting contact’ will receive an email in late September, please follow the instructions in that email which includes links to the relevant election process and policy information.\nFrom 26 applications, our Nominating Committee proposed the following seven candidates to fill the five seats open for election to the Crossref Board of Directors.\nMember organisation Candidate standing Country African Journals Online Susan Murray South Africa American Psychological Association Jasper Simons USA Association for Computing Machinery Scott Delman USA California Digital Library Catherine Mitchell USA Hindawi Paul Peters UK SAGE Richard Fidczuk USA Wiley Duncan Campbell USA Susan Murray, African Journals Online (AJOL), South Africa\nUnlike in Europe and North America with the giant commercial academic publishers there, journals publishing from developing countries are usually stand-alone journals run by subject-specific experts on a Non Profit basis. This is why hosting platforms like African Journals Online (AJOL) in Africa, other (INASP supported) country-level Journal Online (JOL) platforms around the world, and our “big sister” SciELO in Latin America have emerged… to provide technical support, quality improvements, and increased visibility of peer-reviewed Southern-published research content on a Non Profit basis.\nMany journals don’t have the resources or the IT capacity to get online in isolation, and a small journal website is not very visible to search engines, so AJOL provides free highly visible aggregated hosting, software updates, high machine-readability of metadata, and various other free services like monthly usage statistics and free Digital Object Identifiers (DOIs), as a Sponsoring Member of Crossref. We were the first Non Profit Organisation to have successfully negotiated a discounted rate from Crossref for DOIs for journals publishing from Low and Lower Middle Income Countries, and we absorb the costs of membership and DOI assignation on behalf of our journal partners.\nWe are familiar with Crossref and have had a long-standing collaboration with your organisation. Additionally, AJOL supports the subject experts running the journals to become more aware of the quality norms and standards of robust research publishing, and assist them to implement these. Hence the development of the Journal Publishing Practices \u0026amp; Standards (JPPS) framework and assessment process. This work is important so that Southern research journals can be credible and trusted by authors and readers.\nBased in South Africa, AJOL hosts 521 journals based in 32 African countries from all academic disciplines on its platform and over 150,000 full text articles available to download, more than half of which are free to read and download. There are 350 more journals who’ve applied for inclusion and are waiting to be assessed, but this has been put on hold while a new journal publishing practices framework and assessment has been developed by AJOL and INASP (www.journalquality.info). Once all current journal partners are assessed, we will start working through new applicants’ assessments again.\nThere is a lot of demand for AJOL’s services by journals who’ve heard from and observed the benefits of AJOL inclusion, and in the long term, we hope to include all qualifying peer-reviewed, African-published journals on the continent.\nAJOL is a long-standing Non Profit Organisation (started in 1998 and run independently from South Africa since 2005). AJOL\u0026rsquo;s strategy, implementation and finances are overseen by a Board drawn from AJOL\u0026rsquo;s main stakeholder groups, we are annually audited, and we are a well-known and trusted platform internationally. AJOL\u0026rsquo;s users have been tracked with Google Analytics. The primary users 10 years ago were European and North American, but user numbers from Africa have increased substantially over the years to the point that in 2017 there were nearly a quarter of a million repeat African-based users of our platform. This is a vital achievement for us… making African research output available and accessed/used by African researchers! Globally, there were over 8.5 million full-text article downloads from AJOL during 2017, so we know that AJOL is accomplishing the goal of increased accessibility of the research outputs on our website. AJOL also offers support of journal via email, as well as in-person training workshops, which have been held in countries all over the continent. We at AJOL understand the contexts, challenges, and needs of the small, usually stand-alone or scholarly association-based journals in developing countries, as well as the intricacies of implementing DOIs for hundreds of journals as a Crossref Sponsoring Member.\nPersonal statement\nFor the past 11 years, I have been the Executive Director of African Journals OnLine (www.ajol.info). AJOL is a South African Non Profit Organisation working toward increased visibility and quality of African-published research journals. AJOL hosts the world’s largest online collection of peer-reviewed, African-published scholarly journals and is a sponsoring member of Crossref. I am also a member of the Advisory Committee of the Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ www.doaj.org), a member of the Advisory Board for the Public Knowledge Project’s current study on Open Access Publishing Cooperatives, and member of the Advisory Board of CODESRIA’s new African Citation Index initiative.\nI have an academic background in Development Economics and have an abiding interest in the role that increased access to research outputs can play in low income and emerging economies, as well as the practicalities of attaining this. AJOL hosts 521 Journals of which 440 have active DOIs assigned. At last count there were more than 84 000 articles with DOI\u0026rsquo;s on AJOL: including roughly 56 000 with DOIs assigned by AJOL (prefix 10.4314), and 28 000 with DOIs assigned by the Journal itself or relevant publisher. As AJOL has no control over the DOIs assigned by entities other than ourselves, we have found in the past that conflicts can arise when changes take place at Journals\u0026rsquo; publishers and ownership of DOIs. Hence we run a periodic verification process in order to ascertain that the DOIs we display on www.ajol.info are accurate, during which we fetch the latest valid DOI for each article directly from Crossref, regardless of publisher/owner. In order to avoid conflicts, any DOIs added in the interim period to the site do not get displayed until the next verification process. This causes delays in the display of DOIs on AJOL. The verification process happens approximately every 2 months. Even though the process itself is automated, it takes about two days, during which it requires manual monitoring to ensure all goes smoothly, and therefore we are not always able to execute it more often.\nWe would very much like to discuss a different pricing model for the Similarity Checker aspect of Crossref\u0026rsquo;s services for developing country Sponsoring Members to make this essential service more practicable for developing countries, and I believe that our deep knowledge of the (sometimes heterogeneous needs) of our journal partners in Africa can contribute to a more balanced decision-making process of the Crossref Board as regards working towards offsetting the inequalities of scholarly research outputs between the Global North and Global South, helping boost the verified credibility, sharing and preservation of quality research from developing countries.\nMy colleague at AJOL, Kate Snow, who is the Content \u0026amp; Communications Manager, would likely be the person to attend Crossref meetings if I could not. Kate deals with implementing DOIs together with our partner journals every day, and has an intimate knowledge of the specifics of that work, as well as an overall understanding of AJOL\u0026rsquo;s work, organisational ethos and the nature and needs of our partner journals.\nJasper Simons, American Psychological Association (APA), USA\nWith more than 115,000 members, it is APA’s mission to advance the creation, communication and application of psychological knowledge to benefit society and improve people\u0026rsquo;s lives. An important part of achieving this mission is our vibrant publishing program, which includes a portfolio of 80+ journals published on behalf of both communities within APA and related scholarly societies worldwide, a scholarly books program, a children’s book imprint, digital learning solutions and a suite of databases, including the discovery platform PsycINFO®, the most trusted and comprehensive library of psychological science in the world.\nFor decades, APA Publishing has been a leader in developing knowledge solutions and setting standards for scholars in social and behavioral sciences. The APA Style and our new Journal Article Reporting Standards (JARS) for quantitative and qualitative research impact the reporting of scholarly work well beyond APA’s journals or the field of psychology. APA’s partnership with the Center for Open Science further demonstrates our commitment to collaborating across the industry to improve research outcomes.\nAPA has been a member of Crossref and on the Crossref board since its early days. Together with fellow publishers, exceptional Crossref staff and industry partners, APA has helped to structure, process, and share metadata to reveal relationships among research outputs across the world. APA is ambitious about the future and excited about the role Crossref can play to make research outputs easy to find, cite, link, assess, and reuse. It is important that the Crossref board has representation from a trusted Society publisher in the social and behavioral sciences so that the needs of this vibrant community are reflected in the organisation’s important work.\nPersonal statement\nAs the Chief Publishing Officer of APA, Jasper is responsible for driving strategy, establishing editorial policies, producing content, developing products and overseeing the related sales and marketing services. He manages a team of almost 200 expert staff in APA’s Washington, DC office. In 2017, he led the collaboration with the Center for Open Science to support Open Science and Reproducibility in psychology. The collaboration advances the integration between the content in the Open Science Framework and the peer-reviewed content of the APA.\nJasper served on the Crossref board from 2015 through 2017 and was the Chair of Crossref’s Nominating Committee in 2015-2016. He also served on the Executive Committee of the AAP/PSP board, and is a member of the Standards \u0026amp; Technology Committee of the STM Association. Jasper has 20 years of experience in scholarly publishing, working at leading publishing organisations such as Elsevier, SAGE Publications and Thomson Reuters.\n(Alternate) Tony Habash, Chief Information Officer: Tony F. Habash, DSc, has been the Chief Business Integration Officer and the Chief Information Officer of APA since 2007.\nScott Delman, Association for Computing Machinery (ACM), USA\nACM is a scientific society devoted to furthering computing research and education and supporting the professional needs of its 110,000 members around the world. As a non-profit publisher who’s governance is composed primarily of members of the scientific community, ACM has a unique perspective on many of the changes we are experiencing in the scholarly publishing industry, in that every decision we make needs to consider both the short and long term effects on computer scientists, students, and educators as its primary concern and generating income as an important but secondary consideration.\nACM is by most standards an incredibly lean and efficiently managed organisation. As a society publisher, our publication’s program supports the research community through its various high impact publications, but our publications also fund a wide variety of educational and practitioner-oriented good works programs around the world, as well underwrite public policy initiatives that provide a leading independent and non-partisan voice on U.S. and European public policy issues relating to computing and information technology, such as innovation, artificial intelligence, privacy, big data and analytics, security, accessibility, intellectual property, and technology law. As a standalone organisation, ACM is neither big, nor small, in comparison to many of our peers and service to both the computer science community and the scholarly publishing community is embedded in our DNA.\nFor the past two decades, ACM has been committed to serving the interests of the scholarly publishing community as a founding and active board member of many of the industry’s most important publishing technology initiatives, including Crossref, CHORUS, ORCID, and Portico. ACM has served on the Board of Directors of Crossref since inception, and I currently serve on Crossref’s Executive Committee as Board Treasurer.\nI believe Crossref is at a critical moment in its history and now, perhaps more than any other time in the past, requires strategic and disciplined leadership from its Board of Directors, and leadership that can help to provide an important balance to the strong and sometimes dominant voices and special interests of the large commercial publishers’ on the organisation’s Board and to Crossref’s highly skilled and professional staff, who are constantly looking at the scholarly publishing landscape and proposing new ways for Crossref to play a role. As a result, Crossref is rapidly expanding its menu of services to the publishing community and is for the first time considering expanding its membership beyond publishers to research institutions and funders to drive growth for the organisation. At the same time, key technologies, such as Machine Learning, have the potential to impact Crossref’s core DOI registration service, which the organisation relies so heavily on.\nThe decisions Crossref takes over the next few years, in terms of its own growth and where it chooses to invest its staff and financial resources, and more generally how it responds to the changing technology landscape, will have a transformational impact on the organisation. As a technology-focused organisation that faces many of the same challenges that Crossref is facing, ACM, as represented by its Director of Publications, is in a good position to offer sound, consistent, and strategic leadership on the Board.\nPersonal Statement\nDuring my tenure on the Board, I have served as both a board alternate and member, chaired and served on the Nominations Committee, chaired and served on the Membership \u0026amp; Fees Committee, and currently serve on Crossref’s Executive Committee as Board Treasurer. If elected to another term on the Board, I am committed to working closely with Crossref’s excellent staff and leadership to ensure Crossref’s future success, but also to ensure that Crossref’s growth is managed carefully and in a way that supports both the scholarly publishing community and the scientific community.\nMy alternate is Bernadette Shade, Print Production Manager, ACM.\nCatherine Mitchell, California Digital Library (CDL), USA\nSince its founding in 1997, the California Digital Library (CDL) at the University of California has been engaged in building a library-based publishing program that supports emerging disciplines and scholars, explores new publishing models, and seeks to reach professionals in applied fields beyond academia.\nCDL provides open access publishing services for UC-affiliated departments, research units, publishing programs, and individual scholars who seek to publish or edit original work - as well as comprehensive repository services for a wide range of scholarship including working papers, conference proceedings, electronic theses and dissertations, and data sets.\nNow with over 80 journals published on its eScholarship platform, CDL is an established library publisher with robust infrastructure, deep knowledge of the myriad publishing practices and needs across the academy, and a strong interest in the discoverability challenges faced, in particular, by open access materials; the organisation regularly grapples with the complexity of rationalizing metadata across distinct research outputs, identifying new mechanisms to ensure global access to this research, and encouraging authors to license their work in ways that support sharing and reuse while at the same time retaining their own copyright.\nAs a major library publisher and a member of the Library Publishing Coalition, CDL would help broaden Crossref’s understanding of the unique needs and opportunities within this burgeoning space, particularly in the context of DOI registration, metadata requirements associated with new research output formats, aggregated metrics, and the Event Data initiative. As the consortial digital library for the ten University of California campuses, CDL would represent a public institution of great breadth and ambition that has declared its commitment to open scholarship and continues to seek new ways to make good on that promise. And, as a current member of Crossref and ORCID, as well as a founding member of DataCite, CDL would bring its dedication to supporting community-led efforts to enhance the discoverability, interconnectedness and broader contextualization of scholarly communication around the world.\nPersonal statement\nAs the Director of Publishing \u0026amp; Special Collections at the California Digital Library, I am responsible for overseeing the strategic planning, development, and operational management of CDL’s suite of library publishing services for the ten University of California campuses, including an open access publishing platform (80+ active journals), a research information management system, and an institutional repository. I am also Operations Director of UC’s Office of Scholarly Communication and, in this capacity, am particularly engaged in questions of use, value, authorship, and professional legitimacy. And finally, I have served as the President of the Board for the Library Publishing Coalition for the past two years (June 2016 - June 2018), and will remain on the Board this year as Immediate Past-President.\nAs someone with over a decade of leadership experience within scholarly communication and, in particular, library publishing, I am well positioned to bring a new perspective to the Crossref Board that reflects a growing community of academic publishers who operate outside the commercial and university press world but are, nonetheless, responsible for the production and distribution of a significant and growing number of scholarly research publications.\nI would contribute to Crossref as a board member by representing the substantial commitment of libraries as partners in establishing an open scholarly communication environment and the unique needs of and challenges faced by library publishers worldwide in ensuring appropriate visibility and “credit” for open access publications. As a community, we have worked with DOIs for articles but are keen to see the standard evolve in ways that can better accommodate the full complement of scholarly research output, from data sets and pre-prints to blog posts and micro-publications. Crossref is uniquely positioned, as a globally engaged organisation, to solve these problems and help create a standards-driven, hyper-connected scholarly communication environment that transcends siloed publishing systems and national boundaries to maximize the availability of contextualized and relevant information.\nPrior to joining CDL, I earned an AB in English from the University of Chicago and a PhD in English Literature from the University of California, Berkeley.\nI propose John Kunze, Identifier Systems Architect at CDL, as our alternate.\nPaul Peters, Hindawi, UK\nAs one of the leading independent publishers of Open Access journals, Hindawi has played an important role in representing the interests of OA publishers on the Crossref Board for the past 9 years. Hindawi\u0026rsquo;s commitment to develop open infrastructure to support scholarly communications is highly aligned with Crossref\u0026rsquo;s mission, as are Hindawi\u0026rsquo;s efforts to support universities and funding agencies in their efforts to become more closely involved in the scholarly communications system.\nIn addition to the contributions that Hindawi has made to Crossref, it has also been an important contributor to OASPA, I4OC, JATS4R, and many similar initiatives. Hindawi has also built strong partnerships with some of the most well-established scholarly publishers, including Wiley and AAAS, in order to work together in expanding the open access publishing activities of these organisations.\nPersonal statement\nIn my 9 years serving on the Crossref Board I have contributed to a number of important initiatives within Crossref, served on a number of Crossref\u0026rsquo;s working groups and committees, and most recently served as the Chair of Crossref\u0026rsquo;s Board. I have a very detailed understanding of Crossref\u0026rsquo;s existing services, as well as the projects that are currently under development.\nIn terms of my vision for the Crossref community, I believe that one of the greatest opportunities and challenges for Crossref in the years ahead will be to expand the organisation\u0026rsquo;s current membership to include new categories of members while continuing to serve the needs of the existing membership. I also believe that Crossref has a great opportunity to expand the constituencies it serves by building closer relationships with other organisations who share Crossref\u0026rsquo;s mission but cater to constituencies that are not currently represented in Crossref\u0026rsquo;s membership.\nIf Hindawi is re-elected to the Crossref Board, Craig Raybould (Hindawi\u0026rsquo;s Director of Operations) would be Hindawi\u0026rsquo;s alternate Board Member. In addition to currently serving as a member of Crossref\u0026rsquo;s Board, Craig is also involved in several closely-aligned initiatives including JATS4R and Metadata 2020.\nRichard Fidczuk, SAGE, UK\nFounded in 1965, SAGE is a leading independent, academic and professional publisher of innovative, high-quality content. SAGE publishes journals, and books, digital publications and online resources, across the STEM and HSS fields, and has been heavily involved with Crossref since its inception, with members on the Executive, Nominating and Finance Committees in recent years.\nWe are uniquely positioned because of our size and independent status to bridge the gap between the large commercial publishers and smaller publishers and to represent and understand the interests of both in a way no other organisation can. SAGE publishes in partnership with a large number of society partners and so is intimately connected with the academic community and its changing needs, which SAGE can feed into its work with Crossref.\nBecause of the great breadth of its publishing, including journals (STM, HSS, and Open Access), college textbook publishing, library products and data, SAGE is intimately familiar with the large range of the requirements and challenges faced by Crossref and therefore well situated to ensure that it remains at the forefront of developments, whether it is in the use and deployment of new services, identifiers, metadata, or new forms of content. The breadth of SAGE’s use of DOIs and the spectrum of coverage is vast when thinking about the use and place of Crossref services and the importance of quality identifiers and metadata services in our industry.\nSAGE can also call on a wide range of experts within the organisation beyond the proposed Board members if necessary to assist in projects: SAGE staff also participate already in a number of Crossref ad hoc technical working groups.\nPersonal statement\nI am Global Journals Production Director at SAGE Publishing, where I am responsible currently for the production of over 1000 journals, both traditional and open access. I have worked previously at IOP Publishing, Prentice Hall, and Blackwell Publishing and I’ve been in the publishing industry for over 30 years, managing production operations of both books and journals. I was involved right at the start of the publication of online journals in the 1990s.\nI have served as SAGE representative for NISO (the National Standards Information organisation) and on the ALPSP (Association of Learned and Professional Society Publishers) Board, where I was Chair of their Research Committee. I am also a Chartered Director and Fellow of the UK Institute of Directors.\nAs a result of this wide experience I have a deep comprehension of the crucial role that Crossref plays as the underpinning of so much of the infrastructure of scholarly communications today. It’s important that Crossref continues to innovate as the needs of the scholarly community continue to evolve, and to aid this I can contribute and advise in both the technical aspects required to understand and to set Crossref’s vision and future strategy, and the commercial aspects needed to ensure that Crossref continues to be successful and to thrive into the future.\nThe alternate for me on the Board of Crossref would be John Shaw, Vice President, Publishing Technologies. This would reverse the current situation where John is the main Board member and I am his alternate.\nDuncan Campbell, Wiley, USA\nFounded in 1807, John Wiley and Sons (Wiley) publishes on behalf of more academic, professional and scholarly societies and associations than any other publisher.\nWiley was a founding member of Crossref, as was Blackwell, which merged with Wiley in 2007. We see Crossref as a core component of the research publishing ecosystem and are committed to helping Crossref as an organisation meet its goals and objectives. Overall, Wiley strives to take a leadership role in scholarly publishing, and through initiatives such as CHORUS and ORCID (among others) we work with stakeholders across the industry to help develop infrastructure that supports researchers and scholarly publishing globally.\nWe are a global company, with major publishing centres in the United States, the United Kingdom, Germany, Australia, China, and Japan. Wiley colleagues are actively engaged in numerous industry membership associations, such as the International Association of Scientific, Technical and Medical Publishers (STM), the Association of Learned and Professional Society Publishers (ALPSP), the Publishers Association (PA) and the American Association of Publishers (AAP). Wiley is also a co-chair of Project DARE, which is working to address skills gaps in the Asia-Pacific region.\nWe recognize that the market for scholarly publishing is changing rapidly, creating opportunities to develop new ways to describe, share, and disseminate research advances; we are committed to supporting the transition to Open Science in all manifestations, and to managing the transition in a sustainable manner for all stakeholders.\nPersonal statement\nI am currently Director, Global Sales Partnerships, for Wiley’s Research business, where I am responsible for licensing, agent relations and copyright \u0026amp; permissions for Wiley’s academic journal and database content. In addition, I am also engaged in developing Wiley’s strategies and policies in areas such as government affairs, content sharing/syndication and text \u0026amp; data mining. I am co-chair of the CLOCKSS digital archive, a not-for-profit joint venture between the world\u0026rsquo;s leading academic publishers and research libraries, and am also a member of the International Publishers’ Rights organisation (IPRO) board, and a non-executive director of Seren Books, a non-profit literary publisher based in Wales.\nI have represented Wiley on the Crossref board since 2015, and am currently a member of the Audit Committee and the Membership \u0026amp; Fees Committee. Crossref is a key component of the scholarly publishing ecosystem, and plays a major role in the development of the standards and infrastructure that we all depend on for our day-to-day publishing activities. If we want our industry to survive (and thrive) in the future, we need to work together as Crossref members and stakeholders to build a robust and sustainable open infrastructure for scholarly publishing that supports the continuing development of innovative products and services, irrespective of business models.\nWiley’s alternate is Sophia Joyce, Vice President, Content Strategy \u0026amp; Management.\n",
"headings": ["Susan Murray, African Journals Online (AJOL), South Africa\n","Personal statement\n","Jasper Simons, American Psychological Association (APA), USA\n","Personal statement\n","Scott Delman, Association for Computing Machinery (ACM), USA\n","Personal Statement\n","Catherine Mitchell, California Digital Library (CDL), USA\n","Personal statement\n","Paul Peters, Hindawi, UK\n","Personal statement\n","Richard Fidczuk, SAGE, UK\n","Personal statement\n","Duncan Campbell, Wiley, USA\n","Personal statement\n"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/board-and-governance/elections/2017-slate/",
"title": "Board election 2017 candidates",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 2,
"lastmod": "2017-09-29",
"lastmod_ts": 1506643200,
"section": "Board & governance",
"tags": [],
"description": "If you are a voting member of Crossref your \u0026lsquo;voting contact\u0026rsquo; will have received an email on September 28, 2017. If you are the designated voting contact please follow the instructions in that email which includes links to the relevant election process and policy information.\nFrom 25 applications, our Nominating Committee proposed the following nine candidates to fill the six seats open for election to the Crossref Board of Directors. For the first time, we have more candidates than available seats:\n",
"content": "If you are a voting member of Crossref your \u0026lsquo;voting contact\u0026rsquo; will have received an email on September 28, 2017. If you are the designated voting contact please follow the instructions in that email which includes links to the relevant election process and policy information.\nFrom 25 applications, our Nominating Committee proposed the following nine candidates to fill the six seats open for election to the Crossref Board of Directors. For the first time, we have more candidates than available seats:\nMember organisation Candidate standing Country American Institute of Physics Jason Wilde USA F1000 Research Liz Allen UK Institute of Electronic and Electrical Engineers Gerry Grenier USA The Institution of Engineering and Technology Vincent Cassidy UK Massachusetts Institute of Technology Press Amy Brand USA OpenEdition Marin Dacos France SciELO Abel Packer Brazil SPIE Eric Pepper USA Vilnius Gediminas Technical University Press Eleonora Dagiene Lithuania Jason Wilde, American Institute of Physics (AIP), USA\nFor more than 80 years, AIP Publishing has championed the needs of the global research community as a wholly owned, not-for-profit, subsidiary of the American Institute of Physics (AIP). Our mission is to support the charitable, scientific and educational purposes of AIP through scholarly publishing activities across the physical sciences.\nFrom being an instigator in the development of CHORUS to taking a lead role in enabling public access to research content AIP Publishing has played a pivotal role in shaping our industry. Through our role on the boards of key industry bodies, Crossref, International Association of Scientific, Technical and Medical Publishers (STM), CHORUS, and Professional and Scholarly Publishing (PSP) Executive Council, AIP Publishing continues to ensure that the voice of small, scholarly, publishers is clearly heard.\nAt a time when a small number of large commercial publishers are taking dominant roles in scientific publishing, there is an ongoing need for strong representation of self-published not-for-profit societies, such as AIP Publishing, across our industry and, most importantly, on the Crossref board.\nPersonal statement\nAs the Chief Publishing Officer (CPO) for AIP Publishing, Jason is responsible for the leadership, vision, and growth of the publishing program. Jason currently serves as a board member for Crossref (2014–2017) and previously from 2007–2013 when he was with Nature. Jason was a member of the Crossref Nominating Committee in 2011, 2012, and 2015, and in 2017 was elected to Crossref’s Executive Committee.\nWith 20 years’ experience in both large for-profit and smaller not-for-profit organisations and significant involvement in the Crossref organisation, Jason has a unique understanding of our industry and the vital role that Crossref plays. Crossref is not only the core infrastructure that links research and aids discoverability, but it provides the framework and data on which many other industry tools and services are built. As publishing continues to evolve, there is opportunity for Crossref to increasingly serve as a focal point for the industry, fostering collaboration among publishers, and developing solutions that serve the needs of our customers – researchers, librarians, funders and governments.\nBefore joining AIP Publishing, Jason was Business Development Director for Nature Publishing Group (NPG). During his twelve years with NPG, Jason oversaw the creation of the Nature-branded physical science research journals and NPG’s Open Access publications Nature Communications, Scientific Reports and Scientific Data. Prior to his career in publishing, Jason earned degrees from Dundee University (BEng in Electrical and Electronic Engineering), Cambridge University (PGCE in Balanced Science and Physics) and Durham University (PhD in Molecular Electronics).\nJason also serves on the board of the International Association of Scientific, Technical and Medical Publishers (STM).\nThe alternate for Jason on the board of Crossref would be Dr. John Haynes, CEO AIP Publishing.\nLiz Allen, F1000, UK\nF1000 Research would be an important and strategic addition to the Crossref Board at this time. Faculty of 1000 is a long-standing open research innovator and since 2013 has been working with a range of partners across the world to provide online, open research publishing solutions, to accelerate access to research findings outside of traditional publishing outlets, and to support the associated use and potential impact of research (e.g. Wellcome Open Research; Gates Open Research; F1000Research).\nUltimately Crossref exists to build an infrastructure to bring about efficiencies in how we deliver, discover and use knowledge and scholarly insights. F1000 is therefore well placed to specifically advise and play an active role in Crossref Board and strategic discussions about how best to ensure that newer research publishing models and outlets are considered in specific initiatives and broader strategy and projects (e.g. Event Data; Funding Registry; Crossmark). In addition, through its direct work with funding agencies, research institutions and Learned Societies, F1000 would bring a broad, cross-sector perspective and experience to the Crossref Board as it seeks to evolve its scholarly infrastructure and metadata requirements and services.\nPersonal Statement\nI am currently Director of Strategic Initiatives at F1000, and involved in seeking opportunities and shaping new initiatives particularly to promote and foster open research. I have spent much of my career thus far involved in projects and initiatives that aim to improve the understanding of how science progresses and how knowledge can be used - essentially to accelerate access to and the potential impact of research. In 2015 I became a Visiting Senior Research Fellow in the Policy Institute at King’s College London and continue to advise on academic projects that seek to understand research impact.\nPrior to joining F1000 in 2015, I spent over a decade as Head of Evaluation at the Wellcome Trust (a major biomedical research funding agency), with a particular specialism in impact assessment and the development of science-related indicators, serving as an adviser on the 2015 UK government commissioned Independent review of the role of research metrics in research assessment https://www.hefce.ac.uk/rsrch/metrics/. I understand the vital importance of building a data infrastructure to connect science, scientists and associated research outputs. I was a Board Director of ORCID between 2010-2015 and helped to mandate the adoption of ORCID for all Wellcome grantees. While at Wellcome I also co-led the development of project CRediT (Contributor Roles Taxonomy - http://www.casrai.org/CRediT) and continue to serve on the CASRAI CRediT committee.\nDuring my time at Wellcome I played an active role in helping Crossref to shape what is now the Funding Registry and worked with funding agencies to encourage the adoption of consistent ways to classify and capture research-related data – though there is lots more to be done to consolidate and develop this valuable information.\nI am very supportive of Crossref’s metadata drive and think that my knowledge and cross-sector experience and networks, would make me a valuable addition to the Crossref Board at this time. If I were appointed to the Crossref Board, my alternate would be Michaela Torkar, PhD, Publishing Director at F1000.\nGerry Grenier, Institute of Electronic and Electrical Engineers (IEEE), USA\nThe Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) is the world’s leading technical membership organisation, with over 420,000 members and a mission to advance technology for the benefit of society. It inspires a global community of scholars and industry professionals to innovate for a better tomorrow through highly-cited publications, conferences, technology standards, and professional education services.\nA member and supporter of Crossref since its inception, IEEE sees its contribution to the organisation as an opportunity to influence the future of scholarly publishing through continuing development of innovative and shared collaborative services for the industry. IEEE as a publisher and a not-for- profit organisation is at the forefront of numerous initiatives to serve authors, reviewers, readers, and customers and brings a community-centric approach to its work with Crossref. It will seek to balance the needs of Crossref’s global consumers and its diverse member base, advocating sustainable, fiscally sound management of the organisation.\nPersonal statement\nGerry is Senior Director of Publishing Technologies \u0026amp; Content Management, a role he has held since joining IEEE in 1999. He manages the development and operation of the IEEE’s publishing ecosystem, including the systems used to create, enhance, distribute, and archive IEEE’s intellectual property. He has been a member of the Crossref Board since 2004, a member of its Executive Committee since 2013, and its Treasurer since 2016.\nGerry’s career in the STM business began in 1980 with editorial and production roles for life sciences publisher Alan R. Liss, Inc. He joined John Wiley \u0026amp; Sons with its acquisition of Liss in 1987 and served in editorial, production, and technology roles \u0026ndash; culminating in his role as Director of Publishing Technology. He was a key member of the team that developed Wiley’s initial online digital library, Wiley Interscience.\nHe is currently serving on the NISO Board of Directors, is a past Board Member of International STM, Past Chair of the New Jersey Chapter of the American Society for Information Science and is a member of the Association for Computing Machinery.\n(Alternate) Michael Forster, Managing Director, Publications\nMichael is Managing Director for Publications at IEEE, a position he has held since late 2015, and has more than two decades of experience in educational, professional, and research publishing. Working for both Elsevier and Wiley prior to IEEE, he has served in senior management positions in the UK, the US, and in Germany, with expertise in strategic planning, M\u0026amp;A and portfolio analysis, product management, and content development.\nAs a leader within Wiley for nearly a decade, he was responsible for journal, book, magazine, database, and scientific workflow product portfolios, led development of new products in researcher workflow, and introduced the first semantic enrichment products to Wiley’s online platform. Michael began his career with publisher Butterworth-Heinemann, then worked as Publishing Director for Engineering and Computer Science in Elsevier’s Science and Technology Books business where he led innovative projects in online learning and eBook products and to transform business models for the textbook market.\nMichael received his B.A. (Hons) and M.Eng. in Engineering Science from the University of Oxford.\nVincent Cassidy, Institution of Engineering and Technology (IET), UK\nThe Institution of Engineering and Technology will contribute to the Crossref board in two ways. Firstly, as a learned and professional society publishing a broad range of content (journals, books, standards, multi-media) we will represent the interests of a significant section of Crossref’s core membership. Learned membership bodies are developing their own distinct approaches to the open science and open data debate and, being well networked within the world of learned societies, we will be able to reflect the role of the learned society in the changing landscape of scholarly discourse.\nIn addition, through the process of semantically enriching Inspec, our flagship A\u0026amp;I service, we appreciate the opportunities and concerns inherent in managing distributed big-data assets and the evolution of new service models and relationships in the scholarly network. Inspec supports a metadata service business and gives the IET an interesting perspective on the challenges and opportunities facing Crossref.\nPersonal statement\nI have 30 years experience in scholarly and professional publishing and having held leadership positions at Academic Press, Thomson Reuters, Elsevier Health Sciences, British Standards (BSI) and the IET I have experience of many information markets and sectors across Crossref’s membership base. I have worked closely with Crossref and DOIs from the birth of the organisation (in my time working with Academic Press\u0026rsquo;s Ideal project) and have continued to support and promote Crossref through my career, including leading the adoption of DOIs by the standards community during my period at British Standards.\nI understand the key role of standards in our industry and Crossref’s value and potential in the networked information economy. It is easy to take Crossref\u0026rsquo;s central role in facilitating scholarly discourse for granted, and it is instructive to remember the high degree of competition between the major commercial publishers that was the original spur for Crossref\u0026rsquo;s creation. Crossref has facilitated the development of a system of networked content that has improved the process of scholarly communication.\nMy vision is that our content centric industry is evolving new service dimensions that will enhance, not only the content output, but the process of research and development itself. Crossref can continue to add value by providing the standards and the institution to connect this increasingly complex stakeholder group.\nI propose Sara Killingworth (Head of Marketing, IET) as our alternate.\nAmy Brand, Massachusetts Institute of Technology Press (MIT Press), USA\nOne of the largest and most distinguished university presses in the world, the MIT Press is known for bold content and design, creative technology, and its commitment to re-imagining university based publishing. By electing the MIT Press to the Crossref Board, the Crossref community will have the representation not only of a leading university press, but also of a technically progressive press that spans STEM and HSS fields within its book and journal programs. The MIT Press is resolutely focused on pushing the boundaries of digital publication across the board, and is committed to integrating DOIs into all aspects of digital publication. Core to our vision is enriching the metadata environment for academic research, and interlinking as extensively as possible with text, data and nontraditional objects, and with persistently identified organisations, stakeholders, and roles that comprise a more articulated scholarly communication infrastructure. With a seat on the Crossref Board, the MIT Press will be able to help grow adoption of DOIs for books and other digital objects within the university press community, many members of which have only recently embarked on digital publishing.\nPersonal statement\nAmy Brand worked at Crossref for several years in the early days of the organisation, serving as Director of Business and Product Development from 2001-2007. Hence, she should would bring to the Crossref Board a uniquely deep perspective on how the organisation functions, how members of our community work together to move a shared agenda forward, and what the opportunities are for continuing to develop and improve Crossref services.\nBecause her career has afforded her experience in several regions of the scholarly communication landscape — academic research, university administration, open access, analytics, entrepreneurship, in addition to book and journal publishing — Amy brings valuable insight into diverse perspectives.\nShe is unusually well qualified to help build the consensus that makes Crossref work so well. In recent years, she helped launch the CRediT contributor role taxonomy initiative, and she’s currently involved in a new community-wide project to grow the adoption of peer review badges. Both of these projects produce metadata that can and should be integrated into the Crossref system. Amy was also a founding member of the ORCID Board of Directors and currently serves on the National Academies Board of Research Data and Information, the Duraspace Board of Directors, and the advisory board for altmetic.com.\nThe MIT Press Alternate to the Crossref board, should we be elected, would be our Journals Director, Nick Lindsay. Nick has successfully run the MITP journals program since 2009, having brought forward several significant technology and business model changes that positively transformed the division. Prior to his move to the MIT Press, Nick worked at the University of California Press in their journals department. He has served on several committees within the Society for Scholarly Publishing and the Association of American University Presses, and chaired the scholarly journals committee for AAUP for two years.\nMarin Dacos, OpenEdition, France\nOpenEdition is a major European platform for HSS in Europe, which provides publishing services for 450 journals, 4000 books and more than 2000 academic blogs. We are based in Marseille and Paris. We are pursuing long-term projects in Italy (OpenEdition Italia), Portugal (LusOpenEdition), Germany (de.hypotheses.org), Spain (es.hypotheses.org) and the Netherlands (OpenEdition is the co-founder of the DOAB Foundation, with the OAPEN Foundation). Our content is published in five European languages: French, English, German, Spanish and Italian. We are in the process of establishing a European network of all players involved in open digital publishing. This is OPERAS http://operas.hypotheses.org, which brings together 20 partners, 9 countries and 2 lots of H2020 funding. Together, those involved have published 800,000 documents and 250,000 authors.\nOpenEdition’s presence on the board will show that disciplines whose scholarly communication is plurilingual have a place within the organisation. It will also underline the inclusion of non-STM platforms and publishers as integral parts of the digital scholarly publishing sector. This will help Crossref to embrace the cultural and organisational diversity of its communities.\nPersonal statement\nWith 20 years of experience as the founding director of OpenEdition, I am very familiar with the diversity of the HSS publishing ecosystem in Europe. I have been at the forefront of the digitalization of scholarly communication, supporting editors, publishers and academics to shift from paper to electronic formats. This ongoing revolution has deeply transformed the HSS publishing industry, with some embracing it and inventing new formats and economic models, and others remaining reluctant and seeing it as only a secondary market and communication channel.\nIn the face of this diversity, I have developed tools and adapted standards in order to include as many publishing actors as possible and to drive them to the most open solutions. As DOIs and Crossref have become key services for open science, it is necessary to take into account small publishers and platforms, in order to provide a comprehensive service for the whole industry, and not only to major players and international initiatives. To do so, the diversity of languages and disciplines for future developments of Crossref services should be acknowledged.\nI have been using Crossref’s services as a publisher for almost a decade and know them fairly well. I hope that these services will expand even more substantially in the future, particularly in terms of covering the minor forms of scientific communication that are blogs, as well as by offering functionalities specific to fine-grained forms of publishing (particularly critical editions of historical sources).\nProposed alternate : Pierre Mounier (EHESS, OpenEdition).\nAbel Packer, SciELO, Brazil\nMy organisation is the Scientific Electronic Library Online (SciELO) Program which is an international collaboration on scholarly communication aiming at improving quality, visibility and credibility of nationally edited journals and the research they communicate.\nSciELO was launched in 1998 in Brazil and it is implemented through the SciELO Network composed by 15 national collections of selected open access peer reviewed journals from Latin American countries, Portugal, Spain and South Africa. The network is fully decentralized using the same principles and methodology and publishes about 1 thousand journals from all disciplines, 50 thousand new articles per year and an accumulated repository of over 700 thousand articles. The network serves over one million downloads per day according COUNTER methodology.\nSciELO is probably the most important international cooperation program on scientific communication among developing countries.\nPersonal statement\nWith more than 20 years of experience on scientific information management in Latin America, my application envisages to enrich the Crossref Board with a voice and demands of Latin American and other developing regions on the adoption of Crossref products and services.\nMy alternate will be Fabio Batalha, SciELO leader on systems development and information technology infrastructures. Fabio has an extensive experience on the management of Crossref services.\nEric Pepper, SPIE, USA\nI have worked in publishing at SPIE, the international society for optics and photonics, for thirty-five years, the past twenty-four of those as Director of Publications, with responsibilities encompassing editorial, production, technology, and business aspects of all our publishing activities. In this time I have seen and been directly involved in enormous changes in our industry and in how we think about, produce, and disseminate scholarly information.\nCrossref is of course an important outcome of this transformation. SPIE’s first connection to Crossref dates back to 2000 when our journals were hosted on the AIP platform and we participated in Crossref via an agency agreement with AIP. SPIE joined as an independent member a few years after that.\nPersonal statement\nI have been SPIE’s liaison to Crossref during this entire period and in addition to basic DOI registration and linking was instrumental in adding Similarity Check, Funder Registry, and now Cited-by to the suite of Crossref services we use. SPIE greatly values these Crossref services and the organisation that developed and enables them and will appreciate an opportunity to have a voice in Crossref’s governance and strategic direction.\nAs our representative, I believe that my experience helping to develop and manage a diverse portfolio of scholarly publications in a variety of print and digital formats has given me the perspective needed to understand the needs of publishers as well as the research and educational communities that provide and utilize the content we publish. I have worked with many other organisations, vendors, and publishing partners over the years and through that have developed an understanding of broader industry needs and priorities, which which I can bring to my role in Crossref leadership should I have the opportunity.\nEleonora Dagiene, VGTU Press, Lithuania\nIn recent years, many small publishers have joined Crossref. VGTU Press has been representing this particular and growing group of members on the Board for three years. We are an innovative small publisher functioning within a university structure, which means we are close to the academic community and aware of everyday issues faced by researchers, librarians, and administrators.\nThe services offered by Crossref enable small publishers to keep up with the rapidly changing scholarly communication trends. However, it happens that many small publishers find it difficult to implement some of the services due to having fewer staff with limited technical expertise. The young, promising, and curious team of VGTU Press helps Crossref understand these challenges, and we share with staff and the rest of the Board the reasons and causes of such obstacles. VGTU Press seeks to implement as many Crossref innovations as possible so we have firsthand experience with almost every initiative that Crossref is involved in, actively working with staff to share information and help with improvements.\nAs a small publisher supporting Crossref initiatives, VGTU is a good example for other small publishers, showing the feasibility of implementing not only cornerstone services, such as DOI registration or the use of Similarity Check, but also other services offered by Crossref. As the academic community continues to seek new forms and models of publishing, VGTU Press, as one of the most advanced non-profit academic publishers in the Baltics, would be an excellent choice as a representative of small publishers, an area of the world never represented previously on the Crossref Board which is heavily monopolized by large US and UK publishers.\nPersonal statement\nAs someone in the modern academic publishing industry with over ten years’ experience, and for whom work in scholarly communication is a personal passion, I would be a great candidate to re-elect to Crossref\u0026rsquo;s board. Serving on the Board for the term 2015–2017 was not only a privilege and an excellent driver of my professional development but also a great pleasure. It also means I can offer some continuity as I fully understand the key issues that currently face Crossref and the Board. As Director of VGTU Press and President of the Association of Lithuanian Serials, I have gained a considerable expertise related to scholarly publishing, especially familiarity of the challenges faced by small publishers. I have learned from my experience that a person running a small press and turning it successful and contemporary, should have knowledge of different areas and the ability to think creatively.\nTo manage processes efficiently, it is important to gain a thorough understanding not only of everyday activities in a press but also to take an interest in innovations which are usually related to technology. Especially when the descriptions of any current innovation can sound as if they were magic words, demanding more time to gain a required level of understanding.\nLiaising with researchers/authors, journal editors, and university employees is a part of my daily agenda, which helps me to keep my finger on the pulse of needs and expectations arising from the academic community. Besides, I am also a researcher, author and peer-reviewer, working in the field of scholarly communication.\nThe three years of experience as a member of Crossref Board provided me with an excellent opportunity to enhance the understanding of Crossref services. Moreover, I have valuable knowledge of various innovations and it is clear for me what problems current scholarly communication faces.\nFurthermore, I firmly believe that many publishing-related improvements would have been impossible without the services provided by Crossref. It would be an honour to be selected for an additional term. In any case, I would like to take this opportunity to say that I feel inspired by Crossref activities and will continue to promote them actively.\n",
"headings": ["Jason Wilde, American Institute of Physics (AIP), USA\n","Personal statement\n","Liz Allen, F1000, UK\n","Personal Statement\n","Gerry Grenier, Institute of Electronic and Electrical Engineers (IEEE), USA\n","Personal statement\n","Vincent Cassidy, Institution of Engineering and Technology (IET), UK\n","Personal statement\n","Amy Brand, Massachusetts Institute of Technology Press (MIT Press), USA\n","Personal statement\n","Marin Dacos, OpenEdition, France\n","Personal statement\n","Abel Packer, SciELO, Brazil\n","Personal statement\n","Eric Pepper, SPIE, USA\n","Personal statement\n","Eleonora Dagiene, VGTU Press, Lithuania\n","Personal statement\n"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/crossref-annual-meeting/2026-annual-meeting/",
"title": "Crossref Annual Meeting and Board Election 2026",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 3,
"lastmod": "2026-05-18",
"lastmod_ts": 1779062400,
"section": "Crossref Annual Meeting",
"tags": [],
"description": "\nSAVE THE DATE #Crossref2026 online, 22 October 2026 Our annual meeting, #Crossref2026, will be held online. We invited all our members from 160+ countries—and everyone in our community—to join us for the announcement of the board election results, updates from the Crossref team, flash talks from members of our community and more.\nFull agenda and registration information to follow in the coming months.\nPlease contact us with any questions.\n",
"content": "\nSAVE THE DATE #Crossref2026 online, 22 October 2026 Our annual meeting, #Crossref2026, will be held online. We invited all our members from 160+ countries—and everyone in our community—to join us for the announcement of the board election results, updates from the Crossref team, flash talks from members of our community and more.\nFull agenda and registration information to follow in the coming months.\nPlease contact us with any questions.\n",
"headings": ["SAVE THE DATE","#Crossref2026 online, 22 October 2026"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/crossref-annual-meeting/2025-annual-meeting/",
"title": "Crossref Annual Meeting and Board Election 2025",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 3,
"lastmod": "2025-07-01",
"lastmod_ts": 1751328000,
"section": "Crossref Annual Meeting",
"tags": [],
"description": "\n#Crossref2025 online, 22-23 October 2025 Our annual meeting, #Crossref2025, was held online, two 1/2 day sessions, 22-23 October 2025 starting. We invited all our members from 160+ countries—and everyone in our community—to join us for the announcement of the board election results, updates from the Crossref team, flash talks from members of our community and more.\nPlease see information from #Crossref2025 below, and cite the outputs as `#Crossref2025 Annual Meeting and Board Election, 22-23 October 2025 retrieved [date], https://doi.org/10.13003/431937misogo.\n",
"content": "\n#Crossref2025 online, 22-23 October 2025 Our annual meeting, #Crossref2025, was held online, two 1/2 day sessions, 22-23 October 2025 starting. We invited all our members from 160+ countries—and everyone in our community—to join us for the announcement of the board election results, updates from the Crossref team, flash talks from members of our community and more.\nPlease see information from #Crossref2025 below, and cite the outputs as `#Crossref2025 Annual Meeting and Board Election, 22-23 October 2025 retrieved [date], https://doi.org/10.13003/431937misogo.\nIf you attended any portion of the meeting, please take our survey to help inform furture events: Day 1, Day 2\nPosts on BlueSky #Crossref2025 Posts on LinkedIn #Crossref2025 Agenda Day 1 🦩 Time (UTC) Topic 12:00 Celebrating 25th Anniversary of Crossref Hello to Crossref Satellite Event Nairobi, Kenya Welcome and agenda – Ed Pentz Timeline: 25 Years of Crossref Speakers - Urooj Nizami (PKP, Simon Fraser University) – Stronger Together: How PKP and Crossref support a shared scholarly community - Todd Carpenter (NISO) - Abel Packer (SciELO) – Crossref and the evolution of Latin America scholarly communication metadata - Lisa Schiff (California Digital Library, Pre-elections Board Chair) 13:00 Annual meeting \u0026amp; business – 2025 Board election 13:40 Crossref then and now - Membership – Presentation - Roadmap update – Presentation - RCFS – Presentation 14:10 Community highlights - Agon Memeti (University of Tetova) – Analyzing Abstract Coverage and Authorship Patterns in Crossref-Registered University of Tetova Journal Articles (2024) - Charlie Rapple (Kudos) – Scholarly publishing and the Sustainable Development Goals: What you need to know - Antoine Drouin (Fonds de Recherche du Québec) – Diving into Crossref as a Funder: A Tale of Swift Adoption - Pia Kretschmar (SCOAP3) – SCOAP3 Open Science elements - Barbara Rivera (Barcelona Declaration) – Open Research Information 15:15 Metadata updates – Patricia Feeney, Head of Metadata 15:30 Data Science - Dominika Tkaczyk (Director of Technology) – Introduction to Data Science team - Alex Bédard-Vallée (Data Scientist) – Internal environment for efficient data processing - Jason Portenoy (Data Scientist) – Metadata matching service and strategies 16:00 Closing remarks Day 2 🦩 Time (UTC) Topic 07:00 Celebrating 25th Anniversary of Crossref Welcome and agenda – Ed Pentz Timeline: 25 years of Crossref - Soichi Kubota (J-STAGE, JST) – Presentation - Leena Shah (DOAJ) – Presentation - Susan Murray (AJOL) – Presentation 08:00 Tools and services demonstrations New Participation Reports demo – Patrick Vale Record Registration Form demo – Lena Stoll Data storytelling with Crossref REST API – Luis Montilla 08:45 Project and programs updates - Johannsen Obanda – Ambassador Program update - Amanda Bartell – Integrity of the Scholarly Record (ISR) - Dominika Tkaczyk – A few words about technology 09:10 Community highlights - Hans de Jonge (NWO) – Manuscript submission systems and metadata completeness - Audrey Kenni (Pan African Medical Journal) – PAMJ’s Journey to Visibility with Crossref - Nurul Ain Mohd Noor (Universiti Malaysia Terengganu) – My Crossref Journey - Achal Agrawal (PostPub) – The Unreasonable Effectiveness of Author-Affiliation Co-Occurrence - Ratna Galuh Manika Trisista (Universitas Islam Jakarta) – Our Better Metadata Story 10:00 Panel discussion: Research Nexus in the real world Ginny Hendricks (Crossref, Facilitator), Dominika Tkaczyk (Crossref), Bianca Kramer (Barcelona Declaration on Open Research Information), David Oliva Uribe (UNESCO), Amber Osman (Cofounder XploreOpen), Mariángela Nápoli (CONICET-IICE UBA-FFYL; Crossref Ambassador in Pakistan), Kazuhiro Hayashi (National Institute of Science and Technology Policy, Science Council of Japan) 04:00 Closing remarks: Ed Pentz Please contact us with any questions.\n",
"headings": ["#Crossref2025 online, 22-23 October 2025","Agenda","Day 1 🦩","Day 2 🦩"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/crossref-annual-meeting/2024-annual-meeting/",
"title": "Crossref annual meeting and board election 2024",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 3,
"lastmod": "2024-10-29",
"lastmod_ts": 1730160000,
"section": "Crossref Annual Meeting",
"tags": [],
"description": "#Crossref2024 online, 29 October 2024 Our annual meeting, #Crossref2024, was held online on 29 October 2024 starting at 8:00 AM UTC to 18:30 PM UTC (universal coordinated time). We invited all our members from 170+ countries, and everyone in our community, to hear the results of our board election and team updates.\nPlease see information from #Crossref2024 below, and cite the outputs as `#Crossref2024 Annual Meeting and Board Election, 29 October 2024 retrieved [date], https://doi.org/10.13003/1KJ1GBDA9B:\n",
"content": "#Crossref2024 online, 29 October 2024 Our annual meeting, #Crossref2024, was held online on 29 October 2024 starting at 8:00 AM UTC to 18:30 PM UTC (universal coordinated time). We invited all our members from 170+ countries, and everyone in our community, to hear the results of our board election and team updates.\nPlease see information from #Crossref2024 below, and cite the outputs as `#Crossref2024 Annual Meeting and Board Election, 29 October 2024 retrieved [date], https://doi.org/10.13003/1KJ1GBDA9B:\nIf you attended any portion of the meeting, please take our survey to help inform furture events.\nSession I\nTime Topic 0:00 Welcome \u0026amp; Crossref updates 1:20 Strategic programs \u0026amp; annual meeting 31:49 Demos 59:08 Updates from the Community I 1:01:12 - Michael Parkin, EMBL-EBI- [Slides] 1:09:14 - Hans de Jonge, Dutch Research Council NWO - [Slides] 1:23:22 - Fred Atherden, eLife - [Slides] 1:32:02 - Brietta Pike, CSIRO - [Slides] 1:54:12 Panel discussion - Opportunities and challenges of the open scholarly infrastructure 3:10:37 Reflections break-outs (ISR, RCFS, Research Nexus, Reflections) Slides Session II\nTime Topic 0:00 Welcome and introduction 1:38 Beyond the basics: Crossref API Workshop 25:08 Metadata Schema 56:10 Resourcing Crossref for Future Sustainability (RCFS) 1:43:30 The state of Crossref 2:13 Board Election 2:32 Updates from the Community II 2:35:16 - Alice Wise, CLOCKSS- [Slides] 2:48:03 - Mark Williams, Sciety - [Slides] 2:58:34 - Arianna Garcia, AmeliCA/Redalyc - [Slides] 3:27:00 Reflections break-outs (ISR, RCFS, Research Nexus, Reflections) 3:32:21 Closing Remarks Posters\nSlide deck\nThe annual meeting archive Browse our archive of annual meetings with agendas and links to previous presentations from 2001 through 2015. Its a real trip down memory lane!\nPlease contact us with any questions.\n",
"headings": ["#Crossref2024 online, 29 October 2024","The annual meeting archive"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/crossref-annual-meeting/2023-annual-meeting/",
"title": "Crossref annual meeting and board election 2023",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 6,
"lastmod": "2023-07-27",
"lastmod_ts": 1690416000,
"section": "Crossref Annual Meeting",
"tags": [],
"description": "#Crossref2023 online, October 31, 2023 Our annual meeting, #Crossref2023, was held online on October 31 from 9:30 AM UTC to 4:30 PM UTC (universal coordinated time). We invited all our members from 170+ countries, and everyone in our community, to hear the results of our board election and team updates.\nPlease see information from #Crossref2023 below, and cite the outputs as #Crossref2023 Annual Meeting and Board Election, October 31, 2023 retrieved [date], https://doi.org/10.13003/h3yygefpyf:\n",
"content": "#Crossref2023 online, October 31, 2023 Our annual meeting, #Crossref2023, was held online on October 31 from 9:30 AM UTC to 4:30 PM UTC (universal coordinated time). We invited all our members from 170+ countries, and everyone in our community, to hear the results of our board election and team updates.\nPlease see information from #Crossref2023 below, and cite the outputs as #Crossref2023 Annual Meeting and Board Election, October 31, 2023 retrieved [date], https://doi.org/10.13003/h3yygefpyf:\nUpdate on the Research Nexus The latest on the Research Nexus by Ginny Hendricks, Crossref Updates from the community Making data citations available at scale: The Global Open Data Citation Corpus by Iratxe Puebla, DataCite Who cares? Defining Citation Style in Scholarly Journals by Vincas Grigas, Vilnius University DOI registration for scholarly blogs by Martin Fenner, Front Matter Grant DOIs at the AU Publications Office by Izabela Szprowska, OP and European Commission; Nikolaos Mitrakis, European Commission; and Paola Mazzucchi, mEDRA Demos, Experiments and Q\u0026amp;A Registration form for journal content by Lena Stoll, Crossref PKP to demo the latest plugin by Erik Hanson, PKP Data citations matching by Martyn Rittman, Crossref Using Crossref APIby Luis Montilla, Crossref RW data in Labs API by Rachael Lammey \u0026amp; Martin Eve, Crossref Digital preservation reports by Martin Eve, Crossref DOIs for static site generators by Esha Datta, Crossref Panel Discussion What do we still need to build the Research Nexus? Panel discussion with Ginny Hendricks, Crossref; Patricia Feeney, Crossref; Matt Buys, DataCite; Kevin Stranack, PKP; Ludo Waltman, CWTS Leiden University; Mercury Shitindo, St. Paul\u0026rsquo;s University, Kenya; Ran Dang, Atlantis Press. Recording\nAnnual meeting and board election and Crossref strategy Crossref Strategy by Ed Pentz, Crossref Thanks to partners and advocates by Johanssen Obanda Member governance and board election lead by Lucy Ofiesh, Crossref Spotlight on community initiatives Enhancing Research Connections through Metadata: A Case Study with AGU and CHORUS by Tara Packer (CHORUS), Sara Girard (CHORUS), Shelley Stall (AGU), Kristina Vrouwenvelder (AGU) Index Crossref Integrity, Professional, and Institutional Development by Engjellushe Zenelaj, Reald University College Brazilian retractions in the Retraction Watch Database by Edilson Damasio, Maringá State University / Crossref Ambassador Now that you\u0026rsquo;ve published, what do you do with metadata? by Joann Fogleson, American Society of Civil Engineers ROR / Open Funder Registry Overlap by Amanda French, Crossref Other Outputs Presentation: Google slides or pdf slides #Crossref2023 Mastodon stream #Crossref2023 Twitter stream Posters from community guest speakers Board election results LIVE22 online, October 26, 2022 Our annual meeting, LIVE22, was held online on October 26 at 4:00 PM UTC (universal coordinated time). We invited all our members from 140+ countries, and everyone in our community, to hear the results of our board election and team updates.\nHere are some of the outputs from the full session:\nEd Pentz spoke about our vision, mission, strategic goals, update on our efforts toward POSI, and our role in ISR (inclusive scholarly record). Vanessa Fairhurst and Isaac Farley highlighted contributors from those in our community who help make our work possible. Kora Korzec led our community speaker session, \u0026ldquo;Building the Research Nexus together: flash talks\u0026rdquo;, with presentations by Hans de Jonge, Bianca Kramer, Javier Arias, Julie Lambert, Lettie Y. Conrad, and Edilson Damasio. Amanda Bartell and Patricia Feeney talked about the state of membership and metadata members register with us. Dominika Tkaczyk talked about our work around linking grants to research outputs. Lucy Ofiesh led our annual meeting, and board election results looked at our financial performance and the 2023 draft budget. Led by our ambassadors, four in-person \u0026lsquo;LIVE\u0026rsquo; satellite events took place in Lithuania, Brazil, Turkey, and Kenya. Some included a watch party of the meeting, and all included good talks and discussions about metadata and the scholarly record. Please check out the materials from LIVE22 below, and cite the outputs as Crossref Annual Meeting LIVE22, Ocrober 26, 2022 retrieved [date], [https://doi.org/10.13003/i3t7l9ub7t]:\nYouTube recording Recording transcript Zoom Q\u0026amp;A transcript Google slides or pdf slides #CRLIVE22 Twitter stream Posters from community guest speakers Board election results\nThe annual meeting archive Browse our archive of annual meetings with agendas and links to previous presentations from 2001 through 2015. Its a real trip down memory lane!\nPlease contact us with any questions.\n",
"headings": ["#Crossref2023 online, October 31, 2023","Update on the Research Nexus","Updates from the community","Demos, Experiments and Q\u0026amp;A","Panel Discussion","Annual meeting and board election and Crossref strategy","Spotlight on community initiatives","Other Outputs","LIVE22 online, October 26, 2022","The annual meeting archive"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/brand/",
"title": "Brand & logos",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 3,
"lastmod": "2026-06-14",
"lastmod_ts": 1781395200,
"section": "Brand & logos",
"tags": [],
"description": "Resources for members, service providers, and partners referencing Crossref in their communications.\nLogo Versions Version When to use Primary (stacked) Default. Icon above wordmark on white. Landscape When height is limited. Icon to the left of the wordmark. \u0026lsquo;Metadata from Crossref\u0026rsquo; To indicate that metadata has been sourced from Crossref. All logo files are at assets.crossref.org. Reference them directly rather than downloading, so your site picks up any future updates automatically. Contact our community team for variations or special use requests.\n",
"content": "Resources for members, service providers, and partners referencing Crossref in their communications.\nLogo Versions Version When to use Primary (stacked) Default. Icon above wordmark on white. Landscape When height is limited. Icon to the left of the wordmark. \u0026lsquo;Metadata from Crossref\u0026rsquo; To indicate that metadata has been sourced from Crossref. All logo files are at assets.crossref.org. Reference them directly rather than downloading, so your site picks up any future updates automatically. Contact our community team for variations or special use requests.\nStacked logo (default) \u0026lt;img src=\u0026#34;https://assets.crossref.org/logo/crossref-logo-200.svg\u0026#34; width=\u0026#34;200\u0026#34; alt=\u0026#34;Crossref logo\u0026#34;\u0026gt; Landscape logo \u0026lt;img src=\u0026#34;https://assets.crossref.org/logo/crossref-logo-landscape-200.svg\u0026#34; width=\u0026#34;200\u0026#34; alt=\u0026#34;Crossref landscape logo\u0026#34;\u0026gt; Reversed logo (white on dark) Use on dark or richly coloured backgrounds where the colour logo would clash. This file is not on the CDN — contact the community team to request it.\nIcon only For contexts where the wordmark is not needed (favicons, avatars). Use sparingly. Contact the community team to request this file.\n\u0026lsquo;Metadata from Crossref\u0026rsquo; logo Use this if you display metadata sourced from Crossref.\n\u0026lt;img src=\u0026#34;https://assets.crossref.org/logo/metadata-from-crossref-logo-200.svg\u0026#34; width=\u0026#34;200\u0026#34; alt=\u0026#34;Metadata from Crossref logo\u0026#34;\u0026gt; Logo do nots Do not alter proportions, rotate, or recolour the logo Do not reposition the icon relative to the wordmark, or use the wordmark alone Do not place the logo over photographs or complex backgrounds Do not add text, labels, or effects to the logo Do not create your own brand extensions using the Crossref icon Do not write \u0026ldquo;CrossRef\u0026rdquo;\u0026mdash;the lowercase \u0026lsquo;r\u0026rsquo; is intentional Displaying Crossref DOIs Crossref DOIs are persistent links and must be displayed as full HTTPS links in reference lists and anywhere they appear.\nCorrect: https://doi.org/10.XXXX/XXXXXX Incorrect: doi:10.XXXX/XXXXXX\nYou can optionally prepend the Crossref icon to the link:\nhttps://doi.org/10.13003/5jchdy\nSee the official Crossref display guidelines for full details. Displaying DOIs as full HTTPS links (and following the full display guidelines) is an obligation of Crossref membership.\nColour palette Primary palette Name Pantone CMYK RGB Hex Cyan Blue 631 C C:74 M:0 Y:13 K:0 R:62 G:177 B:200 #3eb1c8 Sand 7527 C C:15 M:13 Y:21 K:0 R:216 G:210 B:196 #d8d2c4 Grey 445 C C:68 M:54 Y:55 K:29 R:79 G:88 B:88 #4f5858 Red Red 032 C C:0 M:86 Y:63 K:0 R:239 G:51 B:64 #ef3340 Yellow 123 C C:0 M:19 Y:89 K:0 R:255 G:199 B:44 #ffc72c Dark Blue 634 C C:100 M:27 Y:0 K:49 R:0 G:95 B:131 #005f83 Cyan Blue\n#3eb1c8 Sand\n#d8d2c4 Grey\n#4f5858 Red\n#ef3340 Yellow\n#ffc72c Dark Blue\n#005f83 Secondary palette For illustrations, data visualisations, event materials, and accents.\nName Hex Light Sand #e4e0d6 Green #00ab84 Mocha #a39382 Gold #ffa300 Orange #fd8332 Dark Red #a6192e Light Sand\n#e4e0d6 Green\n#00ab84 Mocha\n#a39382 Gold\n#ffa300 Orange\n#fd8332 Dark Red\n#a6192e Typeface We use Inter, a free, open-source typeface optimised for screen legibility. It covers over 2,000 glyphs across 147 languages.\nWeight Use Regular (400) Body text Medium (500) Navigation, secondary UI SemiBold (600) Subheadings, labels Bold (700) Headings, key statistics Do not substitute other typefaces in Crossref-branded materials.\nAccount badges If you\u0026rsquo;d like to show your account type on your website or in communications, we have standard badges for each account type. See the account badges page for snippets.\nGet in touch with the community team with any questions.\n",
"headings": ["Logo","Versions","Stacked logo (default)","Landscape logo","Reversed logo (white on dark)","Icon only","\u0026lsquo;Metadata from Crossref\u0026rsquo; logo","Logo do nots","Displaying Crossref DOIs","Colour palette","Primary palette","Secondary palette","Typeface","Account badges"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/community/our-ambassadors/asia/",
"title": "Meet our ambassadors in Asia",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2026-06-10",
"lastmod_ts": 1781049600,
"section": "Get involved",
"tags": [],
"description": "\nThe Crossref Ambassador Program is an exciting and important program initiated in early 2018, and one which fully embraces a key strategic focus\u0026mdash;to adapt to expanding constituencies.\nOur Ambassadors are enthusiastic volunteers who work within the global academic community in a variety of ways\u0026mdash;as librarians, researchers, publishers, and societies,\u0026mdash;and all of whom share a strong belief in the mission-driven work we do to improve scholarly research communication. They support us by using their industry expertise, local knowledge, and translation skills to represent Crossref at regional events\u0026mdash;providing training to our members in different languages, locations and time zones.\n",
"content": "\nThe Crossref Ambassador Program is an exciting and important program initiated in early 2018, and one which fully embraces a key strategic focus\u0026mdash;to adapt to expanding constituencies.\nOur Ambassadors are enthusiastic volunteers who work within the global academic community in a variety of ways\u0026mdash;as librarians, researchers, publishers, and societies,\u0026mdash;and all of whom share a strong belief in the mission-driven work we do to improve scholarly research communication. They support us by using their industry expertise, local knowledge, and translation skills to represent Crossref at regional events\u0026mdash;providing training to our members in different languages, locations and time zones.\nSee who is in Asia:\nAzerbaijan - Iltifat Ibrahimov Iltifat Ibrahimov, is a leading specialist for the core applications and integrations at ADA University in Azerbaijan. He also works as senior consultant for digitization and library technologies at Azerbaijan Technical University. Iltifat also represent Follett School Solutions on Destiny Library Manager system in Azerbaijan exclusively and provides consultation and support for local institutions. Iltifat works as volunteer actively in EIFL.net as country coordinator and licensing coordinator in Azerbaijan. In addition, he was the Open Access coordinator of EIFL.net previously. He has over ten years’ experience in library management systems, RIFD systems, Open Access initiatives, digital repository systems, digitization, web design, academic databases, and discovery search tools. Iltifat also organizes workshops and seminars to disseminate OA initiatives, help digitization, build digital repositories, and to assist academic publishing in OA journals. In his new appointment as Crossref Ambassador in Azerbaijan he is ready to help organisations and researchers to provide the necessary information and consultation on how to use and benefit from Crossref services.\nİltifat İbrahimov, Azərbaycanda ADA Universitetində əsas tətbiqlər və inteqrasiyalar üzrə aparıcı mütəxəssisdir. O, həmçinin Azərbaycan Texniki Universitetində rəqəmsallaşdırma və kitabxana texnologiyaları üzrə baş məsləhətçi vəzifəsində çalışır. İltifat həm də Azərbaycanda müstəsna olaraq Destiny Library Manager sistemi üzrə Follett School Solutions şirkətini təmsil edir və yerli qurumlara məsləhət və dəstək verir. İltifat eyni zamanda EIFL.net-də aktiv könüllü olaraq Azərbaycan üzrə ölkə koordinatoru və lisenziyalaşdırma üzrə koordinator kimi çalışır. Bundan əlavə, o, daha öncə EIFL.net-in Open Access üzrə ölkə koordinatoru vəzifəsini icra edirdi. O, kitabxana idarəetmə sistemləri, RFID sistemləri, Open Access (OA) təşəbbüsləri, rəqəmsal repozitariya sistemləri, rəqəmsallaşdırma, veb dizayn, akademik verilənlər bazaları və axtarış sistemləri sahəsində on ildən artıq təcrübəyə malikdir. İltifat həmçinin OA təşəbbüslərini yaymaq, rəqəmsallaşdırma və rəqəmsal repozitariyaların qurulmasına və Open Access jurnallarda akademik məqalə nəşrinə kömək etmək üçün seminarlar verir və təlimlər keçirir. İltifat, Crossref-in Azərbaycandakı Səfiri olaraq bu yeni təyinatında Crossref-in xidmətlərindən istifadə və faydalanmaq haqqında lazımi məlumat və məsləhətlərin verilməsində təşkilatlara və tədqiqatçılara kömək etməyə hazırdır.\nBangladesh - Md Jahangir Alam Dr. Md Jahangir Alam is an academician and researcher currently affiliated with the Department of Japanese Studies, Faculty of Social Sciences, University of Dhaka, Bangladesh. He completed his Ph.D from the Graduate School of International Cooperation Studies, Kobe University, Japan. Dr. Alam’s experiences embrace collaborating with international organisations, especially Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA), International Labor organisation (ILO), International organisation for Migration (IOM), United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), Hiroshima Peacebuilders Center (HPC), Citizenship \u0026amp; Immigration Canada (CIC) and the Japan Foundation. In 2019, Dr. Alam received several international awards for his outstanding research contributions to international education development. Dr. Alam is enthusiastic about disseminating knowledge and transmitting familiarity with Crossref services to his community in Bangladesh. He supports journals and publishers in joining Crossref and using the tools and services offered by Crossref. Dr. Alam speaks Bengali, English, and Japanese.\nড. মো. জাহাঙ্গীর আলম একজন শিক্ষাবিদ ও গবেষক। বর্তমানে তিনি ঢাকা বিশ্ববিদ্যালয়ের সামাজিক বিজ্ঞান অনুষদের জাপানিজ স্টাডিজ বিভাগে শিক্ষকতা করছেন। তিনি জাপানের কোবে বিশ্ববিদ্যালয়ের গ্র্যাজুয়েট স্কুল অব ইন্টারন্যাশনাল কো-অপারেশন স্টাডিজ থেকে পিএইচডি সম্পন্ন করেছেন। ড. আলম বিভিন্ন আন্তর্জাতিক সংস্থা- বিশেষ করে জাপান ইন্টারন্যাশনাল কো-অপারেশন এজেন্সি (জাইকা), ইন্টারন্যাশনাল লেবার অর্গানাইজেশন (আইএলও), ইন্টারন্যাশনাল অর্গানাইজেশন ফর মাইগ্রেশন (আইওএম), ইউনাইটেড নেশনস ডেভেলপমেন্ট প্রোগ্রাম (ইউএনডিপি), হিরোশিমা পিসবিল্ডার্স সেন্টার (এইচপিসি), সিটিজেনশিপ, ইমিগ্রেশন কানাডা (সিআইসি) এবং জাপান ফাউন্ডেশনের সাথে কাজ করেছেন। তিনি আন্তর্জাতিক শিক্ষা উন্নয়নে তাঁর অসামান্য গবেষণা অবদানের জন্য ২০১৯ সালে বেশ কয়েকটি আন্তর্জাতিক পুরস্কার লাভ করেছেন। জ্ঞানের আলো ছড়াতে এবং বাংলাদেশে নিজ সমাজের কাছে ক্রসরেফ পরিষেবাগুলির পরিচিতি প্রেরণে উৎসাহী ড. আলম। তিনি জার্নাল এবং প্রকাশকদের ক্রসরেফে যোগদান করতে ও ক্রসরেফের দেওয়া সরঞ্জাম এবং পরিষেবাগুলি ব্যবহার করতে সহায়তা করেন। তিনি বাংলা, ইংরেজি এবং জাপানি ভাষায় পারদর্শী। ড.\nBangladesh - Shaharima Parvin Shaharima Parvin is Assistant Librarian at East West University, Dhaka, Bangladesh with more than 10 years’ experience in information science and library management. Her current role includes managing the acquisitions life cycle of electronic resources including subscriptions, access, troubleshooting, usage analysis, and budgeting. She obtained a BA and MA in Information Science and Library Management from University of Dhaka, Bangladesh. Shaharima is an independent researcher with interests in Open Access, Open Education, Creative Commons, the Open Science Framework and Open Data. She has held numerous diverse positions including SIG-USE Recruitment/Membership Officer of Association for Information Science and Technology (ASIS\u0026amp;T), Country Ambassador of The Center for Open Science, USA, Country Ambassador of CORE, UK, and Country Ambassador of International Librarians Network (ILN). Shaharima is keen to promote the benefits of Crossref services not only among her university community but also among library and information science (LIS) professionals in her country. She is enthusiastic about travel, reading and writing. She loves working with diverse groups of people and appreciates taking on new challenges and exploring unique experiences.\nশাহারিমা পারভীন বর্তমানে ইস্ট ওয়েস্ট ইউনিভার্সিটি, ঢাকা, বাংলাদেশের সহকারী গ্রন্থাগারিক হিসেবে কর্মরত। তথ্য বিজ্ঞান এবং গ্রন্থাগার ব্যবস্থাপনা বিষয়ে তার দশ বছরেরও বেশি অভিজ্ঞতা রয়েছে। সহকারী গ্রন্থাগারিক হিসাবে তার বর্তমান দায়িত্ব হল ইলেকট্রনিক রিসোর্স নির্বাচন, সাবস্ক্রিপশন, অ্যাক্সেস, ট্রাবলশুটিং, ব্যবহার বিশ্লেষণ এবং বাজেট সহ যাবতীয় বিষয় তদারকি করা। তিনি ঢাকা বিশ্ববিদ্যালয় থেকে তথ্য বিজ্ঞান এবং গ্রন্থাগার ব্যবস্থাপনা বিষয়ে স্নাতক এবং স্নাতকোত্তর ডিগ্রি অর্জন করেন। শাহারিমা একজন স্বাধীন গবেষক যার আগ্রহ ওপেন অ্যাক্সেস, ওপেন এডুকেশন, ক্রিয়েটিভ কমন্স, ওপেন সায়েন্স ফ্রেমওয়ার্ক এবং ওপেন ডেটা। তিনি SIG-USE মেম্বারশিপ অফিসার, অ্যাসোসিয়েশন ফর ইনফরমেশন সায়েন্স অ্যান্ড টেকনোলজি (ASIS\u0026amp;T), কান্ট্রি অ্যাম্বাসেডর, দ্য সেন্টার ফর ওপেন সায়েন্স, মার্কিন যুক্তরাষ্ট্র, কান্ট্রি অ্যাম্বাসেডর, CORE, যুক্তরাজ্য এবং ইন্টারন্যাশনাল লাইব্রেরিয়ান নেটওয়ার্কের কান্ট্রি অ্যাম্বাসেডর সহ অসংখ্য বিভিন্ন পদে অধিষ্ঠিত হয়েছেন। শাহরিমা কেবল তার বিশ্ববিদ্যালয় সম্প্রদায়ের মধ্যেই নয়, তার দেশের গ্রন্থাগার এবং তথ্য বিজ্ঞান (LIS) পেশাদারদের মধ্যেও Crossref এর পরিষেবার সুবিধাগুলি প্রচার করতে আগ্রহী। তিনি ভ্রমণ, পড়া এবং লেখার বিষয়ে উত্সাহী। তিনি বিভিন্ন গোষ্ঠীর মানুষের সাথে কাজ করতে পছন্দ করেন, নতুন চ্যালেঞ্জ গ্রহণ এবং অনন্য অভিজ্ঞতা অন্বেষণ করতে পছন্দ করেন।\nChina - Ran Dang Ran Dang is Editorial Director of Atlantis Press, Springer Nature. She is in full management of Atlantis Press imprint within book division to drive the growth of open access conference proceedings within all major STM and HSS disciplines globally, by leading the team and overseeing and managing the strategic and day-to-day publishing activities, in collaboration with learnt societies, institutions in academia and departments within the whole group. She is also location lead of Zhengzhou office in Springer Nature China. Prior to joining Springer Nature, she gained extensive experience in academic publishing, including Managing Director China at Atlantis Press, Senior Managing Editor \u0026amp; Section Leader at MDPI, Publishing Support Manager at Elsevier, and Project/General Manager for MLS Journals. With over ten years’ experience in the STM publishing industry, Ran has successfully managed over 90 international journals, conference proceedings series and maintained strong external relationships in academia and industry. Ran is a passionate Open Access and Open Science advocator, who currently serves as volunteer Associate Editor of DOAJ (Directory of Open Access Journals). Ran would like to disseminate information about the value of Crossref services to her community in China, including how the wider global community can make the best use of metadata in Mandarin. In her spare time, Ran likes walking with her family and her puppy “Max”, as well as volunteering at “Tree Hole Rescue Team” using AI to proactively identify and help potential suicide victims who post messages online asking for help. You can contact Ran on LinkedIn.\n党冉女士现任施普林格自然集团旗下Atlantis Press的编辑总监。在图书部，她负责Atlantis Press独立品牌的全方位管理，包括战略部署和合作、团队领导以及日常出版活动。通过与学协会及集团内部各部门的合作，推动全球所有主要STM和HSS学科的开放获取会议论文集的发展。她同时是施普林格-自然中国郑州办公室的负责人。在加入施普林格-自然之前，她在学术出版领域积累了丰富的经验，包括Atlantis Press的中国区董事总经理、MDPI的高级编辑和部门负责人、爱思唯尔的出版经理以及MLS期刊的项目/总经理。在超过十年的STM出版工作经历中，党冉女士，成功管理/合作出版过超过90种国际期刊和会议论文集系列，并在学术界和工业界保持着强大的外部关系。与此同时，作为一名积极的开放获取和开放科学的倡导者，党冉女士目前也在担任DOAJ(开放获取期刊目录)的志愿副主编。党冉女士希望传播有关Crossref的服务对她所在的中国社区的价值的信息，包括更广泛的全球社区如何最好地利用普通话元数据。在业余时间，党冉女士喜欢和家人以及她的拉布拉多犬Max一起散步，并在“树洞救援团”做志愿者工作，利用人工智能技术，主动寻找和帮助那些在网上发布信息寻求帮助的潜在自杀者。你可以在LinkedIn上联系Ran。\nIndia - Anjum Sherasiya Anjum Sherasiya has been Editor-in-Chief of Veterinary World since 2008 and the International Journal of One Health since 2015. With 11 years’ experience in scientific publishing, he has extensive experience in Open Access (OA) and scholarly publishing. He was the first to bring the idea of an OA Veterinary journal to India and made Veterinary World the first open access journal among Veterinary journals of India in 2011. He is enthusiastic about disseminating information about Crossref services to his community and throughout the world. His journals benefit from Crossref services such as Content Registration, Similarity Check, and Cited-By.\nDr. Anjum Sherasiya is a passionate advocate of the importance of plagiarism checking in academia. However, in his experience, few universities have adopted this practise in Southeast Asian countries. In addition to English, Dr. Anjum Sherasiya speaks Hindi and Gujarati. He is from Wankaner, Gujarat, India.\nIndia - Dr. Noorjahan Shaikh Dr. Noorjahan Shaikh is an esteemed information scientist with 28 years of academic excellence, currently heading the Library and Information Science Department at a renowned college at Azam Campus, Pune. Internationally recognized by the ALA’s IRRT program, she spearheaded her institution’s registration in the ROR. A dedicated mentor and pioneer of the IRINS platform, she serves as a reviewer for the Annual Meeting of the Association for Information Science and Technology (ASIS\u0026amp;T). Her accolades, including the 2025 Best Women Professional Award and the Dr. M. P. Pethe Memorial Prize, reflect her lifelong commitment to advancing global research ecosystems.\nडॉ. नूरजहाँ शेख, 28 वर्षों की शैक्षणिक उत्कृष्टता के साथ एक प्रतिष्ठित सूचना वैज्ञानिक (Information Scientist) हैं। वर्तमान में, वह, पुणे के आज़म कॅम्पस स्थित एक प्रसिद्ध कॉलेज में पुस्तकालय और सूचना विज्ञान विभाग की प्रमुख हैं। अमेरिकन लायब्ररी असोसिएशन (ALA) के IRRT इंटरनॅशनल रिलेशन्स राउंड टेबल कार्यक्रम द्वारा आंतरराष्ट्रीय स्तर पर मान्यता प्राप्त, उन्होंने शोध संघटन रजिस्ट्री (ROR) में अपने संस्थान के पंजीकरण का नेतृत्व किया है । एक समर्पित मेंटर (Mentor)और IRINS प्लॅटफॉर्म की प्रणेता के रूप में, वह बैंकॉक में हो रहे असोसिएशन फॉर इनफॉमेशन सायन्स एंड टेक्नोलॉजी\u0026rsquo; (ASIS\u0026amp;T) की 89th वार्षिक बैठक के लिए एक समीक्षक (Reviewer) के रूप में अपनी सेवा दे रही हैं। वर्ष 2025 का बेस्ट वूमेन प्रोफेशनल अवार्ड तथा \u0026lsquo;डॉ. एम. पी. पेठे मेमोरियल प्राईज\u0026rsquo; सहित उनके कई सम्मान, वैश्विक अनुसंधान परिस्थितीकी तंत्र को आगे बढाने के प्रति उनकी आजीवन प्रतिबद्धता को दर्शाते हैं।\nIndia - Sushil Kumar Dr. Sushil Kumar is an accomplished scholar with a Ph.D. in Theoretical Nuclear Physics (Panjab University, Chandigarh, 2005) and over 17 years of teaching and research experience. He has extensive expertise in scholarly communication and OJS-PKP journal management. He has chaired international conferences, edited AIP proceedings, and specializes in end-to-end editorial workflows, typesetting, and research visibility strategies (SEO). Dr. Kumar currently serves as Publisher at Vyom Hans Publishing House and is a Crossref Ambassador for Asia (India).\nडॉ. सुशील कुमार एक प्रतिष्ठित विद्वान हैं, जिन्होंने सैद्धांतिक नाभिकीय भौतिकी में पी.एच.डी. (पंजाब विश्वविद्यालय, चंडीगढ़, 2005) प्राप्त की है तथा 17 से अधिक वर्षों का शिक्षण एवं शोध अनुभव रखते हैं। उन्हें स्कॉलर्ली कम्युनिकेशन और OJS-PKP जर्नल मैनेजमेंट में उत्कृष्ट विशेषज्ञता प्राप्त है। उन्होंने अंतरराष्ट्रीय सम्मेलनों की अध्यक्षता की है, AIP प्रोसीडिंग्स का संपादन किया है, तथा संपूर्ण संपादकीय कार्यप्रवाह, टाइपसेटिंग और शोध दृश्यता (SEO) रणनीतियों में महारत रखते हैं। वर्तमान में डॉ. कुमार, व्योम हंस पब्लिशिंग हाउस में पब्लिशर के रूप में कार्यरत हैं और एशिया (भारत) के लिए Crossref Ambassador हैं।\nIndia - Yogesh Singh Bisht Yogesh Singh Bisht is an academic publishing professional and Open Journal Systems (OJS) specialist from India, with hands-on experience supporting scholarly journals, publishers, and research institutions. He works closely with editorial teams on DOI registration, metadata quality, Crossref integrations, indexing readiness (DOAJ, Scopus, and Web of Science), and publishing best practices. Yogesh is passionate about strengthening research visibility, promoting ethical publishing standards, and helping emerging journals adopt global scholarly infrastructure. As a Crossref Ambassador, he is committed to guiding publishers in building sustainable, transparent, and standards-compliant scholarly communication ecosystems.\nयोगेश सिंह बिष्ट भारत के एक अकादमिक पब्लिशिंग विशेषज्ञ और ओपन जर्नल सिस्टम (OJS) सलाहकार हैं। उन्हें शैक्षणिक जर्नलों, प्रकाशकों और शोध संस्थानों के साथ DOI पंजीकरण, मेटाडेटा गुणवत्ता, Crossref इंटीग्रेशन, इंडेक्सिंग तैयारी और प्रकाशन सर्वोत्तम प्रथाओं पर कार्य करने का व्यावहारिक अनुभव है। वे शोध की दृश्यता बढ़ाने, नैतिक प्रकाशन मानकों को बढ़ावा देने और उभरते जर्नलों को वैश्विक शैक्षणिक ढांचे से जोड़ने के लिए प्रतिबद्ध हैं। Crossref Ambassador के रूप में, वे टिकाऊ और पारदर्शी विद्वतापूर्ण संचार को सशक्त बनाने के लिए कार्य करते हैं।\nIndonesia - Fauji Nurdin ST. Mudo I\u0026rsquo;m an IT and information systems enthusiast from Bandung, now living in Banjarmasin. I have a deep passion for technology and academic publishing. Currently, I volunteer as IT Support at Relawan Jurnal Indonesia and also help edit several scientific journals. I work at a private university in the Research and Community Service department, where I support various research initiatives. With a strong tech background and a genuine curiosity about open access, I love building systems, solving problems, and mentoring others. I’m always excited to learn, share knowledge, and collaborate—especially on anything related to journals, tech, or digital tools.\nSaya adalah seorang pecinta IT dan sistem informasi yang berasal dari Bandung dan kini tinggal di Banjarmasin. Ketertarikan saya pada teknologi dan dunia penerbitan akademik membawa saya aktif sebagai relawan IT Support di Relawan Jurnal Indonesia, sekaligus menjadi editor di beberapa jurnal ilmiah. Saat ini saya bekerja di sebuah perguruan tinggi swasta, mendukung berbagai kegiatan penelitian dan pengabdian kepada masyarakat. Dengan latar belakang IT dan rasa ingin tahu yang besar terhadap akses terbuka dan alat digital, saya senang membangun sistem, menyelesaikan masalah, dan berbagi ilmu. Saya selalu terbuka untuk belajar hal baru dan berkolaborasi, terutama dalam hal jurnal, teknologi, atau riset digital.\nIndonesia - Zulidyana D Rusnalasari Zulidyana D Rusnalasari is a researcher and scientific journal editor. Teaching is not only her primary career but also her hobby. Zulidyana is a strong advocate of Open Science and believes that information, particularly related to public knowledge and science, should be available openly and reliably. As a lecturer and trainer, she campaigns for Open Science to her students and trainees. Her interest in this area began in 2010 when she researched the Open Source Community as part of her postgraduate studies in Cultural Studies at the University of Indonesia. Although Zulidyana is a junior lecturer, she works to improve her colleagues\u0026rsquo; knowledge regarding scientific publication literacy and its relation to Open Science Movements. Currently, she is finalizing her dissertation to complete her doctoral degree in Literature and Cultural Education. Zulidyana believes that education is the key to improving human quality of life. Being a Crossref Ambassador supports Zulidyana in her mission to improve scholarly communications among the communities and NGOs that she is involved in. She is also keen to help academic researchers know how to better use Crossref metadata. You can interact with her on her Twitter account @zulidyana.\nZulidyana D. Rusnalasari, peneliti sekaligus editor di beberapa jurnal ilmiah di Indonesia. Sebenarnya, mengajar adalah hobi sekaligus profesi utamanya, sebagai dosen maupun trainer, dia senantiasa mengkampanyekan Sains Terbuka pada mahasiswa maupun peserta pelatihan. Zulidyana optimis dan percaya bahwa informasi terutama yang berkaitan dengan ilmu pengetahuan/sains seharusnya tersedia secara terbuka dan dapat dipercaya. Ketertarikannya pada Sains Terbuka dimulai sejak dia meneliti komunitas Open Source ketika dia menyeleseikan studi S2-nya di Universitas Indonesia dalam bidang Cultural Studies pada tahun 2010. Walaupun masih sebagai dosen junior di kampus, dia selalu berusaha meningkatkan literasi koleganya mengenai literasi publikasi ilmiah dan kaitannya dengan Sains Terbuka. Saat ini, dia sedang menyeleseikan disertasinya untuk menuntaskan pendidikan doktoralnya di bidang Pendidikan Sastra dan Budaya. Meskipun Pendidikan adalah domain baru baginya, namun dia selalu percaya bahwa Pendidikan adalah hal paling esensial untuk meningkatkan kualitas manusia. Anda dapat berinteraksi dengannya di akun twitter-nya @zulidyana.\nIraq - Salwan Abdulateef Dr. Salwan M. Abdulateef currently works as Scientific Research Director, at the University of Anbar. Abdulateef specializes in animal behavior and endocrinology research. He is a member of the Advisory Board of QS World Universities Rankings. Dr. Abdulateef also works as Director of the Academic Journal’s Unit and Managing Editor of the Anbar Journal of Agricultural Sciences and is a member of the Scientific Sobriety Committee for Scientific Research and Publications. Abdulateef has authored more than 44 scientific papers in his field of specialization. He supports journals to join Crossref and expects, as an Ambassador, to improve the dissemination of knowledge and teaching on how to explore and use the tools and services offered by Crossref.\nيعمل الدكتور سلوان محمد عبداللطيف حالياً مديراً للبحث العلمي في جامعة الأنبار. عبد اللطيف متخصص في علم الغدد الصماء وسلوك وفسلجة الحيوان. وهو عضو في المجلس الاستشاري لتصنيفات الجامعات العالمية. يعمل الدكتور عبداللطيف أيضًا كمدير لوحدة المجلة الأكاديمية ومدير التحرير في مجلة الأنبار للعلوم الزراعية وعضوًا في لجنة الامانة العلمية للبحث العلمي والنشر الرصين. قام عبد اللطيف بتأليف أكثر من أربعين بحث علمي في مجال تخصصه. وهو يدعم العديد من المجلات في الحصول على بادئة المعرف الرقمي الخاصة بها ويتوقع، كسفير، تحسين نشر المعرفة والتعليم حول كيفية استكشاف واستخدام جميع الأدوات التي تقدمها كروسريف، من خلال إجراء العديد من ورش العمل التدريبية والمحاضرات والندوات حول كروسريف. Japan – Christopher Magor Christopher Magor is a Japan-based science editor with approximately two decades of experience who specializes in helping researchers for whom English is a secondary language find a global readership for their work. Christopher has worked with scholars from diverse fields, both in Japan and other countries. He is acutely aware of the distinct challenges these authors face, both linguistically and during the publication process. A passionate advocate for open science, Christopher is dedicated to ensuring that language barriers do not impede the dissemination of valuable research.\nクリストファー・メイゴーは、日本に在住し約20年の経験を持つサイエンス・エディターであり、英語が母国語でない研究者が彼らの研究を世界中に広める手助けを専門としています。彼は、日本国内外の幅広い分野の学者と協力してきており、他言語や出版プロセスで直面する特有の課題を深く理解しています。オープンサイエンスの熱心な支持者として、彼は言語の壁が貴重な研究の普及を妨げないように献身的です。\nKazakhstan – Gulzhaina Kuralbaevna Kassymova Ph.D., Dr. in Ed. Gulzhaina Kuralbaevna Kassymova is a teacher in adult education and a linguist in a foreign language. She started her career in 2008 as a flight attendant in the aviation industry and then transitioned to the educational sector. Currently, she teaches educational psychology at Abai University and Suleyman Demirel University in Kazakhstan. She published several research articles at the international level in a short time period during her bilateral doctoral studies in Indonesia and Kazakhstan, ORCID ID: 0000-0001-7004-3864. In her spare time, she loves diving and reading scientific investigations. Besides teaching students, she likes to work with metadata and she is responsible for Membership of the Institute of Metallurgy and Ore Beneficiation with Crossref. She is also responsible for promoting Crossref in the Republic of Kazakhstan.\nPh.D., білім беру ғыл. док. Гулжайна Куралбаевна Касымова – ЖОО-да педагог және шет тілі бойынша лингвист. Ол өзінің еңбек жолын 2008 жылы авиация саласында стюардесса болып бастады, содан кейін мансабын білім беру саласына ауыстырды. Қазіргі уақытта ол Қазақстандағы Абай университетінде және Сүлеймен Демирел университетінде білім беру психологиясынан сабақ береді. Ол Индонезияда және Қазақстанда екіжақты докторантурада оқу кезінде қысқа уақыт ішінде халықаралық деңгейде бірнеше ғылыми мақалаларды басып шығара алды, ORCID ID: 0000-0001-7004-3864. Ол бос уақытында суға түсуді және ғылыми зерттеулерді оқығанды ұнатады. Cабақ берумен қатар, ол DOI-мен жұмыс істегенді ұнатады және Crossref-пен Металлургия және кен байыту институтының арасындағы қарым-қатынасқа жауапты. Ол сонымен қатар Қазақстан Республикасында Crossref DOI ілгерілетуіне жауапты.\nMongolia - Gantulga Lkhagva Gantulga Lkhagva has over 19 years\u0026rsquo; experience working in research and academic institutions and public libraries in Mongolia. Gantulga’s work focuses on improving the publication quality of Mongolian scholarly communities, providing advise on scientific publishing processes, and promoting Mongolian knowledge in the digital age. Gantulga is the Founder and CEO of Mongolian Digital Knowledge Solutions(MDKS), LLC, and MongoliaJOL. He manages Mongolia Journals Online (MongoliaJOL) – a journal platform which was established through collaboration with INASP. MongoliaJOL is a Crossref member and also participates in additional services such as Similarity Check.\nGantulga is happy to support the introduction and promotion of Crossref services in Mongolia. He enjoys collaborating with others; exchanging ideas and experiences. Gantulga also plans to disseminate knowledge and provide training to authors, journal editors, as well as work with other stakeholders. You can contact Gantulga via Twitter @cybermongol or on LinkedIn\nNepal - Niranjan Koirala Dr. Niranjan Koirala, a Ph.D. holder in Biochemistry (Pharmaceutical) from Sun Moon University in the Republic of Korea, is a highly skilled biochemist. He completed postdoctoral research fellowships at the Universidad Nacional Autonoma de Mexico and the University of Macau in Macau SAR-China. Dr. Koirala specializes in genome-guided mining, gene isolation, cloning, protein purification and natural products drugs discovery. His work has been cited over 5000 times by the international research community, and he has received numerous awards for his research, including the Nepal Bidhya Bhushan “A” medal, Science and Technology Youth Award and Dean’s Choice award.\nडा. निरञ्जन कोइराला, कोरिया गणतन्त्रको सन मुन विश्वविद्यालयबाट जीव रसायन (औषधि विज्ञान) मा पएच.डी. गरेका एक उच्च कुशल बायोकेमिस्ट हुन् । उनले युनिभर्सिडेड नेशनल अटोनोमा डे मेक्सिको र मकाउ SAR-चीनमा रहेको मकाउ विश्वविद्यालयमा पोस्टडक्टोरल अनुसन्धान फेलोशिपहरू पूरा गरे। डा. कोइराला जीनोम निर्देशित खनन, जीन आइसोलेसन, क्लोनिङ, प्रोटिन शुद्धिकरण र प्राकृतिक उत्पादन औषधि खोजमा विशेषज्ञ छन्। उहाँको कामलाई अन्तर्राष्ट्रिय अनुसन्धान समुदायले 5000 पटक बढी उद्धृत गरेको छ, र उहाँले आफ्नो अनुसन्धानका लागि नेपाल विद्या भूषण \u0026ldquo;ए\u0026rdquo; पदक, विज्ञान र प्रविधि युवा पुरस्कार र डीन च्वाइस पुरस्कार सहित धेरै पुरस्कारहरू प्राप्त गर्नुभएको छ।\nPakistan - Amber Osman Amber Osman is a passionate expert in open science and a research enthusiast. Over the last decade, she has been actively involved in different international academic, research \u0026amp; publishing organisations and with the Higher Education Commission (Govt. of Pakistan). She has been an award-winning journal editor for advancing the publishing process by adopting innovative research and publishing solutions. Amber advocates for best practices in open access scholarly content.\nامبر عثمان اوپن سائنس کی ایک پرجوش ماہر اور تحقیق کی دلدادہ ہیں۔ پچھلی دہائی کے دوران، وہ مختلف بین الاقوامی تعلیمی، تحقیقی اور اشاعتی اداروں اور ہائر ایجوکیشن کمیشن (حکومت پاکستان) کے ساتھ سرگرم عمل رہی ہیں۔ وہ اختراعی تحقیق اور اشاعت کے حل کو اپنا کر اشاعت کے عمل کو آگے بڑھانے کے لیے ایک ایوارڈ یافتہ جریدے کی ایڈیٹر رہی ہیں۔ امبر کھلی رسائی کے علمی مواد میں بہترین طریقوں کی وکالت کرتی ہے۔ Pakistan - Prof. Dr. Muhammad Imtiaz Subhani Prof. Dr. Muhammad Imtiaz Subhani holds a PhD in Quantum Finance and completed postdoctorate in Open Science at the Federal University of Goiás, Brazil. He is Professor and Director of Postgraduate Studies and Research at ILMA University and recipient of the Web of Science ScholarOne Vision Award (2015). Internationally, he serves as Crossref Ambassador, ALMASI Ambassador for Diamond Open Access, DOAJ Group Editor, and Lead for Creative Commons Pakistan. He advises UNESCO and the World Bank, serves as Editor at PLOS ONE, has authored over 100 publications, secured 14 international research grants, and is CEO \u0026amp; Founder of XploreOpen.\nپروفیسر ڈاکٹر محمد امتیاز سبحانی کوانٹم فنانس میں پی ایچ ڈی کی سند کے حامل ہیں اور برازیل کی وفاقی جامعہ گوئاس سے اوپن سائنس کے شعبے میں پوسٹ ڈاکٹریٹ مکمل کر چکے ہیں۔ آپ جامعہ اِلما میں پروفیسر اور ڈائریکٹر برائے اعلیٰ تعلیم و تحقیق کے منصب پر فائز ہیں اور ۲۰۱۵ء میں ویب آف سائنس اسکالر ون وژن ایوارڈ سے بھی سرفراز ہو چکے ہیں۔ بین الاقوامی سطح پر آپ کراس ریف ایمبیسیڈر، ڈائمنڈ اوپن ایکسیس کے لیے الماسی ایمبیسیڈر، ڈی او اے جے گروپ ایڈیٹر، اور کریئیٹو کامنز پاکستان کے قائد کی حیثیت سے خدمات انجام دے رہے ہیں۔ آپ یونیسکو اور ورلڈ بینک کے مشیر، پلوس ون کے مدیر، ایک سو سے زائد تحقیقی مقالات کے مصنف، چودہ بین الاقوامی تحقیقی گرانٹس کے حاصل کنندہ، اور ایکسپلور اوپن کے بانی و چیف ایگزیکٹو آفیسر ہیں۔ Pakistan - Syed Mughees Ul Hassan Syed Mughees Ul Hassan is an academic publishing, Open Science, and scholarly communications professional based in Lahore, Pakistan, with 8 years of experience strengthening university journals and editorial operations. He serves as Manager Publication and Team Lead (KRSS) at the University of Management and Technology (UMT), where he has supported the launch of 30+ journals, developed editorial SOPs, and led quality and ethics-aligned audits. An OJS expert administrator/developer, he manages Crossref DOI workflows (Crossmark, XML deposits) and supports indexing readiness for DOAJ, Scopus, and Web of Science. He advocates for robust PIDs to improve trust and discoverability. Connect with him on LinkedIn https://www.linkedin.com/in/syeadmughees or write an email at syeadmughees@gmail.com.\nسید مغیث الحسن لاہور، پاکستان میں مقیم ایک اکادمک پبلشنگ، اوپن سائنس اور اسکلرلی کمیونیکیشنز پروفیشنل ہیں جنہیں یونیورسٹی جرنلز اور ایڈیٹوریل آپریشنز میں 8 سال کا تجربہ ہے۔ وہ یونیورسٹی آف مینجمنٹ اینڈ ٹیکنالوجی (UMT) میں منیجر پبلیکیشن اور کے آر ایس ایس (KRSS) ٹیم لیڈ کے طور پر خدمات انجام دے رہے ہیں، جہاں انہوں نے 30 سے زائد جرنلز کے اجرا میں معاونت، ایڈیٹوریل SOPs کی تیاری، اور معیار و اخلاقیات کے مطابق آڈٹس کی قیادت کی۔ وہ OJS کے ماہر ایڈمن/ڈیولپر ہیں اور Crossref DOI (Crossmark، XML ڈپازٹس) کے ورک فلو اور DOAJ، Scopus اور Web of Science کے لیے انڈیکسنگ ریڈینس سپورٹ کرتے ہیں۔ وہ مضبوط PIDs کو تحقیق کی دریافت پذیری اور اعتماد کے لیے بنیادی سمجھتے ہیں۔ ان سے لنکڈ اِن پر رابطہ کریں https://www.linkedin.com/in/syeadmughees یا ای میل کریں syeadmughees@gmail.com۔ Singapore - Xiaofeng Guo Ms. Xiaofeng Guo boasts over 16 years of expertise in Persistent Identifiers (PIDs). As the Director of the Chinese DOI Registration and Service Centre, she spearheaded research, software development, and services based on the DOI/Handle system since its launch in 2007. Serving as the sole Crossref Sponsoring Organisation in Mainland China since 2013, the Center actively promotes Crossref DOI services in China and Asia. Recognizing PIDs as fundamental to Open Science infrastructure, Guo is dedicated to advancing PID standards and services. A FREYA Ambassador since 2019, she joined the Executive Committee of DOIF in 2023 and now serves as the first Crossref Sponsoring Organisation in Singapore. Guo\u0026rsquo;s extensive background includes software engineering, data management, scholarly publishing, and advocacy for Open Access and Open Science. Connect with her on LinkedIn.\n郭晓峰女士在持久性标识符（PIDs）领域拥有超过16年的专业经验。作为中国DOI注册与服务中心主任，自2007年以来，她一直领导着基于DOI/Handle系统的研究、软件开发和服务推广工作。自2013年以来，该中心作为Crossref在中国大陆的唯一赞助机构，积极在中国和亚洲推广Crossref DOI服务。由于认识到PIDs是开放科学基础设施的基础，郭女士致力于推进PID标准和服务。她在2019年担任FREYA项目大使，并于2023年加入DOIF执行委员会，目前服务于新加坡第一个Crossref赞助机构。郭女士的广泛背景包括软件工程、数据管理、学术出版等，并积极倡导开放获取和开放科学。请在 LinkedIn 上与她联系。\nSouth Korea - Yera Hur My side hustle has transformed me from a full-time medical professor to a flower designer, research ethics lecturer, family therapist, and character traits instructor five years ago. But my involvement as a researcher (Hallym University College of Medicine), board member and reviewer for SCIE level journals continues to this day. During my experience as an associate editor of two major medical education journals in Korea (KJME and JEEHP), I discovered the excellent tools offered by Crossref. In light of how the two journals have benefited from Crossref’s diverse programs, I am looking forward to my role as an ambassador of Crossref. I always find that anything volunteered that does not involve money is always the most fun!\n안녕하세요. N잡러, “꽃만지는 상담사” 허예라입니다. 5년전 경력전환을 하여 전임 의과대학 교수에서 현재는 한림의대 연구원, 연구윤리 강사, SCIE급 저널 심사위원과 편집위원, 플라워디자이너, 가족상담사, 그리고 도형심리 교육강사로 가장 활발히 활동하고 있습니다. Korean Journal of Medical Education의 부편장과 편집위원의 봉사 경력과, 지난 7년간 Journal of Educational Evaluation for Health Professions (JEEHP)의 부편집장으로 일하면서 Crossref를 접하게 되었습니다. JEEHP에서는 Crossref의 모든 서비스를 활용하고 있으며 이로 인해 학술지의 국제화에 큰 혜택을 보고 있습니다. Crossref ambassador 활동을 통해 다양한 프로그램 기획에 참여하고 싶고, 세계적인 네트워크뿐만 아니라, 즐거운 배움과 봉사활동도 함께 기대합니다. 자발적이면서 돈 버는 일이 아닌 것은 언제나 가장 즐거우니까요!\nSri Lanka - Lasith Gunawardena Lasith Gunawardena is a Professor in Information Technology at the University of Sri Jayewardenepura, Sri Lanka. At present, he spearheads the University\u0026rsquo;s Innovation Arm - Invention, Innovation and Venture Creation Council (IIVCC) as it\u0026rsquo;s Co-Chair. He has been a founder steering committee member of the ICTer (International Journal on Advances in ICT for Emerging Regions) Journal and is a Mendeley Advisor. Currently, he has been elected as a fellow of BCS, the Chartered Institute for IT, UK, and a Senior Member of the Institution of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, USA as well as a Senior Member of the Association for Computing Machinery, USA. He also serves in the Researcher Advisory Council of ORCID Inc. and Advisory Board of STEMUp Foundation.\nමහාචාර්ය ලසිත් ගුණවර්ධන, ශ්‍රී ජයවර්ධනපුර විශ්වවිද්‍යාලයේ තොරතුරු තාක්ෂණ අධ්‍යනාංශයේ වර්තමාන අධ්‍යනාංශ ප්‍රධාන ලෙස කටයුතු කරයි . තවද ඔහු එම විශ්ව විද්‍යාලයේ නව නිපැයුම්, නවෝත්පාදන සහ ව්‍යාපාර නිර්මාණ සභාවේ සම සභාපතිවරයා ලෙසද කටයුතු කරයි. ඔහු ICTer (International Journal on Advances in ICT for Emerging Regions) ශාස්ත්‍රීය සඟරාවේ ආරම්භක මෙහෙයුම් කමිටු සාමාජිකයෙකු වන අතර මෙන්ඩේලි (Mendeley) උපදේශකවරයෙකි. දැනට, ඔහු එක්සත් රාජධානියේ තොරතුරු තාක්ෂණ සඳහා වරලත් ආයතනය (BCS) හි ජ්‍යෙෂ්ඨ සාමාජිකයෙකු ලෙසත්, ඇමරිකා එක්සත් ජනපදයේ විදුලි හා ඉලෙක්ට්‍රොනික ඉංජිනේරු ආයතනයේ (IEEE )ජ්‍යෙෂ්ඨ සාමාජිකයෙකු ලෙසත්, ඇමරිකා එක්සත් ජනපදයේ පරිගණක යන්ත්‍රෝපකරණ සංගමයේ (ACM) සාමාජිකයෙකු ලෙසත් තේරී පත් වී ඇත. එසේම ඔහු ORCID Inc. හි පර්යේෂක උපදේශක කවුන්සිලයේ සහ STEMUp පදනමේ උපදේශක මණ්ඩලයේ ද සේවය කරයි.\nTurkey - Ahmet Müngen Ahmet A. Müngen is an academic and entrepreneur who holds bachelor’s, master’s, and doctoral degrees in computer science. Since 2020, he has been a founding partner of INSERES, where he develops innovative software for academic networks in the fields of artificial intelligence, data mining, and citation analysis. In the same year (2020), he began serving as an Assistant Professor in the Software Engineering Department at OSTIM Technical University. As the Crossref Ambassador, he provides technical support to researchers and institutions, organizes training sessions and online seminars, and promotes the effective use of Crossref services. His work focuses on AI-driven analyses and knowledge discovery within academic information.\nAhmet A. Müngen, bilgisayar bilimleri alanında lisans, yüksek lisans ve doktora derecelerini tamamlamış bir akademisyen ve girişimcidir. 2020 yılından bu yana INSERES\u0026rsquo;in kurucu ortağı olarak akademik ağlarda yapay zekâ, veri madenciliği ve atıf analizi alanlarında yenilikçi yazılımlar geliştirmektedir. Aynı yıldan (2020) itibaren OSTİM Teknik Üniversitesi\u0026rsquo;nde Yazılım Mühendisliği Bölümü\u0026rsquo;nde Dr. Öğretim Üyesi olarak görev yapmaktadır. Crossref Elçisi sıfatıyla araştırmacılar ve kurumlar için teknik destek sağlamakta, eğitimler ve çevrimiçi seminerler düzenleyerek Crossref hizmetlerinin etkin kullanımını teşvik etmektedir. Çalışmaları, akademik bilgi içinde yapay zekâ analizleri ve bilgi keşfi üzerine odaklanmıştır.\nTurkey - Ramazan Turgut Ramazan Turgut is a faculty member at Mardin Artuklu University in Türkiye. He holds a Ph.D. in the History of Religion and has conducted research at Radboud University and the University of Chicago. As a multilingual scholar fluent in Kurdish, Turkish, English, and Dutch, Ramazan actively collaborates with academics from around the globe. In addition to his role as Crossref Ambassador in Türkiye, Ramazan serves as an Ambassador and Managing Editor for the Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ), overseeing activities in Türkiye, Azerbaijan, and the Netherlands. He is also deeply committed to integrating AI technologies into academic research and publishing. Beyond his professional life, Ramazan is a proud father of three, an avid reader, and a passionate cook. If he could be a character in Middle Earth, he would have chosen Boromir.\n",
"headings": ["Azerbaijan - Iltifat Ibrahimov","Bangladesh - Md Jahangir Alam","Bangladesh - Shaharima Parvin","China - Ran Dang","India - Anjum Sherasiya","India - Dr. Noorjahan Shaikh","India - Sushil Kumar","India - Yogesh Singh Bisht","Indonesia - Fauji Nurdin ST. Mudo","Indonesia - Zulidyana D Rusnalasari","Iraq - Salwan Abdulateef","Japan – Christopher Magor","Kazakhstan – Gulzhaina Kuralbaevna Kassymova","Mongolia - Gantulga Lkhagva","Nepal - Niranjan Koirala","Pakistan - Amber Osman","Pakistan - Prof. Dr. Muhammad Imtiaz Subhani","Pakistan - Syed Mughees Ul Hassan","Singapore - Xiaofeng Guo","South Korea - Yera Hur","Sri Lanka - Lasith Gunawardena","Turkey - Ahmet Müngen","Turkey - Ramazan Turgut"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/community/our-ambassadors/americas/",
"title": "Meet our ambassadors in Americas",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2026-05-26",
"lastmod_ts": 1779753600,
"section": "Get involved",
"tags": [],
"description": "The Crossref Ambassador Program is an exciting and important program initiated in early 2018, and one which fully embraces a key strategic focus\u0026mdash;to adapt to expanding constituencies.\nOur Ambassadors are enthusiastic volunteers who work within the global academic community in a variety of ways\u0026mdash;as librarians, researchers, publishers, and societies,\u0026mdash;and all of whom share a strong belief in the mission-driven work we do to improve scholarly research communication. They support us by using their industry expertise, local knowledge, and translation skills to represent Crossref at regional events\u0026mdash;providing training to our members in different languages, locations and time zones.\n",
"content": "The Crossref Ambassador Program is an exciting and important program initiated in early 2018, and one which fully embraces a key strategic focus\u0026mdash;to adapt to expanding constituencies.\nOur Ambassadors are enthusiastic volunteers who work within the global academic community in a variety of ways\u0026mdash;as librarians, researchers, publishers, and societies,\u0026mdash;and all of whom share a strong belief in the mission-driven work we do to improve scholarly research communication. They support us by using their industry expertise, local knowledge, and translation skills to represent Crossref at regional events\u0026mdash;providing training to our members in different languages, locations and time zones.\nSee who is in the Americas:\nArgentina - Sandra Gisela Martín Sandra Gisela Martín holds a PhD in Library Science and Documentation, a Master\u0026rsquo;s degree in Digital Documentation, a Bachelor\u0026rsquo;s degree in Computer Science and a Bachelor\u0026rsquo;s degree in Library Science and Documentation. Since 2003 she has been Director of the Library System of the Catholic University of Córdoba. She teaches in the Bachelor\u0026rsquo;s Degree in Library Science at the National University of Córdoba, Argentina. She also teaches in doctoral, master\u0026rsquo;s and specialization courses on information technology, information search and retrieval, scientific production, scientific journals, citations and bibliographic references in academic writing. She is a member of the IFLA Bibliography Section, the OCLC Global Council and the Editorial Board of re3data. Author of several scientific articles and numerous conference presentations.\nSandra Gisela Martín es Doctora en Bibliotecología y Documentación, Máster en Documentación Digital, Licenciada en Informática y Licenciada en Bibliotecología y Documentación. Desde el año 2003 es dirige del Sistema de Bibliotecas de la Universidad Católica de Córdoba. Ejerce la docencia en la Licenciatura en Bibliotecología de la Universidad Nacional de Córdoba, Argentina. Además, es profesora en carreras de doctorado, maestrías y especializaciones sobre temas de tecnologías de la información, búsquedas y recuperación de la información, producción científica, revistas científicas, citas y referencias bibliográficas en la escritura académica. Es miembro de la Sección Bibliografía de la IFLA, del Consejo Global de OCLC y del Consejo Editorial de re3data. Autora de diversos artículos científicos y con numerosas presentaciones a congresos.\nBrazil - Edilson Damasio Edilson Damasio has been a librarian since 1995, holding a PhD in Information Science from the Federal University of Rio de Janeiro-UFRJ/IBICT. He currently works in the Department of Mathematics Library of State University of Maringá-UEM, Brazil. With 20 years’ experience in scientific metadata and publishing, is expertise is wide-ranging including knowledge of scientific communication, Crossref services, research integrity, misconduct prevention in science, publishing in Latin America, biomedical information, OJS-Open Journal Systems, Open Access journals, scientific journal quality and indexing, and scientific bibliographical databases. He is enthusiastic about presenting and disseminating information about Crossref services to his community in Brazil and working within the wider community, exchanging ideas and experience. You can contact Edilson via Twitter @edilsondamasio or on LinkedIn.\nEu sou bibliotecário desde 1995, Doutor em Ciência da Informação pela Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro-UFRJ/convênio IBICT. Eu trabalho na Biblioteca do Departamento de Matemática da Universidade Estadual de Maringá-UEM. Com 20 anos de experiência em metadados científicos e editoração, entre outros. Meus conhecimentos são diversos sobre comunicação científica, cientometria, metadados XML, serviços Crossref, integridade em pesquisa, prevenção de más condutas na ciência, editoração, editoração na América Latina, informação biomédica, OJS-Open Journal Systems, revistas de Acesso Aberto, qualidade de periódicos científicos e indexação, bases de dados bibliográficas. Gosto de disseminar meu conhecimento a outras regiões e pessoas e de trabalhar em comunidade junto as instituições e outros países, de planejar novas apresentações, de trocar experiências como palestrante ou convidado e trabalhar na disseminação do conhecimento para todos.\nBrazil - Zach Coble Zach Coble is a doctoral candidate in Library and Information Science at the University of Missouri. He holds a Master’s degree in Library and Information Science from the University of Missouri and a Master’s in Interactive Telecommunications from New York University’s ITP program. Zach has worked as an academic librarian supporting open scholarship, digital preservation, and research infrastructure. His research focuses on the integrity of the scholarly record, academic libraries, and digital humanities, with particular interest in persistent identifiers, metadata, discovery, citation, and long-term access.\nZach Coble é doutorando em Ciência da Informação na Universidade do Missouri. Ele possui mestrado em Biblioteconomia e Ciência da Informação pela Universidade do Missouri e mestrado em Interactive Telecommunications pelo programa ITP da New York University. Zach atuou como bibliotecário universitário, apoiando a ciência aberta, a preservação digital e a infraestrutura de pesquisa. Sua pesquisa se concentra na integridade do registro científico, bibliotecas universitárias e humanidades digitais, com interesse especial em identificadores persistentes, metadados, recuperação da informação, citação e acesso de longo prazo.\nColombia - Nicolás Mejía Torres Nicolás Mejía Torres is a professional social communicator, who specializes in editorial production and bibliometrics. Since 2020 he has been an associate editor for Palabra Clave, a social science communications journal. He has been working with the Universidad de La Sabana as Scientific Journal Coordinator, a role that has given him the chance to work with Open Journal Systems (OJS). He has also worked with different high-impact databases for scientific journals, such as Scopus, SciVal, and Web of Science, and has been using Crossref as a tool to improve the value of the metadata of all publications of his institution. He likes to discover new technologies and tools, useful for both his life and work. He is an amateur enthusiast for bibliometric data and wants to use it to explore new paths for the journals he manages and the disciplines they impact.\nNicolás Mejía Torres es profesional en comunicación social. Se ha especializado en producción editorial y bibliometría. Desde 2020 es editor asociado de Palabra Clave, una revista de comunicación en ciencias sociales. Trabaja con la Universidad de La Sabana como el coordinador de revistas científicas. En ese rol ha podido trabajar con Open Journal Systems (OJS); también, trabaja con bases de datos de alto impacto para revistas científicas, como Scopus, SciVal y Web of Science. Se han involucrado con Crossref como una herramienta que mejora el valor de los metadatos de las publicaciones en su institución. Le gusta descubrir nuevas tecnologías y herramientas que le sirvan en su vida y trabajo. Es un entusiasta por la bibliometría y le gusta explorar con datos nuevos caminos y comportamientos de revistas científicas de su institución y las disciplinas que impactan con lo que publican.\nColombia - Juan Felipe Vargas Martínez Juan Felipe Vargas Martínez, Systems Engineer and Senior Management Specialist, has worked for more than 10 years in contributing to the editorial work of scientific publications. Previously, he was component coordinator of ‘Sistema Nacional de Acceso Abierto al Conocimiento’ (National System of Open Access to Knowledge) in Colombia and has served as assistant and editorial advisor for various scientific publications in Colombia, Ecuador and Spain. Currently, Juan Felipe works as Co-Founder and Director of Journals \u0026amp; Authors, a company that, has supports scientific publications to improve their editorial quality and scientific dissemination through the optimization of editorial processes. Journals \u0026amp; Authors holds a regional meeting of academic journal editors, through which it provides training in editorial work and generates an integrated space within academia to address and discuss the new challenges of scientific publishing. Juan Felipe also acts as coordinator of journal management processes in Open Journals System, metadata deposit in Crossref, Crossmark, and databases.\nJuan Felipe Vargas Martínez, Ingeniero de Sistemas, Especialista en Alta Gerencia, ha trabajado por más de 10 años contribuyendo a la labor editorial de las publicaciones científicas. Fue coordinador de componente del Sistema Nacional de Acceso Abierto al Conocimiento (Colombia) y se ha desempeñado como asistente y asesor editorial para diversas publicaciones científicas en Colombia, Ecuador y España. Es cofundador y actualmente director de Journals \u0026amp; Authors, empresa que por más de 5 años viene apoyando las publicaciones científicas en el mejoramiento de la calidad editorial y la difusión científica a través de la creación de metodologías que permitan la optimización de los procesos editoriales. Journals \u0026amp; Authors realiza un encuentro regional de editores de revistas académicas, a través del cual busca capacitar en la labor editorial y generar espacios de integración entre la academia para abordar y discutir los nuevos retos de la edición científica. Coordinador de procesos de gestión de revistas en Open Journals System, depósito de metadatos en Crossref, Crossmark y bases de datos.\nEcuador - Luis Enrique Lescano Luis Enrique Lescano is a research data management specialist focused on building open science infrastructure in Latin America. With a background in library science, he works at the intersection of repositories, metadata standards, and artificial intelligence. He has supported over 15 universities in implementing interoperable systems aligned with FAIR principles, including platforms such as DSpace, Dataverse, and InvenioRDM. His work centers on transforming fragmented data into scalable knowledge ecosystems. He also trains professionals and researches the evolution of knowledge systems in the AI era as a PhD candidate.\nLuis Enrique Lescano es especialista en gestión de datos de investigación, enfocado en el desarrollo de infraestructura para ciencia abierta en América Latina. Con formación en bibliotecología, trabaja en la intersección de repositorios, estándares de metadatos e inteligencia artificial. Ha colaborado con más de 15 universidades en la implementación de sistemas interoperables alineados con los principios FAIR, utilizando plataformas como DSpace, Dataverse e InvenioRDM. Su trabajo se centra en transformar datos fragmentados en ecosistemas de conocimiento escalables. Además, forma profesionales e investiga la evolución de los sistemas de conocimiento en la era de la IA como candidato a PhD.\nEcuador - Marlon Tenecela Marlon Tenecela is an Ecuadorian educator, academic editor, and researcher with experience in scientific publishing, editorial management, and digital scholarly infrastructure. He is the founder and editor of several peer-reviewed journals and leads educational and editorial initiatives that support researchers, teachers, and institutions in Ecuador. His work focuses on open science, research visibility, metadata quality, and the ethical use of digital technologies in education. He actively collaborates with academic communities to promote best practices in scholarly communication.\nMarlon Tenecela es un docente, editor académico e investigador ecuatoriano con experiencia en publicación científica, gestión editorial e infraestructura digital para la comunicación académica. Es fundador y editor de varias revistas científicas arbitradas y lidera iniciativas educativas y editoriales que apoyan a investigadores, docentes e instituciones en Ecuador. Su trabajo se centra en la ciencia abierta, la visibilidad de la investigación, la calidad de los metadatos y el uso ético de las tecnologías digitales en educación, colaborando activamente con comunidades académicas nacionales.\nEcuador - Sofía E. Calle Pesántez Ph.D. in Information and Communication. Academic editor of books and journals, specializing in scientometrics and scientific communication. She works with universities, international academic networks, and companies in Ecuador, Colombia, and Mexico on managing publishing projects, conducting scientometric analysis, and strengthening publications through scientific marketing strategies. Researcher in the areas of scientific impact metrics, metadata, open access, and the strategic consolidation of academic publishing in Latin America. Founder of Metrics School.\nDoctora en Información y Comunicación. Editora Académica de libros y revistas, especializada en cienciometría y comunicación científica. Trabaja con universidades, redes académicas internacionales y empresas de Ecuador, Colombia y México en la gestión de proyectos editoriales, análisis cienciométrico y fortalecimiento de publicaciones a partir de estrategias de marketing científico. Investigadora en las líneas de métricas de impacto científico, metadatos, acceso abierto y la consolidación estratégica de la edición académica en América Latina. Fundadora de Metrics School.\nMexico - Maria Ramos-Escamilla Dr. Maria Ramos-Escamilla, a PhD in Economics from the Instituto Politécnico Nacional, has trained over 5000 postgraduates worldwide and authored over 200 works in international economics and fractal modelling. She has participated in numerous international research groups, earning recognition in economics and finance. With 25 years of experience, she has edited over 100 indexed journals across continents and is currently the General Director of ECORFAN-MEXICO, S.C. At Crossref, her mission is to aid researchers in globally connected written science.\nLa Dra. Maria Ramos-Escamilla, Doctora en Economía del Instituto Politécnico Nacional, ha capacitado a más de 5000 posgraduados en todo el mundo y es autora de más de 200 trabajos en economía internacional y modelado fractal. Ha participado en numerosos grupos de investigación internacionales, obteniendo reconocimiento en economía y finanzas. Con 25 años de experiencia, ha editado más de 100 revistas indexadas en todos los continentes y actualmente es la Directora General de ECORFAN-MEXICO, S.C. En Crossref, su misión es ayudar a los investigadores en la ciencia escrita conectada globalmente.\nMexico - Pedro López Casique Pedro López Casique is a consultant specializing in academic and scientific publishing, with nearly 15 years of experience in editorial processes across Latin America. He supports institutions in editorial professionalization, policy improvement, and strengthening the visibility of publications through Open Access. As a Crossref Ambassador and software specialist for the Public Knowledge Project (OJS, OMP, and OPS), he promotes the use of open metadata and persistent identifiers, fostering an ethical and interoperable editorial culture. His work facilitates compliance with international standards and brings global knowledge closer to the Spanish speaking community through training, consulting, and technical support.\nPedro López Casique es un consultor especializado en publicaciones académicas y científicas, con cerca de 15 años de experiencia en procesos editoriales en América Latina. Acompaña a instituciones en la profesionalización editorial, la mejora de políticas y el fortalecimiento de la visibilidad a través del Acceso Abierto. Como embajador de Crossref y especialista en software del Public Knowledge Project (OJS, OMP y OPS), busca promover el uso de metadatos abiertos e identificadores persistentes, impulsando una cultura editorial ética e interoperable. Su labor facilita el cumplimiento de lineamientos internacionales y acerca el conocimiento global a la comunidad hispanohablante mediante formación, asesoría y acompañamiento técnico.\n",
"headings": ["Argentina - Sandra Gisela Martín","Brazil - Edilson Damasio","Brazil - Zach Coble","Colombia - Nicolás Mejía Torres","Colombia - Juan Felipe Vargas Martínez","Ecuador - Luis Enrique Lescano","Ecuador - Marlon Tenecela","Ecuador - Sofía E. Calle Pesántez","Mexico - Maria Ramos-Escamilla","Mexico - Pedro López Casique"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/community/our-ambassadors/europe/",
"title": "Meet our ambassadors in Europe",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2026-05-26",
"lastmod_ts": 1779753600,
"section": "Get involved",
"tags": [],
"description": "The Crossref Ambassador Program is an exciting and important program initiated in early 2018, and one which fully embraces a key strategic focus\u0026mdash;to adapt to expanding constituencies.\nOur Ambassadors are enthusiastic volunteers who work within the global academic community in a variety of ways\u0026mdash;as librarians, researchers, publishers, and societies,\u0026mdash;and all of whom share a strong belief in the mission-driven work we do to improve scholarly research communication. They support us by using their industry expertise, local knowledge, and translation skills to represent Crossref at regional events\u0026mdash;providing training to our members in different languages, locations and time zones.\n",
"content": "The Crossref Ambassador Program is an exciting and important program initiated in early 2018, and one which fully embraces a key strategic focus\u0026mdash;to adapt to expanding constituencies.\nOur Ambassadors are enthusiastic volunteers who work within the global academic community in a variety of ways\u0026mdash;as librarians, researchers, publishers, and societies,\u0026mdash;and all of whom share a strong belief in the mission-driven work we do to improve scholarly research communication. They support us by using their industry expertise, local knowledge, and translation skills to represent Crossref at regional events\u0026mdash;providing training to our members in different languages, locations and time zones.\nSee who is in Europe:\nBulgaria - Boryana Kozareva I hold a PhD in the Theory of Scientific Information - Information Services from Sofia University St. Kliment Ohridski. Currently, I am a lecturer at the Department of Library and Information Studies and Cultural Policy at the same University. I serve as the Director of the Library and Publishing Department at the Agricultural Academy, where I manage the Central Agricultural Library - one of the largest scientific libraries in Bulgaria. I am also responsible for the publication of five scientific journals and act as the primary institutional contact for Web of Science, Scopus, Crossref, DOAJ, ProQuest, the Bulgarian Portal for Open Science, the ISBN Agency, etc. My research interests focus on publishing activities, scientific information, and special library collections.\nПритежавам докторска степен по „Теория на научната информация – Информационно обслужване“ от Софийския университет „Св. Климент Охридски“. В момента съм преподавател в катедра „Библиотечно-информационни науки и културна политика“ в същия Университет. Заемам длъжността директор на дирекция „Библиотечна и издателска дейност“ в Селскостопанската академия, където ръководя Централна селскостопанска библиотека – една от най-големите научни библиотеки в България. Отговарям също за издаването на пет научни списания и съм основното лице за контакт на институцията с Web of Science, Scopus, Crossref, DOAJ, ProQuest, Българския портал за отворена наука, ISBN агенцията и други. Научните ми интереси са насочени към издателската дейност, научната информация и специалните библиотечни колекции.\nFrance - Frédéric Lefrançois Frédéric is a researcher/lecturer at the University of the French West Indies. While practising research and lecturing in English Studies and Visual/Performing Arts, he has developed a keen interest in cultural anthropology. After the obtention of his Ph.D. in English Studies, his research has focused on the relationship between aesthetics and social sculpture in a variety of Transamerican diasporic contexts: visual arts, cinema, drama, and performance. He has authored two books and edited 3 journal international issues. He believes that research accessibility and visibility are key to fostering excellent scientific cooperation, hence his engagement with Crossref.\nFrédéric est chercheur/enseignant à l’Université des Antilles Françaises. Tout en pratiquant la recherche et en enseignant en études anglaises et en arts visuels/du spectacle, il a développé un vif intérêt pour l\u0026rsquo;anthropologie culturelle. Après l\u0026rsquo;obtention de son doctorat. en études anglaises, ses recherches se sont concentrées sur la relation entre l\u0026rsquo;esthétique et la sculpture sociale dans divers contextes diasporiques transaméricains : arts visuels, cinéma, théâtre et performance. Il est l\u0026rsquo;auteur de deux livres et a édité trois numéros internationaux de revues. Il estime que l’accessibilité et la visibilité de la recherche sont essentielles pour favoriser une excellente coopération scientifique, d’où son engagement auprès de Crossref.\nRomania - Nicoleta-Roxana Dinu Nicoleta-Roxana Dinu holds a PhD in Library and Information Science at the University of Bucharest. She works at the National Library of Romania, Institutional Development Department. She has been responsible for international relations for the Profesional de la información Journal and the webmaster of the mentioned journal. She is currently editor of the Infonomy Journal (Spain), Scientific advisor of the Journal of Creative Industries and Cultural Studies (JOCIS), Portugal and member of the Advisory Board of the Central European Library and Information Science Review (CeLISR) Journal, Hungary. She is editor of e-LIS for Romania and Moldova. She has published articles on digital information, metadata, trends in scientific journals, use of repositories and social networks.\nNicoleta-Roxana Dinu este doctor în Științele informării și documentării, în cadrul Universității din București. Își desfășoară activitatea la Biblioteca Națională a României, în serviciul Dezvoltare instituțională. A lucrat în Biroul de Relații internaționale al revistei Profesional de la información și a fost webmaster-ul aceleași reviste. În prezent, este editor al revistei Infonomy (Spania), consilier științific al revistei Journal of Creative Industries and Cultural Studies (JOCIS), Portugalia, și membru în Consiliul Consultativ al revistei Central European Library and Information Science Review (CeLISR), Ungaria. Este editor e-Lis pentru România și Republica Moldova. A publicat articole despre informații digitale, metadate, tendințe în revistele științifice, dar și despre utilizarea depozitelor digitale și rețelelor de socializare.\nSerbia - Prof. Lazar Stošić Prof. Dr. Lazar Stošić is Dean of the Faculty of Informatics and Computer Science in Belgrade, Serbia, a Senior Research Associate, and a Corresponding Member of the Serbian Academy of Education. His academic and professional work focuses on computer science, educational technology, artificial intelligence, digital transformation, and scholarly communication. He has extensive experience in the application of AI in education and research, open science infrastructures, metadata quality, DOI implementation, digital publishing systems, research visibility, and journal development. His work supports academic institutions and research communities in improving digital workflows, publication standards, indexing readiness, and responsible use of emerging technologies.\nProf. dr Lazar Stošić je dekan Fakulteta za informatiku i računarstvo u Beogradu, Srbija, viši naučni saradnik i dopisni član Srpske akademije obrazovanja. Njegov akademski i profesionalni rad usmeren je na računarstvo, obrazovnu tehnologiju, veštačku inteligenciju, digitalnu transformaciju i naučnu komunikaciju. Ima značajno iskustvo u primeni AI u obrazovanju i istraživanju, infrastrukturi otvorene nauke, kvalitetu metapodataka, implementaciji DOI brojeva, digitalnim izdavačkim sistemima, vidljivosti istraživanja i razvoju časopisa. Njegov rad podržava akademske institucije i istraživačke zajednice u unapređenju digitalnih tokova rada.\n",
"headings": ["Bulgaria - Boryana Kozareva","France - Frédéric Lefrançois","Romania - Nicoleta-Roxana Dinu","Serbia - Prof. Lazar Stošić"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/working-groups/preprints-meeting-notes/",
"title": "Preprint AG meeting notes",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2024-05-03",
"lastmod_ts": 1714694400,
"section": "Working groups",
"tags": [],
"description": "Preprint Advisory Group meeting notes On this page you can find a summary of meetings held by the preprint advisory group.\nAG meeting, 25 April 2024 Agenda Update on metadata schema changes. Update on new preprint matching method. Ithenticate removal requests. Actions Schema changes will be open for community consultation in the coming weeks. Work continues on implementation of the new matching method, although will be delayed by other high priority development work. AG meeting, 22 February 2024 Agenda Development work starting on implementing preprint matching in production. Proposal for schema changes to support preprints. Follow up discussion on modifying titles for withdrawn preprints. Actions Crossref to continue implementation of new preprint matching method. Continued feedback from the group about proposed schema changes. Crossref to seek community feedback on schema changes. AG meeting, 16 November 2023 Agenda Update on preprint matching: public dataset of matches from the whole corpus available, see blog post. Discussion with Anurag Acharya (Google Scholar) about identifying withdrawn preprints. Actions Members to consider whether to modify titles to indicate withdrawn status. AG meeting, 24 August 2023 Agenda Presentation of results on preprint/article matching prototype (the code is open). Actions Plan for production implementation of the best strategy for matching. AG meeting, 22 June 2023 Agenda Crossref schema change survey and progress. Crossref investigations into improving preprint/article matching. Discussion of the Elife editorial process. Actions Priority list for schema changes at Crosref. Continue experiments in preprint matching. AG meeting, 23 February 2023 Agenda Welcome to new members Update on schema changes: upcoming survey of Crossref members to prioritize planned changes. Introduction to the new eLife editorial workflow and how metadata is handled. Introduction to Docmaps. AG meeting, 27 October 2022 Agenda Upcoming changes to preprint/journal-article notification emails. Discussion of feedback on preprint metadata recommendations: Origin of withdrawals. Representation of editorial progress in preprint metadata. Work of related groups, including NISO and ASAPbio. Interoperability of Crossref metadata with other platforms. Actions No suggested changes to recommendations as a result of feedback. Review forthcoming report on AG discussions. AG meeting, 25 August 2022 Agenda Adding summary of AG meetings to the Crossref website. Update on feedback recommendations. Forthcoming COAR/ASPbio recommendations. Crossmark documentation to support registration of DOIs for preprints. Actions Take feedback on documentation to colleagues looking at website design. Revise the subject line of preprint/journal-article notification emails. AG meeting, 23 June 2022 Agenda Publication of AG recommendations. Discussion of withdrawal processes. Notify Project from COAR. Actions Public posting of AG recommendation document. AG meeting, 26 April 2022 Agenda Multilingualism in preprints Actions Improve Crossref documentation to explain which fields can have multilingual content and how to deposit the metadata. Clearer guidance from Crossref about how to register DOIs for lay summaries in different languages. AG meeting, 17 March 2022 Agenda Feedback from recent Crossref Board meeting Discussion on preprint recommendations: Relationships Versioning Process retrospective Actions Crossref can consider matching preprints to articles and adding them directly to metadata provided the false-positive rate can be quantified and is very low. Crossref should provide more guidance on when to use types of relationships. Recommendation discussion around a \u0026lsquo;citable DOI\u0026rsquo; removed from recommendations document. Seek public feedback on recommendations. AG meeting, 16 February 2022 Agenda Updates to preprint/journal-article notification emails Working group summaries. Metadata recommendation discussions: Withdrawals and removals. Preprints as an article type. Preprint relationships. Actions Discuss Crossref\u0026rsquo;s fee structure in a future meeting. Keep the term \u0026lsquo;preprint\u0026rsquo; despite limitations if it\u0026rsquo;s taken too literally. Crossref should consider notifying interested parties when a preprint is withdrawn. Asynchronous discussion, October 2022 Agenda The balance between best practice and capturing current practice. Followup topics from previous prioritization exercise. Actions Make recommendations optional, do not force specific practices. Come back to language metadata in a future meeting. AG meeting, 13 September 2021 Agenda Initial discussion outcomes of prioritization exercise: Version number. Withdrawal/removal and Crossmark metadata. Establish questions to research, look at current practice. Actions Condense discussions into a list of recommendations. AG meeting, 26 July 2021 Agenda Outcomes of prioritzation exercise. Preprints as an article type. Relationships to/from preprints. Actions Continue discussion on other selected topics in next meeting. AG meeting, 7 June 2021 Agenda Scope of the group. Review of current metadata practice for preprints. Actions Prioritize topics around preprint metadata. Appoint chair. ",
"content": "Preprint Advisory Group meeting notes On this page you can find a summary of meetings held by the preprint advisory group.\nAG meeting, 25 April 2024 Agenda Update on metadata schema changes. Update on new preprint matching method. Ithenticate removal requests. Actions Schema changes will be open for community consultation in the coming weeks. Work continues on implementation of the new matching method, although will be delayed by other high priority development work. AG meeting, 22 February 2024 Agenda Development work starting on implementing preprint matching in production. Proposal for schema changes to support preprints. Follow up discussion on modifying titles for withdrawn preprints. Actions Crossref to continue implementation of new preprint matching method. Continued feedback from the group about proposed schema changes. Crossref to seek community feedback on schema changes. AG meeting, 16 November 2023 Agenda Update on preprint matching: public dataset of matches from the whole corpus available, see blog post. Discussion with Anurag Acharya (Google Scholar) about identifying withdrawn preprints. Actions Members to consider whether to modify titles to indicate withdrawn status. AG meeting, 24 August 2023 Agenda Presentation of results on preprint/article matching prototype (the code is open). Actions Plan for production implementation of the best strategy for matching. AG meeting, 22 June 2023 Agenda Crossref schema change survey and progress. Crossref investigations into improving preprint/article matching. Discussion of the Elife editorial process. Actions Priority list for schema changes at Crosref. Continue experiments in preprint matching. AG meeting, 23 February 2023 Agenda Welcome to new members Update on schema changes: upcoming survey of Crossref members to prioritize planned changes. Introduction to the new eLife editorial workflow and how metadata is handled. Introduction to Docmaps. AG meeting, 27 October 2022 Agenda Upcoming changes to preprint/journal-article notification emails. Discussion of feedback on preprint metadata recommendations: Origin of withdrawals. Representation of editorial progress in preprint metadata. Work of related groups, including NISO and ASAPbio. Interoperability of Crossref metadata with other platforms. Actions No suggested changes to recommendations as a result of feedback. Review forthcoming report on AG discussions. AG meeting, 25 August 2022 Agenda Adding summary of AG meetings to the Crossref website. Update on feedback recommendations. Forthcoming COAR/ASPbio recommendations. Crossmark documentation to support registration of DOIs for preprints. Actions Take feedback on documentation to colleagues looking at website design. Revise the subject line of preprint/journal-article notification emails. AG meeting, 23 June 2022 Agenda Publication of AG recommendations. Discussion of withdrawal processes. Notify Project from COAR. Actions Public posting of AG recommendation document. AG meeting, 26 April 2022 Agenda Multilingualism in preprints Actions Improve Crossref documentation to explain which fields can have multilingual content and how to deposit the metadata. Clearer guidance from Crossref about how to register DOIs for lay summaries in different languages. AG meeting, 17 March 2022 Agenda Feedback from recent Crossref Board meeting Discussion on preprint recommendations: Relationships Versioning Process retrospective Actions Crossref can consider matching preprints to articles and adding them directly to metadata provided the false-positive rate can be quantified and is very low. Crossref should provide more guidance on when to use types of relationships. Recommendation discussion around a \u0026lsquo;citable DOI\u0026rsquo; removed from recommendations document. Seek public feedback on recommendations. AG meeting, 16 February 2022 Agenda Updates to preprint/journal-article notification emails Working group summaries. Metadata recommendation discussions: Withdrawals and removals. Preprints as an article type. Preprint relationships. Actions Discuss Crossref\u0026rsquo;s fee structure in a future meeting. Keep the term \u0026lsquo;preprint\u0026rsquo; despite limitations if it\u0026rsquo;s taken too literally. Crossref should consider notifying interested parties when a preprint is withdrawn. Asynchronous discussion, October 2022 Agenda The balance between best practice and capturing current practice. Followup topics from previous prioritization exercise. Actions Make recommendations optional, do not force specific practices. Come back to language metadata in a future meeting. AG meeting, 13 September 2021 Agenda Initial discussion outcomes of prioritization exercise: Version number. Withdrawal/removal and Crossmark metadata. Establish questions to research, look at current practice. Actions Condense discussions into a list of recommendations. AG meeting, 26 July 2021 Agenda Outcomes of prioritzation exercise. Preprints as an article type. Relationships to/from preprints. Actions Continue discussion on other selected topics in next meeting. AG meeting, 7 June 2021 Agenda Scope of the group. Review of current metadata practice for preprints. Actions Prioritize topics around preprint metadata. Appoint chair. ",
"headings": ["Preprint Advisory Group meeting notes","AG meeting, 25 April 2024","Agenda","Actions","AG meeting, 22 February 2024","Agenda","Actions","AG meeting, 16 November 2023","Agenda","Actions","AG meeting, 24 August 2023","Agenda","Actions","AG meeting, 22 June 2023","Agenda","Actions","AG meeting, 23 February 2023","Agenda","AG meeting, 27 October 2022","Agenda","Actions","AG meeting, 25 August 2022","Agenda","Actions","AG meeting, 23 June 2022","Agenda","Actions","AG meeting, 26 April 2022","Agenda","Actions","AG meeting, 17 March 2022","Agenda","Actions","AG meeting, 16 February 2022","Agenda","Actions","Asynchronous discussion, October 2022","Agenda","Actions","AG meeting, 13 September 2021","Agenda","Actions","AG meeting, 26 July 2021","Agenda","Actions","AG meeting, 7 June 2021","Agenda","Actions"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/community/our-ambassadors/africa/",
"title": "Meet our ambassadors in Africa",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2023-08-01",
"lastmod_ts": 1690848000,
"section": "Get involved",
"tags": [],
"description": "The Crossref Ambassador Program is an exciting and important program initiated in early 2018, and one which fully embraces a key strategic focus\u0026mdash;to adapt to expanding constituencies.\nOur Ambassadors are enthusiastic volunteers who work within the global academic community in a variety of ways\u0026mdash;as librarians, researchers, publishers, and societies,\u0026mdash;and all of whom share a strong belief in the mission-driven work we do to improve scholarly research communication. They support us by using their industry expertise, local knowledge, and translation skills to represent Crossref at regional events\u0026mdash;providing training to our members in different languages, locations and time zones.\n",
"content": "The Crossref Ambassador Program is an exciting and important program initiated in early 2018, and one which fully embraces a key strategic focus\u0026mdash;to adapt to expanding constituencies.\nOur Ambassadors are enthusiastic volunteers who work within the global academic community in a variety of ways\u0026mdash;as librarians, researchers, publishers, and societies,\u0026mdash;and all of whom share a strong belief in the mission-driven work we do to improve scholarly research communication. They support us by using their industry expertise, local knowledge, and translation skills to represent Crossref at regional events\u0026mdash;providing training to our members in different languages, locations and time zones.\nSee who is in Africa:\nAlgeria - Younes Saaid Dr. Younes Saaid is an associate professor at the University of Oran 2 Mohamed Ben Ahmed, Algeria. He is a skilled researcher holding a Ph.D. in Didactics of English for Specific Purposes (ESP). His expertise includes language contact, language teaching methodologies, and ESP. Younes actively contributes to the field by indexing academic journals and enhancing research visibility. He also plays a vital role in the Algerian Scientific Journals Platform (ASJP), promoting Algerian research and managing the Open Journal Systems (OJS) for various journals.\nالدكتور يونس سعيد أستاذ محاضر بجامعة وهران 2 محمد بن أحمد، الجزائر. وهو باحث متمكن حاصل على دكتوراه في تعليمية الإنجليزية لأغراض خاصة. تشمل خبرته في اللسانيات والتواصل اللغات، مناهج تدريس اللغات، والإنجليزية لأغراض خاصة. يساهم يونس بشكل فعال في المجال من خلال فهرسة المجلات العلمية وتعزيز رؤية البحث العلمي. كما يلعب دورًا هامًا في منصة المجلات العلمية الجزائرية، حيث يعمل على الترويج للبحث الجزائري وإدارة أنظمة المجلات المفتوحة لمجلات Cameroon - Audrey Kenni Nganmeni I am Audrey Kenni Nganmeni, editor at the Pan African Medical Journal in charge of legal affairs and focal person of the journal with Crossref, a journal based in Cameroon, Africa. I am very glad to be part of Crossref ambassadors where I will learn more about Crossref services, benefit of diverses training and help Crossref with my French skills.\nJe suis Audrey Kenni Nganmeni, éditrice au Pan African Medical Journal en charge des affaires juridiques et point focal de la revue avec Crossref. Je suis basée au Cameroun en Afrique. Je suis très heureuse de faire partie des ambassadeurs Crossref où je pourrai en savoir plus sur les services Crossref, bénéficier de diverses formations et aider Crossref avec mes compétences en français. Congo (DRC) - Richard Risasi Etutu Junior Richard Risasi Etutu Junior is a Congolese medical doctor and researcher, holding a Doctor of Medicine degree and a master’s degree in environmental sciences, teaching at the Higher Institute of Health Sciences of the Red Cross in Kinshasa, actively involved in research on public health and urban sanitation, author of several scientific studies, and also serving as Technical Director and Journal Manager of Congo Research Papers, where he works to promote and disseminate scientific research in the Democratic Republic of the Congo.\nRichard Risasi Etutu Junior est un médecin et chercheur congolais, titulaire d\u0026rsquo;un doctorat en médecine et d\u0026rsquo;une maîtrise en sciences de l\u0026rsquo;environnement. Il enseigne à l\u0026rsquo;Institut supérieur des sciences de la santé de la Croix-Rouge à Kinshasa, participe activement à la recherche en santé publique et en assainissement urbain, est l\u0026rsquo;auteur de plusieurs études scientifiques et occupe également les fonctions de directeur technique et de responsable de la revue Congo Research Papers, où il œuvre à la promotion et à la diffusion de la recherche scientifique en République démocratique du Congo.\nEgypt - Ahmed Moustafa I’m an Academic Publishing professional who has wide expertise in the Scholarly Publishing industry. I have a B.Sc. in Chemistry/Geology from Cairo University in Egypt, and now I’m the Production Manager at Knowledge E in the UAE. I’m passionate about the openness and integrity of research, as well as integration and collaboration between the different stakeholders in the publishing community. I’m a member of the Creative Commons Global Network (CCGN), the International Society of Managing and Technical Editors (ISMTE), and the Association of Learned and Professional Society Publishers (ALPSP).\nأحمد مصطفى، متخصص في النشر الأكاديمي ولديه خبرة واسعة في صناعة النشر العلمي. حصل على درجة البكالوريوس في الكيمياء/الجيولوجيا من جامعة القاهرة في مصر وهو الآن مدير الإنتاج بنولدج اي في الإمارات العربية المتحدة. شغوف بانفتاح ونزاهة البحث، وكذلك التكامل والتعاون بين مختلف الأطراف المعنية في مجتمع النشر. وهو عضو في شبكة المشاع الإبداعي العالمية والجمعية الدولية للمحررين الإداريين والتقنيين ورابطة ناشري المجتمع العلمي والمهني. Ghana - Richard Bruce Lamptey Richard Bruce Lamptey is the Librarian of the College of Science Library and a Deputy Librarian in the KNUST Library System. He is knowledgeable in digital libraries, data curation, digital repositories, information management, and open access / open data issues. Very much results-driven, go-getter, follow transformational leadership principles. Has supported national and institutional open access awareness raising and advocacy workshops that have resulted in several open access repositories in the country. Through his work, the first open access mandate in the country was introduced by Kwame Nkrumah University of Science and Technology. He holds PhD, MPhil, MA and Diploma (Library and Information Studies). He is very passionate about Knowledge sharing, interested in equity in scholarly communications and research, alternative metrics, grey literature and open access. Kenya - Mercury Shitindo With over 18 years of management experience, Ms. Shitindo is a researcher and bioethicist. She currently chairs the Africa Bioethics Network, is an editor at the African Journal of Bioethics, serves on the BCA-WA-ETHICS II Project Advisory Board, and is a Technical Expert for Global Impact. She is an alumnus of the WCG IRB International Fellows Program and trains Open Peer Reviewers. She promotes human rights and human dignity in African society through research, writing, and capacity-building. She volunteers at Africans Rising as a Regional Resource Mobilizer and is a Crossref Ambassador. Her research aims to promote equitable access to necessities, education, and health by endorsing ethical research conduct and upholding human rights and dignity.\nAkiwa na uzoefu wa usimamizi wa zaidi ya miaka 18, Bi. Shitindo ni mtafiti na mtaalamu wa maadili. Kwa sasa ni mwenyekiti wa Mtandao wa Maadili ya Kibiolojia Afrika, ni mhariri katika Jarida la Afrika la Maadili ya Kibiolojia, anahudumu katika Bodi ya Ushauri ya Mradi wa BCA-WA-ETHICS II, na ni Mtaalam wa Kiufundi wa Athari za Kiulimwengu. Yeye ni mhitimu wa Mpango wa Kimataifa wa Wenzake wa WCG IRB na hufunza Wakaguzi Huria wa Rika. Anakuza haki za binadamu na utu katika jamii ya Kiafrika kupitia utafiti, uandishi, na kujenga uwezo. Anajitolea katika Africans Rising kama Mhamasishaji wa Rasilimali za Kanda na ni Balozi wa Crossref. Utafiti wake unalenga kukuza upatikanaji sawa wa mahitaji, elimu, na afya kwa kuidhinisha mwenendo wa utafiti wa kimaadili na kuzingatia haki za binadamu na utu.\nMorocco - Nadia Boutaleb Dr Nadia Boutaleb is Professor of Agri-Food and Environmental Sciences at Hassan II University of Casablanca (Morocco) and Vice-President of the Moroccan Association for Environmental and Health Sciences and Technologies (AMSTES). She chairs the Editorial Board of a scientific journal where she oversees metadata quality, DOI registration and OJS management. She believes in open science and research integrity, and provides training on scholarly publishing and metadata structuring. Based in Casablanca, she promotes the adoption of Crossref and open scholarly infrastructures across Morocco and the MENA region.\nالدكتورة نادية بوطالب أستاذة في علوم الأغذية والبيئة بجامعة الحسن الثاني بالدار البيضاء، ونائبة رئيس الجمعية المغربية للعلوم والتقنيات في البيئة والصحة AMSTES. تشرف على هيئة تحرير مجلة علمية تُعنى بضمان جودة البيانات الوصفية وتسجيل المعرّفات الرقمية DOI وإدارة منصة النشر OJS. تؤمن بالعلم المفتوح ونزاهة البحث العلمي، وتقدّم دورات تدريبية في النشر العلمي وبناء هياكل البيانات الوصفية. انطلاقًا من الدار البيضاء، تعمل على تعزيز تبنّي Crossref والبنى التحتية العلمية المفتوحة في المغرب ومنطقة الشرق الأوسط وشمال أفريقيا. Senegal - Oumy Ndiaye Dr. Oumy Ndiaye, a certified gender and ethics expert, is a health economist at Cheikh Anta Diop University, Dakar. Her areas of expertise include health financing, inequalities in access to care, sexual and reproductive health, and children’s health. She has led numerous projects and programs in this field, and has collaborated with the United Nations and the international NGO FIND as an international consultant. Dr. Ndiaye has published several articles and a significant work on demographic dividend and development. Currently, she is spearheading a project on violations of the rights of domestic workers in French-speaking West Africa.\nLe Dr Oumy Ndiaye, experte certifiée en genre et en éthique, est économiste de la santé à l\u0026rsquo;Université Cheikh Anta Diop de Dakar. Ses domaines d’expertise incluent le financement de la santé, les inégalités d’accès aux soins, la santé sexuelle et reproductive et la santé des enfants. Elle a dirigé de nombreux projets et programmes dans ce domaine, et a collaboré avec les Nations Unies et l\u0026rsquo;ONG internationale FIND en tant que consultante internationale. Le Dr Ndiaye a publié plusieurs articles et un ouvrage important sur le dividende démographique et le développement. Actuellement, elle mène un projet sur les violations des droits des travailleuses domestiques en Afrique de l’Ouest francophone.\nSouth Africa - Mokheseng Richard Buti Mokheseng Richard Buti is a Portfolio Manager at Taylor \u0026amp; Francis, dedicated to advancing knowledge within Africa. With over seven years of experience, I manage relationships with co-publishing partners and stakeholders, ensuring the dissemination of high-quality research. Passionate about curating reliable information in an era flooded with misinformation, I strive to amplify African research and voices through impactful projects. My commitment to truth and accuracy has been recognized with prestigious awards, underscoring my role as a patriotic ambassador for scholarly excellence in Africa. I believe in the power of knowledge-sharing to transform lives and drive meaningful societal change.\nSouth Africa - Sidney Engelbrecht Sidney is a Senior Research Compliance Specialist at King Abdullah University of Science and Technology in Saudi Arabia with 15 years of experience in research ethics and integrity. He is an accredited Research Management Professional by the International Professional Recognition Council. He is the recipient of the Award for Distinguished Contribution to the Research Management Profession and co-recipient of the Anderson-Kleinert Diversity Award. He is a Research Group Fellow (with distinction) of the Center for AI and Digital Policy (US) and participates in the EdSafe Catalyst Fellowship Programme. He is currently pursuing a PhD in AI Ethics.\nSidney is \u0026rsquo;n Senior Navorsingsnakomingsspesialis by King Abdullah Universiteit van Wetenskap en Tegnologie in Saoedi-Arabië met 15 jaar ondervinding in navorsingsetiek en integriteit. Hy is \u0026rsquo;n geakkrediteerde Navorsingsbestuursprofessiel deur die International Professional Recognition Council. Hy is die ontvanger van die Toekenning vir Uitnemende Bydrae tot die Navorsingsbestuursberoep en mede-ontvanger van die Anderson-Kleinert Diversiteitstoekenning. Hy is \u0026rsquo;n Navorsingsgroepgenoot (met lof) van die Sentrum vir KI en Digitale Beleid (VS) en neem deel aan die EdSafe Catalyst Fellowship-program. Hy is tans besig met \u0026rsquo;n PhD in KI-etiek.\nTanzania - Baraka Manjale Ngussa Baraka Manjale NGUSSA holds a PhD in Education (Curriculum and Teaching) from the University of Eastern Africa Baraton, Kenya. He is an experienced educator, researcher, and administrator in higher learning institutions particularly at the University of Arusha in Tanzania where he currently serves as the Director of Human Resources and Administration. He has been the President for Tanzania Adventist Authors and Writers Association (TAAWA) since 2019. He has a wide experience in teaching, publication and supervision and has authored over 60 publications including books, journal articles, encyclopedia sections, and book chapters. Baraka is the founder, CEO and Chief Editor of the East African Journal of Education and Social Sciences (EAJESS) which is indexed by African Journals Online (AJOL). His research areas include curriculum and teaching, educational management, and leadership. As Crossref Ambassador, Baraka’s passion is to provide his expertise in supporting academic journals in Africa to acquire and maintain high quality standards.\nBaraka Manjale NGUSSA ana Shahada ya Uzamivu katika Elimu (Mitaala na Ufundishaji) ya Chuo Kikuu cha Afrika Mashariki, Baraton kilichoko Kenya. Baraka ana uzoefu mwingi katika ufundishaji, utafiti na uongozi katika Elimu ya Juu hasa Katika Chuo Kikuu cha Arusha ambako kwa sasa ni Mkurugenzi wa Rasilimali watu na Utawala. Amekuwa Rais wa Chama cha Watunzi wa Waandhishi wa Kiadventista nchini Tanzania tangu mwaka 2019. Ana uzoefu mpana katika kufundisha, uandhishi na usimamizi wa tafiti, na ana machapisho zaidi ya 60 ikiwa ni pamoja na vitabu, sura za vitabu pamoja na makala mbalimbali. Baraka ni muasisi na mhariri mkuu wa jarida la Afrika Mashariki la Elimu na Sayansi Jamii ambalo limewekwa katika African Journals Online (AJOL). Maeneo yake ya utafiti ni katika mitaala na ufundishaji, utawala wa elimu pamoja na uongozi. Akiwa Balozi wa Crossref, lengo lake ni kutoa uzoefu wa kitaalamu ili kuwezesha majarida yaliyoko Afrika Kushiriki katika mtandao wa Crossref wa kiulimwengu wa majarida ya kitaaluma.\n",
"headings": ["Algeria - Younes Saaid","Cameroon - Audrey Kenni Nganmeni","Congo (DRC) - Richard Risasi Etutu Junior","Egypt - Ahmed Moustafa","Ghana - Richard Bruce Lamptey","Kenya - Mercury Shitindo","Morocco - Nadia Boutaleb","Senegal - Oumy Ndiaye","South Africa - Mokheseng Richard Buti","South Africa - Sidney Engelbrecht","Tanzania - Baraka Manjale Ngussa"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/community/our-ambassadors/oceania/",
"title": "Meet our ambassadors in Oceania",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2023-08-01",
"lastmod_ts": 1690848000,
"section": "Get involved",
"tags": [],
"description": "The Crossref Ambassador Program is an exciting and important program initiated in early 2018, and one which fully embraces a key strategic focus\u0026mdash;to adapt to expanding constituencies.\nOur Ambassadors are enthusiastic volunteers who work within the global academic community in a variety of ways\u0026mdash;as librarians, researchers, publishers, and societies,\u0026mdash;and all of whom share a strong belief in the mission-driven work we do to improve scholarly research communication. They support us by using their industry expertise, local knowledge, and translation skills to represent Crossref at regional events\u0026mdash;providing training to our members in different languages, locations and time zones.\n",
"content": "The Crossref Ambassador Program is an exciting and important program initiated in early 2018, and one which fully embraces a key strategic focus\u0026mdash;to adapt to expanding constituencies.\nOur Ambassadors are enthusiastic volunteers who work within the global academic community in a variety of ways\u0026mdash;as librarians, researchers, publishers, and societies,\u0026mdash;and all of whom share a strong belief in the mission-driven work we do to improve scholarly research communication. They support us by using their industry expertise, local knowledge, and translation skills to represent Crossref at regional events\u0026mdash;providing training to our members in different languages, locations and time zones.\nSee who is in Oceania:\nAustralia - Melroy Almeida Melroy currently works at the Australian Access Federation (AAF) as their ORCID Technical Support Analyst. AAF is the consortium lead for the Australian ORCID Consortium and as part of his day to day work Melroy works with the Australian ORCID Consortium members on their ORCID implementations as well as assists them in planning their communication and engagement strategy. As part of his work with ORCID, Melroy occasionally gets questions about DOIs, metadata and discoverability. \u0026ldquo;My aim is to help research organisations and researchers understand the benefits of PIDs, why it is needed and how it helps within the scholarly research lifecycle\u0026rdquo;. In addition to English, Melroy also speaks Hindi and Marathi. In his spare time after work and family commitments, Melroy can be found playing/coaching football (soccer) or sitting on the couch reading a good book.\n",
"headings": ["Australia - Melroy Almeida"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/jobs/2023-04-20-technical-community-manager/",
"title": "Technical Community Manager",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2023-04-20",
"lastmod_ts": 1681948800,
"section": "Jobs",
"tags": [],
"description": " Applications for this position closed May 22nd, 2023. Do you want to help improve research communications in all corners of the globe? Come and join the world of nonprofit open infrastructure and be part of improving the creation and sharing of knowledge as our brand-new Technical Community Manager, working with our API users, service providers, and other metadata integrators.\nLocation: Remote and global (with regular working in European timezones) Salary: Approx. EUR 60,000-72,000 or the local equivalent, depending on experience. Note this is a general guide (as there is no universal currency) and local benchmarking will take place before the final offer Reports to: Head of Community Engagement and Communications. See team and org chart Application timeline: Advertise in April, interviews in May, and offer by end of May/early June\n",
"content": " Applications for this position closed May 22nd, 2023. Do you want to help improve research communications in all corners of the globe? Come and join the world of nonprofit open infrastructure and be part of improving the creation and sharing of knowledge as our brand-new Technical Community Manager, working with our API users, service providers, and other metadata integrators.\nLocation: Remote and global (with regular working in European timezones) Salary: Approx. EUR 60,000-72,000 or the local equivalent, depending on experience. Note this is a general guide (as there is no universal currency) and local benchmarking will take place before the final offer Reports to: Head of Community Engagement and Communications. See team and org chart Application timeline: Advertise in April, interviews in May, and offer by end of May/early June\nThe organisations that make up the Crossref community are involved in documenting the process of scholarship and the progress of knowledge. We provide infrastructure to curate, share, and preserve metadata, which is information that underpins and describes all research activities (such as funding, authorship, dissemination, attention, etc., and relationships between these activities). This enables a rich network of relationships and data underpinning scholarship that improves the discoverability of individual works and supports efforts to increase the openness and integrity of research.\nAs the scholarly communications landscape is dynamically changing, the Technical Community Manager’s key responsibility is to engage with tools and organisations that integrate Crossref metadata solutions into their operations – whether these are service providers enabling others to register and maintain their metadata, or organisations making use of our API and metadata – within their own processes, or developing tools and resources that embed them.\nThis is a new role, taking advantage of the progress we’ve seen towards the research nexus vision, supporting the multiple integrations that rely on Crossref, and maximising the awareness of current and future metadata and API developments.\nKey responsibilities Proactively build and maintain relationships with existing and new community integrators. Research and define their needs, involve them with changes to our services, and bring insights to colleagues to help prioritise service improvements and new developments. Design and implement activities to engage all metadata users and grow the usage of our API, ensuring the community is aware of the possibilities of the ‘research nexus’ and can integrate with us in robust and sustainable ways. Create opportunities for testing, co-development, and mutual learning (e.g. through sprints or working groups), working closely with R\u0026amp;D and Product teams. Provide consultation to all metadata users and facilitate advanced support such as for query efficiency at enterprise levels Improve and manage documentation and create demonstrations and materials to engage existing and potential metadata users. Redesign and grow the Plus program to align with improvements in our (cloud-based) infrastructure, automating the onboarding experience and managing terms of use and service level agreements. Develop our Service Provider program to include all the third-party tools and plugins that our community uses to participate in the Crossref infrastructure. Work with Service Providers such as grant/manuscript/repository platforms and systems to help them understand Crossref’s services, policies, and plans. Explore accreditation options and ensure that information about Service Providers’ offerings is transparent so that the community can assess the different options available to them. Represent Crossref and use the role to bring people together, attending and speaking at relevant community meetings and participating in working groups, hosting workshops and sprints, online and in-person Build and manage relationships with community partners and collaborators worldwide to help progress Crossref’s mission, especially with other adopters of the Principles of Open Scholarly Infrastructure (POSI) Create content and materials such as writing articles and blogs, managing website content and documentation, creating slides, videos, demos, and diagrams Contribute to other outreach and communications activities The role is based within the Community Engagement and Communications team. We work collaboratively across a variety of projects and programmes. We adopt an approachable, community-appropriate tone and style in our communications. We’re looking to re-engage with our community through face-to-face opportunities as well as online, so the post-holder will have their share of travel (accordingly with our latest thinking on travel and sustainability).\nOur primary aim is to engage colleagues from the member organisations and other stakeholders to be actively involved in capturing documentation of the scholarly progress and making it transparent. This contributes to co-creating a robust research nexus. As part of the wider Outreach department at Crossref, we seek to encourage wider adoption and development of best practices in scholarly publishing and communication with regard to metadata and the permanence of the scholarly record. Colleagues across the organisation are helpful, easy-going and supportive, so if you’re open-minded and ready to work as part of the team and across different teams, you will fit right in. Watch the recording of our recent Annual Meeting to learn more about the current conversations in our community.\nAbout you As scientific community engagement is an emerging profession, practical experience in this area is more important to us than traditional qualifications. Also, as this is a new and varied role, the list of requirements is long, but we don’t expect that candidates will meet all of those. It’s best if you can demonstrate that you have most of these characteristics:\nCollaborative attitude Ability to translate complex ideas into accessible narratives in English Ability to engage technical audiences on topics related to research metadata including discussing best practices Experience working with Git, RESTful APIs, JSON metadata, and API interfaces such as Postman Some basic programming skills, ability to write short snippets of code for interacting with APIs and for data manipulation. Familiarity with interactive development environments like JupyterLab and Google Colab. Ability to demonstrate APIs, monitor and interpret usage statistics, and advise on querying in a compelling manner Demonstrable skills in group facilitation and building strong relationships with communities or customers Track record of programme development and improvement, working to budget and timelines Confidence in public speaking in-person and online, including delivery of webinars/workshops Understanding and commitment to the highest standards of equity, diversity and inclusiveness It would be a plus if you also have any of the following:\nUnderstanding of research communications operations such as publishing/repository workflows Data visualisation skills Technical sales or contract management experience Experience working in global or multicultural settings Ability to communicate in languages other than English About Crossref Crossref is a non-profit membership organisation that exists to make scholarly communications better. We make research objects easy to find, cite, link, assess, and reuse. We’re passionate about providing open foundational infrastructure for the scholarly communications ecosystem - and we’re continuously evolving our tools and services in response to emerging needs.\nCrossref is, at its core, a community organisation with 18,000 members across 150 countries. We work with the community to prototype and co-create solutions for broad benefit, and we’re committed to lowering barriers to global participation in the research enterprise. We’re funded by members and subscribers, and we forge deep collaborations with many like-minded partners, especially those who are equally as committed to the POSI Principles.\nWhat it’s like working at Crossref We’re about 45 staff and now ‘remote-first’ although we have optional offices in Oxford, UK, and Boston, USA. We are dedicated to an open and fair research ecosystem and that’s reflected in our ethos and staff culture. We like to work hard but we have fun too! We take a creative, iterative approach to our projects, and believe that all team members can enrich the culture and performance of our whole organisation. Check out the organisation chart.\nWe actively support ongoing professional development opportunities and promote self-learning at every opportunity. Crossref has a healthy financial situation and we only continue to grow. While we won’t have a clear hierarchical path for staff to follow, there are always evolving opportunities to progress and be challenged.\nThinking of applying? We encourage applications from excellent candidates wherever you might be in the world, especially from people with backgrounds historically under-represented in research and scholarly communications. Our team is fully remote and distributed across time zones and continents. This role will require regular work in European time zones. Our main working language is English, but there are many opportunities in this job to use other tongues if you’re able. If anything here is unclear, please contact Kora Korzec, the hiring manager, at kora@crossref.org.\nPlease apply via this form, which allows us to sort your application materials into neat folders for a faster review. We have provided space in the form for you to describe an example of how you use an API. In your cover letter, please feel free to include some examples of relevant projects that you\u0026rsquo;re proud of, perhaps content you\u0026rsquo;ve created or talks you\u0026rsquo;ve given. We would particularly welcome mentions of collaborative work where you led a group or a community through implementing or improving technical solutions. This is a great way for you to show evidence of your suitability for this role.\nNote that if you don’t meet the majority of the criteria we listed here, but are confident you’d be natural in delivering the key responsibilities of the role, we encourage your interest and would still like to hear what strengths you would bring.\nWe aim to start reviewing applications on May 22nd. Please strive to send us your documents by then.\nThe role will report to Kora Korzec, Head of Community Engagement and Communications at Crossref, and she will review all applications along with Michelle Cancel, our HR Manager, and Ginny Hendricks, Director of Member \u0026amp; Community Outreach.\nWe intend to invite selected candidates to a brief initial call to discuss the role as soon as possible following an initial review. Following those, shortlisted candidates will be invited to an interview taking place in late April. The interview will include some exercises you’ll have a chance to prepare for. All interviews will be held remotely on Zoom.\nEqual opportunities commitment Crossref is committed to a policy of non-discrimination and equal opportunity for all employees and qualified applicants for employment without regard to race, colour, religion, sex, pregnancy or a condition related to pregnancy, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, national origin, ancestry, age, physical or mental disability, genetic information, veteran status, uniform service member status, or any other protected class under applicable law. Crossref will make reasonable accommodations for qualified individuals with known disabilities in accordance with applicable law.\nThanks for your interest in joining Crossref. We are excited to hear from you! ",
"headings": ["Key responsibilities","About you","About Crossref","What it’s like working at Crossref","Thinking of applying?","Equal opportunities commitment","Thanks for your interest in joining Crossref. We are excited to hear from you!"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/xml-samples/",
"title": "Example XML metadata",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 2,
"lastmod": "2021-08-27",
"lastmod_ts": 1630022400,
"section": "Example XML metadata",
"tags": [],
"description": "Please visit the Best Practice Examples directory in our Schema GitLab repository for up to date XML examples.\nHere are some example XML files to help you get started with Content Registration.\nBooks Type Version Input Output Book / monograph 5.3.0 XML JSON (book) JSON (chapter) Book / monograph 4.8.0 XML Book series 5.3.0 XML JSON (series) JSON (book) JSON (chapter) Book set 5.3.0 XML JSON (set) JSON (book) JSON (chapter) Conference Proceedings Type Version Input Output Single proceeding with papers 5.3.0 XML JSON (proceeding) JSON (paper) Single proceeding with papers 4.8.0 XML JSON (proceeding) JSON (paper) Conference proceeding series 5.3.0 XML JSON (series) JSON (proceeding) JSON (paper) Conference proceeding series 4.8.0 XML JSON (series) JSON (proceeding) JSON (paper) Components Type Version Input Output Component 5.3.0 XML JSON Component 4.8.0 XML JSON Datasets Type Version Input Output Dataset 5.3.0 XML JSON (database) JSON (dataset) Dissertations Type Version Input Output Dissertation 5.3.0 XML JSON Dissertation 4.8.0 XML JSON Grants Type Version Input Output Grant 0.1.1 XML Journals Type Version Input Output Journal with articles 5.3.0 XML JSON (journal title) JSON (article) Journal with articles 4.8.0 XML JSON (journal title) JSON (article) Article with translation 4.8.0 XML JSON Journal title, volume, issue 5.3.0 XML JSON (journal title) JSON (volume) JSON (issue) Journal title 4.8.0 XML JSON Peer reviews Type Version Input Output Peer review 5.3.0 XML JSON Posted content (includes preprints) Type Version Input Output Posted content 5.3.0 XML JSON Posted content 4.8.0 XML JSON Reports and working papers Type Version Input Output Report 5.3.0 XML JSON Standards Type Version Input Output Standard 5.3.0 XML JSON Resource Examples Some metadata segments can be added to an existing record using resource XML.\n",
"content": "Please visit the Best Practice Examples directory in our Schema GitLab repository for up to date XML examples.\nHere are some example XML files to help you get started with Content Registration.\nBooks Type Version Input Output Book / monograph 5.3.0 XML JSON (book) JSON (chapter) Book / monograph 4.8.0 XML Book series 5.3.0 XML JSON (series) JSON (book) JSON (chapter) Book set 5.3.0 XML JSON (set) JSON (book) JSON (chapter) Conference Proceedings Type Version Input Output Single proceeding with papers 5.3.0 XML JSON (proceeding) JSON (paper) Single proceeding with papers 4.8.0 XML JSON (proceeding) JSON (paper) Conference proceeding series 5.3.0 XML JSON (series) JSON (proceeding) JSON (paper) Conference proceeding series 4.8.0 XML JSON (series) JSON (proceeding) JSON (paper) Components Type Version Input Output Component 5.3.0 XML JSON Component 4.8.0 XML JSON Datasets Type Version Input Output Dataset 5.3.0 XML JSON (database) JSON (dataset) Dissertations Type Version Input Output Dissertation 5.3.0 XML JSON Dissertation 4.8.0 XML JSON Grants Type Version Input Output Grant 0.1.1 XML Journals Type Version Input Output Journal with articles 5.3.0 XML JSON (journal title) JSON (article) Journal with articles 4.8.0 XML JSON (journal title) JSON (article) Article with translation 4.8.0 XML JSON Journal title, volume, issue 5.3.0 XML JSON (journal title) JSON (volume) JSON (issue) Journal title 4.8.0 XML JSON Peer reviews Type Version Input Output Peer review 5.3.0 XML JSON Posted content (includes preprints) Type Version Input Output Posted content 5.3.0 XML JSON Posted content 4.8.0 XML JSON Reports and working papers Type Version Input Output Report 5.3.0 XML JSON Standards Type Version Input Output Standard 5.3.0 XML JSON Resource Examples Some metadata segments can be added to an existing record using resource XML.\nType Version Input Clinical trial 4.4.2 XML Crossmark 4.4.2 XML Funding 4.4.2 XML License and full text URL 4.4.2 XML Multiple resolution secondary URLs w/unlock flag 4.4.2 XML Multiple resolution secondary URLs only 4.4.2 XML Multiple resolution unlock only 4.4.2 XML References 4.4.2 XML Relationships 4.4.2 XML Similarity Check URLs 4.4.2 XML Please consult other users on our forum community.crossref.org or open a ticket with our technical support specialists if you have any questions.\n",
"headings": ["Books","Conference Proceedings","Components","Datasets","Dissertations","Grants","Journals","Peer reviews","Posted content (includes preprints)","Reports and working papers","Standards","Resource Examples"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/board-and-governance/bylaws-2019/",
"title": "Archive bylaws from 2019",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2020-04-20",
"lastmod_ts": 1587340800,
"section": "Board & governance",
"tags": [],
"description": "This page shows the Crossref bylaws that were used up to and including March 2025. They have been been superceded by new bylaws approved by the Board in March 2025.\nArticle I\nMembership\nSection 1. Qualification. Membership in Publishers International Linking Association, Inc. (the “Corporation”) shall be open to any organisation that publishes professional and scholarly materials and content and otherwise meets the terms and conditions of membership established from time to time by the Board of Directors of the Corporation (the “Board”), and to such other entities as the Board shall determine from time to time. ",
"content": "This page shows the Crossref bylaws that were used up to and including March 2025. They have been been superceded by new bylaws approved by the Board in March 2025.\nArticle I\nMembership\nSection 1. Qualification. Membership in Publishers International Linking Association, Inc. (the “Corporation”) shall be open to any organisation that publishes professional and scholarly materials and content and otherwise meets the terms and conditions of membership established from time to time by the Board of Directors of the Corporation (the “Board”), and to such other entities as the Board shall determine from time to time. Section 2. Acceptance of members. Applications for membership shall be approved by the Board, which may delegate the authority to approve applications to the Executive Director. An applicant shall become a member of the Corporation (a “member”) upon the Corporation’s approval of its membership application and receipt of its first annual membership fee. The record date of membership for the member shall be the date of the Corporation’s receipt of its first annual membership fee following the Corporation’s approval of its membership application. Section 3. Obligations of members. A member shall pay the dues and fees specified in the membership application, and shall have the rights and obligations specified by the Board from time to time including, but not limited to, executing and complying with an agreement among the Corporation and its various members in the form adopted by the Board from time to time. Each member shall provide the Corporation with written notification designating the person who shall be deemed to be its representative to the Corporation for all purposes, including voting, which designation can be changed from time to time by written notification as set forth in the membership agreement.\nSection 4. Resignation. Any member may withdraw from the Corporation after fulfilling all obligations to it by giving written notice of such intention to the Secretary, which notice shall be presented to the Board or Executive Committee by the Secretary at the first meeting after its receipt. Dues and service fees paid shall not be refundable. Section 5. Suspension and expulsion. A member may be suspended for a period or expelled for cause, such as violation of these By-Laws or any rules of the Corporation, or for conduct prejudicial to the best interests of the Corporation. Suspension or expulsion shall be by a vote of the Board (or by action of the Executive Committee, to take effect at the time specified in such Executive Committee action and to be reviewed and ratified by a vote of the Board at the next subsequent Board meeting), except where the suspension or expulsion is the result of the non-payment of dues and fees or required by applicable international sanctions compliance, in which event the Board may delegate such authority to the Executive Director. The member will be notified of its suspension or expulsion by the method specified in the then current version of the membership agreement. The Executive Committee of the Board shall be empowered to temporarily or permanently ratify, modify or rescind the previous action, and may, within its complete discretion, permit the member to seek reinstatement by presenting a defense to its suspension or expulsion.\nArticle II Fiscal Year\nThe fiscal year of the Corporation shall begin on the first day of January and end on the last day of December in each year.\nArticle III\nDues and Service Fees\nSection 1. Annual dues and service fees. The Board may determine from time to time the amount of all dues and service fees payable to the Corporation by members. Section 2. Payment of dues and service fees. Dues and service fees shall be payable on such terms and at such times specified by the Board from time to time. Dues and service fees of a new member shall be prorated from the first day of the month in which such new member is accepted for membership, for the remainder of the fiscal year of the Corporation. Section 3. Default and termination of membership. When any member shall be in default in the payment of dues and service fees for a period of three (3) consecutive months, its membership may thereupon be terminated in the manner provided in Article I, Section 5, of these By-Laws.\nArticle IV Meetings of Members\nSection 1. Annual meetings. There shall be an annual meeting of members of the Corporation during the second week of November in each year, or at such other time as the Board may determine from time to time, for election of Directors and for receiving the annual reports of officers, Directors, and committees, and the transaction of other business. If the day designated falls upon a legal or religious holiday, the meeting shall be held on the next succeeding secular day not a holiday.\nSection 2. Special meetings. Special meetings of the members may be called by the Board in its discretion. Upon the written request of members entitled to cast forty percent (40%) of the total number of votes entitled to be cast at any such meeting, the Board shall call a special meeting to consider a specific subject. No business other than that specified in the notice of meeting shall be transacted at any special meeting of the members.\nSection 3. Notice and waiver of notice. Notice of any meeting of the members, stating the place, date, and time of the meeting and, in the case of a special meeting, the purpose or purposes for which it is called, shall be given by the Secretary by delivering a copy thereof personally, by first class mail, by facsimile telecommunication (fax) or by electronic mail, not less than ten (10) days nor more than fifty (50) days before the meeting to each member at the address in the records of the Corporation. Notwithstanding the provisions of any of the foregoing sections, a meeting of the members may be held at any time and at any place designated by the Board, and any action may be taken thereat, if notice is waived in writing by every member having the right to vote at the meeting. Any member may waive notice of any meeting by submitting a waiver in person or by proxy either before or after the meeting. Waiver of notice may be written or electronic. If written, the waiver must be signed by the member’s authorized representative (including by facsimile signature). If electronic, the waiver must be sent by electronic mail, and must set forth or be submitted with information from which it can reasonably be determined that the transmission was authorized by the member. The attendance of any member at a meeting, in person or by proxy, without protesting the lack of notice of such meeting prior to the conclusion of the meeting shall constitute a waiver of notice by such member.\nSection 4. Record date. For the purpose of determining the members entitled to vote at any meeting of members or any adjournment thereof, or to express consent to or dissent from any proposal without a meeting, or for the purpose of any other action by the members, the Board may fix, in advance, a date as the record date for any such determination by members. Such record date shall not be more than fifty (50) nor less than ten (10) days before the date of such meeting.\nSection 5. Quorum. The presence in person or by proxy of the lesser of one-tenth of the members entitled to vote, or one hundred (100) members entitled to vote, or such other number as may be set by the laws of the State of New York as the minimum number necessary to constitute a quorum for meetings of members, shall be necessary to constitute a quorum for the transaction of business.\nSection 6. Inspectors of election. One (1) Inspector of Election shall be chosen by vote of the members at the annual meeting. He or she shall act as Inspector of Election at the meeting and at all special meetings until the next annual meeting.\nSection 7. Voting. Any member may be represented at any meeting by any member of its staff delegated by it for that purpose, but each member in good standing shall be entitled to only one vote. If the manner of deciding any question has not otherwise been prescribed, it shall be decided by majority vote of the members present in person or by proxy.\nSection 8. Proxies. Every member entitled to vote at any meeting of the members may vote by proxy. A member may authorize another person to act for the member as proxy by (i) executing a writing providing such authorization, signed (including facsimile signature) by the member’s authorized representative, or (ii) providing such authorization by electronic mail to the person who will be the holder of the proxy or to a proxy solicitation firm, proxy support service organisation or like agent, provided that such authorization must set forth information from which it can be reasonably determined that the authorization was given by the member. A proxy shall be revocable at the pleasure of the member executing it, to the extent permitted by law. Unless the duration of the proxy is specified, it shall be invalid after eleven (11) months from the date of its execution.\nSection 9. Order of business. The order of business at all the meetings of the members, Board, and Executive Committee shall be as determined by the Board or the Executive Committee, as the case may be, from time to time.\nAny question as to priority of business shall be decided by the Chairman without debate.\nThis order of business may be altered or suspended at any meeting by a majority vote of the members, Directors, or Executive Committee members present, as appropriate.\nSection 10. Membership action without meeting. Whenever members are required or permitted to take any action by vote, such action may be taken without a meeting upon the consent of all the members entitled to vote thereon, setting forth the action so taken. Such consent may be written or electronic. If written, the consent must be executed by the member’s authorized representative by signing or causing his or her signature to be affixed to the consent by any reasonable means, including but not limited to facsimile signature. If electronic, the transmission of the consent must be sent by electronic mail and set forth, or be submitted with, information for which it can be reasonably determined that the transmission was authorized by the member.\nArticle V Directors\nSection 1. Number. The property, affairs, activities, and concerns of the Corporation shall be vested in the Board, which shall consist of not fewer than three (3) nor more than sixteen (16) Directors or such other number determined by the Board and as permitted or required by the Not-for-Profit Corporation Law and the Certificate of Incorporation. Directors shall, upon election, enter into the performance of their duties immediately upon the expiration or termination of the term then extant and shall continue in office until their successors shall be duly elected and qualified.\nSection 2. Election and term of Directors. Election of Directors and terms of service shall be as specified in the Certificate of Incorporation, as amended from time to time. Each candidate for Director shall be an employee or officer of a member and no member may designate more than one candidate for election to the Board in any election. Any member whose candidate is elected to the Board may designate an alternate for such Director. Each alternate so designated may attend meetings of the Board and shall be deemed to be a member of the Board for all purposes but only for the duration of such designation. No such designation shall operate to increase the representation on the Board of the member designating the alternate and in the event that both the alternate and the Director are present at any Board meeting only the Director shall have the right to vote at the meeting.\nSection 3. Duties of Directors. The Board may without limitation: (1) hold meetings at such times and places as it thinks proper; (2) admit members and suspend or expel them by ballot; (3) appoint committees on particular subjects from the Directors, or from the members; (4) audit bills and disburse the funds of the Corporation; (5) print and circulate documents and publish articles; (6) carry on correspondence and communicate with other associations interested in scholarly or scientific publishing; (7) employ agents; and (8) devise and carry into execution such other measures as it deems proper and expedient to promote the objects of the Corporation and to best protect the interests and welfare of the members.\nSection 4. Meetings of Board. Regular meetings of the Board shall be held during the next calendar quarter immediately following the annual meeting of the members and on such other days as the Board may determine commensurate with good corporate practice. The Chairman may, when he or she deems necessary, or the Secretary shall, at the request in writing of five (5) Directors, issue a call for a special meeting of the Board. The Chairman shall preside at all meetings of the Board.\nSection 5. Notice and waiver of notice. Notice of each regular meeting, signed by the Secretary or another officer, shall be delivered personally, by first class mail, by facsimile telecommunication (fax) or by electronic mail to the last recorded address of each Director at least five (5) days before the time appointed for the meeting. Notice of each special meeting, signed by the Secretary or another officer, shall be delivered personally, by first class mail, by facsimile telecommunication (fax) or by electronic mail to the last recorded address of each Director at least three (3) days before the time appointed for the meeting. Notice of a meeting need not be given to any Director who submits a signed waiver of notice whether before or after the meeting, or who attends such meeting without protesting, prior thereto or at its commencement, the lack of notice. Waiver of notice may be written or may be given via electronic mail. If written, the waiver must be executed by the Director signing such waiver or causing his or her signature to be affixed to such waiver by any reasonable means, including facsimile signature. If sent by electronic mail, the waiver must include information from which it can be reasonably determined that the transmission was authorized by the Director.\nSection 6. Quorum. A majority of the entire Board shall constitute a quorum for the transaction of business. Any one or more Directors or any committee thereof may participate in a meeting of such Board or committee by means of a conference telephone, videoconference, or similar communications equipment, as long as all persons participating in the meeting can hear each other at the same time and each Director can participate in all matters before the Board. Participation by such means shall constitute presence in person at the meeting. If a quorum is not present, a lesser number by majority may adjourn the meeting to a later date, not more than ten (10) days later. The Secretary shall give written notice of the adjourned date to all Directors in the manner described for regular meetings in Article V, Section 5 above.\nSection 7. Absence. The Board shall have the right, power and authority to set minimum requirements for Board attendance and participation including without limitation rules and criteria for alternate Board members. Should any Director or his or her alternate violate such requirements without sending a communication to the Chairman or Secretary stating his or her reason for so doing, or if his or her excuse should not be accepted by the Board, or if any Director or his or her alternate fails to be present at two (2) consecutive Board meetings, such Director or alternate will be deemed to have resigned. The seat shall be filled as set forth in Section 9.\nSection 8. Resignation of Directors. In addition to the procedures for the resignation of Directors set forth in Article Sixth of the Certificate of Incorporation, if the Board determines that two (2) or more Directors are affiliated with the same member, within ten (10) days following notice thereof by the Board, such member may designate in writing to the Board one Director affiliated with it to remain on the Board, and all other Directors affiliated with such member shall cease to be Directors, provided, that if such member does not make such designation within such time, it shall be made, with the same effect, by a majority of the Board without participation in such decision by the Directors so affiliated.\nSection 9. Vacancies. Except as set forth in the Certificate of Incorporation, any vacancy in the Board shall be filled without undue delay by a majority vote by ballot of the remaining members of the Board at the next regular meeting or at a special meeting which shall be called for that purpose. The election shall be held within sixty (60) days after the occurrence of the vacancy. The person so chosen shall hold office until the end of the term which the director was elected or appointed to fill, or for a term to be determined by the Board which ends at an annual meeting (but in no event longer than three (3) years), or until his or her successor shall have been chosen at a special meeting of the members.\nSection 10. Removal of Directors. Any one or more of the Directors may be removed either with or without cause, at any time, by a vote of two-thirds (2/3) of the members present at a regular meeting or at any special meeting called for that purpose.\nSection 11. Directors’ action without meeting. Any action required or permitted to be taken by the Board or by any committee thereof may be taken without a meeting if all the members of the Board or of such committee consent in writing to the adoption of a resolution authorizing the action, which consent may be sent by electronic mail, including information from which it can reasonably be determined that the transmission was authorized by the applicable Director. In the event of any such action without a meeting, the resolution and the written consent thereto shall be filed with the minutes of the proceedings of the Board or of the relevant committee, as the case may be.\nArticle VI Officers\nSection 1. Number. This Corporation shall, at a minimum, have the following officers: a Chairman, a Secretary, and a Treasurer. The Board shall have the right, power and authority to specify additional offices and elect and/or appoint officers to fill such offices, from time to time.\nSection 2. Method of election. The Board shall elect all officers for a term of one (1) year, the Chairman and Treasurer being elected from the Board. A majority vote of a quorum present shall be necessary to constitute an election. Officers shall serve until their respective successors are elected and have qualified.\nSection 3. Duties of officers. The duties and powers of the following officers of the Corporation shall be as set forth below:\nChairman\nThe Chairman shall preside over operations of the Corporation and shall be a member ex officio, without right to vote (unless such right may be conferred on the Chairman by other or dual status) of the Board. He or she shall also, at the annual meeting of the Corporation and such other times as he or she deems proper, communicate to the Corporation or to the Board such matters and make such suggestions as may in his or her opinion tend to promote the prosperity and welfare and increase the usefulness of the Corporation and shall perform such other duties as are necessarily incident to the office of the Chairman.\nSecretary\nIt shall be the duty of the Secretary to give notice of and attend all meetings of the members and the Board and keep a record of their doings; to conduct all correspondence and to carry into execution all orders, votes, and resolutions not otherwise committed; to keep a list of the members of the Corporation; to collect the fees, annual dues and service fees, and subscriptions and pay them over to the Treasurer; to notify the officers and members of the Corporation of their election; to notify members of their appointment on committees; to furnish the Chairman of each committee with a copy of the vote under which the committee is appointed, and at his request give notice of the meetings of the committee; to prepare, under the direction of the Board, an annual report of the transactions and condition of the Corporation, and generally to devote his or her best efforts to forwarding the business and advancing the interests of the Corporation. In case of absence or disability of the Secretary, the Board may appoint a Secretary pro tem. The Secretary shall be the keeper of the Corporation’s seal. The offices of Secretary and Chairman may not be held by the same person.\nTreasurer\nThe Treasurer shall keep an account of all moneys received and expended for the use of the Corporation, and shall make disbursements only upon vouchers approved in writing by any member of the Executive Committee. He or she shall deposit all sums received in a bank, or banks, or trust company approved by the Board, and make a report at the annual meeting or when called upon by the Chairman. Funds may be drawn only upon the signature of the Chairman, the Treasurer or the Executive Director, if any.\nThe funds, books, and vouchers in his or her hands shall at all times be under the supervision of the Board and subject to its inspection and control. At the expiration of his or her term of office, the Treasurer shall deliver over to his or her successor all books, moneys, and other property, or, in the absence of a treasurer-elect, to the Chairman. In case of the absence or disability of the Treasurer, the Board may appoint a Treasurer pro tem.\nIn case of the death or absence of the Chairman, or of his or her inability from any cause to act, the Treasurer shall perform the duties of the Chairman.\nExecutive Director\nThe Executive Director shall have day-to-day responsibility for the operations of the Corporation and shall report to the Corporation’s senior officers and the Board.\nSection 4. Vacancies. All vacancies in any office shall be filled by the Board without undue delay, at its regular meeting, or at a meeting specially called for that purpose.\nSection 5. Compensation of officers. The officers shall receive no salary or compensation unless the Board otherwise determines, so long as such compensation does not violate the Not-for-Profit Corporation Law.\nSection 6. Reimbursement. The Corporation may reimburse its officers and Directors for their reasonable and documented expenditures which conform to the reimbursement criteria established by the Board from time to time, provided that such expenditures are incurred in furtherance of the Corporation’s purposes.\nArticle VII Committees\nSection 1. Executive Committee. There shall be appointed annually by the Board an Executive Committee to be comprised of the Chairman, the Treasurer and three (3) other Directors at least one of whom shall be the employee or representative of a not-for-profit publishing entity which is a member. The Executive Committee may act on behalf of the Corporation in any matter when the Board is not in session, reporting to the Board on the Executive Committee’s actions at each regular meeting or any special meeting called for that purpose. Three (3) members of the Executive Committee shall constitute a quorum for the transaction of business. Meetings may be called by the Chairman or by two (2) members of the Executive Committee.\nSection 2. Nominating Committee. The Board shall appoint a Nominating Committee of five (5) members, each of whom shall be either a Director or the designated representative of a member that is not represented on the Board, whose duty it shall be to nominate candidates for Directors to be elected at the next annual election. The Nominating Committee shall designate a slate of candidates for each election that is at least equal in number to the number of Directors to be elected at such election. Each such slate will be comprised such that, as nearly as practicable, one-half of the resulting Board shall be comprised of Directors designated by Members then representing Revenue Tier 1; and one-half of the resulting Board shall be comprised of Directors designated by Members then representing Revenue Tier 2. “Revenue Tier 1” means all consecutive membership dues categories, starting with the lowest dues category, that, when taken together, aggregate, as nearly as possible, to fifty percent (50%) of Crossref’s annual revenue. “Revenue Tier 2” means all membership dues categories above Revenue Tier 1. The Nominating Committee shall notify the Secretary in writing, at least twenty (20) days before the date of the annual meeting, of the names of such candidates, and the Secretary, except as herein otherwise provided, shall transmit a copy thereof to the last recorded address of each member of record simultaneously with the notice of the meeting.\nSection 3. [Reserved.]\nSection 4. Audit Committee. The Board shall appoint an Audit Committee comprised of three independent Directors (as defined in the Not-for-Profit Corporation Law) who are not officers of the Corporation or members of the Executive Committee. The Audit Committee shall oversee the accounting and financial reporting processes of the Corporation and the audit of its financial statements, annually retain or renew the retention of an independent auditor, review with the independent auditor the results of the audit, including the management letter, and oversee the adoption and implementation of, and compliance with, any conflict of interest or whistleblower policies. The Audit Committee shall report to the Board at regular meetings, or at special meetings called for that purpose, as requested by the Board but not less often than once per year. The Audit Committee has the authority to engage independent legal, accounting and other advisors as it determines necessary to carry out its duties, and to approve each such advisor’s fees and other retention terms.\nSection 5. Other committees. The Board may, at any time, appoint other committees on any other subject. The Board will appoint the Chair and the members of each such committee, to serve on the committee for the term specified by the Board. Unless specifically provided otherwise in the resolution forming such a committee, such committee shall remain in existence for one year from the date of its formation unless reauthorized by the Board for additional one- year terms. Unless specifically provided otherwise in the Certificate of Incorporation or these By- Laws, members of such committees are not required to be Directors, provided that any committee that is not composed solely of Directors shall not have authority to bind the Board.\nSection 6. Committee quorum. Unless specifically provided otherwise in these By- Laws, a majority of the members of any committee shall constitute a quorum for the transaction of business, unless any committee shall by a majority vote of its entire membership decide otherwise.\nSection 7. Committee vacancies. The various committees shall have the power to fill vacancies in their membership.\nArticle VIII Liability and Indemnification\nSection 1. Liability. The personal liability of the Directors and officers of the Corporation is hereby eliminated to the fullest extent permitted by Sections 719, 720 and 720-a of the Not-for-Profit Corporation Law, as the same may be amended and supplemented, from time to time.\nSection 2. Indemnification. The Corporation shall, to the fullest extent permitted by Sections 721 et seq. of the Not-for-Profit Corporation Law, as the same may be amended and supplemented from time to time, indemnify any and all persons whom it shall have power to indemnify under said sections from and against any and all of the expenses, liabilities or other matters referred to in, or covered by, said sections, and the indemnification provided for herein shall not be deemed exclusive of any other rights to which those indemnified may be entitled under any By-Law, agreement, vote of members or disinterested Directors or otherwise, both as to action in his or her official capacity and as to action in another capacity while holding such office, and shall continue as to a person who has ceased to be a Director, officer, employee or agent of the Corporation and shall inure to the benefit of the heirs, executors and administrators of any such person.\nSection 3. Insurance. The Corporation shall procure and maintain errors and omissions insurance coverage against Director and officer liability in such amounts, upon such terms and from such insurer(s) as the Board may from time to time deem advisable.\nArticle IX\nAudit of Books and Records\nThe Board shall cause the Corporation’s books and records to be audited at least once each year by a certified public accountant and shall report thereon to the Corporation’s membership in the form of a written annual report meeting the requirements of Section 519 of the Not-for-Profit Corporation Law to be distributed to the members as soon after completion of the audit as is practicable.\nArticle X\nAmendments\nThese By-Laws may be amended, repealed, or altered in whole or in part by a majority vote of the entire Board. The proposed change or changes shall be transmitted to the last recorded address of each member of the Board at least ten (10) days before the time of the meeting which is to consider such change or changes.\nEffective July 1, 2014; adopted March 5, 2014; revised July 13, 2016; revised July 12, 2018; revised November 15, 2018; revised March 7, 2019, revised July 11, 2019\n",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/brand/badges/",
"title": "Account badges",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 5,
"lastmod": "2018-11-23",
"lastmod_ts": 1542931200,
"section": "Brand & logos",
"tags": [],
"description": "Do you know which type of account you have with us?. If you\u0026rsquo;d like to share that on your website or in your communications, we\u0026rsquo;ve made some standard badges to do so. Note that we recommend using .svg versions online at 200px wide for the sharpest display.\nWhen placing your badge on your website we ask that you reference (not download) them, using the snippets given below. Please copy the code exactly so that if we update our badges, you’ll automatically get the correct file.\n",
"content": "Do you know which type of account you have with us?. If you\u0026rsquo;d like to share that on your website or in your communications, we\u0026rsquo;ve made some standard badges to do so. Note that we recommend using .svg versions online at 200px wide for the sharpest display.\nWhen placing your badge on your website we ask that you reference (not download) them, using the snippets given below. Please copy the code exactly so that if we update our badges, you’ll automatically get the correct file.\nReferencing your badge Account badge Use this code \u0026lt;img src=\u0026quot;https://assets.crossref.org/logo/member-badges/member-badge-member.svg\u0026quot; width=\u0026quot;200\u0026quot; height=\u0026quot;200\u0026quot; alt=\u0026quot;Crossref Member Badge\u0026quot;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;img src=\u0026quot;https://assets.crossref.org/logo/member-badges/member-badge-metadata-user.svg\u0026quot; width=\u0026quot;200\u0026quot; height=\u0026quot;200\u0026quot; alt=\u0026quot;Crossref Metadata User Badge\u0026quot;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;img src=\u0026quot;https://assets.crossref.org/logo/member-badges/member-badge-service-provider.svg\u0026quot; width=\u0026quot;200\u0026quot; height=\u0026quot;200\u0026quot; alt=\u0026quot;Crossref Service Provider Badge\u0026quot;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;img src=\u0026quot;https://assets.crossref.org/logo/member-badges/member-badge-sponsoring-organization.svg\u0026quot; width=\u0026quot;200\u0026quot; height=\u0026quot;200\u0026quot; alt=\u0026quot;Crossref Sponsor Badge\u0026quot;\u0026gt; ",
"headings": ["Referencing your badge"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/community/orcid/",
"title": "ORCID auto-update",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 3,
"lastmod": "2017-01-13",
"lastmod_ts": 1484265600,
"section": "Get involved",
"tags": [],
"description": "An ORCID iD is a persistent identifier for individual researchers and scholarly contributors. It allows everyone (authors, publishers, funders, and research institutions) to uniquely identify the work that they do, and accurately attribute it.\nEnter once, when you submit a paper, then watch as your ORCID record is automatically updated as your work is published, registered with Crossref, and enters the global citation network!\nWho is it for? Authors: save yourself time and reduce the burden of manual data entry, and easily keep your ORCID record up-to-date Publishers: help automate processes for your authors and enhance the discoverability of their work and your content Funders, research administrators, librarians and anyone else interested in tracking research outputs. How does it work? Crossref’s Auto Update is a classic example of open scholarly infrastructure at work. Registering and sharing metadata and persistent identifiers—such as ORCID iDs and Digital Object Identifiers— means systems can communicate with each other to save everyone a lot of time and effort.\n",
"content": "An ORCID iD is a persistent identifier for individual researchers and scholarly contributors. It allows everyone (authors, publishers, funders, and research institutions) to uniquely identify the work that they do, and accurately attribute it.\nEnter once, when you submit a paper, then watch as your ORCID record is automatically updated as your work is published, registered with Crossref, and enters the global citation network!\nWho is it for? Authors: save yourself time and reduce the burden of manual data entry, and easily keep your ORCID record up-to-date Publishers: help automate processes for your authors and enhance the discoverability of their work and your content Funders, research administrators, librarians and anyone else interested in tracking research outputs. How does it work? Crossref’s Auto Update is a classic example of open scholarly infrastructure at work. Registering and sharing metadata and persistent identifiers—such as ORCID iDs and Digital Object Identifiers— means systems can communicate with each other to save everyone a lot of time and effort.\nWhen Crossref members register their content with us, we encourage the inclusion of the ORCID iDs belonging to the individual(s) who contributed to that publication—whether they are authors, peer reviewers, or editors. When ORCID iDs are included in the metadata provided to Crossref along with other information about the work such as title, date, and DOI, we can automatically update the associated ORCID record(s) upon publication (with permission from the record holder(s)).\nHow do I get started? Authors: register for an ORCID iD, and be sure to supply it when you submit your article. Once your article is published, you will receive a notification from ORCID asking you to grant Crossref permission to update your record. Once granted, Crossref will automatically update your record with any future publications that contain your ORCID ID. If you change your mind, you can revoke Crossref’s permission at any time—you can do this directly from our ORCID record (learn more). As an ORCID record holder, you are in control of your record and can grant and revoke access of trusted parties, including Crossref, at any time. By providing your ORCID iD when you submit a paper, you can be sure that as your work takes on a life of its own, you will always be credited. Publishers: Encourage your authors to sign up and submit their ORCID iDs when submitting papers. Let authors know that by doing this, the article will automatically be added to their ORCID record once published, and that they should look out for a notification if/when their paper is published to prompt them grant permission for ORCID to add their publication to their ORCID record. They can grant long-lived permissions so that they enable the automatic addition of any further publications registered with Crossref to their record. Build awareness among editors of the importance of collecting this persistent identifier. Please consult other users on our forum community.crossref.org or open a ticket with our technical support specialists with any questions.\n",
"headings": ["Who is it for?","How does it work?","How do I get started?"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/community/researchers/",
"title": "For researchers",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 5,
"lastmod": "2017-01-06",
"lastmod_ts": 1483660800,
"section": "Get involved",
"tags": [],
"description": "Find other researchers’ work and let them find yours. Through registering DOIs, we collect and share comprehensive information about research such as citations, mentions, and other relationships. Thousands of tools and services then harness this information—-for search, discovery, and measurement—-through our open APIs.\nPersistent linking Our members register the content they publish with us to tell us it exists - this includes bibliographic (and other) information, and persistent identifiers.\nThis helps make content discoverable by uniquely identifying the work, and giving a means to link to it long-term. When you click on the Digital Object Identifier (DOI) in a reference list, you’ll be reliably taken to the content you’re interested in, regardless of the publication or publisher. If the content moves to a new website, the publisher will come to us and register the new location of the content so that the link doesn’t break and researchers can continue to navigate between content without any snags.\n",
"content": "Find other researchers’ work and let them find yours. Through registering DOIs, we collect and share comprehensive information about research such as citations, mentions, and other relationships. Thousands of tools and services then harness this information—-for search, discovery, and measurement—-through our open APIs.\nPersistent linking Our members register the content they publish with us to tell us it exists - this includes bibliographic (and other) information, and persistent identifiers.\nThis helps make content discoverable by uniquely identifying the work, and giving a means to link to it long-term. When you click on the Digital Object Identifier (DOI) in a reference list, you’ll be reliably taken to the content you’re interested in, regardless of the publication or publisher. If the content moves to a new website, the publisher will come to us and register the new location of the content so that the link doesn’t break and researchers can continue to navigate between content without any snags.\nWe also disseminate that metadata so that other systems - search or subject databases, library systems and scholarly sharing networks - can employ it to help their users find the research they’re interested in.\nRegistering content with us helps the content you publish be found, cited, linked to, and used by other researchers. Watch the video below to find out more:\nAdd DOIs to your reference lists Adding DOIs to your reference lists means that readers can link persistently to related works.\nYou can search for DOIs via our search service or add a list of references to our query tool to have the DOIs we can find returned for those.\nYou’re also welcome to access and use our metadata via our REST API - no sign-up is required and it’s free to use.\nHave an ORCID iD? Speaking of identifiers, we’re big fans of ORCID iDs.\nIt’s simple (and free) to register for an ORCID iD, and providing your ORCID iD when you submit a paper or publish content provides more ways for people to discover your research.\nMany members collect ORCID iDs from their authors, and if they deposit them with us when they register content we can push the publications to the author’s ORCID record automatically. It’s called auto-update and means researchers can skip re-keying information and have their ORCID record show the most complete record of their publications.\nYou can also update your ORCID record by adding existing works that have a Crossref DOI by taking the following steps:\nStart from https://search.crossref.org/ and click “Sign in” at the top right of the screen Sign in with your ORCID account credentials, or “Register now” if you don’t yet have an ORCID iD You’ll then see the following message: “Crossref Metadata Search has asked for the following access to your ORCID Record: Add/update your research activities (works, affiliations, etc) Read your information with visibility set to Trusted Parties” Click \u0026lt;i\u0026gt;Authorize \u0026lt;/i\u0026gt; Search for any of your publications that have a Crossref DOI. You can do this by the title, authors or publication. Click “Add to ORCID” to the right of each publication to add it to your ORCID record. Finding important updates to content If you see this button when reading a paper, make sure you click on it!\nUsing Crossmark gives you quick and easy access to the current status of a work. With one click, you can see if content has been updated, corrected or retracted meaning you can have confidence in the status what you’re reading or citing. You can also see useful additional information on things like who funded the work, what licenses apply to the content and much more.\nInterested in text mining? Our REST API is designed to allow researchers to harvest full-text from participating members for the purpose of text mining.\nPublishers deposit license information and links to the full-text of the content with us, and researchers interested in mining cross-publisher content can use that information to find out where the content is located, and what they are allowed to do with it. A GET request then allows you to download the full-text from the publisher’s site (if you have access to it). We walk you through the process in our documentation.\nQuestions about any of this? Get in touch!\n",
"headings": ["Persistent linking","Add DOIs to your reference lists","Have an ORCID iD?","Finding important updates to content","Interested in text mining?"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/jobs/2026-04-13-senior-software-developer-in-test/",
"title": "Senior Software Developer in Test",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2026-04-13",
"lastmod_ts": 1776038400,
"section": "Jobs",
"tags": [],
"description": " Applications for this position closed on May 5th, 2026. Would you like to help shape the future of open infrastructure that serves as the backbone of global scholarly communication? Join Crossref as a Senior Software Developer with a testing focus.\nLocation: Remote and global, to partially overlap with working hours in European time zones. Type: Full-time, Monday-Friday Remuneration: 90k USD or local equivalent. We pay salaries in the currency of the country in which you\u0026rsquo;re based. We arrive at the local USD-equivalent salary by determining the average 5-year USD exchange rate, to stabilize currency fluctuations. Benefits: Check out our Employee Handbook for more details on paid time off, unlimited sick time, paid parental and medical leaves, and more. Reports to: Program Technical Lead, Bharath Govindarajan Timeline: Advertise in April-May and offer by June. About the role We’re looking for a Senior Software Developer in Test (SDET) to join our Open and Sustainable Operations (OSO) program, taking on significant responsibility for the quality, reliability, and scalability of complex systems across OSO and other Crossref initiatives. This role is focused on establishing and advancing automated testing practices and building the engineering infrastructure needed to support consistent, high-quality software delivery.\n",
"content": " Applications for this position closed on May 5th, 2026. Would you like to help shape the future of open infrastructure that serves as the backbone of global scholarly communication? Join Crossref as a Senior Software Developer with a testing focus.\nLocation: Remote and global, to partially overlap with working hours in European time zones. Type: Full-time, Monday-Friday Remuneration: 90k USD or local equivalent. We pay salaries in the currency of the country in which you\u0026rsquo;re based. We arrive at the local USD-equivalent salary by determining the average 5-year USD exchange rate, to stabilize currency fluctuations. Benefits: Check out our Employee Handbook for more details on paid time off, unlimited sick time, paid parental and medical leaves, and more. Reports to: Program Technical Lead, Bharath Govindarajan Timeline: Advertise in April-May and offer by June. About the role We’re looking for a Senior Software Developer in Test (SDET) to join our Open and Sustainable Operations (OSO) program, taking on significant responsibility for the quality, reliability, and scalability of complex systems across OSO and other Crossref initiatives. This role is focused on establishing and advancing automated testing practices and building the engineering infrastructure needed to support consistent, high-quality software delivery.\nYou’ll lead the design and implementation of robust automated testing frameworks, pipelines, and tooling, working across systems that integrate structured metadata, APIs, and user-facing workflows used by Crossref’s diverse global membership. A key part of the role is creating and maintaining testing infrastructure that enables reliable, repeatable, and scalable testing from integration tests through to end-to-end and contract testing across distributed services.\nYou’ll work on long-lived and complex systems that require strong quality practices to ensure they remain reliable, accessible, and performant as they evolve. Your focus will be on making quality measurable and enforceable through automation, improving test coverage, reducing regression risk, and enabling teams to deliver changes with confidence.\nMany of these systems are used directly by Crossref members and the wider research community, and the testing strategies and infrastructure you build will have a direct impact on the stability and trustworthiness of these services in practice. You’ll have autonomy in how you approach quality engineering challenges, while collaborating closely with engineers to embed effective testing practices into everyday development workflows, as part of a collaborative, mission-driven Technology Team reporting to the Program Technical Lead.\nKey responsibilities Define and evolve testing approaches across unit, integration, end-to-end, and contract testing to ensure comprehensive coverage of complex systems. Develop scalable, reliable test frameworks, tooling, and CI/CD integrations that enable consistent and repeatable test execution across environments. Design and implement performance, load, and stress testing approaches to ensure systems can scale and perform reliably under varying conditions. Work closely with technology teams to embed automated testing into everyday development workflows, improving overall quality and reducing manual effort. Enable fast, actionable feedback from test pipelines through better reporting, monitoring, and failure analysis. Introduce and maintain metrics such as test coverage, flakiness, failure rates, and deployment confidence to guide continuous improvement. Ensure robust validation of integrations, data flows, and contracts between services, particularly in systems handling structured metadata and external APIs. Provide guidance on testing approaches, review test implementations, and help raise the overall quality engineering capability across teams. About you You’re a software developer who enjoys understanding problems end-to-end and making thoughtful technical decisions. You’re comfortable working with ambiguity, you care deeply about users, and you take pride in building systems that last.\nYou don’t need close supervision, but you value collaboration, challenge assumptions constructively, and know when to bring others into technical decisions.\nWe know no-one will meet all the requirements, but we are looking for people who are willing to learn and like to meet new challenges - please apply if this feels like you!\nEssential skills and experience:\nMinimum 7 years of hands-on experience in software development, engineering, or similar. Experience in designing clear, effective test cases (functional, edge, negative) and translating requirements into reliable automated tests. Deep expertise in designing and implementing automated tests (unit, integration, E2E, API). Proficient with modern testing tools (e.g., Playwright, Cypress, Selenium) and building reusable libraries. Experience integrating tests into CI/CD (GitLab CI, Jenkins). Experience in using Docker for consistent, scalable test environments. Skilled in setting up and maintaining test environments, data, and ensuring reproducibility. A self-directed working style, paired with strong communication skills and a collaborative approach to problem-solving. Experience in collaborating closely with developers to embed quality and influence engineering culture. Proactive approach to identifying gaps, evaluating tools, and evolving testing strategies. A preference for clear documentation and shared understanding. Experience managing long-lived production systems, balancing change, stability, and iteration. Familiar with writing and executing performance, load, and stress tests using modern tools (e.g., k6, Gatling, JMeter) to validate system scalability and reliability. Outstanding at interpersonal relations and relationship management. Nice to have:\nBackground in scholarly communications and/or open infrastructure/open metadata. Experience in the non-profit sector or with community-led organisations. Contributions to open source (code, documentation, or community involvement). Understanding of accessibility standards (e.g., WCAG) and integrating them into automated testing. Experience with other programming languages like Java, Kotlin. Exposure to monitoring and logging tools (e.g., Prometheus, Grafana, ELK stack) for performance analysis. Experience using Jira and Zephyr to define, manage, and track test cases. About Crossref and the team We’re a non-profit membership organisation that exists to make scholarly communications better. We rally the community; tag and share metadata; run an open infrastructure; play with technology; and make tools and services—all to help put research in context.\nWe envision a rich and reusable open network of relationships connecting research organisations, people, things, and actions; a scholarly record that the global community can build on forever, for the benefit of society. We are working towards this vision of a ‘Research Nexus’ by demonstrating the value of richer and connected open metadata, incentivising people to meet best practices, while making it easier to do so. “We” means 24,000+ members from 166+ countries, 170+ million records, and nearly 2 billion monthly metadata queries from thousands of tools across the research ecosystem. We want to be a sustainable source of complete, open, and global scholarly metadata and relationships.\nTake a look at our strategic agenda to see the planned work that aims to achieve the vision. The sustainability area aims to make transparent all the processes and procedures we follow to run the operation long-term, including our financials and our ongoing commitment to the Principles of Open Scholarly Infrastructure (POSI). The governance area describes our board and its role in community oversight.\nIt also takes a strong team – because reliable infrastructure needs committed people who contribute to and realise the vision, and thrive doing it. We are a distributed group of 56+ dedicated people who take our work seriously, but don\u0026rsquo;t take ourselves seriously - we like to play quizzes, measure coffee intake, and create 100s of custom slack emojis. We do this through fair policies and working practices, a balanced approach to resourcing, and accountability to each other.\nWe can offer the successful candidate a challenging and fun environment to work in. Together we are dedicated to our global mission and we are constantly adapting to ensure we get there. Take a look at our organisation chart, the latest Annual Meeting recordings, and our financial information.\nThinking of applying? We especially encourage applications from people with backgrounds historically under-represented in research and scholarly communications. You can be based anywhere in the world where we can employ staff, either directly or through an employer of record.\nWe will invite selected candidates to an initial call to discuss the role. Following that, shortlisted candidates will be invited to work on a short (1-2 hours) take-home assignment. This will be followed by a technical interview. The last step will be a panel interview, where you will receive questions in advance. All interviews will be held remotely on Zoom.\nApplications closed on May 5th, 2026.\nAnticipated salary for this role is 90k USD-equivalent, paid in local currency.We calculate the local salary by using the five-year average exchange rate between your currency and USD. This helps balance out exchange rate fluctuations.\nCrossref offers competitive compensation, benefits, flexible work arrangements, professional development opportunities, and a supportive work environment. Check out our Employee Handbook for more details on paid time off, unlimited sick time, paid parental and medical leaves, and more.\nEqual opportunities commitment Crossref is committed to a policy of non-discrimination and equal opportunity for all employees and qualified applicants for employment without regard to race, colour, religion, sex, pregnancy or a condition related to pregnancy, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, national origin, ancestry, age, physical or mental disability, genetic information, veteran status, uniform service member status, or any other protected class under applicable law. Crossref will make reasonable accommodations for qualified individuals with known disabilities in accordance with applicable law.\nThanks for your interest in joining Crossref. We are excited to hear from you! ",
"headings": ["About the role","Key responsibilities","About you","About Crossref and the team","Thinking of applying?","Equal opportunities commitment","Thanks for your interest in joining Crossref. We are excited to hear from you!"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/jobs/2026-04-06-devops-engineer/",
"title": "DevOps Engineer",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2026-04-06",
"lastmod_ts": 1775433600,
"section": "Jobs",
"tags": [],
"description": " Applications for this position closed on May 5th, 2026. We are seeking a talented DevOps Engineer to join our Infrastructure Services team at Crossref.\nLocation: Remote and global, to partially overlap with working hours in European time zones. Type: Full-time, Monday-Friday Remuneration: 90k USD or local equivalent. We pay salaries in the currency of the country in which you\u0026rsquo;re based. We arrive at the local USD-equivalent salary by determining the average 5-year USD exchange rate, to stabilize currency fluctuations. Benefits: Check out our Employee Handbook for more details on paid time off, unlimited sick time, paid parental and medical leaves, and more. Reports to: Head of Infrastructure Services, Stewart Houten Timeline: Advertise in April-May and offer by June. About the role We are looking for a DevOps Engineer to help operate and evolve a large-scale scholarly infrastructure platform. This is a hands-on role focused on improving reliability, observability, and scalability across a mix of legacy and modern systems.\n",
"content": " Applications for this position closed on May 5th, 2026. We are seeking a talented DevOps Engineer to join our Infrastructure Services team at Crossref.\nLocation: Remote and global, to partially overlap with working hours in European time zones. Type: Full-time, Monday-Friday Remuneration: 90k USD or local equivalent. We pay salaries in the currency of the country in which you\u0026rsquo;re based. We arrive at the local USD-equivalent salary by determining the average 5-year USD exchange rate, to stabilize currency fluctuations. Benefits: Check out our Employee Handbook for more details on paid time off, unlimited sick time, paid parental and medical leaves, and more. Reports to: Head of Infrastructure Services, Stewart Houten Timeline: Advertise in April-May and offer by June. About the role We are looking for a DevOps Engineer to help operate and evolve a large-scale scholarly infrastructure platform. This is a hands-on role focused on improving reliability, observability, and scalability across a mix of legacy and modern systems.\nYou will spend much of your time understanding how systems behave in production, diagnosing issues, and making incremental improvements. Alongside this, you will help guide the platform towards more maintainable, cloud-aligned architectures over time.\nWhile much of the work involves improving existing systems, we are also building new services and infrastructure using more modern approaches. You will have the opportunity to contribute to these efforts and shape how the platform evolves.\nThis is not a greenfield, cloud-native environment. You should be comfortable working in systems that are evolving, not fully standardised, and sometimes difficult to reason about. Progress is often gradual, and the role requires persistence, curiosity, and sound engineering judgement.\nCrossref operates an open infrastructure that connects thousands of scholarly publishers, millions of research articles, and research objects to serve an increasingly diverse set of communities within scholarly publishing, research, funding, and beyond. Our system acts as the backbone for preserving and sharing the scholarly record. We offer a wide array of services to ensure that scholarly research metadata is registered, linked, and distributed.\nKey responsibilities Diagnose and resolve production issues across infrastructure, application, and database layers, often with incomplete information. Investigate performance problems (eg slow queries, JVM behaviour, network latency) Operate and maintain a mixed environment of long-lived EC2 instances and newer AWS services. Reduce operational toil by identifying repeatable tasks and automating them with infrastructure-as-code. Improve observability by working with developers to expose metrics, logs, and traces. Contribute to incident response and post-incident reviews with a focus on learning and prevention. Make incremental improvements to legacy systems to improve reliability and reduce operational complexity over time. Support and guide developers in building systems that are easier to run, debug, and operate in production. Contribute to the design of new services and infrastructure, balancing modern practices with the realities of the existing platform. Maintain and improve infrastructure definitions (Terraform/Ansible) with a focus on reducing complexity and improving repeatability. About you You enjoy understanding how systems behave in production, not just how they are designed to work. You are comfortable working in an environment that is not fully standardised or modernised, and you take satisfaction in making incremental improvements. You are persistent and methodical when diagnosing problems. You are able to follow issues across system boundaries until you identify the root cause. You are pragmatic in your decision making, balancing immediate needs with longer-term improvements. You value clear documentation and runbooks, and use them to make systems easier to understand and operate over time. You work well in a small, distributed team, taking ownership of problems independently, while collaborating and consulting with others when needed. You don’t need to have seen everything before, but you should be comfortable figuring things out when you haven’t. Essential skills and experience:\nMinimum 5 years of experience in DevOps, Systems Administration, SRE, or related engineering field. Strong Linux systems knowledge and fluency in native tooling for diagnosing system issues. Comfortable operating services in a cloud or virtualised environment (AWS, GCP, Azure, or similar). Fluent in writing scripts or automation (Bash, Python, Ansible) with a focus on reducing manual work. Enthusiastic about infrastructure-as-code (Terraform, OpenTofu, or similar) and invested in improving how infrastructure is managed. Good understanding of web infrastructure, the HTTP request flow, including how requests move through load balancers, proxies, and application layers. It would be an advantage if you had experience with some of the following:\nBuilding and running CI/CD pipelines JVM-based systems (eg Java, Clojure) Relational databases such as PostgreSQL or MySQL Distributed search systems such as ElasticSearch / OpenSearch Container management (Fargate, Kubernetes) Message queues (SQS, ActiveMQ, RabbitMQ) Monitoring and observability (Prometheus, Grafana, ELK, CloudWatch) Background in scholarly communications and/or open infrastructure/open metadata Experience in the non-profit sector or with community-led organisations About Crossref and the team We’re a non-profit membership organisation that exists to make scholarly communications better. We rally the community; tag and share metadata; run an open infrastructure; play with technology; and make tools and services—all to help put research in context.\nWe envision a rich and reusable open network of relationships connecting research organisations, people, things, and actions; a scholarly record that the global community can build on forever, for the benefit of society. We are working towards this vision of a ‘Research Nexus’ by demonstrating the value of richer and connected open metadata, incentivising people to meet best practices, while making it easier to do so. “We” means 24,000+ members from 166+ countries, 170+ million records, and nearly 2 billion monthly metadata queries from thousands of tools across the research ecosystem. We want to be a sustainable source of complete, open, and global scholarly metadata and relationships.\nTake a look at our strategic agenda to see the planned work that aims to achieve the vision. The sustainability area aims to make transparent all the processes and procedures we follow to run the operation long-term, including our financials and our ongoing commitment to the Principles of Open Scholarly Infrastructure (POSI). The governance area describes our board and its role in community oversight.\nIt also takes a strong team – because reliable infrastructure needs committed people who contribute to and realise the vision, and thrive doing it. We are a distributed group of 56+ dedicated people who take our work seriously, but don\u0026rsquo;t take ourselves seriously - we like to play quizzes, measure coffee intake, and create 100s of custom slack emojis. We do this through fair policies and working practices, a balanced approach to resourcing, and accountability to each other.\nWe can offer the successful candidate a challenging and fun environment to work in. Together we are dedicated to our global mission and we are constantly adapting to ensure we get there. Take a look at our organisation chart, the latest Annual Meeting recordings, and our financial information.\nThinking of applying? We especially encourage applications from people with backgrounds historically under-represented in research and scholarly communications. You can be based anywhere in the world where we can employ staff, either directly or through an employer of record.\nWe will invite selected candidates to an initial call to discuss the role, talk through their background, and explore how their experience aligns with the work we do. Following this, shortlisted candidates will be invited to a technical interview with members of the DevOps team. This will not involve a take-home technical exercise, but it will include some technical discussion to understand your problem-solving approach and how you think about operating infrastructure services. The final stage will involve a broader group from across the organisation, for which questions will be shared in advance to give you time to prepare.\nAll interviews will be held remotely on Zoom.\nApplications closed on May 5th, 2026.\nAnticipated salary for this role is 90k USD-equivalent, paid in local currency. We calculate the local salary by using the five-year average exchange rate between your currency and USD. This helps balance out exchange rate fluctuations.\nCrossref offers competitive compensation, benefits, flexible work arrangements, professional development opportunities, and a supportive work environment. Check out our Employee Handbook for more details on paid time off, unlimited sick time, paid parental and medical leaves, and more.\nEqual opportunities commitment Crossref is committed to a policy of non-discrimination and equal opportunity for all employees and qualified applicants for employment without regard to race, colour, religion, sex, pregnancy or a condition related to pregnancy, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, national origin, ancestry, age, physical or mental disability, genetic information, veteran status, uniform service member status, or any other protected class under applicable law. Crossref will make reasonable accommodations for qualified individuals with known disabilities in accordance with applicable law.\nThanks for your interest in joining Crossref. We are excited to hear from you! ",
"headings": ["About the role","Key responsibilities","About you","About Crossref and the team","Thinking of applying?","Equal opportunities commitment","Thanks for your interest in joining Crossref. We are excited to hear from you!"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/jobs/2026-03-19-head-of-operations/",
"title": "Head of Operations",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2026-03-19",
"lastmod_ts": 1773878400,
"section": "Jobs",
"tags": [],
"description": " Applications for this position closed on April 8th, 2026. Do you want to help improve research communications in all corners of the globe? Come and join the world of nonprofit open infrastructure and be part of improving the creation and sharing of knowledge as our new Head of Operations.\nLocation: Remote and global, availability from 14 - 17 UTC to ensure sufficient overlap with the rest of the team. Type: Full-time, Monday-Friday Remuneration: 120k USD or local equivalent. We pay salaries in the currency of the country in which you\u0026rsquo;re based. We arrive at the local USD-equivalent salary by determining the average 5-year USD exchange rate, to stabilize currency fluctuations. Benefits: Check out our Employee Handbook for more details on paid time off, unlimited sick time, paid parental and medical leaves, and more. Reports to: Chief Operating Officer, Lucy Ofiesh Timeline: Advertise in March-April and offer by May. Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record. As a not-for-profit with over 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support nearly 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication.\n",
"content": " Applications for this position closed on April 8th, 2026. Do you want to help improve research communications in all corners of the globe? Come and join the world of nonprofit open infrastructure and be part of improving the creation and sharing of knowledge as our new Head of Operations.\nLocation: Remote and global, availability from 14 - 17 UTC to ensure sufficient overlap with the rest of the team. Type: Full-time, Monday-Friday Remuneration: 120k USD or local equivalent. We pay salaries in the currency of the country in which you\u0026rsquo;re based. We arrive at the local USD-equivalent salary by determining the average 5-year USD exchange rate, to stabilize currency fluctuations. Benefits: Check out our Employee Handbook for more details on paid time off, unlimited sick time, paid parental and medical leaves, and more. Reports to: Chief Operating Officer, Lucy Ofiesh Timeline: Advertise in March-April and offer by May. Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record. As a not-for-profit with over 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support nearly 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication.\nWhat is \u0026lsquo;operations\u0026rsquo; at Crossref? The Operations group focuses on how we build organizational capacity and resilience, how we translate big ideas into practical solutions for our community, and how we align and support the work across teams. The Operations group includes the data science, finance, human resources, and technology teams. It also works closely with the board of directors and external legal counsel. The team’s work complements and supports the work of the Programs group, which includes our programs \u0026amp; services, membership, and community teams.\nAbout the role Head of Operations is a new role at Crossref. In 2024 we reorganized our work around three program areas – open \u0026amp; sustainable operations, contributing to the research nexus, and co-creation and community trends. This approach has helped foster more cross-function coordination across our teams. Plus, as a global organization that has grown to nearly 60 people, our operational needs have grown more complex.\nThis role would suit a generalist with strong organizational and project management skills, who likes to understand how the details fit together to support a big-picture goal. Experience in a nonprofit setting would be ideal. Interest in working in ways that promote openness and transparency is important.\nThis position will oversee the development and implementation of operating policies, and work across teams to help ensure that our work is coordinated, tracked, and communicated consistently in a way that makes it easy for our colleagues and the community to see. Working openly and collaboratively, success in this role will mean that we are more effectively working together to complete projects that benefit the community. This position will help us keep on track, moving towards our vision of a research nexus.\nKey responsibilities Operations management: work across the teams to ensure we have the internal structures and processes we need to support our mission, work, and people\nSupport team meetings, including the senior management team meeting and some all-staff meetings, facilitate and Chair meetings and working groups as needed. Establish and maintain a vendor management program Identify gaps in our operations and help solve them Support best practices in data privacy and security Manage the quarterly internal risk review process Assess and advise on our approach to systems. We rely on several systems to work together (e.g., CRM, support, finance, email, our custom metadata database) that are managed by various teams throughout the organization. This role should understand and support improving our network of systems, and coordinate with technology services as needed. Provide guidance on prioritizing open source solutions when possible. Support the work of board meetings, board committees, and community/advisory group meetings Project management: work closely with the program groups to support coordination and communication\nDevelop progress reports that can be used to update the board, committees and advisory groups, and the community at large on progress. Work with colleagues to keep the strategic agenda page up to date. Coordinate projects across the organization by working with your colleagues to develop and track project timelines and resource needs. Establish habits and tools that can support better coordination across the team. Develop and ensure consistent internal communication on progress and timelines. Compliance support:\nIn collaboration with the Membership team and external counsel, this role will manage our international sanctions compliance program and other elements of legal compliance with our membership terms This position will support our ongoing compliance with EU GDPR and other data protection regulations. You would oversee internal controls and processes for data protection, ensuring we are mindful of privacy safeguards and best practices in data protection within our business operations. Work with the Infrastructure and HR teams on our security audits About you This role is for someone who gets the big picture and wants to understand how the various pieces fit together. You might not have all the skills we list below. With a broad role like this, we are not looking for someone who has necessarily done all of these things. We are looking for someone who is comfortable taking on new projects, asking questions, gathering input, and making a plan.\nWe encourage you to apply if some or all of this sounds like you:\n5-7 years experience in operations, project management, process design, information architecture, business analysis, or similar work requiring attention to detail and people skills Excellent communication and collaboration skills. Experience working across multiple teams Experience in a nonprofit setting Experience working with boards or advisory groups Project management certification Experience working in scholarly communications and/or open infrastructure organizations Commitment to openness and transparency in everything you do and in how you communicate both with colleagues and with our community Comfort leading and participating in internal and external meetings Experience with CRM, support, project management systems and processes Experience managing a budget or providing a perspective on the financial impact of a decision Comfortable with digital tools and technology, such as Google Workspace, Slack, and Git for website and data management Comfortable working with teams across timezones (that doesn’t mean we expect you to work at all hours. Quite the opposite! We expect that people work their working hours and can wait to hear from their colleagues or rely on written communication from staff in different timezones) About Crossref and the team We’re a non-profit membership organisation that exists to make scholarly communications better. We rally the community; tag and share metadata; run an open infrastructure; play with technology; and make tools and services—all to help put research in context.\nWe envision a rich and reusable open network of relationships connecting research organisations, people, things, and actions; a scholarly record that the global community can build on forever, for the benefit of society. We are working towards this vision of a ‘Research Nexus’ by demonstrating the value of richer and connected open metadata, incentivising people to meet best practices, while making it easier to do so. “We” means 24,000+ members from 166+ countries, 170+ million records, and nearly 2 billion monthly metadata queries from thousands of tools across the research ecosystem. We want to be a sustainable source of complete, open, and global scholarly metadata and relationships.\nTake a look at our strategic agenda to see the planned work that aims to achieve the vision. The sustainability area aims to make transparent all the processes and procedures we follow to run the operation long-term, including our financials and our ongoing commitment to the Principles of Open Scholarly Infrastructure (POSI). The governance area describes our board and its role in community oversight.\nIt also takes a strong team – because reliable infrastructure needs committed people who contribute to and realise the vision, and thrive doing it. We are a distributed group of 56+ dedicated people who take our work seriously, but don\u0026rsquo;t take ourselves seriously - we like to play quizzes, measure coffee intake, and create 100s of custom slack emojis. We do this through fair policies and working practices, a balanced approach to resourcing, and accountability to each other.\nWe can offer the successful candidate a challenging and fun environment to work in. Together we are dedicated to our global mission and we are constantly adapting to ensure we get there. Take a look at our organisation chart, the latest Annual Meeting recordings, and our financial information.\nThinking of applying? We especially encourage applications from people with backgrounds historically under-represented in research and scholarly communications. You can be based anywhere in the world where we can employ staff, either directly or through an employer of record.\nWe will invite selected candidates to an initial call to discuss the role. Following that, shortlisted candidates will be invited to an interview. You will receive all information in advance, and the interview will include some questions and/or exercises you’ll have a chance to prepare for. All interviews will be held remotely on Zoom.\nThe link below will take you to a portal to submit your cover letter and CV. There will also be a few questions to answer. The answer will help us review your application, but there is no specific answer that would be disqualifying. The questions will include:\nFull name What do you prefer we call you? Email address In which country and timezone are you based? Does your local time zone allow you to work with team members during 14-17 UTC? Do you have remote working experience? Do you have experience working in nonprofits and/or open infrastructure organizations? In 2-3 sentences, what elements or qualities of the job are most appealing to you? Applications closed on April 8th, 2026.\nAnticipated salary for this role is 120k USD-equivalent, paid in local currency.We calculate the local salary by using the five-year average exchange rate between your currency and USD. This helps balance out exchange rate fluctuations.\nCrossref offers competitive compensation, benefits, flexible work arrangements, professional development opportunities, and a supportive work environment. Check out our Employee Handbook for more details on paid time off, unlimited sick time, paid parental and medical leaves, and more.\nEqual opportunities commitment Crossref is committed to a policy of non-discrimination and equal opportunity for all employees and qualified applicants for employment without regard to race, colour, religion, sex, pregnancy or a condition related to pregnancy, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, national origin, ancestry, age, physical or mental disability, genetic information, veteran status, uniform service member status, or any other protected class under applicable law. Crossref will make reasonable accommodations for qualified individuals with known disabilities in accordance with applicable law.\nThanks for your interest in joining Crossref. We are excited to hear from you! ",
"headings": ["About the role","Key responsibilities","About you","About Crossref and the team","Thinking of applying?","Equal opportunities commitment","Thanks for your interest in joining Crossref. We are excited to hear from you!"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/jobs/2026-02-17-senior-software-developer-frontend/",
"title": "Senior Software Developer (frontend)",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2026-02-17",
"lastmod_ts": 1771286400,
"section": "Jobs",
"tags": [],
"description": " Applications for this position closed on March 10th, 2026. Would you like to help shape the future of open infrastructure that serves as the backbone of global scholarly communication? Join us as our Senior Software Developer with a frontend focus.\nLocation: Remote and global, to partially overlap with working hours in European time zones. Type: Full-Time, 40 hours a week, Mon-Fri. Remuneration: 90k USD equivalent. We pay salaries in the currency of the country in which you\u0026rsquo;re based. We arrive at the local USD-equivalent salary by determining the average 5-year USD exchange rate, to stabilise currency fluctuations. Benefits: Check out our Employee handbook for more details on paid time off, unlimited sick time, paid parental and medical leaves, and more. Reports to: Program Technical Lead, Patrick Vale Timeline: Advertise in February-March and offer by April About the role We’re looking for a Senior Software Developer to join our Co-Creation and Community Trends (CCT) program to take on significant responsibility for complex, domain-heavy frontend systems and their long-term quality. This is a frontend-focused role, but not frontend-only: you’ll contribute to architectural decisions, work across application boundaries, and help carry work from problem definition through to delivery and iteration, within an established technical framework focussed on Typescript and Vue.js.\n",
"content": " Applications for this position closed on March 10th, 2026. Would you like to help shape the future of open infrastructure that serves as the backbone of global scholarly communication? Join us as our Senior Software Developer with a frontend focus.\nLocation: Remote and global, to partially overlap with working hours in European time zones. Type: Full-Time, 40 hours a week, Mon-Fri. Remuneration: 90k USD equivalent. We pay salaries in the currency of the country in which you\u0026rsquo;re based. We arrive at the local USD-equivalent salary by determining the average 5-year USD exchange rate, to stabilise currency fluctuations. Benefits: Check out our Employee handbook for more details on paid time off, unlimited sick time, paid parental and medical leaves, and more. Reports to: Program Technical Lead, Patrick Vale Timeline: Advertise in February-March and offer by April About the role We’re looking for a Senior Software Developer to join our Co-Creation and Community Trends (CCT) program to take on significant responsibility for complex, domain-heavy frontend systems and their long-term quality. This is a frontend-focused role, but not frontend-only: you’ll contribute to architectural decisions, work across application boundaries, and help carry work from problem definition through to delivery and iteration, within an established technical framework focussed on Typescript and Vue.js.\nYou’ll work on frontend systems that bring together structured metadata, APIs, and user-facing workflows used by Crossref’s diverse global membership. These systems are long-lived and complex, and need to remain usable, accessible, and reliable as they change and grow over time. Your work will focus on designing and maintaining applications that make this complexity understandable and usable, in close partnership with backend systems and data services.\nMany of these systems are used directly by Crossref members and the wider research community, and decisions made in this role have a direct impact on how those services are experienced in practice. You’ll have autonomy in how you approach problems and implement solutions, alongside regular architectural collaboration and shared decision-making on longer-term direction, as part of a collaborative, mission-driven Technology Team reporting to the Program Technical Lead.\nKey responsibilities Understand Crossref’s mission and how we support it with our services. Build accessible software that makes our metadata and services available to all. Design and implement complex frontend systems, contributing from problem definition through to delivery and iteration. Contribute to and document architectural decisions within the frontend and at system boundaries. Translate ambiguous product and domain requirements into robust, maintainable software, proposing options and trade-offs rather than waiting for fully specified solutions. Evolve frontend patterns and standards, including TypeScript usage, state management, testing strategy, and accessibility practices, in collaboration with other developers and technical leadership. Collaborate closely with backend developers and domain experts to ensure frontend architecture reflects real system constraints, data models, and operational realities. Review code and designs with a focus on long-term maintainability, accessibility, and developer experience. Increase team delivery velocity by unblocking others, sharing context, and raising the overall technical bar. Investigate and address issues in production, including bugs, performance problems, and opportunities for incremental improvement. About you You’re a software developer who enjoys understanding problems end-to-end and making thoughtful technical decisions. You’re comfortable working with ambiguity, you care deeply about users, and you take pride in building systems that last.\nYou don’t need close supervision, but you value collaboration, challenge assumptions constructively, and know when to bring others into technical decisions.\nWe know no-one will meet all the requirements, but we are looking for people who are willing to learn and like to meet new challenges - please apply if this feels like you!\nEssential skills and experience:\nMinimum 5 years of hands-on experience in software development, engineering, or similar. Building software that works well for real users, including usability, accessibility, and clarity. Strong foundations in semantic HTML, CSS, and a practical understanding of modern, accessible UI construction. Working experience using TypeScript and JavaScript in production systems. Building and maintaining Vue.js applications over time. Writing effective tests, in Vitest, Testing Library, Playwright. Working with Continuous Integration and Delivery pipelines. Comfortable working with Git, including code reviews and collaborative workflows Experience working on long-lived production systems, balancing change, stability, and iteration. Experience designing frontend systems with an awareness of backend data stores and query patterns, and how frontend choices affect performance, scalability, and reliability. Comfortable being part of a geographically distributed team A self-directed working style, paired with strong communication skills and a collaborative approach to problem-solving. A preference for clear documentation and shared understanding. Curious and tenacious at learning new things and getting to the bottom of problems. Outstanding at interpersonal relations and relationship management. Nice-to-have:\nExperience designing or consuming well-specified APIs. Experience with server-side rendering (SSR) or hybrid rendering approaches. Familiarity with systems that mix modern frontend frameworks with backend-rendered or legacy approaches. Experience working with schemas (JSON, XML, or similar structured formats). Familiarity with workflows, state machines, or complex form-driven systems. A strong interest in UX, including interaction design and usability. Building or maintaining dashboards or data-heavy interfaces. Experience with other programming languages (e.g. Python, Java, or similar). Familiarity with other frontend frameworks (e.g. React or Angular). Experience teaching, mentoring, or supporting other developers. Contributions to open source, whether through code, documentation, or community involvement. Familiarity with the scholarly communications domain. About Crossref \u0026amp; the team We’re a non-profit membership organisation that exists to make scholarly communications better. We rally the community; tag and share metadata; run an open infrastructure; play with technology; and make tools and services—all to help put research in context.\nWe envision a rich and reusable open network of relationships connecting research organisations, people, things, and actions; a scholarly record that the global community can build on forever, for the benefit of society. We are working towards this vision of a ‘Research Nexus’ by demonstrating the value of richer and connected open metadata, incentivising people to meet best practices, while making it easier to do so. “We” means 23,000+ members from 160+ countries, 170+ million records, and nearly 2 billion monthly metadata queries from thousands of tools across the research ecosystem. We want to be a sustainable source of complete, open, and global scholarly metadata and relationships.\nTake a look at our strategic agenda to see the planned work that aims to achieve the vision. The sustainability area aims to make transparent all the processes and procedures we follow to run the operation long-term, including our financials and our ongoing commitment to the Principles of Open Scholarly Infrastructure (POSI). The governance area describes our board and its role in community oversight.\nIt also takes a strong team – because reliable infrastructure needs committed people who contribute to and realise the vision, and thrive doing it. We are a distributed group of 50+ dedicated people who take our work seriously, but don\u0026rsquo;t take ourselves seriously - we like to play quizzes, measure coffee intake, and create 100s of custom slack emojis. We do this through fair policies and working practices, a balanced approach to resourcing, and accountability to each other.\nWe can offer the successful candidate a challenging and fun environment to work in. Together we are dedicated to our global mission and we are constantly adapting to ensure we get there. Take a look at our organisation chart, the latest Annual Meeting recordings, and our financial information.\nThinking of applying? We especially encourage applications from people with backgrounds historically under-represented in research and scholarly communications. You can be based anywhere in the world where we can employ staff, either directly or through an employer of record.\nWe will invite selected candidates to an initial call to discuss the role. Following that, shortlisted candidates will be invited to work on a short (1-2 hours) take-home assignment. This will be followed by a technical interview. The last step will be a panel interview, where you will receive questions in advance. All interviews will be held remotely on Zoom.\nApplications closed on March 10th, 2026.\nAnticipated salary for this role is 90k USD-equivalent, paid in local currency. Crossref offers competitive compensation, benefits, flexible work arrangements, professional development opportunities, and a supportive work environment. Check out our Employee Handbook for more details on paid time off, unlimited sick time, paid parental and medical leaves, and more.\nEqual opportunities commitment Crossref is committed to a policy of non-discrimination and equal opportunity for all employees and qualified applicants for employment without regard to race, colour, religion, sex, pregnancy or a condition related to pregnancy, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, national origin, ancestry, age, physical or mental disability, genetic information, veteran status, uniform service member status, or any other protected class under applicable law. Crossref will make reasonable accommodations for qualified individuals with known disabilities in accordance with applicable law.\nThanks for your interest in joining Crossref. We are excited to hear from you! ",
"headings": ["About the role","Key responsibilities","About you","About Crossref \u0026amp; the team","Thinking of applying?","Equal opportunities commitment","Thanks for your interest in joining Crossref. We are excited to hear from you!"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/jobs/2026-01-07-product-manager-metadata/",
"title": "Product Manager, Metadata",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2026-01-07",
"lastmod_ts": 1767744000,
"section": "Jobs",
"tags": [],
"description": " Applications for this position closed on January 30th, 2026. Do you want to help improve research communications in all corners of the globe? Come and join the world of non-profit open infrastructure and be part of improving the creation and sharing of knowledge as our new Product Manager, Metadata.\nLocation: Remote and global, availability from 2-5 pm UTC Mon-Fri to ensure sufficient overlap with the rest of the team. Type: Full-Time, 40 hours a week, Mon-Fri. Remuneration: 85-90k USD equivalent. We pay salaries in the currency of the country in which you\u0026rsquo;re based. We arrive at the local USD-equivalent salary by determining the average 5-year USD exchange rate, to stabilise currency fluctuations. Benefits: Check out our Employee handbook for more details on paid time off, unlimited sick time, paid parental and medical leaves, and more. Reports to: Head of Metadata, Patricia Feeney Timeline: Advertise in January and offer by end of February or beginning of March About the role The Product Manager, Metadata, as part of the metadata team, helps with metadata development at Crossref with a focus on metadata outputs. This role involves a strong focus on JSON modelling for outputs in our REST API and other services, including proposing, coordinating and testing models for new or updated metadata, as well as active participation in community-led metadata development efforts.\n",
"content": " Applications for this position closed on January 30th, 2026. Do you want to help improve research communications in all corners of the globe? Come and join the world of non-profit open infrastructure and be part of improving the creation and sharing of knowledge as our new Product Manager, Metadata.\nLocation: Remote and global, availability from 2-5 pm UTC Mon-Fri to ensure sufficient overlap with the rest of the team. Type: Full-Time, 40 hours a week, Mon-Fri. Remuneration: 85-90k USD equivalent. We pay salaries in the currency of the country in which you\u0026rsquo;re based. We arrive at the local USD-equivalent salary by determining the average 5-year USD exchange rate, to stabilise currency fluctuations. Benefits: Check out our Employee handbook for more details on paid time off, unlimited sick time, paid parental and medical leaves, and more. Reports to: Head of Metadata, Patricia Feeney Timeline: Advertise in January and offer by end of February or beginning of March About the role The Product Manager, Metadata, as part of the metadata team, helps with metadata development at Crossref with a focus on metadata outputs. This role involves a strong focus on JSON modelling for outputs in our REST API and other services, including proposing, coordinating and testing models for new or updated metadata, as well as active participation in community-led metadata development efforts.\nCrossref collects a broad set of metadata for an increasingly diverse collection of scholarly outputs. By maintaining comprehensive metadata records that include author affiliations, funding information, references, and licensing details, Crossref members contribute to a more open and interconnected research environment where knowledge can be reliably tracked, verified, and built upon. This role will help shape metadata for our community as we actively expand and refine the metadata we collect.\nWe are a small organisation with a big impact, and we’re looking for a creative, technically-oriented Product Manager for metadata. Reporting to the Head of Metadata, the Product Manager will be part of the larger Programs and Services team and work closely with Crossref’s program on ‘Contributing to the Research Nexus’ and with the relevant developers on the technology team. We expect the Product Manager to take a collaborative approach and bring the ability to plan, research, convene, listen, and facilitate consensus-based decision making.\nKey responsibilities Model and maintain JSON-based metadata outputs and JSON schemas with attention to accuracy, completeness, scalability, and usability Contribute to the development and ongoing maintenance of our internal metadata item tree model Ensure consistency in metadata models by developing and adopting standardised patterns and principles Coordinate metadata work across teams at Crossref, by communicating ideas and writing project plans, gathering and assessing feedback, and using data to drive decision-making Work with metadata and development teams to test and develop updates to Crossref metadata Proactively propose improvements to modelling standards to align with evolving community best practicesIntegrate user research, system investigations, and ongoing community feedback into requirements Write product specifications based on internal and external input, and work closely with the technical team to get these translated into technical specifications Maintain and improve internal and public-facing documentation to support transparency and usability Promote the adoption of new services and features directly with the community Collaborate with community stakeholders and participate in working groups to expand and improve Crossref metadata About you You\u0026rsquo;ll need:\nYou have worked in roles where you were responsible for metadata curation and schema development You have experience with XML and JSON, including mapping, modelling and developing crosswalks between data formats You bring a good understanding of knowledge graphs and ongoing work in this area You are comfortable working with RESTful APIs and related web services/technologies You have an understanding and experience of complex workflow systems, writing clear specifications, and working with APIs You have strong written and verbal communication skills, and are able to communicate clearly, simply, and effectively You bring strong collaborative skills, especially in distributed and remote team environments You have strong project management skills and can coordinate projects across people and teams You have experience working with developers. You are technical enough to discuss critical questions about architecture and product choices with engineers You are proactive, self-motivated, and committed to continuous improvement You have familiarity with the scholarly communications ecosystem, particularly open science and open infrastructure You have strong analytical skills and attention to detail, with the ability to capture and interpret complex data relationships Nice-to-have:\nYou come from a technical background or have worked closely with tech teams in the past You are aware of and actively contributing to open, community-driven initiatives You have experience working with contractors and outsourcing specific pieces of work You have experience with project management You are comfortable being part of QA and testing processes About Crossref \u0026amp; the team We’re a non-profit membership organisation that exists to make scholarly communications better. We rally the community; tag and share metadata; run an open infrastructure; play with technology; and make tools and services—all to help put research in context.\nWe envision a rich and reusable open network of relationships connecting research organisations, people, things, and actions; a scholarly record that the global community can build on forever, for the benefit of society. We are working towards this vision of a ‘Research Nexus’ by demonstrating the value of richer and connected open metadata, incentivising people to meet best practices, while making it easier to do so. “We” means 23,000+ members from 160+ countries, 170+ million records, and nearly 2 billion monthly metadata queries from thousands of tools across the research ecosystem. We want to be a sustainable source of complete, open, and global scholarly metadata and relationships.\nTake a look at our strategic agenda to see the planned work that aims to achieve the vision. The sustainability area aims to make transparent all the processes and procedures we follow to run the operation long-term, including our financials and our ongoing commitment to the Principles of Open Scholarly Infrastructure (POSI). The governance area describes our board and its role in community oversight.\nIt also takes a strong team – because reliable infrastructure needs committed people who contribute to and realise the vision, and thrive doing it. We are a distributed group of 50+ dedicated people who take our work seriously, but don\u0026rsquo;t take ourselves seriously - we like to play quizzes, measure coffee intake, and create 100s of custom slack emojis. We do this through fair policies and working practices, a balanced approach to resourcing, and accountability to each other.\nWe can offer the successful candidate a challenging and fun environment to work in. Together we are dedicated to our global mission and we are constantly adapting to ensure we get there. Take a look at our organisation chart, the latest Annual Meeting recordings, and our financial information.\nThinking of applying? We especially encourage applications from people with backgrounds historically under-represented in research and scholarly communications. You can be based anywhere in the world where we can employ staff, either directly or through an employer of record.\nWe will invite selected candidates to an initial call to discuss the role. Following that, shortlisted candidates will be invited to an interview. You will receive all questions in advance, and the interview will include some questions and/or exercises you’ll have a chance to prepare for. All interviews will be held remotely on Zoom.\nApplications closed on January 30th, 2026.\nAnticipated salary for this role is approximately 85-90k USD-equivalent, paid in local currency. Crossref offers competitive compensation, benefits, flexible work arrangements, professional development opportunities, and a supportive work environment. Check out our Employee Handbook for more details on paid time off, unlimited sick time, paid parental and medical leaves, and more.\nEqual opportunities commitment Crossref is committed to a policy of non-discrimination and equal opportunity for all employees and qualified applicants for employment without regard to race, colour, religion, sex, pregnancy or a condition related to pregnancy, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, national origin, ancestry, age, physical or mental disability, genetic information, veteran status, uniform service member status, or any other protected class under applicable law. Crossref will make reasonable accommodations for qualified individuals with known disabilities in accordance with applicable law.\nThanks for your interest in joining Crossref. We are excited to hear from you! ",
"headings": ["About the role","Key responsibilities","About you","About Crossref \u0026amp; the team","Thinking of applying?","Equal opportunities commitment","Thanks for your interest in joining Crossref. We are excited to hear from you!"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/jobs/2025-12-08-ux-researcher/",
"title": "UX Researcher",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2025-12-08",
"lastmod_ts": 1765152000,
"section": "Jobs",
"tags": [],
"description": " Applications for this position closed on December 31st, 2025. Do you want to help improve research communications in all corners of the globe? Come and join the world of non-profit open infrastructure and be part of improving the creation and sharing of knowledge as our new UX Researcher.\nLocation: Remote and global, availability from 2-5pm UTC Mon-Fri to ensure sufficient overlap with the rest of the team. Type: Full-Time, 40 hours a week Mon-Fri. Remuneration: 80k USD equivalent. We pay salaries in the currency of the country in which you\u0026rsquo;re based. We arrive at the local USD-equivalent salary by determining the average 5-year USD exchange rate, to stabilise currency fluctuations. Benefits: Check out our Employee handbook for more details on paid time off, unlimited sick time, paid parental and medical leaves, and more. Reports to: Program Lead, Lena Stoll Timeline: Advertise in December 2025 (closing date is Dec 31st) and offer by end of January or beginning of February 2026 About the role Crossref develops its products and services through three cross-functional programs to guide and accelerate our work. We introduced this new approach to work towards better cross-team alignment, shared responsibility, improved communication and learning, and make more progress on the things our members and users need. The three programs focus on Co-creation and Community Trends, Contributing to the Research Nexus, and Open and Sustainable Operations. Like other functions such as Data Science and Metadata Development, the User Experience Researcher will work across all three programs to build a nuanced understanding of the Crossref community and its needs.\n",
"content": " Applications for this position closed on December 31st, 2025. Do you want to help improve research communications in all corners of the globe? Come and join the world of non-profit open infrastructure and be part of improving the creation and sharing of knowledge as our new UX Researcher.\nLocation: Remote and global, availability from 2-5pm UTC Mon-Fri to ensure sufficient overlap with the rest of the team. Type: Full-Time, 40 hours a week Mon-Fri. Remuneration: 80k USD equivalent. We pay salaries in the currency of the country in which you\u0026rsquo;re based. We arrive at the local USD-equivalent salary by determining the average 5-year USD exchange rate, to stabilise currency fluctuations. Benefits: Check out our Employee handbook for more details on paid time off, unlimited sick time, paid parental and medical leaves, and more. Reports to: Program Lead, Lena Stoll Timeline: Advertise in December 2025 (closing date is Dec 31st) and offer by end of January or beginning of February 2026 About the role Crossref develops its products and services through three cross-functional programs to guide and accelerate our work. We introduced this new approach to work towards better cross-team alignment, shared responsibility, improved communication and learning, and make more progress on the things our members and users need. The three programs focus on Co-creation and Community Trends, Contributing to the Research Nexus, and Open and Sustainable Operations. Like other functions such as Data Science and Metadata Development, the User Experience Researcher will work across all three programs to build a nuanced understanding of the Crossref community and its needs.\nWe are a small team with a big impact, and we’re looking for an empathetic, technically-oriented User Experience Researcher to join us. We are planning to redesign our core system over the coming years, while also continuing to iterate and innovate on the other tools and services that we co-create with our community.\nReporting to the Program Lead for Co-creation and Community Trends, the User Experience Researcher will collaborate closely with our Programs \u0026amp; Services, Technology, Community, Membership, and Data Science teams to build up and advocate for a UX research practice at Crossref, as well as helping inform the work happening in all of our programs. Being community-led means we are not always the experts in what we are developing, so the ability to plan, research, convene, listen, and facilitate consensus-based decisions is a key factor to being successful in this role at Crossref.\nKey responsibilities Plan and conduct user research, interviews, usability studies, and similar activities in close collaboration with cross-functional program groups and functional teams Engage in detailed technical discussions with current and prospective integrators of Crossref systems to explore the needs of users across a wide variety of backgrounds and geographies Build and continuously refine a deep understanding of Crossref’s existing systems and how our community interacts with them - from registering metadata programmatically or via a user interface, to retrieving data from our REST API or gleaning insights from a public data file Work independently with external partners and organisations in the scholarly communications space to explore opportunities for collaboration and carry out pilot projects to gauge the value of potential new service offerings for Crossref members Communicate insights from research activities to program steering groups and other stakeholders in an engaging and actionable way Synthesise insights on user journeys and needs to inform an iterative rebuild of the Crossref system and related services, in close collaboration with the Product Manager Work closely with the Technology and Programs \u0026amp; Services teams to develop strategies for building accessible and extensible user interfaces and API specifications Coordinate work across teams and programs at Crossref, by communicating ideas and writing project plans, gathering and assessing feedback, and using data to drive decision-making Develop and model a culture of UX research and user-centric service development at Crossref Influence the product development strategy and prioritisation by being a voice for members, metadata users, and the wider Crossref community About you You\u0026rsquo;ll need:\nYou are curious about people, systems, and processes You think in terms of the big picture, but you can work closely with others to explain context and deliver on the details You have hands-on UX research experience You have an understanding of and experience with complex workflow systems and are not intimidated by technical intricacies You have enough technical understanding to translate a question about a tool into a research plan - regardless of whether the immediate user of the tool is a human operating a web browser, an API integration, or an automated script You can discuss technical and functional requirements with developers across frontend and backend systems, exploring how to meet user needs with features and functionality to be implemented across the entire Crossref technology stack - which includes Java, Elasticsearch, and Vue.js You care about open infrastructure and want to make scholarly communications better You communicate with empathy and precision You are able to clearly articulate your point of view and say no if needed You can convey and encapsulate strategic and technical concepts in presentations verbally, visually, and textually You understand how to use data and storytelling to inform decision-making and prioritisation You are self-motivated and proactive with a collaborative and can-do attitude, and enjoy working with a small team across multiple time zones You maintain order in a dynamic environment, managing multiple priorities Nice-to-have:\nYou have worked as part of a cross-functional program team in the past You have a background in scholarly comms and/or open infrastructure You have experience working in the non-profit space and for community-led organisations You have knowledge of best practices and regulations in interface design, and would be comfortable developing and owning an accessibility strategy for human and machine interfaces adhering to current WCAG, Section 508 and EU Accessibility Act requirements You are comfortable mocking up simple but effective visuals and wireframes to test with users or to help communicate insights About Crossref \u0026amp; the team We’re a non-profit membership organisation that exists to make scholarly communications better. We rally the community; tag and share metadata; run an open infrastructure; play with technology; and make tools and services—all to help put research in context.\nWe envision a rich and reusable open network of relationships connecting research organisations, people, things, and actions; a scholarly record that the global community can build on forever, for the benefit of society. We are working towards this vision of a ‘Research Nexus’ by demonstrating the value of richer and connected open metadata, incentivising people to meet best practices, while making it easier to do so. “We” means 23,000+ members from 160+ countries, 170+ million records, and nearly 2 billion monthly metadata queries from thousands of tools across the research ecosystem. We want to be a sustainable source of complete, open, and global scholarly metadata and relationships.\nTake a look at our strategic agenda to see the planned work that aims to achieve the vision. The sustainability area aims to make transparent all the processes and procedures we follow to run the operation long-term, including our financials and our ongoing commitment to the Principles of Open Scholarly Infrastructure (POSI). The governance area describes our board and its role in community oversight.\nIt also takes a strong team – because reliable infrastructure needs committed people who contribute to and realise the vision, and thrive doing it. We are a distributed group of 50+ dedicated people who take our work seriously, but don\u0026rsquo;t take ourselves seriously - we like to play quizzes, measure coffee intake, and create 100s of custom slack emojis. We do this through fair policies and working practices, a balanced approach to resourcing, and accountability to each other.\nWe can offer the successful candidate a challenging and fun environment to work in. Together we are dedicated to our global mission and we are constantly adapting to ensure we get there. Take a look at our organisation chart, the latest Annual Meeting recordings, and our financial information.\nThinking of applying? We especially encourage applications from people with backgrounds historically under-represented in research and scholarly communications. You can be based anywhere in the world where we can employ staff, either directly or through an employer of record.\nWe will invite selected candidates to an initial call to discuss the role. Following that, shortlisted candidates will be invited to an interview. You will receive all questions in advance, and the interview will include some questions and/or exercises you’ll have a chance to prepare for. All interviews will be held remotely on Zoom.\nClick here to apply!\nApplications close on December 31st, 2025.\nAnticipated salary for this role is approximately 80k USD-equivalent, paid in local currency. Crossref offers competitive compensation, benefits, flexible work arrangements, professional development opportunities, and a supportive work environment. Check out our Employee Handbook for more details on paid time off, unlimited sick time, paid parental and medical leaves, and more.\nEqual opportunities commitment Crossref is committed to a policy of non-discrimination and equal opportunity for all employees and qualified applicants for employment without regard to race, colour, religion, sex, pregnancy or a condition related to pregnancy, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, national origin, ancestry, age, physical or mental disability, genetic information, veteran status, uniform service member status, or any other protected class under applicable law. Crossref will make reasonable accommodations for qualified individuals with known disabilities in accordance with applicable law.\nThanks for your interest in joining Crossref. We are excited to hear from you! ",
"headings": ["About the role","Key responsibilities","About you","About Crossref \u0026amp; the team","Thinking of applying?","Equal opportunities commitment","Thanks for your interest in joining Crossref. We are excited to hear from you!"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/jobs/2025-10-30-hr-specialist/",
"title": "HR Specialist",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2025-10-30",
"lastmod_ts": 1761782400,
"section": "Jobs",
"tags": [],
"description": " Applications for this position closed on November 14, 2025. Do you want to help improve research communications in all corners of the globe? Come and join the world of nonprofit open infrastructure and be part of improving the creation and sharing of knowledge as our new HR Specialist.\nLocation: Remote and global, with at least two hours overlap with EST/EDT time zone. Type: part-time 25 hours a week Mon-Thu or 32 hours a week Mon-Thu Remuneration: 22/hr USD or local equivalent. Note this is a general guide (as there is no universal currency) and local currency analysis will take place before the final offer. Benefits: Check out our Employee Handbook for more details on paid time off, unlimited sick time, paid parental and medical leaves, and more. Reports to: Head of Human Resources, Michelle Cancel Timeline: Advertise in October-November and offer in December. About the role Reporting to our Head of HR, the HR Specialist is a new role that will support our growing team.\n",
"content": " Applications for this position closed on November 14, 2025. Do you want to help improve research communications in all corners of the globe? Come and join the world of nonprofit open infrastructure and be part of improving the creation and sharing of knowledge as our new HR Specialist.\nLocation: Remote and global, with at least two hours overlap with EST/EDT time zone. Type: part-time 25 hours a week Mon-Thu or 32 hours a week Mon-Thu Remuneration: 22/hr USD or local equivalent. Note this is a general guide (as there is no universal currency) and local currency analysis will take place before the final offer. Benefits: Check out our Employee Handbook for more details on paid time off, unlimited sick time, paid parental and medical leaves, and more. Reports to: Head of Human Resources, Michelle Cancel Timeline: Advertise in October-November and offer in December. About the role Reporting to our Head of HR, the HR Specialist is a new role that will support our growing team.\nWe’re looking for an HR Specialist with a focus on Payroll and Benefits to provide excellent administrative support. You’ll be the main administrator of our HR systems and run smooth payroll and benefits processes. Supporting a global team can be complex at times as it requires familiarity with different sets of local employment laws and benefits. This is an excellent opportunity for someone with curiosity who wants to expand their knowledge on global payroll and benefits practices. The strongest candidates may possess an inclination for detailed, independent, and organizational work.\nCurrently, we are a team of 50, growing to nearly 60 next year. We have staff in over 14 countries, and so this role will play an important part in administering the employment experience of our team. This role sits on the Operations teams, works closely with our Finance team, and will interact with everyone in the organization.\nWe are a diverse distributed team and are seeking candidates who want to foster a strong team. We work a flexible schedule and asynchronously. We ask that candidates have at least 2 hours of availability with EST/EDT timezone for 1:1s, team stand ups, and all staff meetings.\nKey responsibilities Payroll\nAdminister bi-weekly payroll for US with ADP WFN Administer monthly payroll for UK with Paycircle Administer monthly payroll for all other countries with EOR provider Process monthly payments for independent contractors Enter monthly expense reimbursements, EOR provider Review and approval of time tracking submissions Record-keeping of all payroll cycles in Google Suite Maintain accurate personnel data in payroll systems Benefits\nCoordinate renewals and maintain up to date information for global benefits Coordinate annual Open Enrollment for the US health and wellness benefits and manage documentation. Maintain accurate US benefits information. Administer COBRA processes for the US Administer retirement and pension contributions and ensure accuracy Gather monthly invoices for review and approval Administer our global EAP and share monthly newsletters Administer leave system General\nUnderstanding of statutory benefits and taxes Maintenance of SOPs, HR systems, and HR folders Update Holidays, birthday, and anniversary calendars Annual maintenance of US Labor Law posters Support with onboarding and offboarding tasks as needed Support with recruitment tasks and ATS administration as needed Update organizational chart Support annual financial and security audits Answer questions from our team members on payroll and benefits Create and follow-up on tickets from our payroll providers Escalate sensitive and complex issues to Head of HR Participates in cross-collaboration groups Other projects and tasks as assigned About you You\u0026rsquo;ll need:\nOutstanding detail orientation and accuracy Excellent organizational skills and can independently manage tasks and priorities Proper handling of confidential and sensitive information Good written and spoken English Quick learner and can rapidly adapt to new systems and processes Proactive in asking questions and making suggestions for improvements Work efficiently but also kindly and with empathy with our very diverse, global team. Nice-to-have:\nExperience in HR, finance, operations or customer service Experience with HR systems and benefits Experience with global payroll and benefits Strong problem solving skills About Crossref \u0026amp; the team We’re a nonprofit membership organisation that exists to make scholarly communications better. We rally the community; tag and share metadata; run an open infrastructure; play with technology; and make tools and services—all to help put research in context.\nWe envision a rich and reusable open network of relationships connecting research organisations, people, things, and actions; a scholarly record that the global community can build on forever, for the benefit of society. We are working towards this vision of a ‘Research Nexus’ by demonstrating the value of richer and connected open metadata, incentivising people to meet best practices, while making it easier to do so. “We” means 23,000+ members from 160+ countries, 170+ million records, and nearly 2 billion monthly metadata queries from thousands of tools across the research ecosystem. We want to be a sustainable source of complete, open, and global scholarly metadata and relationships.\nTake a look at our strategic agenda to see the planned work that aims to achieve the vision. The sustainability area aims to make transparent all the processes and procedures we follow to run the operation long-term, including our financials and our ongoing commitment to the Principles of Open Scholarly Infrastructure (POSI). The governance area describes our board and its role in community oversight.\nIt also takes a strong team – because reliable infrastructure needs committed people who contribute to and realise the vision, and thrive doing it. We are a distributed group of 40 dedicated people who like to play quizzes, talk about celery (sometimes cucumber), measure coffee intake, and create 100s of custom slack emojis. We enthusiastically support the Oxford comma but waver between use of American or British English. Occasionally we do some work to improve knowledge sharing worldwide— which we take a bit more seriously than ourselves. We do this through fair policies and working practices, a balanced approach to resourcing, and accountability to each other.\nWe can offer the successful candidate a challenging and fun environment to work in. Together we are dedicated to our global mission and we are constantly adapting to ensure we get there. Take a look at our organisation chart, the latest Annual Meeting recordings, and our financial information here.\nThinking of applying? We especially encourage applications from people with backgrounds historically under-represented in research and scholarly communications. You can be based anywhere in the world where we can employ staff, either directly or through an employer of record.\nWe will invite selected candidates to an initial call to discuss the role. Following that, shortlisted candidates will be invited to an interview. You will receive all information in advance, and the interview will include some questions and/or exercises you’ll have a chance to prepare for. All interviews will be held remotely on Zoom.\nClick here to apply!\nApplications close on November 14th, 2025.\nAnticipated salary for this role is approximately 22/hr USD-equivalent, paid in local currency. Crossref offers competitive compensation, benefits, flexible work arrangements, professional development opportunities, and a supportive work environment. Check out our Employee Handbook for more details on paid time off, unlimited sick time, paid parental and medical leaves, and more.\nEqual opportunities commitment Crossref is committed to a policy of non-discrimination and equal opportunity for all employees and qualified applicants for employment without regard to race, colour, religion, sex, pregnancy or a condition related to pregnancy, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, national origin, ancestry, age, physical or mental disability, genetic information, veteran status, uniform service member status, or any other protected class under applicable law. Crossref will make reasonable accommodations for qualified individuals with known disabilities in accordance with applicable law.\nThanks for your interest in joining Crossref. We are excited to hear from you! ",
"headings": ["About the role","Key responsibilities","About you","About Crossref \u0026amp; the team","Thinking of applying?","Equal opportunities commitment","Thanks for your interest in joining Crossref. We are excited to hear from you!"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/jobs/2025-09-11-technical-support-specialist/",
"title": "Technical Support Specialist",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2025-09-11",
"lastmod_ts": 1757548800,
"section": "Jobs",
"tags": [],
"description": " Applications for this position closed on October 2, 2025. Do you want to work directly with Crossref members and metadata users to help progress open science worldwide? Come and join the world of open scholarly infrastructure and metadata as our next Technical Support Specialist.\nLocation: Remote and global with availability from 13:00 to 15:00 UTC Monday through Friday and overlap with working hours in time zones in Africa. Type: Full-time Remuneration: 45-50K USD or local equivalent. Note this is a general guide (as there is no universal currency) and local currency analysis will take place before the final offer. Benefits: Check out our Employee Handbook for more details on paid time off, unlimited sick time, paid parental and medical leaves, and more. Reports to: Head of Participation and Support, Isaac Farley Timeline: Advertise and recruit in September/October and offer in October/November. About the role Reporting to our Head of Participation and Support, the full time Technical Support Specialist is an important role in our Membership team.\n",
"content": " Applications for this position closed on October 2, 2025. Do you want to work directly with Crossref members and metadata users to help progress open science worldwide? Come and join the world of open scholarly infrastructure and metadata as our next Technical Support Specialist.\nLocation: Remote and global with availability from 13:00 to 15:00 UTC Monday through Friday and overlap with working hours in time zones in Africa. Type: Full-time Remuneration: 45-50K USD or local equivalent. Note this is a general guide (as there is no universal currency) and local currency analysis will take place before the final offer. Benefits: Check out our Employee Handbook for more details on paid time off, unlimited sick time, paid parental and medical leaves, and more. Reports to: Head of Participation and Support, Isaac Farley Timeline: Advertise and recruit in September/October and offer in October/November. About the role Reporting to our Head of Participation and Support, the full time Technical Support Specialist is an important role in our Membership team.\nWe’re looking for a Technical Support Specialist to provide first-line help to our international community of publishers, librarians, funders, researchers, and developers on a range of services that help them deposit and retrieve metadata to help them find, link, cite, and assess scholarly content. You’ll be working closely with nine other technical and membership support colleagues to provide support and guidance for people with a wide range of technical experience. The strongest candidates may have a technical background; they’ll also have interest and initiative to grow their technical skills while communicating the complexity of our products and services in straightforward and easy-to-understand terms. You’ll help our community both create and retrieve metadata records with tools ranging from simple user interfaces to APIs and integrations.\nCrossref is a distributed team serving members and users around the world. We are seeking candidates to foster a strong team. We work a flexible schedule; for training and synchronous problem-solving, we also ask that candidates have availability between 13:00 and 15:00 UTC. We’ll also prioritize candidates who have overlap with working hours in Africa (most likely candidates based in Africa, Asia, Australia, and Europe) to balance our existing team.\nKey responsibilities Replying to and solving community queries using the Zendesk support system. Using our various tools and APIs plus knowledge of our XML schema to find the answers to these queries, or pointing users to support materials that will help them. Liaising with colleagues on particularly tricky tickets, escalating as necessary. Working efficiently but also kindly and with empathy with our very diverse, global community. About you We are looking for a proactive candidate with a unique blend of customer service skills, analytical trouble-shooting skills, and a passion to help others. You’ll have an interest in data and technology and will be a quick learner of new technologies. You’ll be able to build relationships with our community members and serve their very diverse needs - from assisting those with basic queries to really digging into some knotty technical queries. Because of this, you’ll also be able to distill those complex and technically challenging queries into easy-to-follow guidance.\nYou’ll need:\nStrong written and spoken English skills The ability to clearly communicate complex technical information to technical and non-technical users, using open questions to get to the bottom of things when queries don’t seem to make sense Quick learner of new technologies; can rapidly pick up new processes and systems; and, have interest and initiative to grow your own technical skills Extremely organized and can bring order to chaos, independently manage multiple priorities Ability to balance a very diverse role, wearing many different hats and providing a wide range of support Proactive in asking questions and making suggestions for improvements Process-driven but able to cope with occasional ambiguity and lack of clarity - open to feedback and adaptable when things change quickly A truly global perspective - we have over 22,500 member organisations from 160 countries across numerous time zones Nice to have:\nExperience helping customers and solving problems in creative and unique ways Experience with or interest in XML, metadata, and Crossref as well as scholarly research and information science Experience with Zendesk and Gitlab or similar support and issue management software Experience with Discourse, similar community forums, and/or past community building Familiarity with REST APIs and metadata retrieval and analysis Strong analytical and problem-solving skills About the team Our technical support team, part of Crossref’s Outreach group, a distributed team with colleagues across Africa, Asia, Europe, and the US, is critical to the ongoing success and day-to-day operations of the organisation. We’re at the forefront of Crossref’s growth, building relationships with new communities in new markets in new ways. We’re aiming for a more open approach to having conversations with people all around the world - including within our growing community forum, which the right candidate will help us expand.\nThis is a remote role. We ask that candidates have availability between 13:00 and 15:00 UTC. You can be based anywhere in the world where we can employ staff, either directly or through an employer of record. We’ll also prioritize candidates with an overlap in their working hours in Africa (most likely candidates based in Asia, Australia, Africa, and Europe) to balance our existing team. Our main working language is English, but there might be opportunities in this job to use other languages if you are able.\nAbout Crossref We’re a nonprofit membership organisation that exists to make scholarly communications better. We rally the community; tag and share metadata; run an open infrastructure; play with technology; and make tools and services—all to help put research in context.\nWe envision a rich and reusable open network of relationships connecting research organisations, people, things, and actions; a scholarly record that the global community can build on forever, for the benefit of society. We are working towards this vision of a ‘Research Nexus’ by demonstrating the value of richer and connected open metadata, incentivising people to meet best practices, while making it easier to do so. “We” means 2 members from 160 countries, 170+ million records, and nearly 2 billion monthly metadata queries from thousands of tools across the research ecosystem. We want to be a sustainable source of complete, open, and global scholarly metadata and relationships.\nTake a look at our strategic agenda to see the planned work that aims to achieve the vision. The sustainability area aims to make transparent all the processes and procedures we follow to run the operation long-term, including our financials and our ongoing commitment to the Principles of Open Scholarly Infrastructure (POSI). The governance area describes our board and its role in community oversight.\nIt also takes a strong team – because reliable infrastructure needs committed people who contribute to and realise the vision, and thrive doing it. We are a distributed group of 48 dedicated people who like to play quizzes, talk about celery (sometimes cucumber), measure coffee intake, and create 100s of custom slack emojis. We enthusiastically support the Oxford comma but waver between use of American or British English. Occasionally we do some work to improve knowledge sharing worldwide— which we take a bit more seriously than ourselves. We do this through fair policies and working practices, a balanced approach to resourcing, and accountability to each other.\nWe can offer the successful candidate a challenging and fun environment to work in. Together we are dedicated to our global mission and we are constantly adapting to ensure we get there. Take a look at our organisation chart, the latest Annual Meeting recordings, and our financial information here.\nThinking of applying? We especially encourage applications from people with backgrounds historically under-represented in research and scholarly communications.\nApplications closed on October 2, 2025.\nEqual opportunities commitment Crossref is committed to a policy of non-discrimination and equal opportunity for all employees and qualified applicants for employment without regard to race, colour, religion, sex, pregnancy or a condition related to pregnancy, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, national origin, ancestry, age, physical or mental disability, genetic information, veteran status, uniform service member status, or any other protected class under applicable law. Crossref will make reasonable accommodations for qualified individuals with known disabilities in accordance with applicable law.\nThanks for your interest in joining Crossref. We are excited to hear from you! ",
"headings": ["About the role","Key responsibilities","About you","About the team","About Crossref","Thinking of applying?","Equal opportunities commitment","Thanks for your interest in joining Crossref. We are excited to hear from you!"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/jobs/2025-08-21-program-technical-lead/",
"title": "Program Technical Lead",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2025-08-20",
"lastmod_ts": 1755648000,
"section": "Jobs",
"tags": [],
"description": " Applications for this position closed on September 8, 2025. Would you like to help shape the future of open infrastructure that serves as the backbone of global scholarly communication? Join Crossref as the Program Technical Lead.\nLocation: Remote and global, to partially overlap with working hours in European time zones. Type: Full-time Remuneration: 120k USD or local equivalent. Note this is a general guide (as there is no universal currency) and local currency analysis will take place before the final offer. Benefits: Check out our Employee Handbook for more details on paid time off, unlimited sick time, paid parental and medical leaves, and more. Reports to: Director of Technology, Dominika Tkaczyk Timeline: Advertise in August-September and offer in October-November. About the role Crossref operates an open infrastructure that connects thousands of scholarly publishers, millions of research articles, and research objects to serve an increasingly diverse set of communities within scholarly publishing, research, funding, and beyond. Our system acts as the backbone for preserving and sharing the scholarly record. We offer a wide array of services to ensure that scholarly research metadata is registered, linked, and distributed. When members register their content with us, we collect both bibliographic and non-bibliographic metadata. We process it so that connections can be made between publications, people, organizations, and other associated outputs. We preserve the metadata we receive as a critical part of the scholarly record. We also make it openly available across a range of interfaces and formats so that the community can use it and build tools with it.\n",
"content": " Applications for this position closed on September 8, 2025. Would you like to help shape the future of open infrastructure that serves as the backbone of global scholarly communication? Join Crossref as the Program Technical Lead.\nLocation: Remote and global, to partially overlap with working hours in European time zones. Type: Full-time Remuneration: 120k USD or local equivalent. Note this is a general guide (as there is no universal currency) and local currency analysis will take place before the final offer. Benefits: Check out our Employee Handbook for more details on paid time off, unlimited sick time, paid parental and medical leaves, and more. Reports to: Director of Technology, Dominika Tkaczyk Timeline: Advertise in August-September and offer in October-November. About the role Crossref operates an open infrastructure that connects thousands of scholarly publishers, millions of research articles, and research objects to serve an increasingly diverse set of communities within scholarly publishing, research, funding, and beyond. Our system acts as the backbone for preserving and sharing the scholarly record. We offer a wide array of services to ensure that scholarly research metadata is registered, linked, and distributed. When members register their content with us, we collect both bibliographic and non-bibliographic metadata. We process it so that connections can be made between publications, people, organizations, and other associated outputs. We preserve the metadata we receive as a critical part of the scholarly record. We also make it openly available across a range of interfaces and formats so that the community can use it and build tools with it.\nCrossref doesn’t take a traditional product management approach, but develops its products and services through three cross-functional programs to guide and accelerate our work. We introduced this new approach to work towards better cross-team alignment, shared responsibility, improved communication and learning, and make more progress on the things members need. The three programs focus on Co-creation and Community Trends, Contributing to the Research Nexus, and Open and Sustainable Operations, with Metadata as a thread running through all three.\nThe Program Technical Lead will work within the Open and Sustainable Operations (OSO) program. This program manages and oversees all activities related to making our operations more open, transparent, and sustainable. This program focuses on supporting and strengthening the core functions our members rely on and enabling future growth. It includes metadata deposit and processing, most apps for e.g. managing titles, authentication, and architectural and infrastructural projects. This program also includes modernising our operations in general, which is not just technology but also finance and human resources, so projects like membership process automation, financial analyses, and business system integrations.\nWe are looking for a Program Technical Lead who would coordinate the technical work within the OSO program, partner with the OSO Program Lead to shape the future technical direction within the program, help prioritise and manage the work, share the ownership of the roadmap, and coordinate different technical functions (infrastructure, development, data science) to achieve the program goals.\nAs part of this role, you would lead a group of software developers and work with other programs to modernise our systems as we transition from a single, complex monolith to a network of interconnected modules. In this role, you should be comfortable working with legacy codebases while also designing new components.\nKey responsibilities Guide the technical direction of the OSO program Ensure that architecture and implementation decisions within the program align with our long-term technical approach Partner with the OSO Program Lead to maintain the roadmap, set priorities, and plan future work Work with other programs to modernise our systems for the long term Coordinate between different technical functions (infrastructure, development, data science) in the projects undertaken within the program Help make sure a healthy balance between maintenance tasks, modernisation, and new features and services is maintained Identify and recruit for needed additional technical skills and expertise within the program Promote best practices and modern technical approaches within the team Oversee the work done with contractors, as needed Be a proactive member of the Technology team’s leadership; contribute to our broader strategy as a member of Crossref’s Senior Management Team (SMT) responsible for planning and priority setting across the organisation Build a shared understanding of the community needs and propagate that within the technology team Engage with the community as appropriate and represent Crossref in working groups, collaborative community initiatives, and at events both online and occasionally in person About you Essential skills and experience:\nMinimum 5 years of technical leadership experience, either in an official capacity or through senior technical roles Background in a technical role such as software developer, DevOps engineer, data engineer, or similar Proven ability to coordinate and lead technical projects, including planning, goal setting, and organising tasks to achieve outcomes Team management skills, such as communication, listening, conflict resolution, empathy, and coaching Understanding of systems thinking and software design principles Familiarity with Java and at least one additional programming language Familiarity with relational databases and REST APIs Comfortable overseeing maintenance and improving legacy codebases Strong analytical and problem-solving skills Ability to work independently while actively collaborating and consulting with others Good communication skills with the ability to explain technical concepts to non-technical audiences Confident in articulating your perspective and able to push back or say no when necessary Nice-to-have:\nBackground in scholarly communications and/or open infrastructure/open metadata Experience working in the non-profit sector or with community-led organisations Familiarity with cloud-native technologies and environments Familiarity with search engines Experience coordinating external collaborations and contractors Experience working within cross-functional teams Knowledge of authentication and authorisation systems Experience designing scalable systems About Crossref \u0026amp; the team We’re a nonprofit membership organisation that exists to make scholarly communications better. We rally the community; tag and share metadata; run an open infrastructure; play with technology; and make tools and services—all to help put research in context.\nWe envision a rich and reusable open network of relationships connecting research organisations, people, things, and actions; a scholarly record that the global community can build on forever, for the benefit of society. We are working towards this vision of a ‘Research Nexus’ by demonstrating the value of richer and connected open metadata, incentivising people to meet best practices, while making it easier to do so. “We” means 2 members from 160 countries, 170+ million records, and nearly 2 billion monthly metadata queries from thousands of tools across the research ecosystem. We want to be a sustainable source of complete, open, and global scholarly metadata and relationships.\nTake a look at our strategic agenda to see the planned work that aims to achieve the vision. The sustainability area aims to make transparent all the processes and procedures we follow to run the operation long-term, including our financials and our ongoing commitment to the Principles of Open Scholarly Infrastructure (POSI). The governance area describes our board and its role in community oversight.\nIt also takes a strong team – because reliable infrastructure needs committed people who contribute to and realise the vision, and thrive doing it. We are a distributed group of 49 dedicated people who like to play quizzes, talk about celery (sometimes cucumber), measure coffee intake, and create 100s of custom slack emojis. We enthusiastically support the Oxford comma but waver between use of American or British English. Occasionally we do some work to improve knowledge sharing worldwide— which we take a bit more seriously than ourselves. We do this through fair policies and working practices, a balanced approach to resourcing, and accountability to each other.\nWe can offer the successful candidate a challenging and fun environment to work in. Together we are dedicated to our global mission and we are constantly adapting to ensure we get there. Take a look at our organisation chart, the latest Annual Meeting recordings, and our financial information here.\nThinking of applying? We especially encourage applications from people with backgrounds historically under-represented in research and scholarly communications. You can be based anywhere in the world where we can employ staff, either directly or through an employer of record.\nWe will invite selected candidates to an initial call to discuss the role. Following that, shortlisted candidates will be invited to an interview. You will receive all questions in advance, and the interview will include some questions and/or exercises you’ll have a chance to prepare for. All interviews will be held remotely on Zoom.\nClick here to apply!\nApplications closed on September 8th, 2025.\nAnticipated salary for this role is approximately 120k USD-equivalent, paid in local currency. Crossref offers competitive compensation, benefits, flexible work arrangements, professional development opportunities, and a supportive work environment. Check out our Employee Handbook for more details on paid time off, unlimited sick time, paid parental and medical leaves, and more.\nEqual opportunities commitment Crossref is committed to a policy of non-discrimination and equal opportunity for all employees and qualified applicants for employment without regard to race, colour, religion, sex, pregnancy or a condition related to pregnancy, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, national origin, ancestry, age, physical or mental disability, genetic information, veteran status, uniform service member status, or any other protected class under applicable law. Crossref will make reasonable accommodations for qualified individuals with known disabilities in accordance with applicable law.\nThanks for your interest in joining Crossref. We are excited to hear from you! ",
"headings": ["About the role","Key responsibilities","About you","About Crossref \u0026amp; the team","Thinking of applying?","Equal opportunities commitment","Thanks for your interest in joining Crossref. We are excited to hear from you!"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/jobs/2025-07-09-product-manager/",
"title": "Product Manager",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2025-08-01",
"lastmod_ts": 1754006400,
"section": "Jobs",
"tags": [],
"description": " Applications for this position closed on July 30th, 2025. Do you want to help improve research communications in all corners of the globe? Come and join the world of nonprofit open infrastructure and be part of improving the creation and sharing of knowledge as our new Product Manager.\nLocation: Remote and global, availability from 2-5pm UTC Monday through Friday to ensure sufficient overlap with the rest of the team Type: Full-time Remuneration: 85-90k USD or local equivalent. Note this is a general guide (as there is no universal currency) and local currency analysis will take place before the final offer. Reports to: Program Lead, Sara Bowman Timeline: Advertise in July and offer in August-September. About the role Crossref doesn’t take a traditional product management approach, but develops its products and services through three cross-functional programs to guide and accelerate our work. We introduced this new approach to work towards better cross-team alignment, shared responsibility, improved communication and learning, and make more progress on the things members need. The three programs focus on Co-creation and Community Trends, Contributing to the Research Nexus, and Open and Sustainable Operations.\n",
"content": " Applications for this position closed on July 30th, 2025. Do you want to help improve research communications in all corners of the globe? Come and join the world of nonprofit open infrastructure and be part of improving the creation and sharing of knowledge as our new Product Manager.\nLocation: Remote and global, availability from 2-5pm UTC Monday through Friday to ensure sufficient overlap with the rest of the team Type: Full-time Remuneration: 85-90k USD or local equivalent. Note this is a general guide (as there is no universal currency) and local currency analysis will take place before the final offer. Reports to: Program Lead, Sara Bowman Timeline: Advertise in July and offer in August-September. About the role Crossref doesn’t take a traditional product management approach, but develops its products and services through three cross-functional programs to guide and accelerate our work. We introduced this new approach to work towards better cross-team alignment, shared responsibility, improved communication and learning, and make more progress on the things members need. The three programs focus on Co-creation and Community Trends, Contributing to the Research Nexus, and Open and Sustainable Operations.\nThe Product Manager would join the Open and Sustainable Operations (OSO) program. This program manages and oversees all activities related to making our operations more open, transparent, and sustainable. This program focuses on supporting and strengthening the core functions our members rely on and enabling future growth. It includes metadata deposit and processing, most apps for e.g. managing titles, authentication, and architectural and infrastructural projects. This program also includes modernising our operations in general, which is not just technology but also finance and human resources, so projects like membership process automation, financial analyses, and business system integrations.\nWe are a small team with a big impact, and we’re looking for a creative, technically-oriented Product Manager to join us to help us with the rebuild of our content system and related services. Reporting to the OSO Program Lead, the Product Manager will take a coordinating role in rebuilding the current Crossref content system and will convene relevant internal and external stakeholders to drive this project forward. Being community-led means the Product Manager is not always the expert in what they are developing, so the ability to plan, research, convene, listen, and facilitate consensus-based decisions is a key factor to being successful in this role at Crossref.\nKey responsibilities Coordinate work across teams at Crossref within the OSO program, by communicating ideas and writing project plans, gathering and assessing feedback, and using data to drive decision-making Build a strong understanding of Crossref’s existing systems to develop a vision for Crossref’s future systems Integrate usability studies, user research, system investigations, and ongoing community feedback into requirements Write product specifications based on internal and external input, and work closely with the technical team to get these translated into technical specifications Prioritise work within a large project and ensure all relevant teams collaborate to stick to the specified timelines Influence the product development strategy by communicating priorities based on organisational needs and community feedback Define goals, methods, and metrics for the adoption of features and functionality to track success Promote the adoption of new services and features directly with the community About you You think in terms of the big picture, but you can work closely with others to explain context and deliver on the details You can turn a range of inputs into solid action plans and achievable chunks of work You have strong project management skills and can coordinate projects across people and teams You have an understanding and experience of complex workflow systems, writing clear specifications, and working with APIs You have experience working with developers. You are technical enough to discuss critical questions about architecture and product choices with engineers You do whatever it takes to make your product and community successful and love to problem solve, whether that means writing a QA plan, tracking down the root cause of a user’s frustration or working with our data science \u0026amp; dev teams to spin up and test a POC in response to an idea You care about open infrastructure and want to make scholarly communications better You communicate with empathy and precision You are able to clearly articulate your point of view and say no if needed You can convey and encapsulate strategic and technical concepts in presentations verbally, visually, and textually. You are motivated to continually improve products based on community feedback You are experienced in using data to inform decision-making and prioritisation You are self-motivated with a collaborative and can-do attitude, and enjoy working with a small team across multiple time zones You maintain order in a dynamic environment, managing multiple priorities Nice-to-have:\nYou have 5 years of product management experience with internet technologies and/or equivalent experience in the research publishing arena You have experience working with product management tools such as Github, JIRA, Productboard and Miro. You have a background in scholarly comms and/or open infrastructure You have experience working in the non-profit space and for community-led organisations About Crossref \u0026amp; the team We’re a nonprofit membership organisation that exists to make scholarly communications better. We rally the community; tag and share metadata; run an open infrastructure; play with technology; and make tools and services—all to help put research in context.\nWe envision a rich and reusable open network of relationships connecting research organisations, people, things, and actions; a scholarly record that the global community can build on forever, for the benefit of society. We are working towards this vision of a ‘Research Nexus’ by demonstrating the value of richer and connected open metadata, incentivising people to meet best practices, while making it easier to do so. “We” means 24,000+ members from 164 countries, 170+ million records, and nearly 2 billion monthly metadata queries from thousands of tools across the research ecosystem. We want to be a sustainable source of complete, open, and global scholarly metadata and relationships.\nTake a look at our strategic agenda to see the planned work that aims to achieve the vision. The sustainability area aims to make transparent all the processes and procedures we follow to run the operation long-term, including our financials and our ongoing commitment to the Principles of Open Scholarly Infrastructure (POSI). The governance area describes our board and its role in community oversight.\nIt also takes a strong team – because reliable infrastructure needs committed people who contribute to and realise the vision, and thrive doing it. We are a distributed group of 49 dedicated people who like to play quizzes, talk about celery (sometimes cucumber), measure coffee intake, and create 100s of custom slack emojis. We enthusiastically support the Oxford comma but waver between use of American or British English. Occasionally we do some work to improve knowledge sharing worldwide— which we take a bit more seriously than ourselves. We do this through fair policies and working practices, a balanced approach to resourcing, and accountability to each other.\nWe can offer the successful candidate a challenging and fun environment to work in. Together we are dedicated to our global mission and we are constantly adapting to ensure we get there. Take a look at our organisation chart, the latest Annual Meeting recordings, and our financial information here.\nThinking of applying? We especially encourage applications from people with backgrounds historically under-represented in research and scholarly communications. You can be based anywhere in the world where we can employ staff, either directly or through an employer of record.\nWe will invite selected candidates to an initial call to discuss the role. Following that, shortlisted candidates will be invited to an interview. You will receive all questions in advance, and the interview will include some questions and/or exercises you’ll have a chance to prepare for. All interviews will be held remotely on Zoom.\nApplications closed on July 30th, 2025.\nAnticipated salary for this role is approximately 85-90k USD-equivalent, paid in local currency. Crossref offers competitive compensation, benefits, flexible work arrangements, professional development opportunities, and a supportive work environment. As a nonprofit organisation, we prioritize mission over profit.\nEqual opportunities commitment Crossref is committed to a policy of non-discrimination and equal opportunity for all employees and qualified applicants for employment without regard to race, colour, religion, sex, pregnancy or a condition related to pregnancy, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, national origin, ancestry, age, physical or mental disability, genetic information, veteran status, uniform service member status, or any other protected class under applicable law. Crossref will make reasonable accommodations for qualified individuals with known disabilities in accordance with applicable law.\nThanks for your interest in joining Crossref. We are excited to hear from you! ",
"headings": ["About the role","Key responsibilities","About you","About Crossref \u0026amp; the team","Thinking of applying?","Equal opportunities commitment","Thanks for your interest in joining Crossref. We are excited to hear from you!"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/jobs/2025-07-24-devops-engineer/",
"title": "DevOps Engineer",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2025-07-24",
"lastmod_ts": 1753315200,
"section": "Jobs",
"tags": [],
"description": " Applications for this position closed on August 15, 2025. We are seeking a talented DevOps Engineer to join our Infrastructure Services team at Crossref.\nLocation: Remote and global, to partially overlap with working hours in European time zones. Type: Full-time Remuneration: 85-90k USD or local equivalent. Note this is a general guide (as there is no universal currency) and local currency analysis will take place before the final offer. Reports to: Head of Infrastructure Services, Stewart Houten Timeline: Advertise in July-August and offer in September-October. About the role Crossref operates an open infrastructure that connects thousands of scholarly publishers, millions of research articles, and research objects to serve an increasingly diverse set of communities within scholarly publishing, research, funding, and beyond. Our system acts as the backbone for preserving and sharing the scholarly record. We offer a wide array of services to ensure that scholarly research metadata is registered, linked, and distributed. When members register their content with us, we collect both bibliographic and non-bibliographic metadata. We process it so that connections can be made between publications, people, organizations, and other associated outputs. We preserve the metadata we receive as a critical part of the scholarly record. We also make it openly available across a range of interfaces and formats so that the community can use it and build tools with it.\n",
"content": " Applications for this position closed on August 15, 2025. We are seeking a talented DevOps Engineer to join our Infrastructure Services team at Crossref.\nLocation: Remote and global, to partially overlap with working hours in European time zones. Type: Full-time Remuneration: 85-90k USD or local equivalent. Note this is a general guide (as there is no universal currency) and local currency analysis will take place before the final offer. Reports to: Head of Infrastructure Services, Stewart Houten Timeline: Advertise in July-August and offer in September-October. About the role Crossref operates an open infrastructure that connects thousands of scholarly publishers, millions of research articles, and research objects to serve an increasingly diverse set of communities within scholarly publishing, research, funding, and beyond. Our system acts as the backbone for preserving and sharing the scholarly record. We offer a wide array of services to ensure that scholarly research metadata is registered, linked, and distributed. When members register their content with us, we collect both bibliographic and non-bibliographic metadata. We process it so that connections can be made between publications, people, organizations, and other associated outputs. We preserve the metadata we receive as a critical part of the scholarly record. We also make it openly available across a range of interfaces and formats so that the community can use it and build tools with it.\nWe are looking for a skilled DevOps Engineer to contribute to a key component of the global scholarly research infrastructure. You will help maintain our infrastructure, adapt it to modern engineering principles, and evolve to meet the requirements of ever-changing scholarly communication. This is a hands-on engineering role requiring deep Linux expertise, along with a strong focus on automation and observability. You will work alongside developers and data scientists across the broader Technology team, supporting innovation, driving continuous improvement, and promoting transparent operations.\nKey responsibilities Keep the system running by contributing to incident response and post-incident reviews Continuously evaluate and improve infrastructure performance, security, and scalability Build and maintain automation tools and infrastructure-as-code to streamline deployments, configuration management, and operations Implement and enhance observability solutions, including monitoring, logging, and alerting, to ensure high system reliability and visibility Implement and promote best practices around scalable, cost-controlled, and secure operations Collaborate with software developers and data scientists to integrate DevOps best practices into the development lifecycle Participate in architecture and design discussions with a focus on maintainability and reliability Maintain clear and comprehensive documentation for infrastructure systems, processes, and automation pipelines About you Essential skills and experience:\nDeep Linux systems administration experience with containerized workloads Good knowledge of AWS or an alternative cloud provider Enthusiasm for infrastructure-as-code in Terraform, OpenTofu, or similar Experience in building and running CI/CD pipelines Fluency in scripting and automation (Python, Bash, Ansible) Familiarity with cloud-native best practices Pragmatic approach to supporting legacy software Enthusiasm for maintaining clear documentation for infrastructure practices and runbooks Good communication skills and the ability to communicate technical concepts to a non-technical audience Strong analytical and problem-solving skills Willingness to learn new skills and work with a variety of technologies Ability to work independently while actively collaborating and consulting with others Self-motivated, collaborative, and proactive, with a positive attitude and a preference for working in a small, distributed team It would be an advantage if you had experience with some of the following:\nConfiguration management (Ansible, Puppet) JVM-based programming languages (Java, Clojure, Kotlin) Relational databases such as PostgreSQL or MySQL No-SQL databases (ElasticSearch, Redis, DynamoDB) Container management (Fargate, Kubernetes) Message queues (SQS, ActiveMQ, RabbitMQ) Monitoring and observability (Prometheus, Grafana, CloudWatch) About Crossref \u0026amp; the team We’re a nonprofit membership organisation that exists to make scholarly communications better. We rally the community; tag and share metadata; run an open infrastructure; play with technology; and make tools and services—all to help put research in context.\nWe envision a rich and reusable open network of relationships connecting research organisations, people, things, and actions; a scholarly record that the global community can build on forever, for the benefit of society. We are working towards this vision of a ‘Research Nexus’ by demonstrating the value of richer and connected open metadata, incentivising people to meet best practices, while making it easier to do so. “We” means 2 members from 160 countries, 170+ million records, and nearly 2 billion monthly metadata queries from thousands of tools across the research ecosystem. We want to be a sustainable source of complete, open, and global scholarly metadata and relationships.\nTake a look at our strategic agenda to see the planned work that aims to achieve the vision. The sustainability area aims to make transparent all the processes and procedures we follow to run the operation long-term, including our financials and our ongoing commitment to the Principles of Open Scholarly Infrastructure (POSI). The governance area describes our board and its role in community oversight.\nIt also takes a strong team – because reliable infrastructure needs committed people who contribute to and realise the vision, and thrive doing it. We are a distributed group of 49 dedicated people who like to play quizzes, talk about celery (sometimes cucumber), measure coffee intake, and create 100s of custom slack emojis. We enthusiastically support the Oxford comma but waver between use of American or British English. Occasionally we do some work to improve knowledge sharing worldwide— which we take a bit more seriously than ourselves. We do this through fair policies and working practices, a balanced approach to resourcing, and accountability to each other.\nWe can offer the successful candidate a challenging and fun environment to work in. Together we are dedicated to our global mission and we are constantly adapting to ensure we get there. Take a look at our organisation chart, the latest Annual Meeting recordings, and our financial information here.\nThinking of applying? We especially encourage applications from people with backgrounds historically under-represented in research and scholarly communications. You can be based anywhere in the world where we can employ staff, either directly or through an employer of record.\nWe will invite selected candidates to an initial call to discuss the role. Following that, shortlisted candidates will be invited to an interview. You will receive all questions in advance, and the interview will include some questions and/or exercises you’ll have a chance to prepare for. All interviews will be held remotely on Zoom.\nApplications closed on August 15th, 2025.\nAnticipated salary for this role is approximately 85-90k USD-equivalent, paid in local currency. Crossref offers competitive compensation, benefits, flexible work arrangements, professional development opportunities, and a supportive work environment. As a nonprofit organisation, we prioritize mission over profit.\nEqual opportunities commitment Crossref is committed to a policy of non-discrimination and equal opportunity for all employees and qualified applicants for employment without regard to race, colour, religion, sex, pregnancy or a condition related to pregnancy, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, national origin, ancestry, age, physical or mental disability, genetic information, veteran status, uniform service member status, or any other protected class under applicable law. Crossref will make reasonable accommodations for qualified individuals with known disabilities in accordance with applicable law.\nThanks for your interest in joining Crossref. We are excited to hear from you! ",
"headings": ["About the role","Key responsibilities","About you","About Crossref \u0026amp; the team","Thinking of applying?","Equal opportunities commitment","Thanks for your interest in joining Crossref. We are excited to hear from you!"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/jobs/2025-01-16-data-scientist/",
"title": "Data Scientist",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2025-01-16",
"lastmod_ts": 1736985600,
"section": "Jobs",
"tags": [],
"description": " Applications for this position will be closed on February 5, 2025. Are you interested in using data to understand the scholarly landscape better and help the scholarly community? Would you like to help Crossref make better-informed decisions? Join us as a Data Scientist.\nLocation: Remote and global (to partially overlap with working hours in European timezones) Type: Full-time Remuneration: 120k USD or local equivalent. Note this is a general guide (as there is no universal currency) and local currency analysis will take place before the final offer. Reports to: Director of Data Science, Dominika Tkaczyk Timeline: Advertise in January/February and offer by February/March About the role Crossref operates an open infrastructure that connects thousands of scholarly publishers, millions of research articles, and research objects to serve an increasingly diverse set of communities within scholarly publishing, research, funding, and beyond. Our system acts as the backbone for preserving and sharing the scholarly record. We offer a wide array of services to ensure that scholarly research metadata is registered, linked, and distributed. When members register their content with us, we collect both bibliographic and non-bibliographic metadata. We process it so that connections can be made between publications, people, organisations, and other associated outputs. We preserve the metadata we receive as a critical part of the scholarly record. We also make it openly available across a range of interfaces and formats so that the community can use it and build tools with it.\n",
"content": " Applications for this position will be closed on February 5, 2025. Are you interested in using data to understand the scholarly landscape better and help the scholarly community? Would you like to help Crossref make better-informed decisions? Join us as a Data Scientist.\nLocation: Remote and global (to partially overlap with working hours in European timezones) Type: Full-time Remuneration: 120k USD or local equivalent. Note this is a general guide (as there is no universal currency) and local currency analysis will take place before the final offer. Reports to: Director of Data Science, Dominika Tkaczyk Timeline: Advertise in January/February and offer by February/March About the role Crossref operates an open infrastructure that connects thousands of scholarly publishers, millions of research articles, and research objects to serve an increasingly diverse set of communities within scholarly publishing, research, funding, and beyond. Our system acts as the backbone for preserving and sharing the scholarly record. We offer a wide array of services to ensure that scholarly research metadata is registered, linked, and distributed. When members register their content with us, we collect both bibliographic and non-bibliographic metadata. We process it so that connections can be made between publications, people, organisations, and other associated outputs. We preserve the metadata we receive as a critical part of the scholarly record. We also make it openly available across a range of interfaces and formats so that the community can use it and build tools with it.\nOver the last few years, we have witnessed substantial growth in the scholarly community, which has been reflected in the increase in the volume and variety of the data we deal with. On the one hand, this growth opens new possibilities for using the data to understand the scholarly landscape better, better serve the community, and make more informed decisions in a data-driven way. On the other hand, we are facing challenges related to the scale and complexity of the data. To fulfil our data-related ambitions and better address the challenges, Crossref has introduced a new Data Science team. The Data Science team will use scientific research and data science to deliver, assess, improve, and enrich scholarly metadata.\nThe Data Science team will provide in-house data expertise to the Programs and Technology teams relating to system improvements, community impact, metadata enrichment, and other key initiatives. We work in matrix program groups across three areas of focus: Co-create and reflect community trends; Contribute to the research nexus; and Open \u0026amp; sustainable operations. The Data Scientists will be embedded in program steering groups.\nWe are looking for two Data Scientists to join our Data Science team. The roles will have different focuses:\nData analysis \u0026amp; insights: The first role will be responsible for processing and analyzing the scholarly and operational data to help the scholarly community and inform Crossref’s strategy and decisions, as well as proposing new ideas for how we can use the data to fulfil our mission. This role will closely collaborate with all other Crossref teams to co-create ideas and transform them into new knowledge and working solutions. Data availability \u0026amp; engineering: The second role will be responsible for detecting and assessing issues and gaps in the scholarly metadata, as well as researching strategies to increase the completeness and accuracy of the metadata and relationships, using internal and external data sources. This role will collaborate with the Technical and Program teams on transforming the research results into production-level services and workflows. Key responsibilities Data Analysis \u0026amp; Insights Working with scholarly metadata and Crossref operational data to answer questions and gather evidence supporting or disproving hypotheses Detecting, diagnosing and assessing problems and gaps in the scholarly metadata using automated and semi-automated techniques gathering insights from available data to help Crossref make well-informed strategic decisions Analyzing trends and monitoring the results of various decisions and policies researching and proposing new data sources and research opportunities that help to support Crossref’s strategy Evaluating and adopting appropriate data analysis tool(s) for the organisation to use for insights and reporting Presenting the insights and new knowledge learned through data science activities internally and externally Collaborating with all Crossref teams to understand their needs, co-create ideas and research questions, and propose data-driven approaches to address them Collaborating with the data science and academic research community in the fields of bibliometrics, scientometrics, digital libraries, and similar Engaging with members, users, and partner organisations to understand trends and needs, and contribute to others’ community initiatives and awareness Implementing and promoting good practices around research, data management, data governance, and transparency Data Availability \u0026amp; Engineering Detecting, diagnosing and assessing problems and gaps in the scholarly metadata using automated and semi-automated techniques Researching automatic and semi-automatic strategies to increase the completeness and accuracy of the metadata and relationships, for example, through data cleaning, metadata matching, metadata extraction from unstructured sources Using evaluation techniques to estimate the quality of automated strategies Proposing additional metadata sources, assessing the overlap between different databases and researching strategies for metadata merging Collaborating with the Metadata team on modelling of the metadata gathered from multiple sources and inferred automatically, considering provenance information Collaborating with the Technology and Program teams on transforming the research results into production-level services Communicating the insights and new knowledge learned through data science activities internally and externally Collaborating with the data science and academic research community in the fields of bibliometrics, scientometrics, digital libraries, and similar Engaging with members, users, and partner organisations to understand trends and needs, and contribute to others’ community initiatives and awareness Implementing and promoting good practices around research, data management, data governance, and transparency About you Essential experience and skills:\nMinimum 3 years of hands-on experience in data science, data engineering, applied research, or similar Proven track record of designing, running, and communicating data science experiments Experience with using and developing data science-based tools and services Experience with software and data engineering Strong analytical and problem-solving skills Expertise in Python programming language Familiarity with machine learning concepts and methods Familiarity with relational databases and REST APIs Willingness to learn new skills and work with a variety of technologies Ability to work independently in a self-directed way while consulting with others and collaborating openly Ability to plan and project manage i.e. think ahead, outline goals, and organize steps to achieve the desired outcomes Good communication skills with the ability to explain technical concepts to non-technical audiences Awareness of the limitations of data e.g. relating to cultural or geographic biases Nice-to-have skills:\nExperience with scholarly metadata Experience with metadata modelling Knowledge of the dynamics of research communications and relevant communities Experience with integrating data from multiple sources Familiarity with JSON and mixed-content model XML Experience with natural language processing techniques Experience with statistical inference and sampling Experience with large-scale data processing frameworks such as Spark Experience with AWS services Experience with search engines such as Elasticsearch Experience with deploying and maintaining machine learning solutions in production Experience with data visualization tools About Crossref \u0026amp; the team We’re a nonprofit membership organisation that exists to make scholarly communications better. We rally the community; tag and share metadata; run an open infrastructure; play with technology; and make tools and services—all to help put research in context.\nWe envision a rich and reusable open network of relationships connecting research organisations, people, things, and actions; a scholarly record that the global community can build on forever, for the benefit of society. We are working towards this vision of a ‘Research Nexus’ by demonstrating the value of richer and connected open metadata, incentivising people to meet best practices, while making it easier to do so. “We” means 22,000+ members from 160 countries, 170+ million records, and nearly 2 billion monthly metadata queries from thousands of tools across the research ecosystem. We want to be a sustainable source of complete, open, and global scholarly metadata and relationships.\nTake a look at our strategic agenda to see the planned work that aims to achieve the vision. The sustainability area aims to make transparent all the processes and procedures we follow to run the operation long-term, including our financials and our ongoing commitment to the Principles of Open Scholarly Infrastructure (POSI). The governance area describes our board and its role in community oversight.\nIt also takes a strong team – because reliable infrastructure needs committed people who contribute to and realise the vision, and thrive doing it. We are a distributed group of 46 dedicated people who like to play quizzes, talk about celery (sometimes cucumber), measure coffee intake, and create 100s of custom slack emojis. We enthusiastically support the Oxford comma but waver between use of American or British English. Occasionally we do some work to improve knowledge sharing worldwide— which we take a bit more seriously than ourselves. We do this through fair policies and working practices, a balanced approach to resourcing, and accountability to each other.\nWe can offer the successful candidate a challenging and fun environment to work in. Together we are dedicated to our global mission and we are constantly adapting to ensure we get there. Take a look at our organisation chart, the latest Annual Meeting recordings, and our financial information here.\nThinking of applying? We especially encourage applications from people with backgrounds historically under-represented in research and scholarly communications. You can be based anywhere in the world where we can employ staff, either directly or through an employer of record.\nClick here to apply!\nPlease strive to submit your application by February 5, 2025.\nAnticipated salary for this role is approximately 120k USD-equivalent, paid in local currency. Crossref offers competitive compensation, benefits, flexible work arrangements, professional development opportunities, and a supportive work environment. As a nonprofit organisation, we prioritize mission over profit.\nEqual opportunities commitment Crossref is committed to a policy of non-discrimination and equal opportunity for all employees and qualified applicants for employment without regard to race, colour, religion, sex, pregnancy or a condition related to pregnancy, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, national origin, ancestry, age, physical or mental disability, genetic information, veteran status, uniform service member status, or any other protected class under applicable law. Crossref will make reasonable accommodations for qualified individuals with known disabilities in accordance with applicable law.\nThanks for your interest in joining Crossref. We are excited to hear from you! ",
"headings": ["About the role","Key responsibilities","Data Analysis \u0026amp; Insights","Data Availability \u0026amp; Engineering","About you","About Crossref \u0026amp; the team","Thinking of applying?","Equal opportunities commitment","Thanks for your interest in joining Crossref. We are excited to hear from you!"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/jobs/2024-12-05-technical-support-specialist/",
"title": "Technical Support Specialist",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2024-12-05",
"lastmod_ts": 1733356800,
"section": "Jobs",
"tags": [],
"description": " Applications for this position will be closed on December 20, 2024. Do you want to work directly with Crossref members and metadata users to help progress open science worldwide? Come and join the world of open scholarly infrastructure and metadata as our next Technical Support Specialist.\nLocation: Remote and global with availability from 13:00 to 15:00 UTC Monday through Friday Type: Full-time Remuneration: 45-50K USD or local equivalent. Note this is a general guide (as there is no universal currency) and local currency analysis will take place before the final offer. Reports to: Head of Participation and Support, Isaac Farley Timeline: Advertise and recruit in December/offer in January About the role Reporting to our Head of Participation and Support, the full time Technical Support Specialist is an important role in our Membership team.\n",
"content": " Applications for this position will be closed on December 20, 2024. Do you want to work directly with Crossref members and metadata users to help progress open science worldwide? Come and join the world of open scholarly infrastructure and metadata as our next Technical Support Specialist.\nLocation: Remote and global with availability from 13:00 to 15:00 UTC Monday through Friday Type: Full-time Remuneration: 45-50K USD or local equivalent. Note this is a general guide (as there is no universal currency) and local currency analysis will take place before the final offer. Reports to: Head of Participation and Support, Isaac Farley Timeline: Advertise and recruit in December/offer in January About the role Reporting to our Head of Participation and Support, the full time Technical Support Specialist is an important role in our Membership team.\nWe’re looking for a Technical Support Specialist to provide first-line help to our international community of publishers, librarians, funders, researchers, and developers on a range of services that help them deposit metadata to help them find, link, cite, and assess scholarly content. You’ll be working closely with nine other technical and membership support colleagues to provide support and guidance for people with a wide range of technical experience. The strongest candidates will not necessarily be from a technical background, but they’ll have interest and initiative to grow their technical skills while communicating the complexity of our products and services in straightforward and easy-to-understand terms. You’ll help our community both create and retrieve metadata records with tools ranging from simple user interfaces to APIs and integrations.\nCrossref is a distributed team serving members and users around the world. We are seeking candidates to foster a strong team. We work a flexible schedule; for training and synchronous problem-solving, we also ask that candidates have availability between 13:00 and 15:00 UTC.\nKey responsibilities Replying to and solving community queries using the Zendesk support system. Using our various tools and APIs plus knowledge of our XML schema to find the answers to these queries, or pointing users to support materials that will help them. Liaising with colleagues on particularly tricky tickets, escalating as necessary. Working efficiently but also kindly and with empathy with our very diverse, global community. About you We are looking for a proactive candidate with a unique blend of customer service skills, analytical trouble-shooting skills, and a passion to help others. You’ll have an interest in data and technology and will be a quick learner of new technologies. You’ll be able to build relationships with our community members and serve their very diverse needs - from assisting those with basic queries to really digging into some knotty technical queries. Because of this, you’ll also be able to distill those complex and technically challenging queries into easy-to-follow guidance.\nYou’ll need:\nThe ability to clearly communicate complex technical information to technical and non-technical users, using open questions to get to the bottom of things when queries don’t seem to make sense Quick learner of new technologies; can rapidly pick up new processes and systems; and, have interest and initiative to grow your own technical skills Extremely organized and can bring order to chaos, independently manage multiple priorities Ability to balance a very diverse role, wearing many different hats and providing a wide range of support Proactive in asking questions and making suggestions for improvements Process-driven but able to cope with occasional ambiguity and lack of clarity - open to feedback and adaptable when things change quickly A truly global perspective - we have over 20,000 member organisations from 160 countries across numerous time zones Nice to have:\nExperience helping customers and solving problems in creative and unique ways Experience with or interest in XML, metadata, and Crossref as well as scholarly research and information science Experience with Zendesk and Gitlab or similar support and issue management software Experience with Discourse, similar community forums, and/or past community building About the team Our technical support team, part of Crossref’s Outreach group, a distributed team with colleagues across Africa, Asia, Europe, and the US, is critical to the ongoing success and day-to-day operations of the organisation. We’re at the forefront of Crossref’s growth, building relationships with new communities in new markets in new ways. We’re aiming for a more open approach to having conversations with people all around the world - including within our growing community forum, which the right candidate will help us expand.\nThis is a remote role. We ask that candidates have availability between 13:00 and 15:00 UTC. You can be based anywhere in the world where we can employ staff, either directly or through an employer of record. Our main working language is English, but there might be opportunities in this job to use other tongues if you are able.\nAbout Crossref We’re a nonprofit membership organisation that exists to make scholarly communications better. We rally the community; tag and share metadata; run an open infrastructure; play with technology; and make tools and services—all to help put research in context.\nWe envision a rich and reusable open network of relationships connecting research organisations, people, things, and actions; a scholarly record that the global community can build on forever, for the benefit of society. We are working towards this vision of a ‘Research Nexus’ by demonstrating the value of richer and connected open metadata, incentivising people to meet best practices, while making it easier to do so. “We” means 20,000+ members from 160 countries, 160+ million records, and nearly 2 billion monthly metadata queries from thousands of tools across the research ecosystem. We want to be a sustainable source of complete, open, and global scholarly metadata and relationships.\nThinking of applying? We especially encourage applications from people with backgrounds historically under-represented in research and scholarly communications.\nClick here to apply!\nPlease strive to submit your application by December 20, 2024.\nEqual opportunities commitment Crossref is committed to a policy of non-discrimination and equal opportunity for all employees and qualified applicants for employment without regard to race, colour, religion, sex, pregnancy or a condition related to pregnancy, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, national origin, ancestry, age, physical or mental disability, genetic information, veteran status, uniform service member status, or any other protected class under applicable law. Crossref will make reasonable accommodations for qualified individuals with known disabilities in accordance with applicable law.\nThanks for your interest in joining Crossref. We are excited to hear from you! ",
"headings": ["About the role","Key responsibilities","About you","About the team","About Crossref","Thinking of applying?","Equal opportunities commitment","Thanks for your interest in joining Crossref. We are excited to hear from you!"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/jobs/2024-10-03-billing-support-specialist/",
"title": "Billing Support Specialist, Part-time",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2024-10-03",
"lastmod_ts": 1727913600,
"section": "Jobs",
"tags": [],
"description": " Applications for this position closed October 21st, 2024. Do you want to help make research communications better in all corners of the globe? Come and join the world of nonprofit open infrastructure as our Billing Support Specialist, Part-time.\nLocation: Remote and global (to overlap with colleagues in East Coast USA) Type: Part-time with 15 to 25 hours per week Remuneration: $20/hour USD or local equivalent. Note this is a general guide (as there is no universal currency) and local currency analysis will take place before the final offer. Reports to: Accounts Receivable Manager, Amy Bosworth Timeline: Advertise and recruit in October/interview and offer in November About the role Reporting to the Accounts Receivable Manager, the part time Billing Support Specialist is a key support role within the Finance Team.\n",
"content": " Applications for this position closed October 21st, 2024. Do you want to help make research communications better in all corners of the globe? Come and join the world of nonprofit open infrastructure as our Billing Support Specialist, Part-time.\nLocation: Remote and global (to overlap with colleagues in East Coast USA) Type: Part-time with 15 to 25 hours per week Remuneration: $20/hour USD or local equivalent. Note this is a general guide (as there is no universal currency) and local currency analysis will take place before the final offer. Reports to: Accounts Receivable Manager, Amy Bosworth Timeline: Advertise and recruit in October/interview and offer in November About the role Reporting to the Accounts Receivable Manager, the part time Billing Support Specialist is a key support role within the Finance Team.\nThe Billing Support Specialist assists in the administration of the financial functions for the Finance Team, with a focus on supporting the billing needs for our global membership community. Crossref has more than 20,000 members in 160 countries; this role will manage inquiries from members across the world, and as such an ideal candidate will be excited to engage with a wide range of community members. The Billing Support Specialist will need to exercise judgment in selecting and applying established procedures correctly and in determining when to refer situations to other support staff.\nKey responsibilities Monitors Zendesk for billing inquiries and resolves or distributes when appropriate Oversees membership form requests Supports in collections initiatives Assists in payment application within accounting platform Aids in other ad hoc financial, administrative and operations projects About you This role provides assistance and support to the Accounts Receivable Manager, the Billing Support Specialist and Director of Finance. This position also works closely with the Membership Experience team.\nThe Billing Support Specialist will need to be organized and have exemplary communication skills. The Billing Support Specialist will be exposed to Accounts Receivable and other aspects of Finance where accuracy will be essential.\nYou’ll need:\n2-3 years of customer service experience Experience in Accounting Systems (Sage Intacct would be ideal) and Microsoft Excel Strong written and verbal communication skills with the ability to communicate clearly and effectively Prior experience with a globally-minded organisation is a plus Critical thinking and problem-solving skills The ability to learn standard processes and apply them when appropriate The ability to track progress on initiatives and follow up on inquires High level of attention to detail About the team The Finance Team at Crossref holds the responsibility for recording and reporting on financial transactions accurately and in a timely manner. We also support the overall membership experience, by billing members accurately and timely, and actively communicating to resolve inquiries they may have about their invoices or payment options. We follow carefully crafted financial controls to ensure that our Financial Reports are robust, accurate and up to date. We work closely with Membership, Technology, and Programs in a variety of ways. Our goal is to provide accurate and timely information so that management can make informed decisions.\nThis is a remote role that will need to overlap with the East Coast, USA. You can be based anywhere in the world where we can employ staff, either directly or through an employer of record.\nAbout Crossref We’re a nonprofit membership organisation that exists to make scholarly communications better. We rally the community; tag and share metadata; run an open infrastructure; play with technology; and make tools and services—all to help put research in context.\nWe envision a rich and reusable open network of relationships connecting research organisations, people, things, and actions; a scholarly record that the global community can build on forever, for the benefit of society. We are working towards this vision of a ‘Research Nexus’ by demonstrating the value of richer and connected open metadata, incentivising people to meet best practices, while making it easier to do so. “We” means 20,000+ members from 160 countries, 160+ million records, and nearly 2 billion monthly metadata queries from thousands of tools across the research ecosystem. We want to be a sustainable source of complete, open, and global scholarly metadata and relationships.\nTake a look at our strategic agenda to see the planned work that aims to achieve the vision. The sustainability area aims to make transparent all the processes and procedures we follow to run the operation long-term, including our financials and our ongoing commitment to the Principles of Open Scholarly Infrastructure (POSI). The governance area describes our board and its role in community oversight.\nIt also takes a strong team – because reliable infrastructure needs committed people who contribute to and realise the vision, and thrive doing it. We are a distributed group of 46 dedicated people who like to play quizzes, talk about celery (sometimes cucumber), measure coffee intake, and create 100s of custom slack emojis. We enthusiastically support the Oxford comma but waver between use of American or British English. Occasionally we do some work to improve knowledge sharing worldwide— which we take a bit more seriously than ourselves. We do this through fair policies and working practices, a balanced approach to resourcing, and accountability to each other.\nWe can offer the successful candidate a challenging and fun environment to work in. Together we are dedicated to our global mission and we are constantly adapting to ensure we get there. Take a look at our organisation chart and view our Annual Reports and financial information here.\nThinking of applying? We especially encourage applications from people with backgrounds historically under-represented in research and scholarly communications.\nApplication deadline was October 21st, 2024\nEqual opportunities commitment Crossref is committed to a policy of non-discrimination and equal opportunity for all employees and qualified applicants for employment without regard to race, colour, religion, sex, pregnancy or a condition related to pregnancy, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, national origin, ancestry, age, physical or mental disability, genetic information, veteran status, uniform service member status, or any other protected class under applicable law. Crossref will make reasonable accommodations for qualified individuals with known disabilities in accordance with applicable law.\nThanks for your interest in joining Crossref. We are excited to hear from you! ",
"headings": ["About the role","Key responsibilities","About you","About the team","About Crossref","Thinking of applying?","Equal opportunities commitment","Thanks for your interest in joining Crossref. We are excited to hear from you!"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/jobs/2023-10-12-senior-developer/",
"title": "Senior Software Developer",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2023-10-12",
"lastmod_ts": 1697068800,
"section": "Jobs",
"tags": [],
"description": " Applications for this position closed October 27, 2023. Do you want to help make research communications better in all corners of the globe? Come and join the world of nonprofit open infrastructure as our new Senior Software Developer.\nLocation: Remote and global (with 3-hour overlap with the UTC-0 time zone) Type: Full-time Remuneration: Approx. EUR 90-95k/USD 128-132k/GBP 56-65k or local equivalent, depending on experience. Note this is a general guide (as there is no universal currency) and local benchmarking will take place before the final offer. Reports to: Head of Software Development, Joe Wass Timeline: Advertise and recruit in October/hire in November About the role We\u0026rsquo;re looking for the next member of the Software Development team. We build, operate and maintain metadata services that enable the global research community. We\u0026rsquo;re on a journey to build features to serve the evolving needs of our changing membership, and migrate our legacy technology. As a team, we have a deep understanding not only of technology, but also the needs of our diverse community.\n",
"content": " Applications for this position closed October 27, 2023. Do you want to help make research communications better in all corners of the globe? Come and join the world of nonprofit open infrastructure as our new Senior Software Developer.\nLocation: Remote and global (with 3-hour overlap with the UTC-0 time zone) Type: Full-time Remuneration: Approx. EUR 90-95k/USD 128-132k/GBP 56-65k or local equivalent, depending on experience. Note this is a general guide (as there is no universal currency) and local benchmarking will take place before the final offer. Reports to: Head of Software Development, Joe Wass Timeline: Advertise and recruit in October/hire in November About the role We\u0026rsquo;re looking for the next member of the Software Development team. We build, operate and maintain metadata services that enable the global research community. We\u0026rsquo;re on a journey to build features to serve the evolving needs of our changing membership, and migrate our legacy technology. As a team, we have a deep understanding not only of technology, but also the needs of our diverse community.\nYou will specify, design and implement improvements, features and services. You will have a key voice in discussions about technical approaches and architecture. You will always keep an eye on software quality and ensure that the code you and your colleagues produce is maintainable, well tested, and of high quality.\nOur new code is written primarily in Kotlin on the back-end and Typescript on the frontend. We have legacy code in Java. We don\u0026rsquo;t expect you to be familiar with our technologies yet, though it\u0026rsquo;s a bonus. This is primarily a back-end role.\nYou should have in-depth knowledge of at least one compiled, typed or functional language (e.g. Java, Clojure, Kotlin, Scala, C#, Go, Typescript etc) and a history of learning new languages and technologies on the job.\nWe are a geographically distributed, remote-first team with flexible working hours.\nKey responsibilities Understand Crossref’s mission and how we support it with our services Collaborate with external stakeholders when needed Pursue continuous improvement across legacy and green-field codebases Work flexibly in multi-functional project teams, especially with the Product team, to design and develop services Ensure that solutions are reliable, responsive, and efficient Produce well-scoped, testable, software specifications Implement and test solutions using Kotlin, Java and other relevant technologies Work closely with the Head of Software Development to solve problems, maintain and improve our services and execute technology changes Provide code reviews and guidance to other developers regarding development practices and help maintain and improve our development environment Identify vulnerabilities and inefficiencies in our system architecture and processes, particularly regarding cloud operations, metrics and testing Communicate proactively with membership and technical support colleagues ensuring they have all the information and tools required to serve our users Openly document and share development plans and workflow changes Be an escalation point for technical support; investigate and respond to occasional but complex user issues; help minimize support demands related to our systems; be part of our on-call team responding to service outages About you We don\u0026rsquo;t expect a successful candidate to tick all of these boxes right away! If you have any questions, please get in touch.\nQualities\nComfortable collaborating with colleagues or stakeholders in the community Have a proven track record of picking up new technologies Outstanding at interpersonal relations and relationship management Comfortable collaborating with colleagues across the organisation Self-directed, a good manager of your own time, with the ability to focus Comfortable being part of a distributed team Curious and tenacious at learning new things and getting to the bottom of problems Skills\nAn expert senior developer with experience in Java, Kotlin, or related languages Experience in Spring or similar frameworks Experienced with continuous integration, testing and delivery frameworks, and cloud operations concepts and techniques Familiar with AWS, containerization and infrastructure management using tools like Terraform Some experience with Python, JavaScript or similar scripting languages Experience working on open source projects Able to quickly understand, refactor and improve legacy code and fix defects A working understanding of XML and document-oriented systems such as Elasticsearch Experience building tools for online scholarly communication or related fields such as Library and information science, etc Ability to create and maintain a project plan Strong at written and verbal communication skills, able to communicate clearly, simply, and effectively About the team The Crossref team is distributed across the world. The Software Development team is based in Europe and the US. We work alongside the Product, Infrastructure and Labs teams.\nAll new code, and most issue tracking, is open source. We strongly believe in open scholarly infrastructure and openness at all stages of the software development lifecycle. We perform code reviews and practice continuous deployment for all new code.\nAs a membership organisation we keep closely in touch with our users, and encourage our developers to be familiar with our community.\nWe work fully remotely, but try to meet in person at least once a year. This is a full-time position, but working hours are flexible. The applicant should expect they will need to travel internationally to work with colleagues for about 5-10 days a year. If you have any questions we would be happy to discuss.\nYou can be based anywhere in the world where we can employ staff, either directly or through an employer of record.\nAbout Crossref We’re a not-for-profit membership organisation that exists to make scholarly communications better. We rally the community; tag and share metadata; run an open infrastructure; play with technology; and make tools and services—all to help put research in context.\nCrossref sits at the heart of the global exchange of research information, and our job is to make it possible—and easier—to find, cite, link, assess, and reuse research, from journals and books, to preprints, data, and grants. Through partnerships and collaborations we engage with members in 148 countries (and counting) and it’s very important to us to nurture that community.\nWe’re about 45 staff and remote-first. This means that we support our teams working asynchronously and to flexible hours. Some international travel will likely be appropriate, for example to in-person meetings with colleagues and members, but in line with our travel policy. We are dedicated to an open and fair research ecosystem and that’s reflected in our ethos and staff culture. We like to work hard but we have fun too! We take a creative, iterative approach to our projects, and believe that all team members can enrich the culture and performance of our whole organisation. Check out the organisation chart.\nWe are active supporters of ongoing professional development opportunities and promote self-learning at every opportunity. Crossref has a healthy financial situation and we only continue to grow. While we won’t have a clear hierarchical path for staff to follow, there are always evolving opportunities to progress and be challenged.\nThinking of applying? This position is full time and, as for all Crossref employees, location is flexible. The Crossref team is geographically distributed in Europe and North America and we fully support working from home. It would be good to have a minimum 3-hour overlap with the UTC-0 time zone.\nWe especially encourage applications from people with backgrounds historically under-represented in research and scholarly communications.\nApplications Closed\nEqual opportunities commitment Crossref is committed to a policy of non-discrimination and equal opportunity for all employees and qualified applicants for employment without regard to race, colour, religion, sex, pregnancy or a condition related to pregnancy, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, national origin, ancestry, age, physical or mental disability, genetic information, veteran status, uniform service member status, or any other protected class under applicable law. Crossref will make reasonable accommodations for qualified individuals with known disabilities in accordance with applicable law.\nThanks for your interest in joining Crossref. We are excited to hear from you! ",
"headings": ["About the role","Key responsibilities","About you","About the team","About Crossref","Thinking of applying?","Equal opportunities commitment","Thanks for your interest in joining Crossref. We are excited to hear from you!"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/jobs/2023-09-27-finance-clerk/",
"title": "Finance Clerk",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2023-09-27",
"lastmod_ts": 1695772800,
"section": "Jobs",
"tags": [],
"description": " Applications for this position closed October, 2023. Do you want to help make research communications better in all corners of the globe? Come and join the world of nonprofit open infrastructure as our new Finance Clerk.\nLocation: Remote and global (to overlap with colleagues in East Coast USA) Type: Full-time Remuneration: 40-44k USD Reports to: Supervising Accountant, Maria Sullivan Timeline: Advertise and recruit in September-October/hire in October-November About the role Reporting to the Supervising Accountant, the Finance Clerk is a key role within the Finance team. The Finance Clerk is responsible for full cycle Accounts Payable, assuring financial transactions are proper recording within the accounting system. This position is the lead contact for vendor relations and our internal expense reporting application. The position will also be cross trained on cash application and membership support.\n",
"content": " Applications for this position closed October, 2023. Do you want to help make research communications better in all corners of the globe? Come and join the world of nonprofit open infrastructure as our new Finance Clerk.\nLocation: Remote and global (to overlap with colleagues in East Coast USA) Type: Full-time Remuneration: 40-44k USD Reports to: Supervising Accountant, Maria Sullivan Timeline: Advertise and recruit in September-October/hire in October-November About the role Reporting to the Supervising Accountant, the Finance Clerk is a key role within the Finance team. The Finance Clerk is responsible for full cycle Accounts Payable, assuring financial transactions are proper recording within the accounting system. This position is the lead contact for vendor relations and our internal expense reporting application. The position will also be cross trained on cash application and membership support.\nA successful candidate in this role will be comfortable performing a broad range of duties,working remotely and independently, and paying close attention to details.\nKey responsibilities Responsible for the full cycle AP function for both the UK and USA entities including entering invoices into our accounting system, obtaining payment approvals and facilitating payment processing (checks/wires/direct debits/ACHs) Responsible for managing corporate credit cards including reviewing and reconciling to statements monthly Responsible for the Expensify expense reporting platform; including maintaining knowledge of updates and enhancements and troubleshooting Onboard/train new hires in Expensify and be the main point of contact for team members on system and reimbursement process inquiries Responsible for the yearly 1099/1096 filing and vendor reporting Act as backup for other Finance Team staff Responding to Zendesk inquires and assisting in collections as needed Assist with cash application Assist with monthly and quarterly financial reporting Assist with audits Other ad hoc financial and operational projects About you The successful candidate will possess the following\nThe ability to organize work, set priorities, follow-up and work proactively and accurately Excellent oral, written, data entry and communication skills Have experience in a multi-currency environment, to include USD \u0026amp; GBP Equally comfortable communicating with colleagues and our members to help problem solve Experience working across timezones, with an understanding of the global nature of our work and community A self-starter and problem solver with an exceptional attention to detail Be comfortable using a variety of technology and software to communicate with a distributed staff It would be a plus if you possess the following\n2-5 years of accounting experience; basic understanding of US GAAP accounting practices Solid experience using cloud-based/accounting applications (Intacct) Solid experience using Microsoft Excel and other tools (gmail/google docs, etc) Bachelor\u0026rsquo;s Degree in Accounting/Business or equivalent business experience About Crossref We’re a not-for-profit membership organisation that exists to make scholarly communications better. We rally the community; tag and share metadata; run an open infrastructure; play with technology; and make tools and services—all to help put research in context.\nCrossref sits at the heart of the global exchange of research information, and our job is to make it possible—and easier—to find, cite, link, assess, and reuse research, from journals and books, to preprints, data, and grants. Through partnerships and collaborations we engage with members in 148 countries (and counting) and it’s very important to us to nurture that community.\nWe’re about 45 staff and remote-first. This means that we support our teams working asynchronously and to flexible hours. Some international travel will likely be appropriate, for example to in-person meetings with colleagues and members, but in line with our travel policy. We are dedicated to an open and fair research ecosystem and that’s reflected in our ethos and staff culture. We like to work hard but we have fun too! We take a creative, iterative approach to our projects, and believe that all team members can enrich the culture and performance of our whole organisation. Check out the organisation chart.\nWe are active supporters of ongoing professional development opportunities and promote self-learning at every opportunity. Crossref has a healthy financial situation and we only continue to grow. While we won’t have a clear hierarchical path for staff to follow, there are always evolving opportunities to progress and be challenged.\nAbout the team This role is in our Finance and Operations team which consists of 6 (soon to be 7) team members remotely sitting in the East Coast, USA. The Finance Clerk is a remote role that will need to overlap with East Coast, USA for at least 3-4 working hours. You can be based anywhere in the world where we can employ staff, either directly or through an employer of record.\nThinking of applying? We especially encourage applications from people with backgrounds historically under-represented in research and scholarly communications.\nApplications closed\nEqual opportunities commitment Crossref is committed to a policy of non-discrimination and equal opportunity for all employees and qualified applicants for employment without regard to race, colour, religion, sex, pregnancy or a condition related to pregnancy, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, national origin, ancestry, age, physical or mental disability, genetic information, veteran status, uniform service member status, or any other protected class under applicable law. Crossref will make reasonable accommodations for qualified individuals with known disabilities in accordance with applicable law.\nThanks for your interest in joining Crossref. We are excited to hear from you! ",
"headings": ["About the role","Key responsibilities","About you","About Crossref","About the team","Thinking of applying?","Equal opportunities commitment","Thanks for your interest in joining Crossref. We are excited to hear from you!"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/jobs/2023-04-13-member-experience-manager/",
"title": "Member Experience Manager",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2023-04-13",
"lastmod_ts": 1681344000,
"section": "Jobs",
"tags": [],
"description": " Applications for this position closed May 1st, 2023. Do you want to help make research communications better in all corners of the globe? Come and join the world of nonprofit open infrastructure and be part of improving the creation and sharing of knowledge as our brand new Member Experience Manager.\nLocation: Remote and global (to overlap with colleagues in Indonesia and East Coast USA) Remuneration: Approx. EUR 58,000 - 70,000 or local equivalent, depending on experience. Note this is a general guide (as there is no universal currency) and local benchmarking will take place before final offer. Reports to: Head of Member Experience, Amanda Bartell Timeline: Advertise and recruit in April/May; offer by end of May About the role This position is a mix of community and relationship management alongside business process management, data quality, and analytics; it’s a very varied role and ideal for an experienced generalist with a passion for collaboration and transparency.\n",
"content": " Applications for this position closed May 1st, 2023. Do you want to help make research communications better in all corners of the globe? Come and join the world of nonprofit open infrastructure and be part of improving the creation and sharing of knowledge as our brand new Member Experience Manager.\nLocation: Remote and global (to overlap with colleagues in Indonesia and East Coast USA) Remuneration: Approx. EUR 58,000 - 70,000 or local equivalent, depending on experience. Note this is a general guide (as there is no universal currency) and local benchmarking will take place before final offer. Reports to: Head of Member Experience, Amanda Bartell Timeline: Advertise and recruit in April/May; offer by end of May About the role This position is a mix of community and relationship management alongside business process management, data quality, and analytics; it’s a very varied role and ideal for an experienced generalist with a passion for collaboration and transparency.\nYou’ll be managing two membership specialists to help ensure our members have a smooth experience with us, with a particular focus on a carefully-managed application and onboarding process, reducing manual tasks, and making things more efficient and transparent wherever possible. You’ll be ensuring that our members understand the role that they and Crossref play in building the vision of a shared research nexus and helping them to join and contribute the best quality and quantity of metadata about their research with the global scholarly community. You’ll be overseeing data integrity and reporting on trends to provide actionable insights. You’ll be active in the scholarly communications community, contributing to volunteer-led co-creation initiatives. And you’ll work hand-in-hand with community engagement colleagues to support key programs for members, sponsors, service providers, and metadata users.\nKey responsibilities Managing our small membership team of two member support specialists (one based in the UK, one based in Indonesia), along with three membership contractors. Managing the new member onboarding process to ensure members have all the information they need to succeed. Supporting the membership specialists by answering particularly involved or knotty questions through our support system (Zendesk), our Community Forum (Discourse), face-to-face (via zoom and in person), or on social media like our growing mastodon presence. Making our membership application process as smooth as possible for new members, while ensuring that applicants have all the information they need to get the most out of their membership. Identifying and implementing process improvements for a more efficient experience (including for our staff) by eliminating manual and intensive tasks where possible. Managing our automated onboarding email program. Working with long-term members to make the most of their membership and follow the member obligations Providing virtual (and in-person) training, support, and metadata ‘health checks’, following up and triaging issues to other expert colleagues. Identifying issues and working proactively with members to solve problems, including any who are not meeting their membership obligations. Working with the membership specialists to ensure that our member data is accurate and up-to-date, and that our CRM system (Sugar) can meet the organisation’s reporting needs. Using the CRM reports to provide actionable insights on trends. Being a key point of contact for and working with our finance team to help improve the payment and invoicing experience for everyone. Supporting meeting our openness and transparency goals (see POSI) by exposing publicly all membership operations and activities. Participating in community events and volunteer initiatives to maintain an awareness of community issues and providing guidance or co-creating shared resources. Working hand-in-hand with community engagement colleagues to support key programs for sponsors, service providers, and metadata users - as these programs support all our members. Helping to create and implement rollout plans for new features that will affect our community, such as new ways of logging in or interacting with our systems, changes to fees, or opportunities to participate in or test Crossref services and initiatives. About you We’re looking for a colleague who will take this opportunity and make it their own. While we have many documented processes for handling such a large membership operation, your fresh eyes will be able to highlight and improve how we work. Ideally, you will have an understanding of the dynamics within the academic research and open science environment, know what metadata is and why it matters, and have the ability to engage with and enthuse a wide range of stakeholders. You’ll have a love of data and analytics, a comfort level with metadata and databases, and a logical, systematic approach to prioritising and work in general.\nYou’ll be experienced working within the broad areas of community, process, and data. You’ll be as comfortable demonstrating online tools or explaining complex concepts (such as the ‘research nexus’) as you are with handling detailed data and systems like CRMs. And you are a persuasive presenter with excellent written English skills (with other languages highly desirable). It’s particularly important that you can explain complicated concepts and multi-step processes clearly and convincingly. You’re able to build strong relationships and collaborate with internal teams and community partners, keeping member experience at the forefront of colleagues’ activity. You’ll be comfortable taking the initiative to lead conversations with people at all levels, with team management experience with remote and international teams. You’ll need to be extremely organized and attentive to detail. You’ll be able to follow set processes carefully and accurately, but adapt when situations change and simplify processes where possible. You’ll have a passion to understand and improve member experience, and are able to build credibility, trust, and relationships with our members, sponsors, service providers, metadata users, and partners. You’re a quick learner of new technologies and can rapidly pick up new programs and systems. You’ll ideally have experience with Zendesk or similar support systems and have used CRM systems (such as Sugar) - and you might even dabble in XML or JSON (we all succumb eventually 😁). You’ll have a truly global perspective - we have 18,000 member organisations from 150 countries across numerous time zones and they engage and interact with us in numerous ways. About Crossref We’re a not-for-profit membership organisation that exists to make scholarly communications better. We rally the community; tag and share metadata; run an open infrastructure; play with technology; and make tools and services—all to help put research in context.\nCrossref sits at the heart of the global exchange of research information, and our job is to make it possible—and easier—to find, cite, link, assess, and reuse research, from journals and books, to preprints, data, and grants. Through partnerships and collaborations we engage with members in 148 countries (and counting) and it’s very important to us to nurture that community.\nWe’re about 45 staff and remote-first. This means that we support our teams working asynchronously and to flexible hours. Some international travel will likely be appropriate, for example to in-person meetings with colleagues and members, but in line with our travel policy. We are dedicated to an open and fair research ecosystem and that’s reflected in our ethos and staff culture. We like to work hard but we have fun too! We take a creative, iterative approach to our projects, and believe that all team members can enrich the culture and performance of our whole organisation. Check out the organisation chart.\nWe are active supporters of ongoing professional development opportunities and promote self-learning at every opportunity. Crossref has a healthy financial situation and we only continue to grow. While we won’t have a clear hierarchical path for staff to follow, there are always evolving opportunities to progress and be challenged.\nThis role is in our Member Experience team, part of our larger Community Outreach team - a fourteen-strong team split across the US, Africa, Asia and Europe.\nThinking of applying? We especially encourage applications from people with backgrounds historically under-represented in research and scholarly communications.\nEqual opportunities commitment Crossref is committed to a policy of non-discrimination and equal opportunity for all employees and qualified applicants for employment without regard to race, colour, religion, sex, pregnancy or a condition related to pregnancy, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, national origin, ancestry, age, physical or mental disability, genetic information, veteran status, uniform service member status, or any other protected class under applicable law. Crossref will make reasonable accommodations for qualified individuals with known disabilities in accordance with applicable law.\nThanks for your interest in joining Crossref. We are excited to hear from you! ",
"headings": ["About the role","Key responsibilities","About you","About Crossref","Thinking of applying?","Equal opportunities commitment","Thanks for your interest in joining Crossref. We are excited to hear from you!"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/strategy/archive-2021/",
"title": "Strategic agenda 2021-2022",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2021-05-28",
"lastmod_ts": 1622160000,
"section": "Strategic agenda and roadmap",
"tags": [],
"description": " This is our strategic agenda from 2020-2022 and it\u0026rsquo;s now archived, along with the previous 2018-2022 version, please visit the main strategy page for the current version. Welcome to our new strategic narrative\u0026mdash;published June 2021\u0026mdash;which sets out our agenda through 2025. It encompasses all our plans, from governance and sustainability, our work with different parts of the scholarly community, through to new and existing product development as well as strategic initiatives.\n",
"content": " This is our strategic agenda from 2020-2022 and it\u0026rsquo;s now archived, along with the previous 2018-2022 version, please visit the main strategy page for the current version. Welcome to our new strategic narrative\u0026mdash;published June 2021\u0026mdash;which sets out our agenda through 2025. It encompasses all our plans, from governance and sustainability, our work with different parts of the scholarly community, through to new and existing product development as well as strategic initiatives.\nWe have six overarching goals, two more than the previous set, now archived; \u0026lsquo;bolster the team\u0026rsquo; and \u0026rsquo;live up to POSI\u0026rsquo; are the 2021 additions. Historic strategy information can be found on our blog.\nRead on to learn more about where the Crossref community is heading and let us have your thoughts by starting or joining a discussion in the strategy section of our community forum.\nBolster the team This theme is all about people, support, culture, and resilience. In recent years, Crossref has grown in every way: members, users, registered content, and staff. We see no indication of things slowing down which is usually seen as a positive, but we need to get into a position where we can project and manage growth more purposefully, and catch up with our technical debt which will support our staff and community in improving scholarly communications.\nAll teams have manual processes that need to be automated, and a continued priority is to ‘reduce toil’ for our staff, and therefore for our members and users. Support queries have grown as we’ve introduced new services and tools (along with the volume of content and members). Having needed to recruit contractors for technical support and membership, we need to carefully consider what resourcing Crossref will require if we continue to grow as we have been before we achieve our other goal to radically simplify our services. We won’t be able to meet our community members in their own (now numbering 140) countries, and while we can reach a breadth of people online, we miss the depth of understanding that meeting face-to-face can give. So we need new ways to hear from and understand many varied needs. We will organise our communications and engagement activities under a new community playbook where we have a programming and co-creation approach to content, events, and supporting languages other than English.\nAs our staff have become more distributed, and our organisation is adapting to changes in work culture, we want to improve the way we communicate across teams and timezones, and improve how we make decisions and track progress towards the goals set out here. Our recruitment practices are being honed to better reflect our inclusive values, and we are improving the new hire ‘welcome’ experience.\nStrong leadership and organisational resilience are priorities and activities such as knowledge transfer, documentation, succession planning, risk management, and identification of critical functions, will all help to keep Crossref thriving. Live up to POSI This theme is stated because we want to be held publicly accountable to the Principles of Scholarly Infrastructure standards of governance, insurance, and sustainability. Our board adopted POSI in November 2020 and we published a self-assessment soon after. We meet most of the 16 principles and this goal keeps us working towards the others as well as maintaining those we are doing well in.\nThe one principle we meet least well is broad stakeholder governance. A stakeholder is any person or organisation that would be affected by decisions made by Crossref. That includes anyone who has ever clicked on a Crossref DOI. So\u0026mdash;starting with research funders\u0026mdash;we will actively work to broaden the governance of the organisation. In 2021, the board gave guidance to the nominating committee to add at least one funder to the election slate.\nA number of projects in this section center around transparent operations. While we have a lot of information here on our website, some of it is not easy to find and some of it we\u0026rsquo;ve never thought to publish. So we will work to digitise things such as our financial updates and we\u0026rsquo;ve introduced a public product roadmap where we are updating information more frequently throughout the year. Governance and sustainability information will be added to the website, the practices we follow to onboard as well as \u0026lsquo;off-board\u0026rsquo; accounts, as well as recruitment policies and staff handbooks.\nOn the technical side we will continue to release public data files periodically, we’ll clarify licenses of the different kinds of metadata, services, and tools that we have. And we will aim to continue to open-source the majority of our code, bug reporting, and issue tracking. Over time, support will be lifted out of a 1:1 setting and into the open, via our community forum. All of these activities\u0026mdash;and the mindset that goes along with them\u0026mdash;will ensure that Crossref can be \u0026lsquo;forked\u0026rsquo; if anything goes badly wrong.\nEngage with expanding communities This theme centers on scale, strengthening relationships, community facilitation, and communications/content. Crossref has enjoyed incredible growth for many years and we need to be able to predict what’s coming next and project the scale of Crossref some years down the line. We know that not all content has a DOI (even with other agencies) and we know that many countries and organisations still do not find Crossref accessible. The priority activities under this goal include gap analyses work with organisations such as DOAJ to predict future growth areas. We will also be conducting a review of our revenue, its current distribution, historical trends, and capacities for growth across our services, all in line with our mission and the POSI sustainability definition.\nCrossref currently has members in 140 countries and we interact with people in 160. With that comes the need to increasingly and proactively involve emerging markets as they begin sharing research outputs globally. We are regularly reassessing the ways that we manage the long tail of new members, our relationship with and management of Sponsors (also growing in number), and how we have structured our teams to support this growth.\nWe include emerging markets in our training and events, and we will develop as much content in languages other than English as we can. We are also exploring removing barriers to participation for US-sanctioned countries. We work with government education/science ministries and local Sponsors and Ambassadors, and are increasing our efforts to do more public support via the community forum. We are also creating more bitesize and visual/audio resources and taking a programming approach to our online events.\nWe will re-establish a practice of community consultation where possible, involving people in our priorities and plans, refreshing or revising community groups, starting with one for metadata users as a key and growing group of stakeholders.\nFurthermore, funders and research institutions are increasingly interested in supporting open scholarly infrastructure and have increased their engagement with Crossref in recent years. Funder’s service providers are already supporting the registration and use of grant metadata and our outreach activities with them will expand. Library-publishing infrastructure is a growing interest and activity. Our overarching objective is to extend our value proposition to convince these new constituents of Crossref’s relevance, getting them into our system and using our infrastructure.\nImprove our metadata This theme involves researching and communicating the value of richer, connected, and reusable, open metadata, and incentivising people to meet best practices, while also making it possible (and easier) to do so. Increased metadata quality is an ongoing effort and will also be the result of meeting other goals, particularly engaging with new communities (to understand new workflows and record types) and simplifying our services (to provide the data and tools to make better metadata creation easier and reduce manual interventions by our staff).\nWe will commission a metadata ‘reach and return’ study to understand and analyse the outcomes of investing in quality open metadata, and the benefits to members and others. We will convene metadata users in a new user group and we are actively involved in the follow-on phase Metadata 20/20: Your Turn. We will set out the Crossref metadata strategy and create new best practice documentation, incentivising good practice through appropriate fees and actionable participation reports. We have also started a partnership program to work 1:1 with select organisations whose improvement would see the greatest improvement for everyone.\nWe are improving support for standards including JATS for Content Registration, and will provide clear guidelines for service providers. We need to ensure members (and their Service Providers and Sponsors) can register metadata more easily, and we will create a new process to crowdsource corrections and error reporting and make it easier for members to act on those reports.\nBy working to understand new workflows, and applying this knowledge in a revised community data model, we will further develop the research nexus to expand the links between more research objects and plan for new relationships and record types such as protocols, videos, and conferences. We will implement schema 5.0—for both input and output—to enable members to include CRediT and ROR for affiliations.\nCrossref is now a recognized source of scholarly metadata for thousands of services across multiple communities so we will maintain a clear provenance trail of every metadata assertion, assisted by Event Data. And we will continue to work on end-to-end metadata distribution through our public REST API, moving from solr to elasticsearch, while maintaining and growing the Metadata Plus service.\nCollaborate and partner We\u0026rsquo;ve always collaborated but we want to work even more closely with like-minded organisations to solve problems together. This theme cuts across all of our other goals like engaging with new and existing communities, simplifying services, and improving our metadata.\nCrossref did not develop its mission alone, and we cannot meet and exceed these goals alone. The essence of our vision is shared by many organisations and initiatives:\nWe envision a rich and reusable nexus of metadata and relationships connecting all research objects, organisations, people, and actions; an open scholarly infrastructure that the global community can build on forever, for the benefit of society.\nTo realize this vision, we must deepen and cement partnerships with like-minded initiatives and organisations such as DataCite, ORCID, and ROR, to name but a few, ideally reducing the burden of supporting us or our mutual stakeholders. We want to co-create and co-develop and encourage integrations that solve problems for the whole community.\nWe will collaborate on outreach and technical development and improve and extend integrations such as ORCID Auto-update. We will support for DataCite’s ‘commons’ work for a joint discovery experience, our shared Event Data infrastructure, and in promoting data citation. We will continue to spend time and effort co-governing ROR and ensuring its sustainability, and we will continue our partnership with the Public Knowledge Project to build plugins for the thousands of Crossref members who use OJS. Our new partnership with DOAJ means we can lower barriers to participation for small and emerging constituencies.\nIn order to invest in new and upcoming community initiatives, we are also expanding our R\u0026amp;D focus (Labs is back!).\nSimplify and enrich services This goal is all about focus. And about delivering easy-to-use tools that are critically important for our community. If we are to reduce ‘toil’ for our staff and users, handle growth and engage with new communities, expand our support for the research nexus, improve metadata, and collaborate with others\u0026hellip; we need to radically simplify our services, starting with unifying Content Registration tools and deprecating old tools and APIs as we go.\nIn order that we can plan, develop, test, deliver, maintain, and update our services faster and more reliably, we are untangling years of code and rules. We have and will continue focusing on knowledge transfer, documentation, and creating a robust test environment. We will extract and refactor major subsystems (Content Registration, matching, billing, monitoring, reporting) and we will build this modern and extensible architecture around a set of capabilities\u0026hellip;\nUnder a concept known as ‘My Crossref’, we will create my.crossref.org. We need to better understand our users, starting with a new authentication module for all tools and for different layers of permissions to reflect all the ways our users work with Crossref on behalf of each other. We will develop linked and actionable reports to help both users and ourselves to make decisions, improve metadata, and increase participation. We will add to the research nexus of relationships, bringing together the technologies we have for matching and linking all objects in the research nexus and extending our support for additional record types and metadata, including additional provenance tracking. We are working on creating an open crowdsourced facility for updates/corrections for metadata enrichment, an activity and notification capability, and we\u0026rsquo;ll unify designs of all Crossref UIs based on usability, accessibility, responsiveness, and internationalization.\nMy Crossref will also allow self-service for toilsome tasks such as title transfers and bulk URL updates, reducing the pressure on our teams and our community. Our new elasticsearch-backed REST API will be more closely aligned with our metadata input, and we will disseminate all metadata, starting with grant records.\nApart from Content Registration and all the related activities above, we have work to do to introduce and support Similarity Check\u0026rsquo;s iThenticate V2 including training materials, member migration, revenue planning, and a future needs analysis.\nEvent Data is an important part of our strategy as that exposes multiple relationships and extends the research nexus beyond member-defined connections. We have stabilised and relaunched Event Data, and we\u0026rsquo;ll also add to its sources in time. We will monitor and grow our Metadata Plus service, which includes high rate limits and monthly snapshot downloads of all metadata, and with Crossmark we will start to conceptualise a more accessible widget to combine with DOI display guidelines.\n",
"headings": ["This is our strategic agenda from 2020-2022 and it\u0026rsquo;s now archived, along with the previous 2018-2022 version, please visit the main strategy page for the current version.","Bolster the team","This theme is all about people, support, culture, and resilience.","Live up to POSI","This theme is stated because we want to be held publicly accountable to the Principles of Scholarly Infrastructure standards of governance, insurance, and sustainability.","Engage with expanding communities","This theme centers on scale, strengthening relationships, community facilitation, and communications/content.","Improve our metadata","This theme involves researching and communicating the value of richer, connected, and reusable, open metadata, and incentivising people to meet best practices, while also making it possible (and easier) to do so.","Collaborate and partner","We\u0026rsquo;ve always collaborated but we want to work even more closely with like-minded organisations to solve problems together.","Simplify and enrich services","This goal is all about focus. And about delivering easy-to-use tools that are critically important for our community."]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/ip-blocked/",
"title": "Blocked IP",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 2,
"lastmod": "2019-02-14",
"lastmod_ts": 1550102400,
"section": "",
"tags": [],
"description": "Hello. We\u0026rsquo;re delighted that you\u0026rsquo;re using our API and we hope you find it useful.\nUnfortunately, your usage also seems to be causing some problems with the API, which, in turn, is preventing other users from accessing it as well.\nTherefore we have temporarily blocked your access. Please contact us at support@crossref.org. We’ll be happy to help you optimize your system to make the best, unobtrusive use of our API.\nAlso take a look at these API tips and the etiquette section of our API documentation for more tips on using the system \u0026lsquo;politely\u0026rsquo;.\n",
"content": "Hello. We\u0026rsquo;re delighted that you\u0026rsquo;re using our API and we hope you find it useful.\nUnfortunately, your usage also seems to be causing some problems with the API, which, in turn, is preventing other users from accessing it as well.\nTherefore we have temporarily blocked your access. Please contact us at support@crossref.org. We’ll be happy to help you optimize your system to make the best, unobtrusive use of our API.\nAlso take a look at these API tips and the etiquette section of our API documentation for more tips on using the system \u0026lsquo;politely\u0026rsquo;.\n",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/community/developers/",
"title": "For developers",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 5,
"lastmod": "2021-02-26",
"lastmod_ts": 1614297600,
"section": "Get involved",
"tags": [],
"description": "If you develop tools and software to find, cite, link, and/or assess research outputs, you can integrate our metadata about scholarly content into your project, through our open APIs.\nTrying to get data from us? We have an open REST API that provides a flexible way of accessing and using the most up-to-date metadata we have. We store bibliographic metadata related to currently \u0026gt;170 million publications, coupled with funding information, license details, ORCID iDs, full-text links and much more.\n",
"content": "If you develop tools and software to find, cite, link, and/or assess research outputs, you can integrate our metadata about scholarly content into your project, through our open APIs.\nTrying to get data from us? We have an open REST API that provides a flexible way of accessing and using the most up-to-date metadata we have. We store bibliographic metadata related to currently \u0026gt;170 million publications, coupled with funding information, license details, ORCID iDs, full-text links and much more.\nThe API makes it easy to facet, filter, or search the metadata we hold. There\u0026rsquo;s no need to sign-up, but we’d love you to tell us how you’re using it or check out some examples for inspiration.\nIf the REST API isn’t the best fit for what you’re doing, we have a number of other delivery options and are happy to discuss to get you fixed-up with one of those.\nWorking on Crossref services Implementing Crossmark? Publishers participate in Crossmark by depositing additional metadata for their content and adding a snippet of code to their DOI landing pages to generate the Crossmark button and link. Details for each of these steps are on in our documentation. Interested in text mining? Our REST API is designed to allow harvesting full-text from participating members for the purpose of text mining. We walk you through the process if you’re keen to explore. Want to register content with us, upload files or do bulk queries? Stuck? Email our technical support specialists and we’ll try to help.\n",
"headings": ["Trying to get data from us?","Working on Crossref services"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/events/crossref-community-update-2026/",
"title": "Crossref community update 2026",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 8,
"lastmod": "2026-05-16",
"lastmod_ts": 1778889600,
"section": "Events",
"tags": [],
"description": "We held our community update call on Wednesday, May 13, 2026. You will find session recordings linked below.\nSessions 1 \u0026amp; 2 — Combined agenda Session 1 (UTC) Session 2 (UTC) Topic Hosts Recordings 07:00 16:00 Welcome and introductions Kora Korzec / Rosa Clark Recording S1 / Recording S2 07:05 16:05 Operations and governance\nand invitation to nominate candidates for the Board slate Ed Pentz / Lucy Ofiesh Recording S1 / Recording S2 07:10 16:10 Membership update\nKey stats on changes across the Crossref community Robbykha Rosalien / Maryna Kovalyova Recording S1 / Recording S2 07:15 16:15 Introducing the Member Practices Working Group\nNew working group focused on how members work with Crossref in practice — includes poll and discussion Amanda Bartell Recording S1 / Recording S2 07:25 16:25 Metadata update\nNew grant_doi field, state of adoption of schema 5.4, and updates on relationships metadata Helena Cousijn / Patricia Feeney Recording S1 / Recording S2 07:45 16:45 Funder matching demo Dominika Tkaczyk / Jason Portenoy Recording S1 / Recording S2 07:55 16:55 Data citations endpoint demo Martyn Rittman / Panos Pandis Recording S1 / Recording S2 08:10 17:10 Metadata Manager update\nDemo of new features for editing records, including books and chapters and other work types Lena Stoll / Patrick Vale Recording S1 / Recording S2 08:20 17:20 Service Providers Program announcement\nLaunching a formal Service Providers Program — includes poll and invitation to share input on platforms Madhura Amdekar Recording S1 / Recording S2 Recordings and slide deck.\n",
"content": "We held our community update call on Wednesday, May 13, 2026. You will find session recordings linked below.\nSessions 1 \u0026amp; 2 — Combined agenda Session 1 (UTC) Session 2 (UTC) Topic Hosts Recordings 07:00 16:00 Welcome and introductions Kora Korzec / Rosa Clark Recording S1 / Recording S2 07:05 16:05 Operations and governance\nand invitation to nominate candidates for the Board slate Ed Pentz / Lucy Ofiesh Recording S1 / Recording S2 07:10 16:10 Membership update\nKey stats on changes across the Crossref community Robbykha Rosalien / Maryna Kovalyova Recording S1 / Recording S2 07:15 16:15 Introducing the Member Practices Working Group\nNew working group focused on how members work with Crossref in practice — includes poll and discussion Amanda Bartell Recording S1 / Recording S2 07:25 16:25 Metadata update\nNew grant_doi field, state of adoption of schema 5.4, and updates on relationships metadata Helena Cousijn / Patricia Feeney Recording S1 / Recording S2 07:45 16:45 Funder matching demo Dominika Tkaczyk / Jason Portenoy Recording S1 / Recording S2 07:55 16:55 Data citations endpoint demo Martyn Rittman / Panos Pandis Recording S1 / Recording S2 08:10 17:10 Metadata Manager update\nDemo of new features for editing records, including books and chapters and other work types Lena Stoll / Patrick Vale Recording S1 / Recording S2 08:20 17:20 Service Providers Program announcement\nLaunching a formal Service Providers Program — includes poll and invitation to share input on platforms Madhura Amdekar Recording S1 / Recording S2 Recordings and slide deck.\n",
"headings": ["Sessions 1 \u0026amp; 2 — Combined agenda"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/events/crossref-community-call-2025/",
"title": "Midyear community update",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 8,
"lastmod": "2025-04-06",
"lastmod_ts": 1743897600,
"section": "Events",
"tags": [],
"description": " Watch the recording and access the event materials. The Crossref Community Update was held on 7 May 2025.\nSome topics we covered: Metadata schema update - what\u0026rsquo;s included in the 5.4 version just released, and what\u0026rsquo;s planned for 5.5 coming next Our latest tools including extension of the grants registration form to journal articles - now live and with even newer features The inaugural Crossref Metadata Awards, recognising our community\u0026rsquo;s efforts in metadata completeness and enrichment Celebrating Crossref\u0026rsquo;s 25th anniversary year … and more! ",
"content": " Watch the recording and access the event materials. The Crossref Community Update was held on 7 May 2025.\nSome topics we covered: Metadata schema update - what\u0026rsquo;s included in the 5.4 version just released, and what\u0026rsquo;s planned for 5.5 coming next Our latest tools including extension of the grants registration form to journal articles - now live and with even newer features The inaugural Crossref Metadata Awards, recognising our community\u0026rsquo;s efforts in metadata completeness and enrichment Celebrating Crossref\u0026rsquo;s 25th anniversary year … and more! ",
"headings": ["Watch the recording and access the event materials.","Some topics we covered:"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/events/archive/",
"title": "Crossref events archive",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 2,
"lastmod": "2021-01-11",
"lastmod_ts": 1610323200,
"section": "Events",
"tags": [],
"description": "An archive of all community events which Crossref people have participated in years past such as conferences, workshops, hack days, and seminars.\n+- Events in Arabic\rMetadata webinar series with Knowledge E - Recordings playlist\n#1) Slides - September 21, 2022 #2) Slides - October 5, 2022 #3) Slides - October 19, 2022\nندوه عن كيفية استخدام كروس مارك باللغة العربية | Crossmark How-To Arabic webinar - September 15, 2020 Slides, Recording Crossref LIVE Arabic - May 11, 2020 - Recording - Slides Reference Linking \u0026amp; Cited-By - November 8, 2018 - Slides, Recording Getting Started with Content Registration - September 17, 2018 Slides, Recording Introduction to Crossref - August 6, 2018 Recording +- Events in Bangladesh\rCrossref Live Bangladesh - An Introduction to Crossref Bangladesh - May 2, 2023 - Recording +- Events in Chinese\rCrossref Live Chinese网络研讨会——Crossref简介 - October 14, 2021 - Slides, Recording +- Events in Indonesian\rOJS-focused webinar - March 18, 2025\n",
"content": "An archive of all community events which Crossref people have participated in years past such as conferences, workshops, hack days, and seminars.\n+- Events in Arabic\rMetadata webinar series with Knowledge E - Recordings playlist\n#1) Slides - September 21, 2022 #2) Slides - October 5, 2022 #3) Slides - October 19, 2022\nندوه عن كيفية استخدام كروس مارك باللغة العربية | Crossmark How-To Arabic webinar - September 15, 2020 Slides, Recording Crossref LIVE Arabic - May 11, 2020 - Recording - Slides Reference Linking \u0026amp; Cited-By - November 8, 2018 - Slides, Recording Getting Started with Content Registration - September 17, 2018 Slides, Recording Introduction to Crossref - August 6, 2018 Recording +- Events in Bangladesh\rCrossref Live Bangladesh - An Introduction to Crossref Bangladesh - May 2, 2023 - Recording +- Events in Chinese\rCrossref Live Chinese网络研讨会——Crossref简介 - October 14, 2021 - Slides, Recording +- Events in Indonesian\rOJS-focused webinar - March 18, 2025\nCrossref Jakarta 2024 - August 27, 2024\nCrossref LIVE Indonesia webinar series: Introduction to Crossref, Content Registration, The Value of Crossref metadata - July 13 - 15 - Online Recordings\n+- Events in Korean\rCrossref LIVE Korea - June 17 2020 - Online (in Korean) - Recording - Slides\n+- Events in Nepal\rCrossref Live Nepal - An Introduction to Crossref - May 2, 2023, Recording +- Events in Portuguese\rMantenha seus DOIs atualizados: A importância dos metadados (em Português) - March 17, 2022, Recording and Slides Introdução ao registro de livros no Crossref (Introduction to Registering Book Content Webinar, Brazilian Portuguese) - November 17, 2021 - Recording and Slides Introduction to Crossmark/Crossmark: O que é e como usar - October 19, 2020 Recording Melhores Práticas para Registro de Conteúdo/Crossref Content Registration - October 7, 2020 Slides, Recording\nCrossref LIVE Brazil - June 25 2020 - Online (in Portuguese) - Recording - Slides Introduction to Participation Reports webinar - October 30, 2019 - Slides, Recording Reference Linking \u0026amp; Cited By webinar - April 16, 2019 Recording Registering content and adding to your Crossref metadata - November 26, 2018 Slides, Recording Introduction to Similarity Check webinar - April 10, 2018 Slides, Q\u0026amp;A, Recording Funder Registry - in Portuguese - September 26, 2016 Slides Getting started with Content Registration: Portuguese Webinar - September 5, 2017 - Slides, Recording +- Events in Romania\rIntroduction to Crossref - October 30, 2025 - Recording\n+- Events in Russian\rUnderstanding Crossref reports - in Russian - April 18, 2019 Slides, Recording Introduction to Crossmark - in Russian - December 6, 2018 Slides, Recording Crossref and OJS - in Russian - November 22, 2018 Recording +- Events in Spanish\rMantener sus DOI actualizados: la importancia de los metadatos (en español) - April 6, 2022 - Recording and Slides Crossmark (en español) - September 30, 2021 - Recording Registro y actualización de contenido en Crossref / Register and update content in Crossref - October 1, 2020 Slides, Recording Crossref LIVE Spanish - May 19, 2020 - Recording, Slides Reference linking and Cited-by - in Spanish - November 7, 2018 Slides, Recording Introduction to Crossref and Content Registration - in Spanish - October 24, 2018 Slides, Recording\n+- Events in Turkish\rCrossref LIVE Turkey - February 18, 2020 - Online (in Turkish) - Recording Introduction to Crossref: Turkish Seminar November 2, 2017 Recording +- Events in Ukrainian\rParticipation Reports webinar in Ukrainian +- Events in French\rVérification de la qualité des métadonnées Quelle est la qualité de vos métadonnées ? Une découverte de l’outil Crossref Participation Reports (French) | How good is your metadata? A look at Crossref Participation Reports (French)- October 31, 2025 - Recording +- 2026 events\rHow good is your metadata? A tour of the Crossref Participation Reports tool - January 13, 2026 Upholding integrity: Crossref member obligations and COPE guidance - January 21, 2026 جودة البيانات الوصفية: جولة في أداة تقارير المشاركة من كروس رف - January 29, 2026 Join us for a session on the OJS Plug-in and learn how to improve your metadata quality - February 12, 2026 Building the Research Nexus with relationship metadata in Crossref - February 24, 2026 ¿Qué tan buenos son sus metadatos? Una sesión práctica de la herramienta Crossref Participation Reports - February 26, 2026 Services Crossref pour les bibliothécaires et les éditeurs de revues – Congo (RDC)\u0026quot; - February 27, 2026 Join us for a session on the OJS Plug-in and learn how to improve your metadata quality - Tuesday, March 17, 2026 COPE \u0026amp; Crossref Best practices webinar: Funding transparency - Tuesday, March 17, 2026 Metadata Manager - Tuesday, April 14, 2026 Getting started at Crossref - Thursday, April 16, 2026 Crossref Metadata Sprint 2026: Presentación de proyectos - Wednesday, April 22, 2026 Crossref Sponsor Training Webinar: The DOI Journey - from registration to verification - April 21-22, 2026 Servicios de Crossref para bibliotecarios y editores de revistas - May 12, 2026 Crossref Community Update Call 2026 - May 13, 2026 ¿Qué tan buenos son sus metadatos? Una sesión práctica de la herramienta Crossref Participation Reports - May 19, 2026 Getting started at Crossref - May 20, 2026 ¿Qué tan buenos son sus metadatos? Una sesión práctica de la herramienta Crossref Participation Reports - Tuesday, 19 May, 2026 Registrasi Webinar Pemeriksaan Kesehatan Metadata dan penggunaan Record Registration Form - Wednesday, 20 May, 2026 Metadata Manager - Thursday, 21 May, 2026 +- 2025 events\rHow good is your metadata? A tour of the Crossref Participation Reports tool - February 6, 2025\nOur new tool for registering journal metadata and improving its quality - March 3, 2025\nCrossref Metadata for Librarians: An Introduction - March 12, 2025\nMetadata quality webinar - OJS Plug-in tool - March 13, 2025\nCrossref LIVE Accra | March 20, 2025 | In-person (Accra, Ghana) Slides, Blog\nMetadata Health Check Webinar Open Journal Systems (OJS) - March 27, 2025\nCrossref Metadata Sprint 2025 - April 8, 2025 | In-Person (Madrid, Spain)\nBest Practices for Interpreting Similarity Check Reports - April 29, 2025\nCrossref Community Update Call - Session 1 and Session 2 Slides - May 7, 2025\nExploring Retraction Watch Data in Crossref - May 9, 2025\nEASE 2025 Conference | May 14, 2025 | In-Person (Oslo, Norway)\n5th Latin American Congress of Editors of Scientific and Research Journals | May 22, 2025 | In-Person (Cartagena, Colombia)\nCSE 2025 Annual Meeting | May 3, 2025\nINORMS Congress 2025 | May 6, 2025\nOpen Research Information Conference | May 26, 2025 | In-Person\nHow good is your metadata? A tour of the Crossref Participation Reports tool - June 17, 2025\nBeijing Book Fair 2025 (BIBF) | In-person (Beijing, China)\nMetadata Health Check Webinar with a focus on OJS - June 26, 2025\nMetadata health checks: How to register journal metadata with Crossref - new record registration form - July 15, 2025 | Online Metascience 2025 Conference | June 30, 2025 | In-Person (London, UK)\nLiber | July 2, 2025 | In-Person (Lausanne, Switzerland)\nROR Community Call – July 2025 | July 16, 2025 | Online\nHong Kong Book Fair 2025 | July 16, 2025 | In-Person\nFSCI 2025 | July 21, 2025 | Online\nISMTE 2025 Annual Conference | August 5, 2025 | Montréal, Québec\nPemeriksaan Kesehatan Metadata | September 1, 2025 | Online\nMetadatos de Retraction Watch en la REST API | September 10, 2025 | Online\nCrossref Annual Meeting and Board Election #Crossref2025 | October 22-23, 2025 | Online Quelle est la qualité de vos métadonnées ? Une découverte de l’outil Crossref Participation Reports | October 31, 2025 | Online New Record Registration Form Webinar | Thursday, November 13, 2025 – 16:00 UTC | Online Publishing best practices and metadata: Crossref essentials + DOAJ | November 13, 2025 | Online\nIntroduction to funding metadata | November 25, 2025 | Online Metadata Health Check with a focus on OJS | December 2, 2025 | Online\nNuevo formulario de registro de contenidos | December 9, 2025 | Online How good is your metadata? A tour of the Crossref Participation Reports tool | December 10, 2025 | Online\n+- 2024 events\rCrossref 2024 Annual Meeting and Board Election - October 29, 2024\nServicios de Crossref para revistas y libros y los beneficios del DOI: CRECS – 2024 (Arequipa-Perú) - May 10, 2024\nCrossref community call: The shape of things to come - May 08, 2024\nConexiónCrossref Bogotá24 - February 29, 2024\n+- 2023 events\rNational Science Library Chinese Academy of Sciences - December 14 - 15 - Zhuhai, China Crossref Services for Librarians and Journal Editors - November 29\nAfricArXiv Open Science Webinar Series\nFeria Internacional del Libro de Guadalajara (Guadalajara International Book Fair) - November 25 - December 3\nCrossref for Research Scholars and Librarians, India - November 18\nFORM Community Development Series: Metadata Makes Open Research Better - November 15 2023 Charleston Conference - In Person: November 6 – 10; Online: November 27 – December 1\nBetter together webinar series together with DataCite and ORCID - November 1 Crossref Annual Meeting and Board Election #CRLIVE23 - October 31\nOpen Science and Innovation in Ukraine - October 26 - 27 Lithuanian Periodical Press conference - October 20\nCUUL Annual Research Dissemination Conference - October 19 - 20\nBetter together webinar series together with DataCite and ORCID - September 28, November 1\nOpen Access Days 2023 - September 27 - 29 - Berlin, Germany\nSciELO Network Meeting - September 25 - 26\nIntroduction to Crossref-Tanzania - September 26\nCrossref and Retraction Watch - September 27\nWorkshop on Open Citations and Openly Scholarly Metadata 2023 - September 26 - 27\nOpen Access Days 2023n - September 27 - 29 - Berlin, Germany\nBetter together webinar series together with DataCite and ORCID - September 29 Presentation\nCrossref and Retraction Watch - September 27\nWorkshop on Open Citations and Openly Scholarly Metadata 2023 - September 26 - 27\nAltum Funder Forum - September 20 - Alexander, VA\nKenya National Open Science Dialogue - September 20 - Kenya\nEIFL Lithuania - September 20\nOASPA Online Conference on Open Access Scholarly Publishing 2023 - September 19 - 21 COPE: Navigating Corrections, Retractions, and Expressions of Concern: workshop - September 19\nCOPE: Navigating Corrections, Retractions, and Expressions of Concern: workshop - September 19\n2023 EIFL General Assembly - September 18 - 20\nALPSP - September 13 - 15 - Manchester, UK\nMake Data Count summit - September 12 - 13\nPKP Software Sprint 2023 - September 11 - Hannover, UK Janeway Conference - September 8\nSheffield\u0026rsquo;s OpenFest - September 7\nDigital Preservation Coalition\u0026rsquo;s PID - September 6\nBetter Together: Improving Access to the Global Scholarly Record: Recording, Presentation - August 30 SciELO 25 Years Conference - July 28 ISMTE Global Event - July 18 - 20\nISSI 2023 - July 2 - 5 - Bloomington, IN\nJoint Conference on Digital Libraries (JCDL) - June 26 - 30\nSSP Virtual 5K Run, Walk, and Roll Returns for Second Year #SSP5K - June 10\nOpen Repositories in South Africa - June 12 - Stellenbosch, South Africa EASE Conference 2023 - June 1 - 3 - Istanbul\nSociety for Scholarly Publishing (SSP) 2023 Conference - May 31 - June 2 - Portland, OR\nAfLIA/SPARC Africa Post-conference Workshop on Library Publishing - May 28\nGetting started at Crossref - an introduction for new members including a review of PKP\u0026rsquo;s OJS Plug-in - May 26\nGetting started as a new Crossref member - May 25, 2023\nRegistering content with Crossref - Bangladesh - May 11 Metascience Conference 2023 - May 10 - Washington, DC Metadata connects the global community: a mid-year update - May 10\nIntroduction to Crossref - Bangladesh - May 9 An Introduction to Crossref - Nepal - May 9 Crossref Community update: metadata connects the global community Recordings and presentation - May 3\ncsv,conf,v7 2023 Conference - April 19-20\nFORCE2023 - April 18 - 20\nUKSG - April 13 - 15 - Glasgow, UK\nRDA 20th Plenary Meeting - Gothenburg (Hybrid) - March 21 - 23\nNISO Plus 2023 - February 14 - 16\nAPE 2023 - January 10 - 11 - Berlin\n+- 2022 events\rMunin Conference Panel on Open Identifiers\nBetter Together: Complete Metadata as Robust Infrastructure (APAC region) - Recording - November 28\nFeria Internacional del Libro de Guadalajara ( Guadalajara International Book Fair) - November 28-30\nISMTE 2022 Global Event - November 1\n2022 Charleston Conference - November 2 - 5\n2022 SSP Regional Meetup - October 27 - Oxford, UK\nFrankfurt Book Fair 2022, Stand M5, Hall 4.2 - October 17 - 21\nBetter Together: Facilitating FAIR Research Output Sharing (APAC time zones) (with ORCID, Crossref, and DataCite) Recording ABEC (Associação Brasileira de Editores Científicos) Annual Meeting - Oct 4 Similarity Check iThenicate v2 - October 6, 2022 Recording Participation Reports and Reference Metadata (Indonesian time zone) - October 12, 2022 Recording\nPubmet - Sept 14 - 16 - Online\nALPSP Annual Conference and Awards 2022 - September 14 - 16 - In person\nOASPA Online Conference on Open Access Scholarly Publishing - September 20 - 22 - Online\nDataCite Annual Member Meeting - September 22 - Online\nEurope PMC AGM - September 22 - London, UK\nPlagiarism detection in the evolving publishing landscape: Best practices for journals - September 22 - Online\nBetter Together: Open new possibilities with Open Infrastructure (APAC time zones)(with ORCID, Crossref, and DataCite) - June 27, 2022 Data Policy IG: Exploring features and improving standards for data availability statements - June 21, 2022 Crossref community call: the Research Nexus, Google slides, pdf slides - June 14, 2022\nWorking with Scholarly APIs: A NISO Training Series - May 12 - Online\nALPSP Climate change: Practical steps to take action - March 16 - Online\nNISO Plus 2022: Global Conversations: Global Connections - February 15 - 17 - Online\nParis Open Science European Conference - February 4 - 6 - Online\n+- 2021 events\rAcademic Publishing in Europe Nr. 16 (APE) - January 12 - 13 - Online\nPIDapalooza - January 28 - Online\nNAS Journal Summit - March 22, 2021\nEstablishing Open \u0026amp; FAIR Research Data: Initiatives and Coordination - March 22 - Online\nMozfest 2021 - March 16 - Online\nSTM Research Data - March 22 - Online\nNORF Open Research in Ireland webinar: Infrastructures for Open Research - March 30 - Online UKSG - April 12 - 14 - Online\nEARMA 2021 - April 14 - 20 - Online\nRDA 17th Plenary Meeting - April 20 - 23 - Online\nJATS-con 2021 - April 27 – 29 - Online\nLos Metadatos Para la Comunidad de Investigacion - May 4 - Online - Recording - Slides\nLIS-Bibliometrics 2021 - May 5 - Online\nEARMA Digital Event - Global grant identifiers: building a richer picture of research support - May 6 - Online\nLibrary Publishing Forum - May 10 - 14 - Online\nUNAM webinar: Infraestructura Académica Abierta: uso y explotación de metadatos - May 13 (Online)\nSSP 2021 Virtual Meeting - May 24 - 27 - Online\nCrossref update: The Road Ahead (Western timezones timezones) - June 8 - Online Recording, Slides\nCrossref update: The Road Ahead (Eastern timezones) - June 9 - Online Recording, Slides EOSC Symposium 2021 Programme - June 15 - Online\nJapan Open Science Summit 2021 - June 15 - Online\nPKP Annual Meeting 2021 - June 18 - Online Crossref LIVE Indonesia webinar series - July 13 - 15 - Online - Recordings\nASAPBio #feedbackASAP - July 21 - Online\nThe Geneva Workshop on Innovations in Scholarly Communication - September 6 - 10 - Online\nOAI12 - September 6 - 10 - Online\nKorean Council of Science Editors 10th anniversary conference - September 8 - Online\nThe 25th International Conference on Science, Technology and Innovation Indicators, STI 2021 - September 15 - Online\nOASPA conference 2021 - September 21 - Online\nMaking the world a PIDder place: it’s up to all of us! (Co-hosted by DataCite, Crossref, ORCID \u0026amp; ROR) - Sep 22, 2021 Recording, Slides Peer Review Week 2021 - September 20 - 24 - Online\nRORing-at-Crossref community webinar - September 29 - Online\nCOPE: Seminar 2021: Reducing the inadvertent spread of retracted science: taxonomy considerations - September 29 - Online\n+- 2020 events\rOpenCon Oxford 2020 in in collaboration with the Bodleian Library - December 4 - Online Crossref LIVE20 - November 10 - Online\nScholix Working Group: stakeholder uptake and next steps for article/data linking - November 12 - Online\nFrankfurt Book Fair 2020 - October 14 - 18 - Online\nOASPA 2020 Conference - September 21-24 - Online\nPlatform Strategies 2020 - September 23 - 24 - New York, NY\nABEC Annual Meeting 2020 - September 22-25 - Online\nCrossref Live (US timezones) - October 6 - Online\nWorkshop on Open Citations and Open Scholarly Metadata 2020 - September 9 - Online\nPUBMET2020 - Septelmber 16-18 - Online\nPIDapalooza - January 29-30 2020 - Lisbon, Portugal\nROR Community Meeting - January 28 - Lisbon, Portugal ASAPbio January 2020 workshop: A Roadmap for Transparent and FAIR Preprints in Biology and Medicine - January 20 - Hinxton, UK Academic Publishing in Europe (APE) - January 13-14 2020 - Berlin, Germany NISO Plus - February 23 -25 - Baltimore, USA SocietyStreet (virtual) - March 26 - Washington, DC\nER\u0026amp;L - March 8 - 11 - Austin, TX CASE (webinar) - August 21 - Online\nProposed schema changes - have your say - January 2, 2020 Slides, Recording\nThe ins and outs of our Admin Tool - March 5, 2020 - Recording\nIntroduction to ROR - April 29, 2020 Recording\nIntroduction to Similarity Check - April 30, 2020 Slides, Recording\nGetting started with books at Crossref - July 22, 2020 Slides, Recording\nFinding your way with Crossref: getting started \u0026amp; additional services - September 2, 2020 Slides, Recording\nNot just identifiers: why Crossref DOIs are important - September 2, 2020 Slides, Recording\nParticipation Reports - October 7, 2020 - Slides, Recording\nHow to manage your metadata with Crossref - November 18, 2020 Slides, Recording\nOpenCon Oxford 2020 Recording\n+- 2019 events\rOpenCon Oxford Satellite - December 6 - Oxford, UK SPARC Africa Open Access Symposium 2019 - December 4-7 - Cape Town, South Africa STM Week - December 3-4 - London, UK\nMunin Conference on Scholarly Publishing - November 27-28 - Tromsø, Norway SpotOn London - November 21 - London, UK euroCRIS Strategic Membership Meeting - November 18-20 - Münster, Germany 7th Annual PKP Conference - November 18-20 - Barcelona, Spain Crossref Annual Community Meeting #CRLIVE19 - November 13-14 - Amsterdam, Netherlands 2LATmetrics conference - November 4-6 - Cusco, Perú Charleston Library Conference - November 4-8 - Charleston, SC RDA - October 23-25, Helsinki, Finland FORCE2019 - October 16-17 - Edinburgh, UK Frankfurt Book Fair 2019 - October 16-20 - Frankfurt, Germany 6:AM Altmetrics Conference - October 8-11 - Stirling, UK ISMTE Europe - October 3 - Oxford, UK Transforming Research - September 26-27 - Washington, DC Silverchair Platform Strategies - September 25-26 - New York, NY European Research Innovation Days - September 24-26 - Brussels, Belgium PubMet - September 18-20 - Zadar, Croatia ARMS 2019 - September 17-20 - Adelaide, South Australia iPres - September 16-20 - Amsterdam, Netherlands ALPSP 2019 - September 11-13 - Berkshire, UK 17th International Conference on Scientometrics \u0026amp; Infometrics (ISSI2019) - September 2-5 - Rome, Italy RDA UK Workshop - July 16 - London, UK OAI11 - June 19-21 - Geneva, Switzerland ARMA conference, 2019 - June 17-18 - Belfast, Northern Ireland 4th Regional Meeting of Academic Journal Editors - June 5-7 - Medellín, Columbia International Conference on Electronic Publishing (ElPub) 2019 - June 2-4 - Marseille, France CALJ Annual Conference 2019 - June 1-2 - Vancouver, BC SSP 41st Annual Meeting - May 29-31 - San Diego, CA iAnnotate 2019 - May 22-23 - Washington, DC JATS-Con 2019 - May 21 - Cambridge, UK Library Publishing Forum - May 8-10 - Vancouver, BC 8th International Scientific and Practical Conference - April 23-26 - Moscow, Russia STM US Annual Conference 2019 - April 11-12 - Washington, DC UKSG 42nd Annual Conference and Exhibition - April 8-10 - Telford, UK Metrics in Transition Workshop 2019 - March 27-28 - Göttingen, Germany\nThe London Book Fair 2019 - March 12-14 - London, UK IFLA SIG on Library Publishing 2019 Midterm Meeting - February 28 - March 1 - Dublin, Ireland AAP/PSP 2019 Annual Conference - February 6-8 - Washington, DC Publisher workshop: metadata, Open Access and more - February 5 - London, UK PIDapalooza 2019 - January 23-24 - Dublin, Ireland APE 2019 - January 16 - Berlin, Germany SSP Pre-Conference - January 15 - Berlin, Germany\nCrossref and DataCite joint data citation webinar - February 4, 2019 Slides, Recording\nUsing ORCID in publishing workflows - September 16, 2019 Recording\nResearch infrastructure with and for funders - September 6, 2019 Recording\n+- 2018 events\rCoko London - December 5 - London, UK\nSTM Week 2018 Tools and Standards - Decemer 4 - London, UK\nOpenCon Oxford - November 30 - Oxford, UK\nMunin Conference on Scholarly Publishing - November 28 - 29 - Tromsø, Norway\nCrossref LIVE18 #CRLIVE18 - November 13 -14 - Toronto, Canada\nSpotOn London - November 3 - London, UK\nWorkshop on Research Objects - October 29 - Amsterdam, Netherlands\nRDA 12th Plenary Meeting - October 26 - Gaborone, Botswana\nSciDataCon 2018 - October 22 - 26 - Gaborone, Botswana\nFrankfurt Book Fair - October 10 - 12 - Frankfurt, Germany\nFORCE2018 - October 10 - 12 - Montreal, Canada\nTransforming Research - October 3 - 4 - Providence, RI\nSciELO 20 Years - September 26 - 28 - Sao Paulo, Brazil\n5AM London 2018 - September 25-28 - London, UK\nCOASP 2018 Conference - September 19 - Vienna, Austria\nDublin Core Metadata Initiative - September 10 - 13 - Porto, Portugal\nOpenCitations workshop - September 3 - 5 - Bologna, Italy\nEuropean Association of Science Editors (EASE) - June 7 - 10 - Bucharest, Romania\nINORMS Conference - Jun 6 - 8 - Edinburgh, UK\nSSP 40th Annual Meeting, Booth #212A - May 30 - June 1 - Chicago, IL, USA\nLibrary Publishing Forum - May 21 - 23 - Minneapolis, MN, USA\n3er Congreso Internacional de Editores Redalyc - May 16 - 18 - Trujillo, Peru\nCSE 2018 Conference - May 5 - 8 - New Orleans, LA, USA\nMIT Better Science Ideathon - April 23 - Cambridge, MA, USA\nComputers in Libraries 2018 - April 17 - 19 - Arlington, VA, USA\nEARMA Conference 2018 - April 16 - 18 - Brussels, Belgium\nInternational Publishing Symposium - April 12 - 13 - Oxford, UK\nUKSG 2018 - April 9 - 11 - Glasgow, Scotland\nISMTE 2018 Asia Pacific Conference - March 27 - 28 - Singapore\nNFAIS 2018 Annual Conference - February 28 - March 2 - Alexandrea, VA, USA\nResearcher to Reader - February 26 - 27 - London, UK\nASAPBio Meeting - February 7 - 9 - Chevy Chase, Maryland, USA\nLIS Bibliometrics - January 30 - London, UK\nPeer Review Transparency Workshop - January 24 - Cambridge, MA, USA\nPIDapalooza - January 23 - 24 - Girona, Catalonia, Spain\nIntroduction to Crossmark - January 18, 2018 Slides, Recording\nMaintaining your metadata - April 24, 2018 Slides, Vimeo Recording, Recording\nGetting started with looking up metadata - March 8, 2018 Slides, Recording\nCrossmark how-to - May 15, 2018 Slides, Recording\nGet started with Reference Linking - May 23, 2018 Slides, Recording\nWhere does publisher metadata go and how is it used? - September 11, 2018 Webinar Slides: Laura Wilinson, Webinar Slides: Anna Tolwinska, Webinar Slides: Stephanie Dawson, Webinar Slides: Pierre Mounier, Recording\n+- 2017 events\rAGU - December 14 - 15 - New Orleans, LA, USA\nSTM Innovations Seminar 2017 - December 6 - London, UK\nCrossref #LIVE17 - November 14 - 15 - Singapore\nXUG eXtyles User Group Meeting - November 2-3 - Cambridge, MA, USA\nDublin Core 2017 - October 26-29 - Washington, DC, USA\nFORCE 2017 - October 25-27 - Berlin, Germany\nFrankfurt Book Fair, #FBM17 - October 11-15 - Frankfurt, Germany\nAltmetrics Conference 4:AM - September 26 - 29 - Toronto, Canada\nCOASP 2017 - September 20 - 21 - Lisbon, Portugal\nALPSP Conference - September 13 - 15 - Netherlands\nISMTE North American Conference - August 10-11 - Denver, CO, USA\nLIBER 2017 Conference - July 5-7 - Patras, Greece\nALA Annual Conference (ALCTS CRS) - June 25 - Chicago, IL, USA\nEMUG 2017 - June 22-23 - Boston, MA, USA\nORCID Identifiers and Intellectual Property Workshop - June 22 - Paris, France\n32nd Annual NASIG Conference 2017 - June 8 -11 - Indianapolis, IN, USA\nSSP 39th Annual Meeting - Booth 500A - May 31-June 2 - Boston, MA, USA\n5th World Conference on Research Integrity - May 28 - 31 - Amsterdam, The Netherlands\nWikiCite 2017 - May 23-25 - Vienna, Austria\nCSE 2017 Annual Meeting - May 20-23 - San Diego, CA, USA\n2017 ScholarONE User Conference - May 3-4 - Madrid, Spain\nUKSG 2017 Annual Conference - April 10-12 - Harrogate, UK\nHighwire Spring Publishers Meeting - April 4-6 - Stanford, CA, USA\nCNI Spring 2017 Membership Meeting - April 3-4 - Albuquerque, NM\nISMTE 2017 Asian-Pacific Conference - March 27-28 - Beijing, China\nCOPE China Seminar 2017 - March 26 - Beijing, China\nACRL 2017 Conference - March 22-25 - Baltimore, MD, USA\n#FuturePub 10 - New Developments in Scientific Collaboration Tech - March 13 - London, UK\nResearch Libraries UK (RLUK) - March 8-10 - London, UK\nPSP 2017 Annual Conference - February 1-3 - Washington, DC, USA\nSimilarity Check Members update - March 02, 2017 Recording (must register first to view)\nCrossmark update - February 23, 2017 Slides, Recording\nFunding data and the Funder Registry - April 4, 2017 Slides, Recording\nPreprints and scholarly infrastructure - January 30, 2017 Slides, Recording\nContent Registration maintaining metadata - May 17, 2017 Slides, Recording\nCrossref Cited-by - June 8, 2017 Slides, Recording\nCrossref Cited-by how-to - June 13, 2017 - Slides, Recording\nBeyond OpenURL: Making the most of Crossref metadata - July 12, 2017 Slides, Recording\nGet started with Content Registration - October 17, 2017 Slides, Recording\n+- 2016 events\rSTM Digital Publishing Conference – December 6-8 – London, UK\nOpenCon 2016 – November 12-14 – Washington DC, USA\nPIDapalooza – November 9-10 – Reykjavik, Iceland\nFrankfurt Book Fair – October 19-23 – Frankfurt, Germany (Hall 4.2, Stand 4.2 M 85)\nORCID Outreach Conference – October 5-6 – Washington DC, USA\n3:AM Conference – September 26 – 28 – Bucharest, Romania\nSimilarity Check update - September 20, 2016 Slides\nOASPA – September 21-22 – Arlington VA, USA\nALPSP – September 14-16 – London, UK\nSciDataCon – September 11-17 – Denver CO, USA\nVivo 2016 Conference – August 17-19 – Denver CO, USA\nACSE Annual Meeting 2016 – August 10-11 - Dubai, UAE\nCASE 2016 Conference – July 20-22 - Seoul, South Korea\nSHARE Community Meeting - July 11-14 - Charlottesville, VA, USA\nContact our community team if you\u0026rsquo;d like us to participate in an event or meet us at one of the above.\n",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/webinars_old/",
"title": "Webinars_old",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 3,
"lastmod": "2019-04-02",
"lastmod_ts": 1554163200,
"section": "Webinars_old",
"tags": [],
"description": "Our regular webinars are a great way to find out more about the various Crossref services.\nWe are now doing face-to-face meetings online. You can find our virtual events on our events page.. Look back at some recent recordings such as an update on Crossmark, the Funder Registry, getting started with Content Registration, maintaining your metadata, or the latest on Similarity Check.\nRecordings of recent webinars Our getting started series Get started with Content Registration Slides, Recording Get started with Reference Linking Slides, Recording Getting started as a new Crossref member Slides, Recording Getting started with looking up metadata Slides, Recording Our how-to webinar series Crossmark how-to Crossref Cited-by how-to Participation Reports The ins and outs of our Admin Tool About our services Content Registration maintaining metadata Crossmark update Crossref Cited-by Funding data and the Funder Registry Introduction to Crossmark Introduction to Similarity Check Research infrastructure with and for funders Similarity Check update Similarity Check Members update Webinars in Arabic Getting Started with Content Registration - in Arabic Introduction to Crossref - in Arabic Reference Linking \u0026amp; Cited-By - in Arabic ندوه عن كيفية استخدام كروس مارك باللغة العربية | Crossmark How-To Arabic webinar Webinars in Indonesian Crossref LIVE Indonesia webinar series: Introduction to Crossref, Content Registration, The Value of Crossref metadata - July 13 - 15 - Online Recordings Webinars in Portuguese Funder Registry - in Portuguese Getting started with Content Registration: Portuguese Webinar Introduction to Participation Reports webinar in Portuguese Introduction to Similarity Check webinar - in Portuguese Reference Linking \u0026amp; Cited By webinar - in Portuguese Registering content and adding to your Crossref metadata - in Portuguese Melhores Práticas para Registro de Conteúdo/Crossref Content Registration in Brazilian Portuguese Introduction to Crossmark/Crossmark: O que é e como usar Webinars in Russian Crossref and OJS - in Russian Recording Introduction to Crossmark - in Russian Slides, Recording Understanding Crossref reports - in Russian Slides, Recording Crossref LIVE, in Russian: Value \u0026amp; Use of Metadata Slides, Recording Webinars in Spanish Introduction to Crossref and Content Registration - in Spanish Reference linking and Cited-by - in Spanish Registro y actualización de contenido en Crossref / Register and update content in Crossref Crossref ‘Similarity Check’, en español Seminario web de Informes de Participación / Participation Reports Webinar, in Spanish Crossmark (en español Webinars in Turkish Introduction to Crossref: Turkish Seminar Crossref İçerik Kaydı Webinarı, Türkçe | Content Registration at Crossref , Turkish Webinar Webinars in Ukrainian Participation Reports webinar in Ukrainian Other Asia Pacific community webinar Beyond OpenURL: Making the most of Crossref metadata Crossref and DataCite joint data citation webinar Getting started with books at Crossref Introduction to ROR Maintaining your metadata Participation Reports webinar Preprints and scholarly infrastructure Proposed schema changes - have your say Using ORCID in publishing workflows Where does publisher metadata go and how is it used? Not just identifiers: why Crossref DOIs are important - Slides, Recording How to manage your metadata with Crossref Finding your way with Crossref: getting started \u0026amp; additional services SE Asia webinar series OpenCon Oxford 2020 Making the world a PIDder place: it’s up to all of us! (Co-hosted by DataCite, Crossref, ORCID \u0026amp; ROR) - Sep 22, 2021 05:00 PM in Amsterdam, Berlin, Rome, Stockholm, Vienna If you’re interested in viewing recordings of past LIVE events, check out our YouTube channel.\n",
"content": "Our regular webinars are a great way to find out more about the various Crossref services.\nWe are now doing face-to-face meetings online. You can find our virtual events on our events page.. Look back at some recent recordings such as an update on Crossmark, the Funder Registry, getting started with Content Registration, maintaining your metadata, or the latest on Similarity Check.\nRecordings of recent webinars Our getting started series Get started with Content Registration Slides, Recording Get started with Reference Linking Slides, Recording Getting started as a new Crossref member Slides, Recording Getting started with looking up metadata Slides, Recording Our how-to webinar series Crossmark how-to Crossref Cited-by how-to Participation Reports The ins and outs of our Admin Tool About our services Content Registration maintaining metadata Crossmark update Crossref Cited-by Funding data and the Funder Registry Introduction to Crossmark Introduction to Similarity Check Research infrastructure with and for funders Similarity Check update Similarity Check Members update Webinars in Arabic Getting Started with Content Registration - in Arabic Introduction to Crossref - in Arabic Reference Linking \u0026amp; Cited-By - in Arabic ندوه عن كيفية استخدام كروس مارك باللغة العربية | Crossmark How-To Arabic webinar Webinars in Indonesian Crossref LIVE Indonesia webinar series: Introduction to Crossref, Content Registration, The Value of Crossref metadata - July 13 - 15 - Online Recordings Webinars in Portuguese Funder Registry - in Portuguese Getting started with Content Registration: Portuguese Webinar Introduction to Participation Reports webinar in Portuguese Introduction to Similarity Check webinar - in Portuguese Reference Linking \u0026amp; Cited By webinar - in Portuguese Registering content and adding to your Crossref metadata - in Portuguese Melhores Práticas para Registro de Conteúdo/Crossref Content Registration in Brazilian Portuguese Introduction to Crossmark/Crossmark: O que é e como usar Webinars in Russian Crossref and OJS - in Russian Recording Introduction to Crossmark - in Russian Slides, Recording Understanding Crossref reports - in Russian Slides, Recording Crossref LIVE, in Russian: Value \u0026amp; Use of Metadata Slides, Recording Webinars in Spanish Introduction to Crossref and Content Registration - in Spanish Reference linking and Cited-by - in Spanish Registro y actualización de contenido en Crossref / Register and update content in Crossref Crossref ‘Similarity Check’, en español Seminario web de Informes de Participación / Participation Reports Webinar, in Spanish Crossmark (en español Webinars in Turkish Introduction to Crossref: Turkish Seminar Crossref İçerik Kaydı Webinarı, Türkçe | Content Registration at Crossref , Turkish Webinar Webinars in Ukrainian Participation Reports webinar in Ukrainian Other Asia Pacific community webinar Beyond OpenURL: Making the most of Crossref metadata Crossref and DataCite joint data citation webinar Getting started with books at Crossref Introduction to ROR Maintaining your metadata Participation Reports webinar Preprints and scholarly infrastructure Proposed schema changes - have your say Using ORCID in publishing workflows Where does publisher metadata go and how is it used? Not just identifiers: why Crossref DOIs are important - Slides, Recording How to manage your metadata with Crossref Finding your way with Crossref: getting started \u0026amp; additional services SE Asia webinar series OpenCon Oxford 2020 Making the world a PIDder place: it’s up to all of us! (Co-hosted by DataCite, Crossref, ORCID \u0026amp; ROR) - Sep 22, 2021 05:00 PM in Amsterdam, Berlin, Rome, Stockholm, Vienna If you’re interested in viewing recordings of past LIVE events, check out our YouTube channel.\nCrossmark (en español) September 30, 2021\nRecording\nSeminario web de Informes de Participación / Participation Reports Webinar, in Spanish Webinar Recording\nIntroduction to Crossmark/Crossmark: O que é e como usar Webinar Recording\nCrossref ‘Similarity Check’, en español Webinar Recording\nOpenCon Oxford 2020 Webinar Recording\nCrossref İçerik Kaydı Webinarı, Türkçe | Content Registration at Crossref , Turkish Webinar Webinar slides\nWebinar Recording\nHow to manage your metadata with Crossref Webinar slides\nWebinar Recording\nFinding your way with Crossref: getting started \u0026amp; additional services Webinar slides\nWebinar Recording\nMelhores Práticas para Registro de Conteúdo/Crossref Content Registration in Brazilian Portuguese Date: Wednesday, October 7, 2020\nWebinar slides\nWebinar Recording\nRegistro y actualización de contenido en Crossref / Register and update content in Crossref Date: Thursday, October 1, 2020\nWebinar slides\nWebinar Recording\nندوه عن كيفية استخدام كروس مارك باللغة العربية | Crossmark How-To Arabic Date: Tuesday, September 15, 2020\nWebinar slides\nWebinar Recording\nGetting started with books at Crossref Date: Wednesday, July 22, 2020\nWebinar slides\nWebinar Recording\nIntroduction to Similarity Check Date: Thursday, April 30, 2020 Speaker: Vanessa Fairhurst, Susan Collins Webinar Slides\nWebinar Recording\nIntroduction to ROR Date: Wednesday, April 29, 2020 Webinar Recording\nThe ins and outs of our Admin tool Date: Thursday, March 5, 2020 Speakers: Isaac Farley, Paul Davis, Kathleen Luschek Webinar Recording\nParticipation Reports webinar Date: Wednesday, October 7, 2020 Speakers: Anna Tolwinska\nWebinar Slides\nWebinar Recording\nВебінар “Інструмент Participation Reports” (Українською мовою) - Participation Reports webinar in Ukrainian Date: Tuesday, August 11, 2020 Speakers: Anna Danilova and Anna Tolwinska\nWebinar Slides\nWebinar Recording\nIntroduction to Participation Reports webinar in Portuguese Date: Wednesday, October 30, 2019 Speakers: Rachael Lammey, Edilson Damasio\nWebinar Slides\nWebinar Recording\nProposed schema changes - have your say Date: Thursday, January 2, 2020 Speakers: Patrica Feeney\nWebinar Slides\nWebinar Recording\nUsing ORCID in publishing workflows Date: Monday, September 16, 2019 Speakers: Estelle Cheng / Rachael Lammey\nWebinar Recording\nResearch infrastructure with and for funders Date: Thursday, September 6, 2019 Speakers: Josh Brown / Rachael Lammey\nWebinar Recording\nUnderstanding Crossref Reports - presented in Russian Date: Thursday, April 18, 2019 Speakers: Rachael Lammey / Andrii Zolkover\nWebinar Slides\nWebinar Recording\nReference Linking \u0026amp; Cited By webinar - in Portuguese Date: Tuesday, April 16, 2019 Speakers: Edilson Damasio / Rachael Lammey\nWebinar Recording\nCrossref and DataCite joint data citation webinar Date: Monday, Feb 4, 2019\nSpeakers: Rachael Lammey, Helena Cousijn, Patricia Feeney, Robin Dasler\nWebinar Slides\nWebinar Recording\nIntroduction to Crossmark - in Russian Date: Thursday, December 6, 2018 Speakers: Maxim Mitrofanov\nWebinar Slides\nWebinar Recording\nRegistering content and adding to your Crossref metadata - in Portuguese Date: Monday, November 26, 2018 Speakers: Edilson Damasio / Rachael Lammey\nWebinar Slides\nWebinar Recording\nCrossref and OJS - presented in Russian Date: Thursday, November 22, 2018 Speakers: Rachael Lammey / Andrii Zolkover / Vitaliy Bezsheiko\nWebinar Recording\nReference Linking \u0026amp; Cited-By - in Arabic Date: Thursday, November 8, 2018 Speakers: Mohamad Mostafa / Vanessa Fairhurst / Rachael Lammey\nWebinar Slides\nWebinar Recording\nIntroduction to Reference Linking and Cited-by webinar - in Spanish Date: Monday, November 7, 2018 Speakers: Susan Collins / Vanessa Fairhurst / Arley Soto\nWebinar Slides\nWebinar Recording\nIntroduction to Crossref and Content Registration - in Spanish Date: Tuesday, October 24, 2018\nSpeakers: Susan Collins / Vanessa Fairhurst / Arley Soto\nWebinar Slides\nWebinar Recording\nWhere does publisher metadata go and how is it used? Date: Tuesday, September 11, 2018 Speakers: Laura J. Wilkinson, Anna Tolwinska, Stephanie Dawson, and Pierre Mounier\nWebinar Slides: Laura Wilinson\nWebinar Slides: Anna Tolwinska\nWebinar Slides: Stephanie Dawson\nWebinar Slides: Pierre Mounier\nWebinar Recording\nGetting Started with Content Registration - in Arabic Date: Monday, September 17, 2018 Speakers: Mohamad Mostafa/Rachael Lammey/Vanessa Fairhurst\nWebinar Slides\nWebinar Recording\nIntroduction to Crossref - in Arabic Date: Monday, August 6, 2018 Speaker: Rachael Lammey/Mohamad Mostafa\nWebinar recording Getting started as a new Crossref member Date: Thursday, May 24, 2018 Speaker: Rachael Lammey\nWebinar Slides\nWebinar Recording\nReference Linking Date: Date: Wednesday, May 23, 2018\nSpeaker: Patricia Feeney\nWebinar Slides\nWebinar Recording\nCrossmark how-to Date: Tuesday, May 15, 2018\nSpeaker: Kirsty Meddings\nWebinar Slides\nWebinar Recording\nMaintaining your metadata Date: Tuesday, April 24, 2018\nSpeaker: Patricia Feeney\nWebinar Slides\nVimeo recording\nWebinar Recording\nIntroduction to Similarity Check - in Portuguese Date: Tuesday, April 10, 2018 Speaker: Rachael Lammey/Edilson Damasio Webinar Slides\nQ \u0026amp; A: http://bit.ly/simcheck-portuguese\nWebinar Recording\nGetting started with looking up metadata Date: Thursday, March 8, 2018\nSpeaker: Patricia Feeney\nWebinar Slides\nWebinar Recording\nGetting started with Content Registration: Portuguese Webinar Date: Tuesday, September 5, 2017 Speaker: Rachael Lammey/Edilson Damasio\nWebinar Slides\nWebinar Recording\nCrossref Cited-by how-to Date: Tuesday, June 13, 2017\nSpeaker: Patrica Feeney\nWebinar Slides\nWebinar Recording\nBeyond OpenURL: Making the most of Crossref metadata Date: Wednesday, July 12, 2017 Speaker: Patricia Feeney\nWebinar Slides\nWebinar Recording\nCrossref Cited-by Date: Thursday, June 8. 2017\nSpeaker: Anna Tolwinska\nWebinar Slides\nWebinar Recording\nFunding data \u0026amp; the Funder Registry Date: Tuesday, April 4, 2017\nSpeaker: Patricia Feeney\nWebinar Slides\nWebinar Recording\nPreprints and scholarly infrastructure Date: Monday, January 30, 2017\nSpeaker: Rachael Lammey\nWebinar Slides\nWebinar Recording\nCrossmark update Date: Thursday, February 23, 2017\nSpeaker: Kirsty Meddings\nWebinar Slides\nWebinar Recording\nGet Started with Content Registration Date: Tuesday, October 17, 2017\nSpeaker: Patricia Feeney\nWebinar Slides\nWebinar Recording\nIntroduction to Crossmark Date: Tuesday, Nov 21, 2017\nSpeaker: Kirsty Meddings Webinar Slides\nWebinar Recording\nIntroduction to Crossref: Turkish Seminar Date: Thursday, Nov 2, 2017\nSpeaker: Rachael Lammey/Prof. Dr. Serkan Eryilmaz Translation: Dogan Kusmus\nWebinar Recording\nSimilarity Check update Date: Tuesday, September 20, 2016\nSpeaker: Madeleine Watson\nWebinar Slides\nFunder Registry - in Portuguese Date: Monday, September 26, 2016\nSpeaker: Rachael Lammey\nWebinar Slides\nContent Registration maintaining metadata Date: Tuesday, May 17, 2017\nSpeaker: Rachael Lammey\nWebinar Slides\nWebinar Recording Asia Pacific community webinar Date: Thursday, December 14, 2016\nWebinar Slides\nCrossref Similarity Check members update Date: Thursday, March 2\nSpeaker: Gareth Malcolm, Turnitin\nWebinar Recording (must register first to view)\nIf you have a question or would like us to hold a webinar on another topic, please contact our outreach team with your ideas.\n",
"headings": ["Recordings of recent webinars","Our getting started series","Our how-to webinar series","About our services","Webinars in Arabic","Webinars in Indonesian","Webinars in Portuguese","Webinars in Russian","Webinars in Spanish","Webinars in Turkish","Webinars in Ukrainian","Other","Crossmark (en español)","Seminario web de Informes de Participación / Participation Reports Webinar, in Spanish","Introduction to Crossmark/Crossmark: O que é e como usar","Crossref ‘Similarity Check’, en español","OpenCon Oxford 2020","Crossref İçerik Kaydı Webinarı, Türkçe | Content Registration at Crossref , Turkish Webinar","How to manage your metadata with Crossref","Finding your way with Crossref: getting started \u0026amp; additional services","Melhores Práticas para Registro de Conteúdo/Crossref Content Registration in Brazilian Portuguese","Registro y actualización de contenido en Crossref / Register and update content in Crossref","ندوه عن كيفية استخدام كروس مارك باللغة العربية | Crossmark How-To Arabic","Getting started with books at Crossref","Introduction to Similarity Check","Introduction to ROR","The ins and outs of our Admin tool","Participation Reports webinar","Вебінар “Інструмент Participation Reports” (Українською мовою) - Participation Reports webinar in Ukrainian","Introduction to Participation Reports webinar in Portuguese","Proposed schema changes - have your say","Using ORCID in publishing workflows","Research infrastructure with and for funders","Understanding Crossref Reports - presented in Russian","Reference Linking \u0026amp; Cited By webinar - in Portuguese","Crossref and DataCite joint data citation webinar","Introduction to Crossmark - in Russian","Registering content and adding to your Crossref metadata - in Portuguese","Crossref and OJS - presented in Russian","Reference Linking \u0026amp; Cited-By - in Arabic","Introduction to Reference Linking and Cited-by webinar - in Spanish","Introduction to Crossref and Content Registration - in Spanish","Where does publisher metadata go and how is it used?","Getting Started with Content Registration - in Arabic","Introduction to Crossref - in Arabic","Getting started as a new Crossref member","Reference Linking","Crossmark how-to","Maintaining your metadata","Introduction to Similarity Check - in Portuguese","Getting started with looking up metadata","Getting started with Content Registration: Portuguese Webinar","Crossref Cited-by how-to","Beyond OpenURL: Making the most of Crossref metadata","Crossref Cited-by","Funding data \u0026amp; the Funder Registry","Preprints and scholarly infrastructure","Crossmark update","Get Started with Content Registration","Introduction to Crossmark","Introduction to Crossref: Turkish Seminar","Similarity Check update","Funder Registry - in Portuguese","Content Registration maintaining metadata","Asia Pacific community webinar","Crossref Similarity Check members update"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/community/librarians/",
"title": "For librarians",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 5,
"lastmod": "2017-03-02",
"lastmod_ts": 1488412800,
"section": "Get involved",
"tags": [],
"description": "Libraries and Crossref are a winning combination. Our shared goal is to improve discoverability of content for researchers. For our part we look after our members\u0026rsquo; metadata and run a registry of persistent links. We also offer services that help systems and people to make connections.\nWe currently look after over 170 million records from theses, dissertations, preprints, grants, and reports\u0026ndash; through to journal articles and books/book chapters. Enhance your metadata and connect your discovery and linking services with these records, they\u0026rsquo;re all available through open APIs and [search] (https://search.crossref.org/).\n",
"content": "Libraries and Crossref are a winning combination. Our shared goal is to improve discoverability of content for researchers. For our part we look after our members\u0026rsquo; metadata and run a registry of persistent links. We also offer services that help systems and people to make connections.\nWe currently look after over 170 million records from theses, dissertations, preprints, grants, and reports\u0026ndash; through to journal articles and books/book chapters. Enhance your metadata and connect your discovery and linking services with these records, they\u0026rsquo;re all available through open APIs and [search] (https://search.crossref.org/).\nRetrieve metadata into your library discovery system using our OpenURL service If you are a librarian and you need to use OpenURL with your library link resolver e.g. Alma, an email address should be supplied in queries that the link resolver sends to Crossref. This will be configured in your link resolver. You can find more information in our OpenURL documentation.\nThe metadata we take in Our members register records with us including as much metadata as possible, they then use each others\u0026rsquo; metadata to link their references and commit to maintaining these links for the long-term.\nIncreasingly we are being asked to take in other scholarly outputs such as grants, peer review reports, videos, blogs, and other. Watch our blog for news of these additions or sign up to our newsletter via the link in the footer of this website.\nOther ways to get metadata One of our responsibilities is to make metadata available to the systems and people who need it. The benefits to libraries in using our metadata are that you can ensure persistent links, which lead to increased discoverability of your resources. And it also means you don\u0026rsquo;t have to sign individual linking agreements with each publisher or keep track of their different ways of linking.\nWe have a number of metadata retrieval options, in addition to OpenURL. The most visible is search.crossref.org (for humans!) which uses our REST API (for machines!). Both interfaces are open and free to use without registering.\nFrom search.crossref.org you can search for a DOI, an article, an author, an ORCID iD, etc. You can search right from our homepage on the second tab \u0026lsquo;search metadata\u0026rsquo; or go directly to search.crossref.org.\nWe have a browsable title list of all titles registered with us, by journal, book series, or conference proceeding.\nLibrary publishers A growing number of libraries are publishers themselves. Many of the approximately 180 members that join every month are, for example, a scholar-publisher or a library-publisher. If you\u0026rsquo;d like to register content and contribute metadata please take a look at the member terms and if you can meet them, apply to join.\nContact our community team to set up an account or ask any questions. Technical support is also available from our metadata experts.\n",
"headings": ["Retrieve metadata into your library discovery system using our OpenURL service","The metadata we take in","Other ways to get metadata","Library publishers"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/jobs/2023-04-19-community-engagement-manager/",
"title": "Community Engagement Manager (editorial)",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2023-04-19",
"lastmod_ts": 1681862400,
"section": "Jobs",
"tags": [],
"description": " Applications for this position closed May 12, 2023. Do you want to help improve research communications in all corners of the globe? Come and join the world of nonprofit open infrastructure and be part of improving the creation and sharing of knowledge as our new Community Engagement Manager for the editorial community.\nLocation: Remote and global (with regular working in European timezones) Salary: Approx. EUR 58,000-70,000 or local equivalent, depending on experience. Note this is a general guide (as there is no universal currency) and local benchmarking will take place before final offer. Reports to: Head of Community Engagement and Communications. See org chart and team.\nApplication timeline: Advertise in April, interviews in May, and offer by end of May/start of June.\n",
"content": " Applications for this position closed May 12, 2023. Do you want to help improve research communications in all corners of the globe? Come and join the world of nonprofit open infrastructure and be part of improving the creation and sharing of knowledge as our new Community Engagement Manager for the editorial community.\nLocation: Remote and global (with regular working in European timezones) Salary: Approx. EUR 58,000-70,000 or local equivalent, depending on experience. Note this is a general guide (as there is no universal currency) and local benchmarking will take place before final offer. Reports to: Head of Community Engagement and Communications. See org chart and team.\nApplication timeline: Advertise in April, interviews in May, and offer by end of May/start of June.\nThe organisations that make up the Crossref community are involved in documenting the process of scholarship and the progress of knowledge. We provide infrastructure to curate, share, and preserve metadata, which is information that underpins and describes all research activities (such as funding, authorship, dissemination, attention, etc., and relationships between these activities).\nIncreasingly, the community is concerned with matters of research integrity, and Crossref plays a central role with several tools and services to help record and track corrections and retractions and identify issues such as plagiarism, along with other trust indicators that metadata can provide.\nAs the scholarly communications landscape is dynamically changing, the Community Engagement Manager’s key responsibility is to engage with the global community of scholarly editors, working with publishers and partners like EASE and CSE. You will help the community leverage metadata to assert the integrity of the scholarly record. This is a new role, responding to a growing need identified through recent consultations with the community on these topics.\nKey responsibilities Create opportunities to engage with editors regarding the integrity of the scholarly record, and develop a programme to sustain collaboration and devise activities and resources that help equip, mobilise and empower editors to collect and leverage rich metadata Build relationships with scientific editorial groups such as EASE (Europe), ACSE (Asia), and CSE (US) and support their communities, bringing insights to shape our development and priorities Identifying and creating opportunities to listen to the sentiment and feedback of the Crossref’s community, sharing community insights with colleagues Representing Crossref and using the role to bring people together, attending and speaking at relevant industry events, online and in-person Building and managing relationships with community partners and collaborators worldwide to help progress Crossref’s mission Creating content, such as writing articles and blogs, creating slides and diagrams Contribute to other outreach and communications activities The role is based within the Community Engagement and Communications team. We work collaboratively across a variety of projects and programmes. We adopt an approachable, community-appropriate tone and style in our communications. We’re looking to re-engage with our community through face-to-face opportunities as well as online, so the post-holder will have their share of travel (accordingly with our latest thinking on travel and sustainability).\nOur primary aim is to engage colleagues from the member organisations and other stakeholders to be actively involved in documenting the scholarly progress and making it transparent. This contributes to co-creating a robust research nexus. As part of the wider Outreach department at Crossref, we seek to encourage wider adoption and development of best practices in scholarly publishing and communication with regard to metadata and the permanence of scholarly record. Colleagues across the organisation are helpful, easy-going and supportive, so if you’re open-minded and ready to work as part of the team and across different teams, you will fit right in. Watch the recording of our recent Annual Meeting to learn more about the current conversations in our community and explore our blog for a series of articles concerning the integrity of the scholarly record.\nAbout you As scientific community engagement is an emerging profession, practical experience in this area is more important to us than traditional qualifications. It’s best if you can demonstrate that you have most of these characteristics:\nCollaborative attitude Demonstrable experience working within the scholarly editorial community Awareness of current trends in academic culture and scholarly communications Curiosity to explore complex concepts and to learn new skills and perspectives Ability to translate complex ideas into accessible narratives in English Experience of community building and management and/or of planning, executing and evaluating participatory initiatives Demonstrable skills in group facilitation and stakeholder relationships management Track record of programme development and improvement, working to budget Confidence in public speaking in-person and online, including delivery of webinars/workshops Event and project management experience Tried and tested strategies for ensuring that your engagement programs are equitable, diverse and inclusive It would be a plus if you also have any of the following: Understanding of matters concerning metadata Experience of working in global or multicultural settings Ability to communicate in languages other than English About Crossref Crossref is a non-profit membership organisation that exists to make scholarly communications better. We make research objects easy to find, cite, link, assess, and reuse. We’re passionate about providing open foundational infrastructure for the scholarly communications ecosystem - and we’re continuously evolving our tools and services in response to emerging needs.\nCrossref is, at its core, a community organisation with 18,000 members across 150 countries. We work with the community to prototype and co-create solutions for broad benefit, and we’re committed to lowering barriers to global participation in the research enterprise. We’re funded by members and subscribers, and we forge deep collaborations with many like-minded partners, especially those who are equally as committed to the POSI Principles.\nWhat it’s like working at Crossref We’re about 45 staff and ‘remote-first’. We are dedicated to an open and fair research ecosystem and that’s reflected in our ethos and staff culture. We like to work hard but we have fun too! We take a creative, iterative approach to our projects, and believe that all team members can enrich the culture and performance of our whole organisation. Check out the organisation chart.\nWe actively support ongoing professional development opportunities and promote self-learning at every opportunity. Crossref has a healthy financial situation and we only continue to grow. While we won’t have a clear hierarchical path for staff to follow, there are always evolving opportunities to progress and be challenged.\nThinking of applying? We encourage applications from excellent candidates wherever you might be in the world, especially from people with backgrounds historically under-represented in research and scholarly communications. Our team is fully remote and distributed across time zones and continents. This role will require regular work in European time zones. Our main working language is English, but there are many opportunities in this job to use other tongues if you’re able. If anything here is unclear, please contact Kora Korzec, the hiring manager, on kora@crossref.org.\nPlease apply via this form which allows us to sort your application materials into neat folders for a faster review. One of the best ways of offering evidence of your suitability within the cover letter is with an example of a relevant project you’re particularly proud of – we would particularly welcome mentions of your work with scholarly editors. If possible, we’d also love to see an example of content you’ve created – a link to a recording of your talk, blog post, infographic, or something else. There is space to share documents and links within the application form.\nLastly, if you don’t meet the majority of the criteria we listed here, but are confident you’d be natural in delivering the key responsibilities of the role, we encourage your interest and would still like to hear what strengths you would bring.\nWe aim to start reviewing applications on May 12th. Please strive to send us your documents by then.\nThe role will report to Kora Korzec, Head of Community Engagement and Communications at Crossref, and she will review all applications along with Michelle Cancel, our HR Manager, and Ginny Hendricks, Director of Member \u0026amp; Community Outreach.\nWe intend to invite selected candidates to a brief initial call to discuss the role as soon as possible following an initial review. Following those, shortlisted candidates will be invited to an interview taking place in May. The interview will include some exercises you’ll have a chance to prepare for. All interviews will be held remotely on Zoom.\nEqual opportunities commitment Crossref is committed to a policy of non-discrimination and equal opportunity for all employees and qualified applicants for employment without regard to race, colour, religion, sex, pregnancy or a condition related to pregnancy, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, national origin, ancestry, age, physical or mental disability, genetic information, veteran status, uniform service member status, or any other protected class under applicable law. Crossref will make reasonable accommodations for qualified individuals with known disabilities in accordance with applicable law.\nThanks for your interest in joining Crossref. We are excited to hear from you! ",
"headings": ["Key responsibilities","About you","About Crossref","What it’s like working at Crossref","Thinking of applying?","Equal opportunities commitment","Thanks for your interest in joining Crossref. We are excited to hear from you!"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/community/forum/",
"title": "Community forum",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 3,
"lastmod": "2021-01-20",
"lastmod_ts": 1611100800,
"section": "Get involved",
"tags": [],
"description": " Community is at the very core of what we do and who we are. At Crossref we work with a diverse, global community of publishers, libraries, government agencies, funders, researchers, universities, ambassadors, and more from over 140 countries. We are also actively part of the larger scholarly research community, which includes other persistent identifier organisations, metadata users and aggregators, open science initiatives, and others with shared aims and values.\nWe strive to work more openly and collaboratively with you, our community, and so we have established the Crossref Community Forum - community.crossref.org - using open source discussion platform Discourse. The forum compliments our existing support process by enabling collaborative problem solving, you can post questions to be answered by Crossref staff or other community members, and share your expertise and experiences across various time zones and languages. Our goal is that you, the Crossref community, will own this space. This is a platform for you to connect and build relationships with others working in scholarly communications, to advance your work with us and shape the future of scholarly infrastructure.\n",
"content": " Community is at the very core of what we do and who we are. At Crossref we work with a diverse, global community of publishers, libraries, government agencies, funders, researchers, universities, ambassadors, and more from over 140 countries. We are also actively part of the larger scholarly research community, which includes other persistent identifier organisations, metadata users and aggregators, open science initiatives, and others with shared aims and values.\nWe strive to work more openly and collaboratively with you, our community, and so we have established the Crossref Community Forum - community.crossref.org - using open source discussion platform Discourse. The forum compliments our existing support process by enabling collaborative problem solving, you can post questions to be answered by Crossref staff or other community members, and share your expertise and experiences across various time zones and languages. Our goal is that you, the Crossref community, will own this space. This is a platform for you to connect and build relationships with others working in scholarly communications, to advance your work with us and shape the future of scholarly infrastructure.\nWhy join the Crossref Community Forum? Becoming a member of the Crossref Community Forum allows you to connect and interact with our vast network of members from across the globe.\nShare issues that you need some help resolving, post a question to the forum in your native language and get help from another community member. Easily navigate to FAQs and related support documentation to answer your own questions. Share what activities or projects you are working on and get input from others. Give us feedback on our plans and help us shape future developments at Crossref Test out new tools and services. Find out about upcoming events and webinars, and share any you think are of interest to the community. Help us identify better ways of working together through Crossref and co-create new materials and projects. Make connections with other members, learn what others are working on, and identify opportunities for collaboration. Feel more actively involved in the Crossref community. How to get involved Simply head over to community.crossref.org to set up an account. There’s a useful How-To guide available in our welcome post, as well as some Community Guidelines all our members should follow.\nSome general tips are:\nTake a couple of minutes to personalise your profile - add a picture and a bit of a text about yourself - as well as making sure your preferences such as your email address, language, and notification settings are correct. ‘Track’ or ‘watch’ any specific categories you are interested in so you don’t miss out on new posts. Before creating a new post first look and see if anyone has already raised a similar topic, the answer you are looking for could already be there, or you could add to an existing conversation. When making a new post, make sure it’s in the relevant category, and provide as much information as you can so that other members of the community are able to fully understand and help you. And of course treat the forum and its members with respect. Don’t post spam or other non-relevant content and make sure that any language, links and images you post are professional. If you see a problem, flag it and we can take the appropriate action. For more information on how to use the Crossref Community, please refer to our Code of Conduct and our Terms of Service. You can also give us feedback or ask us any questions via the forum itself or by emailing us at feedback@crossref.org.\n",
"headings": ["Why join the Crossref Community Forum?","How to get involved"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/community/research-administrators/",
"title": "For research managers",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 5,
"lastmod": "2017-01-10",
"lastmod_ts": 1484006400,
"section": "Get involved",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref helps research institutions with the management, analyses, and reporting of their research activities. Through our open metadata, institutions can:\nSupport researchers in identifying possible collaborators, partner organisations, related research and funding opportunities Locate, enhance, and analyze information about outcomes of previous projects to show impact and influence Help researchers demonstrate compliance with funder policies Enhance assessment activities by streamlining reporting on a range of published outputs Verify and group outputs related to particular grants, projects, and people to better understand the research profile of their organisation. More than just bibliographic metadata The basic bibliographic metadata we collect from our members is really useful in helping the identification and discovery of content.\n",
"content": "Crossref helps research institutions with the management, analyses, and reporting of their research activities. Through our open metadata, institutions can:\nSupport researchers in identifying possible collaborators, partner organisations, related research and funding opportunities Locate, enhance, and analyze information about outcomes of previous projects to show impact and influence Help researchers demonstrate compliance with funder policies Enhance assessment activities by streamlining reporting on a range of published outputs Verify and group outputs related to particular grants, projects, and people to better understand the research profile of their organisation. More than just bibliographic metadata The basic bibliographic metadata we collect from our members is really useful in helping the identification and discovery of content.\nHowever, there’s lots more to the metadata than that. We collect additional information that helps track and link research outputs to researchers, funders and institutions. This includes:\nInformation on who funded the research The ORCID iDs of the authors, and we can push the articles to their ORCID records automatically License information and embargo dates Author affiliation information (soon to be supported by the collection of ROR ids) Links to full text, or different versions of content e.g. accepted manuscript, version of records Third party archive arrangements Abstracts Acceptance dates We allow publishers to register DOIs upon manuscript acceptance, even if the manuscript has not been made available online. This will help notify you and your institution of impending publications by your researchers as early in the process as possible, and track them through to publication and beyond.\nUsing this information to track research outputs This information is freely available for you to use and integrate into your own systems via our REST API and search interfaces. We have a detailed guide on what this information looks like in our metadata to help you search, facet or filter the metadata.\nInterested in what others are doing? Read our case study on how the National Library of Sweden is using our REST API in two of their projects, Open APC Sweden and in their local analysis database for publication statistics used in negotiations with publishers.\nPlease get in touch if you have any questions or suggestions: we’d be happy to provide help, advice or update you on publisher uptake and our future plans.\n",
"headings": ["More than just bibliographic metadata","Using this information to track research outputs"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/events/board-elections-askmeanything-2026/",
"title": "Board elections 2026",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2026-06-15",
"lastmod_ts": 1781481600,
"section": "Events",
"tags": [],
"description": "Considering putting yourself forward to serve on the Crossref Board? Join an Ask us anything session. Are you thinking about submitting an expression of interest to serve on the Crossref board, but still have questions?\nJoin us for a drop-in session to learn about what serving on the board actually means, what the commitment looks like, and whether it might be the right fit for you.\nDate: 17 June 2026\nTime: 12:00 UTC (useful timezone converter)\n",
"content": "Considering putting yourself forward to serve on the Crossref Board? Join an Ask us anything session. Are you thinking about submitting an expression of interest to serve on the Crossref board, but still have questions?\nJoin us for a drop-in session to learn about what serving on the board actually means, what the commitment looks like, and whether it might be the right fit for you.\nDate: 17 June 2026\nTime: 12:00 UTC (useful timezone converter)\nWe are accepting expressions of interest until 22 June 2026. Read about the process on our blog.\nAdd this event to your calendar Click here to add this event to your Google calendar.\nClick here to add this event to you Outlook calendar.\nClick here to add this event to your Yahoo calendar.\n",
"headings": ["Considering putting yourself forward to serve on the Crossref Board? Join an Ask us anything session.","Add this event to your calendar"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/jobs/2026-02-17-senior-software-developer-backend/",
"title": "Senior Software Developer (backend)",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2026-02-17",
"lastmod_ts": 1771286400,
"section": "Jobs",
"tags": [],
"description": " Applications for this position closed on March 10th, 2026. Would you like to help shape the future of open infrastructure that serves as the backbone of global scholarly communication? Join us as our Senior Software Developer with a backend focus.\nLocation: Remote and global, to partially overlap with working hours in European time zones. Type: Full-Time, 40 hours a week, Mon-Fri. Remuneration: 90k USD equivalent. We pay salaries in the currency of the country in which you\u0026rsquo;re based. We arrive at the local USD-equivalent salary by determining the average 5-year USD exchange rate, to stabilise currency fluctuations. Benefits: Check out our Employee handbook for more details on paid time off, unlimited sick time, paid parental and medical leaves, and more. Reports to: Program Technical Lead, Carlos del Ojo Elias Timeline: Advertise in February-March and offer by April About the role We are looking for a Senior Software Developer to join our Contributing to the Research Nexus (CRN) program. In this backend-focused role, you will help maintain, extend, and modernize our existing services while also leading the design and implementation of new greenfield systems. The role centres on JVM technologies and cloud-native, distributed systems operating at scale.\n",
"content": " Applications for this position closed on March 10th, 2026. Would you like to help shape the future of open infrastructure that serves as the backbone of global scholarly communication? Join us as our Senior Software Developer with a backend focus.\nLocation: Remote and global, to partially overlap with working hours in European time zones. Type: Full-Time, 40 hours a week, Mon-Fri. Remuneration: 90k USD equivalent. We pay salaries in the currency of the country in which you\u0026rsquo;re based. We arrive at the local USD-equivalent salary by determining the average 5-year USD exchange rate, to stabilise currency fluctuations. Benefits: Check out our Employee handbook for more details on paid time off, unlimited sick time, paid parental and medical leaves, and more. Reports to: Program Technical Lead, Carlos del Ojo Elias Timeline: Advertise in February-March and offer by April About the role We are looking for a Senior Software Developer to join our Contributing to the Research Nexus (CRN) program. In this backend-focused role, you will help maintain, extend, and modernize our existing services while also leading the design and implementation of new greenfield systems. The role centres on JVM technologies and cloud-native, distributed systems operating at scale.\nCrossref collects a wide range of metadata for an ever-growing and increasingly diverse collection of scholarly outputs. We build and operate services that register, link, and distribute scholarly research metadata. The CRN program develops retrieval, matching, and enrichment services that integrate closely with systems across Crossref.\nWe are a small organisation with a big impact, and we’re seeking a mission-driven Senior Software Developer who can help maintain and evolve our services, design well-scoped solutions, and contribute to operational reliability through code reviews and documentation. This role will collaborate closely with colleagues across Technology and Programs \u0026amp; Services teams.\nKey responsibilities Understand Crossref’s mission and how we support it with our services Work collaboratively in multi-functional project teams Work closely with the Programs \u0026amp; Services Team to solve problems, maintain and improve our services and execute technology changes Collaborate with external stakeholders when needed Produce well-scoped and testable software design and specification Implement and test solutions using Clojure, Kotlin, Java and other relevant technologies Pursue continuous improvement across legacy and green-field codebases Provide code reviews and guidance to other developers regarding development practices and help maintain and improve our development environment Identify and report vulnerabilities and inefficiencies in our services Document and share development plans and changes Be an escalation point for technical support; investigate and respond to occasional but complex user issues About you You’re a software developer who enjoys understanding problems end-to-end and making thoughtful technical decisions. You’re comfortable working with ambiguity, you care deeply about users, and you take pride in building systems that last. You don’t need close supervision, but you value collaboration, challenge assumptions constructively, and know when to bring others into technical decisions.\nWe know no-one will meet all the requirements, but we are looking for people who are willing to learn and like to meet new challenges - please apply if this feels like you!\nEssential skills and experience:\nMinimum 5 years of hands-on experience in software development, engineering, or similar Working knowledge of Clojure or another Lisp / functional language, or demonstrated ability and willingness to learn Clojure quickly. Familiarity with JVM technologies (Kotlin and/or Java) Comfortable working with Git, including code reviews and collaborative workflows Experience contributing to or maintaining production systems, including reading and extending existing codebases Experienced with continuous integration, testing and delivery frameworks, and cloud operations concepts and techniques Familiar with Docker technologies Strong communication skills and a collaborative approach to problem-solving Strong written communication skills, particularly for design discussions and technical documentation Comfortable being part of a geographically distributed team Self-directed, a good manager of your own time, with the ability to focus Nice-to-have:\nCurious and tenacious at learning new things and getting to the bottom of problems Strong understanding of functional programming concepts, including immutability, pure functions, higher-order functions, composition Outstanding at interpersonal relations and relationship management Ability to work autonomously while collaborating in a distributed team environment A working understanding of XML and document-oriented systems such as Elasticsearch Some experience with Python, JavaScript or similar scripting languages Experience building tools for online scholarly communication or related fields such as library and information science Comfortable working in open source projects, including public issue tracking, pull requests, and community discussion Experience with JVM web frameworks (Spring, Quarkus, or similar) Direct experience with Clojure in production, especially in open source projects Experience with JVM internals, performance tuning, or memory management Familiarity with the scholarly communications domain About Crossref \u0026amp; the team We’re a non-profit membership organisation that exists to make scholarly communications better. We rally the community; tag and share metadata; run an open infrastructure; play with technology; and make tools and services—all to help put research in context.\nWe envision a rich and reusable open network of relationships connecting research organisations, people, things, and actions; a scholarly record that the global community can build on forever, for the benefit of society. We are working towards this vision of a ‘Research Nexus’ by demonstrating the value of richer and connected open metadata, incentivising people to meet best practices, while making it easier to do so. “We” means 23,000+ members from 160+ countries, 170+ million records, and nearly 2 billion monthly metadata queries from thousands of tools across the research ecosystem. We want to be a sustainable source of complete, open, and global scholarly metadata and relationships.\nTake a look at our strategic agenda to see the planned work that aims to achieve the vision. The sustainability area aims to make transparent all the processes and procedures we follow to run the operation long-term, including our financials and our ongoing commitment to the Principles of Open Scholarly Infrastructure (POSI). The governance area describes our board and its role in community oversight.\nIt also takes a strong team – because reliable infrastructure needs committed people who contribute to and realise the vision, and thrive doing it. We are a distributed group of 50+ dedicated people who take our work seriously, but don\u0026rsquo;t take ourselves seriously - we like to play quizzes, measure coffee intake, and create 100s of custom slack emojis. We do this through fair policies and working practices, a balanced approach to resourcing, and accountability to each other.\nWe can offer the successful candidate a challenging and fun environment to work in. Together we are dedicated to our global mission and we are constantly adapting to ensure we get there. Take a look at our organisation chart, the latest Annual Meeting recordings, and our financial information.\nThinking of applying? We especially encourage applications from people with backgrounds historically under-represented in research and scholarly communications. You can be based anywhere in the world where we can employ staff, either directly or through an employer of record.\nWe will invite selected candidates to an initial call to discuss the role. Following that, shortlisted candidates will be invited to work on a short (1-2 hours) take-home assignment. This will be followed by a technical interview. The last step will be a panel interview, where you will receive questions in advance. All interviews will be held remotely on Zoom.\nApplications closed on March 10th, 2026.\nAnticipated salary for this role is 90k USD-equivalent, paid in local currency. Crossref offers competitive compensation, benefits, flexible work arrangements, professional development opportunities, and a supportive work environment. Check out our Employee Handbook for more details on paid time off, unlimited sick time, paid parental and medical leaves, and more.\nEqual opportunities commitment Crossref is committed to a policy of non-discrimination and equal opportunity for all employees and qualified applicants for employment without regard to race, colour, religion, sex, pregnancy or a condition related to pregnancy, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, national origin, ancestry, age, physical or mental disability, genetic information, veteran status, uniform service member status, or any other protected class under applicable law. Crossref will make reasonable accommodations for qualified individuals with known disabilities in accordance with applicable law.\nThanks for your interest in joining Crossref. We are excited to hear from you! ",
"headings": ["About the role","Key responsibilities","About you","About Crossref \u0026amp; the team","Thinking of applying?","Equal opportunities commitment","Thanks for your interest in joining Crossref. We are excited to hear from you!"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/jobs/2026-02-03-contract-membership-support/",
"title": "Member Support Contractor",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2026-02-03",
"lastmod_ts": 1770076800,
"section": "Jobs",
"tags": [],
"description": "Request for services: contract member support Come and work with us as an independent Member Support Contractor. It’ll be fun!\nLocation: Remote and global\nAbout the contractor role Crossref receives over 200 new applications every month from organisations who produce scholarly and professional materials and content. We’re looking for an independent contractor able to work remotely in helping us to welcome new members from around the world.\nThere is no set schedule and the independent contractor would bill their hours monthly.\n",
"content": "Request for services: contract member support Come and work with us as an independent Member Support Contractor. It’ll be fun!\nLocation: Remote and global\nAbout the contractor role Crossref receives over 200 new applications every month from organisations who produce scholarly and professional materials and content. We’re looking for an independent contractor able to work remotely in helping us to welcome new members from around the world.\nThere is no set schedule and the independent contractor would bill their hours monthly.\nScope of work Manage queries from applicants and members via our Zendesk support desk and potentially other channels. Follow the administrative process for new applicants, such as: Check the details in application forms that come via our website. Set them up in our Customer Relationship Management (CRM) System (CRM). We use SugarCRM. Send them an invoice for the first year of membership, and once this is paid\u0026hellip; Set up and share their DOI prefix and account credentials. Ensure that the information in our CRM is kept clean and up-to-date. Work with the Member Experience and Finance teams. Working efficiently but also kindly and with empathy with our very diverse, global community. About you Organized with an eye for details Happy with data entry and maintenance Comfortable following processes and taking on new systems Friendly and clear communication skills (in English) About Crossref We’re a nonprofit membership organisation that exists to make scholarly communications better. We rally the community; tag and share metadata; run an open infrastructure; play with technology; and make tools and services—all to help put research in context.\nWe envision a rich and reusable open network of relationships connecting research organisations, people, things, and actions; a scholarly record that the global community can build on forever, for the benefit of society. We are working towards this vision of a ‘Research Nexus’ by demonstrating the value of richer and connected open metadata, incentivising people to meet best practices, while making it easier to do so. “We” means 22,000+ members from 160 countries, 170+ million records, and nearly 2 billion monthly metadata queries from thousands of tools across the research ecosystem. We want to be a sustainable source of complete, open, and global scholarly metadata and relationships.\nHow to respond A statement of interest that includes:\nExamples of similar work (and/or your CV) References from previous work Hourly rate Please send your response, statement of interest, and resume to: jobs@crossref.org.\n",
"headings": ["Request for services: contract member support","About the contractor role","Scope of work","About you","About Crossref","How to respond"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/jobs/2026-01-26-engagement-consultant/",
"title": "Engagement Consultant, Asia",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2026-01-26",
"lastmod_ts": 1769385600,
"section": "Jobs",
"tags": [],
"description": "Request for services: expanding Crossref engagement with the research funding community in Asia Come and work with us as an independent Engagement Consultant. It’ll be fun!\nLocation: Remote and global, some limited availability required from 12-3 pm UTC to facilitate overlap with the team\nBudget: This contract for services has a budget of up to $10,000. The contract amount does not include potential travel expenses which will be determined in the course of the contract and covered separately by Crossref.\n",
"content": "Request for services: expanding Crossref engagement with the research funding community in Asia Come and work with us as an independent Engagement Consultant. It’ll be fun!\nLocation: Remote and global, some limited availability required from 12-3 pm UTC to facilitate overlap with the team\nBudget: This contract for services has a budget of up to $10,000. The contract amount does not include potential travel expenses which will be determined in the course of the contract and covered separately by Crossref.\nProject Timeline: up to 6 months\nAbout the contractor role Crossref is a non-profit membership organization that exists to make scholarly communications better. We make research objects easy to find, cite, link, assess, and reuse. For over 25 years, we’ve been providing open foundational infrastructure for the scholarly communications ecosystem - and we’re continuously evolving our tools and services in response to emerging needs. Since 2019, we’ve created the first opportunity for funders who wish to register metadata for research grants.\nThe Crossref Grant Linking System The Crossref Grant Linking System (GLS) is a service for research funders to contribute to open science infrastructure by registering and sharing funding metadata records. As members of Crossref, funders can create persistent identifiers and open metadata records about their support of all kinds, from financial grants, to prizes, to use of facilities. These unique links can be acknowledged in any outputs related to the funding, such as publications, preprints, data and code, through the openly available metadata. Funders\u0026rsquo; links with works become discoverable, making their impact transparent and streamlining the reporting process.\nAs of 2025, close to 50% of Crossref members are based in Asia, but funders are underrepresented in that group. We would like to learn more about this part of the funding community, support funders in Asia in learning more about their opportunities to participate in the research nexus, and benefits it brings for them and the research community at large.\nThe main goal of this project is to engage with research funding organisations in Asia to build robust relationships based on the mutual understanding of the community needs and benefits of the Crossref Grant Linking System. You will raise awareness and encourage the adoption of the system and funding metadata, enhancing transparency and discoverability of funded research outputs in the region.\nThe term of this contract is up to 6 months and we welcome a timeline giving an idea for how you plan to fulfill the objectives as part of your proposal.\nObjectives Map the broader policy and practice landscape in Asia to highlight opportunities for GLS uptake in the near future. Identify and engage key funders to promote adoption of Crossref’s GLS and the sharing of open funding metadata, as well as to facilitate opportunities for funder engagement and feedback about the GLS for their needs. Recommend actionable opportunities for Crossref to build relationships and influence adoption pathways. Deliverables Stakeholder map: Identification of priority research funders in Asia. Identification of key staff within those funders responsible for research management, funding policy or digital infrastructure. Brief organizational profiles outlining each funder\u0026rsquo;s mission and potential alignment with Crossref’s vision for the research nexus. Initiate relationships on Crossref behalf with at least three organisations resulting in introductory meetings (in person or online). Policy landscape summary: Analysis of positive policy trends and mandates across Asia that support open research infrastructure to inform engagement plans and activities. Concentrate on opportunities for GLS adoption linked to national research assessment frameworks, transparency initiatives, or open science policies and movements. Opportunities identification: List of relevant upcoming events, conferences, workshops where Crossref could engage with funders in 2026 and beyond. Representing Crossref Grant Linking System at selected regional opportunities in agreement with Crossref Community Engagement Manager, in accordance with Crossref travel policy and Code of Conduct. Identification of existing partnerships, consortia or networks that could facilitate engagement, introduction or collaboration. Recommendations for immediate and strategic engagement actions. Success indicators Delivery of a comprehensive, actionable stakeholder map and opportunities list. Identification of at least 2-3 funders and relevant contacts for priority engagement. Physical attendance of at least 2 events in the region to represent the GLS and Crossref. Policy summary highlighting regional enablers for GLS adoption. Practical, context specific recommendations to guide Crossref’s next steps in the region. About you You’ll need:\nTo be physically located in Asia. To be able to travel occasionally across Asia. A strong existing network of research funders in Asia (please note that we do not expect a single person to have a network spanning all of Asia, please highlight in your proposal which areas, regions or countries are you are best connected/ familiar with). A strong understanding of open science, open metadata, research and science policy. About Crossref We’re a nonprofit membership organisation that exists to make scholarly communications better. We rally the community; tag and share metadata; run an open infrastructure; play with technology; and make tools and services—all to help put research in context.\nWe envision a rich and reusable open network of relationships connecting research organisations, people, things, and actions; a scholarly record that the global community can build on forever, for the benefit of society. We are working towards this vision of a ‘Research Nexus’ by demonstrating the value of richer and connected open metadata, incentivising people to meet best practices, while making it easier to do so. “We” means 22,000+ members from 160 countries, 170+ million records, and nearly 2 billion monthly metadata queries from thousands of tools across the research ecosystem. We want to be a sustainable source of complete, open, and global scholarly metadata and relationships.\nHow to respond Responses should be submitted by the 19th of February and should include:\nResume(s) of the individual(s) to undertake the work, to highlight relevant experience for this work, and including their country location(s). A one page note (or up to 5 slides deck) explaining your motivation and approach for this work. Project timeline and budget. Please send your response, statement of interest, and resume to: jobs@crossref.org.\nWe are reviewing the proposals on a rolling basis and will set up 30 minutes calls with promising candidates to establish further details in the course of the process. Application deadline 19th of February. We aim to make a decision by the 10th of March.\n",
"headings": ["Request for services: expanding Crossref engagement with the research funding community in Asia","About the contractor role","The Crossref Grant Linking System","Objectives","Deliverables","Success indicators","About you","About Crossref","How to respond"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/jobs/2025-11-13-member-support-specialist/",
"title": "Member Support Specialist",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2025-11-12",
"lastmod_ts": 1762905600,
"section": "Jobs",
"tags": [],
"description": " Applications for this position closed on November 28, 2025. Do you want to help improve research communications in all corners of the globe? Come and join the world of nonprofit open infrastructure and be part of improving the creation and sharing of knowledge as our new Member Support Specialist.\nLocation: Remote and global with a focus on locations in UTC +3 to UTC +9 timezones. The successful candidate would need availability from 13:00 - 15:00 UTC on some days to ensure overlap with the rest of the team. Type: Full-time Remuneration: Approximately 40-45k USD-equivalent, paid in local currency. Note this is a general guide (as there is no universal currency) and local currency analysis will take place before the final offer. Benefits: Check out our Employee Handbook for more details on paid time off, unlimited sick time, paid parental and medical leaves, and more. Reports to: Member Experience Manager, Maryna Kovalyova Timeline: Advertise in November and offer in December About the role The member support specialist role combines member consultation and detailed systems and administrative work. You’ll need to have an understanding of the academic and scientific research process, great attention to detail, the ability to ask probing questions of applicants, and a logical, systematic approach to work. You’ll be working with a wide range of organisations in the scholarly communications world, from journal publishers to research funders to museums to libraries, in order to determine their needs and advise them on membership. You’ll take them through our application process, setting them up carefully in our CRM and other systems, navigating through automated processes, paying extremely close attention to data quality.\n",
"content": " Applications for this position closed on November 28, 2025. Do you want to help improve research communications in all corners of the globe? Come and join the world of nonprofit open infrastructure and be part of improving the creation and sharing of knowledge as our new Member Support Specialist.\nLocation: Remote and global with a focus on locations in UTC +3 to UTC +9 timezones. The successful candidate would need availability from 13:00 - 15:00 UTC on some days to ensure overlap with the rest of the team. Type: Full-time Remuneration: Approximately 40-45k USD-equivalent, paid in local currency. Note this is a general guide (as there is no universal currency) and local currency analysis will take place before the final offer. Benefits: Check out our Employee Handbook for more details on paid time off, unlimited sick time, paid parental and medical leaves, and more. Reports to: Member Experience Manager, Maryna Kovalyova Timeline: Advertise in November and offer in December About the role The member support specialist role combines member consultation and detailed systems and administrative work. You’ll need to have an understanding of the academic and scientific research process, great attention to detail, the ability to ask probing questions of applicants, and a logical, systematic approach to work. You’ll be working with a wide range of organisations in the scholarly communications world, from journal publishers to research funders to museums to libraries, in order to determine their needs and advise them on membership. You’ll take them through our application process, setting them up carefully in our CRM and other systems, navigating through automated processes, paying extremely close attention to data quality.\nOnce they’re members, you’ll continue to work with them closely for onboarding - answering their questions via email, and increasingly via our community forum and other public channels as we work to make membership operations fully transparent. You’ll help them take on new Crossref services, navigate platform migrations, and understand how to set up service providers to work with us on their behalf. You’ll work closely with sponsors, platform providers, service providers, and other registration agencies to support our members. It’s a very diverse role and is an excellent opportunity to get wide-ranging experience within Crossref and global open scholarly infrastructure and communications.\nKey responsibilities Answer questions in writing from people across the international scholarly community through our support software (Zendesk), our community forum, social media, and Q\u0026amp;A on webinars. This will mostly be in the English language. These questions might be from organisations that are already members, organisations seeking to join Crossref as a member, metadata users, or community members with a general enquiry. You’ll be working with publishers, funders, universities, museums, scholarly tools and platforms, authors and many more. Help applicants understand the community aspect of Crossref, the benefits and obligations of being a member, and the importance of correct and complete metadata. Work with new applicants to understand their organisations’ internal structures and help them understand the various membership options available to them. Own and drive the administrative process for new applicants, ensuring that any sanctions checks have been performed and that we have all the necessary information to help them get started, as well as setting them up correctly in our central systems. Broker conversations between publishers, platforms, and service providers to ensure the member is able to fulfil their aims while still meeting their membership obligations. Ensure that the data in our CRM system (Sugar CRM) is kept clean and up-to-date. Assist with designing automated membership processes based on existing documentation. Work closely with the billing team to ensure that members understand their billing responsibilities and that we have the information we need to make their payment experience smooth. Liaise with other registration agencies and CNRI to transfer ownership of DOI prefixes and ensure that no metadata is lost from the research nexus during the transfer. Manage title ownership transfers between members in our system, ensuring that the relevant permissions have been provided. Work closely with technical support colleagues on the membership team. Represent the membership team (and members) on Crossref-wide projects. Present on occasional community calls and represent Crossref at occasional in-person events. About you We’re looking for a smart, savvy person who’s able to work with our diverse membership to really get to the bottom of their needs. You’ll need to be able to follow processes precisely and maintain accuracy, while at the same time being comfortable with ambiguity - our membership and environment is changing rapidly and we won’t always have a clear answer for everything. This means we sometimes need to work slowly and carefully with our members to get to the bottom of things - either through exploratory emails or Zoom meetings - but, at other times, adapt quickly to changing needs.\nYou’ll be a quick learner of new technologies and enjoy improving systems and processes, automating those where possible, but you’ll also be able to build relationships with our members and serve their very diverse needs - from hand-holding those with basic queries to really digging into some knotty organisational relationships.\nNeeded to succeed:\nAble to balance a very busy role while still paying close attention to detail and keeping member experience at the forefront of everything you do. Experience in helping customers (or other stakeholders) and solving problems in creative and unique ways. Strong written and verbal communication skills with the ability to communicate clearly in English - able to use open questions to get to the bottom of things when members don’t seem to make sense. A truly global perspective - we have ocwe 23k member organisations from 164 countries across numerous time zones. Comfortable taking the initiative to lead conversations with people at all levels. Extremely organised and attentive to detail. Nice-to-have:\nQuick learner of new technologies and able to rapidly pick up new programs and systems. We are trying to automate as much as possible while still maintaining the human touch - so experience of automation platforms such as Workato, Zapier or Make are a plus. Experience with Zendesk or similar support system is ideal, as is familiarity with CRM systems such as Sugar. Familiar with the publishing process with knowledge of XML, metadata, scholarly research, or information science being a bonus. About Crossref \u0026amp; the team We’re a nonprofit membership organisation that exists to make scholarly communications better. We rally the community; tag and share metadata; run an open infrastructure; play with technology; and make tools and services—all to help put research in context.\nWe envision a rich and reusable open network of relationships connecting research organisations, people, things, and actions; a scholarly record that the global community can build on forever, for the benefit of society. We are working towards this vision of a ‘Research Nexus’ by demonstrating the value of richer and connected open metadata, incentivising people to meet best practices, while making it easier to do so. “We” means 23,000+ members from 160+ countries, 170+ million records, and nearly 2 billion monthly metadata queries from thousands of tools across the research ecosystem. We want to be a sustainable source of complete, open, and global scholarly metadata and relationships.\nTake a look at our strategic agenda to see the planned work that aims to achieve the vision. The sustainability area aims to make transparent all the processes and procedures we follow to run the operation long-term, including our financials and our ongoing commitment to the Principles of Open Scholarly Infrastructure (POSI). The governance area describes our board and its role in community oversight.\nIt also takes a strong team – because reliable infrastructure needs committed people who contribute to and realise the vision, and thrive doing it. We are a distributed group of 50 dedicated people who take our work seriously, but don\u0026rsquo;t take ourselves seriously - we like to play quizzes, measure coffee intake, and create 100s of custom slack emojis. We do this through fair policies and working practices, a balanced approach to resourcing, and accountability to each other.\nWe can offer the successful candidate a challenging and fun environment to work in. Together we are dedicated to our global mission and we are constantly adapting to ensure we get there. Take a look at our organisation chart, the latest Annual Meeting recordings, and our financial information here.\nThinking of applying? We especially encourage applications from people with backgrounds historically under-represented in research and scholarly communications. You can be based anywhere in the world where we can employ staff, either directly or through an employer of record.\nWe will invite selected candidates to an initial call to discuss the role. Following that, shortlisted candidates will be invited to an interview. You will receive all information in advance, and the interview will include some questions and/or exercises you’ll have a chance to prepare for. All interviews will be held remotely on Zoom.\nApplications closed on November 28th, 2025.\nAnticipated salary for this role is approximately 40-45k USD-equivalent, paid in local currency. Crossref offers competitive compensation, benefits, flexible work arrangements, professional development opportunities, and a supportive work environment. Check out our Employee Handbook for more details on paid time off, unlimited sick time, paid parental and medical leaves, and more.\nEqual opportunities commitment Crossref is committed to a policy of non-discrimination and equal opportunity for all employees and qualified applicants for employment without regard to race, colour, religion, sex, pregnancy or a condition related to pregnancy, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, national origin, ancestry, age, physical or mental disability, genetic information, veteran status, uniform service member status, or any other protected class under applicable law. Crossref will make reasonable accommodations for qualified individuals with known disabilities in accordance with applicable law.\nThanks for your interest in joining Crossref. We are excited to hear from you! ",
"headings": ["About the role","Key responsibilities","About you","About Crossref \u0026amp; the team","Thinking of applying?","Equal opportunities commitment","Thanks for your interest in joining Crossref. We are excited to hear from you!"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/events/metadata-health-check-webinars/",
"title": "Metadata health check webinars",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2025-08-28",
"lastmod_ts": 1756339200,
"section": "Events",
"tags": [],
"description": "How good is your metadata? Are you curious about the quality of the metadata you\u0026rsquo;re depositing with Crossref? Join our hands-on session to learn how to use the Participation Reports tool to assess the quality of your metadata with Crossref. We\u0026rsquo;ll show you why good metadata matters and provide help on improving your metadata completeness and quality. Good metadata makes your content easier to find and use.\nWhy attend? Get practical help and advice to improve your metadata on-the-spot, adding useful information for completeness and quality.\n",
"content": "How good is your metadata? Are you curious about the quality of the metadata you\u0026rsquo;re depositing with Crossref? Join our hands-on session to learn how to use the Participation Reports tool to assess the quality of your metadata with Crossref. We\u0026rsquo;ll show you why good metadata matters and provide help on improving your metadata completeness and quality. Good metadata makes your content easier to find and use.\nWhy attend? Get practical help and advice to improve your metadata on-the-spot, adding useful information for completeness and quality.\nWhat to expect? We’ll guide you through the Participation Reports tool, showing how it helps you to understand the quality of your metadata. Many people who have attended these sessions have found them helpful for improving their practices.\nChoose a session that suits your schedule We will have several one-hour sessions, so watch this space and pick a session that works best for you:\nWebinar Register How good is your metadata? A tour of the Crossref Participation Reports tool Wednesday, 17 June, 2026 – 12:00 UTC Register now Metadata Health Check Webinar with a focus on OJS Tuesday, 23 July, 2026 – 16:00 UTC Register now Metadata health check: A tour of the Crossref Participation Reports tool Wednesday, 12 August, 2026 – 7:00 UTC Register now Metadata health check: A tour of the Crossref Participation Reports tool Thursday, 12 November, 2026 – 15:00 UTC Register now Metadata health check: A tour of the Crossref Participation Reports tool Monday, 7 December, 2026 – 8:00 UTC Register now Metadata health check: A tour of the Crossref Participation Reports tool Tuesday, 15 December, 2026 – 9:00 UTC Register now Here is a helpful time converter.\nFor more details on what we\u0026rsquo;ll cover, check out our Participation Reports page. If you\u0026rsquo;d like to dive deeper into the tool and its benefits, visit our detailed documentation. Watch previous webinars: Metadata health check: Participation Report tool; Metadata Managerhttps://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLe_-TawAqQj1P_d7PwW0UUGoopMef8go4; Metadata health check: OJS focused.\nSee you on Zoom!\n",
"headings": ["How good is your metadata?","Why attend?","What to expect?","Choose a session that suits your schedule"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/jobs/2025-08-21-contract-billing-support/",
"title": "Billing Support Contractor",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2025-08-20",
"lastmod_ts": 1755648000,
"section": "Jobs",
"tags": [],
"description": "Request for services: contract billing support Come and work with us as an independent Billing Support Contractor. It’ll be fun!\nLocation: Remote and global\nAbout the contractor role Crossref is a membership organization with over 23,000 members in 160+ countries who produce scholarly and professional materials and content that is registered with Crossref for linking and citation. We’re looking for an independent contractor able to work remotely in helping us provide billing support and complete a project cenetred around new fees.\n",
"content": "Request for services: contract billing support Come and work with us as an independent Billing Support Contractor. It’ll be fun!\nLocation: Remote and global\nAbout the contractor role Crossref is a membership organization with over 23,000 members in 160+ countries who produce scholarly and professional materials and content that is registered with Crossref for linking and citation. We’re looking for an independent contractor able to work remotely in helping us provide billing support and complete a project cenetred around new fees.\nThis is a contract role consisting of two phases. Phase one is project work which is updating customer fee tiers within our accounting software. Phase two is backup billing support through Feberuary, 2026.\nThere is no set schedule and the independent contractor will bill their hours monthly.\nScope of work Monitors Zendesk for billing inquiries and resolves or distributes when appropriate Update Membership Fees for members moving to a new tier Supports in collections initiatives Assists in payment application within accounting platform Aids in other ad hoc financial, administrative and operation projects About you Organized with an eye for details Happy with data entry and maintenance Comfortable following processes and taking on new systems Friendly and clear communication skills (in English) About Crossref We’re a nonprofit membership organisation that exists to make scholarly communications better. We rally the community; tag and share metadata; run an open infrastructure; play with technology; and make tools and services—all to help put research in context.\nWe envision a rich and reusable open network of relationships connecting research organisations, people, things, and actions; a scholarly record that the global community can build on forever, for the benefit of society. We are working towards this vision of a ‘Research Nexus’ by demonstrating the value of richer and connected open metadata, incentivising people to meet best practices, while making it easier to do so. “We” means 23,000+ members from 160+ countries, 170+ million records, and nearly 2 billion monthly metadata queries from thousands of tools across the research ecosystem. We want to be a sustainable source of complete, open, and global scholarly metadata and relationships.\nHow to respond A statement of interest that includes:\nExamples of similar work (and/or your CV) References from previous work Hourly rate Please send your response, statement of interest, and resume to: jobs@crossref.org.\n",
"headings": ["Request for services: contract billing support","About the contractor role","Scope of work","About you","About Crossref","How to respond"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/jobs/2025-06-30-contract-technical-support/",
"title": "Technical Support Contractor",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2025-06-30",
"lastmod_ts": 1751241600,
"section": "Jobs",
"tags": [],
"description": "Request for services: contract technical support Come and work with us as an independent Technical Support Contractor. It’ll be fun!\nLocation: Remote and global\nAbout the contractor role The Technical Support Contractor will work with our Membership team, part of Crossref’s Programs team, a distributed team with members across Africa, Asia, Europe, and the US. We’re at the forefront of Crossref’s growth, building relationships with new communities in new markets in new ways. We’re aiming for a more open approach to having conversations with people all around the world - including within our growing community forum, which the right candidate will help us expand, in multiple languages. We’re looking for a Technical Support Contractor to provide front-line help to our international community of publishers, librarians, funders, researchers and developers on a range of services that help them deposit, find, link, cite, and assess scholarly content.\n",
"content": "Request for services: contract technical support Come and work with us as an independent Technical Support Contractor. It’ll be fun!\nLocation: Remote and global\nAbout the contractor role The Technical Support Contractor will work with our Membership team, part of Crossref’s Programs team, a distributed team with members across Africa, Asia, Europe, and the US. We’re at the forefront of Crossref’s growth, building relationships with new communities in new markets in new ways. We’re aiming for a more open approach to having conversations with people all around the world - including within our growing community forum, which the right candidate will help us expand, in multiple languages. We’re looking for a Technical Support Contractor to provide front-line help to our international community of publishers, librarians, funders, researchers and developers on a range of services that help them deposit, find, link, cite, and assess scholarly content.\nThere is no set schedule and the independent contractor would bill their hours monthly.\nScope of work Replying to and solving community queries using the Zendesk support system. Using our various tools and APIs to find the answers to these queries, or pointing users to support materials that will help them. Working with staff on particularly tricky tickets, escalating as necessary. Working efficiently but also kindly and with empathy with our very diverse, global community. About the team You’ll communicate with the technical and membership support staff to provide support and guidance for people with a wide range of technical experience. You’ll help our community create and retrieve metadata records with tools ranging from simple user interfaces to robust APIs.\nAbout Crossref We’re a nonprofit membership organisation that exists to make scholarly communications better. We rally the community; tag and share metadata; run an open infrastructure; play with technology; and make tools and services—all to help put research in context.\nWe envision a rich and reusable open network of relationships connecting research organisations, people, things, and actions; a scholarly record that the global community can build on forever, for the benefit of society. We are working towards this vision of a ‘Research Nexus’ by demonstrating the value of richer and connected open metadata, incentivising people to meet best practices, while making it easier to do so. “We” means 22,000+ members from 160 countries, 170+ million records, and nearly 2 billion monthly metadata queries from thousands of tools across the research ecosystem. We want to be a sustainable source of complete, open, and global scholarly metadata and relationships.\nHow to respond A statement of interest that includes:\nExamples of similar work (and/or your CV) References from previous work Hourly rate Please send your response, statement of interest, and resume to: jobs@crossref.org.\n",
"headings": ["Request for services: contract technical support","About the contractor role","Scope of work","About the team","About Crossref","How to respond"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/jobs/2024-12-05-community-engagement-manager/",
"title": "Community Engagement Manager (Funders)",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2024-12-05",
"lastmod_ts": 1733356800,
"section": "Jobs",
"tags": [],
"description": " Applications for this position will be closed on January 8, 2025. Do you want to help improve research communications in all corners of the globe? Come and join the world of nonprofit open infrastructure and be part of improving the creation and sharing of knowledge as our new Community Engagement Manager for the funding community.\nLocation: Remote and global (to at least partially overlap with working hours in European timezones) Type: Full-time Remuneration: 70-78k USD or local equivalent, depending on experience. Note this is a general guide (as there is no universal currency) and local benchmarking will take place before the final offer. Reports to: Director of Community, Kora Korzec Timeline: Advertise in December/offer by February About the role The Crossref members document the progress of knowledge through our sustainable, global, and open system. We run an infrastructure so they can curate, share, and preserve metadata, which is information that underpins and describes all research activities such as funding, authorship, dissemination, and attention—and the relationships between these activities.\n",
"content": " Applications for this position will be closed on January 8, 2025. Do you want to help improve research communications in all corners of the globe? Come and join the world of nonprofit open infrastructure and be part of improving the creation and sharing of knowledge as our new Community Engagement Manager for the funding community.\nLocation: Remote and global (to at least partially overlap with working hours in European timezones) Type: Full-time Remuneration: 70-78k USD or local equivalent, depending on experience. Note this is a general guide (as there is no universal currency) and local benchmarking will take place before the final offer. Reports to: Director of Community, Kora Korzec Timeline: Advertise in December/offer by February About the role The Crossref members document the progress of knowledge through our sustainable, global, and open system. We run an infrastructure so they can curate, share, and preserve metadata, which is information that underpins and describes all research activities such as funding, authorship, dissemination, and attention—and the relationships between these activities.\nIncreasingly, the organisations that drive open science through policy, funding, and related support are turning their attention to the underlying data infrastructure and, as part of that, are joining Crossref to provide their part of the picture and link their awards (including the use of facilities and equipment) with Crossref’s vast corpus of publications and other outputs.\nFor five years, the Crossref Grant Linking System has been steadily gaining traction. We are now at a tipping point, and we need an experienced community manager with strong connections with funders and funding platforms to supercharge the program and take it to the next level by growing membership and facilitating even more integrations with grant platforms.\nKey responsibilities Increase awareness and grow global funder membership\nCreate opportunities to engage funders globally—especially in Africa, Asia, and South America—and listen to and learn their needs, introduce Crossref, and invite them to engage with our part of the research ecosystem. Contribute to the Funder Advisory Group and help make their work mutually beneficial, i.e. facilitate the sharing of experiences between funders and help the group contribute to development such as schema evolution and governance and fee changes. Develop the pipeline of interested and eligible funders to grow membership and, therefore, participation in Crossref through more records and metadata for the Grant Linking System. Support funders in preparing for and meeting membership obligations and help onboard new members so that they can take advantage of all relevant services. Facilitate new integrations\nCreate an action-focused campaign to incentivise publishers and other Crossref members to report funding acknowledgements using Crossref grant links. Create action plans with the 20+ grant management systems to encourage and facilitate integrations with the Crossref GLS. This could mean working with community consultants and developers to commission and oversee such projects. Forge partnerships with related organisations\nIdentify organisations and initiatives with which to collaborate for mutual benefit, particularly outside of Western countries. Strengthen relationships with long-standing partners such as Altum and Europe PMC. Contribute to community initiatives and others’ working groups that support the shared vision for a connected research nexus. Support all Crossref programs and the Research Nexus vision\nListen to the sentiment and feedback of our community, share insights with colleagues and contribute to other programs and services. Represent Crossref, attending and speaking at relevant industry events, online and in-person, on topics even beyond funding and grants, and use the role to bring stakeholders together. Create content, such as writing articles and blogs, slides and diagrams, updating documentation, and creating new resources in support of the above work. About you We are looking for a proactive candidate with a unique blend of customer service skills, analytical trouble-shooting skills, and a passion to help others. You’ll have an interest in data and technology and will be a quick learner of new technologies. You’ll be able to build relationships with our community members and serve their very diverse needs - from assisting those with basic queries to really digging into some knotty technical queries. Because of this, you’ll also be able to distill those complex and technically challenging queries into easy-to-follow guidance.\nYou’ll need:\nAs scientific community engagement is an emerging profession, practical experience in this area is more important to us than traditional qualifications.\nWe will prioritise candidates who can demonstrate most of these characteristics:\nExperience working with or within the research funding community, either in grant-making (directly or indirectly) or in leading a community initiative centred around funding and policy-making. Experience in community building and management and/or planning, executing and evaluating participatory initiatives, including group facilitation and relationship management. Collaborative attitude and evidence of co-creation Experience working within technical or metadata-focused initiatives and systems Curiosity to explore complex concepts and to learn new skills and perspectives Excellent communication both written and spoken Track record of project management, working to budget and timelines, and reporting on progress against clear goals. Confidence in public speaking in-person and online, including delivery of webinars/workshops. Tried and tested strategies for ensuring that your programs are equitable, diverse, and inclusive. It would be a bonus if you also have any of the following:\nAbility to communicate in languages other than English Experience working in global or multicultural settings Experience with or strong understanding of open infrastructure and metadata About the team The role is based within the Community team. We collaborate across a variety of projects and programs, and you will be asked to represent other programs and communities where practical. We adopt an approachable tone and style in our communications and enjoy systematic planning combined with flexibility and resourcefulness. We’re looking to re-engage with our community through face-to-face opportunities as well as online, so the work will involve some travel (according to our thinking on travel and sustainability).\nOur team’s primary aim is to engage colleagues from member organisations and other stakeholders to be actively involved in documenting the scholarly progress and making it transparent. This contributes to co-creating a robust research nexus. As part of the wider Community group at Crossref, we seek to encourage wider adoption and development of best practices in research communications with regard to metadata and the persistence and integrity of the scholarly record. Colleagues across the organisation are helpful, easy-going and supportive, so if you’re open-minded and ready to work as part of the team and across different teams, you will fit right in. Watch the recording of our recent event celebrating 5 years of the GLS to learn more about the current conversations in our community.\nAbout Crossref We’re a nonprofit membership organisation that exists to make scholarly communications better. We rally the community; tag and share metadata; run an open infrastructure; play with technology; and make tools and services—all to help put research in context.\nWe envision a rich and reusable open network of relationships connecting research organisations, people, things, and actions; a scholarly record that the global community can build on forever, for the benefit of society. We are working towards this vision of a ‘Research Nexus’ by demonstrating the value of richer and connected open metadata, incentivising people to meet best practices, while making it easier to do so. “We” means 20,000+ members from 160 countries, 160+ million records, and nearly 2 billion monthly metadata queries from thousands of tools across the research ecosystem. We want to be a sustainable source of complete, open, and global scholarly metadata and relationships.\nTake a look at our strategic agenda to see the planned work that aims to achieve the vision. The sustainability area aims to make transparent all the processes and procedures we follow to run the operation long-term, including our financials and our ongoing commitment to the Principles of Open Scholarly Infrastructure (POSI). The governance area describes our board and its role in community oversight.\nIt also takes a strong team – because reliable infrastructure needs committed people who contribute to and realise the vision, and thrive doing it. We are a distributed group of 46 dedicated people who like to play quizzes, talk about celery (sometimes cucumber), measure coffee intake, and create 100s of custom slack emojis. We enthusiastically support the Oxford comma but waver between use of American or British English. Occasionally we do some work to improve knowledge sharing worldwide— which we take a bit more seriously than ourselves. We do this through fair policies and working practices, a balanced approach to resourcing, and accountability to each other.\nWe can offer the successful candidate a challenging and fun environment to work in. Together we are dedicated to our global mission and we are constantly adapting to ensure we get there. Take a look at our organisation chart, the latest Annual Meeting recordings, and our financial information here.\nThinking of applying? We encourage applications from excellent candidates especially from people with backgrounds historically under-represented in research and scholarly communications. You can be based anywhere in the world where we can employ staff, either directly or through an employer of record. This position is full-time, however we can make accommodations for alternative schedules on request. Our team is fully remote and distributed across time zones and continents. This role will require some regular work in European time zones. Our main working language is English, but there are many opportunities in this job to use other tongues if you’re able. If anything here is unclear, please contact Kora Korzec, the hiring manager, on kora@crossref.org.\nPlease apply via this form which allows us to sort your application materials into neat folders for a faster review. One of the best ways of offering evidence of your suitability within the cover letter is with an example of a relevant project you’re particularly proud of – we would particularly welcome mentions of your work with research funders. If possible, we’d also love to see an example of content you’ve created – a link to a recording of your talk, blog post, infographic, or something else. There is space to share documents and links within the application form.\nLastly, if you don’t meet the majority of the criteria we listed here, but are confident you’d be natural in delivering the key responsibilities of the role, we encourage your interest and would still like to hear what strengths you would bring.\nWe aim to start reviewing applications on January 8, 2025. Please strive to send us your documents by then.\nThe role will report to Kora Korzec, Director of Community at Crossref. She will review all applications along with Michelle Cancel, our HR Manager, and Ginny Hendricks, Chief Program Officer.\nWe will invite selected candidates to a brief initial call to discuss the role as soon as possible following an initial review. Following that, shortlisted candidates will be invited to an interview. You will receive all questions in advance, and the interview will include some exercises you’ll have a chance to prepare for. All interviews will be held remotely on Zoom.\nEqual opportunities commitment Crossref is committed to a policy of non-discrimination and equal opportunity for all employees and qualified applicants for employment without regard to race, colour, religion, sex, pregnancy or a condition related to pregnancy, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, national origin, ancestry, age, physical or mental disability, genetic information, veteran status, uniform service member status, or any other protected class under applicable law. Crossref will make reasonable accommodations for qualified individuals with known disabilities in accordance with applicable law.\nThanks for your interest in joining Crossref. We are excited to hear from you! ",
"headings": ["About the role","Key responsibilities","About you","About the team","About Crossref","Thinking of applying?","Equal opportunities commitment","Thanks for your interest in joining Crossref. We are excited to hear from you!"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/jobs/2023-03-01-contract-technical-support/",
"title": "Technical Support Contractor",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2023-03-01",
"lastmod_ts": 1677628800,
"section": "Jobs",
"tags": [],
"description": "Request for services: contract technical support Come and work with us as an independent Technical Support Contractor. It’ll be fun!\nLocation: Remote\nAbout the contractor role The Technical Support Contractor will work closely with our Member Experience team, part of Crossref’s Outreach team, an eighteen-strong distributed team with members across Africa, Asia, Europe, and the US. We’re at the forefront of Crossref’s growth, building relationships with new communities in new markets in new ways. We’re aiming for a more open approach to having conversations with people all around the world - including within our growing community forum, which the right candidate will help us expand, in multiple languages. We’re looking for a Technical Support Contractor to provide front-line help to our international community of publishers, librarians, funders, researchers and developers on a range of services that help them deposit, find, link, cite, and assess scholarly content.\n",
"content": "Request for services: contract technical support Come and work with us as an independent Technical Support Contractor. It’ll be fun!\nLocation: Remote\nAbout the contractor role The Technical Support Contractor will work closely with our Member Experience team, part of Crossref’s Outreach team, an eighteen-strong distributed team with members across Africa, Asia, Europe, and the US. We’re at the forefront of Crossref’s growth, building relationships with new communities in new markets in new ways. We’re aiming for a more open approach to having conversations with people all around the world - including within our growing community forum, which the right candidate will help us expand, in multiple languages. We’re looking for a Technical Support Contractor to provide front-line help to our international community of publishers, librarians, funders, researchers and developers on a range of services that help them deposit, find, link, cite, and assess scholarly content.\nWe’re looking for an independent contractor able to work remotely. There is no set schedule and contractors bill hours monthly.\nScope of work Replying to and solving community queries using the Zendesk support system. Using our various tools and APIs to find the answers to these queries, or pointing users to support materials that will help them. Working with colleagues on particularly tricky tickets, escalating as necessary. Working efficiently but also kindly and with empathy with our very diverse, global community. About the team You’ll be working closely with nine other technical and membership support colleagues to provide support and guidance for people with a wide range of technical experience. You’ll help our community create and retrieve metadata records with tools ranging from simple user interfaces to robust APIs.\nAbout Crossref Crossref makes research objects easy to find, cite, link, assess, and reuse. We’re a not-for-profit membership organisation that exists to make scholarly communications better. We rally the community; tag and share metadata; run an open infrastructure; play with technology; and make tools and services—all to help put research in context. It’s as simple—and as complicated—as that.\nWe’re a small but mighty group working with over 17,000 members from 146 countries, and we have thousands of tools and services relying on our metadata. We take our work seriously but usually not ourselves.\nHow to respond We\u0026rsquo;re currently looking for contract help, so responses are accepted on a rolling basis:\nA statement of interest that includes:\nExamples of similar work (and/or your CV) References from previous work Hourly rate Please send your response, statement of interest, and resume to: jobs@crossref.org.\n",
"headings": ["Request for services: contract technical support","About the contractor role","Scope of work","About the team","About Crossref","How to respond"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/events/metadata-sprint/",
"title": "Crossref Metadata Sprint",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 8,
"lastmod": "2025-10-31",
"lastmod_ts": 1761868800,
"section": "Events",
"tags": [],
"description": "Version en español | Versão em português Metadata sprint in São Paulo (4–6 March 2026) We are excited to announce the upcoming Metadata Sprint in São Paulo, Brazil, which will take place 4–6 March 2026. This is the second Metadata Sprint organized by Crossref and our first to be held in Latin America with the participation of SciELO. In recognition of the region’s diversity, the event will be held in three languages – Portuguese, Spanish, and English, to support the opportunity for active participation for all.\n",
"content": "Version en español | Versão em português Metadata sprint in São Paulo (4–6 March 2026) We are excited to announce the upcoming Metadata Sprint in São Paulo, Brazil, which will take place 4–6 March 2026. This is the second Metadata Sprint organized by Crossref and our first to be held in Latin America with the participation of SciELO. In recognition of the region’s diversity, the event will be held in three languages – Portuguese, Spanish, and English, to support the opportunity for active participation for all.\nOur goal is to continue fostering community spaces for co-creation using our open scholarly metadata. The Sprint will offer an opportunity to pose questions, share ideas, collaborate on research, and propose innovative solutions that enhance the use of metadata in scholarly communication and beyond.\nWho is it for? The Sprint brings together scientometricians, meta-scientists, data scientists, librarians, research integrity experts, coders, engineers, and other open scholarly infrastructure enthusiasts. Participants share an interest in metadata, and either an understanding of the research process, or experience with tools used in some aspects of the scholarly ecosystem – research communication, assessment, funding, policy-making, infrastructure, or something else. Analytical as well as coding skills are useful but not essential. The ability to ask novel questions and create translations or training materials will also provide ample opportunities to participate and contribute.\nHow does it work? The Metadata Sprint is designed for a limited number of participants to support focused collaboration.\nAhead of the event, participants will be added to a dedicated Slack channel to start early communications, share updates, and participate in preparation video calls. We want to make sure participants feel prepared for the event and that they have the tools and potential questions addressed before we come together.\nWe will kick off the event with a short icebreaker session, to help consolidate teams. We don’t expect participants to develop a complete production- or publication-ready project. Instead, we would like to see your ideas being developed, taking advantage of the diverse community of participants. However, teams will be expected to share and show their ideas and what they managed to accomplish by the close of the event.\nFor inspiration and ideas, participants can refer to our GitLab Sprint repository and our related blog post, which feature outcomes from our first sprint. If you’d like to learn more about the current focus of our work, read about our approach to cross-functional programs, data science, and more specifically to metadata matching too. The Crossref community is always growing and new needs and trends emerge all the time the Sprint provides space to explor ways of leveraging metadata to benefit your corner of the scholarly community.\nWe\u0026rsquo;ve made an effort to balance the skills and backgrounds of the participants in support of a productive and enjoyable event.\nWhere will the event be held? The Sprint will be held in the installations of the Getulio Vargas Foundation, Sao Paulo, Brazil. Remember to check if you will need to request a visa to enter Brazil. You can find more information about Brazil’s visa requirements at: https://www.gov.br/mre/pt-br/consulado-atlanta/english/visas/visa-requirements-by-country. We’ll gladly provide you with letters confirming your participation in the event if you need them as support.\nTogether, let’s shape the future of scholarly metadata!\nPlease share comments and questions for this blog post on our forum, or contact Luis Montilla.\nExpresa tu interés ahora para unirte a nuestro próximo Metadata Sprint en São Paulo Nos complace anunciar el próximo Metadata Sprint en São Paulo, Brasil, que tendrá lugar del 4-6 de marzo de 2026. Este es el segundo Metadata Sprint organizado por Crossref y el primero que se celebra en América Latina con la participación de SciELO. En reconocimiento a la diversidad de la región, el evento se llevará a cabo en tres idiomas: portugués, español e inglés, con el fin de facilitar la participación activa de todos.\nNuestro objetivo es seguir fomentando espacios comunitarios para la creación conjunta utilizando nuestros metadatos académicos abiertos. El Sprint te ofrecerá la oportunidad de plantear preguntas, compartir ideas, colaborar en investigaciones y proponer soluciones innovadoras que mejoren el uso de los metadatos en la comunicación académica y más allá.\n¿A quién va dirigido? El Sprint reúne cientometristas, metacientíficos, científicos de datos, bibliotecarios, expertos en integridad de la investigación, programadores, ingenieros y otros entusiastas de la infraestructura académica abierta. Los participantes comparten un interés por los metadatos y tienen conocimientos sobre el proceso de investigación o experiencia con herramientas utilizadas en algunos aspectos del ecosistema académico, comunicación de la investigación, evaluación, financiación, elaboración de políticas, infraestructura u otros. Las habilidades analíticas y de programación son útiles, pero no imprescindibles. La capacidad de plantear preguntas novedosas y crear traducciones o materiales de formación también te brindará amplias oportunidades para participar y contribuir.\n¿Cómo funciona? El Metadata Sprint está diseñado para un número limitado de participantes con el fin de facilitar una colaboración específica.\nAntes del evento, los participantes se añadirán a un canal de Slack específico para comenzar a comunicarse, compartir novedades y participar en videollamadas preparatorias. Queremos asegurarnos de que los participantes se sientan preparados para el evento y de que dispongan de las herramientas y las posibles preguntas antes de reunirnos.\nComenzaremos el evento con una breve sesión para romper el hielo y ayudar a consolidar los equipos. No esperamos que los participantes desarrollen un proyecto completo listo para su producción o publicación. En cambio, nos gustaría ver cómo se desarrollan tus ideas, aprovechando la diversidad de la comunidad de participantes. Sin embargo, se espera que los equipos compartan y muestren sus ideas y lo que han logrado al final del evento.\nPara inspiración e ideas, los participantes pueden explorar nuestro repositorio GitLab del Sprint y a nuestra entrada de blog relacionada, donde encontrarás los resultados de nuestro primer sprint. Si deseas obtener más información sobre el enfoque actual de nuestro trabajo, puedes leer sobre nuestro enfoque de los programas interfuncionales, la ciencia de datos y, más concretamente, la correspondencia de metadatos. La comunidad Crossref está en constante crecimiento y surgen nuevas necesidades y tendencias continuamente. Si tienes alguna idea para aprovechar los metadatos en beneficio de tu ámbito de la comunidad académica, estaremos encantados de escucharla.\nHemos hecho un esfuerzo para equilibrar las habilidades y los antecedentes de los participantes para que el evento sea productivo y agradable.\n¿Dónde se celebrará el evento? El Sprint se llevará a cabo en las instalaciones de la Fundación Getulio Vargas, en São Paulo, Brasil. Recuerda verificar si necesitas solicitar una visa para ingresar a Brasil. Puedes encontrar más información sobre los requisitos de visa de Brasil en: https://www.gov.br/mre/pt-br/consulado-atlanta/english/visas/visa-requirements-by-country. Estaremos encantados de proporcionarte cartas que confirmen tu participación en el evento si las necesitas como respaldo.\n¡Juntos, demos forma al futuro de los metadatos académicos!\nComparte tus comentarios y preguntas sobre esta entrada del blog en nuestro foro o ponte en contacto con Luis Montilla.\nManifeste já o seu interesse em participar do nosso próximo Metadata Sprint em São Paulo Temos o prazer de anunciar o próximo Metadata Sprint em São Paulo, Brasil, que acontecerá de 4-6 de março de 2026. Este é a segunda Metadata Sprint organizada pela Crossref e a primeira a ser realizada na América Latina com participação do SciELO. Em reconhecimento à diversidade da região, o evento será realizado em três idiomas – português, espanhol e inglês – para apoiar a oportunidade de participação ativa de todos.\nNosso objetivo é continuar promovendo espaços comunitários para a cocriação usando nossos metadados acadêmicos abertos. O Sprint oferecerá a você a oportunidade de fazer perguntas, compartilhar ideias, colaborar em pesquisas e propor soluções inovadoras que aprimorem o uso de metadados na comunicação acadêmica e além.\nA quem se destina? O Sprint reúne cientometristas, metacientistas, cientistas de dados, bibliotecários, especialistas em integridade da pesquisa, programadores, engenheiros e outros entusiastas da infraestrutura acadêmica aberta. Os participantes compartilham um interesse por metadados. e compreende o processo de pesquisa ou tem experiência com ferramentas utilizadas em alguns aspectos do ecossistema acadêmico, comunicação de pesquisa, avaliação, financiamento, formulação de políticas, infraestrutura ou outros. Habilidades analíticas e de programação são úteis, mas não essenciais. A capacidade de fazer perguntas inovadoras e criar traduções ou materiais de treinamento também proporcionará amplas oportunidades de participação e contribuição.\nComo funciona? O Metadata Sprint foi concebido para um número limitado de participantes, com o objetivo de facilitar uma colaboração específica.\nAntes do evento, os participantes serão adicionados a um canal específico no Slack para começarem a comunicar, partilhar novidades e participar em videochamadas preparatórias. Queremos garantir que os participantes se sentem preparados para o evento e que dispõem das ferramentas e das possíveis perguntas antes de nos reunirmos.\nIniciaremos o evento com uma breve sessão para quebrar o gelo e ajudar a consolidar as equipes. Não esperamos que os participantes desenvolvam um projeto completo pronto para produção ou publicação. Em vez disso, gostaríamos de ver como suas ideias se desenvolvem, aproveitando a diversidade da comunidade de participantes. No entanto, espera-se que as equipes compartilhem e mostrem suas ideias e o que alcançaram no final do evento.\nPara obter inspiração e ideias, os participantes podem explorar nosso repositório GitLab Sprint e nossa postagem no blog relacionada, que apresentam os resultados do nosso primeiro sprint. Se quiser saber mais sobre o foco atual do nosso trabalho, leia sobre nossa abordagem a programas multifuncionais, ciência de dados e, mais especificamente, para correspondência de metadados. A comunidade Crossref está sempre crescendo e novas necessidades e tendências surgem o tempo todo. Se você tem uma ideia para aproveitar os metadados em benefício da sua área da comunidade acadêmica, estamos ansiosos para ouvi-la.\nFizemos um esforço para equilibrar as habilidades e os antecedentes dos participantes, a fim de tornar o evento produtivo e agradável.\nOnde será realizado o evento? O Sprint será realizado nas instalações da Fundação Getulio Vargas, em São Paulo, Brasil. Lembre-se de verificar se você precisará solicitar um visto para entrar no Brasil. Você pode encontrar mais informações sobre os requisitos de visto do Brasil em: https://www.gov.br/mre/pt-br/consulado-atlanta/english/visas/visa-requirements-by-country. Teremos prazer em fornecer cartas confirmando sua participação no evento, caso você precise delas como comprovante.\nJuntos, vamos moldar o futuro dos metadados acadêmicos!\nCompartilhe comentários e perguntas sobre esta publicação do blog em nosso fórum ou entre em contato com Luis Montilla.\nFollow us on | Siga-nos no | Siguénos en: Community Forum LinkedIn Mastodon Bluesky Instagram ",
"headings": ["Version en español | Versão em português","Metadata sprint in São Paulo (4–6 March 2026)","Who is it for?","How does it work?","Where will the event be held?","Expresa tu interés ahora para unirte a nuestro próximo Metadata Sprint en São Paulo","¿A quién va dirigido?","¿Cómo funciona?","¿Dónde se celebrará el evento?","Manifeste já o seu interesse em participar do nosso próximo Metadata Sprint em São Paulo","A quem se destina?","Como funciona?","Onde será realizado o evento?","Follow us on | Siga-nos no | Siguénos en:"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/events/metadata-sprint/metadata-sprint-archive/",
"title": "Crossref Metadata Sprint archive",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 8,
"lastmod": "2025-08-21",
"lastmod_ts": 1755734400,
"section": "Events",
"tags": [],
"description": " +- Metadata Sprint Madrid - 8-9 April 2025\rRead all about the event on our blog. Overview Crossref makes research objects easy to find, cite, link, assess, and reuse. We exist to make scholarly communications better. We emphasise the community\u0026rsquo;s role in contributing to this goal and next Spring, we’re opening a new option to collaborate and co-create new research, tools and initiatives – at our first Metadata Sprint. Read on to learn what we’re hoping to achieve and how you can take part.\n",
"content": " +- Metadata Sprint Madrid - 8-9 April 2025\rRead all about the event on our blog. Overview Crossref makes research objects easy to find, cite, link, assess, and reuse. We exist to make scholarly communications better. We emphasise the community\u0026rsquo;s role in contributing to this goal and next Spring, we’re opening a new option to collaborate and co-create new research, tools and initiatives – at our first Metadata Sprint. Read on to learn what we’re hoping to achieve and how you can take part.\nStudying and using the ever-growing magnitude of the scholarly record requires collaboration and joint thinking. In the case of Crossref’s metadata, we are referring to a body of over 162 million records provided by 22,000 members across the globe. This is actively used, on one hand, to power all sorts of scholarly tools, such as reference managers, open catalogues, information dashboards and many more, but also as the raw data for meta-research.\nWe offer open access to this metadata via our REST API, which supports a wide range of queries, facets and filters. The REST API can be used, for example, to look up the metadata for specific records, search for works mentioning an author’s name or find retractions registered with us. It also allows users to filter on several elements, including funder IDs, ORCIDs, dates and more. Despite API being commonly defined as interfaces for machines, the number of people engaging directly with APIs is accelerating and diversifying today. Additionally, we also provide annual public data files, which you can download via BitTorrent protocol and get your hands on the ~212 GB file containing all of Crossref metadata.\nOur upcoming 25th anniversary lends itself as an opportunity for doing something new and increasing support for community-led initiatives. We want to bring together community members to engage with our REST API and the scholarly metadata therein, and foster innovation and creativity, solve real-world problems, and promote networking and collaboration. Some examples of projects that we have co-created with the community include the JSON Forms release that supported Vuetify, the Vue.js user interface library we use and, more recently, the update to our Participation Reports. We welcome librarians, research integrity experts, scientometricians, meta-scientists, data scientists, coders, engineers, and other open scholarly infrastructure enthusiasts. We invite the participants to suggest and join projects within the following themes:\nIntegrity of the scholarly record - what signals and patterns of lack of integrity can be detected using scholarly metadata? Quality and completeness - tools and strategies to assess and enhance the quality and completeness of the scholarly metadata. Metadata for everyone - making interacting with our REST API easier and more accessible. Metadata by everyone - tools to help the community contribute to the scholarly record in various ways. Outside the box - projects that don’t fit any of the above themes. You can pitch your project or support one proposed by others in the community. This event is not limited to technical-oriented participants. If you are interested in open infrastructure and don’t have a technical or code-oriented background, we encourage you to register your interest too.\nThe Metadata Sprint will take place in the National Museum of Natural Sciences of Madrid, Spain, on the 8 and 9 of April 2025. There is a limited number of spaces – we hope to welcome 30 participants at the event. We will encourage accepted participants to involve others in the community to collaborate ahead of time via our Community Forum, crowdsourcing ideas and comments on their initiative to support productivity on the day.\nIf you need a refresher on our API and what you can access through it, you can visit the REST API section of our documentation. We also encourage you to explore the API documentation and the latest news about our public data file.\nWe\u0026rsquo;re committed to inclusivity and diversity at our Metadata Sprint and will look to offer assistance for accepted applicants for whom travel costs might be a barrier to participation.\nFinally, we encourage you to read our Code of Conduct, which also applies to this event.\nWe are looking forward to meeting you in Madrid!\nFAQs What should I bring?\nBring your laptop with you. The venue will have wifi access and plenty of power sockets. If you are visiting us from outside the EU, make sure you pack your power adapters.\nIs there a fee to participate?\nRegistration is free, but we do have limited seats.\nCan I join if I don’t have a team?\nAbsolutely. We will have slack channels and host group calls to let the participants start interacting with each other in advance. Ultimately, you can always choose to develop your project on your own.\nCan I propose a different theme or topics?\nSure! Be sure to include your proposal in the registration form.\nWhat are the entry requirements for Spain?\nYou can check if you need an entry Visa in this link\nDo you have any hotel suggestions?\nHere’s a selection of hotels near the Museo Nacional de Ciencias Naturales, with options for every budget. All hotels are within walking distance or a short transport ride, making it convenient for your visit. See the map below to see the proximity of the hotels to the venue.\nMap view of all locations shared below.\nNH Collection Madrid Abascal\nDistance: approx. 15-minute walk Price: €260+ a night Google Maps NH Madrid Chamberí\nDistance: approx. 15-minute walk Price: €210+ a night Google Maps Exclusive Rooms in the Heart of the City, Madrid, Spain\nDistance: approx. 15-minute walk Price: €110+ a night Google Maps Hotel NH Madrid Chamberí\nDistance: approx. 15-minute walk Price: €200-€250 a night Google Maps Hotel Suites Barrio De Salamanca\nDistance: approx. 15-minute walk Price: €250-€300 a night Google Maps Hotel NH Madrid Zurbano\nDistance: approx. 9-minute walk Price: €100-€150 a night Google Maps Barceló Emperatriz\nDistance: approx. 11-minute walk Price: €200-€250 a night Google Maps How do I get to the venue?\nWe encourage participants to consider the environment and travel by land wherever practicable. However, if you need to fly, Adolfo Suárez Madrid–Barajas Airport (MAD) is the nearest. By train: Getting to Madrid by Train.\nThe venue is close to the Nuevos Ministerios metro and train station, and it can also be reached by those arriving to the Gregorio Marañón metro station. Both are at less than 10-minute walk.\nContact us If you have any questions, contact events@crossref.org.\nSocial Media Links: LinkedIn, Mastodon, Twitter, Instagram\n",
"headings": ["Overview","Registration and submission form","FAQs","Contact us"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/membership/terms/member-terms-2022/",
"title": "2022 membership terms",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2025-05-07",
"lastmod_ts": 1746576000,
"section": "Become a member",
"tags": [],
"description": " This page shows the Crossref member terms were used from June 2022 to July 2025. These terms were superceded by new membership terms approved by the Board in 2025. Updated June 2022\nThese Crossref Terms of Membership (these \u0026ldquo;Terms\u0026rdquo;) set forth the terms and conditions of membership in The Publishers International Linking Association, Inc. d/b/a Crossref (\u0026ldquo;Crossref\u0026rdquo;), a nonprofit corporation organized under the laws of New York, USA.\nBackground Crossref is a not-for-profit membership organisation that exists to make scholarly communications better. Its mission is to \"make research outputs easy to find, cite, link, assess, and reuse.\" To that end, Crossref: manages and maintains a database of information (\"Metadata\") that describes and identifies professional and scholarly materials and content (collectively, \"Content\") and persistent identifiers such as Digital Object Identifiers (\"Identifiers\") that point to or give context to the Content online; facilitates the deposit and retrieval of Metadata and Identifiers; enables linking among Content online through embedded reference citations; and offers other online information management tools. All of the above functions and offerings, including associated systems, hardware, software, and know-how, are referred to in these Terms as the \"Crossref Infrastructure and Services.\" Membership in Crossref is open to organisations that produce Content and otherwise meet the terms and conditions of membership established from time to time by Crossref, and to such other entities as Crossref may determine from time to time. Together with Crossref's Articles of Incorporation and Bylaws (collectively, the \"Crossref Governing Documents\"), these Terms govern membership in Crossref. By submitting a membership application, the applicant agrees to be bound by these Terms and, upon Crossref's approval of that application, and receipt of the first annual membership fee, the applicant becomes a \"Member.\" Terms Member's Rights. Subject to these Terms, the Crossref Governing Documents, and Crossref's policies and procedures as promulgated by Crossref's board and staff and made available on the Website (as defined below) from time to time, the Member shall: be entitled to use the Crossref Infrastructure and Services as set forth herein; and have the governance rights afforded to Members in the Crossref Governing Documents. Member's Obligations. As a condition of its membership, the Member shall comply with the provisions of these Terms, including this Section 2. Metadata Deposits. The Member is responsible for depositing accurate Metadata for each Content item: produced by the Member, and/or for which the Member otherwise has rights to cause such Content to be included in the Crossref Infrastructure and Services. All Content described in the two bullet points above is referred to in these Terms as the Member's Content. Timely Metadata Deposits. Prior to, or as soon as reasonably practicable after, online publication of the Member's Content, the Member shall deposit with Crossref the Metadata corresponding to such Content. All deposits of Metadata shall comply with Crossref's technical documentation and schemas, including fields, parameters and other metadata criteria, set forth from time to time in support and best practice documentation on Crossref's website (the \"Website\") and/or email notices. Rights to Content. The Member will not deposit or register Metadata for any Content for which the Member does not have legal rights to do so. Registering Identifiers. The Member shall assign an Identifier to each of its Content items, for registration within the Crossref Infrastructure and Services. Linking. Promptly upon becoming a Member, the Member shall embed the appropriate Identifier(s) within each reference citation appearing in the Member's Content. Reference Linking. Throughout the Term, the Member shall use best efforts to maximize linking through Identifiers to other Content within the Crossref Infrastructure and Services, known in these Terms as \"Reference Linking\". Display Identifiers. With respect to each Identifier assigned to the Member's Content, the Member shall use commercially reasonable efforts to (i) display each Identifier in a location and format that comply with the Crossref Display Guidelines, as updated on the Website from time to time (the \"Display Guidelines\"), and (ii) ensure each Identifier is hyperlinked so as to be citable. Maintaining and Updating Metadata. The Member shall ensure that each Identifier assigned to the Member's Content continuously resolves to a response page (a \"Response Page\") containing, at a minimum, (i) complete bibliographic information about the corresponding Content (including the Identifier), visible on the initial page, with reasonably sufficient information detailing how the Content can be cited and accessed, and/or (ii) a hyperlink leading to the Content itself, in each case in accordance with the Display Guidelines. The Identifier shall serve as the permanent URL link to the Response Page. The Member shall register the Response Page URL with Crossref, keep it up-to-date and active, and promptly correct any errors or variances communicated to the Member by Crossref. The Member shall be exclusively responsible for maintaining the accuracy of data associated with each Identifier relating to the Member's Content, and the validity and operation of the corresponding URL(s) containing the Response Page, and related pages. Some examples of failures to maintain and update Metadata consistent with this Section 2(h) include: 1) publishing or communicating Identifiers without registering them with Crossref; 2) withdrawing content without posting a notification and updating the record's URL/metadata with Crossref; or 3) registering new Identifiers with the Member's own prefix for content that already had Identifiers registered by a prior publisher. Archives. The Member shall use best efforts to contract with a third-party archive or other content host (an \"Archive\") (a list of which can be found here) for such Archive to preserve the Member's Content and, in the event that the Member ceases to host the Member's Content, to make such Content available for persistent linking. The Member hereby authorizes Crossref, solely in the event an Archive becomes the primary location of the Member's Content, to contract directly with such Archive for the purpose of ensuring the persistence of links to such Content. The Member agrees that, in the event that the Content permanently ceases to be maintained by the Member, Crossref is entitled to redirect Identifiers to an Archive or a \"Defunct DOI\" page hosted by Crossref. Content-Specific Obligations. Should the Member choose to register different types of Content and Metadata, such as but not limited to journal articles, book chapters, datasets, conference proceedings, preprints, components, data, peer review reports, versions, or relations, the Member shall be bound by all obligations applicable to each specific record type as set forth on the Website from time to time. Fees. The Member shall pay the Fees described in this Section 3. These Terms refer to Annual Fees and Content Registration Fees collectively as \"Fees.\" Annual Fee. The Member is responsible to pay an annual membership fee (the \"Annual Fee\"). The Annual Fee for a Member's first year of membership is invoiced as a prorated amount for the Member's initial calendar year of membership, to be paid in full for membership. Thereafter, the Annual Fee is invoiced at the beginning of each calendar year. Payment terms are 45 days from the date of invoice. Content Registration Fees. Crossref charges Members a Content Registration fee (collectively, \"Content Registration Fees\") to deposit content with Crossref, as more fully described on the Website from time to time. Content Registration Fees are invoiced on a quarterly basis. Payment terms are 45 days from the date of invoice. Wire Transfer Fees. The Member is responsible for any wire transfer fees and other ancillary costs incurred by Crossref that are associated with the Member's chosen payment methods. Fees for Optional Services. From time to time Crossref charges Members other optional service fees for various optional services offered by Crossref, if and to the extent elected by the Member. These are set forth on the Website and updated from time to time. Intellectual Property Rights. General License. Subject to these Terms, the Member hereby grants to Crossref and its agents a fully-paid, non-exclusive, worldwide license for any and all rights necessary to use, reproduce, transmit, distribute, display and sublicense Metadata and Identifiers corresponding to the Member's Content, in the reasonable discretion of Crossref in connection with the Crossref Infrastructure and Services, including all aspects of Reference Linking and Crossref's various other service offerings. Metadata Rights and Limitations. Except as set forth herein and without limiting Section 4(a) above, Crossref shall not use, or acquire or retain any rights in the deposited Metadata of a Member. Nothing in these Terms gives a Member any rights (including copyrights, database compilation rights, trademarks, trade names, and other intellectual property rights, currently in existence or later developed) to any Metadata belonging to another Member. Crossref Intellectual Property. The Member acknowledges that, as between itself and Crossref, Crossref has all right, title and interest in and to the Crossref Infrastructure and Services, including all related copyrights, database compilation rights, trademarks, trade names, and other intellectual property rights, currently in existence or later developed, with the exception of rights in the deposited Metadata as set forth in Section 4(b) or expressly provided elsewhere in writing. The Member shall not delete or modify any of Crossref's logos or notices of intellectual property rights on documents, online text or interfaces made available by Crossref. Distribution of Metadata by Crossref. Without limiting the provisions of Section 4 above, the Member acknowledges and agrees that all Metadata and Identifiers registered with Crossref are made available for reuse without restriction through (but not limited to) public APIs and search interfaces, which enhances discoverability of Content. Metadata and Identifiers may also be licensed to third party subscribers along with an agreement for Crossref to provide third parties with certain higher levels of support and service. Use of Marks. Crossref may use the Member's name(s) and mark(s) to identify the Member's status as a member of Crossref. The Member may identify itself as a Crossref member by placing the Crossref mark or Crossref badges (without modification) on its website, by referencing the code provided on the Website. The Member may also identify use of Crossref Identifiers and Metadata, for example within reference lists, using the label \"Crossref.\" Maintenance of the Crossref Infrastructure and Services. Crossref shall use commercially reasonable efforts to maintain the Crossref Infrastructure and Services and to make it continually available for use by Members. Term. These Terms shall remain in effect until and unless superseded by updated Crossref Terms of Membership amended as set forth in Section 18 below. Termination of Membership; Effect. Termination of Membership. A Member's Crossref membership may be terminated: By the Member for convenience upon written notice to Crossref; By the Member for cause (1) in the event of Crossref's material breach of these Terms, which breach remains uncured following 45 days' notice from the Member to Crossref (or is by its nature incapable of cure) or (2) in the event Crossref provides notice of a material amendment to these Terms pursuant to the provisions of Section 18 hereof, and the Member provides notice to Crossref within 60 days of such notice of the Member's objection to such amendment and its intention to terminate; and By Crossref upon written notice to the Member, in accordance with the Crossref Governing Documents, including for (1) a misrepresentation in the Member's membership application; (2) legal sanctions or judgments against the Member or its home country; (3) fraudulent use of Identifiers or Metadata; (4) failure to pay Fees due, which failure persists for 120 or more days following the initial invoice therefor; or (5) any other basis set forth in the Crossref Governing Documents. Review of Termination of Membership. Except where termination is on account of nonpayment of fees, the Executive Committee of Crossref's board shall review and ratify any Crossref decision to permanently terminate a Member's membership or any significant membership benefit (e.g., blocking access to or removing significant amounts of Metadata for multiple items of Content for an extended period), within 10 days of such decision. As part of this review, the Member will have an opportunity to be heard under such reasonable procedures as the board may determine in its good faith. Crossref or the Member may petition the Executive Committee to review and ratify any Crossref decision temporarily restricting the Member's access to or use of the Crossref Infrastructure and Services for a limited period, and the Executive Committee shall determine in its sole discretion whether to conduct such a review. Effect of Termination of Membership. An outgoing Member shall not be entitled to a refund of any Fees that have been paid or waiver of any Fees that have accrued, except that a Member will be entitled to a refund of any prepaid fees representing the remaining portion of the then-current term of such Member's membership in the event of a termination for cause pursuant to Section 9(a)(ii) above. Termination of Membership shall have no adverse effect on Crossref's intellectual property rights in any Metadata or upon any related licenses then in effect. Following termination of its membership, an outgoing Member shall have no further obligation to deposit Metadata with Crossref or to assign Identifiers to its Content, and Crossref shall have no further obligation to register such Identifiers. With respect to Metadata deposited and Identifiers registered prior to such termination: (i) Crossref shall have the right to keep, maintain and use such Metadata and Identifiers within the Crossref Infrastructure and Services; and (ii) the obligations of the Member set forth in Sections 2(h) (i), and (j) of these Terms will survive. Enforcement. Crossref shall take reasonable steps to enforce these Terms, provided that Crossref shall not be obligated to take any action with respect to any Metadata that is the subject of an intellectual property dispute, but reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to remove or suspend access from, to or through such Metadata and/or its associated Content or to take any other action it deems appropriate. Governing Law. These Terms shall be interpreted, governed and enforced under the laws of New York, USA, without regard to its conflict of law rules. All claims, disputes and actions of any kind arising out of or relating to these Terms shall be settled in Boston, Massachusetts, USA. Disputes. Alternative Dispute Resolution. The Member shall promptly notify Crossref of any claim, dispute or action, whether against other Members or Crossref, related to these Terms or any Identifiers or Metadata. Pursuant to the Commercial Arbitration Rules of the American Arbitration Association, a single arbitrator reasonably familiar with the publishing (including online publishing) and internet industries shall settle all claims, disputes or actions of any kind arising from or relating to the subject matter of these Terms between Crossref and the Member. The decision of the arbitrator shall be final and binding on the parties, and may be enforced in any court of competent jurisdiction. Injunctive Relief. Notwithstanding Section 12(a), no party shall be prevented from seeking injunctive or preliminary relief in anticipation, but not in any way in limitation, of arbitration. The Member acknowledges that the unauthorized deposit or use of Metadata would cause irreparable harm to Crossref, the Crossref Infrastructure and Services, and/or other Members, that could not be compensated by monetary damages. The Member therefore agrees that Crossref may seek injunctive relief to remedy any actual or threatened unauthorized deposit or use of Metadata. Indemnification. To the extent authorized by law, the Member agrees to indemnify and hold harmless Crossref, its representatives, and their respective directors, officers and employees, from and against any and all liability, damage, loss, cost or expense, including reasonable attorney fees, costs, and other expenses, to the extent arising from or resulting from such Member's or its agent's or representative's acts or omissions, breach of these Terms, or violation of any third-party intellectual property right. Limitations of Liability. NEITHER PARTY SHALL BE LIABLE TO THE OTHER FOR ANY INDIRECT, SPECIAL, INCIDENTAL, PUNITIVE, CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES OR LOST PROFITS ARISING FROM OR RELATING TO THESE TERMS OR THE CROSSREF INFRASTRUCTURE AND SERVICES, EVEN IF IT HAS BEEN INFORMED IN ADVANCE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES. NEITHER PARTY SHALL BE LIABLE TO THE OTHER FOR (I) ANY LOSS, CORRUPTION OR DELAY OF DATA OR (II) ANY LOSS, CORRUPTION OR DELAY OF COMMUNICATIONS WITH OR CONNECTION TO ANY CROSSREF SERVICE OR ANY CONTENT. Taxes. The Member is responsible for all sales and use taxes imposed, if any, with respect to the services rendered or products provided to the Member hereunder, other than taxes based upon or credited against Crossref's income. Other Terms. Independent Contractors. These Terms will not create or be deemed to create any agency, partnership, employment relationship, or joint venture between Crossref and any Member. The Member shall not have any right, power or authority to enter into any agreement for or on behalf of, or incur any obligation or liability of, or to otherwise bind, Crossref. No Third-Party Beneficiaries. Except to the extent expressly set forth herein, neither party intends that these Terms shall benefit, or create any right or cause of action in or on behalf of, any person or entity other than Crossref and the Member. No Assignment. A Member may not assign, subcontract or sublicense these Terms without the prior written consent of Crossref, and any attempted assignment in violation of the foregoing shall be void. Notices. Written notice under these Terms shall be given as follows: If to Crossref: by emailing member@crossref.org addressing Mr. Edward Pentz, Executive Director. If to a Member: To the name and email address designated by the Member as the Primary Contact (previously \"Business Contact\") in such Member's membership application. This information may be changed by the Member by giving notice to Crossref by email at member@crossref.org. The Member shall also designate a technical, business, voting, billing, and metadata quality contact, and advise Crossref of any changes to such information. Survival. Sections (and the corresponding subsections, if any) 2(g), (h), and (i), 4, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, and 16, and any other provisions that by their express terms or nature survive, and any rights to payment, shall survive the expiration or termination of these Terms. Headings. The headings of the sections and subsections used in these Terms are included for convenience only and are not to be used in construing or interpreting these Terms. Severability. If any provision of these Terms (or any portion thereof) is determined to be invalid or unenforceable, the remaining provisions of these Terms will not be affected thereby and will be binding upon the parties and will be enforceable, as though said invalid or unenforceable provision (or portion thereof) were not contained in these Terms. Entire Agreement. These Terms, together with any Addenda of Terms executed between Crossref and a Member, constitute and contain the entire agreement between Crossref and such Member with respect to the subject matter hereof, and supersede any prior or contemporaneous oral or written agreements. The \"Background\" section at the beginning of these Terms forms a part of these Terms and is incorporated by reference herein. Amendment. These Terms may be amended by Crossref, via updated Terms posted on the Website and emailed to each Member no fewer than sixty (60) days prior to effectiveness. By using the Crossref Infrastructure and Services after the effective date of any such amendment hereto, the Member accepts the amended Terms. These Terms may also be amended by mutual agreement of a given Member and Crossref by execution of an Addendum of Terms. Data Privacy. By providing Crossref with personal data which was provided to the Member by a natural person(s), including Member staff (the \"origin party\"), the Member guarantees that: the Member collected and processed the data in accordance with applicable law, including the General Data Protection Regulation; the Member acquired the origin party's informed consent to share the data with Crossref; the Member acquired the origin party's consent for the data to be transferred to the United States for processing. The Member further agrees that it will maintain appropriate mechanisms to ensure that it will provide natural person(s) whose personal data it provides to Crossref with a means to have access to, to correct, and to delete such data and understands that the burden is on the Member to communicate such corrections or deletions to Crossref.\nCrossref's Privacy Policy is located here. Compliance. Each of the Member and Crossref shall perform under this Agreement in compliance with all laws, rules, and regulations of any jurisdiction which is or may be applicable to its business and activities, including anti-corruption, copyright, privacy, and data protection laws, rules, and regulations.\nThe Member warrants that neither it nor any of its affiliates, officers, directors, employees, or members is (i) a person whose name appears on the list of Specially Designated Nationals and Blocked Persons published by the Office of Foreign Assets Control, U.S. Department of Treasury (\"OFAC\"), (ii) a department, agency or instrumentality of, or is otherwise controlled by or acting on behalf of, directly or indirectly, any such person; (iii) a department, agency, or instrumentality of the government of a country subject to comprehensive U.S. economic sanctions administered by OFAC; or (iv) is subject to sanctions by the United Nations, the United Kingdom, or the European Union. ---",
"content": " This page shows the Crossref member terms were used from June 2022 to July 2025. These terms were superceded by new membership terms approved by the Board in 2025. Updated June 2022\nThese Crossref Terms of Membership (these \u0026ldquo;Terms\u0026rdquo;) set forth the terms and conditions of membership in The Publishers International Linking Association, Inc. d/b/a Crossref (\u0026ldquo;Crossref\u0026rdquo;), a nonprofit corporation organized under the laws of New York, USA.\nBackground Crossref is a not-for-profit membership organisation that exists to make scholarly communications better. Its mission is to \"make research outputs easy to find, cite, link, assess, and reuse.\" To that end, Crossref: manages and maintains a database of information (\"Metadata\") that describes and identifies professional and scholarly materials and content (collectively, \"Content\") and persistent identifiers such as Digital Object Identifiers (\"Identifiers\") that point to or give context to the Content online; facilitates the deposit and retrieval of Metadata and Identifiers; enables linking among Content online through embedded reference citations; and offers other online information management tools. All of the above functions and offerings, including associated systems, hardware, software, and know-how, are referred to in these Terms as the \"Crossref Infrastructure and Services.\" Membership in Crossref is open to organisations that produce Content and otherwise meet the terms and conditions of membership established from time to time by Crossref, and to such other entities as Crossref may determine from time to time. Together with Crossref's Articles of Incorporation and Bylaws (collectively, the \"Crossref Governing Documents\"), these Terms govern membership in Crossref. By submitting a membership application, the applicant agrees to be bound by these Terms and, upon Crossref's approval of that application, and receipt of the first annual membership fee, the applicant becomes a \"Member.\" Terms Member's Rights. Subject to these Terms, the Crossref Governing Documents, and Crossref's policies and procedures as promulgated by Crossref's board and staff and made available on the Website (as defined below) from time to time, the Member shall: be entitled to use the Crossref Infrastructure and Services as set forth herein; and have the governance rights afforded to Members in the Crossref Governing Documents. Member's Obligations. As a condition of its membership, the Member shall comply with the provisions of these Terms, including this Section 2. Metadata Deposits. The Member is responsible for depositing accurate Metadata for each Content item: produced by the Member, and/or for which the Member otherwise has rights to cause such Content to be included in the Crossref Infrastructure and Services. All Content described in the two bullet points above is referred to in these Terms as the Member's Content. Timely Metadata Deposits. Prior to, or as soon as reasonably practicable after, online publication of the Member's Content, the Member shall deposit with Crossref the Metadata corresponding to such Content. All deposits of Metadata shall comply with Crossref's technical documentation and schemas, including fields, parameters and other metadata criteria, set forth from time to time in support and best practice documentation on Crossref's website (the \"Website\") and/or email notices. Rights to Content. The Member will not deposit or register Metadata for any Content for which the Member does not have legal rights to do so. Registering Identifiers. The Member shall assign an Identifier to each of its Content items, for registration within the Crossref Infrastructure and Services. Linking. Promptly upon becoming a Member, the Member shall embed the appropriate Identifier(s) within each reference citation appearing in the Member's Content. Reference Linking. Throughout the Term, the Member shall use best efforts to maximize linking through Identifiers to other Content within the Crossref Infrastructure and Services, known in these Terms as \"Reference Linking\". Display Identifiers. With respect to each Identifier assigned to the Member's Content, the Member shall use commercially reasonable efforts to (i) display each Identifier in a location and format that comply with the Crossref Display Guidelines, as updated on the Website from time to time (the \"Display Guidelines\"), and (ii) ensure each Identifier is hyperlinked so as to be citable. Maintaining and Updating Metadata. The Member shall ensure that each Identifier assigned to the Member's Content continuously resolves to a response page (a \"Response Page\") containing, at a minimum, (i) complete bibliographic information about the corresponding Content (including the Identifier), visible on the initial page, with reasonably sufficient information detailing how the Content can be cited and accessed, and/or (ii) a hyperlink leading to the Content itself, in each case in accordance with the Display Guidelines. The Identifier shall serve as the permanent URL link to the Response Page. The Member shall register the Response Page URL with Crossref, keep it up-to-date and active, and promptly correct any errors or variances communicated to the Member by Crossref. The Member shall be exclusively responsible for maintaining the accuracy of data associated with each Identifier relating to the Member's Content, and the validity and operation of the corresponding URL(s) containing the Response Page, and related pages. Some examples of failures to maintain and update Metadata consistent with this Section 2(h) include: 1) publishing or communicating Identifiers without registering them with Crossref; 2) withdrawing content without posting a notification and updating the record's URL/metadata with Crossref; or 3) registering new Identifiers with the Member's own prefix for content that already had Identifiers registered by a prior publisher. Archives. The Member shall use best efforts to contract with a third-party archive or other content host (an \"Archive\") (a list of which can be found here) for such Archive to preserve the Member's Content and, in the event that the Member ceases to host the Member's Content, to make such Content available for persistent linking. The Member hereby authorizes Crossref, solely in the event an Archive becomes the primary location of the Member's Content, to contract directly with such Archive for the purpose of ensuring the persistence of links to such Content. The Member agrees that, in the event that the Content permanently ceases to be maintained by the Member, Crossref is entitled to redirect Identifiers to an Archive or a \"Defunct DOI\" page hosted by Crossref. Content-Specific Obligations. Should the Member choose to register different types of Content and Metadata, such as but not limited to journal articles, book chapters, datasets, conference proceedings, preprints, components, data, peer review reports, versions, or relations, the Member shall be bound by all obligations applicable to each specific record type as set forth on the Website from time to time. Fees. The Member shall pay the Fees described in this Section 3. These Terms refer to Annual Fees and Content Registration Fees collectively as \"Fees.\" Annual Fee. The Member is responsible to pay an annual membership fee (the \"Annual Fee\"). The Annual Fee for a Member's first year of membership is invoiced as a prorated amount for the Member's initial calendar year of membership, to be paid in full for membership. Thereafter, the Annual Fee is invoiced at the beginning of each calendar year. Payment terms are 45 days from the date of invoice. Content Registration Fees. Crossref charges Members a Content Registration fee (collectively, \"Content Registration Fees\") to deposit content with Crossref, as more fully described on the Website from time to time. Content Registration Fees are invoiced on a quarterly basis. Payment terms are 45 days from the date of invoice. Wire Transfer Fees. The Member is responsible for any wire transfer fees and other ancillary costs incurred by Crossref that are associated with the Member's chosen payment methods. Fees for Optional Services. From time to time Crossref charges Members other optional service fees for various optional services offered by Crossref, if and to the extent elected by the Member. These are set forth on the Website and updated from time to time. Intellectual Property Rights. General License. Subject to these Terms, the Member hereby grants to Crossref and its agents a fully-paid, non-exclusive, worldwide license for any and all rights necessary to use, reproduce, transmit, distribute, display and sublicense Metadata and Identifiers corresponding to the Member's Content, in the reasonable discretion of Crossref in connection with the Crossref Infrastructure and Services, including all aspects of Reference Linking and Crossref's various other service offerings. Metadata Rights and Limitations. Except as set forth herein and without limiting Section 4(a) above, Crossref shall not use, or acquire or retain any rights in the deposited Metadata of a Member. Nothing in these Terms gives a Member any rights (including copyrights, database compilation rights, trademarks, trade names, and other intellectual property rights, currently in existence or later developed) to any Metadata belonging to another Member. Crossref Intellectual Property. The Member acknowledges that, as between itself and Crossref, Crossref has all right, title and interest in and to the Crossref Infrastructure and Services, including all related copyrights, database compilation rights, trademarks, trade names, and other intellectual property rights, currently in existence or later developed, with the exception of rights in the deposited Metadata as set forth in Section 4(b) or expressly provided elsewhere in writing. The Member shall not delete or modify any of Crossref's logos or notices of intellectual property rights on documents, online text or interfaces made available by Crossref. Distribution of Metadata by Crossref. Without limiting the provisions of Section 4 above, the Member acknowledges and agrees that all Metadata and Identifiers registered with Crossref are made available for reuse without restriction through (but not limited to) public APIs and search interfaces, which enhances discoverability of Content. Metadata and Identifiers may also be licensed to third party subscribers along with an agreement for Crossref to provide third parties with certain higher levels of support and service. Use of Marks. Crossref may use the Member's name(s) and mark(s) to identify the Member's status as a member of Crossref. The Member may identify itself as a Crossref member by placing the Crossref mark or Crossref badges (without modification) on its website, by referencing the code provided on the Website. The Member may also identify use of Crossref Identifiers and Metadata, for example within reference lists, using the label \"Crossref.\" Maintenance of the Crossref Infrastructure and Services. Crossref shall use commercially reasonable efforts to maintain the Crossref Infrastructure and Services and to make it continually available for use by Members. Term. These Terms shall remain in effect until and unless superseded by updated Crossref Terms of Membership amended as set forth in Section 18 below. Termination of Membership; Effect. Termination of Membership. A Member's Crossref membership may be terminated: By the Member for convenience upon written notice to Crossref; By the Member for cause (1) in the event of Crossref's material breach of these Terms, which breach remains uncured following 45 days' notice from the Member to Crossref (or is by its nature incapable of cure) or (2) in the event Crossref provides notice of a material amendment to these Terms pursuant to the provisions of Section 18 hereof, and the Member provides notice to Crossref within 60 days of such notice of the Member's objection to such amendment and its intention to terminate; and By Crossref upon written notice to the Member, in accordance with the Crossref Governing Documents, including for (1) a misrepresentation in the Member's membership application; (2) legal sanctions or judgments against the Member or its home country; (3) fraudulent use of Identifiers or Metadata; (4) failure to pay Fees due, which failure persists for 120 or more days following the initial invoice therefor; or (5) any other basis set forth in the Crossref Governing Documents. Review of Termination of Membership. Except where termination is on account of nonpayment of fees, the Executive Committee of Crossref's board shall review and ratify any Crossref decision to permanently terminate a Member's membership or any significant membership benefit (e.g., blocking access to or removing significant amounts of Metadata for multiple items of Content for an extended period), within 10 days of such decision. As part of this review, the Member will have an opportunity to be heard under such reasonable procedures as the board may determine in its good faith. Crossref or the Member may petition the Executive Committee to review and ratify any Crossref decision temporarily restricting the Member's access to or use of the Crossref Infrastructure and Services for a limited period, and the Executive Committee shall determine in its sole discretion whether to conduct such a review. Effect of Termination of Membership. An outgoing Member shall not be entitled to a refund of any Fees that have been paid or waiver of any Fees that have accrued, except that a Member will be entitled to a refund of any prepaid fees representing the remaining portion of the then-current term of such Member's membership in the event of a termination for cause pursuant to Section 9(a)(ii) above. Termination of Membership shall have no adverse effect on Crossref's intellectual property rights in any Metadata or upon any related licenses then in effect. Following termination of its membership, an outgoing Member shall have no further obligation to deposit Metadata with Crossref or to assign Identifiers to its Content, and Crossref shall have no further obligation to register such Identifiers. With respect to Metadata deposited and Identifiers registered prior to such termination: (i) Crossref shall have the right to keep, maintain and use such Metadata and Identifiers within the Crossref Infrastructure and Services; and (ii) the obligations of the Member set forth in Sections 2(h) (i), and (j) of these Terms will survive. Enforcement. Crossref shall take reasonable steps to enforce these Terms, provided that Crossref shall not be obligated to take any action with respect to any Metadata that is the subject of an intellectual property dispute, but reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to remove or suspend access from, to or through such Metadata and/or its associated Content or to take any other action it deems appropriate. Governing Law. These Terms shall be interpreted, governed and enforced under the laws of New York, USA, without regard to its conflict of law rules. All claims, disputes and actions of any kind arising out of or relating to these Terms shall be settled in Boston, Massachusetts, USA. Disputes. Alternative Dispute Resolution. The Member shall promptly notify Crossref of any claim, dispute or action, whether against other Members or Crossref, related to these Terms or any Identifiers or Metadata. Pursuant to the Commercial Arbitration Rules of the American Arbitration Association, a single arbitrator reasonably familiar with the publishing (including online publishing) and internet industries shall settle all claims, disputes or actions of any kind arising from or relating to the subject matter of these Terms between Crossref and the Member. The decision of the arbitrator shall be final and binding on the parties, and may be enforced in any court of competent jurisdiction. Injunctive Relief. Notwithstanding Section 12(a), no party shall be prevented from seeking injunctive or preliminary relief in anticipation, but not in any way in limitation, of arbitration. The Member acknowledges that the unauthorized deposit or use of Metadata would cause irreparable harm to Crossref, the Crossref Infrastructure and Services, and/or other Members, that could not be compensated by monetary damages. The Member therefore agrees that Crossref may seek injunctive relief to remedy any actual or threatened unauthorized deposit or use of Metadata. Indemnification. To the extent authorized by law, the Member agrees to indemnify and hold harmless Crossref, its representatives, and their respective directors, officers and employees, from and against any and all liability, damage, loss, cost or expense, including reasonable attorney fees, costs, and other expenses, to the extent arising from or resulting from such Member's or its agent's or representative's acts or omissions, breach of these Terms, or violation of any third-party intellectual property right. Limitations of Liability. NEITHER PARTY SHALL BE LIABLE TO THE OTHER FOR ANY INDIRECT, SPECIAL, INCIDENTAL, PUNITIVE, CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES OR LOST PROFITS ARISING FROM OR RELATING TO THESE TERMS OR THE CROSSREF INFRASTRUCTURE AND SERVICES, EVEN IF IT HAS BEEN INFORMED IN ADVANCE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES. NEITHER PARTY SHALL BE LIABLE TO THE OTHER FOR (I) ANY LOSS, CORRUPTION OR DELAY OF DATA OR (II) ANY LOSS, CORRUPTION OR DELAY OF COMMUNICATIONS WITH OR CONNECTION TO ANY CROSSREF SERVICE OR ANY CONTENT. Taxes. The Member is responsible for all sales and use taxes imposed, if any, with respect to the services rendered or products provided to the Member hereunder, other than taxes based upon or credited against Crossref's income. Other Terms. Independent Contractors. These Terms will not create or be deemed to create any agency, partnership, employment relationship, or joint venture between Crossref and any Member. The Member shall not have any right, power or authority to enter into any agreement for or on behalf of, or incur any obligation or liability of, or to otherwise bind, Crossref. No Third-Party Beneficiaries. Except to the extent expressly set forth herein, neither party intends that these Terms shall benefit, or create any right or cause of action in or on behalf of, any person or entity other than Crossref and the Member. No Assignment. A Member may not assign, subcontract or sublicense these Terms without the prior written consent of Crossref, and any attempted assignment in violation of the foregoing shall be void. Notices. Written notice under these Terms shall be given as follows: If to Crossref: by emailing member@crossref.org addressing Mr. Edward Pentz, Executive Director. If to a Member: To the name and email address designated by the Member as the Primary Contact (previously \"Business Contact\") in such Member's membership application. This information may be changed by the Member by giving notice to Crossref by email at member@crossref.org. The Member shall also designate a technical, business, voting, billing, and metadata quality contact, and advise Crossref of any changes to such information. Survival. Sections (and the corresponding subsections, if any) 2(g), (h), and (i), 4, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, and 16, and any other provisions that by their express terms or nature survive, and any rights to payment, shall survive the expiration or termination of these Terms. Headings. The headings of the sections and subsections used in these Terms are included for convenience only and are not to be used in construing or interpreting these Terms. Severability. If any provision of these Terms (or any portion thereof) is determined to be invalid or unenforceable, the remaining provisions of these Terms will not be affected thereby and will be binding upon the parties and will be enforceable, as though said invalid or unenforceable provision (or portion thereof) were not contained in these Terms. Entire Agreement. These Terms, together with any Addenda of Terms executed between Crossref and a Member, constitute and contain the entire agreement between Crossref and such Member with respect to the subject matter hereof, and supersede any prior or contemporaneous oral or written agreements. The \"Background\" section at the beginning of these Terms forms a part of these Terms and is incorporated by reference herein. Amendment. These Terms may be amended by Crossref, via updated Terms posted on the Website and emailed to each Member no fewer than sixty (60) days prior to effectiveness. By using the Crossref Infrastructure and Services after the effective date of any such amendment hereto, the Member accepts the amended Terms. These Terms may also be amended by mutual agreement of a given Member and Crossref by execution of an Addendum of Terms. Data Privacy. By providing Crossref with personal data which was provided to the Member by a natural person(s), including Member staff (the \"origin party\"), the Member guarantees that: the Member collected and processed the data in accordance with applicable law, including the General Data Protection Regulation; the Member acquired the origin party's informed consent to share the data with Crossref; the Member acquired the origin party's consent for the data to be transferred to the United States for processing. The Member further agrees that it will maintain appropriate mechanisms to ensure that it will provide natural person(s) whose personal data it provides to Crossref with a means to have access to, to correct, and to delete such data and understands that the burden is on the Member to communicate such corrections or deletions to Crossref.\nCrossref's Privacy Policy is located here. Compliance. Each of the Member and Crossref shall perform under this Agreement in compliance with all laws, rules, and regulations of any jurisdiction which is or may be applicable to its business and activities, including anti-corruption, copyright, privacy, and data protection laws, rules, and regulations.\nThe Member warrants that neither it nor any of its affiliates, officers, directors, employees, or members is (i) a person whose name appears on the list of Specially Designated Nationals and Blocked Persons published by the Office of Foreign Assets Control, U.S. Department of Treasury (\"OFAC\"), (ii) a department, agency or instrumentality of, or is otherwise controlled by or acting on behalf of, directly or indirectly, any such person; (iii) a department, agency, or instrumentality of the government of a country subject to comprehensive U.S. economic sanctions administered by OFAC; or (iv) is subject to sanctions by the United Nations, the United Kingdom, or the European Union. --- ",
"headings": ["Background","Terms"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/events/india-events/",
"title": "Webinar series for our community in India",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 8,
"lastmod": "2026-06-11",
"lastmod_ts": 1781136000,
"section": "Events",
"tags": [],
"description": "Building Trust through Metadata was a Crossref learning series focused on supporting the publishing community in India and beyond. The sessions explored how richer metadata and Crossref’s infrastructure can strengthen publishing practices, improve research visibility, and preserve the integrity of the scholarly record. The series featured speakers from DOAJ (Directory of Open Access Journals) and COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics), who shared how their resources and guidance contribute to maintaining integrity within the scholarly publishing ecosystem. The sessions also highlighted common challenges members face and outlined practical ways to enhance how metadata supports research communication.\n",
"content": "Building Trust through Metadata was a Crossref learning series focused on supporting the publishing community in India and beyond. The sessions explored how richer metadata and Crossref’s infrastructure can strengthen publishing practices, improve research visibility, and preserve the integrity of the scholarly record. The series featured speakers from DOAJ (Directory of Open Access Journals) and COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics), who shared how their resources and guidance contribute to maintaining integrity within the scholarly publishing ecosystem. The sessions also highlighted common challenges members face and outlined practical ways to enhance how metadata supports research communication.\nWebinar #1: Publishing best practices and metadata: Crossref essentials + DOAJ The first webinar in the series, Publishing best practices and metadata: Crossref essentials + DOAJ, featured speakers from Crossref and DOAJ who shared practical insights on publishing best practices and the role of metadata in supporting discovery, transparency, and research integrity.\nNovember 13, 2025 | 2:30 PM IST / 9 AM UTC | Online | Slides and recording Webinar #2: Upholding integrity: Crossref member obligations and COPE guidance This session brought together experts from Crossref and COPE to explore how metadata, member responsibilities, and publication ethics work together to safeguard the integrity of the scholarly record.\nJanuary 21, 2026 | 2:30 PM IST / 9 AM UTC | Online | Slides and recording Webinar #3: Preserving the scholarly record: how to deposit post-publication updates with Crossref In this session, attendees learned the importance of post-publication updates in preserving the integrity of the scholarly record, how to register retractions and other post- publication updates using the Crossref infrastructure, and how to use the Crossmark service\nMarch 12, 2026 | 4:30 PM IST / 11:00 AM UTC | Online | Slides and recording ",
"headings": [" Webinar #1: Publishing best practices and metadata: Crossref essentials + DOAJ"," Webinar #2: Upholding integrity: Crossref member obligations and COPE guidance"," Webinar #3: Preserving the scholarly record: how to deposit post-publication updates with Crossref"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/deprecated/",
"title": "This tool is no longer available",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2026-03-31",
"lastmod_ts": 1774915200,
"section": "",
"tags": [],
"description": "You may have been redirected here from a tool that that no longer exists.\nFrom time to time we need to sunset tools or services. This might be because we\u0026rsquo;ve changed our policies, developed newer technologies to replace the old, perhaps low usage means maintenance costs are too high, or sometimes the need simply passes as the community changes.\nAn archive of deprecated tools is below.\n2026-April-23: Event Data public API sunset The Event Data public API was sunset on 23 April 2026. While it provided a valuable proof of concept for collecting online uses of DOIs, there was not sufficient community interest to sustain it as a standalone service. For further details, see this blog post. A repository containing all events collected by Crossref agents as part of Event Data is available.\n",
"content": "You may have been redirected here from a tool that that no longer exists.\nFrom time to time we need to sunset tools or services. This might be because we\u0026rsquo;ve changed our policies, developed newer technologies to replace the old, perhaps low usage means maintenance costs are too high, or sometimes the need simply passes as the community changes.\nAn archive of deprecated tools is below.\n2026-April-23: Event Data public API sunset The Event Data public API was sunset on 23 April 2026. While it provided a valuable proof of concept for collecting online uses of DOIs, there was not sufficient community interest to sustain it as a standalone service. For further details, see this blog post. A repository containing all events collected by Crossref agents as part of Event Data is available.\n2026-Jan-01: Removing the legacy Metadata Manager interface The legacy Metadata Manager interface offered a way to deposit and update metadata for journal content. The tool had some fundamental architectural issues which meant we had to deprecate it in 2021.\nThe new Metadata Manager (previously known as the record registration form) can be found at this link; other ways of registering journal content are listed on this page. For more information on why we have decided to retire the legacy Metadata Manager, see our blog post.\n2024-Oct-15: Removing the XML journal list (AKA mddb.xml) The XML journal list provided an XML-formatted list of journal titles registered with Crossref. The XML journal list had few users and was redundant with the functionality in the Browsable Title List. In the interest of consolidating our reporting tools, we have deprecated the XML journal list.\n2024-April-23: Subject codes removed from REST API Subject codes in the REST API have always been incomplete and unreliable for a variety of reasons explained in this blog post.\nWhile we evaluate replacement systems, we wanted to remove the misleading subject codes already in the system. While the data has been removed, we\u0026rsquo;ve left the features related to subject codes in place, so this is not a breaking change.\n2023-October-31: Shutting down piped queries Piped querying has been deprecated since before this deprecated services page was created. We are now shutting down the service for good.\nWe recommend the REST API for metadata retrieval.\n2023-April-13: Removing localized linking for link resolvers We used to offer localized linking for link resolvers which involved downloading a cookie. As most link resolvers use more modern methods for this, we have removed this outdated technology. There were only two institutions still using this, and they have been informed.\n2022-September-28: Removing reference visibility functionality from REST API Following the change in our reference distribution policy noted below, we have removed all reference visibility functionality from the REST API. This includes the reference-visibility filter, the reference-visibility and public-references fields available via the /members route, and open-references coverage calculations available via the /journals and /members routes. You can read about the board vote and the membership terms change. All the members that previously had limited or closed references have now been set to open.\n2022-June-06: Removing reports of members with open/closed references Since 2017 we hosted API generated tables of members with open and closed references here on our website. The board voted in March 2022 to remove the ability for members to limit the distribution of references, to be more in line with all other metadata which is default open. You can read about the board vote and the membership terms change. All the members that previously had limited or closed references have now been set to open.\n2022-June-01: Crossmark statistics For users of Crossmark, we provided a platform to access statistics about Crossmark usage, the number of status updates, and potential domain violations. The platform received very low usage and, after surveying users of the page, we decided that maintaining it is not beneficial to Crossref or our members. Other aspects of Crossmark are not affected.\n2022-January-12: Sunsetting Simple Text Query Upload The Simple Text Query Upload (STQ Upload) service allows users to upload a text file containing references, with the results emailed back to the user in an HTML file. STQ Upload is lightly used and redundant with the functionality in the Simple Text Query service. In the interest of consolidating and improving our reference matching services, we have deprecated STQ Upload and plan to retire it in August 2022.\n2021-December-10: Distributed Usage Logging (DUL) key registry moves to STM Solutions Through 2020, we re-evaluated the progress of Distributed Usage Logging (DUL) and how it fits with other Crossref services. While technically we had reached the stage of releasing a proof-of-concept service, it became clear to us that Crossref is not best placed to expand the project in the future and increase participation. At the November 2020 Crossref Board meeting a motion was passed “that the Crossref Board supports another organization’s taking ownership of the Distributed Usage Logging (“DUL”) initiative.” We have therefore been seeking other partners to take DUL forward.\nWe are delighted that STM Solutions has agreed to take on a crucial part of the infrastructure for DUL: maintaining a registry of public keys that can be used to authenticate messages. From the end of 2021, the registry will be fully transferred to STM and Crossref’s version of the registry will be removed in early 2022.\nCrossref will continue to collect DUL endpoints for individual works, as part of the metadata deposited by our members.\n2021-July-07: v1 Deposit API via OJS Crossref and PKP have collaborated for some time to help publishers using Open Journal Systems (OJS) to benefit from Crossref services.\nBefore 2019 (OJS 3.1.1 and older) OJS integrated with the dedicated v1 OJS deposit API. From 2019 (OJS 3.1.2 and higher) a newer more reliable API (v2 deposit API) was made available and v1 was deprecated and unsupported. In July 2021 we turned off the v1 deposit API. For members who are still using an older version of OJS (OJS 3.1.1 and older)\nyou can continue to export your xml, and upload it to Crossref’s systems; or you could—-and probably should—-upgrade your OJS instance to a supported version that makes use of the v2 deposit API (OJS 3.1.2 or higher). 2020-November-24: Click-through Service for text and data mining The Click-through Service for text and data mining was a registry of additional TDM license agreements, posted by Crossref members, which researchers could review and accept and then use the API token provided when requesting full-text from the publisher.\nGiven the low take-up of the service by both publishers and researchers, its goals are no longer being met. Therefore we will retire the service on 31 December 2020. Until that date, it will still operate for the two publishers and various researchers who use it while they finish implementing their alternative plans. For more details on this, and our continuing support for text and data mining, please read the blog post Evolving our support for text-and-data mining.\nNote, Crossref will continue to collect member-supplied TDM licensing information in metadata for individual works, and researchers can continue to find this via the Crossref APIs. 2020-November-03: Guest service query accounts Crossref provides various interfaces for query services.\nThe Crossref Query Services interfaces are:\nOpenURL HTTPS Registered Crossref Members, Libraries and Affiliates are able to use these interfaces with their previously supplied system account credentials.\nFollowing a recent change, guest users no longer need to register for a free Guest Services Query account. You must include your email address in your queries. The purpose of requiring an email address is simply to monitor usage to balance system demand and to identify problems.\nThis brings querying our XML API and Open URL services inline with our REST API.\nNote, if you are not a member, you still need to supply your email address in the query; this is only used to contact you if there is a problem with your query. We always give advanced warning so those using the services can prepare and transition away from using it. Please check out information about such changes on our community forum, blog, or subscribe to our newsletter.\nContact our support group with any questions.\n",
"headings": ["2026-April-23: Event Data public API sunset","2026-Jan-01: Removing the legacy Metadata Manager interface","2024-Oct-15: Removing the XML journal list (AKA mddb.xml)","2024-April-23: Subject codes removed from REST API","2023-October-31: Shutting down piped queries","2023-April-13: Removing localized linking for link resolvers","2022-September-28: Removing reference visibility functionality from REST API","2022-June-06: Removing reports of members with open/closed references","2022-June-01: Crossmark statistics","2022-January-12: Sunsetting Simple Text Query Upload","2021-December-10: Distributed Usage Logging (DUL) key registry moves to STM Solutions","2021-July-07: v1 Deposit API via OJS","2020-November-24: Click-through Service for text and data mining","2020-November-03: Guest service query accounts"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/services/crossmark/crossmark-stats-deprecation/",
"title": "Crossmark statistics is no longer available",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 5,
"lastmod": "2021-09-20",
"lastmod_ts": 1632096000,
"section": "Find a service",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossmark statistics is changing\u0026hellip; We are re-evaluating Crossmark statistics and looking for your input.\nWe didn\u0026rsquo;t include Crosmark statistics in our recent authentication rollout, and the process of adding it has led us to look again at the service. It has low usage, suggesting that it either isn\u0026rsquo;t sufficiently visible or has low utility. However, we know that there may be a small number of members who find it very valuable and we would like to know more about how it is being used.\n",
"content": "Crossmark statistics is changing\u0026hellip; We are re-evaluating Crossmark statistics and looking for your input.\nWe didn\u0026rsquo;t include Crosmark statistics in our recent authentication rollout, and the process of adding it has led us to look again at the service. It has low usage, suggesting that it either isn\u0026rsquo;t sufficiently visible or has low utility. However, we know that there may be a small number of members who find it very valuable and we would like to know more about how it is being used.\nWe are therefore seeking your feedback. To contribute, please complete our user survey.\nFor further details about how we sunset services, see our deprecation page.\n",
"headings": ["Crossmark statistics is changing\u0026hellip;"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/membership/terms/2018-agreement/",
"title": "2018 membership agreement",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2018-11-11",
"lastmod_ts": 1541894400,
"section": "Become a member",
"tags": [],
"description": " This page shows the agreement that was used up to and including 2018. But it was superceded by new membership terms approved by the Board in July 2018 Former membership agreement Updated September 2017\nThis membership agreement, version 5.5, and any duly executed addenda and any other attachments hereto (\u0026ldquo;Agreement\u0026rdquo;) sets forth the terms and conditions under which a qualified institution becomes a member of The Publishers International Linking Association, Inc. (“PILA”), a nonprofit corporation organized under the laws of New York, and doing business as Crossref, subject to the approval of PILA. Membership in PILA is open to publishers of scholarly and professional content who have rights to transfer, manage and otherwise fulfill the obligations of this Agreement with respect to the content’s “Metadata” and, to the extent necessary, the content itself. Additional criteria for qualifying institutions, incorporated by reference, are available at https://www.Crossref.org or successor sites (“PILA Site”). The Agreement is by and between PILA and the party below (the “PILA Member”) and shall be deemed effective upon execution by both parties (the \u0026ldquo;Effective Date\u0026rdquo;).\n",
"content": " This page shows the agreement that was used up to and including 2018. But it was superceded by new membership terms approved by the Board in July 2018 Former membership agreement Updated September 2017\nThis membership agreement, version 5.5, and any duly executed addenda and any other attachments hereto (\u0026ldquo;Agreement\u0026rdquo;) sets forth the terms and conditions under which a qualified institution becomes a member of The Publishers International Linking Association, Inc. (“PILA”), a nonprofit corporation organized under the laws of New York, and doing business as Crossref, subject to the approval of PILA. Membership in PILA is open to publishers of scholarly and professional content who have rights to transfer, manage and otherwise fulfill the obligations of this Agreement with respect to the content’s “Metadata” and, to the extent necessary, the content itself. Additional criteria for qualifying institutions, incorporated by reference, are available at https://www.Crossref.org or successor sites (“PILA Site”). The Agreement is by and between PILA and the party below (the “PILA Member”) and shall be deemed effective upon execution by both parties (the \u0026ldquo;Effective Date\u0026rdquo;).\nIntroduction. Under the mark Crossref®, PILA manages and maintains a database of regularly updated information (collectively, \u0026ldquo;Metadata\u0026rdquo;) that describes and identifies substantially non-derivative publishable works (“Original Works”), as well as of digital identifiers (“Digital Identifiers”) that point to the location of certain Original Works on the Internet. As described below, PILA also facilitates the deposit and retrieval of Metadata and Digital Identifiers to enable and promote persistent and reliable linking among and discovery of Original Works on the Internet through their embedded reference citations, as well as other online information management services. The “PILA System” (occasionally, the “Crossref System”) refers to all of the foregoing, including associated software and know-how.\nPILA Membership. By accepting all of the terms of this Agreement and paying the requisite fees a qualified institution becomes a member of PILA entitled to all of the benefits and subject to all of the responsibilities of being a member of PILA, as governed by the bylaws of PILA (\u0026ldquo;Bylaws\u0026rdquo;).\na). Benefits. Provided that the PILA Member is in full compliance with the terms of the Agreement, it may use the PILA System under the terms and conditions of this Agreement, participate in the governance of PILA by voting for members of the board of directors of PILA (the \u0026ldquo;Board\u0026rdquo;) and on various issues, and recommend one or more representatives (if desired) to certain of the PILA working committees through which policy recommendations are made (the Board shall retain the authority to appoint and remove committee members in accordance with the Bylaws).\nb). Obligations. The PILA Member must promptly pay all membership dues and any charges or fees as established by the Board from time to time and set forth on the PILA Site. The PILA Member must nominate a business, technical and billing contact for purposes of PILA administration, and keep such contact information up to date.\nc). Terms and Conditions. At all times, the PILA Member may exercise any authority over the Board, individually or collectively with other members of PILA, expressly granted by the Bylaws, as amended from time to time. The Board shall have the power to modify the terms of this Agreement by publishing amended versions that will automatically supersede prior versions, and shall further establish or amend supplemental policies and procedures governing membership from time to time. The PILA Member agrees to periodically review the membership terms and conditions at a designated location on the PILA Site for revisions and modifications. PILA will use its reasonable discretion in deciding if a modification is material, and if so will provide written notice to the PILA Member’s representative (designated above) of material changes in terms and conditions of membership by email or postal service. Continued acceptance of all terms and conditions pertaining to membership is a condition of remaining a member of PILA.\nPILA Operations. Subject to the limitations and restrictions set forth herein, and through the use of Digital Identifiers, the PILA Member agrees to permit other members of PILA or other qualified users of the PILA System to at all times link their Original Works and/or other qualified content to the Original Works or other qualified content of the PILA Member; to actively maximize and maintain Digital-Identifier enabled links from within its own Original Works to those of other members of PILA or other qualified users of the PILA System; and to otherwise cooperate with the implementation or operation of other PILA online information management services. a). Initiation of Cross-Linking. The process of linking among Original Works in electronic form is known as \u0026ldquo;Cross-Linking\u0026rdquo;. As part of being a member of PILA, the PILA Member is required to do the following:\ni) Depositing Data. As soon as reasonably practicable after electronic publication of each Original Work, the PILA Member shall deposit into the PILA System the Metadata corresponding to said Original Work (\u0026ldquo;Deposited Metadata\u0026rdquo;). From time to time, PILA shall specify certain fields, parameters and other criteria that Deposited Metadata must contain. For example (and not by way of limitation), each single set of Deposited Metadata includes various reference citations and fields designated by PILA (e.g., title, author, etc.) that describes and identifies the corresponding Original Work. In addition, the PILA Member shall ensure that its Deposited Metadata conforms to the PILA technical documentation standards, as amended by PILA from time to time. For example (and not by way of limitation), the PILA Member is responsible for maintaining the accuracy of Deposited Metadata.\nii) Digital Identifiers. The PILA Member shall assign or re-assign (as the case may be) a Digital Identifier (as provided by PILA technical specifications, as may be modified from time to time) to each of its Original Works, and shall provide the same to PILA as a Crossref Member, and PILA shall register the same within the PILA System and elsewhere consistent with its business practice.\niii) Retrieving Data. As soon as practicable, the PILA Member shall use the PILA System to retrieve the Digital Identifier(s) corresponding to each reference citation within said Original Work for which a Digital Identifier is available, and embed the same as set forth immediately below.\niv) Cross-Linking. The PILA Member may maintain reference links that are not based on Digital Identifiers. However, other than for citations to Original Works, all of which said cited-Original Works are collectively hosted on a common hosting system or platform controlled by the PILA Member or its agent (\u0026ldquo;Internal Citations\u0026rdquo;), the Crossref Member shall use Digital Identifiers (if a Digital Identifier has been registered for the cited item) for reference linking in the same manner(s) it may provide, offer or support all other (i.e., non-Digital-Identifier-based) reference linking. The PILA Member may not divert, interrupt or otherwise interfere or delay the resolution of said Digital Identifier-enabled reference citation links to the “Response Page” (defined below), and shall display the same to end-users (i.e., readers) in a manner that is no less prominent or immediate than other reference links (if any). For avoidance of doubt, the PILA Member is encouraged but not required to use Digital Identifiers for Internal Citations.\nb) Accessibility of Content. The PILA Member must maintain each Digital Identifier assigned to it or for which it is otherwise responsible such that said Digital Identifier continuously resolves to a response page (\u0026ldquo;Response Page\u0026rdquo;) containing no less than complete bibliographic information about the corresponding Original Work (including without limitation the Digital Identifier), visible on the initial page, with reasonably sufficient information detailing how the Original Work can be acquired and/or a hyperlink leading to the Original Works itself (collectively, “Accessibility Standards”). The PILA Member shall use the Digital Identifier as the permanent URL link to the Response Page. The PILA Member shall register the URL for the Response Page with Crossref, shall keep it up-to-date and active, and shall promptly correct any errors or variances noted by Crossref. The members of PILA may support enhanced levels of accessibility to Original Work in their sole discretion. For the avoidance of doubt, the Board may modify the Accessibility Standards from time to time.\nc) No Fees. The members of PILA may not charge fees for Cross-Linking. Subject to the foregoing sentence, each member of PILA shall control access to its systems and shall have discretion to establish pricing and other terms of access to its Original Work (and other content) beyond the Response Page.\nd) Archives. The PILA Member will use commercially reasonable efforts to establish and maintain arrangements whereby Original Works will be preserved and made available through an authorized archive (\u0026ldquo;Authorized Archive\u0026rdquo;) in the event that the PILA Member or a successor ceases to host such Original Works. In the event that an agreement is entered into between the PILA Member and the Authorized Archive (an “Archive Agreement”) and a “trigger event” as defined in such Archive Agreement occurs, the PILA Member authorizes PILA to enter into an appropriate agreement with such Authorized Archive or other subsequent authorized host of the content to ensure the persistence of links to the Original Work.\nGeneral License. Subject to the terms and conditions of this Agreement, the PILA Member hereby grants to PILA and its agents a fully-paid, non-exclusive, worldwide license for any and all rights necessary to use, reproduce, transmit, distribute, display and sublicense the Deposited Metadata and Digital Identifiers in the discretion of PILA in connection with the PILA System, including without limitation all aspects of Cross-Linking and online information management services.\nMetadata Rights and Limitations. The PILA Member shall not acquire or retain, and may not provide or transfer, any rights (including all related copyrights, database compilation rights, trademarks, trade names, and other intellectual property rights, currently in existence or later developed) in any Metadata belonging to another member of PILA. Except as set forth herein and specifically without limitation to section 4 (General License) above, PILA shall not use, or acquire or retain any rights (including all related copyrights, database compilation rights, trademarks, trade names, and other intellectual property rights, currently in existence or later developed) in the Deposited Metadata of the PILA Member.\nPILA’s Intellectual Property. The PILA Member acknowledges that nothing shall enlarge or restrict the rights of PILA or its agents to acquire, develop and maintain any Metadata and any collective rights therein. The PILA Member acknowledges that, as between itself and PILA, PILA has all right, title and interest in and to the PILA System, including all related copyrights, database compilation rights, trademarks, trade names, and other intellectual property rights, currently in existence or later developed, with the exception of rights in the Deposited Metadata as set forth in section 5 (Metadata Rights and Limitations), or as expressly provided elsewhere in writing. The PILA Member shall accurately maintain and not delete or modify any of PILA’s copyright notices on documents, electronic text or programs that PILA may prepare or enable for the use or display by members of PILA.\nPermissive Use of the PILA System by PILA Members. Subject to the payment of corresponding fees if any, the PILA Member may (i) confirm Metadata about the identity, description and location of Original Works of other members of PILA (\u0026ldquo;Clean-Up\u0026rdquo;), (ii) submit Digital Identifiers to retrieve the corresponding Metadata (“Reverse Look-Up”) and (iii) retrieve and display Digital Identifiers and corresponding Metadata for Original Works of other members of PILA to enable “cited-by” links in published content (“Cited By Linking”) where both PILA Members participate in Cited By Linking.. Notwithstanding the general limitations in section 5 (Metadata Rights and Limitations), as part of its use of Clean-Up, Reverse Look-Up and Cited By Linking and other PILA services, the PILA Member may from time to time transfer, copy or display Metadata of other members of PILA; provided however that the PILA Member may not use the Metadata of other members of PILA to create a system that directly competes with the PILA System. For the avoidance of doubt, (i) PILA reserves the right to provide and modify guidelines governing Clean-Up, Reverse Look-Up, Cited By Linking and other PILA services from time to time.; and (ii) nothing herein shall be deemed to limit the rights that the PILA Member may have, if any, to use the Metadata of other PILA members as a member of the general public.\nCaching and Transfer. Providing that the PILA Member is not in violation of the Agreement, subject to certain restrictions that PILA shall provide and amend from time to time, and accordance with PILA technical guidelines, a member of PILA may cache Digital Identifiers obtained through the PILA System. However, other than incidentally to the copying or transfer of Original Works containing embedded Digital Identifiers enabling the reference citation links, no member of PILA may provide, copy or transfer for value any Digital Identifier (cached or otherwise).\nSharing of Metadata by PILA.\na) Local Hosting. Subject to the payment of local hosting fees and costs, and compliance with other PILA local hosting terms and conditions as set forth in a separate agreement between PILA and the local hosting entity, PILA may authorize the PILA Members and affiliate members of PILA (\u0026ldquo;PILA Affiliates\u0026rdquo;) to locally host Metadata and Digital Identifiers from the PILA System, which PILA shall provide directly, solely to facilitate use of DOIs for linking to Original Works, subject to all other restrictions on the use of Metadata and Digital Identifiers. PILA reserves the right, upon reasonable notice, to audit the local hosting activity to ensure the proper functioning of the local-host system, and compliance with all applicable Crossref guidelines and agreements.\nb) Other Metadata Services. Subject to compliance by the entity receiving the Metadata and Digital Identifiers with terms and conditions established by PILA for the particular service through which access is provided, PILA may authorize third parties to receive and use Metadata and Digital Identifiers from PILA, which PILA shall provide directly to such third parties.\nPromotion. PILA and the PILA Member may each use the other’s name(s) and mark(s) to identify the status of the PILA Member as a member of PILA. The PILA Member may use a print version of the Crossref mark, as it appears at https://www.crossref.org/brand, in its print publications subject to PILA approval not to be unreasonably withheld. The PILA Member shall use commercially reasonable efforts to place the Crossref mark in electronic form, by referencing the code provided at https://www.crossref.org/brand, as a link to the PILA Site in a prominent location on Web pages of the PILA Member related to its Original Works. The PILA Member may otherwise use the PILA name(s) or mark(s) only with the prior written consent of PILA. Notwithstanding any of the foregoing, PILA reserves the right to reasonably regulate or restrict use of the PILA name(s) and mark(s) by its members in press releases, advertising, client lists or marketing materials.\nTerm, PILA-Member Termination. This Agreement shall commence upon the Effective Date and shall continue through December 31 of the current year (\u0026ldquo;Initial Term\u0026rdquo;), and thereafter shall automatically be renewed according to the terms of the then-most recent version for consecutive twelve (12) month periods (each a “Term”) unless terminated in accordance with the Agreement. The PILA Member may terminate this Agreement upon ninety (90) days prior written notice, but shall not be entitled to a refund of any fees that have been paid or waiver of any fees that have accrued. Termination by any party shall have no adverse effect on PILA’s intellectual property rights in any Metadata or upon any related licenses then in effect, subject only to the following section 12 (Actions Following Termination).\nActions Following Termination. Following termination or expiration of its membership in PILA, the PILA Member shall have no further obligation to deposit Metadata with PILA or to assign Digital Identifiers to its Original Works, and PILA shall have no further obligation to register such Digital Identifiers. With respect to Metadata deposited and Digital Identifiers registered prior to such termination or expiration: (i) PILA shall have the right to keep, maintain and use such Metadata and Digital Identifiers within the PILA System, including without limitation in deliveries of metadata made pursuant to Section 9 above unless the terminating PILA Member indicates otherwise in writing as of the Effective Date of Termination; and (ii) the obligations of the PILA Member set forth in section 3(b), (c), and (d) will survive. PILA may substitute a general PILA response page where a Digital Identifier ceases to resolve to an Original Work.\nEnforcement. PILA has the right but not the obligation to enforce the terms of this Agreement against any of its members. PILA shall not be obligated to take any action with respect to any Metadata that is the subject of an intellectual property dispute, but nonetheless reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to remove or suspend access from, to or through it and/or its associated Original Work(s), or to take any other action it deems appropriate. Without limiting the foregoing, PILA reserves the right to terminate or restrict access by the PILA Member to the PILA System and related services (including Cross-Linking) for just cause as PILA determines in its reasonable good faith discretion. The PILA Member agrees to hold PILA harmless from any consequences of any of the foregoing, provided PILA does not willfully, recklessly or with gross negligence violate its obligations. PILA’s executive committee as defined in the Bylaws (\u0026ldquo;Executive Committee\u0026rdquo;) shall review and ratify any PILA decision permanently terminating the PILA Member’s membership in PILA, as provided in the Bylaws, or any significant membership benefit (e.g., blocking access to or removing significant amounts of Deposited Metadata for many Original Works for an extended period) of the PILA Member within 10 days of implementation. As part of such review, the PILA Member shall have an opportunity to be heard under such reasonable procedures as the Board may determine in its good faith. PILA or the PILA Member may petition PILA’s Executive Committee to review and ratify any PILA decision temporarily restricting the PILA Member’s access to or use of the PILA System for a limited period, and the PILA Executive Committee shall decide whether it wishes to exercise its authority in its sole and complete discretion. Any decision by PILA to terminate or restrict the access of a party that is not a member of PILA to the PILA System or any portion of it shall not be subject to the foregoing Executive Committee automatic review provisions.\nDisputes. The PILA Member agrees to abide by the terms and conditions of the following dispute resolution procedures, which PILA may amend in its discretion from time to time (\u0026ldquo;Dispute Policies\u0026rdquo;).\na) Choice of Law, Jurisdiction. This Agreement shall be interpreted, governed and enforced under the laws of New York, without regard to its conflict of law rules. All claims, disputes and actions of any kind arising out of or relating to the Agreement shall be settled in New York, New York.\nb) Alternative Dispute Resolution. The PILA Member shall be responsible for promptly notifying PILA of any claim, dispute or action, whether against other members of PILA or PILA, related to this Agreement or any Digital Identifiers or Deposited Metadata. Pursuant to the Commercial Arbitration Rules of the American Arbitration Association, a single arbitrator reasonably familiar with the publishing and Internet industries shall settle all claims, disputes or actions of any kind arising out of or relating to the subject matter of this Agreement, including the interpretation of all Dispute Policies, between PILA and the PILA Member or among members of PILA (\u0026ldquo;ADR Procedures\u0026rdquo;). The decision of the arbitrator shall be final and binding on the parties, and may be enforced in any court of competent jurisdiction. Without limiting the application of any of the foregoing, any claim, dispute or action arising out of or relating to this Agreement that is not otherwise within the scope of these ADR Procedures shall be settled before a federal court located in New York, New York.\nc) Injunctive Relief. Notwithstanding the foregoing subsection 14(b) (Alternative Dispute Resolution), no party shall be prevented from seeking injunctive or preliminary relief in anticipation, but not in any way in limitation, of arbitration, before any court located in New York, New York and pursuant to the Civil Practice Law and Rules of New York. The PILA Member acknowledges that the unauthorized use of Metadata would cause the owner or PILA as a beneficial owner thereof irreparable harm that could not be compensated by monetary damages. The PILA Member therefore agrees that PILA and affected members of PILA may seek injunctive and preliminary relief to remedy any actual or threatened unauthorized use of Metadata without the posting of a bond, and otherwise as consistent with the Dispute Policies.\nd) Actions between Members. The PILA Member agrees that any member of PILA may bring and maintain an action arising out of the subject matter of this Agreement directly against any other member of PILA to enforce rights and seek remedies for misuse of its Deposited Metadata, which shall be subject to the Dispute Policies. The foregoing sentence shall not limit the moving party’s other rights and remedies at law or in equity relating to any violation of its intellectual property rights, breach of contract or other cause of action that is merely incidental to its activities or assets as a member of PILA and does not otherwise arise out of or relate to this Agreement.\ne) Limitations. The PILA Member may not seek to impel PILA to act against any other member of PILA, and agrees not to join PILA in any action between itself and another member of PILA (except if PILA is required to be joined for just adjudication, consistent with the standards set forth in the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, R. 19, and provided that the joining party indemnifies PILA as PILA may reasonably require) or to bring any related cause of action against PILA directly or indirectly for such purpose(s). PILA agrees, however, to use commercially reasonable efforts to seek to enforce any final judgment of a competent tribunal that PILA reasonably believes to be enforceable, subject to the receipt of sufficient indemnities by the PILA Member seeking enforcement. Nothing in this subsection shall limit the PILA Member’s right to bring an action against PILA for a direct violation of this Agreement subject to the Dispute Policies.\nWarranty. Each party warrants and represents that it has the full power and complete authority to enter into this Agreement, that it has conducted a review of the rights granted herein according to documented internal policies and procedures, and that the rights granted by the respective parties herein will not infringe the rights of any third party. The PILA Member agrees only to deposit or register Metadata in the PILA System corresponding to Original Work for which it has electronic rights, including the right to use such Original Work as part of the PILA System including Cross-Linking. The PILA Member shall be exclusively responsible for maintaining the accuracy of data associated with each Digital Identifier and the validity and operation of the corresponding URL(s) containing the Response Page and related pages.\nIndemnification. To the extent authorized by law, and subject to the terms of the Agreement, the PILA Member agrees to indemnify and hold harmless PILA, and its agents and affiliates, and their directors, officers and employees (\u0026ldquo;PILA\u0026rdquo;), as well as other members of PILA, from and against any and all liability, damage, loss, cost or expense, including reasonable attorney\u0026rsquo;s fees, costs, and other expenses arising out of any activity undertaken by the PILA Member, its agent(s) or representatives, pursuant to this Agreement or its subject matter, or which if true would be a violation of any PILA Member warranty, obligation or third-party intellectual property right.\nLimitations of Liability. NEITHER PARTY SHALL BE LIABLE TO THE OTHER FOR ANY INDIRECT, SPECIAL, INCIDENTAL, PUNITIVE, CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES OR LOST PROFITS ARISING OUT OF OR RELATING TO THIS AGREEMENT, EVEN IF IT HAS BEEN INFORMED IN ADVANCE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES. NEITHER PARTY SHALL BE LIABLE TO THE OTHER FOR (I) ANY LOSS, CORRUPTION OR DELAY OF DATA OR (II) ANY LOSS, CORRUPTION OR DELAY OF COMMUNICATIONS WITH OR CONNECTION TO RELATED PRODUCT OR CONTENT.\nTaxes. The PILA Member is responsible for all sales and use taxes imposed, if any, with respect to the services rendered or products provided to the PILA Member hereunder, other than taxes based upon or credited against PILA’s income.\nNo Waiver. The parties agree that no delay or omission by either party hereto, or by any member of PILA, to exercise any right or power hereunder shall impair such right or power or be construed to be a waiver thereof. A waiver by either of the parties of any of the covenants to be performed by the other or any breach thereof shall not be construed to be a waiver of any succeeding breach thereof or of any other covenant contained herein.\nNo Partnership. Neither party to the Agreement is an agent, representative, or partner of the other party, except insofar as PILA rules and regulations expressly provide that PILA may act on behalf of the PILA Member. The PILA Member shall not have any right, power or authority to enter into any agreement for or on behalf of, or incur any obligation or liability of, or to otherwise bind, PILA.\nNo Third-Party Beneficiaries. Except as expressly set forth herein, neither party intends that this Agreement shall benefit, or create any right or cause of action in or on behalf of, any person or entity other than PILA or the PILA Member.\nNo Assignment. The PILA Member may not assign, subcontract or sublicense this Agreement without the prior written consent of PILA, which consent shall not be unreasonably withheld, delayed, conditioned or denied.\nNotices. Written notice under this Agreement shall be effective if sent to the party’s address as follows: (i) by personal service on the same day, or (ii) by internationally recognized courier (e.g., FedEx, UPS) on the next business day following the scheduled delivery date.\nIf to PILA:\nMr. Edward Pentz, Executive Director Crossref 50 Salem Street Lynnfield, MA 01940, USA, (fax) +1-781-295-0077 If to the PILA Member, to the name and address designated by the PILA Member as the Business Contact in the membership application, with a copy to \u0026ldquo;General Counsel/Legal Department\u0026rdquo; at the same address. The Business Contract may be changed by the PILA Member by giving notice as provided in this section.\nSurvival. Sections (and the corresponding subsections, if any) 5, 6, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 19, 20, 21, 23, 24, 26, 27 and any rights to payment shall survive the expiration or termination of this Agreement for any reason.\nHeadings. The headings of the sections and subsections used in this Agreement are included for convenience only and are not to be used in construing or interpreting this Agreement.\nSeverability. If any provision of this Agreement is held to be invalid, illegal, or unenforceable, such invalidity, illegality, or unenforceability will be reformed to be enforceable to the maximum extent permitted under applicable law, and whether or not it may be so reformed, it will not affect any other provision of this Agreement, unless the unenforceability of the applicable provision would materially impair either party\u0026rsquo;s ability to obtain substantial performance of the other party.\nEntire Agreement. The terms and conditions of this Agreement and any exhibits supersede all prior oral and written agreements between the parties with respect to the subject matter of this Agreement and shall constitute the entire agreement between the parties with respect to the matters contained herein. This Agreement shall not be modified or amended except through Board action or in writing duly executed by authorized representatives of the parties.\nCounterparts; Electronic Signature. This Agreement and any amendments may be executed in one or more counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original, but all of which shall constitute one agreement. EACH PARTY MAY USE A HARD COPY (INK ON PAPER) OR ELECTRONIC SIGNATURE, EACH OF WHICH SHALL BE DEEMED TO BE AUTHENTIC AND EQUALLY ENFORCEABLE.\nAgency Authorization Addendum (Optional) This page only needs to be completed if you are authorizing a third-party vendor to interact with PILA on your behalf. For example, if you are working with a hosting provider.\nThe PILA Member authorizes __________________________ to be the exclusive agent (\u0026ldquo;Agent\u0026rdquo;) for itself and its designated content for purposes of interacting with PILA and the PILA System, and accepts responsibility for the Agent’s acts and omissions on behalf of the PILA Member as if such acts were the PILA Member’s own. Without limiting the foregoing, and for avoidance of doubt, it is understood that:\nA) The Agent, in consultation with the Business Contact for the PILA Member, will assign DOIs using standard methods and will register with Crossref on the PILA Member’s account/login the DOI, the URL corresponding to each DOI, and the required metadata identifying each content item;\nB) The Agent will query the Crossref Metadata Database on the PILA Member’s account/login to obtain and insert links into the PILA Member organization’s registered content for all references that are contained in the Crossref Database;\nC) The Agent is not permitted to cache any Metadata or DOIs on behalf of the PILA Member without signing a separate Affiliate Agreement;\nD) Although either the PILA Member or the Agent may pay Crossref the established membership and Content Registration fees for all activity performed on behalf of the PILA Member’s registered content using its account/login, the PILA Member remains responsible for such fees as they accrue.\nIf you would like to apply to join please visit our membership page which describes the obligation and leads to an application form. Please contact our membership specialist with any questions.\n",
"headings": ["Former membership agreement","Agency Authorization Addendum (Optional)"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/working-groups/linked-clinical-trials/",
"title": "Linked clinical trials working group",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2021-02-26",
"lastmod_ts": 1614297600,
"section": "Working groups",
"tags": [],
"description": "The purpose of this advisory group is to advise on linked clinical trials and support staff. The group comprises Crossref members and non-members, and is lead by a Chair and Crossref staff facilitator.\nGroup members This group is not currently active but was Chaired by Daniel Shanahan, then at BioMed Central, and by Crossref\u0026rsquo;s Kirsty Meddings.\nHow the group works (and the guidelines) Members commit to attend all meetings by conference call, and may choose to send a named proxy if they are not available. Meeting notes will be circulated to all by the facilitator. The schedule of meetings is at the discretion of the chair and facilitator and may vary depending on whether there are relevant topics for discussion, but will not be more than one per quarter.\n",
"content": "The purpose of this advisory group is to advise on linked clinical trials and support staff. The group comprises Crossref members and non-members, and is lead by a Chair and Crossref staff facilitator.\nGroup members This group is not currently active but was Chaired by Daniel Shanahan, then at BioMed Central, and by Crossref\u0026rsquo;s Kirsty Meddings.\nHow the group works (and the guidelines) Members commit to attend all meetings by conference call, and may choose to send a named proxy if they are not available. Meeting notes will be circulated to all by the facilitator. The schedule of meetings is at the discretion of the chair and facilitator and may vary depending on whether there are relevant topics for discussion, but will not be more than one per quarter.\nWith the exception of Crossref staff, the group will be limited to one representative from each participating organisation, unless particular agenda items or topics call for domain expertise from specific colleagues or departments. Advisory group members are, however, free to discuss the information shared during meetings with colleagues or any external party.\nPlease contact Bryan Vickery with any questions or to apply to join the advisory group.\n",
"headings": ["Group members","How the group works (and the guidelines)"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/events/the-shape-of-things-to-come/",
"title": "The shape of things to come - Crossref community call",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 6,
"lastmod": "2024-03-20",
"lastmod_ts": 1710892800,
"section": "Events",
"tags": [],
"description": "We joined together to learn about our strategies for making Crossref sustainable and how we planned for the future. We also shared exciting updates on our initiatives and tools that enhance data management, improve accessibility, and ensure metadata is complete. Highlights included our work on preprint matching.\nHere\u0026rsquo;s what was on the agenda:\nExamined our strategic direction \u0026amp; achievements Resourced Crossref for future sustainability Revealed our 2024 Product Roadmap Discussed the metadata development pipeline Explored Crossref for Grants Explored the latest in preprint matching Webinar was held on Wednesday, March 8, 2024.\n",
"content": "We joined together to learn about our strategies for making Crossref sustainable and how we planned for the future. We also shared exciting updates on our initiatives and tools that enhance data management, improve accessibility, and ensure metadata is complete. Highlights included our work on preprint matching.\nHere\u0026rsquo;s what was on the agenda:\nExamined our strategic direction \u0026amp; achievements Resourced Crossref for future sustainability Revealed our 2024 Product Roadmap Discussed the metadata development pipeline Explored Crossref for Grants Explored the latest in preprint matching Webinar was held on Wednesday, March 8, 2024.\nSlides\nRecording\nSlides Poll questions\nQ\u0026amp;A report\n",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/working-groups/distributed-usage-logging/",
"title": "DUL Project working group",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2021-11-24",
"lastmod_ts": 1637712000,
"section": "Working groups",
"tags": [],
"description": "The distributed usage logging (DUL) working group ran until 2020 and was the community group driving the distributed usage logging project.\nThe objectives of the DUL working group were to address the following:\nDefine a way for DOIs to advertise endpoints to which event data may be submitted, including a mechanism to specify the payload schemas that the endpoint accepts. Pilot the transmission of COUNTER-usage events from platforms providing direct access to full text to publishers responsible for that full text, using the above mechanism, in a secure manner Work out the \u0026ldquo;rules of the game\u0026rdquo; for the COUNTER use cases, including message semantics, responsibility for anti-gaming mechanism, etc. What we’re working on The working group has now retired.\n",
"content": "The distributed usage logging (DUL) working group ran until 2020 and was the community group driving the distributed usage logging project.\nThe objectives of the DUL working group were to address the following:\nDefine a way for DOIs to advertise endpoints to which event data may be submitted, including a mechanism to specify the payload schemas that the endpoint accepts. Pilot the transmission of COUNTER-usage events from platforms providing direct access to full text to publishers responsible for that full text, using the above mechanism, in a secure manner Work out the \u0026ldquo;rules of the game\u0026rdquo; for the COUNTER use cases, including message semantics, responsibility for anti-gaming mechanism, etc. What we’re working on The working group has now retired.\nGroup members The group comprised some of our members as well as some third party platforms who were actively interested in participating in a secure exchange of usage records.\nFacilitator: Martyn Rittman, Crossref\nEsther Heuver, Elsevier (Chair) Paul Dlug, American Physical Society Lorraine Estelle, Project COUNTER John Chodacki, California Digital Library Paul Needham, Cranfield University Johannes Buchmann, De Gruyter Nicko Goncharoff, Digital Science Oliver Pesch, EBSCO Ian Hayes, Atypon Tom Beyer, PubFactory Maciej Rymarz, Mendeley Robert McGrath, ReadCube Kimberly Tryka, National Institute of Standards and Technology John Connolly, Springer Nature Jo Cross, Taylor \u0026amp; Francis Clara Brown, United States Geological Survey Greg Hargrave, Wiley Stuart Maxwell, Scholarly iQ Aaron Wood, American Psychological Association Please contact Martyn Rittman with any questions.\n",
"headings": ["What we’re working on","Group members"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/community/project-dul/",
"title": "Distributed usage logging collaboration",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2020-11-24",
"lastmod_ts": 1606176000,
"section": "Get involved",
"tags": [],
"description": "Current status In November 2020, Crossref\u0026rsquo;s board decided to scale down our involvement in the distributed usage logging (DUL) initiative and sought a new lead organisation. In our view, others were better-placed to progress the work and increase participation, building on the proof-of-concept created.\nSince December 2021, STM Solutions has maintained the public key registry. Crossref will continue to support DUL endpoints included in our members\u0026rsquo; metadata.\nBackground Researchers are increasingly using “alternative” (non-publisher) platforms to store, access and share literature, e.g. via:\n",
"content": "Current status In November 2020, Crossref\u0026rsquo;s board decided to scale down our involvement in the distributed usage logging (DUL) initiative and sought a new lead organisation. In our view, others were better-placed to progress the work and increase participation, building on the proof-of-concept created.\nSince December 2021, STM Solutions has maintained the public key registry. Crossref will continue to support DUL endpoints included in our members\u0026rsquo; metadata.\nBackground Researchers are increasingly using “alternative” (non-publisher) platforms to store, access and share literature, e.g. via:\nInstitutional and subject repositories Aggregator platforms (EBSCOhost, IngentaConnect) Researcher-oriented networking sites (e.g. Academia.edu, ResearchGate, Mendeley) Reading environments and tools (e.g. ReadCube, Utopia Docs) Use of content on these platforms is by researchers who also have access to the same content via institutional subscription agreements. However, publishers are unable to report this use in their COUNTER-compliant reports, because it does not occur on their own platforms. This means:\nPublishers are unable to demonstrate the full value of their content to library customers. They are also unable to provide authors will a full picture of usage of their articles Because use is distributed, institutions do not have a complete picture of usage The distributed usage logging collaboration was established as an R\u0026amp;D experimental initiative between COUNTER, Crossref members, and scholarly technology \u0026amp; service providers. The initiative, driven by the DUL working group, has explored and implemented private peer-to-peer channels for the secure exchange and processing of COUNTER-compliant private usage records from hosting platforms to publishers. All data provided back to the original publisher is anonymized, preserving individual user privacy.\nResources COUNTER’s Distributed Usage Logging stakeholder demand report COUNTER Code of Practice v5 compliance requirements for processing and reporting data from non-publisher usage sources DUL proof of concept reference implementation of the end-to-end transaction pipeline with validation credentials For general questions about this initiative, please contact Martyn Rittman.\n",
"headings": ["Current status","Background","Resources"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/co-access/",
"title": "Help with Co-access",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 3,
"lastmod": "2017-12-20",
"lastmod_ts": 1513728000,
"section": "",
"tags": [],
"description": " UPDATE, May 2026: Co-access is being fully deprecated 1 January 2027, with no new co-access relationships being added after 1 July 2026. We recommend using the multiple resolution service instead of co-access. What is Co-access? What problem does Co-access solve? Who is Co-access for and how does it work? How much does Co-access cost? How do I participate in Co-access? What is the difference between Multiple Resolution and Co-access? Can Co-access be used for journal content DOIs too? Doesn’t Co-access violate the “uniqueness” rule? What about citation splitting? How does Co-access affect resolution reports? How are Co-access relationships represented in Crossref metadata? How are Co-Access groups defined What if a deposit is made by a party not included in a Co-access agreement? I’m a book publisher, how do I know which aggregators have registered me for Co-access? How are Co-Access groups defined? Can I opt-out a single title in a Co-access group? Is Co-access a long term solution? ",
"content": " UPDATE, May 2026: Co-access is being fully deprecated 1 January 2027, with no new co-access relationships being added after 1 July 2026. We recommend using the multiple resolution service instead of co-access. What is Co-access? What problem does Co-access solve? Who is Co-access for and how does it work? How much does Co-access cost? How do I participate in Co-access? What is the difference between Multiple Resolution and Co-access? Can Co-access be used for journal content DOIs too? Doesn’t Co-access violate the “uniqueness” rule? What about citation splitting? How does Co-access affect resolution reports? How are Co-access relationships represented in Crossref metadata? How are Co-Access groups defined What if a deposit is made by a party not included in a Co-access agreement? I’m a book publisher, how do I know which aggregators have registered me for Co-access? How are Co-Access groups defined? Can I opt-out a single title in a Co-access group? Is Co-access a long term solution? What is Co-access? Co-access allows multiple Crossref members to register content and create DOIs for the same book content; both whole titles or individual chapters. This means that there can be multiple DOIs registered for the same book content. Prefixes must be pre-registered for Co-access in order to participate. Co-access does not require a primary depositor. For Co-access registered members, we’ll match records with near identical metadata (for example, matching ISBNs and titles) and enter them into a Co-access relationship where matches are found between participating members. This means that Co-access enables better linking between different Crossref DOIs and gives book publishers and aggregators of book content greater flexibility to host content within a timeframe and in a location which suits them best.\nWhat problem does Co-access solve? Many organizations can be involved in the hosting and distribution of books. Up until now, Crossref’s Multiple Resolution (MR) functionality has worked well with journals, where content may exist on the publisher’s site and also on a third-party hosting platform. In this case the content on the publisher site gets registered first and then the URLs for the content on the third-party sites can be added after this. Both the publisher and the third-party sites can use the same DOI. Unlike with journal content, book publishers often outsource their content hosting to multiple aggregators/platforms with none of them considered the primary site. Additionally in some cases, the book publisher does not deposit any metadata and DOIs with Crossref at all. Multiple Resolution requires coordination between the primary publisher and the secondary content hosts which is too burdensome to be feasible between book aggregators - especially as there is often no primary depositor (i.e the book publisher). Instead, publishers leave depositing to secondary content hosts. This means that MR functionality is unsuitable for this use case, as book aggregators have expressed the need for a process that allows independent transactions on the part of any secondary content hosts.\nWho is Co-access for and how does it work? Co-access is for any Crossref publisher or sponsoring publisher member who faces the challenge of assigning DOI identifiers to book content that is distributed across a number of different platforms. Crossref members who aggregate book content on behalf of other publishers can contact Crossref to request that their prefix be added to the Co-access group for each of the book publisher members they work with.\nFor items from approved prefixes, Crossref\u0026rsquo;s system will automatically look to establish a Co-access match with any other DOI where near-identical bibliographic metadata is found. When matches are found, an interim page hosted by Crossref will be displayed to end users when any matched DOI URL is followed. Users can then interact with the Co-Access interim page to choose their preferred DOI to follow in order to access the content.\nHow much does Co-access cost? Each depositor is billed for their own item registered. There are no additional fees to participate in Co-access.\nHow do I participate in Co-access? You must first be registered for Co-access in order to participate. Crossref members who host/aggregate book content on behalf of other Crossref book publisher members, can register their prefix, and those of the book publishers they work with, by sending the details of your Co-access relationship to support@crossref.org.\nBefore contacting our support team, aggregators should please ensure they have spoken with each book publisher they work with about Co-access deposits and have collected the following details:\nAggregator\u0026rsquo;s own Crossref membership information (i.e depositor prefix/s)\nThe name, prefix/s and contact details of each Crossref book publisher member you work with\nAggregator\u0026rsquo;s company logo file\nThe logo file for each publisher\nWhat is the difference between Multiple Resolution and Co-access? Multiple Resolution is when a single DOI has multiple resolution URLs; for example, if the same content is available in different locations. When the DOI is resolved it goes to an interim landing page that shows the different resolution URLs. Co-access is for book content and is when multiple DOIs are assigned to the same book title or chapter; each DOI is deposited by a different member and each has only one resolution URL. The DOIs are grouped together and when any of the DOIs is resolved they go to the an interim landing page showing all the DOIs and the resolution URLs.\nCan Co-access be used for journal content DOIs too? No, Co-access is only for book content. Journal publishers do not encounter the same distributed content issues that book publishers and their aggregators face. In the rare cases where journal content is distributed, members can use our existing Multiple Resolution functionality in order to add multiple hosting locations within a single Crossref deposit.\nDoesn’t Co-access violate the “uniqueness” rule? Yes it does. While it is Crossref policy that only one DOI be created for a given work because Crossref DOIs are citation identifiers, we are enabling multiple DOIs to be assigned for the same book content in order to solve a very specific use case identified by our book publisher members and their aggregators. Crossref offers Co-access exclusively to book publishers to address the specific structural needs inherent to their production and distribution environment. See the response above in “What problem does Co-access solve?” and below in “What about citation splitting?”.\nWhat about citation splitting? The Crossref DOI is a citation identifier. This means that we identify content to enable accurate citation for scholarly content. This is different from other identifiers, like the ISBN, which are used to identify all the different formats - hardback, paperback, ePub. Therefore, a basic Crossref principle is that content, even if it’s available in different formats, should only have one Crossref DOI. For content that is part of Co-access, there will be multiple DOIs for the same content and this could mean that where systems and services use the DOI to track citations that all the citations will not be captured since they are spread across multiple DOIs. Crossref DOIs are increasingly being used to track activity. So Co-access involves a tradeoff between increased flexibility against accurate citation and event counting.\nHow does Co-access affect resolution reports? The DOI that was clicked on initially, before the landing page is enabled, is the DOI resolution that is captured in our reports. If a user selects an alternative DOI from the options presented on the Co-access landing page, we do not report this as a resolution.\nHow are Co-access relationships represented in Crossref metadata? To inspect the output metadata to see what DOIs are related through Co-access, see our technical documentation for details.\nHow are Co-Access groups defined? Co-Access is enabled between prefixes. Prefixes registered for Co-access will be grouped to allow each member of the group access to a given book content item. This allows each member to deposit (and update) their own DOI for that title and for the content items (chapters) within that title. Once a Co-access group is defined any member could create a DOI for any title owned by any member of the Co-Access group.\nWhat if a deposit is made by a party not included in a Co-access agreement? If the depositor’s prefix is not in a registered Co-access group, then the conflicting deposit will be rejected. Multiple registered items for the same book title is only possible if prefixes have been pre-registered for Co-access.\nI’m a book publisher, how do I know which aggregators have registered me for Co-access? Members can email support@crossref.org to obtain a list of all prefixes they are in Co-access with.\nHow are Co-Access groups defined? Co-Access is enabled between prefixes. Prefixes registered for Co-access will be grouped to allow each member of the group access to a given book content item. This allows each member to deposit (and update) their own DOI for that title and for the content items (chapters) within that title.\nCan I opt-out a single title in a Co-access group? Ideally, single title opt-out should occur before any Co-access deposits are made for that item. To do this, the title owner should contact us at support@crossref.org to request we set a Co-access exclusion flag on their title. If a title owner want to undo Co-access deposits that have already been made and matched, then they should our support team to ask that the title be excluded from Co-access and that any unwanted DOIs be aliased.\nIs Co-access a long term solution? No, Co-access is an interim solution to solve the current issue faced by our book publisher members and their content aggregators. In the long run, we will be exploring more effective solutions to improve how Crossref accommodates the unique challenges of the book publishing environment.\nMore questions? Review other Crossref FAQs or visit our support site to open a support ticket or review detailed technical documentation.\n",
"headings": ["What is Co-access?","What problem does Co-access solve?","Who is Co-access for and how does it work?","How much does Co-access cost?","How do I participate in Co-access?","What is the difference between Multiple Resolution and Co-access?","Can Co-access be used for journal content DOIs too?","Doesn’t Co-access violate the “uniqueness” rule?","What about citation splitting?","How does Co-access affect resolution reports?","How are Co-access relationships represented in Crossref metadata?","How are Co-Access groups defined?","What if a deposit is made by a party not included in a Co-access agreement?","I’m a book publisher, how do I know which aggregators have registered me for Co-access?","How are Co-Access groups defined?","Can I opt-out a single title in a Co-access group?","Is Co-access a long term solution?"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/operations-and-sustainability/accessibility/",
"title": "Accessibility",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2026-04-27",
"lastmod_ts": 1777248000,
"section": "Operations & sustainability",
"tags": [],
"description": "We aim to continuously improve the accessibility of our tools and interfaces for all human users. If you have feedback for us related to digital accessibility, please get in touch.\nThe standard against which we measure this website and all Crossref user interfaces is level AA of the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG 2.2). The main principles of these guidelines state that web content should be perceivable, operable, understandable, and robust.\nOn this page, we list the Voluntary Product Accessibility Templates (VPAT®) we have filled out to create accessibility conformance reports (ACRs).\n",
"content": "We aim to continuously improve the accessibility of our tools and interfaces for all human users. If you have feedback for us related to digital accessibility, please get in touch.\nThe standard against which we measure this website and all Crossref user interfaces is level AA of the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG 2.2). The main principles of these guidelines state that web content should be perceivable, operable, understandable, and robust.\nOn this page, we list the Voluntary Product Accessibility Templates (VPAT®) we have filled out to create accessibility conformance reports (ACRs).\nList of available accessibility conformance reports for Crossref user interfaces Service/interface Status ACR link ACR last updated Crossref website Actively developed ACR: Crossref website 2026-04-17 Participation Reports Actively developed ACR: Crossref Participation Reports 2026-04-17 Console (including Metadata Manager) Actively developed ACR: Crossref Console 2026-04-17 Metadata Search Actively developed ACR: Crossref Metadata Search 2026-04-17 Crossmark Actively developed ACR: Crossmark 2026-04-17 Admin tool Legacy ACR: Crossref Admin tool 2026-04-17 Legacy small apps and reports Legacy ACR: Crossref legacy small apps and reports 2026-04-17 Chooser interstitial pages Actively developed ACR: Crossref Chooser interstitial pages 2026-04-17 As we develop our accessibility roadmap, we will share updates and more information on this page.\nSome of the interfaces marked \u0026ldquo;Legacy\u0026rdquo; are 20+ years old, and making accessibility improvements to them in their current form is very challenging due to the older technologies they are built on. Rather, we will replace these tools in future with modern interfaces that have accessibility built into them by design, as part of the regular software development lifecycle.\nChanges to this accessibility policy This accessibility policy is effective as of April 2026 and will remain in effect except with respect to any changes in its provisions in the future, which will be in effect immediately after being posted on this page.\nWe reserve the right to update or change our accessibility policy at any time, and you should check back periodically.\nPlease email us with any questions about accessibility.\n",
"headings": ["List of available accessibility conformance reports for Crossref user interfaces","Changes to this accessibility policy"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/operations-and-sustainability/privacy/",
"title": "Privacy",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2024-08-13",
"lastmod_ts": 1723507200,
"section": "Operations & sustainability",
"tags": [],
"description": "We are committed to safeguarding your privacy. If you feel we need to change something please contact us with your feedback.\nOne of our guiding principles is to use open source tools and technologies. That extends to how we communicate with you and we endeavor to use systems we think we can trust not to misuse our\u0026mdash;or your\u0026mdash;data.\nBrowsing this website We are trying to strike a balance between understanding what content people appreciate most (and least) on our site, and ensuring your information remains as private as possible. We therefore decided to use Matomo which is an open source analytics program that respects user privacy. We look at page views, referrers, geographies, exit pages, and try to discern patterns in what content is most used. Matomo does not hold onto your data.\n",
"content": "We are committed to safeguarding your privacy. If you feel we need to change something please contact us with your feedback.\nOne of our guiding principles is to use open source tools and technologies. That extends to how we communicate with you and we endeavor to use systems we think we can trust not to misuse our\u0026mdash;or your\u0026mdash;data.\nBrowsing this website We are trying to strike a balance between understanding what content people appreciate most (and least) on our site, and ensuring your information remains as private as possible. We therefore decided to use Matomo which is an open source analytics program that respects user privacy. We look at page views, referrers, geographies, exit pages, and try to discern patterns in what content is most used. Matomo does not hold onto your data.\nSubscribing to our updates If you sign up for news and updates, the information you provide will be stored in our email service called Act-On. We will email you once a month with a newsletter containing recent blog posts and product and service information. You won\u0026rsquo;t be added to other mailing lists unless you ask. If you later decide you do not want to receive these communications, we put opt-out links on all our emails. If you just want alerts of new blogs, please use RSS.\nJoining as a member If you sign up to become a member of Crossref, we add you as an \u0026lsquo;inactive\u0026rsquo; account in our Customer Relationship Management (CRM) system, SugarCRM. Once your account is approved, and when you\u0026rsquo;ve signed your contract and paid your first year\u0026rsquo;s membership fee, we set your account to \u0026lsquo;active\u0026rsquo;. When you sign up we ask for a Primary contact (previously \u0026ldquo;business\u0026rdquo; contact) plus contacts for: billing, voting, technical, and metadata quality. The billing contact receives the invoices for annual membership fees and quarterly Content Registration fees. The voting contact receives the annual board election notices and votes on behalf of the member organisation. The Primary contact agrees to the terms and receives regular service and product information. The technical contact may be your chosen agent to deposit metadata with us. And the metadata quality contact is the one we send reports to about metadata errors and would be the one to fix them.\nOver time we might ask to be in touch with additional people at your organisation, such as editors, product managers, production staff, and other interested colleagues. We will ask upfront for your consent and it is always possible to opt-out later if you change your mind.\nDepending on the type of account, you may receive a series of on-boarding emails that provide information about how to get started with your participation in Crossref. We will also email you with significant news as and when things change, services are improved, or new services are introduced. We may also invite you to participate in research or surveys.\nUsing our metadata services We offer both members and non-members a range of services to access metadata. In some cases, the provided metadata may include data (or metadata derived from data) that originated from sources other than our members (\u0026ldquo;third-party sources\u0026rdquo;). We will take steps to inform all users of our metadata retrieval services about any third-party sources for the metadata. If the third-party source requires it, we will also provide their privacy policies or usage restrictions. We respect the terms and conditions, including the privacy policies, of the third-party sources and we expect the users of our metadata services to do so as well.\nIf you identify yourself in API queries (our \u0026lsquo;Polite\u0026rsquo; or \u0026lsquo;Plus\u0026rsquo; API pools), we will not under any circumstances store or use your email for any other purpose than technical troubleshooting and only if absolutely necessary. You may choose to use our \u0026lsquo;Public\u0026rsquo; API which won\u0026rsquo;t identify you at all. More information can be found in the etiquette section of our REST API documentation.\nUsing our tools and user interfaces Like our website, some of our helper tools and report interfaces use Matomo, an open source analytics program that respects user privacy. We are interested in the number of page views, number of actions taken, and geographies of users in order to understand how, and how much, our tools are used. Matomo does not hold on to your data.\nIf a tool requires you to sign in with your Crossref credentials (username and password), this data is not shared with Matomo or connected with usage analytics in any way.\nAsking for support If you ask for support and raise a ticket with our support team, the information to send will be stored in our ticketing system, Zendesk. We don’t use your contact information for anything other than resolving your support ticket, and any logins or private details provided during a support conversation are secure.\nComments on our blog and community forum Conversations among the Crossref community can be made on our discussion forum at community.crossref.org which uses Discourse. Discourse is an open source platform that asks people for minimal information such as your name, alias (name you wish to display), and your email address. We may use your email address to answer your questions and feedback, but we do not store it in our email database so you won\u0026rsquo;t receive newsletters and other emails unless you specifically sign up. Discourse is the tool enabled for blog comments too.\nCookies Cookies are files with small amount of data, which may include an anonymous unique identifier. Cookies are sent to your browser from a web site and stored on your computer\u0026rsquo;s hard drive. Like many sites, we use \u0026ldquo;cookies\u0026rdquo; to collect basic information in order to allow us to serve you better and improve your experience while visiting our website. Cookies are not used to retain personal data. You can instruct your browser to refuse all cookies or to indicate when a cookie is being sent.\nEmail privacy We categorically do not under any circumstances\u0026mdash;however persuasive\u0026mdash;sell or rent email addresses with parties outside of Crossref. On rare occasions\u0026mdash;and only where it prevents you from using a service you\u0026rsquo;ve signed up for\u0026mdash;we may need to provide a contact email address to a supplier or partner in order for you to receive important information or technical support.\nRetaining your information We will keep your information as long as it is necessary to fulfill the purpose for which you gave us the information. We may delete your personal information if the information is incomplete or inaccurate. We may also keep personal information where it is necessary to comply with legal obligations, resolve disputes, and comply with or enforce agreements. While there is not a specific length of time for which we may keep your information, we keep it only as long as we have a permissible purpose for processing it.\nLinks to other sites Our website may contain links to some other sites. We can\u0026rsquo;t be responsible for the privacy policies and content of these other sites, nor whether they\u0026rsquo;ve maintained the links persistently. If you tell us that some links might be questionable, we will look into removing the link.\nSecurity Crossref has taken steps to ensure that personal information collected is secure. However, no method of transmission over the Internet or method of electronic storage is 100% secure. While we strive to use commercially acceptable means to protect your information, we cannot guarantee its absolute security.\nTransfer We will not share your personal information with third parties, except as we describe in this policy or as separately authorized by you. We may share some of your information with companies that perform support services to us, such as accounting or legal firms, firms that provide data hosting or database management services, and other technical support. These third parties are required to maintain the confidentiality of your personal information and to use your personal information only in providing services to us. In rare circumstances, your personal information may be disclosed to third parties to comply with applicable laws and regulations. Any other disclosure of your personal information will only be made following your express consent.\nCrossref is registered in the United States. Wherever you are located, any of the data you provide to Crossref may be transferred to the United States, where data protection and privacy laws may be different, and less rigorous, than the laws in your country.\nAccessing, correcting, and removing information Unless there is an exemption or other applicable law, you have the right to withdraw your consent to us processing your personal data, including the transfer of that information to the United States. You also have a right to request copies of your personal data and request that we correct any information that is inaccurate or out of date, or to ask that it be erased where it is no longer necessary for us to have the data. Where your data has been provided to us by another organisation, such as a publisher, you should contact that organisation in the first instance. If you have provided your information directly to us, or if you have any other questions about this notice or want additional information, you should contact us directly.\nChanges to this privacy policy This privacy policy is effective as of May 2018 and will remain in effect except with respect to any changes in its provisions in the future, which will be in effect immediately after being posted on this page.\nWe reserve the right to update or change our privacy policy at any time and you should check back periodically.\nPlease email us with any questions about privacy.\n",
"headings": ["Browsing this website","Subscribing to our updates","Joining as a member","Using our metadata services","Using our tools and user interfaces","Asking for support","Comments on our blog and community forum","Cookies","Email privacy","Retaining your information","Links to other sites","Security","Transfer","Accessing, correcting, and removing information","Changes to this privacy policy"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/labs/",
"title": "",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 10,
"lastmod": "2026-06-12",
"lastmod_ts": 1781222400,
"section": "",
"tags": [],
"description": "\rBackground Crossref Labs was the name for earlier R\u0026amp;D initiatives, which shaped much of what Crossref now enables as foundational open scholarly infrastructure. In 2024 we integrated experimentation, research, and proof-of-concept (POC) work directly into new scalable program and engineering workflows, supported by dedicated data science expertise.\nA flavour of past research and experiments Matching Grants registered with Crossref to other research outputs: read Dominika\u0026rsquo;s blog to explain the methodology we used to match grants to other works registered in Crossref, using grant identifier metadata. DOI Popup Proof of Concept: what would it look like if we displayed Crossref metadata in a handy work-level popup? Open Funder Registry reconciliation service: designed to help members (or anybody) more easily clean-up their funder data and map it to the Open Funder Registry. pdfmark and pdfstamp: Open source command line tools to add Crossref metadata to a PDF (pdfmark) and to automate the application of linked images to PDFs (pdfstamp). Open source search-based reference matcher. Continuing adventures in reference matching: Comparing approaches Adding unstructured reference strings And structured references Automatic citation style classifier Detective work on duplicate DOIs QR Code generator WordPress \u0026amp; Moveable Type plugins Ubiquity plugin Linked periodical data InChI lookup Family name detector pmid2doi PDF-extract URL to DOI Documents Recommendations on RSS Feeds for Scholarly Publishers Unixref Reference (the schema used in Crossref OpenURL results) Disambiguation without de-duplication: Modeling authority and trust in the ORCID system R\u0026amp;D blog topics Labs team alumni Some of the lovely labs \u0026lsquo;creatures\u0026rsquo; who helped with much of the above work, alongside numerous consultants and volunteer developers from the community.\n",
"content": "\rBackground Crossref Labs was the name for earlier R\u0026amp;D initiatives, which shaped much of what Crossref now enables as foundational open scholarly infrastructure. In 2024 we integrated experimentation, research, and proof-of-concept (POC) work directly into new scalable program and engineering workflows, supported by dedicated data science expertise.\nA flavour of past research and experiments Matching Grants registered with Crossref to other research outputs: read Dominika\u0026rsquo;s blog to explain the methodology we used to match grants to other works registered in Crossref, using grant identifier metadata. DOI Popup Proof of Concept: what would it look like if we displayed Crossref metadata in a handy work-level popup? Open Funder Registry reconciliation service: designed to help members (or anybody) more easily clean-up their funder data and map it to the Open Funder Registry. pdfmark and pdfstamp: Open source command line tools to add Crossref metadata to a PDF (pdfmark) and to automate the application of linked images to PDFs (pdfstamp). Open source search-based reference matcher. Continuing adventures in reference matching: Comparing approaches Adding unstructured reference strings And structured references Automatic citation style classifier Detective work on duplicate DOIs QR Code generator WordPress \u0026amp; Moveable Type plugins Ubiquity plugin Linked periodical data InChI lookup Family name detector pmid2doi PDF-extract URL to DOI Documents Recommendations on RSS Feeds for Scholarly Publishers Unixref Reference (the schema used in Crossref OpenURL results) Disambiguation without de-duplication: Modeling authority and trust in the ORCID system R\u0026amp;D blog topics Labs team alumni Some of the lovely labs \u0026lsquo;creatures\u0026rsquo; who helped with much of the above work, alongside numerous consultants and volunteer developers from the community.\nGeoffrey Bilder Esha Datta Paul Davis Martin Eve Dominika Tkaczyk Rachael Lammey Karl Ward Joe Wass ",
"headings": ["Background","A flavour of past research and experiments","Documents","Labs team alumni"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/contact/",
"title": "Contact",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2017-11-21",
"lastmod_ts": 1511222400,
"section": "",
"tags": [],
"description": "Contact Us Please contact us through the form below and your question will be routed to the relevant person.\nYou can also contact us via our main twitter account, our support twitter account, our facebook page.\nIf you\u0026rsquo;re looking for a particular individual, check out our people page and contact any of us directly.\nIt looks like you don't have javascript enabled so please contact us through one of the methods mentioned above.\rMandatory fields are marked with an *.\n",
"content": "Contact Us Please contact us through the form below and your question will be routed to the relevant person.\nYou can also contact us via our main twitter account, our support twitter account, our facebook page.\nIf you\u0026rsquo;re looking for a particular individual, check out our people page and contact any of us directly.\nIt looks like you don't have javascript enabled so please contact us through one of the methods mentioned above.\rMandatory fields are marked with an *.\nFirst Name*\rLast Name*\rEmail Address*\rName of Company or Organization*\rYour Crossref prefix (if you have one)\rJob title (optional)\rMy Question is about*\r-- Please select --\rTechnical support - Content Registration\rTechnical support - other\rBilling\rGeneral feedback or complaint\rMedia or collaboration\rJoining Crossref, fees and membership enquiries\rServices: Cited-by\rServices: Funder Registry\rServices: Crossmark\rServices: Similarity Check\rServices: Event Data\rServices: Querying and using our Metadata\rReporting a metadata error\rPassword reset\rContent Registration method*\rWeb Deposit Form\rOJS plugin\rXML upload in admin tool\rXML via https post\rOther (please specify)\rI don't know\rOther\rSubmission ID (this will be in the email you received after you submitted your content) (optional)\rDo take a look at this page, which gives more more information about the benefits and obligations of membership, how much it costs, and the application process.\rDoes this answer your question? If not, please pop your question in the box below, and we'll get back to you soon.\nMy Question\rOffice locations North America office Europe office Crossref, PO BOX 719, Lynnfield, MA 01940, United States of America Oxford Centre for Innovation, New Road, Oxford, OX1 1BY, United Kingdom ",
"headings": ["Contact Us","Office locations"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/retrieve-metadata/rest-api/access-and-authentication/",
"title": "Access and authentication",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2025-10-16",
"lastmod_ts": 1760572800,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "Anyone can access the REST API, no signup or registration is required. We offer the following access options:\nOption How to authenticate Public No authentication or identification. Polite Include your email address in the mailto parameter or agent header. Metadata Plus Include your API key in the request header as Crossref-Plus-API-Token: Bearer [API key] The option you choose affects the rate limits. We recommend the polite option so that we can contact you if there is an issue.\n",
"content": "Anyone can access the REST API, no signup or registration is required. We offer the following access options:\nOption How to authenticate Public No authentication or identification. Polite Include your email address in the mailto parameter or agent header. Metadata Plus Include your API key in the request header as Crossref-Plus-API-Token: Bearer [API key] The option you choose affects the rate limits. We recommend the polite option so that we can contact you if there is an issue.\nMetadata Plus is our premium service that offers higher rate limits and priority support, and is designed for those who wish to integrate Crossref metadata into production services. If you subscribe to the service, you receive an API key. You can test your API key using cURL:\ncurl -I -H \u0026quot;crossref-api-key: Bearer [API key]\u0026quot; \u0026quot;https://api.crossref.org/v1/works\u0026quot;\nIf successful, the HTTP status code will be 200 (it will be 401 if the token is not valid) and the response header will contain x-api-pool: plus.\nRequest limits In order to make the data accessible to all and keep the service stable, we operate limits that apply to individual users.\nRate limits: These are included in the results headers under x-rate-limit-limit and x-rate-limit-interval and depend on the pool accessed by your request. This gives the maximum number of requests you can make in a given time period.\nConcurrent request limits: These limits restrict the number of simultaneous requests that can be made and are given in the x-concurrency-limit response header. To avoid exceeding these limits, check that previous requests have completed before sending the next one.\nThe following limits apply:\nPool Rate limit Concurrency limit Public 5 1 Polite 10 3 Plus 150 None If you exceed the rate limits, you will receive a 429 HTTP response. In this case, wait a short while and try your request again at a lower rate or with fewer simultaneous requests.\nRate limits are usually applied and removed automatically. In the rare case that we apply a block manually, we will first make an effort to contact you to resolve the issue. For this reason we strongly recommend providing a mailto parameter in all requests. Blocked users will receive a 403 HTTP response and you can contact our support team to ask for a block to be removed.\nBest practice By using our REST API, you are part of our community that supports open access to scholarly metadata. We ask that you are considerate of other users and don\u0026rsquo;t take actions that will make the API unstable, and hence unusable for others. You can do this by:\nCaching responses so you don\u0026rsquo;t make the same requests repeatedly. Be considerate about the frequency with which you refresh your cache. Use the mailto parameter and specify a User-Agent header that identifies you and your script. Handle HTTP response codes and monitor response times. Back off if the response times start to increase. See more recommendations about how to get the most from the API.\n",
"headings": ["Request limits","Best practice"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/retrieve-metadata/xml-api/query-schema/",
"title": "Query schema",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2025-09-15",
"lastmod_ts": 1757894400,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "Queries to the XML API use XML format. The full schema can be found at https://data.crossref.org/schemas/crossref_query_input2.0.xsd. This page provides an introduction and doesn\u0026rsquo;t cover all options available in the schema.\nTo make a query, we recommend the following workflow:\nDecide which fields to include in your query. This will depend on the information you have about the record or records you are looking for. Decide how to search. Some fields have options for how to query. Determine how many results to return and add other options. Fields to include in your query The following fields can be used in queries:\n",
"content": "Queries to the XML API use XML format. The full schema can be found at https://data.crossref.org/schemas/crossref_query_input2.0.xsd. This page provides an introduction and doesn\u0026rsquo;t cover all options available in the schema.\nTo make a query, we recommend the following workflow:\nDecide which fields to include in your query. This will depend on the information you have about the record or records you are looking for. Decide how to search. Some fields have options for how to query. Determine how many results to return and add other options. Fields to include in your query The following fields can be used in queries:\narticle_title, author, component_number, doi, edition_number, first_page, identifier, isbn, issn, issue, journal_title, name_choice, ORCID, proceedings_title, publication_type, series_title, standard_designator, unstructured_citation, volume, volume_title, year\nTo make a valid query:\nDOIs must follow the expected DOI format (10.XXXX/yyy\u0026hellip;) and not exceed 200 characters. Either first page or author must be supplied. Either ISSN or journal title must be supplied. Either ISSN/ISBN or series/volume title must be supplied. An invalid query will return no result, i.e. \u0026lt;body/\u0026gt;.\nQuery options The match attribute for a field describes how the search is carried out. Depending on the field, it can have the following values:\nfuzzy : Uses fuzzy matching rather than looking for an exact match. exact : Looks for an exact match to the value in the field. Cannot be combined with fuzzy or optional attributes. optional : This field may be dropped from the query. null : The value of this field must be null. Cannot be combined with other fields and no value should be provided. match and its options are available for the following query fields:\nfield fuzzy exact optional null article_title x x author x x x x component_number x x edition_number x x first_page x x x identifier x x institution_name x x x isbn x x issn x x issue x x journal_title x x x proceedings_title x x x publication_type series_title x x x x standard_designator standards_body_name x x x volume x x x volume_title x x x year x x It can\u0026rsquo;t be used for doi, ORCID, name_choice, or unstructured_citation.\nOther search options A query can have other attributes to determine how the search is conducted:\nAttribute Possible values Description key Any string Optional, for users to identify their query. enable-multiple-hits true, false, multi_hit_per_rule, exact Determines how many results to return, see below. forward-match true, false If true, stores the query and notifies you of new matches by email. list-components true, false If true, also returns records of type component. expanded-results true, false If true, returns additional author, article title, and date information. secondary-query none, multiple-hits, author-title, author-title-multiple-hits Perform a second type of query in case the first returns no results. See details below. To determine whether to return one or multiple results, you can use:\n\u0026lt;query enable-multiple-hits:false\u0026gt; or \u0026lt;query secondary-query=none\u0026gt; are equivalent and return only one result. If multiple records match the query, no result will be returned.\n\u0026lt;query enable-multiple-hits:true\u0026gt; or \u0026lt;query secondary-query=multiple-hits\u0026gt; have the same effect and will return any content items matching the query.\n\u0026lt;query enable-multiple-hits:multi_hit_per_rule\u0026gt; treats each query field independently and returns all records that match any value in the query.\n\u0026lt;query secondary-query:author-title\u0026gt; and \u0026lt;query secondary-query:author-title-multiple-hits\u0026gt; perform a query where only the title and first author are required, returning one or multiple records respectively. Providing additional fields overrides this option and a regular metadata query is performed.\n",
"headings": ["Fields to include in your query","Query options","Other search options"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/retrieve-metadata/rest-api/",
"title": "REST API",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2020-04-08",
"lastmod_ts": 1586304000,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "Our publicly available REST API exposes the scholarly metadata that members and trusted sources deposit with Crossref. This bibliographic metadata and much more—you will find funding data, license information, post-publication updates, ORCID and ROR IDs, and abstracts. You can search, facet, filter, or sample metadata from dozens of thousands of members from all around the world, and the results are returned in JSON format.\nThe metadata is deposited directly by our members, who publish the content represented by each metadata record. This is complemented by trusted sources, such as Retraction Watch. You will also find other identifiers, such as ORCID for individuals, RORs for funders and affiliations, and more. In some cases we add these identifiers where they are missing in the original deposit. There is an overview of the available content at Crossref stats.\n",
"content": "Our publicly available REST API exposes the scholarly metadata that members and trusted sources deposit with Crossref. This bibliographic metadata and much more—you will find funding data, license information, post-publication updates, ORCID and ROR IDs, and abstracts. You can search, facet, filter, or sample metadata from dozens of thousands of members from all around the world, and the results are returned in JSON format.\nThe metadata is deposited directly by our members, who publish the content represented by each metadata record. This is complemented by trusted sources, such as Retraction Watch. You will also find other identifiers, such as ORCID for individuals, RORs for funders and affiliations, and more. In some cases we add these identifiers where they are missing in the original deposit. There is an overview of the available content at Crossref stats.\nNo sign-up is required to use the REST API, and almost none of the metadata is subject to copyright, and you may use it for any purpose. Some abstracts contained in the metadata may be subject to copyright by publishers or authors.\nQuick start Use https://api.crossref.org/ as your base URL. Add one of the available endpoints to query works, journals, members, funders, licences, prefixes, or types. Here are some examples to get you started:\nI would like to\u0026hellip; Example request Use the polite pool https://api.crossref.org/works?rows=0\u0026mailto=yourmail@company.org Retrieve metadata for a Crossref DOI https://api.crossref.org/works/doi/10.1128/mbio.01735-25 Retrieve records for 10 content items https://api.crossref.org/works?rows=10 Find works in the journal Psychoneuroendocrinology, ISSN 03064530 https://api.crossref.org/journals/03064530/works Endpoints The Crossref REST API provides a number of endpoints for querying different types of records. Each endpoint has request parameters and filters to enable you to retrieve the metadata you are looking for. For further details about each endpoint, its parameters, and to try them out, see the Swagger documentation at https://api.crossref.org/\nEndpoint Metadata returned /works A list of content items registered with Crossref. This endpoint has a large number of parameters and filters available. /works/{doi} A single metadata record for a Crossref DOI. /works/{doi}/agency The registration agency for the specified DOI (e.g., Crossref or DataCite). /journals A list of journals whose content with registered content items. /journals/{issn} Details of the journal with the given ISSN. /journals/{issn}/works A list of works in the journal with the given ISSN. members A list of all organisations that have registered metadata with Crossref. /members/{id} Details about the Crossref member with the specified member ID. /members/{id}/works/ A list of works associated with the specified member. /prefixes/{prefix} The name and Crossref member ID of the steward of the specified prefix. /prefixes/{prefix}/works A list of works associated with the specified prefix. /funders A list of funders in the Open Funder Registry. /funders/{id} Metadata for the member with the given ID. /funders/{id}/works A list of works associated with the specified funder ID. /types A list of all work types used in Crossref metadata. /types/{id} Information about the specified work type, e.g. journal-article, monograph, grant. /types/{id}/works A list of works with the specified work type. /licenses A list of licenses used by registered content items. Content negotiation The REST API can return single metadata records in a variety of formats through a process known as content negotiation. See the content negotiation page for more details.\nReport an issue Have you detected something that you would like to report? It could be incorrect, confusing, or partial metadata. Please report it on our community forum or check our backlog of bugs and feature requests to see if it has already been reported.\n",
"headings": ["Quick start","Endpoints","Content negotiation","Report an issue"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/retrieve-metadata/rest-api/rest-api-filters/",
"title": "REST API filters",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2025-10-16",
"lastmod_ts": 1760572800,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "Records retrieved from the Crossref REST API can be filtered to give more precise results. On this page, we list and define the available filters for each available works endpoint. See here for more information about endpoints.\nFilters are added using the filter parameter, with filters and values separated by a colon, and filters separated by a comma. For example:\nhttps://api.crossref.org/v1/works?filter=from-created-date:2023-04-01T12,until-created-date:2023-04-01T12\nThe journals, types, licenses, and members endpoints do not have filters. Other request parameters can be found in our Swagger documentation.\n",
"content": "Records retrieved from the Crossref REST API can be filtered to give more precise results. On this page, we list and define the available filters for each available works endpoint. See here for more information about endpoints.\nFilters are added using the filter parameter, with filters and values separated by a colon, and filters separated by a comma. For example:\nhttps://api.crossref.org/v1/works?filter=from-created-date:2023-04-01T12,until-created-date:2023-04-01T12\nThe journals, types, licenses, and members endpoints do not have filters. Other request parameters can be found in our Swagger documentation.\nOn this page Below are filters for the following endpoints:\nMembers Funders Works Members endpoint filters The /members endpoint has the following filters:\nfilter value description backfile-doi-count integer members with given count of DOIs for material published more than two years ago. current-doi-count integer members with given count of DOIs for material published within last two years . prefix string members with given DOI prefix, e.g. 10.5555. Funders endpoint filters filter description location string Funders located in the given country. Note that the country name is case sensitive, so location=France gives different results to location=france.\nWorks endpoint filters The works endpoint has a very large number of filters. They can be used for any endpoint ending in works, for example members/works, journals/works, or works. We have broken then down into three types by function:\nFilter by date Find out whether a value is present Search for a specific value Filter by date You can filter results for works before a certain date, after a certain date, or between two dates. Note that date ranges are inclusive so, for example, to get all metadata updated on a single day you can use the same day for the from and until filters, e.g.\nhttps://api.crossref.org/v1/works?filter=from-update-date:2025-10-01,until-update-date:2025-10-01\nThe following filters related to when metadata was received. ISO-formatted time stamps can be used with these filters. For example, any of the following are valid: 2025, 2025-01, 2025-01-04, 2025-01-04T00, 2025-01-04T00:12, 2025-01-04T00:12:32.\nfilter description from-created-date First deposited at or after the given date or time until-created-date First deposited before the given date or time from-update-date Deposited or redeposited at or after the given date or time, includes changes from the stewarding member until-update-date Deposited or redeposited at or before the given date or time, includes changes from the stewarding member from-deposit-date Deposited or redeposited at or after the given date or time (identical to from-update-date) until-deposit-date Deposited or redeposited on or before the given date or time (identical to until-update-date) from-index-date Reindexed in the API at or after the given date or time; includes changes from members, Crossref, and external sources. until-index-date Reindexed on or before the given date or time; includes changes from members, Crossref, and external sources. Date filters relating to the editorial and publication process. These and the following date filters take ISO-formatted dates as inputs, e.g. 2025, 2025-01, or 2025-01-05.\nfilter description from-pub-date The publication date is on or after the given date until-pub-date The publication date is on or before the given date from-print-pub-date Published in print on or after the given date until-print-pub-date Published in print on or before the given date from-online-pub-date Published online on or after the given date until-online-pub-date Published online date is on or before the given date from-accepted-date Accepted for publication on or after the given date until-accepted-date Accepted for publication on or before the given date from-posted-date Posted online on or after the given date, for the posted-content type until-posted-date Posted online on or before the given date, for the posted-content type from-approved-date Approved on or after the given date; for types dissertation, standard, and report until-approved-date Approved date is on or before the given date; for types dissertation, standard, and report from-awarded-date Awarded on or after the given date, for the grant type until-awarded-date Award on or before the given date, for the grant type Date filters related content items in a journal:\nfilter description from-issued-date Issued on or after the given date until-issued-date Issued on or before the given date Date filters related to content items in a conference:\nfilter description from-event-start-date Event start date is on or after the given date until-event-start-date Event start date is on or before the given date from-event-end-date Event end date is on or after the given date until-event-end-date Event end date is on or before the given date Find out whether a value is present There are a number of filters that take a boolean value (0 or 1, true or false) that return content items that have a value in one or more metadata fields. For example:\nhttps://api.crossref.org/v1/works?filter=has-ror-id:1\nThe following filters relate to persistent identifiers:\nfilter identifier present (or not present) has-orcid ORCID ID has-authenticated-orcid ORCID ID where the ORCID owner has authenticated with ORCID (asserted by the depositing member) has-clinical-trial-number Clinical trial number has-funder-doi Funder DOI has-ror-id ROR ID has-alias The record has other DOIs aliased to it has-prime-doi The record has been aliased and redirects to another DOI The following filters return items with a given property (one or more times):\nfilter value present (or not present) has-abstract Abstract has-description A description field has-license One or more licenses for the content has-update-policy Contains a link to a policy describing how updates are made has-domain-restriction The member restricts content to speciffic domains (part of Crossmark) has-assertion Assertions (part of Crossmark) has-content-domain A content domain (part to Crossmark) These filters relate to presence of a relationship to another item or organisation\nfilter Relationship type has-affiliation has and author affiliated institution has-award was funded by an award has-event associated with an event has-funder includes a funder identifier (ROR or Funder ID) has-relation has any kind of relationship has-update has been updated by another DOI (e.g., via a correction or retraction) is-update is an update to another DOI (e.g., is a correction or retraction) has-full-text includes one or more full-text links has-references works that have a list of references has-archive includes the name of an archive partner Search for a specific value These filters look for an exact match between the input value and the value in one or more fields in the metadata. If you’re looking across several fields, for values that contain a word or short phrase, or fuzzy matching , you can use a query.\nApply these filters by provdiing the filter name and the value you would like to apply, for example to look for works in the serial with ISSN 1097-4547:\nhttps://api.crossref.org/v1/works?filter=issn:1097-4547\nFilters related to identifiers\nfilter filter by the following metadata alternative-id Alternative ID, which may be a member-specific ID, or any other identifier a a member has provided doi The content item DOI orcid Contributor ORCID IDs ror-id Contributor affiliation or funding ROR IDs isbn The record\u0026rsquo;s ISBN issn The ISSN of the serial containing the item (e.g., 1234-5678) member Crossref member ID of the member who owns the record prefix the DOI owner prefix (e.g. 10.5555) Filters for metadata properties:\nfilter filter by the following metadata article-number Article number group-title Group title (used by content items of type posted-content) license.url License_ref is the given url license.version The license applies_to the given version (can be vor, am, tdm, or stm-asf) license.delay delay-in-days: how long after publication a license applies. The filter finds all values \u0026gt;= the given number type Metadata records whose type equals given type. Use one of the ID values in the /types endpoint type-name Type name. Use one of the name values in the /types endpoint assertion Name of an assertion (part of Crossmark) assertion-group Name of an assertion group (part of Crossmark) content-domain The domain name on which the content will appear (part of Crossmark) Filters related to funding metadata:\nfilter filter by the following metadata award.funder Award funder is the given funder award.number Award number is the given number gte-award-amount Award is greater than or equal to the given number lte-award-amount Award is less than or equal to the given number funder Funding metadata includes the given Funder ID funder-doi-asserted-by Funder DOI was asserted by the given body (crossref or publisher) Filters for relationships:\nfilter filter by the following metadata archive Archive partner has the given name clinical-trial-number Has the given clinical trial number container-title Container name (e.g., journal, conference, or book) exactly matches the given value full-text.type Resource element\u0026rsquo;s content_type attribute equals given version mime type (e.g., application/pdf) full-text.application Resource link has the given application (text-mining, similarity-checking or unspecified) full-text.version Resource element\u0026rsquo;s content_version attribute is the given version relation.type Has a relation with the given type (e.g., is-referenced-by, is-parent-of, is-preprint-of) relation.object-type Is related to an item of this type (e.g., doi, issn) relation.object Is related to the given identifier update-type Is an update of the given type (e.g., correction or retraction) updates Is an update to the given DOI ",
"headings": ["On this page","Members endpoint filters","Funders endpoint filters","Works endpoint filters","Filter by date","Find out whether a value is present","Search for a specific value"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/retrieve-metadata/xml-api/xml-query-examples/",
"title": "Query examples",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2020-04-08",
"lastmod_ts": 1586304000,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "This section includes examples for:\na strict journal article query a less strict journal article query an unstructured citation a book chapter query a book title query a book title query without an author controlling query result XML searching all authors DOI-to-metadata query (retrieves metadata for a DOI) A strict journal article query This query is fairly strict - it is requesting a single match for the given metadata. The ISSN is provided but does not need to be used for matching (match=\u0026quot;optional\u0026quot;). The journal title needs to match exactly (match=\u0026quot;exact\u0026quot;), no fuzzy matching will be applied. Fuzzy matching is applied to the author (match=\u0026quot;fuzzy\u0026quot;) but only the first author will be matched.\n",
"content": "This section includes examples for:\na strict journal article query a less strict journal article query an unstructured citation a book chapter query a book title query a book title query without an author controlling query result XML searching all authors DOI-to-metadata query (retrieves metadata for a DOI) A strict journal article query This query is fairly strict - it is requesting a single match for the given metadata. The ISSN is provided but does not need to be used for matching (match=\u0026quot;optional\u0026quot;). The journal title needs to match exactly (match=\u0026quot;exact\u0026quot;), no fuzzy matching will be applied. Fuzzy matching is applied to the author (match=\u0026quot;fuzzy\u0026quot;) but only the first author will be matched.\n\u0026lt;query key=\u0026#34;1178517\u0026#34; enable-multiple-hits=\u0026#34;false\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;issn match=\u0026#34;optional\u0026#34;\u0026gt;15360075\u0026lt;issn\u0026gt; \u0026lt;journal_title match=\u0026#34;exact\u0026#34;\u0026gt;American Journal of Bioethics\u0026lt;/journal_title\u0026gt; \u0026lt;author match=\u0026#34;fuzzy\u0026#34; search-all-authors=\u0026#34;false\u0026#34;\u0026gt;Agich\u0026lt;/author\u0026gt; \u0026lt;volume match=\u0026#34;fuzzy\u0026#34;\u0026gt;1\u0026lt;/volume\u0026gt; \u0026lt;issue\u0026gt;1\u0026lt;/issue\u0026gt; \u0026lt;first_page\u0026gt;50\u0026lt;/first_page\u0026gt; \u0026lt;year\u0026gt;2001\u0026lt;/year\u0026gt; \u0026lt;article_title\u0026gt;The Salience of Narrative for Bioethics\u0026lt;/article_title\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/query\u0026gt; A less strict journal article query The query below will return multiple matches (enable-multiple-hits=\u0026quot;true\u0026quot;) and fuzzy match the author against all deposited authors, and will do an author/article title query if the full metadata query does not produce a match.\n\u0026lt;query key=\u0026#34;1178517\u0026#34; enable-multiple-hits=\u0026#34;true\u0026#34; secondary-query=\u0026#34;author-title\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;journal_title match=\u0026#34;fuzzy\u0026#34;\u0026gt;American Journal of Bioethics\u0026lt;/journal_title\u0026gt; \u0026lt;author match=\u0026#34;fuzzy\u0026#34; search-all-authors=\u0026#34;true\u0026#34;\u0026gt;Agich\u0026lt;/author\u0026gt; \u0026lt;volume match=\u0026#34;fuzzy\u0026#34;\u0026gt;1\u0026lt;/volume\u0026gt; \u0026lt;issue\u0026gt;1\u0026lt;/issue\u0026gt; \u0026lt;first_page\u0026gt;50\u0026lt;/first_page\u0026gt; \u0026lt;year\u0026gt;2001\u0026lt;/year\u0026gt; \u0026lt;article_title\u0026gt;The Salience of Narrative for Bioethics\u0026lt;/article_title\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/query\u0026gt; An unstructured citation This citation has not been marked up into separate elements. The query simply supplies the reference string.\n\u0026lt;query key=\u0026#34;q1\u0026#34; enable-multiple-hits=\u0026#34;true\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;unstructured_citation\u0026gt;Hungate, B. A., \u0026amp;amp; Hampton, H. M. (2012). Ecosystem services: Valuing ecosystems for climate. Nature Climate Change, 2(3), 151-152. \u0026lt;/unstructured_citation\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/query\u0026gt; Book chapter query A query which will return the DOI for a single chapter in the specific title\n\u0026lt;query key=\u0026#34;MyKey1\u0026#34; enable-multiple-hits=\u0026#34;false\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;author\u0026gt;Casteilla\u0026lt;/author\u0026gt; \u0026lt;volume\u0026gt;155\u0026lt;/volume\u0026gt; \u0026lt;first_page\u0026gt;1\u0026lt;/first_page\u0026gt; \u0026lt;year\u0026gt;2001\u0026lt;/year\u0026gt; \u0026lt;isbn\u0026gt;1-59259-231-7\u0026lt;/isbn\u0026gt; \u0026lt;volume_title\u0026gt;Adipose Tissue Protocol\u0026lt;/volume_title\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/query\u0026gt; Searching for individual chapters within a book may also be done by using just the author name and chapter title (author name is optional, but should be included for better results):\n\u0026lt;query key=\u0026#34;MyKey1\u0026#34; enable-multiple-hits=\u0026#34;false\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;author\u0026gt;Casteilla\u0026lt;/author\u0026gt; \u0026lt;article_title\u0026gt;Choosing an Adipose Tissue Depot for Sampling \u0026lt;/article_title\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/query\u0026gt; Book title query Book title queries should include the book title (as volume_title) and author (or editor) when available.\n\u0026lt;query key=\u0026#34;MyKey1\u0026#34; enable-multiple-hits=\u0026#34;false\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;author\u0026gt; Ailhaud\u0026lt;/author\u0026gt; \u0026lt;volume\u0026gt;155\u0026lt;/volume\u0026gt; \u0026lt;first_page\u0026gt;1\u0026lt;/first_page\u0026gt; \u0026lt;year\u0026gt;2001\u0026lt;/year\u0026gt; \u0026lt;isbn\u0026gt;1-59259-231-7\u0026lt;/isbn\u0026gt; \u0026lt;volume_title\u0026gt;Adipose Tissue Protocol\u0026lt;/volume_title\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/query\u0026gt; Book title query without an author Some title-level book DOIs lack author information. If you do not have author information to include in your query or you are querying for an authorless book, for best results your query should instruct the system to ignore author by setting the author match attribute to null.\n\u0026lt;query key=\u0026#34;555-555\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;isbn\u0026gt;9780387791456\u0026lt;/isbn\u0026gt; \u0026lt;volume_title\u0026gt;Ordinary and Partial Differential Equations\u0026lt;/volume_title\u0026gt; \u0026lt;year\u0026gt;2009\u0026lt;/year\u0026gt; \u0026lt;author match=\u0026#34;null\u0026#34;/\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/query\u0026gt; Controlling query result XML Crossref query results can be retrieved in several formats. By default the XSD_XML format will only contain basic bibliographic metadata. Setting expanded-results to TRUE will also return the article title.\nThis example shows use of expanded-results=true along with enable-multiple-hits=true:\nQuery \u0026lt;?xml version = \u0026#34;1.0\u0026#34; encoding=\u0026#34;UTF-8\u0026#34;?\u0026gt; \u0026lt;query_batch version=\u0026#34;2.0\u0026#34; xmlns = \u0026#34;https://www.crossref.org/qschema/2.0\u0026#34; xmlns:xsi=\u0026#34;http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;head\u0026gt; \u0026lt;email_address\u0026gt;someone@crossref.org\u0026lt;/email_address\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi_batch_id\u0026gt;Sample multi resolve\u0026lt;/doi_batch_id\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/head\u0026gt; \u0026lt;body\u0026gt; \u0026lt;query key=\u0026#34;mutliResolve1\u0026#34; enable-multiple-hits=\u0026#34;true\u0026#34; expanded-results=\u0026#34;true\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;issn\u0026gt;0360-3016\u0026lt;/issn\u0026gt; \u0026lt;volume\u0026gt;54\u0026lt;/volume\u0026gt; \u0026lt;issue\u0026gt;2\u0026lt;/issue\u0026gt; \u0026lt;first_page\u0026gt;215\u0026lt;/first_page\u0026gt; \u0026lt;year\u0026gt;2002\u0026lt;/year\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/query\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/body\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/query_batch\u0026gt; Query results \u0026lt;crossref_result version=\u0026#34;2.0\u0026#34; xsi:schemaLocation=\u0026#34;https://www.crossref.org/qrschema/2.0 https://www.crossref.org/qrschema/crossref_query_output2.0.xsd\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;query_result\u0026gt; \u0026lt;head\u0026gt; \u0026lt;email_address\u0026gt;hisham@atypon.com\u0026lt;/email_address\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi_batch_id\u0026gt;Sample multi resolve\u0026lt;/doi_batch_id\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/head\u0026gt; \u0026lt;body\u0026gt; \u0026lt;query key=\u0026#34;mutliResolve1\u0026#34; status=\u0026#34;multiresolved\u0026#34; fl_count=\u0026#34;0\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi type=\u0026#34;journal_article\u0026#34;\u0026gt;10.1016/S0360-3016(02)03429-6\u0026lt;/doi\u0026gt; \u0026lt;issn type=\u0026#34;print\u0026#34;\u0026gt;03603016\u0026lt;/issn\u0026gt; \u0026lt;journal_title\u0026gt; International Journal of Radiation Oncology*Biology*Physics\u0026lt;/journal_title\u0026gt; \u0026lt;author\u0026gt;KIM\u0026lt;/author\u0026gt; \u0026lt;volume\u0026gt;54\u0026lt;/volume\u0026gt; \u0026lt;issue\u0026gt;2\u0026lt;/issue\u0026gt; \u0026lt;first_page\u0026gt;215\u0026lt;/first_page\u0026gt; \u0026lt;year\u0026gt;2002\u0026lt;/year\u0026gt; \u0026lt;publication_type\u0026gt;full_text\u0026lt;/publication_type\u0026gt; \u0026lt;article_title\u0026gt; Potential radiation sensitizing effect of SU5416 by down-regulating the COX-2 expression in human lung cancer cells \u0026lt;/article_title\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/query\u0026gt; \u0026lt;query key=\u0026#34;mutliResolve1\u0026#34; status=\u0026#34;multiresolved\u0026#34; fl_count=\u0026#34;0\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi type=\u0026#34;journal_article\u0026#34;\u0026gt;10.1016/S0360-3016(02)03428-4\u0026lt;/doi\u0026gt; \u0026lt;issn type=\u0026#34;print\u0026#34;\u0026gt;03603016\u0026lt;/issn\u0026gt; \u0026lt;journal_title\u0026gt; International Journal of Radiation Oncology*Biology*Physics \u0026lt;/journal_title\u0026gt; \u0026lt;author\u0026gt;WILLIAMS\u0026lt;/author\u0026gt; \u0026lt;volume\u0026gt;54\u0026lt;/volume\u0026gt; \u0026lt;issue\u0026gt;2\u0026lt;/issue\u0026gt; \u0026lt;first_page\u0026gt;215\u0026lt;/first_page\u0026gt; \u0026lt;year\u0026gt;2002\u0026lt;/year\u0026gt; \u0026lt;publication_type\u0026gt;full_text\u0026lt;/publication_type\u0026gt; \u0026lt;article_title\u0026gt; Effect of the administration of lovastatin on the development of pulmonary fibrosis following whole lung irradiation in a mouse model \u0026lt;/article_title\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/query\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/body\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/query_result\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/crossref_result\u0026gt; The system will return no DOIs if an ambiguity exists. Setting enable-multiple-hits to true instructs the system to return the list of DOIs.\nSearching all authors Normally the author name supplied in a query must be that of the article\u0026rsquo;s first author. First author is an optional designation made by the member when depositing a DOI\u0026rsquo;s metadata. Articles registered without a first author designation handicap queries that depend on author (for example, those which do not supply a page number). In an XML query there is a property called search-all-authors which forces the process to examine all authors associated with the article.\nThis example shows a query that would not return any results if this feature were not used:\n\u0026lt;?xml version = \u0026#34;1.0\u0026#34; encoding=\u0026#34;UTF-8\u0026#34;?\u0026gt; \u0026lt;query_batch version=\u0026#34;2.0\u0026#34; xmlns = \u0026#34;https://www.crossref.org/qschema/2.0\u0026#34; xmlns:xsi=\u0026#34;http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;head\u0026gt; \u0026lt;email_address\u0026gt;support@crossref.com\u0026lt;/email_address\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi_batch_id\u0026gt;Sample multi resolve\u0026lt;/doi_batch_id\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/head\u0026gt; \u0026lt;body\u0026gt; \u0026lt;query key=\u0026#34;mutliResolve1\u0026#34; enable-multiple-hits=\u0026#34;false\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;journal_title\u0026gt;Advances in Applied Probability\u0026lt;/journal_title\u0026gt; \u0026lt;author search-all-authors=\u0026#34;true\u0026#34;\u0026gt;Weil\u0026lt;/author\u0026gt; \u0026lt;volume\u0026gt;33\u0026lt;/volume\u0026gt; \u0026lt;year\u0026gt;2001\u0026lt;/year\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/query\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/body\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/query_batch\u0026gt; DOI-to-metadata query (retrieves metadata for a DOI) \u0026lt;?xml version = \u0026#34;1.0\u0026#34; encoding=\u0026#34;UTF-8\u0026#34;?\u0026gt; \u0026lt;query_batch version=\u0026#34;2.0\u0026#34; xmlns = \u0026#34;https://www.crossref.org/qschema/2.0\u0026#34; xmlns:xsi=\u0026#34;http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;head\u0026gt; \u0026lt;email_address\u0026gt;hisham@atypon.com\u0026lt;/email_address\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi_batch_id\u0026gt;Sample multi resolve\u0026lt;/doi_batch_id\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/head\u0026gt; \u0026lt;body\u0026gt; \u0026lt;query key=\u0026#34;mykey\u0026#34; expanded-results=\u0026#34;true\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi\u0026gt;10.1006/jmbi.2000.4282\u0026lt;/doi\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/query\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/body\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/query_batch\u0026gt; DOI-to-metadata query results \u0026lt;crossref_result version=\u0026#34;2.0\u0026#34; xsi:schemaLocation=\u0026#34;https://www.crossref.org/qrschema/2.0 https://www.crossref.org/qrschema/crossref_query_output2.0.xsd\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;query_result\u0026gt; \u0026lt;head\u0026gt; \u0026lt;email_address\u0026gt;hisham@atypon.com\u0026lt;/email_address\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi_batch_id\u0026gt;Sample multi resolve\u0026lt;/doi_batch_id\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/head\u0026gt; \u0026lt;body\u0026gt; \u0026lt;query key=\u0026#34;mykey\u0026#34; status=\u0026#34;resolved\u0026#34; fl_count=\u0026#34;1\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi type=\u0026#34;journal_article\u0026#34;\u0026gt;10.1006/jmbi.2000.4282\u0026lt;/doi\u0026gt; \u0026lt;issn type=\u0026#34;print\u0026#34;\u0026gt;00222836\u0026lt;/issn\u0026gt; \u0026lt;issn type=\u0026#34;electronic\u0026#34;\u0026gt;10898638\u0026lt;/issn\u0026gt; \u0026lt;journal_title\u0026gt;Journal of Molecular Biology\u0026lt;/journal_title\u0026gt; \u0026lt;contributors\u0026gt; \u0026lt;contributor first-author=\u0026#34;true\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;given_name\u0026gt;Y\u0026lt;/given_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;surname\u0026gt;Jiang\u0026lt;/surname\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/contributor\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/contributors\u0026gt; \u0026lt;volume\u0026gt;305\u0026lt;/volume\u0026gt; \u0026lt;issue\u0026gt;3\u0026lt;/issue\u0026gt; \u0026lt;first_page\u0026gt;377\u0026lt;/first_page\u0026gt; \u0026lt;year\u0026gt;2001\u0026lt;/year\u0026gt; \u0026lt;publication_type\u0026gt;full_text\u0026lt;/publication_type\u0026gt; \u0026lt;article_title\u0026gt; Specific interaction between anticodon nuclease and the tRNALys wobble base \u0026lt;/article_title\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/query\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/body\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/query_result\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/crossref_result\u0026gt; ",
"headings": ["A strict journal article query ","A less strict journal article query ","An unstructured citation ","Book chapter query ","Book title query ","Book title query without an author ","Controlling query result XML ","Query ","Query results ","Searching all authors ","DOI-to-metadata query (retrieves metadata for a DOI) ","DOI-to-metadata query results "]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/retrieve-metadata/xml-api/",
"title": "XML API",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2020-04-08",
"lastmod_ts": 1586304000,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "The XML API returns lists of metadata records in XML format. Requests can be made using a DOI or querying in XML format. Its main uses include:\nRetrieving metadata for a DOI in XML format. Finding the DOI for an item based on bibliographic metadata. For Crossref members, retrieve bibliographic metadata for content items that cite your own. These are known as forward links. The XML API is the closest to member-deposited metadata, so is also useful for members to verify that deposited metadata is publicly available.\n",
"content": "The XML API returns lists of metadata records in XML format. Requests can be made using a DOI or querying in XML format. Its main uses include:\nRetrieving metadata for a DOI in XML format. Finding the DOI for an item based on bibliographic metadata. For Crossref members, retrieve bibliographic metadata for content items that cite your own. These are known as forward links. The XML API is the closest to member-deposited metadata, so is also useful for members to verify that deposited metadata is publicly available.\nOn this page:\nQuick start Output format Character encoding Endpoints DOI lookup Query Forward links Quick start This section contains examples to demonstrate how to make requests of the XML API. See below for descriptions of the parameters available for each endpoint. Replace the example email addresses with your own before using these examples. For readability, these requests have not been URL encoded.\nRetrieve metadata for a single content item based on its DOI: https://doi.crossref.org/search/doi?pid=email@address.com\u0026amp;doi=10.1577/H02-043\u0026amp;format=unixsd Search for a content item using an unstructured citation (see additional query examples): https://doi.crossref.org/servlet/query?usr=email@address.com\u0026amp;format=unixref\u0026amp;qdata=\u0026lt;?xml version = \u0026#34;1.0\u0026#34; encoding=\u0026#34;UTF-8\u0026#34;?\u0026gt; \u0026lt;query_batch xmlns:xsi=\u0026#34;http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance\u0026#34; version=\u0026#34;2.0\u0026#34; xmlns=\u0026#34;http://www.crossref.org/qschema/2.0\u0026#34; xsi:schemaLocation=\u0026#34;http://www.crossref.org/qschema/2.0 http://www.crossref.org/qschema/crossref_query_input2.0.xsd\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;head\u0026gt; \u0026lt;email_address\u0026gt;your@email.org\u0026lt;/email_address\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi_batch_id\u0026gt;my_batch_label\u0026lt;/doi_batch_id\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/head\u0026gt; \u0026lt;body\u0026gt; \u0026lt;query key=\u0026#34;q1\u0026#34; enable-multiple-hits=\u0026#34;true\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;unstructured_citation\u0026gt;Hungate, B. A., \u0026amp;amp; Hampton, H. M. (2012). Ecosystem services: Valuing ecosystems for climate. Nature Climate Change, 2(3), 151-152.\u0026lt;/unstructured_citation\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/query\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/body\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/query_batch\u0026gt; Search for a content item using structured metadata: https://doi.crossref.org/servlet/query?usr=email@address.com\u0026amp;qdata=\u0026lt;?xml version = \u0026#34;1.0\u0026#34; encoding=\u0026#34;UTF-8\u0026#34;?\u0026gt; \u0026lt;query_batch xmlns:xsi=\u0026#34;http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance\u0026#34; version=\u0026#34;2.0\u0026#34; xmlns=\u0026#34;http://www.crossref.org/qschema/2.0\u0026#34; xsi:schemaLocation=\u0026#34;http://www.crossref.org/qschema/2.0 http://www.crossref.org/qschema/crossref_query_input2.0.xsd\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;head\u0026gt; \u0026lt;email_address\u0026gt;support@crossref.org\u0026lt;/email_address\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi_batch_id\u0026gt;my_batch_label\u0026lt;/doi_batch_id\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/head\u0026gt; \u0026lt;body\u0026gt; \u0026lt;query key=\u0026#34;1178517\u0026#34; enable-multiple-hits=\u0026#34;false\u0026#34; forward-match=\u0026#34;false\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;issn match=\u0026#34;optional\u0026#34;\u0026gt;15360075\u0026lt;/issn\u0026gt; \u0026lt;journal_title match=\u0026#34;exact\u0026#34;\u0026gt;American Journal of Bioethics\u0026lt;/journal_title\u0026gt; \u0026lt;author match=\u0026#34;fuzzy\u0026#34; search-all-authors=\u0026#34;false\u0026#34;\u0026gt;Agich\u0026lt;/author\u0026gt; \u0026lt;volume match=\u0026#34;fuzzy\u0026#34;\u0026gt;1\u0026lt;/volume\u0026gt; \u0026lt;issue\u0026gt;1\u0026lt;/issue\u0026gt; \u0026lt;first_page\u0026gt;50\u0026lt;/first_page\u0026gt; \u0026lt;year\u0026gt;2001\u0026lt;/year\u0026gt; \u0026lt;article_title\u0026gt;The Salience of Narrative for Bioethics\u0026lt;/article_title\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/query\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/body\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/query_batch\u0026gt; Retrieve forward links using the forward link endpoint: https://doi.crossref.org/servlet/getForwardLinks?usr=email@address.com/role\u0026amp;pwd=password\u0026amp;doi=10.1021\u0026amp;startDate=YYYY-MM-DD\u0026amp;endDate=YYYY-MM-DD Retrieve forward links using XML query: https://doi.crossref.org/servlet/query?usr=ROLE\u0026amp;pwd=PASSWORD\u0026amp;qdata=\u0026lt;?xml version=\u0026#34;1.0\u0026#34;?\u0026gt; \u0026lt;query_batch version=\u0026#34;2.0\u0026#34; xmlns = \u0026#34;http://www.crossref.org/qschema/2.0\u0026#34; xmlns:xsi=\u0026#34;http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance\u0026#34; xsi:schemaLocation=\u0026#34;http://www.crossref.org/qschema/2.0 http://www.crossref.org/qschema/crossref_query_input2.0.xsd\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;head\u0026gt; \u0026lt;email_address\u0026gt;EMAIL\u0026lt;/email_address\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi_batch_id\u0026gt;my_batch_label\u0026lt;/doi_batch_id\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/head\u0026gt; \u0026lt;body\u0026gt; \u0026lt;fl_query alert=\u0026#34;false\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi\u0026gt;10.1021/acs.joc.7b01326\u0026lt;/doi\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/fl_query\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/body\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/query_batch\u0026gt; In this request fl_query_alert allows the requester to receive email or endpoint notification alerts for subsequent references to the work.\nOutput format The XML API returns metadata in UNIXSD or UNIXREF format. The format can be specified in the request. The output for the forward links endpoint is the query output schema.\nNote that in the forward links output, the field fl_count refers to the number of times the referencing item has itself been referenced.\nCharacter encoding Some characters must be URL-encoded to ensure that requests work correctly:\nCharacter Name URL code ; Semi-colon %3B / Slash, virgule, separatrix, or solidus %2F ? Question mark %3F : Colon %3A @ At sign, arobase %40 = Equals sign %3D \u0026amp; Ampersand %26 lf line feed %0A Endpoints The base URL for the XML API is https://doi.crossref.org. The following endpoints are available:\nDOI lookup To find metadata for a single DOI, use the endpoint https://doi.crossref.org/search/doi. One of the pid and usr parameters is required, and one of doi and pubid must also be used.\nUp to 2025, some members could also add a pwd parameter combined with a unique username to specify a password and perform their DOI lookups. This is not required anymore and you only need to add pid or usr.\nMetadata Plus subscribers should use the following header with their API token:\nCrossref-Plus-API-Token: Bearer [FullTokenHere]\nParameter name Values and examples Description usr email@address.com Identify yourself so that we can contact you in case of any issues with your requests. pid email@address.com An alternative to the usr field. doi 10.1577/H02-043 DOI of a content item. pubid J173705 Record type and journal ID. See below*. format unixsd or unixref XML format for the response. See UNIXSD and unixref. The default is UNIXSD v2.0. Including unixref gives the response in v3.0. *pubid can be used to retrieve content items in a title, such as a journal or book. The value starts with a single letter defining the record type: J for journals, B for books or conference proceedings, S for series. This is followed by the publication ID of the title.\nQuery To find one or more matching DOIs based on some input metadata, use the endpoint https://doi.crossref.org/servlet/query. Note, however, that the REST API also provides a query parameter and is typically more straightforward to use.\nOne of pid and usr is required. See query schema for how to construct a query. Metadata Plus subscribers should use the following header with their API token:\nCrossref-Plus-API-Token: Bearer [FullTokenHere]\nAny special characters, such as accents or symbols, in values included in qdata should be HTML encoded to ensure the correct results. For example, replace á with \u0026amp;#x00E1;.\nParameter name Values and examples Description usr email@address.com Identify yourself so that we can contact you in case of any issues with your requests. pid email@address.com An alternative to the usr field. id 10.1577/H02-043 Optional. DOI of a content item. doi 10.1577/H02-043 Optional. Alternative to the id field. qdata See query schema Required. An XML query using the UNIXSD query format. The \u0026lt;query\u0026gt; field is repeatable and up to five queries can be made in one request. format unixsd, unixref, or info Output format for the response. See UNIXSD and UNIXREF. info includes selected crm-items from UNIXSD. The default is UNIXSD v2.0. Including unixsd gives the response in v3.0. Forward links The endpoint https://doi.crossref.org/servlet/getForwardLinks allows members to retrieve bibliographic information of content items that reference theirs. This information is called forward links. Member login credentials (email address, role, and password) are required to access this endpoint.\nParameter name Values and examples Description usr email@address.com/my_role Required. Email address and user role. pwd my_password Required. Password for the user account. doi 10.1577/H02-043, 10.1577 DOI or DOI prefix that you would like to retrieve results for. date YYYY-MM-DD Date for which to retrieve forward links. include_postedcontent true or false (default) Include references from posted content (e.g., preprints and theses). ",
"headings": ["Quick start","Output format","Character encoding","Endpoints","DOI lookup","Query","Forward links"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/retrieve-metadata/rest-api/tips-for-using-the-crossref-rest-api/",
"title": "Tips and tricks",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2025-10-24",
"lastmod_ts": 1761264000,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "We love to share our data and we want it to be used. Yes, really—and by as many people as possible. Here we share tips to help you get the most out of our REST API. Everyone benefits if you use our REST API responsibly and efficiently. Very occasionally we have had to block users who misuse our APIs, usually through carelessness rather than malice. If you follow the advice on this page you should have no problem.\n",
"content": "We love to share our data and we want it to be used. Yes, really—and by as many people as possible. Here we share tips to help you get the most out of our REST API. Everyone benefits if you use our REST API responsibly and efficiently. Very occasionally we have had to block users who misuse our APIs, usually through carelessness rather than malice. If you follow the advice on this page you should have no problem.\nNote that for conciseness, the examples on this page omit the API URL, which is https://api.crossref.org/v1, so for an example like /members/120 the full query is https://api.crossref.org/v1/members/120.\nOn this page Where do I start? Get the right endpoint Use filter and query parameters Be selective with fields, if you need to be How much metadata? Rows and cursors Large numbers of queries and very large results sets How to keep your local data synced with the REST API Code Libraries Where do I start? If you are just getting started with our API, we recommend heading to the API Learning Hub. There you can get to grips with APIs, what kind of metadata you can retrieve, and how to formulate queries. For a description of the endpoints and request parameters, see our Swagger documentation, where you can try out some queries.\nGet the right endpoint Most of our queries go through the /works endpoint. If you’re looking for research outputs such as journal articles, that’s probably where you want to start.\nBear in mind that we also have other endpoints, including /prefixes, /journals, and /members. You can, for example, get all works in a journal by using its ISSN, e.g.: /journals/0003-3804/works. The members endpoint contains summary metadata about organisations that have deposited metadata, including which metadata fields they deposit and the fraction of records with certain properties e.g.: /members/120.\nUse filter and query parameters Our API contains a range of parameters that can be used to pull out records that match certain criteria. For example, various kinds of date filters: /works?filter=from-pub-date:2024-01-01,until-pub-date:2025-12-31 will get all records with a publication date in 2024.\nThere are filters to detect the presence of certain properties, e.g., /works?filter=has-references:1,filter=has-orcid:1 will return only works with both references and authors where at least one has an ORCID ID.\nThere are also filters for specific values, e.g., /works?filter=type:journal-article,funder:10.13039/100000040 retrieves journal articles funded by the organisation with the specified funder ID.\nIf you are looking to analyse a large number of metadata records, such as all records from a single journal or publisher, it is almost always more efficient to query using a filter than for each DOI individually.\nBe selective with fields, if you need to be If you are only interested in 2 or 3 fields of the output from the works endpoint, you can use select to retrieve only that metadata. For example, /works?rows=10\u0026amp;select=DOI returns the DOI field. Don’t do this if you’re looking for more than 3 or 4 fields: the longer your list of fields gets, the more it slows down the query. Instead, retrieve the whole record and discard the information you don’t need. This can make your API calls much more efficient. For example:\nRetrieve 10 random DOIs in the Crossref corpus with only the DOI and record title: https://api.crossref.org/works?sample=10\u0026amp;select=DOI,title\nRetrieve all works for ISSN 1527-2095 with only these elements returned in the results: DOI, title, and page number (only the first 20 results are returned): https://api.crossref.org/journals/1527-2095/works?select=DOI,title,page\nHow much metadata? Rows and cursors You can make more efficient use of the API and get results more quickly by thinking in advance about how many results you need. The default number of rows returned is 20 and you can increase it up to 1000. If you have a query where you only need to know the total number of results, you can use rows=0. For requests with a query parameter, 2–5 rows might be enough (see more on that below), whereas to look at a few examples of records with a certain property, maybe 10 records is enough.\nEach endpoint has a limit on the number of items returned in a single request. Paginating through multiple pages of results is possible through the cursor parameter.\nTo retrieve multiple pages, add cursor=* to your first request (and a value for rows that is greater than 0). The response will include a next-cursor value. Use this in your next request to obtain the following page of results. Stop sending requests when the number of items in the response is less than the number of rows requested.\nCursors expire after 5 minutes if not used. Note that our REST API returns a cursor even on the last page. To stop your script at the correct point, check the number of results returned—you have reached the last page when it is less than the requested rows.\nExample: https://api.crossref.org/funders/501100009187/works?cursor=*\u0026amp;rows=600\u0026amp;select=DOI,title,container-title,is-referenced-by-count (Note: in this example, at the time of this writing, there are ~1025 results for this query, so you are requesting 600 rows; the first page of results will include 600 results, while the second will include ~425, thus you know that you have retrieved all results once you see the second page, since 425 \u0026lt; 600).\nLarge numbers of queries and very large results sets If you are planning to get hundreds of thousands or even millions of records from our API, read this section before you get started!\nFirst, determine whether you really need to use the REST API. We have an annual public data file that contains all of our data. If you are a Metadata Plus subscriber, you have access to a monthly snapshot. Using these and setting up a local database means that you can run more custom queries than with the API and get results more quickly.\nSecond, cache your results. Try to avoid making the same requests repeatedly. Our metadata does change over time, but the majority of records change infrequently, if at all.\nThird, if you do need to make a query with a very large result set, we recommend splitting it into a series of smaller queries. You can use cursors to page through results, but if you’re running to thousands of pages, the chance of a cursor failing and expiring at some point becomes much higher. For example, if you break down a request into days or weeks and one of them fails, it will be much easier to go back and pick up the missing data. Also pay attention to the http status code and back off if you start seeing 4XX statuses.\nHow to keep your local data synced with the REST API You might have a request that you want to make repeatedly and keep local results cached. You may even want to have a complete copy of the Crossref database and keep it up-to-date (in this case consider whether Metadata Plus might be a good option for you, since the monthly snapshots provided as part of the service would best enable this. Here are a few suggestions and tips for how to do that.\nChoose your date filter. There are three types of date filters that can help you pick up new and updated items.\nThe created date will return any new records (from-created-date, until-created-date).\nUsing updated date will give you both new records and those with any changes deposited by the member (from-update-date, until-update-date).\nThe indexed date retrieves all records updated or created by the stearding member, as well as those that were modified by Crossref or other third parties, for example to update the Cited-by count or add a relationship deposited by a different member (from-index-date, until-index-date).\nAs you can see, the third of these options gives you the most results, but it can return a very large number of records. Which option you choose will depend on how you want to use the metadata. For this use case, we don\u0026rsquo;t recommend using published date, as this can change over time and might be different from when the record was created, meaning that you are likely to miss results.\nHere are some other considerations.\nChoose your frequency. How often do you want to get new records? All of these filters offer the option to retrieve updates once per second, but you might decide that once an hour, once a day, or once a month is ok. Note that the timestamps are inclusive, so to get everything created between 12:00 and 13:00 on 1 January 2025, you can use: filter=from-created-date:2025-02-02T12,until-created-date:2025-01-12. Using 13 instead of 12 in the until-created-date filter will get you two hours of data, not one.\nUse cursors. If your time range is reasonably large or you aren’t using other additional filters, it is likely that you will reach more than the page limit of 1000 items. Use cursors in your request to make sure you get all of the results (see above).\nCache. To make sure you don’t keep retrieving the same unchanged records, make sure you save the responses locally. If you are looking for updates or newly indexed works, you will need to replace the old records in your cache with the newest version.\nCode Libraries There are a number of libraries that have been written for the Crossref REST API. These are neither maintained nor endorsed by Crossref (except where noted). Available libraries include:\ncrossrefapi (Go) pitaya (Julia) crossref-commons (Python, developed by Crossref) habanero (Python) crossrefapi (Python) rcrossref (R) serrano (Ruby) crossref-rs (rust) Crossref API Typescript client (Typescript) ",
"headings": ["On this page","Where do I start?","Get the right endpoint","Use filter and query parameters","Be selective with fields, if you need to be","How much metadata? Rows and cursors","Large numbers of queries and very large results sets","How to keep your local data synced with the REST API","Code Libraries"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/retrieve-metadata/bulk-downloads/",
"title": "Public data files and snapshots",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2025-10-20",
"lastmod_ts": 1760918400,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "Once a year we release files that include the metadata for all Crossref-registered DOIs. We typically release this as a tar file and distribute it via Academic Torrents, with the metadata in JSONL format. You can see details of the latest release on our blog.\nOn a monthly basis, we release snapshots that are available to Metadata Plus subscribers. The monthly snapshots are available in both JSON and XML format and accessed via an API token. New snapshots are created each month, available by the 5th day, and includes all records up to and including the end of the previous month. Snapshots remain available until the end of the following quarter, after which they are removed (for example the October snapshot remains available until the end of the following March).\n",
"content": "Once a year we release files that include the metadata for all Crossref-registered DOIs. We typically release this as a tar file and distribute it via Academic Torrents, with the metadata in JSONL format. You can see details of the latest release on our blog.\nOn a monthly basis, we release snapshots that are available to Metadata Plus subscribers. The monthly snapshots are available in both JSON and XML format and accessed via an API token. New snapshots are created each month, available by the 5th day, and includes all records up to and including the end of the previous month. Snapshots remain available until the end of the following quarter, after which they are removed (for example the October snapshot remains available until the end of the following March).\nThe snapshots are very large (\u0026gt;200GB) so may take a long time to download on slow connections. This document provides you with information about how to access them and tips for handling them.\nFor applications that only require a small amount of the data, you should use the REST API instead. For applications where you want to keep a copy of our metadata records current, use the REST API or OAI-PMH to query for new records at your preferred interval.\nAccessing the public data file Access via Academic Torrents The most recent public data file is accessible via Academic Torrents at https://doi.org/10.13003/nggf-vt1j.\nDownload from AWS Since 2023, the public data file has also been available via a \u0026ldquo;Requester Pays\u0026rdquo; option, primarily to provide access for organisations that don\u0026rsquo;t permit downloads via torrent services.\nA copy is stored on AWS S3 in a bucket configured with the \u0026ldquo;Requester Pays\u0026rdquo; option. This means that rather than the bucket owner (Crossref) paying for bandwidth and transfer costs when downloading objects, the requester pays instead. The cost is expected to vary slightly year to year depending on variables like file size and end-user setups. The 2025 file is approximately 200 GB, and plugging that into this calculator results in an estimated cost of $18 USD. More information about \u0026ldquo;Requester Pays\u0026rdquo; can be found in the AWS documentation.\nThe bucket is called api-snapshots-reqpays-crossref. You can use the AWS CLI or the AWS REST API to access it. There are code examples in the AWS documentation.\nUsing the AWS CLI for example, after authenticating run these commands:\n# List the objects in the bucket aws s3 ls --request-payer requester s3://api-snapshots-reqpays-crossref # Download the public data file aws s3api get-object --bucket api-snapshots-reqpays-crossref --request-payer requester --key March-2025-public-data-file-from-crossref.tar ./March-2025-public-data-file-from-crossref.tar Note that --request-payer requester is mandatory. Without that flag, the command will fail.\nAccessing monthly snapshots Snapshots are available to Metadata Plus via a /snapshots route in the REST API, which offers a compressed .tar file (tar.gz). These links always lead to the most recent snapshot:\nJSON output: https://api.crossref.org/snapshots/monthly/latest/all.json.tar.gz UNIXSD (XML) output: https://api.crossref.org/snapshots/monthly/latest/all.xml.tar.gz To see if the snapshot from a particular month is available, make an HTTP HEAD request using the following URL patterns:\nJSON output: https://api.crossref.org/snapshots/monthly/{YYYY/MM}/all.json.tar.gz XML output: https://api.crossref.org/snapshots/monthly/{YYYY/MM}/all.xml.tar.gz Include your API token in the request header using the format Crossref-Plus-API-Token: Bearer [API token].\nTips and tricks Don\u0026rsquo;t decompress the file, since you can work directly with the tar file. This saves space and in our tests performed quicker than decompressing to perform analysis.\nCheck what\u0026rsquo;s changed from month to month using the REST API. This can help you decide whether to download the next monthly snapshot or update from the REST API. The number of new or updated records deposited by members can be found using a request such as the following:\nhttps://api.crossref.org/v1/works?filter=from-update-date:2025-01-01,until-update-date:2025-01-31\u0026amp;rows=0\nThe number of records with any changes, including new relationships and changes in Cited-by counts, can be found using a request such as the following:\nhttps://api.crossref.org/v1/works?filter=from-index-date:2025-01-01,until-index-date:2025-01-31\u0026amp;rows=0\nYou can use these requests (with rows=1000 and a cursor) to retrieve all items with changes.\nKeep your snapshot updated by retrieving works using a created, update, or index date filter.\ncreated date filters retrieves only newly created metadata records; update filters retrieves items that are new or updated by a member; index finds any items created or modified by the member, Crossref, or other sources. See information about using filters on queries and learn about using cursors to scroll through large datasets. Note that this can be done on an hourly basis (or even per minute):\nhttps://api.crossref.org/v1/works?filter=from-index-date:2025-01-01T12,until-index-date:2025-01-31T12\u0026amp;rows=1000\u0026amp;cursor=*\nTypically the number of changes per month are low. Occasionally, a member updates a very large number of records, for example to add a new piece of metadata or to register historical content. Refreshing the snapshot several times a year and retrieving changes via the REST API in the iterim period should be sufficient to keep your local cache in sync.\nIf your download is interrupted, you can resume from the point it stopped instead of starting over. This is easiest to do using something like wget, but you can also do it with curl. For example:\n\u0026gt; export TOKEN=\u0026#39;\u0026lt;insert-your-token-here\u0026gt;\u0026#39; \u0026gt; curl -o \u0026#34;all.json.tar.gz\u0026#34; --progress-bar -L -X GET https://api.crossref.org/snapshots/monthly/latest/all.json.tar.gz -H \u0026#34;Crossref-Plus-API-Token: ${TOKEN}\u0026#34; Wait a few minutes, then execute ctrl-c to interrupt the download. To resume, include the switch -C -:\ncurl -o \u0026#34;all.json.tar.gz\u0026#34; --progress-bar -L -X GET https://api.crossref.org/snapshots/monthly/latest/all.json.tar.gz -H \u0026#34;Crossref-Plus-API-Token: ${TOKEN}\u0026#34; -C - The curl command will calculate the byte offset from where it left off and continue the download from there.\nSupplementary tools and alternative formats We have developed several tools to support handling the snapshots and public data file. These are not currently maintained but may make it easier to handle the data.\nThe Crossref Data Dump Repacker is a Python application that allows you to repack the Crossref data dump into JSON Lines format.\ndoi2sqlite is a tool for loading Crossref metadata into a SQLite database.\nAnd for finding the record of a particular DOI, we\u0026rsquo;ve published a Python API for interacting with the annual public data files. This tool can create an index of the DOIs in the file, enabling easier record lookups without having to iterate over the entire file, which can take hours. A torrent is available for the 2024 index in SQLite format if you do not wish to generate it yourself.\n",
"headings": ["Accessing the public data file","Access via Academic Torrents","Download from AWS ","Accessing monthly snapshots","Tips and tricks","Supplementary tools and alternative formats "]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/retrieve-metadata/data-citations/",
"title": "Data citations",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2025-01-22",
"lastmod_ts": 1737504000,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": " This endpoint has been released in beta format. We invite the community to use it and provide feedback. Note that the contents and output formats may change and users may experience downtime and slow response times. Data citation is a key component of open science, and is important for transparency and reproducibility of research. Being able to locate the data used or generated by a piece of research helps others to verify and build on it. Everyone benefits when research data is transparent and visible.\n",
"content": " This endpoint has been released in beta format. We invite the community to use it and provide feedback. Note that the contents and output formats may change and users may experience downtime and slow response times. Data citation is a key component of open science, and is important for transparency and reproducibility of research. Being able to locate the data used or generated by a piece of research helps others to verify and build on it. Everyone benefits when research data is transparent and visible.\nThe data citation endpoint returns connections between content items deposited by Crossref members and known datasets. The metadata is sourced from references and relationships deposited by Crossref members, and linked to datasets with either a Crossref or DataCite DOI. Note that no matching is carried out, so the metadata must include a dataset DOI.\nOn this page:\nQuick start Details See the API documentation to try out the API and for further details, including endpoints, request parameters, and response fields.\nQuick start Data citations added to the API in a time range:\nhttps://api.crossref.org/beta/datacitations/?from-created-date=2026-01-20T00:00:00\u0026amp;until-created-date=2026-01-21T12:00:00 Data citations from a specific member:\nhttps://api.crossref.org/beta/datacitations/?member-id=78 Citations to a specific dataset:\nhttps://api.crossref.org/beta/datacitations/?object-id=10.1037/e495862006-009 Details Data sources: The API scans all items in the reference and relation fields of recently updated works. New data citations are added to the API for any that include a DataCite DOI where resourceTypeGeneral is Dataset, or a Crossref DOIs where the type is dataset. Due to technical constraints, in the beta version there is a delay of 5 days between metadata being deposited by members and appearing in the data citation API.\nOutput format: The output format is similar to its forerunner Event Data, although some field names have been changed for clarity. See the Swagger documentation for definitions of output fields.\nAuthentication and access: No authentication is required to access the service. While the service is in beta, we request that you include a mailto parameter so that we can contact you in case there are any issues with your requests, or if we plan to make substantial changes to the service.\nUsage limits: Users may make up to 3 requests concurrently, at a rate of 3 requests per second. Rate limits are included in the response headers. An HTTP response code of 429 indicates that you have been rate limited. Check the HTTP response codes for requests, and back off or make changes if you see a high rate of unsuccessful requests.\n",
"headings": ["Quick start","Details"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/retrieve-metadata/oai-pmh/",
"title": "OAI-PMH",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2020-04-08",
"lastmod_ts": 1586304000,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "OAI-PMH is a widely-used standard for querying metadata, frequently used by libraries and repositories. We operate an OAI-PMH service for the distribution of metadata in XML format using the OAI-PMH version 2 repository framework.\nOn this page:\nQuick start Details Understanding sets and verbs Endpoints OAI-PMH DepositHarvester Quick start See below for a description of the request parameters, including and explanation of sets an verbs. Please read that section if you are not familiar with OAI-PMH interfaces.\n",
"content": "OAI-PMH is a widely-used standard for querying metadata, frequently used by libraries and repositories. We operate an OAI-PMH service for the distribution of metadata in XML format using the OAI-PMH version 2 repository framework.\nOn this page:\nQuick start Details Understanding sets and verbs Endpoints OAI-PMH DepositHarvester Quick start See below for a description of the request parameters, including and explanation of sets an verbs. Please read that section if you are not familiar with OAI-PMH interfaces.\nPublic requests:\nTo get all sets: https://oai.crossref.org/oai?verb=ListSets To get get records deposited by a journal on a single day: https://oai.crossref.org/oai?verb=ListIdentifiers\u0026amp;from=2025-03-07\u0026amp;until=2025-03-07\u0026amp;set=J:10.1371:60407 For Members:\nTo get records registered for a title on a single day: https://oai.crossref.org/DepositHarvester?verb=ListRecords\u0026amp;from=2020-01-01\u0026amp;until=2025-03-01\u0026amp;set=J:10.5555:161845\u0026amp;usr=email@address.com/role\u0026amp;pwd=password To get citation matches for a given day: https://oai.crossref.org/oai?verb=ListRecords\u0026amp;usr=email@address.com/role\u0026amp;pwd=password\u0026amp;set=J:10.5555:161845\u0026amp;from=2025-03-01\u0026amp;until=2025-03-01\u0026amp;metadataPrefix=cr_citedby\u0026amp;include_postedcontent=false For Metadata Plus subscribers:\nUse the following header and your API token: Crossref-Plus-API-Token: Bearer [FullTokenHere] in all requests.\nTo get a single metadata record: https://oai.crossref.org/oai?verb=GetRecord\u0026amp;identifier=info:doi/10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0021395 To get metadata for one journal on a given day: https://oai.crossref.org/oai?verb=ListRecords\u0026amp;from=2025-03-07\u0026amp;until=2025-03-07\u0026amp;set=J:10.1371:60407 Details Authentication Members can access the DepositHarvester endpoint by including their username and role in the usr field and their password in the password field.\nMetadata Plus subscribers can use the verbs GetRecord and ListRecords on the oai endpoint by including the following header with their requests:\nCrossref-Plus-API-Token: Bearer [API token]\nWe allow 3 concurrent initial OAI-PMH requests per user. There is no concurrency limit for follow-on requests (requests made with a resumption token).\nData sources The OAI API does not include all records, only those that appear in a journal, book, or series. For example, posted content (including preprints) are not included. To access all metadata, we recommend using the REST API.\nOutput format Responses are in an XML format. The available formats can be retrieved by making the following requests:\nhttps://oai.crossref.org/oai?verb=ListMetadataFormats\nhttps://oai.crossref.org/DepositHarvester?verb=ListMetadataFormats\nThe supported formats are:\ncr_unixml : https://doi.crossref.org/schema/unixref1.1.xsd cr_unixsd: https://doi.crossref.org/schema/crossref_output3.0.1.xsd cr_citedby: https://doi.crossref.org/schemas/crossref_citations_1.0.0.xsd, used by members for retrieving forward links Understanding sets and verbs Two understand how to make requests, there are two important concepts: sets and verbs. We explain these before giving the request parameters below.\nSets Requests depend on the concept of a ‘set’, which is a journal, book, conference series, or other item that contains content items and has a publication ID. Each set has a type: J for journals, B for books, conference proceedings, dissertations, reports, and datasets, and S for series.\nThe format for the set field is: [set type]:[doi_prefix]:[pub id] where\nSet type:, J, B, or S. doi_prefix is the prefix of the DOI, e.g. 10.64000. pub id is the [publication ID] of a set. For example, J:10.1002:4 returns content in the journal Applied Organometallic Chemistry. The DOI prefix and publication ID are optional and can be omitted. If only the set is given, content in sets of the given type will be returned. If a set and a prefix are given, content matching the set and in the given prefix will be returned.\nYou can retrieve publication IDs from the title list. Click the ID logo next to the title in search results to see the ID.The UNIXSD output format also includes the journal-id (J) or book-id (B).\nVerbs The content of the response is defined by the verb parameter. Here is a summary of what each verb provides:\nVerb Accessible by Response ListSets All users List all sets included in the API. ListIdentifiers All users A list of DOIs satisfying the request criteria. ListMetadataFormats All users A list of all metadata formats the API delivers. GetRecord Members (for their own content) and Metadata Plus subscribers (for all content) A single metadata record. ListRecords Members (for their own content) and Metadata Plus subscribers (for all content) A list of metadata records satisfying the request criteria. Identify All users Provides details about the endpoint. Members can access information about their recent deposits using GetRecord and ListRecords with the DepositHarvester endpoint.\nEndpoints The base URL for requests is https://oai.crossref.org and there are two endpoints:\noai for general requests and retrieving metadata. DepositHarveter for members to retrieve their deposited metadata. OAI The endpoint is located at https://oai.crossref.org/oai. The following parameters can be used with all verbs:\nParameter name Possible values (red) and examples (black) Description usr example@email.com/my_role Crossref member email address and role. Required for metadataPrefix=cr_citedby. pwd my_password Crossref member password. Required for metadataPrefix=cr_citedby. metadataPrefix cr_unixsd, cr_unixsd, cr_citedby The output format. cr_citedby returns forward links (for members only). verb ListSets, ListIdentifiers, ListMetadataFormats for metadata Plus subscribers: GetRecord, ListRecords, Identify The type of request being made. Additional parameters with the ListSets verb:\nParameter name Description resumptionToken For large responses, use the resumptionToken in the previous response to retrieve the next page of responses. Note that the total number of items is also in the resumptionToken field of the response. Additional parameters with the ListIdentifiers and ListRecords verbs:\nParameter name Possible values (red) and examples (black) Description metadataPrefix cr_unixsd, cr_unixsd, cr_citedby (members only) The output format. set S, B:10.64000, or J:10.1002:4. Set for the items. See above for an explanation. Used for ListIdentifiers and ListRecords identifier info:doi/10.1101%2Fgr.3760605 DOI for record to return (for verb=GetRecord only) from YYYY-MM-DD Returns records updated on or after this date. until YYYY-MM-DD Returns records updated on or before this date. resumptionToken For large responses, use the resumptionToken in the previous response to retrieve the next page of responses. Note that the total number of items is also in the resumptionToken field of the response. includePostedContent True, False (default) Only for members retrieving forward links. Includes forward links from posted content items, e.g. preprints. Additional parameters with the GetRecord verb:\nParameter name Possible values (red) and examples (black) Description identifier info:doi/10.1101%2Fgr.3760605 DOI for record to return (for verb=GetRecord only) DepositHarvester The endpoint is located at https://oai.crossref.org/DepositHarvester and is available to Crossref members only. It takes the same arguments for ListRecords and GetRecord as the oai endpoint.\nUsing metadataPrefix=cr_citedby retrieves forward links, however we recommend using other methods to retrieve forward links because the OAI-PMH API does not contain all content items and therefore does not include all references.\n",
"headings": ["Quick start","Details","Authentication","Data sources","Output format","Understanding sets and verbs","Sets","Verbs","Endpoints","OAI","DepositHarvester"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/retrieve-metadata/openurl/",
"title": "OpenURL",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2025-08-22",
"lastmod_ts": 1755820800,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "OpenURL is an API that can resolve a content item based on either its DOI or metadata. It can also return an XML metadata record. OpenURL is a NISO standard for resolving identifiers and delivering metadata, and is primarily used by library link resolver services to direct users to content, i.e. users reach the publisher landing page for the item they are looking for.\nQuick start I would like to\u0026hellip; Example request Resolve a DOI https://doi.crossref.org/openurl?pid=email@address.com\u0026amp;id=doi:10.1103/PhysRev.47.777 Resolve a DOI using its metadata: https://doi.crossref.org/openurl?pid=email@address.com\u0026amp;title=Atoms\u0026amp;volume=11\u0026amp;spage=98\u0026amp;aulast=Danner Retrieve the metadata record for a DOI https://doi.crossref.org/openurl?pid=email@address.com\u0026amp;id=doi:10.1103/PhysRev.47.777\u0026amp;format=unixsd Technical information Data sources: OpenURL covers all content items registered by Crossref members. That means that it can be used to resolve all Crossref DOIs.\n",
"content": "OpenURL is an API that can resolve a content item based on either its DOI or metadata. It can also return an XML metadata record. OpenURL is a NISO standard for resolving identifiers and delivering metadata, and is primarily used by library link resolver services to direct users to content, i.e. users reach the publisher landing page for the item they are looking for.\nQuick start I would like to\u0026hellip; Example request Resolve a DOI https://doi.crossref.org/openurl?pid=email@address.com\u0026amp;id=doi:10.1103/PhysRev.47.777 Resolve a DOI using its metadata: https://doi.crossref.org/openurl?pid=email@address.com\u0026amp;title=Atoms\u0026amp;volume=11\u0026amp;spage=98\u0026amp;aulast=Danner Retrieve the metadata record for a DOI https://doi.crossref.org/openurl?pid=email@address.com\u0026amp;id=doi:10.1103/PhysRev.47.777\u0026amp;format=unixsd Technical information Data sources: OpenURL covers all content items registered by Crossref members. That means that it can be used to resolve all Crossref DOIs.\nOutput format: OpenURL can either resolve directly to a landing page or retrieve a metadata record in XML format. Either UNIXSD XML or UNIXREF can be retrieved.\nAuthentication and access: No authentication is needed, however an email address is required in requests. This is provided using the pid field. For interfaces that require a key, your email address is your key. If you are using OpenURL with your library link resolver, the email address supplied in OpenURL requests should be configured in your link resolver.\nProviding an email address in your requests means that we can identify and contact you if your requests are causing issues. These email addresses will only stay in our logs for 90 days, and we do not share them with anyone else.\nRequest parameters All requests must include the pid field.\nIf id is not used the the following must be included:\neither issn or title, and either spage or aulast. The parameters redirect, noredirect, and format have similar function and only one of them should be used, although they are not required.\nParameter name Values permitted (red) or example (black) Description pid test@email.com Your email address, we may use this contact you in case of any issues with your requests. Note that in this context pid refers to a personal identifier, not a persistent identifier. redirect true (default), false Retreives the XML record instead of resolving the content\u0026rsquo;s URL. noredirect true, false (default) If false, retrieves the XML record instead of resolving the content\u0026rsquo;s URL. format unixsd or unixref If used, returns metadata in the unixsd XML format as opposed to resolving the DOI (the same as redirect=true). multihit true, false (default) If true, returns more than one content item if the request doesn\u0026rsquo;t find an exact match. issn 1425-8392 ISSN of the journal or serial where the work was published. title Journal of Sustainable Farming The title of the journal or proceedings the item was published. aulast Robertson Last name of the first author. volume 10 Volume in which the content was published. issue March Issue in which the content was published. spage 100 First page of the content. date YYYY, e.g. 1984 Year of publication. stitle J Sus Farming The title of the journal or proceedings the item was published. id DOI:10.1126/science.275.5304.1320 DOI of the content item prefixed with DOI:. NISO 0.1 or 1.0 URLs We also support NISO 0.1 and 1.0 URLs as well as some common deviations. In general it supports the San Antonio Profile #1, a description of which is given in the NISO standard.\nExamples:\nI would like to\u0026hellip; Example request Resolve a DOI https://doi.crossref.org/openurl?pid=email@address.com\u0026amp;url_ver=Z39.88-2004\u0026amp;rft_id=info:doi/10.1103/PhysRev.47.777 Retrieve metadata for a DOI https://doi.crossref.org/openurl?pid=email@address.com\u0026amp;url_ver=Z39.88-2004\u0026amp;rft_id=info:doi/10.1361/15477020418786\u0026amp;noredirect=true Resolve an article using its metadata https://doi.crossref.org/openurl?pid=email@address.com\u0026amp;url_ver=Z39.88-2004\u0026amp;rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal\u0026amp;rft.atitle=Isolation of a common receptor for coxsackie B\u0026amp;rft.jtitle=Science\u0026amp;rft.aulast=Bergelson\u0026amp;rft.auinit=J\u0026amp;rft.date=1997\u0026amp;rft.volume=275\u0026amp;rft.spage=1320\u0026amp;rft.epage=1323 ",
"headings": ["Quick start ","Technical information","Request parameters ","NISO 0.1 or 1.0 URLs "]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/retrieve-metadata/dois-openurl-and-link-resolvers/",
"title": "DOIs, OpenURL, and link resolvers",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2020-04-08",
"lastmod_ts": 1586304000,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "DOIs point to the authoritative version of content on the publisher\u0026rsquo;s web site and to publisher-designated resources. In an institutional context, it is often useful to direct users to other resources via their institution\u0026rsquo;s link resolver.\nCrossref acts as a source of metadata to enhance OpenURL-based local link resolvers and supports DOI redirection for localized linking within library holdings.\nHow DOIs and OpenURL work together DOIs and OpenURL work together in several ways. First, the DOI resolver itself\u0026mdash;where link resolution occurs\u0026mdash;is OpenURL-enabled. This means that it can recognize a user with access to a local resolver. When a user clicks on a DOI link, it is used as a key to pull the metadata needed to create the OpenURL targeting the local link resolver out of our metadata, and redirects that DOI back to the user\u0026rsquo;s local resolver. The institutional user is then directed to appropriate resources.\n",
"content": "DOIs point to the authoritative version of content on the publisher\u0026rsquo;s web site and to publisher-designated resources. In an institutional context, it is often useful to direct users to other resources via their institution\u0026rsquo;s link resolver.\nCrossref acts as a source of metadata to enhance OpenURL-based local link resolvers and supports DOI redirection for localized linking within library holdings.\nHow DOIs and OpenURL work together DOIs and OpenURL work together in several ways. First, the DOI resolver itself\u0026mdash;where link resolution occurs\u0026mdash;is OpenURL-enabled. This means that it can recognize a user with access to a local resolver. When a user clicks on a DOI link, it is used as a key to pull the metadata needed to create the OpenURL targeting the local link resolver out of our metadata, and redirects that DOI back to the user\u0026rsquo;s local resolver. The institutional user is then directed to appropriate resources.\nIt works this way:\nA library user clicks a DOI link within a link resolver-enabled resource. A cookie on the user’s machine alerts the DOI proxy server to redirect this DOI to the local linking server. The local linking server receives the metadata needed for local resolution, either from the source of the link or from Crossref via OpenURL. ",
"headings": ["How DOIs and OpenURL work together "]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/retrieve-metadata/retraction-watch/",
"title": "Retraction Watch",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2025-01-19",
"lastmod_ts": 1737244800,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "Research can be modified after publication, including being corrected or retracted. This is a natural part of the research process and important for accurately reporting changes. While members can deliver this information to us, Retraction Watch has also collected a large number of retractions. Many of these have not been reported by our members.\nIn September 2023, we acquired the Retraction Watch database from the Center of Scientific Integrity and have made it publicly available. The database contains retractions gathered from publisher websites and is updated every working day by Retraction Watch. Some other update types, such as expressions of concern and corrections, are also included in the data, but these are not as comprehensive as retractions. Various methods are used to find retractions, including searching scholarly databases, checking publisher websites, web searches, and reports from the community. For further details, see this document.\n",
"content": "Research can be modified after publication, including being corrected or retracted. This is a natural part of the research process and important for accurately reporting changes. While members can deliver this information to us, Retraction Watch has also collected a large number of retractions. Many of these have not been reported by our members.\nIn September 2023, we acquired the Retraction Watch database from the Center of Scientific Integrity and have made it publicly available. The database contains retractions gathered from publisher websites and is updated every working day by Retraction Watch. Some other update types, such as expressions of concern and corrections, are also included in the data, but these are not as comprehensive as retractions. Various methods are used to find retractions, including searching scholarly databases, checking publisher websites, web searches, and reports from the community. For further details, see this document.\nAccessing the Retraction Watch Database There are two ways to access the Retraction Watch data, either via the Crossref REST API or downloading the full dataset.\nREST API Retractions are included in the update-to field of json files in the REST API. Retractions and other updates from Retraction Watch are identified by a source field, which can have a value of publisher or retraction-watch. The following query provides a list of 100 retractions:\nhttps://api.crossref.org/v1/works?filter=update-type:retraction\nCSV dataset The Retraction Watch database is available in csv format from a git repository. It is updated once per working day. Git is a widely used for sharing software code and can also be used for datasets.\nTo create a local copy of the Retraction Watch metadata file, install git and use the command git clone https://gitlab.com/crossref/retraction-watch-data. This creates a folder called retraction-watch-data. When you want to update to the most recent version, run the command git pull from this folder.\nData in the csv file is comma-separated, with lists within a single entry separated by a semicolon (such as author names or reasons for retraction). The column headings in the csv file are:\nRecord ID: An internal identifier from Retraction Watch. Title: The title of the retracted or updated content. Subject: The subject area of the publication. Institution: Author affiliations, as given in the content. Journal: The source (serial, book, etc.) in which the research was published. Publisher: The organisation responsible for publication. Country: Countries included in author affiliations. Author: A list of author names. URLS: Links to relevant pages on the Retraction Watch website, including blog posts about the retraction. ArticleType: The content type, using a list of types maintained by Retraction Watch. Note that this isn’t the same as the Crossref work type. RetractionDate: The date of the published retraction. RetractionDOI: The DOI of the published retraction, if available. If there is no DOI, the value is either blank, \u0026lsquo;unavailable\u0026rsquo;, or \u0026lsquo;Unavailable\u0026rsquo;. RetractionPubMedID: PubMED ID of the published retraction, if available. If there is no Pubmed ID, the value is either blank or 0. OriginalPaperDate: The publication date of the retracted content. OriginalPaperDOI: The DOI of the retracted publication, if available. If there is no DOI, the value is either blank, \u0026lsquo;unavailable\u0026rsquo;, or \u0026lsquo;Unavailable\u0026rsquo;. OriginalPaperPubMedID: PubMED ID of the original publication, if available. If there is no Pubmed ID, the value is either blank or 0. RetractionNature: The type of update notice, which can be Retraction, Correction, Expression of concern, or Reinstatement. Note that these are different to the list of update types in the Crossref schema. Reason: A list of reasons for retraction. This uses a controlled vocabulary maintained by Retraction Watch. Paywalled: Is a fee or paid subscription required to access the retraction notice? Note that there can be cases where this changes some time after publication of the notice. Notes: Additional comments about the retraction. These fields are also documented on the Retraction Watch website. Changes to the field names and vocabulary used are recorded by Retraction Watch.\n",
"headings": ["Accessing the Retraction Watch Database","REST API","CSV dataset"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/retrieve-metadata/simple-text-query/",
"title": "Simple Text Query",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2020-10-06",
"lastmod_ts": 1601942400,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "The Simple Text Query form allows you to retrieve DOI names for journal articles, books, and chapters by cutting and pasting a reference or reference list into the query box. References are entered as a standard bibliographic entry, such as:\nClow GD, McKay CP, Simmons Jr. GM, and Wharton RA, Jr. 1988. Climatological observations and predicted sublimation rates at Lake Hoare, Antarctica. Journal of Climate 1:715-728. For best results, each reference should appear on a single line. When submitting multiple references, you can enter them in alphabetical order, or as a numbered list. Separate each reference using a blank line.\n",
"content": "The Simple Text Query form allows you to retrieve DOI names for journal articles, books, and chapters by cutting and pasting a reference or reference list into the query box. References are entered as a standard bibliographic entry, such as:\nClow GD, McKay CP, Simmons Jr. GM, and Wharton RA, Jr. 1988. Climatological observations and predicted sublimation rates at Lake Hoare, Antarctica. Journal of Climate 1:715-728. For best results, each reference should appear on a single line. When submitting multiple references, you can enter them in alphabetical order, or as a numbered list. Separate each reference using a blank line.\nUsing Simple Text Query to match references with DOIs If you are a member and want to match and deposit references, please see using Simple Text Query to add references. If you just want to match references to DOIs, follow these instructions.\nGo to the Simple Text Query form and enter a reference or list of references into the search box. Optional: select List all possible DOIs per reference to return multiple results select Include PubMed IDs in results to include PubMed IDs Click Submit The system attempts to find exactly one DOI for each reference. For some citations, multiple DOIs may be deposited for an item, or the metadata in either the reference or record registered with us is not sufficient to make a single match. Selecting List All Possible DOIs will return multiple results which will need to be evaluated to select the appropriate DOI.\nWe want our members to match and register as many references as possible, so there are no limits on the use of this service. We provide space for 1,000 references per submission.\n",
"headings": ["Using Simple Text Query to match references with DOIs "]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/retrieve-metadata/content-negotiation/",
"title": "Content negotiation",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2025-03-17",
"lastmod_ts": 1742169600,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "Through content negotiation you can request a single metadata record in a specified format. It is a service offered by several DOI registrations agencies (currently Crossref, DataCite, and mEDRA) through the DOI Foundation. It means that you don’t need to know where a DOI is registered in order to retrieve its associated metadata.\nHow to use content negotiation Content negotiation is an API request where the format of the metadata returned is specified in the Accept header, for example (using cURL in a terminal):\n",
"content": "Through content negotiation you can request a single metadata record in a specified format. It is a service offered by several DOI registrations agencies (currently Crossref, DataCite, and mEDRA) through the DOI Foundation. It means that you don’t need to know where a DOI is registered in order to retrieve its associated metadata.\nHow to use content negotiation Content negotiation is an API request where the format of the metadata returned is specified in the Accept header, for example (using cURL in a terminal):\ncurl -LH \u0026quot;Accept: application/rdf+xml\u0026quot; \u0026quot;https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1157784\u0026quot;\nAt Crossref, the following formats are available:\nFormat Accept header value Resource Description Framework (RDF) application/rdf+xml Terse RDF Triple Language (Turtle) text/turtle Citation style language (CSL) application/vnd.citationstyles.csl+json Formatted citation text/x-bibliography Research Information Systems (RIS) application/x-research-info-systems BibTeX citation application/x-bibtex Crossref Deposit XML (UNIXREF) application/vnd.crossref.unixref+xml Crossref Output XML (UNIXSD) application/vnd.crossref.unixsd+xml The formatted citation format uses two additional headers to define the citation style and locale. Here is an example query: curl -LH \u0026quot;Accept: text/x-bibliography; style=bibtex; locale=en-US\u0026quot; \u0026quot;https://doi.org/10.1126/science.169.3946.635\u0026quot;\nWe use formatting styles from the CSL repository and are currently using this version. We maintain an artifact in the API with the list of available citation styles.\nHow does it work? The DOI foundation runs an API that accepts content negotiation requests. It determines which registration agency holds the metadata and redirects the request (which is why -L is included in the examples above, to ensure that redirects are followed).\nAt Crossref, requests are handled by the transform route of the REST API, so\ncurl -LH \u0026quot;Accept: application/rdf+xml\u0026quot; \u0026quot;https://api.crossref.org/v1/works/10.1126/science.1157784/transform\u0026quot;\nand\ncurl -LH \u0026quot;Accept: application/rdf+xml\u0026quot; \u0026quot;https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1157784\u0026quot;\ngive the same result. Using 10.23719/1531731, however, will not return a result in the first case because the DOI is registered with DataCite and not Crossref.\nAdvantages and limitations Content negotiation is useful if you want to retrieve metadata in a commonly used format, such as BibTeX or RIS. It is also convenient for compiling references in a bibliography in accordance with a publisher style. The other big advantage of content negotiation is that it can retrieve metadata from several DOI registration agencies.\nNote that content negotiation maps from multiple schema to multiple schema, which may use different field names and vocabularies and the mapping is not always direct. Sometimes several types are matched to a single field, or differ between registration agencies. For example, the Crossref types book, edited-book, and monograph map to the single RIS type book.\nOnly one record at a time is returned by content negotiation. For filtering and queries that return multiple metadata records, use the REST API.\nThere are some known bugs with content negotiation, they are listed on Jira.\n",
"headings": ["How to use content negotiation","How does it work?","Advantages and limitations"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/retrieve-metadata/retrieving-identifiers-for-deposited-references/",
"title": "Matched references",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2020-04-08",
"lastmod_ts": 1586304000,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "Members can find matched references to a work using the getresolvedrefs endpoint.\nReferences that do not match at the time of deposit will be remembered internally and periodically re-run. These subsequent attempts to match references contribute to Cited-by data. The member who deposited the article containing these references can use getResolvedRefs to retrieve an updated list of the article’s matched references.\nOn this page:\nQuick start Details Request parameters Quick start Get recently added references for a single DOI:\n",
"content": "Members can find matched references to a work using the getresolvedrefs endpoint.\nReferences that do not match at the time of deposit will be remembered internally and periodically re-run. These subsequent attempts to match references contribute to Cited-by data. The member who deposited the article containing these references can use getResolvedRefs to retrieve an updated list of the article’s matched references.\nOn this page:\nQuick start Details Request parameters Quick start Get recently added references for a single DOI:\nhttps://doi.crossref.org/getResolvedRefs?doi=10.1103/PhysRevE.91.062714\u0026amp;usr=email@address.com/role\u0026amp;pwd=password\nExample output:\n{ doi: \u0026#34;10.1103/PhysRevE.91.062714\u0026#34;, matched-references: [ { key: \u0026#34;PhysRevE.91.062714Cc1R1\u0026#34;, doi: \u0026#34;10.1038/nature01609\u0026#34;, type: \u0026#34;journal_article\u0026#34; }, { key: \u0026#34;PhysRevE.91.062714Cc2R1\u0026#34;, doi: \u0026#34;10.1016/S0301-4622(02)00177-1\u0026#34;, type: \u0026#34;journal_article\u0026#34; }, { key: \u0026#34;PhysRevE.91.062714Cc3R1\u0026#34;, doi: \u0026#34;10.1073/pnas.1214051110\u0026#34;, type: \u0026#34;journal_article\u0026#34; }, { key: \u0026#34;PhysRevE.91.062714Cc4R1\u0026#34;, doi: \u0026#34;10.1529/biophysj.106.093062\u0026#34;, type: \u0026#34;journal_article\u0026#34; } ] } The key field corresponds to the key in the reference section of the original deposit.\nDetails Only members have access to getResolvedRefs and can only retrieve resolved references for their own prefixes. Authentication is via the usr and pwd request parameters.\ngetResolvedRefs returns the output of the Crossref reference matching. It doesn’t include references where the DOI was supplied in a member deposit. The output is in JSON format and contains a list of matched references. Each reference has:\nkey: the reference key from the original deposit. doi: the DOI of the matched reference. type: the content type of the matched reference. Request parameters All parameters are required.\nParameter name Example value Description usr test@email.com/abcd Use your email address and Crossref role. pwd my_password Your password. doi 10.1103/PhysRevE.91.062714 DOI for which you want to retrieve matched reference DOIs. ",
"headings": ["Quick start","Details","Request parameters"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/retrieve-metadata/text-and-data-mining/",
"title": "Accessing full texts",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2025-10-17",
"lastmod_ts": 1760659200,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "For some purposes, such as text and data mining (TDM), you may want to access the full text of a content item. We only collect metadata, but this metadata often contains a URL to access full-text content along with the intended purpose for the URL and the license under which content can be used. Note that full-text URLs may differ from the landing page for the DOI, which often contains only basic information and an abstract.\n",
"content": "For some purposes, such as text and data mining (TDM), you may want to access the full text of a content item. We only collect metadata, but this metadata often contains a URL to access full-text content along with the intended purpose for the URL and the license under which content can be used. Note that full-text URLs may differ from the landing page for the DOI, which often contains only basic information and an abstract.\nExamples JSON format\nGet a single record from the REST API:\nhttps://api.crossref.org/v1/works/10.1007/978-3-031-23161-2_300726 Get a list of records, requesting the DOI and any available links:\nhttps://api.crossref.org/v1/works?rows=5\u0026amp;select=DOI,link These results are in JSON format and contain a link field that includes the full-text URL information about the accessible version and what it may be used for, e.g.\n\u0026#34;link\u0026#34;: [ { \u0026#34;URL\u0026#34;: \u0026#34;https://api.elsevier.com/content/article/PII:B9780081026960000208?httpAccept=text/xml\u0026#34;, \u0026#34;content-type\u0026#34;: \u0026#34;text/xml\u0026#34;, \u0026#34;content-version\u0026#34;: \u0026#34;vor\u0026#34;, \u0026#34;intended-application\u0026#34;: \u0026#34;text-mining\u0026#34; }, { \u0026#34;URL\u0026#34;: \u0026#34;https://api.elsevier.com/content/article/PII:B9780081026960000208?httpAccept=text/plain\u0026#34;, \u0026#34;content-type\u0026#34;: \u0026#34;text/plain\u0026#34;, \u0026#34;content-version\u0026#34;: \u0026#34;vor\u0026#34;, \u0026#34;intended-application\u0026#34;: \u0026#34;text-mining\u0026#34; } XML format\nTo retrieve a single record from the XML API:\nhttps://doi.crossref.org/search/doi?pid=email@address.com\u0026amp;doi=10.1577/H02-043\u0026amp;format=unixsd There is a program field with the attribute name=\u0026quot;AccessIndicators\u0026quot; containing license information:\n\u0026lt;ai:license_ref applies_to=\u0026#34;tdm\u0026#34;\u0026gt; https://www.springernature.com/gp/researchers/text-and-data-mining \u0026lt;/ai:license_ref\u0026gt; \u0026lt;ai:license_ref applies_to=\u0026#34;vor\u0026#34;\u0026gt; https://www.springernature.com/gp/researchers/text-and-data-mining \u0026lt;/ai:license_ref\u0026gt; And a further section collection with a property attribute corresponding to the use. The value of this field is a link to the full text, e.g.:\n\u0026lt;item\u0026gt; \u0026lt;resource mime_type=\u0026#34;application/pdf\u0026#34;\u0026gt; https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/978-3-031-23161-2.pdf \u0026lt;/resource\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/item\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/collection\u0026gt; Access and rate limits Note that the presence of a URL in one of these fields does not guarantee access. You might need a subscription or a login to access the full text content, or you might need to accept a text and data mining license. Such requirements are at the discretion of the Crossref member and are not controlled by Crossref.\nRate limits may apply to websites on which the full text is hosted, and these do not correspond to rate limits on Crossref APIs and websites. We have defined a set of standard HTTPS headers that can be used by servers hosting full-text content to convey rate-limiting information to automated text and data mining tools:\nHeader name Explanation CR-TDM-Rate-Limit Maximum number of full-text downloads that are allowed to be performed in the defined rate limit window. CR-TDM-Rate-Limit-Remaining Number of downloads left for the current rate limit window. CR-TDM-Rate-Limit-Reset Remaining time (in UTC epoch seconds) before the rate limit resets and a new rate limit window is started. ",
"headings": ["Examples","Access and rate limits"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/principles-practices/best-practices/",
"title": "Metadata best practices",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2021-10-21",
"lastmod_ts": 1634774400,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "Best practices, like principles, are aspirational for our members, but we’ll do our best to help you meet them. Our systems, schema, and practices have evolved over time and, as with many organisations, we need to balance the decisions of the past with the needs of the future. When a best practice is not met, we try to assess that honestly with a goal of meeting the best practice in the future.\n",
"content": "Best practices, like principles, are aspirational for our members, but we’ll do our best to help you meet them. Our systems, schema, and practices have evolved over time and, as with many organisations, we need to balance the decisions of the past with the needs of the future. When a best practice is not met, we try to assess that honestly with a goal of meeting the best practice in the future.\nCrossref metadata requirements for content registration are minimal but meeting minimum requirements only means that you have succeeded in registering your content and DOIs. Most of the optional metadata we collect is recommended to improve discoverability and connect content persistently to the scholarly record. There are nuances and best practices for both different types of content and different types of metadata.\nBest practices are available for the following:\nBest practices for key metadata elements Abstracts Bibliographic metadata Titles Contributors Dates Page numbers and article IDs Funding License Multi-language and translated content References Relationships Versioning Best practices for key record types Books and chapters Conference proceedings and papers Datasets Dissertations Grants Peer review Pending publication Posted content Reports and working papers Standards ",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/principles-practices/best-practices/abstracts/",
"title": "Abstracts",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2022-05-31",
"lastmod_ts": 1653955200,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "You can include JATS-formatted abstracts with your metadata records. All abstracts registered with us will be included in the metadata distributed through our metadata outputs.\nDo:\nsupply abstracts for journal articles and beyond - most metadata models support abstracts supply multiple abstracts where applicable: if your content has multiple abstracts (different languages, or a simple and complex abstract) supply all of them as separate abstracts Use the language tag to identify the language used in each abstract Do not:\n",
"content": "You can include JATS-formatted abstracts with your metadata records. All abstracts registered with us will be included in the metadata distributed through our metadata outputs.\nDo:\nsupply abstracts for journal articles and beyond - most metadata models support abstracts supply multiple abstracts where applicable: if your content has multiple abstracts (different languages, or a simple and complex abstract) supply all of them as separate abstracts Use the language tag to identify the language used in each abstract Do not:\ninclude multiple abstracts in a single abstracts tag See our Abstracts Markup Guide for XML and metadata help.\n",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/principles-practices/books-and-chapters/",
"title": "Books and chapters",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2020-04-08",
"lastmod_ts": 1586304000,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "Our Books Advisory Group advises on books best practices; its goals are to:\nMaximize reference linking between books and other record types including journals and conference proceedings Ensure that we collect and distributes persistent identifiers and authoritative metadata for online books Ensure that book content is part of all our services Enhance the discovery, visibility, and usage of book content. On this page, learn more about:\nBest practices for depositing metadata, linking, and DOI use for books Best practices for updates and versions Best practices for citation matching for book title queries Best practices for citation matching for book chapters or reference entry queries Best practices for DOIs in citations Best practices for books on multiple platforms Review our Books Markup Guide for XML and metadata help.\n",
"content": "Our Books Advisory Group advises on books best practices; its goals are to:\nMaximize reference linking between books and other record types including journals and conference proceedings Ensure that we collect and distributes persistent identifiers and authoritative metadata for online books Ensure that book content is part of all our services Enhance the discovery, visibility, and usage of book content. On this page, learn more about:\nBest practices for depositing metadata, linking, and DOI use for books Best practices for updates and versions Best practices for citation matching for book title queries Best practices for citation matching for book chapters or reference entry queries Best practices for DOIs in citations Best practices for books on multiple platforms Review our Books Markup Guide for XML and metadata help.\nDepositing metadata, linking, and DOI use for books You should:\nRegister the content by depositing metadata at the time of online publication and assign DOIs at the title and chapter/entry level. Learn more about the benefits of registering book chapters. Add DOI links to references in books. Learn more about our DOI display guidelines. Deposit references from books and collect references from other members to your books via our Cited-by service. Instruct authors to cite specific chapters and entries using page numbers, chapter/entry titles and DOIs. Update your editorial guidelines - ask copyeditors to look for page numbers and chapter titles in book citations. Use our tools to check references as part of the production process so that references can be corrected and missing information added. Learn more about creating reference links. Updates and versions There are two types of updates:\nMajor content changes that may affect the interpretation of a work may mean a new edition with new ISBNs. Major version changes imply that the publisher will formally notify readers that content has changed (through errata, corrigenda, or new editions (which would also get a new ISBN) Minor content changes are unlikely to affect a reader’s interpretation of the work, and the publisher will not generally draw attention to the changes with a new version. Just as publishers decide when a new print edition or version is warranted, it is publishers’ responsibility to distinguish between major and minor versions in online content.\nSince a Crossref DOI is a citation identifier, a new DOI should only be issued if the new version will be cited differently. The same logic applies to differing formats, for example, the file types or containers used to present content: a distinct DOI should not be registered for different formats unless the format will be cited in a different way. This means, for example, that you should not assign one DOI to an EPUB version of a book and another DOI to the PDF version of a book if the format doesn’t affect how the book is cited. You may register a single DOI for all versions of a translated book. Distinct DOIs may also be registered for translated versions of content.\nThe recommended best practice is:\nAssign new DOIs to new major versions or editions of books, chapters and entries. This practice will preserve the scholarly citation record. Older versions should remain available online with links to the latest version. In use, a reader follows a link to the version cited and then has the option to follow a link to the current version. Do not assign new DOIs to minor new versions of books, chapters and entries. Where book content is hosted on multiple platforms (such as NetLibrary, ebrary) and publishers can enable enable linking from a single DOI to those platforms, they should use multiple resolution, which allows multiple URLs to be associated with one DOI. Learn more about multiple resolution. If multiple resolution doesn’t work for your circumstances, or content on your platform does not already have DOIs, please contact us to find a solution.\nCitation matching for book title queries To enable citation matching at the title level, the minimum query must include the following elements:\nbook title book author book copyright year To increase the accuracy of matching, members should also include as many of the following elements as possible in the query:\neditor (where appropriate) ISBN ISSN / DOI publisher Citation matching for book chapters or reference entry queries The metadata provided for a book title is used to identify book chapters during querying. This means that a book chapter query should include title metadata as well. The minimum query for a book chapter must include the following elements:\nbook title title and subtitle should be separated with a colon (:) book year chapter author first page To increase the accuracy of matching, publishers should also include as many of the following elements as possible in the query:\neditor (where appropriate) publisher chapter title Combining chapter title and chapter author returns the best matches.\nDOIs in citations Following a review in 2017 of common citation style guides and publishers’ instructions to authors, this is what we recommend for the use of DOIs in citations, of any style or format:\nInclude DOIs whenever they are available (use Metadata Search to find DOIs for registered content) Display DOIs as links and follow our DOI display guidelines In your in author guidelines, describe the use of DOIs in general, and for different record types (such as journals, conference proceedings) Books that have DOIs at the title and chapter levels should be cited accordingly Print materials (of any record type) may display DOIs but should not have their own print-only DOIs Providing information to us on update cycles (when possible), and contact information for keeping in touch with questions or future developments (such as new record types). You can register books and chapters using one of our helper tools: web deposit form, and by direct deposit of XML - learn more about markup examples for books and chapters.\n",
"headings": ["Depositing metadata, linking, and DOI use for books ","Updates and versions ","Citation matching for book title queries ","Citation matching for book chapters or reference entry queries ","DOIs in citations "]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/principles-practices/conference-proceedings/",
"title": "Conference proceedings and papers",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2021-11-10",
"lastmod_ts": 1636502400,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "Our conference proceedings model supports registration of conference series, proceedings, and papers.\nConference series You can register series-level metadata for proceedings that are part of an ongoing series with an ISSN. A DOI is not required for the series information, but is recommended.\nWhen registering a conference series DO:\ninclude the series name and ISSN in your metadata register each proceedings within the series as a separate volume include series-level contributors register a DOI for the conference series - this makes the series cite-able and easy to identify include a series number (if you have one) Conference proceedings When registering a single conference proceeding DO:\n",
"content": "Our conference proceedings model supports registration of conference series, proceedings, and papers.\nConference series You can register series-level metadata for proceedings that are part of an ongoing series with an ISSN. A DOI is not required for the series information, but is recommended.\nWhen registering a conference series DO:\ninclude the series name and ISSN in your metadata register each proceedings within the series as a separate volume include series-level contributors register a DOI for the conference series - this makes the series cite-able and easy to identify include a series number (if you have one) Conference proceedings When registering a single conference proceeding DO:\ninclude a conference title, publisher, and publication date in the proceedings metadata include a conference name in the event metadata include proceedings-level contributors like editors register a DOI for the conference volume include ISBN assigned to the proceedings include a conference acronym within the even metadata supply relevant event information like date, location, number, acronym, theme, and sponsor Do not:\ninclude more than one proceeding within a single conference element Conference papers When registering conference papers, DO:\ninclude a paper title include a publication date include all relevant funding, license, and relationship metadata include a language (using the language attribute on the conference_paper element) include all contributors include abstracts (recommended for all types of content, but particularly useful for conference papers) include references identify the publication type (full text or abstract) include article / elocation IDs Do not:\nregister separate records for abstract and full text Review our Conference Proceeding Markup Guide for XML and metadata help.\n",
"headings": ["Conference series","Conference proceedings","Conference papers"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/principles-practices/best-practices/bibliographic/",
"title": "Bibliographic metadata",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2022-05-31",
"lastmod_ts": 1653955200,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "The bibliographic (descriptive) metadata you send us is used to display citations, match DOIs to citations, and to enhance discovery services. It is essential that this metadata is clean, complete, and accurate.\nDo:\nprovide all contributors, titles, dates, and identifiers associated with the item you are registering make sure the contributors, titles, dates, and identifiers are accurate update and correct metadata as needed Do not:\nsupply titles, names, or other metadata in all caps, even if that is how you display and store them - it makes it difficult for others to use your metadata to format citations (and link to your content) omit article identifiers, page numbers, or author names - omissions will make your metadata less or undiscoverable force metadata into fields that aren’t a good match - it’s often better just to leave it out. For example, putting subject keywords into a title Titles Your metadata should include the title used for the content when it was first published. For most types of content alternate titles and subtitles can be provided as well (see each record type markup guide for details). You are also able in most cases to provide titles in multiple languages (see translated and multi-language materials).\n",
"content": "The bibliographic (descriptive) metadata you send us is used to display citations, match DOIs to citations, and to enhance discovery services. It is essential that this metadata is clean, complete, and accurate.\nDo:\nprovide all contributors, titles, dates, and identifiers associated with the item you are registering make sure the contributors, titles, dates, and identifiers are accurate update and correct metadata as needed Do not:\nsupply titles, names, or other metadata in all caps, even if that is how you display and store them - it makes it difficult for others to use your metadata to format citations (and link to your content) omit article identifiers, page numbers, or author names - omissions will make your metadata less or undiscoverable force metadata into fields that aren’t a good match - it’s often better just to leave it out. For example, putting subject keywords into a title Titles Your metadata should include the title used for the content when it was first published. For most types of content alternate titles and subtitles can be provided as well (see each record type markup guide for details). You are also able in most cases to provide titles in multiple languages (see translated and multi-language materials).\nDo:\nuse subtitles - subtitles are supported in a distinct subtitle element, and allow an item to be discoverable using the main title, subtitle, or both combined. supply alternate titles, abbreviated titles, and translated titles if you use them in citation recommendations. use face markup and/or MathML in titles when it impacts the meaning of the text. follow journal title best practise. Do not:\ninclude non-title metadata such as author, price, or volume numbers in a title field - this is a common error that significantly impacts discoverability and display. cram multiple titles in multiple languages in one element - see translated and multi-language materials for guidance. supply titles in ALL CAPS - our metadata is often used for display and citation formatting. Additional best practices may apply for the content you are registering, see specific record type guides for details.\nContributors Contributor metadata is expressed consistently across record types (excluding Grants), and includes contributor names, roles, identifiers, alternate names, and affiliation information. A contributor is a single person or a group of people/organisation that has contributed in some way to the content being registered.\nDo include:\ncorrect names, so authors and other contributors can be matched to citations a complete contributor list so that contributors can receive credit for their work, and to help make your content more discoverable Contributor role - only a single contributor role is currently allowed, include a supported role that best applies to the contributor\u0026rsquo;s primary role ORCID iDs, so that authors can be disambiguated and connected to the research they write and support Affiliations and ROR IDs so that contributor institutions can be identified and research outputs can be traced by institution Do not:\ninclude suffixes such as Jr, Sr, IV in the family name field - use the suffix element Guidance on constructing XML for contributors can be found in our Contributors Markup Guide.\nDates (publication and other) Do:\nsupply the entire date whenever possible - for most dates supplied within our metadata we allow you to supply just a year, with month and day being optional, but we encourage you to supply full dates whenever possible, particularly for online content. supply all relevant date types - for most items a publication date is required and other dates are optional but we encourage you to supply all dates that apply to the content you are registering. This includes acceptance dates for most content, and approval and posted dates for others. Include the correct date at both the parent and child level (journal issue / article, book title / chapter) Include both online and print publication dates (if applicable) Do not:\nsupply only the most recent publication date - this is inaccurate and may impact your registration fees, as back year rates are calculated based on the publication year provided in your registration metadata. Page numbers and article identifiers Correct page number and article identifier (aka e-location ID) metadata is essential for many discovery systems.\nDo:\nbe careful with your pages - be sure each page element contains only the page number itself, not a range. This means capture the first page in first_page, the last page in last_page, and any additional page information in other_pages. If your content has pages, first_page is essential. if you use article numbers /e-location IDs, supply them as described in the markup guide Do not:\ninclude an entire page range in first_page - this is incorrect, and will throw off many matching processes (in Crossref and beyond) and cause your metadata to be displayed incorrectly wherever it is used. include extraneous text in the page field - just the page please, no ‘page 1’ or ‘1st pg’ Guidance on constructing XML for article IDs and page ranges can be found in our Article ID Markup Guide.\n",
"headings": ["Titles","Contributors","Dates (publication and other)","Page numbers and article identifiers"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/principles-practices/datasets/",
"title": "Datasets",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2021-11-10",
"lastmod_ts": 1636502400,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "Dataset records capture information about one or more database records or collections.\nWhen registering datasets, DO:\nregister a DOI (or include a registered DOI) for a parent database - datasets must be registered as part of a collection include all relevant funding, license, and relationship metadata include all contributors include relevant dates (supported date types are creation, publication, and update dates) provide description, format, and citation metadata Review our Datasets Markup Guide for XML and metadata help.\n",
"content": "Dataset records capture information about one or more database records or collections.\nWhen registering datasets, DO:\nregister a DOI (or include a registered DOI) for a parent database - datasets must be registered as part of a collection include all relevant funding, license, and relationship metadata include all contributors include relevant dates (supported date types are creation, publication, and update dates) provide description, format, and citation metadata Review our Datasets Markup Guide for XML and metadata help.\n",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/principles-practices/dissertations/",
"title": "Dissertations",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2021-11-10",
"lastmod_ts": 1636502400,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "Dissertation records capture information about dissertations or theses.\nWhen registering dissertations, DO:\ninclude all relevant funding, license, and relationship metadata include contributors metadata, including ORCID iDs and affiliation metadata include an abstract 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 \u0026quot;dai\u0026quot;. If an institution has its own numbering system, it should be deposited in item_number, and the item_number_type should be set to \u0026quot;institution\u0026quot; Do not:\n",
"content": "Dissertation records capture information about dissertations or theses.\nWhen registering dissertations, DO:\ninclude all relevant funding, license, and relationship metadata include contributors metadata, including ORCID iDs and affiliation metadata include an abstract 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 \u0026quot;dai\u0026quot;. If an institution has its own numbering system, it should be deposited in item_number, and the item_number_type should be set to \u0026quot;institution\u0026quot; Do not:\nuse the dissertation model for versions of a dissertations published in a book or journal Review our Dissertation Markup Guide for XML and metadata help.\n",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/principles-practices/best-practices/funding/",
"title": "Funding metadata",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2025-12-15",
"lastmod_ts": 1765756800,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "Funding metadata may be supplied for most record models, and helps link funding to research.\nWhen registering funding metadata, DO:\ninclude the ROR ID of the funding organisation, or the name of the funding organisation and thefunder identifier from the Open Funder Registry if you have not yet migrated to using the ROR registry include an award number or grant DOI whenever possible include a funder name if a ROR or funder identifier is not available - we may be able to match the name supplied with an identifier and make the data available pay close attention to the structure of your metadata - correct nesting of funder names and identifiers is essential as it significantly impacts how funders, funder identifiers, and award numbers are related to each other Do not:\n",
"content": "Funding metadata may be supplied for most record models, and helps link funding to research.\nWhen registering funding metadata, DO:\ninclude the ROR ID of the funding organisation, or the name of the funding organisation and thefunder identifier from the Open Funder Registry if you have not yet migrated to using the ROR registry include an award number or grant DOI whenever possible include a funder name if a ROR or funder identifier is not available - we may be able to match the name supplied with an identifier and make the data available pay close attention to the structure of your metadata - correct nesting of funder names and identifiers is essential as it significantly impacts how funders, funder identifiers, and award numbers are related to each other Do not:\nInclude incomplete funder names or acronyms as a funder_name, particularly if you have not supplied an accompanying funder identifier. Some additional best practices for extracting data and working with vendors to supply funding data are available in this Best Practices for depositing funding data blog post, and review our Funding Markup Guide for XML and metadata help.\n",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/principles-practices/grants/",
"title": "Grants",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2021-11-10",
"lastmod_ts": 1636502400,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "Grants may be registered using our grants model.\nWhen registering a grant, DO:\ninclude required project information (a project title, a funder name and identifier, and a funding type) as well as your internal grant or award number include information describing grant-funded projects such as project description, language information, investigator details (including ORCID IDs and ROR IDs within affiliations) include award amounts and currency, and project start and end dates and/or an award date include multiple titles and descriptions as well as language information; include a funding scheme, and planned project start and end dates when relevant Review our Grants Markup Guide for XML and metadata help.\n",
"content": "Grants may be registered using our grants model.\nWhen registering a grant, DO:\ninclude required project information (a project title, a funder name and identifier, and a funding type) as well as your internal grant or award number include information describing grant-funded projects such as project description, language information, investigator details (including ORCID IDs and ROR IDs within affiliations) include award amounts and currency, and project start and end dates and/or an award date include multiple titles and descriptions as well as language information; include a funding scheme, and planned project start and end dates when relevant Review our Grants Markup Guide for XML and metadata help.\n",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/principles-practices/journals/",
"title": "Journals and articles",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2025-10-06",
"lastmod_ts": 1759708800,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "Our journals model supports registration of records for journal titles and articles, as well for individual volumes and issues of a journal. We recommend registering DOI records for journal articles, and optionally for journal titles, volumes, and issues.\nJournal titles\nDo:\nbe consistent - journal title records are created from the metadata submitted when you first register your journal and articles. You determine the exact title and ISSN included in the deposit, and we record that title and ISSN in a title record in our database. The title, ISSN, and title-level persistent identifier supplied in your content registration files must be consistent across submissions. include all registered ISSN for your journal - the ISSN is crucial for identifying a serial. If you are supplying us with data for older titles that predate ISSN assignment, you should request ISSNs from your ISSN agency as they can be assigned retroactively. This isn’t only for our convenience - libraries, database providers, and other organisations using your data will welcome (and often require) an ISSN for anything defined as a journal. supply distinct ISSN and / or title DOI for each distinct version of a title. If a title changes significantly the publisher should obtain new ISSNs (both print and online). This rule is established by the ISSN International Centre, not us, but we support and enforce it. Minor title changes (such as changing ‘and’ to ‘\u0026amp;’) don’t require a new ISSN. supply all commonly used title abbreviations within the repeatable abbrev element supply a journal language using the language attribute Do not:\n",
"content": "Our journals model supports registration of records for journal titles and articles, as well for individual volumes and issues of a journal. We recommend registering DOI records for journal articles, and optionally for journal titles, volumes, and issues.\nJournal titles\nDo:\nbe consistent - journal title records are created from the metadata submitted when you first register your journal and articles. You determine the exact title and ISSN included in the deposit, and we record that title and ISSN in a title record in our database. The title, ISSN, and title-level persistent identifier supplied in your content registration files must be consistent across submissions. include all registered ISSN for your journal - the ISSN is crucial for identifying a serial. If you are supplying us with data for older titles that predate ISSN assignment, you should request ISSNs from your ISSN agency as they can be assigned retroactively. This isn’t only for our convenience - libraries, database providers, and other organisations using your data will welcome (and often require) an ISSN for anything defined as a journal. supply distinct ISSN and / or title DOI for each distinct version of a title. If a title changes significantly the publisher should obtain new ISSNs (both print and online). This rule is established by the ISSN International Centre, not us, but we support and enforce it. Minor title changes (such as changing ‘and’ to ‘\u0026amp;’) don’t require a new ISSN. supply all commonly used title abbreviations within the repeatable abbrev element supply a journal language using the language attribute Do not:\nregister issues and articles published under a past title under the current title - this makes it hard to match DOIs to citations and accurately identify items published over time. ome publishers consolidate all versions of a title under the most recent title. This isn’t recommended practice as it causes a lot of linking and citing confusion – you’ve essentially created two (or more) versions of a title. This is particularly confusing when volume and issue numbers overlap between title iterations. Journal titles should reflect the journal title at the time of publication, and should not be updated if the journal title changes later on. vary your journal title without obtaining a new ISSN For recommendations on displaying information about journals, see the ISSN Manual, and NISO\u0026rsquo;s recommended practice on Presentation \u0026amp; Identification of E-Journals.\nJournal issue and volume metadata You can register DOIs for volumes and issues of journals if you want to make them citeable and linked persistently. If you do not opt to register DOIs for volumes and issues you should still provide clean and complete metadata as it is needed for the article records within each issue.\nDo:\nsupply accurate issue and volume numbers for special issues, include additional metadata to make the issue identifiable and citable - this includes: editors in the contributors section issue title (as title) any special issue numbering, including text (as special_numbering) Do not:\ninclude non-essential text in the volume or issue elements Journal articles\nYou should register all research articles published by your journal, as well as other cite-able content (book reviews, case studies, editorials).\nDo:\npay close attention to title best practice - journal article metadata is used for display and discoverability, so it is vital that article titles are accurate. include all contributors and (again) pay close attention to the metadata you are sending us. include affiliation info for each contributor include abstracts (recommended for all types of content, but particularly useful for journal articles) include all relevant funding, license, and relationship metadata include full text URLs to facilitate text and data mining include information on updates, corrections, withdrawals, and retractions via Crossmark include references include a language (using the language attribute on the journal_article element) Do not:\nregister records for items you do not intend to maintain long-term, such as advertisements supply titles in all caps - titles in article metadata are used for display and citation formatting, and if it supplied in all caps, it will appear in all caps wherever our metadata is used. Review our Journals and Articles Markup Guide for XML and metadata help.\n",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/principles-practices/best-practices/license/",
"title": "License metadata",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2022-06-01",
"lastmod_ts": 1654041600,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "Members registering licensing information in their metadata let researchers know when they can perform TDM and under what conditions. This license could be proprietary, or an open license such as Creative Commons.\nWhen supplying license metadata, DO:\nprovide URLs for proprietary or open licenses for your content supply dates that apply to your licenses (to support embargos, for example) and KEEP THEM UP TO DATE! make sure the URLs resolve to an active license review any metadata records you acquire from other members to make sure the license data supplied is accurate and up to date Do not:\n",
"content": "Members registering licensing information in their metadata let researchers know when they can perform TDM and under what conditions. This license could be proprietary, or an open license such as Creative Commons.\nWhen supplying license metadata, DO:\nprovide URLs for proprietary or open licenses for your content supply dates that apply to your licenses (to support embargos, for example) and KEEP THEM UP TO DATE! make sure the URLs resolve to an active license review any metadata records you acquire from other members to make sure the license data supplied is accurate and up to date Do not:\nsupply unverified license URLs - we make sure the URLs provided are URLs, but don\u0026rsquo;t verify that they resolve to an active license Review our License information Markup Guide for XML and metadata help.\n",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/principles-practices/best-practices/multi-language/",
"title": "Multi-language material and translations",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2023-01-18",
"lastmod_ts": 1674000000,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "Much of the content in Crossref is English language, but we encourage members to register content in the appropriate language for the content being registered. We support UTF-8 encoded character sets and in many cases you will be able to supply multiple versions of titles, abstracts, and other metadata.\nIf you consider your content to be multi-language and not a translation (meaning it will be cited as a single item) Do:\n",
"content": "Much of the content in Crossref is English language, but we encourage members to register content in the appropriate language for the content being registered. We support UTF-8 encoded character sets and in many cases you will be able to supply multiple versions of titles, abstracts, and other metadata.\nIf you consider your content to be multi-language and not a translation (meaning it will be cited as a single item) Do:\nregister one DOI for the item include titles, abstracts, and other metadata in multiple languages in your metadata record (support for this varies by record type) pay attention to order in your input XML - if the English title is provided as the primary title in your metadata, then the English title will be displayed in citations generated from our metadata If your content is translated -\nDo:\nregister separate DOIs for each translation connect each registered record with relationship metadata (hasTranslation) include language metadata wherever possible Do not:\ncram multiple titles in multiple languages in one element - this impacts discoverability and citation formatting Review our Translated and multi-language materials Markup Guide for XML and metadata help.\n",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/principles-practices/peer-review/",
"title": "Peer review",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2021-11-10",
"lastmod_ts": 1636502400,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "You can register peer review metadata and connect reviews to reviewed items via relationships.\nWhen registering peer reviews, DO:\ninclude a review title - if you don’t have a review-specific title convention, we recommend that you include \u0026ldquo;Review\u0026rdquo; (or your own term for review) as well as a revision and review number. For example, a review pattern of Review: title of article (Revision number/Review number) will be: Review: Analysis of the effects of bad metadata on discoverability (R2/RC3) include reviewer information with the contributor section, including information about anonymous reviewers include relevant stage, type, and recommendation metadata include license information include relationship metadata linking the review with the item being reviewed (relation type isReviewOf). Do not:\n",
"content": "You can register peer review metadata and connect reviews to reviewed items via relationships.\nWhen registering peer reviews, DO:\ninclude a review title - if you don’t have a review-specific title convention, we recommend that you include \u0026ldquo;Review\u0026rdquo; (or your own term for review) as well as a revision and review number. For example, a review pattern of Review: title of article (Revision number/Review number) will be: Review: Analysis of the effects of bad metadata on discoverability (R2/RC3) include reviewer information with the contributor section, including information about anonymous reviewers include relevant stage, type, and recommendation metadata include license information include relationship metadata linking the review with the item being reviewed (relation type isReviewOf). Do not:\ninclude metadata specific to the reviewed item, like author and title - that is captured in the record of the reviewed item, which you supply via the isReviewof relationship Other things to know:\nreferences are not currently supported for peer review records but if someone cites your reviews, those citations will be included in our cited-by service Review our Peer Review Markup Guide for XML and metadata help.\n",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/principles-practices/posted-content/",
"title": "Posted content",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2021-11-10",
"lastmod_ts": 1636502400,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "You can register records for preprints and other posted material using our posted content metadata model.\nWhen registering posted content, DO:\ninclude the appropriate sub-type using the type attribute (preprint, working paper, letter, dissertation, report, other) - it\u0026rsquo;s vital that preprints be identified as preprints include abstracts connect posted content to related items via relationships - this is required for preprints and important for other posted content as well Do not:\nregister non-preprints with the \u0026ldquo;preprint\u0026rdquo; type Other things to know:\n",
"content": "You can register records for preprints and other posted material using our posted content metadata model.\nWhen registering posted content, DO:\ninclude the appropriate sub-type using the type attribute (preprint, working paper, letter, dissertation, report, other) - it\u0026rsquo;s vital that preprints be identified as preprints include abstracts connect posted content to related items via relationships - this is required for preprints and important for other posted content as well Do not:\nregister non-preprints with the \u0026ldquo;preprint\u0026rdquo; type Other things to know:\nour Preprint Advisory Group is actively creating new recommendations and best practices for preprint metadata records Review our Posted Content Markup Guide for XML and metadata help.\n",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/principles-practices/best-practices/references/",
"title": "References",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2022-06-01",
"lastmod_ts": 1654041600,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "Registering references means submitting reference lists as part of your metadata deposit. It is optional but strongly encouraged (especially if you use our Cited-by service) and any references you include in your Crossref metadata will be made available through our APIs.\nDo:\nsupply DOIs with your references! This is the most effective way to identify and connect the references supplied with your content metadata. supply a full reference or complete marked up metadata for every citation that you do not have a DOI for - we do our best to match these citations to registered DOIs. cite data, software, and other materials used to support and supplement the content being registered Do not:\n",
"content": "Registering references means submitting reference lists as part of your metadata deposit. It is optional but strongly encouraged (especially if you use our Cited-by service) and any references you include in your Crossref metadata will be made available through our APIs.\nDo:\nsupply DOIs with your references! This is the most effective way to identify and connect the references supplied with your content metadata. supply a full reference or complete marked up metadata for every citation that you do not have a DOI for - we do our best to match these citations to registered DOIs. cite data, software, and other materials used to support and supplement the content being registered Do not:\nomit non-Crossref DOIs from your references - this eliminates data, software, and other types of citations from our records. We aren\u0026rsquo;t able to match citations to non-Crossref DOIs, but we do pass them along to our APIs and they are used by our metadata subscribers. Review our References Markup Guide for XML and metadata help.\n",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/principles-practices/reports/",
"title": "Reports and working papers",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2022-09-08",
"lastmod_ts": 1662595200,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "Our reports model supports registration of reports and working papers within or outside of a series.\nWhen registering reports, DO:\ninclude a report title and publication date include all relevant funding metadata, license information, and relationships include all contributors info, publisher and institution details, abstracts, approval dates, as well any edition numbers, contract numbers, and ISBN applied to your report Report registration files may include a publisher name (within publisher) and/or institution name (within depending on the organisation issuing the report. Reports/working papers may be deposited as a series. register DOIs for each section or chapter of a report or working paper if you want to make each section citeable, or if each section has dates, contributors, or other metadata that differs from the report itself Review our Reports and Working Papers Markup Guide for XML and metadata help.\n",
"content": "Our reports model supports registration of reports and working papers within or outside of a series.\nWhen registering reports, DO:\ninclude a report title and publication date include all relevant funding metadata, license information, and relationships include all contributors info, publisher and institution details, abstracts, approval dates, as well any edition numbers, contract numbers, and ISBN applied to your report Report registration files may include a publisher name (within publisher) and/or institution name (within depending on the organisation issuing the report. Reports/working papers may be deposited as a series. register DOIs for each section or chapter of a report or working paper if you want to make each section citeable, or if each section has dates, contributors, or other metadata that differs from the report itself Review our Reports and Working Papers Markup Guide for XML and metadata help.\n",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/principles-practices/best-practices/relationships/",
"title": "Relationship metadata",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2022-06-01",
"lastmod_ts": 1654041600,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "Creating relationships helps build a map of scholarly research objects that we call the research nexus. Expressing these relationships in the metadata enables the evolving infrastructure to build on this mapping.\nThese connections may consist of citations, or refer to publications which do not always exist as a single content item (its parts may be produced, curated, and published by different organisations and separate activities). Making these connections creates linked metadata, which is useful because it establishes associations and context.\n",
"content": "Creating relationships helps build a map of scholarly research objects that we call the research nexus. Expressing these relationships in the metadata enables the evolving infrastructure to build on this mapping.\nThese connections may consist of citations, or refer to publications which do not always exist as a single content item (its parts may be produced, curated, and published by different organisations and separate activities). Making these connections creates linked metadata, which is useful because it establishes associations and context.\nConnections between research objects can be established through your reference lists, or by asserting a relationships type.\nWe have also introduced other interlinking services that address specific types of relationships:\nComponents allow for the assignment of DOIs to the component parts of a publication (figures, tables, images) which may lead to their reuse. Updates notify the community about changes that have a material effect on the original work, including corrections and retractions. Funding data supports identifying the organisation that financially supports the research behind a specific publication. Peer reviews support the host of outputs made publicly available about published scholarly content, for example: referee reports, decision letters, and author responses. These and other services create relationships between metadata records; however, they share two characteristics that restrict their ability to define relationships:\nBoth items involved in a relationship must be identified by Crossref DOIs. The types of relationships are dictated by the mission of the specific service. The following modifications and new services developed in response to these two limitations:\nAllow non-Crossref DOIs to be deposited in an item\u0026rsquo;s (article/chapter/paper) list of citations. Support the creation of general typed relationships between items with a Crossref DOI, and other content items with a variety of identifiers. Review our Relationships Markup Guide for XML and metadata help.\n",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/principles-practices/standards/",
"title": "Standards",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2022-07-11",
"lastmod_ts": 1657497600,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "Our standards model allows you to register records for dated and undated standards, as well as families and sets of standards.\nWhen registering a standard, DO:\ninclude all designators associated with the standard include (and keep up to date) the current publication status using the publication_status attribute Do not:\nupdate an existing DOI record with a new primary as-published designator - SDOs may opt to register DOIs for an undated standard, or to register DOIs for each version or update (as-published) of a standard. Review our Standards Markup Guide for XML and metadata help.\n",
"content": "Our standards model allows you to register records for dated and undated standards, as well as families and sets of standards.\nWhen registering a standard, DO:\ninclude all designators associated with the standard include (and keep up to date) the current publication status using the publication_status attribute Do not:\nupdate an existing DOI record with a new primary as-published designator - SDOs may opt to register DOIs for an undated standard, or to register DOIs for each version or update (as-published) of a standard. Review our Standards Markup Guide for XML and metadata help.\n",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/retrieve-metadata/api-versioning/",
"title": "API Versions",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2022-12-01",
"lastmod_ts": 1669852800,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "REST API Versions The Crossref REST API is versioned. You should always use the API version in your REST API requests.\nBreaking changes Any breaking changes will be released in a new API version. Breaking changes are changes that can potentially break an integration. Breaking changes include:\nremoving an entire operation removing or renaming a parameter removing or renaming a response field adding a new required parameter making a previously optional parameter required changing the type of a parameter or response field removing enum values adding a new validation rule to an existing parameter changing authentication or authorization requirements Non-breaking changes Any additive (non-breaking) changes will be available in all supported API versions. Additive changes are changes that should not break an integration. Additive changes include:\n",
"content": "REST API Versions The Crossref REST API is versioned. You should always use the API version in your REST API requests.\nBreaking changes Any breaking changes will be released in a new API version. Breaking changes are changes that can potentially break an integration. Breaking changes include:\nremoving an entire operation removing or renaming a parameter removing or renaming a response field adding a new required parameter making a previously optional parameter required changing the type of a parameter or response field removing enum values adding a new validation rule to an existing parameter changing authentication or authorization requirements Non-breaking changes Any additive (non-breaking) changes will be available in all supported API versions. Additive changes are changes that should not break an integration. Additive changes include:\nadding an operation adding an optional parameter adding an optional request header adding a response field adding a response header adding enum values Specifying an API version To be safe, specify an API version in your requests.\nFor example:\nhttps://api.crossref.org/v1/works?rows=0\nHowever, as long as v1 of the API exists, requests that do not contain an API version in the request will default to v1. Eventually, if you specify an API version that is no longer supported, you will receive a 400 error.\nUpgrading and legacy support When a new REST API version is released, the previous API version will be supported for 24 more months following the release of the new API version. In exceptional circumstances, we may decide to extend this.\nBefore upgrading to a new REST API version, you should read the changelog of breaking changes for the new API version to understand what breaking changes are included and to learn more about how to upgrade to that specific API version.\nSupported API versions The following REST API versions are currently supported:\nV1 Credits: This policy is adapted from the very short, clear and reasonable Github API policy\n",
"headings": ["REST API Versions ","Breaking changes ","Non-breaking changes ","Specifying an API version ","Upgrading and legacy support ","Supported API versions "]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/retrieve-metadata/xml-output-formats/",
"title": "XML output formats",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2020-04-08",
"lastmod_ts": 1586304000,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "XML output formats include:\nUNIXSD: Member deposited metadata with additional metadata provided by Crossref. This is the most complete output format. UNIXREF: Member deposited metadata only. XSD XML: Contains a limited set of fields from UNIXSD with the most essential information about content items. ",
"content": "XML output formats include:\nUNIXSD: Member deposited metadata with additional metadata provided by Crossref. This is the most complete output format. UNIXREF: Member deposited metadata only. XSD XML: Contains a limited set of fields from UNIXSD with the most essential information about content items. ",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/retrieve-metadata/publication-ids/",
"title": "Publication IDs",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2022-01-19",
"lastmod_ts": 1642550400,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "Publication IDs Every publication in our 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.\nFind 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:\n",
"content": "Publication IDs Every publication in our 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.\nFind 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:\nJournal data http://oai.crossref.org/OAIHandler?verb=ListSets Non-journal data http://oai.crossref.org/OAIHandler?verb=ListSets\u0026amp;set=B 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.\nThe publication ID is listed within the \u0026lt;setspec\u0026gt; element, after the set and member prefix. For example, within the following set, 24 is the publication ID for Journal of Clinical Psychology:\n\u0026lt;set\u0026gt; \u0026lt;setSpec\u0026gt;J:10.1002:24\u0026lt;/setSpec\u0026gt; \u0026lt;setName\u0026gt;Journal of Clinical Psychology\u0026lt;/setName\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/set\u0026gt; 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).\n",
"headings": ["Publication IDs ","Find publication IDs using an OAI-PMH request ","Find publication IDs using the browsable title list "]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/retrieve-metadata/xml-output-formats/unixsd-query-output-format/",
"title": "UNIXSD query output format",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2020-04-08",
"lastmod_ts": 1586304000,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "UNIXSD query results include member metadata as deposited (as with the UNIXREF format) as well as some Crossref-generated information about the metadata record. UNIXSD is the most comprehensive metadata output format available for our metadata records.\nUNIXSD format will return deposited references for other members. References will also be returned to members querying for their own deposited data.\nUNIXSD metadata UNIXSD results contain a sequence of Crossref produced meta-metadata including:\n",
"content": "UNIXSD query results include member metadata as deposited (as with the UNIXREF format) as well as some Crossref-generated information about the metadata record. UNIXSD is the most comprehensive metadata output format available for our metadata records.\nUNIXSD format will return deposited references for other members. References will also be returned to members querying for their own deposited data.\nUNIXSD metadata UNIXSD results contain a sequence of Crossref produced meta-metadata including:\nbook-id: a Crossref internal identifier assigned to a non-journal title (book, conference proceeding, database, standard, dissertation, or report/working paper) citation-id: a Crossref internal identifier assigned to a DOI record citedby-count: number of Cited-by matches identified by Crossref created: the date the record was created deposit-timestamp: timestamp provided in most recent submission journal-id: a Crossref internal identifier assigned to a journal title last-update: the date the record was last updated member-id: a Crossref internal identifier assigned to a member owner-prefix: the prefix that ‘owns’ (has permissions to update) the DOI record prefix-name: name associated with the prefix prime: the DOI a record is aliased to (if the record is aliased) publisher-name: member account name relation: related item, includes ‘type’ attribute to identify the identifier, and ‘claim’ to identify type of relationship series-id: a Crossref internal identifier assigned to a series title (applies to book and conference proceeding series) This meta-metadata is contained in a \u0026lt;crm-item\u0026gt; element, for example:\n\u0026lt;crm-item name=\u0026#34;citedby-count\u0026#34; type=\u0026#34;number\u0026#34;\u0026gt;0\u0026lt;/crm-item\u0026gt; \u0026lt;crm-item name=\u0026#34;owner-prefix\u0026#34; type=\u0026#34;string\u0026#34;\u0026gt;10.1353\u0026lt;/crm-item\u0026gt; \u0026lt;crm-item name=\u0026#34;citation-id\u0026#34; type=\u0026#34;number\u0026#34;\u0026gt;25715607\u0026lt;/crm-item\u0026gt; \u0026lt;crm-item name=\u0026#34;journal-id\u0026#34; type=\u0026#34;number\u0026#34;\u0026gt;48965\u0026lt;/crm-item\u0026gt; \u0026lt;crm-item name=\u0026#34;book-id\u0026#34; type=\u0026#34;number\u0026#34; /\u0026gt; \u0026lt;crm-item name=\u0026#34;series-id\u0026#34; type=\u0026#34;number\u0026#34; /\u0026gt; \u0026lt;crm-item name=\u0026#34;last-update\u0026#34; type=\u0026#34;date\u0026#34;\u0026gt;2007-08-07 15:31:43.0\u0026lt;/crm-item\u0026gt; The full metadata record as deposited by members is available as well. The member as-deposited XML will begin with the \u0026lt;crossref\u0026gt; element.\nUNIXSD schema UNIXSD results are generated using crossref_query_output3.0.xsd (schema | documentation)\nExample UNIXSD result \u0026lt;crossref_result xmlns=\u0026#34;http://www.crossref.org/qrschema/3.0\u0026#34; xmlns:xsi=\u0026#34;http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance\u0026#34; version=\u0026#34;3.0\u0026#34; xsi:schemaLocation=\u0026#34;https://www.crossref.org/qrschema/3.0 https://data.crossref.org/schemas/crossref_query_output3.0.xsd\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;query_result\u0026gt; \u0026lt;head\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi_batch_id\u0026gt;none\u0026lt;/doi_batch_id\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/head\u0026gt; \u0026lt;body\u0026gt; \u0026lt;query status=\u0026#34;resolved\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi type=\u0026#34;journal_article\u0026#34;\u0026gt;10.1353/aq.1998.0005\u0026lt;/doi\u0026gt; \u0026lt;crm-item name=\u0026#34;publisher-name\u0026#34; type=\u0026#34;string\u0026#34;\u0026gt;Johns Hopkins University Press\u0026lt;/crm-item\u0026gt; \u0026lt;crm-item name=\u0026#34;prefix-name\u0026#34; type=\u0026#34;string\u0026#34;\u0026gt;Muse - Johns Hopkins University Press\u0026lt;/crm-item\u0026gt; \u0026lt;crm-item name=\u0026#34;member-id\u0026#34; type=\u0026#34;number\u0026#34;\u0026gt;147\u0026lt;/crm-item\u0026gt; \u0026lt;crm-item name=\u0026#34;citation-id\u0026#34; type=\u0026#34;number\u0026#34;\u0026gt;25715607\u0026lt;/crm-item\u0026gt; \u0026lt;crm-item name=\u0026#34;journal-id\u0026#34; type=\u0026#34;number\u0026#34;\u0026gt;48965\u0026lt;/crm-item\u0026gt; \u0026lt;crm-item name=\u0026#34;deposit-timestamp\u0026#34; type=\u0026#34;number\u0026#34;\u0026gt;20070206205234\u0026lt;/crm-item\u0026gt; \u0026lt;crm-item name=\u0026#34;owner-prefix\u0026#34; type=\u0026#34;string\u0026#34;\u0026gt;10.1353\u0026lt;/crm-item\u0026gt; \u0026lt;crm-item name=\u0026#34;last-update\u0026#34; type=\u0026#34;date\u0026#34;\u0026gt;2007-02-13T20:56:13Z\u0026lt;/crm-item\u0026gt; \u0026lt;crm-item name=\u0026#34;created\u0026#34; type=\u0026#34;date\u0026#34;\u0026gt;2007-02-07T02:04:57Z\u0026lt;/crm-item\u0026gt; \u0026lt;crm-item name=\u0026#34;citedby-count\u0026#34; type=\u0026#34;number\u0026#34;\u0026gt;1\u0026lt;/crm-item\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi_record\u0026gt; \u0026lt;crossref xmlns=\u0026#34;https://www.crossref.org/xschema/1.0\u0026#34; xsi:schemaLocation=\u0026#34;https://www.crossref.org/xschema/1.0 https://doi.crossref.org/schemas/unixref1.0.xsd\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;journal\u0026gt; \u0026lt;journal_metadata language=\u0026#34;en\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;full_title\u0026gt;American Quarterly\u0026lt;/full_title\u0026gt; \u0026lt;abbrev_title\u0026gt;American Quarterly\u0026lt;/abbrev_title\u0026gt; \u0026lt;issn media_type=\u0026#34;electronic\u0026#34;\u0026gt;1080-6490\u0026lt;/issn\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/journal_metadata\u0026gt; \u0026lt;journal_issue\u0026gt; \u0026lt;publication_date media_type=\u0026#34;print\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;year\u0026gt;1998\u0026lt;/year\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/publication_date\u0026gt; \u0026lt;journal_volume\u0026gt; \u0026lt;volume\u0026gt;50\u0026lt;/volume\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/journal_volume\u0026gt; \u0026lt;issue\u0026gt;1\u0026lt;/issue\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/journal_issue\u0026gt; \u0026lt;journal_article publication_type=\u0026#34;full_text\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;titles\u0026gt; \u0026lt;title\u0026gt;\u0026amp;quot;Disturbing the Peace: What Happens to American Studies If You Put African American Studies at the Center?\u0026amp;quot;: Presidential Address to the American Studies Association, October 29, 1997\u0026lt;/title\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/titles\u0026gt; \u0026lt;contributors\u0026gt; \u0026lt;person_name sequence=\u0026#34;first\u0026#34; contributor_role=\u0026#34;author\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;given_name\u0026gt;Mary Helen.\u0026lt;/given_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;surname\u0026gt;Washington\u0026lt;/surname\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/person_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/contributors\u0026gt; \u0026lt;publication_date media_type=\u0026#34;print\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;year\u0026gt;1998\u0026lt;/year\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/publication_date\u0026gt; \u0026lt;pages\u0026gt; \u0026lt;first_page\u0026gt;1\u0026lt;/first_page\u0026gt; \u0026lt;last_page\u0026gt;23\u0026lt;/last_page\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/pages\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi_data\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi\u0026gt;10.1353/aq.1998.0005\u0026lt;/doi\u0026gt; \u0026lt;timestamp\u0026gt;20070206205234\u0026lt;/timestamp\u0026gt; \u0026lt;resource\u0026gt; http://muse.jhu.edu/content/crossref/journals/american_quarterly/v050/50.1washington.html\u0026lt;/resource\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/doi_data\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/journal_article\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/journal\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/crossref\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/doi_record\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/query\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/body\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/query_result\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/crossref_result\u0026gt; ",
"headings": ["UNIXSD metadata ","UNIXSD schema ","Example UNIXSD result "]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/retrieve-metadata/xml-output-formats/unixref-query-output-format/",
"title": "UNIXREF query output format",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2020-04-08",
"lastmod_ts": 1586304000,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "Our unified XML (UNIXREF) format returns all metadata submitted by the member responsible for a DOI. The UNIXREF data does not include namespaces or namespace prefixes, which are used extensively for non-bibliographic metadata.\nThe UNIXREF format will return deposited citations from other members. Citations will also be returned to members querying for their own deposited data.\nUNIXREF schema The majority of UNIXREF results use the unixref1.1.xsd schema (schema | documentation). Some results involving book or conference proceeding data deposited prior to a deposit schema change use unixref1.0.xsd (schema | documentation).\n",
"content": "Our unified XML (UNIXREF) format returns all metadata submitted by the member responsible for a DOI. The UNIXREF data does not include namespaces or namespace prefixes, which are used extensively for non-bibliographic metadata.\nThe UNIXREF format will return deposited citations from other members. Citations will also be returned to members querying for their own deposited data.\nUNIXREF schema The majority of UNIXREF results use the unixref1.1.xsd schema (schema | documentation). Some results involving book or conference proceeding data deposited prior to a deposit schema change use unixref1.0.xsd (schema | documentation).\nExample UNIXREF result \u0026lt;doi_records\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi_record owner=\u0026#34;10.1353\u0026#34; timestamp=\u0026#34;2007-02-13 15:56:13\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;crossref\u0026gt; \u0026lt;journal\u0026gt; \u0026lt;journal_metadata language=\u0026#34;en\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;full_title\u0026gt;American Quarterly\u0026lt;/full_title\u0026gt; \u0026lt;abbrev_title\u0026gt;American Quarterly\u0026lt;/abbrev_title\u0026gt; \u0026lt;issn media_type=l\u0026#34;electronic\u0026#34;\u0026gt;1080-6490\u0026lt;/issn\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/journal_metadata\u0026gt; \u0026lt;journal_issue\u0026gt; \u0026lt;publication_date media_type=\u0026#34;print\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;year\u0026gt;1998\u0026lt;/year\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/publication_date\u0026gt; \u0026lt;journal_volume\u0026gt; \u0026lt;volume\u0026gt;50\u0026lt;/volume\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/journal_volume\u0026gt; \u0026lt;issue\u0026gt;1\u0026lt;/issue\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/journal_issue\u0026gt; \u0026lt;journal_article publication_type=\u0026#34;full_text\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;titles\u0026gt; \u0026lt;title\u0026gt;\u0026amp;quot;Disturbing the Peace: What Happens to American Studies If You Put African American Studies at the Center?\u0026amp;quot;: Presidential Address to the American Studies Association, October 29, 1997\u0026lt;/title\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/titles\u0026gt; \u0026lt;contributors\u0026gt; \u0026lt;person_name sequence=\u0026#34;first\u0026#34; contributor_role=\u0026#34;author\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;given_name\u0026gt;Mary Helen.\u0026lt;/given_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;surname\u0026gt;Washington\u0026lt;/surname\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/person_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/contributors\u0026gt; \u0026lt;publication_date media_type=\u0026#34;print\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;year\u0026gt;1998\u0026lt;/year\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/publication_date\u0026gt; \u0026lt;pages\u0026gt; \u0026lt;first_page\u0026gt;1\u0026lt;/first_page\u0026gt; \u0026lt;last_page\u0026gt;23\u0026lt;/last_page\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/pages\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi_data\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi\u0026gt;10.1353/aq.1998.0005\u0026lt;/doi\u0026gt; \u0026lt;timestamp\u0026gt;20070206205234\u0026lt;/timestamp\u0026gt; \u0026lt;resource\u0026gt; http://muse.jhu.edu/content/crossref/journals/american_quarterly/v050/50.1washington.html\u0026lt;/resource\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/doi_data\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/journal_article\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/journal\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/crossref\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/doi_record\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/doi_records\u0026gt; ",
"headings": ["UNIXREF schema ","Example UNIXREF result "]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/retrieve-metadata/xml-output-formats/xsd-xml-query-output-format/",
"title": "XSD XML query output format",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2020-04-08",
"lastmod_ts": 1586304000,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "The XSD_XML format follows the Crossref query output schema. It provides basic citation metadata that has been processed by Crossref. For doi-to-metadata XML querying, some controls are available for including expanded data and/or components in results.\nXSD XML examples The default query set will return basic citation metadata only:\n\u0026lt;query key=\u0026#34;q1\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi\u0026gt;10.1107/s1600536814013208\u0026lt;/doi\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/query\u0026gt; Set expanded-results=\u0026ldquo;true\u0026rdquo; to return additional author, article title, and date information:\n\u0026lt;query list-components=\u0026#34;false\u0026#34; expanded-results=\u0026#34;true\u0026#34; key=\u0026#34;expanded\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi\u0026gt;10.1107/s1600536814013208\u0026lt;/doi\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/query\u0026gt; Set list-components=\u0026ldquo;true\u0026rdquo; to include components in results:\n",
"content": "The XSD_XML format follows the Crossref query output schema. It provides basic citation metadata that has been processed by Crossref. For doi-to-metadata XML querying, some controls are available for including expanded data and/or components in results.\nXSD XML examples The default query set will return basic citation metadata only:\n\u0026lt;query key=\u0026#34;q1\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi\u0026gt;10.1107/s1600536814013208\u0026lt;/doi\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/query\u0026gt; Set expanded-results=\u0026ldquo;true\u0026rdquo; to return additional author, article title, and date information:\n\u0026lt;query list-components=\u0026#34;false\u0026#34; expanded-results=\u0026#34;true\u0026#34; key=\u0026#34;expanded\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi\u0026gt;10.1107/s1600536814013208\u0026lt;/doi\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/query\u0026gt; Set list-components=\u0026ldquo;true\u0026rdquo; to include components in results:\n\u0026lt;query list-components=\u0026#34;true\u0026#34; expanded-results=\u0026#34;true\u0026#34; key=\u0026#34;expanded-with-components\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi\u0026gt;10.1107/s1600536814013208\u0026lt;/doi\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/query\u0026gt; Example files: xsd_xml.out.xml and xsd_xml.in.xml\n",
"headings": ["XSD XML examples "]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/register-maintain-records/choose-content-registration-method/",
"title": "Choosing a content registration method",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2025-12-10",
"lastmod_ts": 1765324800,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "In order to get working DOIs for your content and share your metadata with the scholarly ecosystem, you need to register your content with Crossref.\nYour metadata is stored with us as XML. Some members send us XML files directly, but if you’re not familiar with writing XML files, you can use a helper tool instead. There are three helper tools available - these are online forms with different fields for you to complete, and this information is converted to XML and deposited with Crossref for you. A big decision to make as a new member is which of our content registration methods to use.\n",
"content": "In order to get working DOIs for your content and share your metadata with the scholarly ecosystem, you need to register your content with Crossref.\nYour metadata is stored with us as XML. Some members send us XML files directly, but if you’re not familiar with writing XML files, you can use a helper tool instead. There are three helper tools available - these are online forms with different fields for you to complete, and this information is converted to XML and deposited with Crossref for you. A big decision to make as a new member is which of our content registration methods to use.\nHelper tools Crossref XML plugin for OJS (Open Journal Systems) - you can use this helper tool if you’re using the Open Journal Systems publishing platform. Web deposit form - you can use this form to register metadata for journals, books, conference proceedings, reports, and dissertations. New Metadata Manager (previously known as the record registration form) - you can use this tool to register metadata for journal articles and grants. Direct deposit of XML Upload JATS XML using the web deposit form Upload XML files using our admin tool XML deposit using HTTPS POST Quick guide to choosing your content registration method Use this chart to choose the best option for you:\nShow image × Which registration tools support which metadata? Record type / deposit method OJS-to-Crossref plugin Web deposit form New Metadata Manager Direct deposit of XML Books and chapters No (OJS is a journal platform) Yes No Yes Conference proceedings No (OJS is a journal platform) Yes No Yes Datasets No (OJS is a journal platform) No No Yes Dissertations No (OJS is a journal platform) Yes No Yes Journals and articles Yes Yes Yes Yes Peer reviews No (OJS is a journal platform) No No Yes Posted content (including preprints) No (OJS is a journal platform) No No Yes Reports and working papers No (OJS is a journal platform) Yes No Yes Standards No (OJS is a journal platform) No No Yes Grants No (OJS is a journal platform) No Yes Yes Documentation for this deposit method Crossref XML plugin for OJS Web deposit form New Metadata Manager Direct deposit of XML Which deposit methods can I use to register pending publications? Crossref XML plugin for OJS Web deposit form XML (via the web deposit form, admin tool, or HTTPS POST) Pending publication No No Yes ",
"headings": ["Helper tools ","Direct deposit of XML ","Quick guide to choosing your content registration method ","Which registration tools support which metadata? ","Which deposit methods can I use to register pending publications? "]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/member-setup/account-credentials/",
"title": "Your Crossref account credentials",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2025-12-10",
"lastmod_ts": 1765324800,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "To register your content with us you’ll need a set of Crossref account credentials. These credentials will consist of a username and a password.\nDepending on when you joined Crossref and how you work with us, your organisation might use unique and personal user credentials for each user at your organisation, or alternatively, everyone at your whole organisation might share a single set of role credentials. When you apply for membership, we’ll set you up with the best option based on the content registration tool you plan to use, and whether you joined Crossref through a sponsor.\n",
"content": "To register your content with us you’ll need a set of Crossref account credentials. These credentials will consist of a username and a password.\nDepending on when you joined Crossref and how you work with us, your organisation might use unique and personal user credentials for each user at your organisation, or alternatively, everyone at your whole organisation might share a single set of role credentials. When you apply for membership, we’ll set you up with the best option based on the content registration tool you plan to use, and whether you joined Crossref through a sponsor.\nOn this page, learn more about:\nPersonal user credentials Organisation-wide, shared role credentials Forgotten your password, or want to change your password? Password reset for personal user credentials Password reset for organisation-wide shared role credentials Want to remove a set of user credentials from having access to your account? Personal user credentials Using personal user credentials to access our tools and services is the most secure and flexible option.\nIf your organisation will be using personal user credentials, each individual who needs to access our system will have a unique set of credentials. Their username will be their email address, and their password will be one that they themselves set, and only they know.\nWhen we first set up a new member account with user credentials, we’ll create user credentials for the nominated technical contact only. We send the nominated technical contact an email which includes a link for them to set their personal password.\nThese personal user credentials are unique to each individual user and should not be shared with others. If there are other people at your organisation (or a third party) who need to register content as well as your nominated technical contact, you will need to request that we add them as a user. This request will need to come from one of the main contacts we hold on your account to keep things secure.\nEach set of user credentials will be associated with a role – this role gives your users permission to register content on behalf of your organisation. For some tools and services, the user will need to specify the role too.\nOrganisation-wide, shared role credentials If everyone at your organisation will be using a single set of shared role credentials to access our tools and services, we’ll create a new role when we first create your account. We\u0026rsquo;ll then send an email to one person at your organisation who will create a central, shared password for your organisation.\nIf your organisation is a direct member, the person who will set the shared password will be your Technical contact. If you are a member of Crossref through a sponsor, then your Sponsor will set the password.\nThis new role and password can then be shared with anyone who will be registering content with Crossref for your organisation. Individual people will all use the same shared role as their username, and the same shared password as the password.\nForgotten your password, or want to change your password? Password reset for personal user credentials If you use your personal email address and password to access our tools and services, you can use the \u0026ldquo;forgotten password\u0026rdquo; link in the admin tool, web deposit form, or the new Metadata Manager. These tools will send you an email with a link to reset your password.\nWhen you change your personal user credentials password, this won’t have any effect on any other users at your organisation.\nPassword reset for organisation-wide shared role credentials If your organisation uses a central set of shared role credentials and you need to change the password, please contact us and we will be able to send a password reset email to one of the main contacts on your account. Crossref staff are not able to view or share the password.\nDon’t forget, if you update the password on shared role credentials, then you will need to let all your colleagues know about the new password so they can still access our tools and services.\nWant to remove a set of user credentials from having access to your account? If your organisation uses unique user credentials for each person, you may want to remove one of these users from having access to your account - for example, if someone has left your organisation, or if you have stopped working with a third party. If you would like to remove specific users from your account, one of the main contacts on your account can contact us to request this change.\n",
"headings": ["Personal user credentials ","Organisation-wide, shared role credentials ","Forgotten your password, or want to change your password? ","Password reset for personal user credentials ","Password reset for organisation-wide shared role credentials ","Want to remove a set of user credentials from having access to your account? "]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/register-maintain-records/ojs-plugin/ojs-3.4/",
"title": "OJS 3.4",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2025-09-17",
"lastmod_ts": 1758067200,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": " Registering your DOI records using OJS version 3.4 You can register your DOI records with us using the OJS (Open Journal Systems) platform by enabling the Crossref Manager plugin. We highly recommend including your references in the metadata you send to us, too - you can do this by adding the OJS references plugin. The instructions below are for configuring OJS version 3.4 (more in Public Knowledge Project\u0026rsquo;s (PKP) documentation).\nEnglish ",
"content": " Registering your DOI records using OJS version 3.4 You can register your DOI records with us using the OJS (Open Journal Systems) platform by enabling the Crossref Manager plugin. We highly recommend including your references in the metadata you send to us, too - you can do this by adding the OJS references plugin. The instructions below are for configuring OJS version 3.4 (more in Public Knowledge Project\u0026rsquo;s (PKP) documentation).\nEnglish Step 1: Enabling the Crossref Manager plugin As Journal Manager, under Settings, click Website \u0026gt; Plugins. Under Installed Plugins, scroll down to the section labelled Generic Plugins. Click the checkbox next to the plugin description to enable the plugin. Show image × Step 2: Setting up automatic DOI registrations in OJS 3.4 Go to the Distribution menu Select the DOI tab Click on the Setup option Show image × Check the box to allow DOIs to be assigned to your published works Check the box to determine which items DOI will be assigned Enter your Crossref assigned DOI prefix. Your prefix will start with 10. and is in the format 10.xxxx (e.g., 10.5555). Show image × Select your preferred stage for automatic DOI assignment to your articles (can be upon the article reaching copyediting stage or upon article publication). Select your preferred method of DOI suffix generation (can be Default, None for manual entry of suffixes, or Custom pattern) Show image × Next, switch to the \u0026lsquo;Registration\u0026rsquo; tab menu Show image × Select Crossref your \u0026lsquo;Registration Agency\u0026rsquo; from the drop down options. If you don\u0026rsquo;t see \u0026ldquo;Crossref\u0026rdquo; in the list, navigate to Website \u0026gt; Plugins \u0026gt; Plugin Gallery to enable the \u0026lsquo;Crossref Manager Plugin\u0026rsquo;. Check the box under ‘Automatic Deposit’ to enable automatic DOI deposits from your OJS instance. Enter your name here as the depositor. Enter your email here as the depositor (all deposit emails will be sent to this email). Show image × Enter your assigned Crossref username. For example support@crossref.org/abcd Note: if the combination of username and password is incorrect, OJS will return a ‘401 unauthorized status code’ error at the time of registration. This error indicates that the username and password are incorrectly entered. That is, they do not match the username and/or password set with Crossref.\nIf you are using organisation-wide, shared role credentials (i.e. your username is a collection of letters), you can simply add in your shared username and password. If you are using personal user credentials that are unique to you (i.e. your username is your email address), you’ll need to add your email address and your role into the username field, and your personal password into the password field. Here’s an example of what this will look like: Username: email@address.com/role Password: your password\nEnter your set personal password into the password field. IMPORTANT: Leave the test checkbox unchecked. Show image × Step 3: Activate the OJS references plugin The OJS references plugin is available from OJS 3.1.2 onwards. The plugin will use the Crossref API to check against plain text references and locate possible DOIs for articles. The plugin will also allow the display of reference lists on the article landing page in OJS and deposit them as part of your metadata deposit. Linking references is a requirement of Crossref membership.\nWorkflow Settings Click ‘Settings’ and then ‘Workflow’ from your dashboard Under the ‘Submission’ tab, choose ‘Metadata’! Show image × Scroll down to the bottom and find the ‘References’ section Make sure you enable references metadata by clicking the checkbox ‘Enable references metadata’. You also need to select the option ‘Ask the author to provide references during submission’. Click save! Show image × Website Settings Then you need to activate the references plugin on the website, too, by following the instructions here:\nClick ‘Settings’ and then ‘Website’ from your dashboard Choose the ‘Plugins’ tab. Show image × Search ‘Crossref reference linking’ Click the ‘Crossref reference linking’ checkbox This plugin will deposit the references that you enter into the XML deposit.\nAdditional OJS plugins for Crossref In addition to the Crossref XML plugin for OJS, there are also other important plugins that can be enabled in OJS to enrich your metadata records:\nCited-by (OJS Scopus/Crossref plugin) - as of OJS 3.2, this third-party plugin allows journals to display citations and citation counts (using article DOIs) from Scopus and/or Crossref. Funding Metadata plugin - as of OJS 3.1.2, it is possible to enable a funder registry plugin for submitting funding information to Crossref. The plugin will use the Open Funder Registry to check against existing funding agencies. The plugin will include funding information in your Crossref DOI deposits. Similarity Check plugin - if you are using OJS 3.1.2 or above, you are able to use the Similarity Check plugin. This will enable you to automatically send manuscripts to your iThenticate account to check their similarity to already published content. You will need to be subscribed to Crossref’s Similarity Check service for this to work. ROR plugin - the ROR Plugin for OJS enables authors to add the ROR ID for the organization they are affiliated with. Getting help with OJS plugins The team at Crossref didn’t create these plugins - they were either created by the team at PKP, or by third-party developers. Because of this, we aren’t able to give in-depth help or troubleshooting on problems with these plugins.\nIf you need more help, you can learn more from PKP’s Crossref OJS Manual and PKP’s Open Journals System 3.3 How to guides on DOI \u0026amp; Crossref Plugins plus there’s a very active PKP Community Forum that has more information on how to modify your OJS instance to submit metadata and register DOIs with Crossref.\nAlternatively, you can contact the support team at PKP.\n",
"headings": ["Registering your DOI records using OJS version 3.4","Step 1: Enabling the Crossref Manager plugin ","Step 2: Setting up automatic DOI registrations in OJS 3.4 ","Step 3: Activate the OJS references plugin ","Workflow Settings","Website Settings","Additional OJS plugins for Crossref ","Getting help with OJS plugins "]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/register-maintain-records/ojs-plugin/",
"title": "OJS platform",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2025-09-17",
"lastmod_ts": 1758067200,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "Registering your DOI records using the OJS platform In order to register DOI records with Crossref, you need to set up your OJS (Open Journal Systems) platform to create DOIs on your Crossref DOI prefix, and also set up your OJS platform to send your records to Crossref. You do this in a different way depending on whether you are using OJS 3.4 or OJS 3.3:\nLearn more about OJS 3.4\n",
"content": "Registering your DOI records using the OJS platform In order to register DOI records with Crossref, you need to set up your OJS (Open Journal Systems) platform to create DOIs on your Crossref DOI prefix, and also set up your OJS platform to send your records to Crossref. You do this in a different way depending on whether you are using OJS 3.4 or OJS 3.3:\nLearn more about OJS 3.4\nLearn more about OJS 3.3\nYou can download the newest versions of OJS in the Public Knowledge Project\u0026rsquo;s (PKP) documentation.\nAdditional OJS plugins for Crossref There are also other important plugins that can be enabled in OJS to enrich your metadata records:\nCited-by (OJS Scopus/Crossref plugin) - as of OJS 3.2, this third-party plugin allows journals to display citations and citation counts (using article DOIs) from Scopus and/or Crossref. Funding Metadata plugin - as of OJS 3.1.2, it is possible to enable a funder registry plugin for submitting funding information to Crossref. The plugin will use the Open Funder Registry to check against existing funding agencies. The plugin will include funding information in your Crossref DOI deposits. Similarity Check plugin - if you are using OJS 3.1.2 or above, you are able to use the Similarity Check plugin. This will enable you to automatically send manuscripts to your iThenticate account to check their similarity to already published content. You will need to be subscribed to Crossref’s Similarity Check service for this to work. ROR plugin - the ROR Plugin for OJS enables authors to add the ROR ID for the organization they are affiliated with. Getting help with OJS plugins The team at Crossref didn’t create these plugins - they were either created by the team at PKP, or by third-party developers. Because of this, we aren’t able to give in-depth help or troubleshooting on problems with these plugins.\nIf you need more help, you can learn more from PKP’s Crossref OJS Manual and PKP’s Open Journals System 3.3 How to guides on DOI \u0026amp; Crossref Plugins plus there’s a very active PKP Community Forum that has more information on how to modify your OJS instance to submit metadata and register DOIs with Crossref.\nAlternatively, you can contact the support team at PKP.\n",
"headings": ["Registering your DOI records using the OJS platform","Additional OJS plugins for Crossref ","Getting help with OJS plugins "]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/register-maintain-records/ojs-plugin/ojs-3.3/",
"title": "OJS 3.3",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2025-08-27",
"lastmod_ts": 1756252800,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "Registering your DOI records using OJS version 3.3 You can register your DOI records with us using the OJS (Open Journal Systems) platform with two extra plugins - the DOI plugin, and the Crossref XML plugin for OJS. We highly recommend including your references in the metadata you send to us, too - you can do this by adding the OJS references plugin. The instructions below are for configuring OJS version 3.3.\n",
"content": "Registering your DOI records using OJS version 3.3 You can register your DOI records with us using the OJS (Open Journal Systems) platform with two extra plugins - the DOI plugin, and the Crossref XML plugin for OJS. We highly recommend including your references in the metadata you send to us, too - you can do this by adding the OJS references plugin. The instructions below are for configuring OJS version 3.3.\nEnglish Step 1: Set up the DOI plugin Ask your OJS administrator to install the DOI plugin, and add the DOI prefix that we gave to you. Your prefix will start with 10. and is in the format 10.xxxx (e.g., 10.1234).\nYou can check whether the DOI Plugin is already set up by following these steps:\nGo to ‘Settings’ on your dashboard and click ‘Website’ Switch to the ‘Plugins’ tab Show image × Search ‘Public Identifier Plugins’ and find ‘DOI’ Click the checkbox on the right side of the DOI plugin description to enable it Show image × Step 2: Set up the Crossef XML plugin for OJS To make best use of the plugin, make sure you’re using OJS version 3 or higher.\nYou can start by finding the Crossref plugin from your dashboard:\nClick ‘Tools’ Choose the ‘Import/Export’ tab Click ‘Crossref XML Export Plugin’ Show image × You can deposit content with us in one of three ways:\nRegister your content with us automatically using the OJS plugin Register the content with us manually, from the plugin interface Have the plugin create an XML file that you can then upload to our admin tool We recommend automatic deposits.\nStep 3: Enable automatic deposits Simply click the checkbox at the bottom of the DOI plugin settings to enable automatic deposits.\nShow image × You’ll then need to add information into the plugin:\nShow image × Here’s what to enter into each of the fields shown in the screenshot above:\nDepositor name - the name of the organisation registering the DOIs (note: this field is not authenticated with Crossref) Depositor email - the email address of the individual responsible for registering content with Crossref (note: this field is not authenticated with Crossref) Username - this is the username element of your Crossref depositor credentials. It will be passed to us to authenticate your submission(s). Your username might be just a collection of letters (role credentials), or it might be an email address (user credentials) - there is more information on role versus user credentials below. Password - this is the password associated with your Crossref depositor credentials Note: if the combination of username and password is incorrect, OJS will return a ‘401 unauthorized status code’ error at the time of registration. This error indicates that the username and password are incorrectly entered. That is, they do not match the username and/or password set with Crossref.\nIf you are using organisation-wide, shared role credentials (i.e. your username is a collection of letters), you can simply add in your shared username and password. If you are using personal user credentials that are unique to you (i.e. your username is your email address), you’ll need to add your email address and your role into the username field, and your personal password into the password field. Here’s an example of what this will look like: Username: email@address.com/role\nPassword: your password\nStep 4: Activate the OJS references plugin The OJS references plugin is available from OJS 3.1.2 onwards. The plugin will use the Crossref API to check against plain text references and locate possible DOIs for articles. The plugin will also allow the display of reference lists on the article landing page in OJS and deposit them as part of your metadata deposit. Linking references is a requirement of Crossref membership.\nTwo things need to be set up to activate the references plugin:\na) Workflow Settings\nClick ‘Settings’ and then ‘Workflow’ from your dashboard Under the ‘Submission’ tab, choose ‘Metadata’! Show image × Scroll down to the bottom and to find the ‘References’ section\nMake sure you enable references metadata by clicking the checkbox ‘Enable references metadata’. You also need to select the option ‘Ask the author to provide references during submission’. Click save! Show image × b) Website Settings\nThen you need to activate the references plugin on the website, too, by following the instructions here:\nClick ‘Settings’ and then ‘Website’ from your dashboard Choose the ‘Plugins’ tab. Show image × Search ‘Crossref reference linking’ Click the ‘Crossref reference linking checkbox This plugin will deposit the references that you enter into the XML deposit.\nAdditional OJS plugins for Crossref In addition to the Crossref XML plugin for OJS, there are also other important plugins that can be enabled in OJS to enrich your metadata records:\nCited-by (OJS Scopus/Crossref plugin) - as of OJS 3.2, this third-party plugin allows journals to display citations and citation counts (using article DOIs) from Scopus and/or Crossref. Funding Metadata plugin - as of OJS 3.1.2, it is possible to enable a funder registry plugin for submitting funding information to Crossref. The plugin will use the Open Funder Registry to check against existing funding agencies. The plugin will include funding information in your Crossref DOI deposits. Similarity Check plugin - if you are using OJS 3.1.2 or above, you are able to use the Similarity Check plugin. This will enable you to automatically send manuscripts to your iThenticate account to check their similarity to already published content. You will need to be subscribed to Crossref’s Similarity Check service for this to work. ROR plugin - the ROR Plugin for OJS enables authors to add the ROR ID for the organization they are affiliated with. Getting help with OJS plugins The team at Crossref didn’t create these plugins - they were either created by the team at PKP, or by third-party developers. Because of this, we aren’t able to give in-depth help or troubleshooting on problems with these plugins.\nIf you need more help, you can learn more from PKP’s Crossref OJS Manual and PKP’s Open Journals System 3.3 How to guides on DOI \u0026amp; Crossref Plugins plus there’s a very active PKP Community Forum that has more information on how to modify your OJS instance to submit metadata and register DOIs with Crossref.\nAlternatively, you can contact the support team at PKP.\n",
"headings": ["Registering your DOI records using OJS version 3.3","Step 1: Set up the DOI plugin ","Step 2: Set up the Crossef XML plugin for OJS ","Step 3: Enable automatic deposits ","Step 4: Activate the OJS references plugin ","Additional OJS plugins for Crossref ","Getting help with OJS plugins "]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/register-maintain-records/web-deposit-form/",
"title": "Web deposit form",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2025-09-03",
"lastmod_ts": 1756857600,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "The web deposit form is suitable for making small numbers of deposits, and you do not need any knowledge of XML to use it. You can use this form to deposit metadata for journals, books, conference proceedings, reports, and dissertations. You can also upload NLM or JATS-formatted XML using this form.\nWeb deposit form tutorial\n",
"content": "The web deposit form is suitable for making small numbers of deposits, and you do not need any knowledge of XML to use it. You can use this form to deposit metadata for journals, books, conference proceedings, reports, and dissertations. You can also upload NLM or JATS-formatted XML using this form.\nWeb deposit form tutorial\nHow to use the web deposit form to register your content Step one: Select your record type Start at the web deposit form and select the type of content you want to register: journal, book, conference proceedings, report or dissertation. Different fields will appear depending on what you\u0026rsquo;ve chosen.\nStep two: Add the content you want to register Journals You can deposit a journal-level DOI only or DOIs for each article within a given issue.\nRegister DOIs for articles - you can register articles for up to one issue in any deposit. On the first screen, enter information for the relevant journal or issue, then click add articles. After you\u0026rsquo;ve added information for each article, click on Add another article to register the next article. When you are done, click Finish. Register a journal-level DOI only - on the first screen, enter the information for the relevant journal or issue and click Submit journal/issue DOI. Please note: when you register your first item, be really careful about the journal title you enter - this will create a journal title record and any future submissions will have to match this. Your journal title doesn\u0026rsquo;t have to match the title in the ISSN portal, but if you do want it to match, make sure to check what this is before you register your first item. Books You can register both book- and chapter-level information. Add you content and select Submit Book DOI to deposit a title-level DOI, or select Add Chapters to enter metadata for chapters attached to the book being registered. For series and sets, only one volume can be registered at a time.\nConference proceedings Enter event and conference paper information. Select Add Papers to enter metadata for conference papers.\nReports Select Submit Report DOI to deposit a single report DOI, or select Add Content Item if the report contains multiple chapters or papers.\nDissertations Complete the fields and click Submit dissertation.\nStep three: Login and submit your content Login with your Crossref account credentials, and then add the email address that should receive the submission log email. Even if your login username is your email address, you still need to add an email address to receive the submission log email. It can be the same or different from the email you used as your login username. Finally, click Deposit.\nYour submission is then added to our submission queue. When we\u0026rsquo;ve processed your file we\u0026rsquo;ll send you a log via email (to the address you gave us in step three). You must review this log to make sure your content was registered successfully. Learn more about error and warning messages.\nWe also send you a copy of the XML that has been generated by the web deposit form. This XML is just for your records - you don\u0026rsquo;t need to do anything with it. If changes or corrections need to be made to your metadata record, you can edit and submit the XML instead of re-entering your metadata into the form. If you do edit the XML, be sure to increment the value in the \u0026lt;timestamp\u0026gt; field to ensure a successful update.\nWeb deposit form limitations and how to work around them There are some metadata elements that you can’t currently register as part of your initial deposit in the web deposit form. However, you can add many of these to an existing deposit later on, using our other tools. Here’s a list of the elements that can’t currently be included in your initial deposit with the web deposit form, and your options for adding them later:\narchive locations, and article numbers or IDs can\u0026rsquo;t be registered using the web deposit form. Funding and license information, Similarity Check URLs, STM-article sharing framework (stm-asf) license information, and text and data mining URLs can be added to existing DOIs in bulk using a supplemental metadata upload. References: use Simple Text Query to match and deposit references to existing DOIs. How to use the web deposit form to upload a JATS or NLM file You can use the web deposit form to upload an XML file built according to the NLM or JATS document type definition (DTD) publishing tag set. Find out more.\nHow to use the web deposit form for supplemental metadata upload using a .csv file Supplemental metadata upload enables members to add metadata elements to existing DOIs in bulk by uploading a .csv file via the web deposit form. You can use it to add funding metadata, license metadata, funding and license metadata together, Similarity Check URLs, or STM-article sharing framework (stm-asf) license metadata.\nStep one: Prepare your CSV file Step two: Add in the relevant headings and information Step three: Upload the CSV file to the web deposit form. Step one: Prepare your CSV file Files submitted for supplemental metadata upload using a .csv file must comply with these specifications:\nFiles must be submitted in .csv format Column headings must match the headings outlined for each deposit type: see below for how to prepare your .csv file for funding, license, funding and license metadata, Similarity Check full-text URLs, and for STM-article sharing framework (stm-asf) license metadata Values must be separated by a comma (,) Don\u0026rsquo;t use commas (,) or quotation marks (\u0026quot;) within a column value Dates must be in the format: YYYY-MM-DD If metadata is not available for an item, leave the cell blank. If an entire column is not populated, you may omit it. Do not enter placeholders such as n/a or -, as this will cause your deposit to fail, or cause incorrect metadata to be attached to a DOI Files may be up to 45 MB in size. We automatically split the file into batches of 4,000 DOIs for processing. We send you two emails for each batch: a submission log, and a copy of the submitted XML, so uploading a large file may result in many emails. Step two: Add the relevant headings and information You\u0026rsquo;ll need to add different headings and information depending on what type of metadata you wish to add to your record. Here are the options:\nAdd funding metadata Add license metadata Add both funding metadata and license metadata at the same time Add Similarity Check full-text URLs Add STM-article sharing framework (stm-asf) license metadata Add funding metadata To update your deposits with Funder Registry metadata using a .csv file, your file must contain 4 columns with these headings:\nDOI: the DOI whose metadata is being updated \u0026lt;funder_name\u0026gt;: name of the funding agency as it appears in the Funder Registry. Learn more about accessing the Funder Registry. \u0026lt;funder_identifier\u0026gt;: funding agency identifier in the form of a DOI \u0026lt;award_number\u0026gt;: grant number or other fund identifier If a DOI has multiple funders, the DOI must be repeated for each funder. We recommend that all available metadata is deposited. If a piece of funding metadata is not available (for example, a grant number) the field should be left blank.\nExample .csv file for funding metadata\nYou can now go go step three: Upload the CSV into the web deposit form.\nAdd license metadata To add license metadata to your existing records the .csv file may contain these headings (*=required):\nDOI: the DOI whose metadata is being updated* \u0026lt;license_ref applies_to=\u0026quot;vor\u0026quot;\u0026gt;: license URL for version of record \u0026lt;vor_lic_start_date\u0026gt;: start date of version of record license \u0026lt;license_ref applies_to=\u0026quot;am\u0026quot;\u0026gt;: license URL for accepted manuscript \u0026lt;am_lic_start_date\u0026gt;: start date of accepted manuscript license \u0026lt;license_ref applies_to=\u0026quot;tdm\u0026quot;\u0026gt;: license URL for text and data mining \u0026lt;tdm_lic_start_date\u0026gt;: start date of text and data mining license \u0026lt;resource content_version=\u0026quot;vor\u0026quot;\u0026gt;: item URL for version of record \u0026lt;resource content_version=\u0026quot;vor\u0026quot; mime_type=\u0026quot;?\u0026quot;\u0026gt;: item URL for version of record with MIME type \u0026lt;resource content_version=\u0026quot;am\u0026quot;\u0026gt;: item URL for author manuscript with MIME type \u0026lt;resource content_version=\u0026quot;am\u0026quot; mime_type=\u0026quot;?\u0026quot;\u0026gt;: item URL for author manuscript with MIME type \u0026lt;resource\u0026gt;: item URL with no version type and with MIME type \u0026lt;resource mime_type=\u0026quot;?\u0026quot;\u0026gt;: item URL with no version type where \u0026ldquo;?\u0026rdquo; is the MIME type as defined in the deposit section of the schema.\nExample .csv file for license metadata\nYou can now go go step three: Upload the CSV into the web deposit form.\nAdd both funding and license metadata at the same time Funding and license metadata may be combined into a single file. The order is important: please include columns in the order listed below (*=required):\nDOI: the DOI whose metadata is being updated* \u0026lt;funder_name\u0026gt;: name of the funding agency* as it appears in the Funder Registry. Learn more about accessing the Funder Registry \u0026lt;funder_identifier\u0026gt;: funding agency identifier in the form of a DOI* \u0026lt;award_number\u0026gt;: grant number or other fund identifier* \u0026lt;license_ref\u0026gt;: license URL \u0026lt;license_ref applies_to=\u0026quot;vor\u0026quot;\u0026gt;: license URL for version of record \u0026lt;vor_lic_start_date\u0026gt;: start date of version of record license \u0026lt;license_ref applies_to=\u0026quot;am\u0026quot;\u0026gt;: license URL for accepted manuscript \u0026lt;am_lic_start_date\u0026gt;: start date of accepted manuscript license \u0026lt;license_ref applies_to=\u0026quot;tdm\u0026quot;\u0026gt;: license URL for text and data mining \u0026lt;tdm_lic_start_date\u0026gt;: start date of text and data mining license \u0026lt;resource content_version=\u0026quot;vor\u0026quot;\u0026gt;: item URL for version of record \u0026lt;resource content_version=\u0026quot;vor\u0026quot; mime_type=\u0026quot;?\u0026quot;\u0026gt;: item URL for version of record with MIME type \u0026lt;resource content_version=\u0026quot;am\u0026quot;\u0026gt;: item URL for author manuscript with MIME type \u0026lt;resource content_version=\u0026quot;am\u0026quot; mime_type=\u0026quot;?\u0026quot;\u0026gt;: item URL for author manuscript with MIME type where \u0026ldquo;?\u0026rdquo; is the MIME type as defined in the deposit section of the schema.\nExample .csv file for funding and license metadata\nYou can now go go step three: Upload the CSV into the web deposit form.\nAdd Similarity Check full-text URLs Download your file of DOIs that are missing Similarity Check URLs using the Similarity Check widget, or prepare your file using our supplemental-metadata-upload sample file. Open your file using spreadsheet software (such as MS Excel). Your file should contain two columns with the headings DOI and \u0026lt;item crawler=\u0026quot;iParadigms\u0026quot;\u0026gt;, where DOI is the DOI being updated and \u0026lt;item crawler=\u0026quot;iParadigms\u0026quot;\u0026gt; is the URL being submitted for Similarity Check indexing. Here is an example: DOI,\u0026lt;item crawler=\u0026#34;iParadigms\u0026#34;\u0026gt; 10.5555/test1,https://www.yoururl.com/pdf1 10.5555/test2,https://www.yoururl.com/pdf2 10.5555/test3,https://www.yoururl.com/pdf3 10.5555/test4,https://www.yoururl.com/pdf4 10.5555/test5,https://www.yoururl.com/pdf5 10.5555/test6,https://www.yoururl.com/pdf6 10.5555/test7,https://www.yoururl.com/pdf7 10.5555/test8,https://www.yoururl.com/pdf8 Replace the example DOIs (10.5555/test1) and URLs (https://www.yoururl.com/pdf1) with your DOIs and URLs. Be sure to save the file as .csv and not as .xlsx (or any other file type) Some spreadsheet programs add additional quotation marks to the column headers, such as \u0026quot;DOI\u0026quot; or \u0026quot;\u0026lt;item crawler=\u0026quot;iParadigms\u0026quot;\u0026gt;\u0026quot;. If your upload is not successful, please open your file in a text editor, and make sure the top line of the file is simply: DOI or \u0026lt;item crawler=\u0026quot;iParadigms\u0026quot;\u0026gt;. Edit if necessary, and resubmit.\nExample .csv file for Similarity Check full-text URLs\nYou can now go go step three: Upload the CSV into the web deposit form.\nAdd STM-article sharing framework (stm-asf) license metadata As of 2022, Crossref supports registration of STM-article sharing framework (stm-asf) license metadata. The .csv file may contain these headings (*=required):\nDOI: the DOI whose metadata is being updated* \u0026lt;license_ref applies_to=\u0026quot;stm-asf\u0026quot;\u0026gt;: stm-asf license URL for version of record \u0026lt;stm-asf_lic_start_date\u0026gt;: start date of version of record license \u0026lt;license_ref applies_to=\u0026quot;am\u0026quot;\u0026gt;: license URL for accepted manuscript \u0026lt;am_lic_start_date\u0026gt;: start date of accepted manuscript license \u0026lt;license_ref applies_to=\u0026quot;tdm\u0026quot;\u0026gt;: license URL for accepted manuscript \u0026lt;tdm_lic_start_date\u0026gt;: start date of accepted manuscript license \u0026lt;resource content_version=\u0026quot;vor\u0026quot;\u0026gt;: item URL for version of record \u0026lt;resource content_version=\u0026quot;vor\u0026quot; mime_type=\u0026quot;?\u0026quot;\u0026gt;: item URL for version of record with MIME type \u0026lt;resource content_version=\u0026quot;am\u0026quot;\u0026gt;: item URL for author manuscript with MIME type \u0026lt;resource content_version=\u0026quot;am\u0026quot; mime_type=\u0026quot;?\u0026quot;\u0026gt;: item URL for author manuscript with MIME type \u0026lt;resource\u0026gt;: item URL with no version type and with MIME type \u0026lt;resource mime_type=\u0026quot;?\u0026quot;\u0026gt;: item URL with no version type where \u0026ldquo;?\u0026rdquo; is the MIME type as defined in the deposit section of the schema.\nExample .csv file for stm-asf license metadata\nStep three: Use the web deposit form’s supplemental metadata upload option to upload your csv and add this element to your existing records Start at the web deposit form Under data type selection, choose supplemental metadata upload Log in using your Crossref account credentials in the appropriate fields Click the choose file button next to csv file information and select your .csv file for upload Enter the email address that should receive the submission log email Click upload csv data Some initial validation relating to formatting is performed upon upload. Incomplete or incorrect files will return an error message, and will not be deposited. If the file passes the initial validation, it will be converted to XML, and registered with us. Additional validation is performed upon deposit.\nYou will receive a submission log when your deposit is complete. Please review the log to be sure your DOIs have been updated successfully.\nPlease contact us with questions or comments about your .csv upload. If you are reporting problems with a .csv upload, please attach the .csv file to your support request.\n",
"headings": ["How to use the web deposit form to register your content ","Step one: Select your record type","Step two: Add the content you want to register","Journals","Books","Conference proceedings","Reports","Dissertations","Step three: Login and submit your content","Web deposit form limitations and how to work around them ","How to use the web deposit form to upload a JATS or NLM file ","How to use the web deposit form for supplemental metadata upload using a .csv file ","Step one: Prepare your CSV file ","Step two: Add the relevant headings and information ","Add funding metadata ","Add license metadata ","Add both funding and license metadata at the same time ","Add Similarity Check full-text URLs ","Add STM-article sharing framework (stm-asf) license metadata ","Step three: Use the web deposit form’s supplemental metadata upload option to upload your csv and add this element to your existing records "]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/register-maintain-records/metadata-manager/",
"title": "Metadata Manager",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2026-01-23",
"lastmod_ts": 1769126400,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "The new Metadata Manager tool (previously known as the record registration form) can be used to deposit metadata for your records. You do not need any knowledge of XML to use it. The tool currently supports journal articles and grants, but we are planning to add support for additional record types in future.\nHow to use the new Metadata Manager English Start at the landing page and sign in using your Crossref account credentials. You can choose to register a new record, edit an existing record, or upload a .json template that you have created using the form. If you want to register a new journal article or grant, choose New Record.\n",
"content": "The new Metadata Manager tool (previously known as the record registration form) can be used to deposit metadata for your records. You do not need any knowledge of XML to use it. The tool currently supports journal articles and grants, but we are planning to add support for additional record types in future.\nHow to use the new Metadata Manager English Start at the landing page and sign in using your Crossref account credentials. You can choose to register a new record, edit an existing record, or upload a .json template that you have created using the form. If you want to register a new journal article or grant, choose New Record.\nShow image × Create a new record Select the type of record you wish to create, then enter the metadata associated with your record in the corresponding fields. Some fields are required to be filled out in order to submit your record, while others are optional. If you are registering a journal article, you can find links to our documentation in the form for more information on what each field means.\nJournal article metadata also includes some information on the journal and, optionally, the issue and/or volume that the article was published in. To help avoid common errors with journal titles, you can auto-fill the journal metadata by choosing from a list of titles you have previously deposited into. You can search the list by title or by ISSN. Note that an ISSN is currently required to use the new Metadata Manager for registering journal articles.\nShow image × Submit your record After filling out the required fields as well as any optional metadata you want to deposit, check that everything looks correct and then click Submit at the bottom of the form. The submission will be made immediately and a success message will appear on the screen.\nFrom the success page, you can click through to more information about your submission in our Admin tool, or start another submission right away. If you have registered a journal article, you can choose to repeat the process for another article in the same journal and/or journal issue, which will pre-fill the form with the appropriate metadata so you don\u0026rsquo;t have to re-enter it.\nShow image × If there is a problem with your submission, you will see an error message appear instead of the success page. Go to the documentation for tips on how to troubleshoot common errors from our deposit system.\nShow image × Edit an existing record Metadata can change over time, and the new Metadata Manager tool allows you to update your records to reflect this.\nChoose Edit Record from the landing page or the sidebar navigation to see a list of the journal article and grant records you have previously registered using this tool, the web deposit form, or the deprecated legacy Metadata Manager.\nShow image × You can search for any DOI, scroll through the list of previously registered records, or filter it by the date when the record was last updated. Find the record you are looking for and click Edit to access a form page with the record\u0026rsquo;s current metadata filled in. Simply make any changes and submit the record again to register the updated metadata.\n",
"headings": ["How to use the new Metadata Manager ","Create a new record ","Submit your record ","Edit an existing record "]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/register-maintain-records/direct-deposit-xml/",
"title": "Direct deposit of XML",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2025-09-16",
"lastmod_ts": 1757980800,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "If you’re sending us XML directly, you\u0026rsquo;ll need to review our input schema, and check your XML files follow the schema\u0026rsquo;s rules.\nTo deposit your XML files with Crossref, you have a choice of two methods:\nUpload XML files using our admin tool XML deposit using HTTPS POST Special characters in your XML All XML submitted to our system must be UTF-8 encoded. There are two ways to include a special unicode character in a Crossref deposit XML file:\n",
"content": "If you’re sending us XML directly, you\u0026rsquo;ll need to review our input schema, and check your XML files follow the schema\u0026rsquo;s rules.\nTo deposit your XML files with Crossref, you have a choice of two methods:\nUpload XML files using our admin tool XML deposit using HTTPS POST Special characters in your XML All XML submitted to our system must be UTF-8 encoded. There are two ways to include a special unicode character in a Crossref deposit XML file:\nEncode the special character using a numerical representation. This is the preferred approach. Constructing an entity reference in the XML that is the numerical value of the character. For example, \u0026lt;surname\u0026gt;\u0026amp;#352;umbera\u0026lt;/surname\u0026gt; includes the special character S with a háček (Š). Use a UTF-8 editor or tool when creating the XML and insert characters directly into the file, which results in a one or more byte sequence per character in the file. For example, an S with a háček (Š) has a decimal value of 352 which is 160hex. This value converts to the UTF-8 sequence C5,A0 in hex. You can create a small XML file in which you insert this two-byte sequence (shown here between the \u0026lt;UTF_encoded\u0026gt; tags).\n\u0026lt;?xml version=\u0026#34;1.0\u0026#34; encoding=\u0026#34;utf-8\u0026#34; ?\u0026gt; \u0026lt;start\u0026gt; \u0026lt;UTF_encoded\u0026gt;Š\u0026lt;/UTF_encoded\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/start\u0026gt; The character displays properly in a browser but if you save the XML source and try to view it in certain editors, it will not display correctly.\nCharacter entities XML based on schema does not support named character entities (sometimes referred to as html-encoded characters). For example, é or – are not allowed. To include these characters you must use their numerical representation, \u0026amp;#x0E9; or \u0026amp;#x2013; respectively. These are called numerical entities, shown by the # (hash or pound sign). The x following # indicates the value is in hex (rather than decimal if the x were omitted). All entities must end with the ; character.\nCharacter numerical values may be found in the Unicode Character Code Charts. Learn more about UTF-8 and unicode, and the ISO 8859 series of standardized multilingual graphic character sets for writing in alphabetic languages.\nUsing face markup Some style/face markup is supported by our schema but we recommend using it only when it is essential to the meaning of the text. Learn more about face markup.\n",
"headings": ["Special characters in your XML ","Character entities ","Using face markup "]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/register-maintain-records/direct-deposit-xml/admin-tool/",
"title": "Upload XML files using our admin tool",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2026-04-21",
"lastmod_ts": 1776729600,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "If you generate your own XML files (or export them from OJS), you can deposit these using the deposit admin tool.\nLog in with your Crossref account credentials Go to Submissions Click Upload Click Browse to locate the file you are uploading Select the file type: Metadata: content registration XML Query: XML queries DOI Query: XML-formatted DOI-to-metadata queries DOI References/Resources: resource-only deposit XML Conflict Management: conflict management .txt file Bulk URL Update: URL updates .txt file Click Upload. The file size limit for full XML metadata uploads is 10 MB.\n",
"content": "If you generate your own XML files (or export them from OJS), you can deposit these using the deposit admin tool.\nLog in with your Crossref account credentials Go to Submissions Click Upload Click Browse to locate the file you are uploading Select the file type: Metadata: content registration XML Query: XML queries DOI Query: XML-formatted DOI-to-metadata queries DOI References/Resources: resource-only deposit XML Conflict Management: conflict management .txt file Bulk URL Update: URL updates .txt file Click Upload. The file size limit for full XML metadata uploads is 10 MB.\nThe uploaded file will be added to the system submission queue. We\u0026rsquo;ll email submission reports and query results to the email address you specified in the uploaded file.\n",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/register-maintain-records/direct-deposit-xml/https-post/",
"title": "XML deposit using HTTPS POST",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2026-04-21",
"lastmod_ts": 1776729600,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "XML files can be POSTed to our system where they are added to the submission queue to await processing. You can do this yourself or make use of our java program.\nOn this page, find out more about:\nSubmitting files - an overview Sample transactions Submission limits Submitting files - an overview Uploading files (for deposit or for bulk queries) are submitted using HTTPS POST with the encType: multipart/form-data. The URL for all submissions is https://doi.crossref.org/servlet/deposit.\n",
"content": "XML files can be POSTed to our system where they are added to the submission queue to await processing. You can do this yourself or make use of our java program.\nOn this page, find out more about:\nSubmitting files - an overview Sample transactions Submission limits Submitting files - an overview Uploading files (for deposit or for bulk queries) are submitted using HTTPS POST with the encType: multipart/form-data. The URL for all submissions is https://doi.crossref.org/servlet/deposit.\nIf you\u0026rsquo;re a service provider and would like to test your integrations, you may POST submissions to our test system using https://test.crossref.org/servlet/deposit. You\u0026rsquo;ll need to email us at support@crossref.org so we can configure an account within the test system before you test your integration.\nThe following parameters are supported:\nForm field Description Possible values Mandatory? Default operation Depends on submission type doMDUpload: For metadata (XSD) submissions (or, (full XML) metadata upload) doDOICitUpload: For DOI citations or resources submissions (or, (resource-only) DOI resources) doQueryUpload: For query submissions doDOIQueryUpload: For DOI-to-metadata query submissions doTransferDOIsUpload: For submissions to update resource resolution URLs No doMDUpload subType subtype for metadata submissions cm: for conflict management submissions No Not applicable login_id Crossref account credentials username If using shared role credentials, add the role. If using personal user credentials, add your email address and the role in this format email@address.com/role. The login_id value is case sensitive Yes Not applicable login_passwd Crossref account credentials password the login_passwd value is case sensitive Yes Not applicable Content parts fname Submission contents the fname value is case sensitive Yes Not applicable Sample transactions Sample transaction using curl curl -F \u0026#39;operation=doQueryUpload\u0026#39; -F \u0026#39;login_id=[username]\u0026#39; -F \u0026#39;login_passwd=[password]\u0026#39; -F \u0026#39;fname=@[filename]\u0026#39; https:// doi.crossref.org/servlet/deposit Note: several members have contacted us about use of the @ in the above sample transaction; it should be retained prior to the filename\nSample https transaction POST https://doi-crossref-org/servlet/deposit?operation=doMDUpload\u0026amp;login_id=[username]\u0026amp;login_passwd=[password] HTTP/1.1 Accept: image/gif, image/x-xbitmap, image/jpeg, image/pjpeg, */* Accept-Language: en-us Content-Type: multipart/form-data; boundary=---------------------------7d22911b10028e User-Agent: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.1; Q312461) Host: Myhost Content-length: 1304 Pragma: no-cache -----------------------------7d22911b10028e Content-Disposition: form-data; name=\u0026#34;fname\u0026#34;; filename=\u0026#34;crossref_query.xml\u0026#34; \u0026lt;?xml version=\u0026#34;1.0\u0026#34; encoding=\u0026#34;UTF-8\u0026#34;?\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi_batch version=\u0026#34;4.3.0\u0026#34; xmlns=\u0026#34;http://www.crossref.org/schema/4.3.0\u0026#34; xmlns:xsi=\u0026#34;http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance\u0026#34; xsi:schemaLocation=\u0026#34;http://www.crossref.org/schema/4.3.0 http://www.crossref.org/schemas/crossref4.3.0.xsd\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;head\u0026gt; ... \u0026lt;/head\u0026gt; \u0026lt;body\u0026gt; \u0026lt;journal\u0026gt; .... \u0026lt;/journal\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/body\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/doi_batch\u0026gt; -----------------------------7d22911b10028e-- For backward compatibility, we also accept the login_id, login_passwd, operation, and area parameters in a multi-part request:\n-----------------------------7d22911b10028e Content-Disposition: form-data; name=\u0026#34;login_id\u0026#34; atypon -----------------------------7d22911b10028e Content-Disposition: form-data; name=\u0026#34;login_passwd\u0026#34; _atypon_ -----------------------------7d22911b10028e Content-Disposition: form-data; name=\u0026#34;fname\u0026#34;; filename=\u0026#34;hisham.xml\u0026#34; ... file contents ... Submission limits We have a limit of 10,000 pending submissions per user. If there are 10,000 submissions in our queue for a given user, subsequent uploads will fail with a 429 error. You may resume POSTing when pending submissions are below 10,000.\nThe file size limit for full XML metadata uploads is 10 MB.\n",
"headings": ["Submitting files - an overview ","Sample transactions ","Sample transaction using curl","Sample https transaction","Submission limits "]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/register-maintain-records/direct-deposit-xml/https-post-using-java-program/",
"title": "POSTing files using our upload tool",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2025-08-18",
"lastmod_ts": 1755475200,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "We provide a Java program that performs file uploads (via HTTPS POST) to Crossref. This program allows you to upload a single file, a list of files, or a whole directory of files.\nTo use, download crossref-upload-tool.jar and place it in /usr/local/lib.\nHow to use our upload tool In the following examples:\nuser is the username and password from your Crossref account credentials. If you are using organisation-wide shared role credentials, the username is the role. If you\u0026rsquo;re using personal user credentials, the username is your email address plus the role in the following format email@address.com/role. file is the name of the file you are uploading or directory is the name of the directory containing files to upload To upload a metadata file java -jar crossref-upload-tool.jar --user [username] [password] --metadata ([filename/directory]) Using role credentials (note: in these examples, we have used the fictional role and password combination of mrcrossref and abc134):\n",
"content": "We provide a Java program that performs file uploads (via HTTPS POST) to Crossref. This program allows you to upload a single file, a list of files, or a whole directory of files.\nTo use, download crossref-upload-tool.jar and place it in /usr/local/lib.\nHow to use our upload tool In the following examples:\nuser is the username and password from your Crossref account credentials. If you are using organisation-wide shared role credentials, the username is the role. If you\u0026rsquo;re using personal user credentials, the username is your email address plus the role in the following format email@address.com/role. file is the name of the file you are uploading or directory is the name of the directory containing files to upload To upload a metadata file java -jar crossref-upload-tool.jar --user [username] [password] --metadata ([filename/directory]) Using role credentials (note: in these examples, we have used the fictional role and password combination of mrcrossref and abc134):\njava -jar crossref-upload-tool.jar --user mrcrossref abc134 --metadata crdeposit234.xml Using user credentials (note: in these examples, we have used the fictional user credential, role, and password combination of: email@address.com/role, mrcrossref, and abc134)\njava -jar crossref-upload-tool.jar --user email@address.com/mrcrossref abc134 --metadata crdeposit234.xml To upload a resource-only deposit file java -jar crossref-upload-tool.jar --user [username] [password] --resources ([filename/directory]) for example:\njava -jar crossref-upload-tool.jar --user mrcrossref abc134 --metadata cr_refs.xml To upload conflict files Single file:\njava -jar crossref-upload-tool.jar --user mrcrossref abc134 --conflicts ticket1234.txt Directory of files:\njava -jar crossref-upload-tool.jar --user mrcrossref abc134 --conflicts ALIAS_123 To upload bulk Resource URL updates Single file:\njava -jar crossref-upload-tool.jar -user mrcrossref abc 134 -transfers ticket1234.text Directory of files:\njava -jar crossref-upload-tool.jar -user mrcrossref abc134 -transfer ALIAS_123 To direct upload(s) to the test system If you don\u0026rsquo;t already have Crossref test system credentials configured, you\u0026rsquo;ll need to contact our technical support team in order for us to enable a test account for test.crossref.org.\njava -jar crossref-upload-tool.jar --user mrcrossref abc134 --host test.crossref.org --metadata crdeposit234.xml Dry run (test) Note that if the \u0026ndash;metadata option is given a directory name instead of a filename then all files within the directory are uploaded. To ensure that you are uploading what you want use the \u0026ndash;dry-run option and review the listing of files, eg:\njava -jar crossref-upload-tool.jar --user mrcrossref abc134 --metadata mydeposits/ --dry-run Additional info If your upload is successful, you will see this message:\n[\u0026hellip;] INFO uploading to https://doi.crossref.org:443/\n[\u0026hellip;] INFO uploading submission: file=myfile.xml\n[\u0026hellip;] INFO uploaded submission: file=myfile.xml\n[\u0026hellip;] INFO done\nIf the username is wrong, you will see the message:\n[\u0026hellip;] INFO uploading to https://doi.crossref.org:443/\n[\u0026hellip;] INFO uploading submission: file=myfile.xml\n[\u0026hellip;] INFO unauthorized: file=myfile.xml; user=mrcrossref\n[\u0026hellip;] INFO done\nUpload options --user name password --metadata ( file | directory ) --query ( file | directory ) --transfers ( file | directory ) --handles ( file | directory ) --resources ( file | directory ) --conflicts ( file | directory ) --address host port --protocol ( http | https ) --dry-run --help Where:\nuser: your Crossref system username (either role, for role credentials, or email@address.com/role, for user credentials) and password metadata: use for metadata deposits query: use for query deposits transfers: admin use only handles: admin use only resources: resource-only deposits conflicts: conflict resolution files address: direct to a different address (such as test.crossref.org) protocol: http or https dry-run: test uploader without uploading help: displays the above list of upload options Further examples Entry into terminal\njava -jar /usr/local/crossref-upload-tool.jar --user mrcrossref abc134 --metadata /Users/mistercrossref/Uploader/September/19/134/ Key for entry into terminal:\nusr/local/crossref-upload-tool.jar = location of the upload program on your machine mrcrossref abc134 = Crossref role and password you are using for upload metadata = type of content being uploaded Users/mistercrossref/Uploader/September/19/134/ = location of XML files on my machine being uploaded ",
"headings": ["How to use our upload tool ","To upload a metadata file ","To upload a resource-only deposit file ","To upload conflict files ","To upload bulk Resource URL updates ","To direct upload(s) to the test system ","Dry run (test) ","Additional info ","Upload options ","Further examples "]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/register-maintain-records/direct-deposit-xml/testing-your-xml/",
"title": "Testing your XML",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2025-08-18",
"lastmod_ts": 1755475200,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "It’s a good idea to verify the format and structure of your XML file before trying to register your content. You can validate your XML locally using an XML editor such as Oxygen or XMLSpy, or command line tools such as xmllint. We provide an XML parser that supports single file uploads for validation only.\nYou can use that XML parser to check your XML before submission. The parser quickly identifies errors in the XML you uploaded.\n",
"content": "It’s a good idea to verify the format and structure of your XML file before trying to register your content. You can validate your XML locally using an XML editor such as Oxygen or XMLSpy, or command line tools such as xmllint. We provide an XML parser that supports single file uploads for validation only.\nYou can use that XML parser to check your XML before submission. The parser quickly identifies errors in the XML you uploaded.\nCarrying out a platform migration? Please let us know so we can update your account. Learn more about planning a platform migration.\n",
"headings": ["Carrying out a platform migration? "]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/register-maintain-records/direct-deposit-xml/jats-xml/",
"title": "Using JATS XML",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2020-04-08",
"lastmod_ts": 1586304000,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "We recommend creating XML directly to our schema rather than trying to convert JATS (NLM) formatted XML as we don\u0026rsquo;t currently have a reliable way to convert it.\nThere are two UNRELIABLE options available in beta.\nUpload NLM JATS-formatted XML files into our system using the web deposit form Use our basic JATS-to-Crossref XSLT conversion and then upload using the admin tool or https post. Upload NLM JATS-formatted XML files using the web deposit form Start at the web deposit form Under data type selection, choose NLM file Log in using your Crossref account credentials Click on select file and select your NLM or JATS file Enter the email address that should receive the all-important submission log email Add the DOI in the relevant field (if your XML contains \u0026lt;article-id pub-id-type=\u0026quot;doi\u0026quot;\u0026gt; you can leave the DOI field empty) Add the URL in the relevant field (if your XML contains \u0026lt;self-uri\u0026gt; and that URI contains the URL you intend to register with your DOI, you can leave the URL field empty) Click Upload NLM Data to submit You\u0026rsquo;ll receive a submission log when your deposit is complete. Please review the log to be sure your DOIs have been updated successfully.\n",
"content": "We recommend creating XML directly to our schema rather than trying to convert JATS (NLM) formatted XML as we don\u0026rsquo;t currently have a reliable way to convert it.\nThere are two UNRELIABLE options available in beta.\nUpload NLM JATS-formatted XML files into our system using the web deposit form Use our basic JATS-to-Crossref XSLT conversion and then upload using the admin tool or https post. Upload NLM JATS-formatted XML files using the web deposit form Start at the web deposit form Under data type selection, choose NLM file Log in using your Crossref account credentials Click on select file and select your NLM or JATS file Enter the email address that should receive the all-important submission log email Add the DOI in the relevant field (if your XML contains \u0026lt;article-id pub-id-type=\u0026quot;doi\u0026quot;\u0026gt; you can leave the DOI field empty) Add the URL in the relevant field (if your XML contains \u0026lt;self-uri\u0026gt; and that URI contains the URL you intend to register with your DOI, you can leave the URL field empty) Click Upload NLM Data to submit You\u0026rsquo;ll receive a submission log when your deposit is complete. Please review the log to be sure your DOIs have been updated successfully.\nNLM JATS to Crossref conversion We have a basic JATS-to-Crossref XSLT conversion that can be used to transform NLM JATS-formatted XML into Crossref-friendly XML. You may download the .xsl file for local use.\nPlease note:\nThe journal title used for Crossref deposits be included in the \u0026lt;journal-title\u0026gt; element The DOI should be included in \u0026lt;article-id\u0026gt; with attribute pub-id-type=\u0026lsquo;doi\u0026rsquo; The DOI URL should be included in \u0026lt;self-uri\u0026gt; The JATS document type definition (DTD) does not have an appropriate place to include the email element used in Crossref deposits - this needs to be added manually. ",
"headings": ["Upload NLM JATS-formatted XML files using the web deposit form ","NLM JATS to Crossref conversion "]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/member-setup/constructing-your-dois/",
"title": "Constructing your DOIs",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2024-02-05",
"lastmod_ts": 1707091200,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref allows citation linking using Digital Object Identifiers (DOIs) between research produced by different organisations (without the need for individual agreements between them). This ensures that citation links are persistent - that they work over long periods of time. However, there is no purely technical solution to the problem of broken links on the web; Crossref members have to keep these links updated, along with rich metadata that everyone in the scholarly ecosystem relies on.\n",
"content": "Crossref allows citation linking using Digital Object Identifiers (DOIs) between research produced by different organisations (without the need for individual agreements between them). This ensures that citation links are persistent - that they work over long periods of time. However, there is no purely technical solution to the problem of broken links on the web; Crossref members have to keep these links updated, along with rich metadata that everyone in the scholarly ecosystem relies on.\nAt Crossref, every metadata record that our members register for their content needs to have a unique DOI attached to it, both as a container for that record and as a locator for others to use. A DOI does not signify any value or accuracy of the thing it locates; the value lies in the record\u0026rsquo;s metadata which gives context about the object (such as contributors, funding bodies, abstract/summary) and enables connections with other entities (such as people (e.g. ORCID) or organisations (e.g. ROR)).\nDOIs include 3 parts:\nShow image × Of these three parts of the DOI, members (or their service providers) create the last part, the suffix. Because DOIs must be unique and persistent, members need a reasonable way to create and manage their suffixes, which should be opaque.\nHere, we share the rules, guidelines and some examples to help you decide how to approach your suffixes. You can also go straight to our suffix generator.\nNote, if you’re using the Crossref XML plugin for OJS, you don’t need to create your suffixes as the plugin will generate them for you automatically.\nWe’ve also got some advice for DOIs and DSpace repositories.\nFirst, a few rules Rules are shared by all DOI registration agencies.\nEach DOI must be unique Only use approved characters: DOI suffixes can be any alphanumeric string that includes combinations the following approved characters: Letters of the Roman alphabet, A-Z (see below on case insensitivity) Numbers, 0-9 -._;()/ (hyphen, period, underscore, semicolon, parentheses, forward slash). Note that the non-breaking hyphen (U+2011), figure dash (U+2012), en dash (U+2013), and em dash (U+2014) are not approved characters. The only approved hyphen is the hyphen-minus (U+002D). Note, some older (pre-2008) DOIs which contain other characters. Learn more about suffixes containing special characters. Suffixes are case insensitive, so 10.1006/abc is the same in the system as 10.1006/ABC. Note that using lowercase is better for accessibility. Guidelines for creating a DOI suffix In part because there are few rules, it can be helpful to have some guidance in how to approach suffixes. This advice applies to DOIs at all levels, whether at journal or book level (a title-level DOI), or volume, issue, article, or chapter level.\nThe most important part of creating your DOIs is to understand that because DOIs are unique, persistent and \u0026lsquo;dumb\u0026rsquo;, once they are created, they will always work. There is never a need to delete or update existing DOIs.\nBest practices for DOI suffixes: Suffixes are best when they include short strings that are easily displayed and typed but are ‘dumb’ - meaning, the suffixes contains no readable information, including metadata.\nUse a random approach: this ensures the DOIs are opaque or ‘dumb’ and minimizes attempts at interpretation or prediction (more on opaque suffixes below). Try our suggested DOI registration workflow, including our suffix generator. Any random generator will also work. Note, if you’re using the Crossref XML plugin for OJS,you don’t need to create your suffixes as the plugin will generate them for you automatically. Keep suffixes short. This makes them easier to read and to re-type. Remember, DOIs will appear online and in print. Best practice DOI example: 10.3390/s18020479 This example appears to be opaque because it includes no obvious information.\nAvoid the following in DOI suffixes: The function of suffixes is technical in nature so they are most problematic when they are treated as information to be read, interpreted and/or predicted. Remember, DOIs are persistent and not subject to correction or deletion.\nWhile it may be tempting, using a pattern, such as a sequence, can cause problems. Services and tools that use DOIs may, for example, try to predict future DOIs that are not registered and may never be (more on opaque suffixes below). Don’t include information like journal title (or initials), page number or date. This kind of information should be included in the metadata but can cause problems when included in suffixes for 2 main reasons: Information in the suffix that conflicts with information in the metadata is confusing. Information like journal title (or initials) may change or be found to be incorrect, as with dates, but DOIs are persistent, cannot be deleted and are not subject to correction. See more on opaque suffixes below. Example problematic DOI suffix: 10.5555/2014-04-01 This example is not opaque because it includes a date, which should be included in the metadata instead of in the suffix.\nProceed with caution in DOI suffixes: Determining how to create suffixes and manage the over time can be a challenge. We recognize that some systems have requirements that don’t follow this advice and that human readability is helpful in managing DOIs.\nIf you must use a suffix with meaning, internal system identifiers can work, with careful management. Because things like ISBNs are themselves metadata, we don’t recommend using them in suffixes. Just remember that while you and readers may recognize an ISBN, for example, the DOI system itself doesn’t and DOIs are not subject to correction or deletion.\nNo matter your approach, it’s worth taking some time to understand the emphasis on opaque suffixes.\nOnce a DOI has been registered with us, it should always be used for the same content. Even if the content moves to a new website or a new owner, the same DOI should continue to be used. Though the DOI never changes, its associated metadata is kept up-to-date by the relevant Crossref member.\nWhat if your content already has a DOI? Sometimes members may acquire a journal that already has DOIs registered for some articles. It\u0026rsquo;s important to keep and continue to use the DOIs that have already been registered and not change them - DOIs need to be persistent.\nIt doesn\u0026rsquo;t matter if the prefix on the existing DOI is different from the prefix belonging to the acquiring member. As content can move between members, the owner of a DOI is not necessarily the same as the owner of the prefix. Read more about transferring responsibility for DOIs.\nThe importance of opaque identifiers What are opaque suffixes \u0026amp; why they are important\nSuffixes are ‘dumb numbers.’ They are essentially meaningless on their own and meant to be that way\u0026ndash;opaque. One good reason for that is because when something is meaningless, it doesn’t need to be corrected.\nDOIs should not include information that can be understood, interpreted or predicted, especially information that may change. Page numbers and dates are examples of information that shouldn’t be included in suffixes. It is particularly problematic if the suffix includes information that conflicts with the metadata associated with the DOI.\nWe’ve referred to creating ‘suffix patterns’ in the past but information that includes or implies a pattern is also problematic. A sequence of numbers, for example, lends itself to the assumption that future DOIs can be predicted.\nScraping for DOIs - or what appear to be DOIs\u0026ndash;is common, as is the likelihood that what is\u0026ndash;or appears to be\u0026ndash;a pattern will be treated as such. Just as the timing of DOI registration is important, in order to avoid unregistered DOIs, their construction is critical to avoiding interpretation.\nMore information on creating DOIs Here are a few other resources that discuss creating DOIs and the importance of using opaque suffixes.\nhttps://blog.datacite.org/cool-dois/ https://doi.org/10.64000/cc6d3-tkc85 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Handle_System ",
"headings": ["First, a few rules","Guidelines for creating a DOI suffix ","What if your content already has a DOI?","The importance of opaque identifiers","More information on creating DOIs"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/member-setup/constructing-your-dois/the-structure-of-a-doi/",
"title": "DOIs for different levels",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2020-04-08",
"lastmod_ts": 1586304000,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "DOIs at different levels A DOI may refer to a journal or book (a title-level DOI), or to a specific article or chapter.\nShow image × Journals and DOIs Like a set of nesting dolls, a journal may be made up of volumes, each containing a number of issues, each containing a number of articles. You can assign a DOI at each level, for example:\n",
"content": "DOIs at different levels A DOI may refer to a journal or book (a title-level DOI), or to a specific article or chapter.\nShow image × Journals and DOIs Like a set of nesting dolls, a journal may be made up of volumes, each containing a number of issues, each containing a number of articles. You can assign a DOI at each level, for example:\njournal-level-DOI (sometimes called the title-level-DOI) 10.5555/QYPF2031. Like an ISSN, it refers to the whole journal volume-level-DOI 10.5555/FFFU4804 issue-level-DOI 10.5555/QKLE5634 article-level-DOI 10.5555/CNBT7653 Show image × The role of the journal-level-DOI, volume-level-DOI, and issue-level-DOI is to link persistently to a point in the journal structure. These DOIs do not have any associated content, and it does not cost anything to register these DOIs.\nHowever, article-level-DOIs do have associated content, and therefore a fee applies to register these DOIs.\nBooks and DOIs Like a set of nesting dolls, a book may be made up of chapters. Again, you can assign a DOI at each level, for example:\nbook-level-DOI (sometimes called the title-level-DOI) 10.5555/ZAAR1365. Just like an ISBN, it refers to the whole book. chapter-level-DOI 10.5555/TFWD2627 Show image × Both book-level-DOIs and chapter-level-DOIs have associated content, and therefore a fee applies to register these DOIs.\nLearn more about our fees for different record types, and how to construct your DOIs.\n",
"headings": ["DOIs at different levels ","Journals and DOIs ","Books and DOIs "]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/member-setup/constructing-your-dois/suffixes-containing-special-characters/",
"title": "Suffixes containing special characters",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2021-12-03",
"lastmod_ts": 1638489600,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "You might see (or inherit responsibility for) older DOIs which contain other characters, and require special treatment in a URL:\nEncode hash or pound sign # as %23 Do not encode left bracket (or less than) \u0026lt; as \u0026amp;lt; and right bracket (or greater than) \u0026gt; as \u0026amp;gt; when resolving DOIs or retrieving metadata from our REST API to retrieve the metadata (see below) Do not encode forward slash / when resolving DOIs or retrieving metadata from our REST API For example, use the following when resolving DOIs with special characters:\n",
"content": "You might see (or inherit responsibility for) older DOIs which contain other characters, and require special treatment in a URL:\nEncode hash or pound sign # as %23 Do not encode left bracket (or less than) \u0026lt; as \u0026amp;lt; and right bracket (or greater than) \u0026gt; as \u0026amp;gt; when resolving DOIs or retrieving metadata from our REST API to retrieve the metadata (see below) Do not encode forward slash / when resolving DOIs or retrieving metadata from our REST API For example, use the following when resolving DOIs with special characters:\nhttps://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1521-3951(199911)216:1\u0026lt;135::AID-PSSB135\u0026gt;3.0.CO;2-%23 instead of:\nhttps://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1521-3951(199911)216:1\u0026lt;135::AID-PSSB135\u0026gt;3.0.CO;2-# And, to retrieve the metadata in our REST API, using those same DOI examples use:\nhttps://api.crossref.org/works/10.1002/(SICI)1521-3951(199911)216:1%3C135::AID-PSSB135%3E3.0.CO;2-%23 instead of:\nhttps://api.crossref.org/works/10.1002/(SICI)1521-3951(199911)216:1\u0026lt;135::AID-PSSB135\u0026gt;3.0.CO;2-# ",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/member-setup/constructing-your-dois/suggested-doi-registration-workflow-including-suffix-generator/",
"title": "Suggested DOI registration workflow, including suffix generator",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2020-04-08",
"lastmod_ts": 1586304000,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "Here is a suggested workflow for depositing DOIs and metadata in order to register your content. We also provide a suffix generator tool to help you create suffix strings which comply with best practices (suffixes should be opaque, unique, and short). Download the suffix generator (macro-enabled .xlsm file). When you open it, choose Read-only, and Enable macros.\nCreate a spreadsheet to keep track of DOIs assigned (master list). Use one tab per prefix. Add columns for suffix, full DOI, and URL (you can add others if you wish) Generate suffixes using our tool (or invent them yourself), and add each suffix and full DOI to the master list Each time you create a new content item, add its URL to a new row. Display the DOI from the same row on your content item, following our DOI display guidelines Deposit the the DOI and its associated metadata with Crossref. The DOI is only active once it is registered with us. Checking for duplicates: the suffix generator should be sufficiently random to avoid creating duplicates. However, if when you deposit the metadata with Crossref, if the system says the DOI has already been registered, remove it from your master list, and use a new suffix.\n",
"content": "Here is a suggested workflow for depositing DOIs and metadata in order to register your content. We also provide a suffix generator tool to help you create suffix strings which comply with best practices (suffixes should be opaque, unique, and short). Download the suffix generator (macro-enabled .xlsm file). When you open it, choose Read-only, and Enable macros.\nCreate a spreadsheet to keep track of DOIs assigned (master list). Use one tab per prefix. Add columns for suffix, full DOI, and URL (you can add others if you wish) Generate suffixes using our tool (or invent them yourself), and add each suffix and full DOI to the master list Each time you create a new content item, add its URL to a new row. Display the DOI from the same row on your content item, following our DOI display guidelines Deposit the the DOI and its associated metadata with Crossref. The DOI is only active once it is registered with us. Checking for duplicates: the suffix generator should be sufficiently random to avoid creating duplicates. However, if when you deposit the metadata with Crossref, if the system says the DOI has already been registered, remove it from your master list, and use a new suffix.\n",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/member-setup/constructing-your-dois/dois-and-dspace-repositories/",
"title": "DOIs and DSpace repositories",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2025-03-27",
"lastmod_ts": 1743033600,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "We encourage members with institutional repositories to assign DOIs to their original author accepted manuscripts (AAM) (but, members should avoid registering duplicate DOIs for AAMs and versions of record (VoR), as both the AAM and VoR would be cited in the same way).\nHere are some simple guidelines for repositories based on DSpace. DSpace and the DOI both use the Handle system for identifiers. When a DSpace repository is configured it must be registered with CNRI, which provides the repository with a Handle prefix (typically a sequence of numbers). This is not a DOI prefix (also a sequence of numbers which begin with 10.).\n",
"content": "We encourage members with institutional repositories to assign DOIs to their original author accepted manuscripts (AAM) (but, members should avoid registering duplicate DOIs for AAMs and versions of record (VoR), as both the AAM and VoR would be cited in the same way).\nHere are some simple guidelines for repositories based on DSpace. DSpace and the DOI both use the Handle system for identifiers. When a DSpace repository is configured it must be registered with CNRI, which provides the repository with a Handle prefix (typically a sequence of numbers). This is not a DOI prefix (also a sequence of numbers which begin with 10.).\nWhen constructing a Crossref DOI for your repository content, use the DSpace suffix as the DOI suffix. For example, a member with a DOI prefix of 10.1575 would construct a DSpace DOI like this: 10.1575/1912/1099, where:\n10.1575 = DOI prefix 1912 = DSpace prefix 1099 = DSpace suffix The URL registered for the DOI should be the Handle URL, which uses the form http://hdl.handle.net/DSpace-prefix/DSpace-suffix. So in this example, the URL registered for the DOI is: http://hdl.handle.net/1912/1099, and the DOI link is: https://doi.org/10.1575/1912/1099.\nYou may also be interested in recommendations for using ORCID in repositories.\n",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/member-setup/creating-a-landing-page/",
"title": "Creating a landing page",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2026-02-26",
"lastmod_ts": 1772064000,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "As soon your content is registered with Crossref, users will be able to retrieve identifiers and create links with them. Crossref DOIs must resolve to a unique landing (or response) page that you maintain.\nA landing page is a web page that provides further information to someone who has clicked on a DOI link to help them confirm that they are in the right place. It\u0026rsquo;s important that each DOI resolves to a unique landing page that is just for that specific item.\n",
"content": "As soon your content is registered with Crossref, users will be able to retrieve identifiers and create links with them. Crossref DOIs must resolve to a unique landing (or response) page that you maintain.\nA landing page is a web page that provides further information to someone who has clicked on a DOI link to help them confirm that they are in the right place. It\u0026rsquo;s important that each DOI resolves to a unique landing page that is just for that specific item.\nLanding pages for published research outputs The landing page for research outputs should be unique for that item and should contain:\nFull bibliographic information: so that the user can verify they have been delivered to the correct item The DOI displayed as a URL: so that if a reader wishes to cite this item, they can just copy and paste the DOI link (learn more about our DOI display guidelines) A way to access the full-text of the content: It\u0026rsquo;s acceptable for the full-text to be behind a login or paywall - this is fine as long as the landing page is accessible to everyone. A DOI can resolve to the HTML full-text of the content, and if this page includes the criteria above, a separate landing page is not necessary. It\u0026rsquo;s not good practice to link directly to a PDF however, as it will start downloading when the DOI is clicked. Here are some examples of landing pages for published research outputs:\nhttps://doi.org/10.63172/971029zfsclq - an open-access journal article https://doi.org/10.11116/MTA.2.2.2 - a closed-access (i.e., paywalled) journal article https://doi.org/10.54957/jolas.v2i2.182 - an open-access journal article hosted on the OJS platform https://doi.org/10.1109/AIPR.2015.7444535 - a closed-access conference proceeding https://doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.106437 - an open-access book chapter https://doi.org/10.18574/nyu/9780814768839.001.0001 - a closed-access book https://doi.org/10.3133/ofr93184 - an open-access report https://doi.org/10.1079/cabicompendium.46299 - a closed-access dataset https://doi.org/10.62481/f02ed1c5 - a closed-access posted content document (a scientific blog) Many publishers also include abstracts on their landing pages, especially for journal articles.\nAdditional details and examples of good landing pages for many different types of materials can be found here.\nAnd a little more for preprints As well as the criteria above, a preprint landing page (such as https://doi.org/10.31235/osf.io/bkx3n) should also prominently identify the content as a preprint and include a link to any AAM or VOR. This information should be above the fold.\nLanding pages for grants The landing pages for grants should be unique for that specific grant and contain:\nInformation about the grant so the user can verify they\u0026rsquo;ve been delivered to the correct item The DOI displayed as a URL - learn more about our DOI display guidelines. Here are two example landing pages for grants: https://doi.org/10.37717/220020589 and https://doi.org/10.35802/107769.\n",
"headings": ["Landing pages for published research outputs","And a little more for preprints","Landing pages for grants"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/member-setup/working-with-a-service-provider/",
"title": "Working with a service provider",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2020-04-08",
"lastmod_ts": 1586304000,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "Service providers such as hosting platforms and XML providers may provide or deposit metadata with Crossref on behalf of members.\nThese organisations provide key services to our shared community, by formatting metadata and providing visibility to registered content on hosting platforms. Working closely with service providers as our own services develop is critical to improving research communications at all points in the supply chain.\nIf you\u0026rsquo;re working with a service provider, check that they’re helping you fulfil your member obligations, and look at your Participation Report to see how your metadata is growing. Learn more about metadata stewardship, and how our reports help you evaluate and improve your metadata. If you would like your reports to go directly to a contact at your service provider, please contact us so we can add their details.\n",
"content": "Service providers such as hosting platforms and XML providers may provide or deposit metadata with Crossref on behalf of members.\nThese organisations provide key services to our shared community, by formatting metadata and providing visibility to registered content on hosting platforms. Working closely with service providers as our own services develop is critical to improving research communications at all points in the supply chain.\nIf you\u0026rsquo;re working with a service provider, check that they’re helping you fulfil your member obligations, and look at your Participation Report to see how your metadata is growing. Learn more about metadata stewardship, and how our reports help you evaluate and improve your metadata. If you would like your reports to go directly to a contact at your service provider, please contact us so we can add their details.\nEven if you are not moving platforms, you might find our checklist for platform migration helpful in discussing aspects of metadata deposit with your service provider.\nIf you are looking to access rather than deposit Crossref metadata, learn more about metadata retrieval and choose the best service for your needs.\n",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/member-setup/working-with-a-service-provider/hosting-platforms/",
"title": "Hosting platforms",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2020-04-08",
"lastmod_ts": 1586304000,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "Hosting platforms are organisations that host publisher content. They give visibility to Crossref metadata in two key ways:\nPlatforms register content on behalf of publishers. This means that they are responsible for a significant proportion of the metadata records in Crossref. Platforms show published research to the world. They support authors, readers and search engines through the display of bibliographic metadata, links to citing articles and Cited-by counts, and updates and retractions through Crossmark. Hosting platforms deliver metadata to Crossref as well as consuming it as output. Citation matching is a good example of metadata retrieval - try this out using our Metadata Search, and learn more about looking up metadata and identifiers.\n",
"content": "Hosting platforms are organisations that host publisher content. They give visibility to Crossref metadata in two key ways:\nPlatforms register content on behalf of publishers. This means that they are responsible for a significant proportion of the metadata records in Crossref. Platforms show published research to the world. They support authors, readers and search engines through the display of bibliographic metadata, links to citing articles and Cited-by counts, and updates and retractions through Crossmark. Hosting platforms deliver metadata to Crossref as well as consuming it as output. Citation matching is a good example of metadata retrieval - try this out using our Metadata Search, and learn more about looking up metadata and identifiers.\nHosting platforms work with our members and help deliver Crossref services to our shared community. When we plan a change or new service, we help hosting platforms to prepare both for the change and for questions from members.\nContent sometimes moves from one member or platform to another. We aim to make these transitions as smooth as possible, so that deposits and other key activities continue uninterrupted. Learn more about transferring responsibility for DOIs.\n",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/member-setup/working-with-a-service-provider/manuscript-submission-systems/",
"title": "Manuscript submission systems",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2020-04-08",
"lastmod_ts": 1586304000,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "Metadata first takes shape with author manuscripts.\nDiscoverability starts here Manuscript submission systems, and the authors who use them, start metadata on its long lifecycle. Publishers’ instructions to authors and author-created metadata (such as keywords) are first captured by manuscript submission systems.\nAlong with other publishing service organisations such as typesetters, submission systems are a kind of service provider, and are the first step in getting content registered, often by yet another kind of service provider, hosting platforms.\n",
"content": "Metadata first takes shape with author manuscripts.\nDiscoverability starts here Manuscript submission systems, and the authors who use them, start metadata on its long lifecycle. Publishers’ instructions to authors and author-created metadata (such as keywords) are first captured by manuscript submission systems.\nAlong with other publishing service organisations such as typesetters, submission systems are a kind of service provider, and are the first step in getting content registered, often by yet another kind of service provider, hosting platforms.\nBeyond bibliographic Learn about the importance of depositing different types of metadata.\nWe encourage the fullest metadata possible and recognize that manuscript submission systems are among those that make this possible!\n",
"headings": ["Discoverability starts here ","Beyond bibliographic "]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/member-setup/working-with-a-service-provider/planning-a-platform-migration/",
"title": "Planning a platform migration",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2025-08-11",
"lastmod_ts": 1754870400,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "We understand that migrating your hosting platform is an extremely stressful time. There’s so much to think about and plan for, and the last thing you want to be worrying about is whether your DOIs will resolve after the move and what this will mean for the quality of your metadata.\nMembers often ask us for advice on the best way to handle a platform migration. This handy guide will help you prepare for the move, and gives hints and tips for managing the actual process as smoothly as possible. It also includes a very useful checklist to include in your request for proposal (RFP) to make sure you’re asking the right questions of your vendors and making life easier for everyone involved.\n",
"content": "We understand that migrating your hosting platform is an extremely stressful time. There’s so much to think about and plan for, and the last thing you want to be worrying about is whether your DOIs will resolve after the move and what this will mean for the quality of your metadata.\nMembers often ask us for advice on the best way to handle a platform migration. This handy guide will help you prepare for the move, and gives hints and tips for managing the actual process as smoothly as possible. It also includes a very useful checklist to include in your request for proposal (RFP) to make sure you’re asking the right questions of your vendors and making life easier for everyone involved.\nSelecting your new service provider A key element in selecting your new service provider will be ensuring they can do everything you need them to do with Crossref.\nThere’s a big difference between just depositing skeleton metadata and depositing full, rich metadata and participating in all our services. And there’s sometimes a big difference in cost from different providers. You’ll want to be clear on what you need up front so your providers know what you’re expecting and you don’t get any surprises further down the line. This also means you’ll be able to accurately compare the different service providers, and have a smoother working relationship with your chosen service provider in the future. So where do you start?\nMake sure you know how you’re participating in Crossref today The first place to start is to be clear on how you’re participating with us right now. This means your starting point is a metadata audit. We know you probably won’t want to do this with everything else that’s going on with a platform move. However, members who haven’t done this up front have said that they wish they had. They ended up having to do one anyway but further down the process and with less time, adding to the stress. It’s definitely better to start this early.\nThe easiest way to see what metadata you’re already depositing with us is to use our Participation Reports tool. It may surprise you to see what you are and aren’t currently depositing, or what you current platform provider is or isn’t depositing on your behalf.\nThink about how you want to participate in Crossref in the future Once you’re clear on how you’re participating currently, think about what you may want to do in the future.\nWhat record types are you registering with us right now, and what you might want to register in the future? Perhaps you’re only registering journal articles right now, but are planning to register preprints in the future.\nWhat metadata elements are you registering with us right now, and what you may want to register later? Are you registering references? They’re a key addition for discoverability and especially recommended if you want to use the Cited-by service in the future. Are you registering full-text URLs and license information for text and data mining? What about full-text URLs for the Similarity Check service?\nLearn more about all our services.\nAsk the right questions of your service providers up front Members in the community have told us that even when some service providers have confirmed in their contract that they \u0026ldquo;support Crossref content registration\u0026rdquo; or \u0026ldquo;deposit metadata with Crossref\u0026rdquo; there have still been surprises when working together in terms of the amount of metadata the service provider can actually deposit, or costs for doing this fully.\nTo help ask Crossref-related questions of service providers, we’ve created a checklist. This contains specific questions to ask about content registration. You can add the checklist into your RFP so you’re absolutely clear on what your prospective service providers can and can’t provide. Your metadata audit and your thinking about what you want to do in the future will help you to select the right sections from the checklist.\nPlanning the changeover process Once you’ve selected your new provider and are starting to think about the changeover process and timings, please let us know.\nConfirm with us which platform you’re moving to, and who we’ll be working with when you actually migrate. The best model for success is for us to work with a single contact. It doesn’t matter if that contact works for you or your new service provider, the key thing is that we keep the same contact consistently through your migration process.\nIf you need to update a lot of URLs (over 50,000) please let us know as soon as possible when you’re planning on doing this. This will slow down our deposit queue for other members, and we’ll need to avoid doing any maintenance while your update is running, so we’ll need to coordinate carefully with you on this.\nThis is a great opportunity to review the other contacts we hold for you, and make sure our billing, voting, technical, metadata quality, and primary (formerly business) contacts are up-to-date.\nAccount details and permissions You need to think carefully about how your service provider will register (and update) content on your behalf.\nIf your service provider will be using their own Crossref account credentials to register your content with us, do let us know in advance so we can give them permission to update your prefix using their credentials. We also may need to remove the account credentials for your old service provider. If your new service provider will be sharing your Crossref account credentials, we may need to update passwords so that your old service provider doesn\u0026rsquo;t accidentally continue to update your records. Updating the URLs for your existing DOIs You’ll probably need to update the URLs for all your existing DOIs when you move. Updating multiple DOIs at a time in our system is a process, and can’t happen at a single moment in time. Do make sure that your platforms can coordinate redirection while this is happening.\nThe good news is that this update won’t cost you anything extra with Crossref - you’re only charged registration fees the first time you register a DOI. Although if you’ve uncovered backlist DOIs that were never registered as part of your metadata audit you will need to pay registration fees for them.\nDon’t forget that you may have other types of URLs in the metadata that will need updating as well as the main URL where the DOI resolves to. If you’ve previously registered text and data mining URLs, or full-text URLs for Similarity Check, these will also need updating.\nIf you’re planning on updating your URLs, you may do so yourself by following these instructions. If you have more than 50,000 DOIs to update, do get in contact with us and we can coordinate timing of the update and help you manage the process efficiently.\nUpdating contacts for reports We send out a range of reports to help our members manage their metadata. Please confirm with us which named contacts (and email addresses) should receive Crossref reports going forward. These reports include:\nConflict report DOI error report Preprint version of record report Resolution report Title report Don’t forget you may already have reports set up to go to your existing service provider, so do ask us to delete these.\nLearn more about reports.\nAfter the migration Once your migration is complete, do keep an eye on your Participation Reports to make sure everything is happening as you think it should.\n",
"headings": ["Selecting your new service provider ","Make sure you know how you’re participating in Crossref today ","Think about how you want to participate in Crossref in the future ","Ask the right questions of your service providers up front ","Planning the changeover process ","Account details and permissions ","Updating the URLs for your existing DOIs ","Updating contacts for reports ","After the migration "]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/member-setup/working-with-a-service-provider/checklist-for-platform-migration/",
"title": "Checklist for platform migration",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2025-08-13",
"lastmod_ts": 1755043200,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "This checklist will help you ask the right questions of your content hosting providers when selecting a new platform. It helps ensure that you can continue to participate with us in the way you want to after a migration - without any surprises.\nYou can cut and paste the bits you need into your RFP, or use File \u0026gt; Print in your browser to save or print a copy to use in your meeting. But before you remove any sections, do check that you definitely won’t want them in the future. Even if you aren’t planning to use all the options now, it’s good to know what your chosen platform will be able to do for you in the future, and whether there will be any extra costs involved.\n",
"content": "This checklist will help you ask the right questions of your content hosting providers when selecting a new platform. It helps ensure that you can continue to participate with us in the way you want to after a migration - without any surprises.\nYou can cut and paste the bits you need into your RFP, or use File \u0026gt; Print in your browser to save or print a copy to use in your meeting. But before you remove any sections, do check that you definitely won’t want them in the future. Even if you aren’t planning to use all the options now, it’s good to know what your chosen platform will be able to do for you in the future, and whether there will be any extra costs involved.\nRecord types Is the potential provider able to register these record types with Crossref (using the relevant schema)?\nRecord type Able to register? Extra charge? Charge (if applicable) Books, chapters and reference works Components (as part of other content) Conference proceedings and conference papers Datasets Journal articles Peer review reports Pending publications (DOIs on acceptance) Preprints Other posted content (such as blogs, posters) Reports and working papers Standards Theses and dissertations Grants that you award Metadata elements Is the potential provider able to gather and register these metadata elements with Crossref?\nMetadata type Able to register? Extra charge? Charge (if applicable) Abstracts References Award/grant numbers Open Funder Registry IDs ROR identifiers for affiliations ROR identifiers for funders Full-text URLs for text mining License URLs (eg for Version of Record (VOR), Accepted Manuscript (AM), Text and Data Mining (TDM) or STM\u0026rsquo;s Article Sharing Framework (ASF)) ORCID iDs for contributors Relationships (such as data, translations, preprints, versions) Resolution URL, title, authors, and dates Full-text URLs for Similarity Check Other Crossref services Is the potential provider able to support these services?\nOther Crossref services Able to support? Extra fee? Fee (if applicable) Cited-by display Crossmark display |Similarity Check|\nBack-year records Is the potential provider able to support the deposit of metadata for back-year records?\nBack-year content Able to support? Extra fee? Fee (if applicable) Will back-year content be supported? Will back-year content be migrated at the same time as current? Will back-year content registration happen at the same time? DOI obligations and best practice Is the potential provider able to support the Crossref best practice and obligations?\nCrossref best practice and obligations Able to support? Extra fee? Fee (if applicable) DOI display guidelines compliance Reference linking(displaying Crossref DOIs in article reference lists) Code of conduct for liaising with Crossref staff Member Practices Other relevant obligations set out in the Membership Terms ",
"headings": ["Record types ","Metadata elements ","Other Crossref services ","Back-year records ","DOI obligations and best practice "]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/member-setup/leveling-up/",
"title": "Leveling up as a member",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2025-05-27",
"lastmod_ts": 1748304000,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "Once you’ve mastered the three steps of setting up as a member and have registered and displayed your new DOIs, it doesn’t stop there. You’ll need to continue to register any new content that you publish, and make sure to keep the metadata associated with existing DOIs up to date. There are also a range of other services you could use.\nReference linking Use other services Maintain your DOIs and metadata Step 4: Reference linking It’s an obligation of membership that you include other members’ DOIs in your reference lists - and they will do the same for you. Learn more about what this means and how to find DOIs in our documentation on reference linking.\n",
"content": "Once you’ve mastered the three steps of setting up as a member and have registered and displayed your new DOIs, it doesn’t stop there. You’ll need to continue to register any new content that you publish, and make sure to keep the metadata associated with existing DOIs up to date. There are also a range of other services you could use.\nReference linking Use other services Maintain your DOIs and metadata Step 4: Reference linking It’s an obligation of membership that you include other members’ DOIs in your reference lists - and they will do the same for you. Learn more about what this means and how to find DOIs in our documentation on reference linking.\nStep 5: Use other services Alongside content registration and reference linking we offer a range of other services to help make your metadata richer, help you identify how and where your content is being talked about, and support editorial workflows.\na) Richer metadata Funder Registry: you can use this open and unique registry of persistent identifiers for grant-giving organisations around the world so you can include Funder IDs in your metadata. Crossmark: add richer metadata related to ethics and integrity. and display this information on your content with the Crossmark button. b) Citations and more Cited-by: find and display the number of times your content has been cited, and link to the citing content. Data citations: share DOIs for datasets to give them better visibility. c) Support editorial workflows Similarity Check: this service gives Crossref members reduced rate access to the iThenticate service from Turnitin so they can check submitted manuscripts for similarities to published content. Step 6: Maintain your DOIs and metadata It’s an obligation of membership to make sure that your DOIs always resolve to a live landing page, so you may need to update your resource resolution URLs if your website moves or if you change platforms. You can also add to or amend existing metadata at any time. Any changes to an existing DOI after its initial registration are free of charge. Learn more about metadata stewardship.\nIn the case of significant changes, you can inform the community by registering updates.\n",
"headings": ["Step 4: Reference linking ","Step 5: Use other services ","a) Richer metadata ","b) Citations and more ","c) Support editorial workflows ","Step 6: Maintain your DOIs and metadata "]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/schema-library/required-recommended-elements/",
"title": "Required, recommended, and optional metadata",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2021-05-13",
"lastmod_ts": 1620864000,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "Each record type we support has a unique set of requirements and recommended metadata. Contributor metadata is consistent across record types and, while not always required, has consistent recommendations if present.\nRequired metadata must be included or your submission will be rejected. Recommended metadata should be included to create a complete metadata record. Optional metadata should be included if relevant, but will not be relevant for most records.\nFind required, recommended and optional metadata for:\n",
"content": "Each record type we support has a unique set of requirements and recommended metadata. Contributor metadata is consistent across record types and, while not always required, has consistent recommendations if present.\nRequired metadata must be included or your submission will be rejected. Recommended metadata should be included to create a complete metadata record. Optional metadata should be included if relevant, but will not be relevant for most records.\nFind required, recommended and optional metadata for:\nContributor Journal Book Conference Proceeding Database Dissertation Posted content Report / working paper Standard Peer Review Contributor metadata Required Surname Recommended given_name, suffix, affiliation, ORCID Journal and article metadata Required Journal (journal_metadata) full_title, ISSN or title-level DOI and URL Issue (issue_metadata) issue, publication_date (year) Article (article_metadata) titles, publication_date (year), doi_data Issue elements are only required if a DOI is being deposited at the issue level. Article elements are likewise only required for article DOI deposits.\nRecommended Journal (journal_metadata) abbrev_title, doi_data, coden, journal_issue, archive-locations (with one archive name), title-level DOI and URL Issue (issue_metadata) publication_date (month, day), journal_volume, contributors, issue, doi_data Article (article_metadata) contributors, ORCID, publication_date (day, month), pages (first_page, last_page), citation_list, funding, license, Crossmark metadata and JATS-formatted abstracts Optional publisher_item, special_numbering, component_list Book metadata Required Series titles, ISSN, volume, publication_date (year), publisher (publisher_name) Set titles, volume Book titles, publication_date (year), publisher Chapter doi_data Recommended Series doi_data,edition_number, ISBN, contributors, coden, series_number, citation_list Set contributors, ISBN, edition_number, citation_list, doi_data Book contributors, ISBN, edition_number, doi_data, citation_list, funding, license, and Crossmark metadata Chapter contributors, titles, pages, publication_date, citation_list, funding, license, and Crossmark metadata Optional publisher_item, part_number, component_number,component_list Conference Proceeding metadata Required Series titles, ISSN Proceeding level proceedings_title, publisher, publication_date (year) Conference paper contributors, titles, doi_data Recommended Series level doi_data, contributors, series_number, ISBN Conference level volume, contributors, ISBN, event_metadata (conference_date, conference_location, conference_acronym, conference_theme, conference_sponsor, conference_number), proceedings_subject Conference paper publication_date, pages, citation_list, funding, license, and Crossmark metadata Optional publisher_item, coden, component_list Dataset metadata Required Database level titles Dataset level doi_data Recommended Database level contributors, description, database_date, publisher, institution, doi_data Dataset level contributors, titles, database_date, description, format, citation_list, component_list, funding, license, and Crossmark metadata Optional publisher_item, component_list Dissertation metadata Required titles, approval_date, institution, doi_data Recommended contributors, ISBN, degree, ORCID, funding, license, and Crossmark metadata Optional citation_list, component_list Posted content metadata Required titles, posted_date, doi_data Recommended group_title, contributors, acceptance_date, institution, item_number, abstracts, doi_data, citation_list, funding, license, Crossmark metadata and JATS-formatted abstracts Optional component_list Report / Working paper metadata Required Series level titles, ISSN Report level title, publication_date (year) Recommended Series level contributors, coden, series_number, volume, doi_data, edition_number, approval_date, publisher, institution, doi_data, citation_list Report level contributors, ORCIDs, edition_number, approval_date, ISBN, publisher, institution, citation_list, funding, license, and Crossmark metadata Optional publisher_item, contract_number Standard metadata Required Standard level title, designator, approval_date, standard_body_name, standard_body_acronym Item level contributors, titles, component_number, publication_date (year), pages, publisher_item, doi_data Recommended Standard level contributors, edition_number, ISBN, institution, citation_list, funding, license, and Crossmark metadata metadata Item level citation_list Optional publisher_item, content_item, component_list Peer Review metadata Required title, review_date (year), relation (isReviewOf) Recommended contributors, institution, competing_interest_statement, running_number, license metadata ",
"headings": ["Contributor metadata ","Journal and article metadata ","Book metadata ","Conference Proceeding metadata ","Dataset metadata ","Dissertation metadata ","Posted content metadata ","Report / Working paper metadata ","Standard metadata ","Peer Review metadata "]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/schema-library/markup-guide-metadata-segments/",
"title": "Markup guides for metadata segments",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2025-03-18",
"lastmod_ts": 1742256000,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "For a deeper dive into each metadata segment, an introduction and markup guide for each are below:\nAbstracts Affiliations and ROR Archive locations Article IDs Contributors Data and Software Citation Face markup within titles Full-text URLs Funding information ISSN and ISBN License Information MathML Multi-language content and translations References Relationships Titles Each record model also has its own markup guide and full XML examples are also available in our GitLab repository.\n",
"content": "For a deeper dive into each metadata segment, an introduction and markup guide for each are below:\nAbstracts Affiliations and ROR Archive locations Article IDs Contributors Data and Software Citation Face markup within titles Full-text URLs Funding information ISSN and ISBN License Information MathML Multi-language content and translations References Relationships Titles Each record model also has its own markup guide and full XML examples are also available in our GitLab repository.\n",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/schema-library/markup-guide-record-types/",
"title": "Markup guides for record types",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2022-05-20",
"lastmod_ts": 1653004800,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "For a deeper dive into each record model, an introduction and markup guide for each are below:\nBooks and chapters markup guide Components markup guide Conference proceedings markup guide Datasets markup guide Dissertations markup guide Grants markup guide Journals and articles markup guide Peer reviews markup guide Pending publications markup guide Posted content (includes preprints) markup guide Reports and working papers markup guide Standards markup guide Many segments of metadata are repeatable across record models and have their own markup guides.\n",
"content": "For a deeper dive into each record model, an introduction and markup guide for each are below:\nBooks and chapters markup guide Components markup guide Conference proceedings markup guide Datasets markup guide Dissertations markup guide Grants markup guide Journals and articles markup guide Peer reviews markup guide Pending publications markup guide Posted content (includes preprints) markup guide Reports and working papers markup guide Standards markup guide Many segments of metadata are repeatable across record models and have their own markup guides.\n",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/schema-library/xsd-schema-quick-reference/",
"title": "XSD schema quick reference",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2021-10-05",
"lastmod_ts": 1633392000,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "We support additional schema (not listed here) for legacy purposes.\nDeposit schema Used for registering and updating DOI metadata records:\nSchema Purpose Status Further info grant_id0.2.0.xsd grant metadata recommended documentation crossref5.4.0.xsd full metadata deposits recommended documentation crossref5.3.1.xsd full metadata deposits recommended documentation crossref4.8.1.xsd full metadata deposits recommended documentation AccessIndicators.xsd license data imported relations.xsd relationships between DOIs and other identifiers imported clinicaltrials.xsd relationships between publications that report on a clinical trial imported doi_resources4.4.2.xsd used to append or update specific sets of metadata to an existing record recommended documentation Query schema Used for formatting XML queries:\n",
"content": "We support additional schema (not listed here) for legacy purposes.\nDeposit schema Used for registering and updating DOI metadata records:\nSchema Purpose Status Further info grant_id0.2.0.xsd grant metadata recommended documentation crossref5.4.0.xsd full metadata deposits recommended documentation crossref5.3.1.xsd full metadata deposits recommended documentation crossref4.8.1.xsd full metadata deposits recommended documentation AccessIndicators.xsd license data imported relations.xsd relationships between DOIs and other identifiers imported clinicaltrials.xsd relationships between publications that report on a clinical trial imported doi_resources4.4.2.xsd used to append or update specific sets of metadata to an existing record recommended documentation Query schema Used for formatting XML queries:\nSchema Purpose Further info Crossref_query_input2.0.xsd used to input XML queries to the system documentation Metadata retrieval schema Used for retrieving our metadata:\nSchema Purpose Further info crossref_query_output2.0.xsd returns query results in xsd_xml format, used for Cited-by results documentation crossref_query_output3.0.xsd returns query results in UNIXSD format documentation unixref1.1.xsd returns query results in the UNIXML format, also used to support the data delivered by our OAI-PMH service documentation unixref1.0.xsd returns query results in the UNIXML format for some older content, also used to support the data delivered by our OAI-PMH service documentation crossref_output3.0.1.xsd used to support data files generated for bulk data distribution documentation OAI-PMH.cr.xsd accommodates differences between Crossref\u0026rsquo;s OAI-PMH implementation and the published Open Archives OAI 2.0 schema documentation ",
"headings": ["Deposit schema ","Query schema ","Metadata retrieval schema "]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/schema-library/schema-versions/",
"title": "Schema versions",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2025-02-10",
"lastmod_ts": 1739145600,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "We support several versions of our metadata input and grants schema, as well as XML Schema Definition (XSD) schema for looking up and retrieving DOIs and metadata. A quick reference is available. The metadata input schema is used to deposit metadata for most record types, except Grants, which have their own schema.\nWe currently support versions 4.3.0 to 5.4.0 of our main metadata schema. If you are beginning to register your metadata with Crossref you should use the most recent version (currently 5.4.0) to ensure you are able to take advantage of all metadata deposit options. We also have a resource-only deposit schema that may be used to add some pieces of metadata to an existing record.\n",
"content": "We support several versions of our metadata input and grants schema, as well as XML Schema Definition (XSD) schema for looking up and retrieving DOIs and metadata. A quick reference is available. The metadata input schema is used to deposit metadata for most record types, except Grants, which have their own schema.\nWe currently support versions 4.3.0 to 5.4.0 of our main metadata schema. If you are beginning to register your metadata with Crossref you should use the most recent version (currently 5.4.0) to ensure you are able to take advantage of all metadata deposit options. We also have a resource-only deposit schema that may be used to add some pieces of metadata to an existing record.\nMetadata input schema versioning All supported schema are available in our Schema GitLab repository. Versions 4.3.0 - 4.8.1 of our schema are backwards-compatible with the exception of deposits for standards, which may only be deposited with version 4.3.6 and above. A breaking change to affiliations metadata was made with version 5.3.1\nWe are now incrementing our input schema version numbers with each change for all updates after version 4.4.2. Note that addtional schema versions are available via gitlab (5.0 - 5.2 for example) but are not documented for use as subsequent versions were released at the same time (5.3.1).\nRecommended metadata deposit schema crossref5.4.0xsd: type attribute added to citations, support added for version numbering, status support added for posted content/preprints Recommended grants deposit schema grant_id0.2.0.xsd: adds support for ROR identifiers to identify funders; adds new funding types (APC, BPC, infrastructure) Recommended resource-only deposit schema doi_resources5.4.0.xsd Also supported crossref5.3.1.xsd: adds support for ROR, wikidata, and ISNI identifiers in affiliations (breaking change) crossref4.8.1.xsd: changes include support for ISBN that begin with 979, changes to the regex for the email_address field, relaxed regex for given_name to allow numbers, and schema refactoring. crossref4.4.2.xsd: adds support for pending publication, distributed usage logging (DUL), multiple dissertation authors, abstracts for all record types, support for JATS 1.2 abstracts, and adds acceptance_date element to journal article, book, book chapter, and conference papers crossref4.4.1.xsd: adds support for peer reviews crossref4.4.0.xsd: adds support for posted content (includes preprints) crossref4.3.7.xsd: adds support for linked clinical trials, journal deposits without ISSNs crossref4.3.6.xsd: expanded support for standards crossref4.3.5.xsd: supports relationships between DOIs and other objects crossref4.3.4.xsd: add archive_location option, change name element to depositor_name crossref4.3.3.xsd: modifications for standards crossref4.3.2.xsd: adds support for license metadata crossref4.3.1.xsd: adds support for Crossmark, funding data, ORCID iDs crossref4.3.0.xsd: revisions to handling of books doi_resources4.4.2.xsd doi_resources4.3.6.xsd doi_resources4.3.5.xsd doi_resources4.3.4.xsd doi_resources4.3.2.xsd doi_resources4.3.0.xsd ",
"headings": ["Metadata input schema versioning","Recommended metadata deposit schema ","Recommended grants deposit schema","Recommended resource-only deposit schema ","Also supported "]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/schema-library/metadata-deposit-schema-5-4-0/",
"title": "Metadata deposit schema 5.4.0",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2025-03-17",
"lastmod_ts": 1742169600,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "Beginning with deposit schema version 4.4.2, all Crossref schema releases are available in our GitLab schema repository as a bundle. Bundle 0.4.0 contains schema version 5.4.0 and associated files.\nSchema: crossref5.4.0.xsd Full documentation: 5.4.0\nCrossref included schema:\ncommon5.4.0.xsd fundref.xsd AccessIndicators.xsd clinicaltrials.xsd relations.xsd languages5.4.0.xsd mediatypes5.4.0.xsd External imported schema:\nMathML JATS Changes from 5.3.1\ntype attribute added to citations element to allow citations to be labeled with a specific citation type (journal article, dataset, etc.) version number support added to journal article, content item (book chapter/segment, report chapter/segment, and standard chapter/segment), proceedings paper, posted content, database / dataset, report, standard, and dissertation status added to posted content record types number of allowed ISBN increased to 100 @language attribute values have been expanded to include ISO 639-2 values and moved to languages5.4.0.xsd ‘similarity-check’ has been added as a crawler value to support Similarity Check crawling. The list of supported media types (labeled mime types in our schema) have been expanded and moved to mediatypes5.4.0.xsd The language values associated with the ‘language’ attribute have been expanded to include ISO 639-2. The ‘language’ attribute assigned to the ‘relations’ xsd has not yet been updated, this will be included in a later update. ",
"content": "Beginning with deposit schema version 4.4.2, all Crossref schema releases are available in our GitLab schema repository as a bundle. Bundle 0.4.0 contains schema version 5.4.0 and associated files.\nSchema: crossref5.4.0.xsd Full documentation: 5.4.0\nCrossref included schema:\ncommon5.4.0.xsd fundref.xsd AccessIndicators.xsd clinicaltrials.xsd relations.xsd languages5.4.0.xsd mediatypes5.4.0.xsd External imported schema:\nMathML JATS Changes from 5.3.1\ntype attribute added to citations element to allow citations to be labeled with a specific citation type (journal article, dataset, etc.) version number support added to journal article, content item (book chapter/segment, report chapter/segment, and standard chapter/segment), proceedings paper, posted content, database / dataset, report, standard, and dissertation status added to posted content record types number of allowed ISBN increased to 100 @language attribute values have been expanded to include ISO 639-2 values and moved to languages5.4.0.xsd ‘similarity-check’ has been added as a crawler value to support Similarity Check crawling. The list of supported media types (labeled mime types in our schema) have been expanded and moved to mediatypes5.4.0.xsd The language values associated with the ‘language’ attribute have been expanded to include ISO 639-2. The ‘language’ attribute assigned to the ‘relations’ xsd has not yet been updated, this will be included in a later update. ",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/schema-library/metadata-deposit-schema-5-3-1/",
"title": "Metadata deposit schema 5.3.1",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2021-10-05",
"lastmod_ts": 1633392000,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "Beginning with deposit schema version 4.4.2, all Crossref schema releases are available in our GitLab schema repository as a bundle. Bundle 0.3.1 contains schema version 5.3.1 and associated files.\nSchema: crossref5.3.1.xsd Full documentation: 5.3.1\nCrossref included schema:\ncommon5.3.1.xsd fundref.xsd AccessIndicators.xsd clinicaltrials.xsd relations.xsd External imported schema:\nMathML JATS Changes from 4.8.1\nreplace \u0026lt;affiliation\u0026gt; tag with \u0026lt;affiliations\u0026gt; tag to support new affiliations structure add \u0026lt;institution_id\u0026gt; element to support ROR and other org IDs make either \u0026lt;institution_id\u0026gt; or \u0026lt;institution_name\u0026gt; required within institution metadata relax regex rules for \u0026lt;given_name\u0026gt; element ",
"content": "Beginning with deposit schema version 4.4.2, all Crossref schema releases are available in our GitLab schema repository as a bundle. Bundle 0.3.1 contains schema version 5.3.1 and associated files.\nSchema: crossref5.3.1.xsd Full documentation: 5.3.1\nCrossref included schema:\ncommon5.3.1.xsd fundref.xsd AccessIndicators.xsd clinicaltrials.xsd relations.xsd External imported schema:\nMathML JATS Changes from 4.8.1\nreplace \u0026lt;affiliation\u0026gt; tag with \u0026lt;affiliations\u0026gt; tag to support new affiliations structure add \u0026lt;institution_id\u0026gt; element to support ROR and other org IDs make either \u0026lt;institution_id\u0026gt; or \u0026lt;institution_name\u0026gt; required within institution metadata relax regex rules for \u0026lt;given_name\u0026gt; element ",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/schema-library/grants-schema/",
"title": "Grants schema",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2025-02-10",
"lastmod_ts": 1739145600,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "All metadata records and identifiers registered with Crossref are submitted as XML formatted using our metadata input schema. Unlike other objects registered with Crossref, grants have their own grant-specific input schema.\nVersion 0.2.0 was released in January 2025 and added support for ROR identifiers to identify funders as well as new funding types (APC, BPC, infrastructure).\nCrossref schema releases are available in our GitLab schema repository as a bundle. Bundle 0.3.3 contains grants schema version 0.2.0 and associated files.\n",
"content": "All metadata records and identifiers registered with Crossref are submitted as XML formatted using our metadata input schema. Unlike other objects registered with Crossref, grants have their own grant-specific input schema.\nVersion 0.2.0 was released in January 2025 and added support for ROR identifiers to identify funders as well as new funding types (APC, BPC, infrastructure).\nCrossref schema releases are available in our GitLab schema repository as a bundle. Bundle 0.3.3 contains grants schema version 0.2.0 and associated files.\nFull documentation: grant_id0.2.0\nAlso supported Version 0.1.1 Version 0.1.0 ",
"headings": ["Also supported"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/schema-library/resource-only-deposit-schema-5-4-0/",
"title": "Resource-only deposit schema 5.4.0",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2025-03-17",
"lastmod_ts": 1742169600,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "Schema: doi_resources5.4.0.xsd Full documentation: doi_resource5.4.0\ndoi_resources5.4.0.xsd is included in bundle 0.3.3 and imports\ncommon5.4.0.xsd fundref.xsd AccessIndicators.xsd clinicaltrials.xsd relations.xsd languages5.4.0.xsd mediatypes5.4.0.xsd ",
"content": "Schema: doi_resources5.4.0.xsd Full documentation: doi_resource5.4.0\ndoi_resources5.4.0.xsd is included in bundle 0.3.3 and imports\ncommon5.4.0.xsd fundref.xsd AccessIndicators.xsd clinicaltrials.xsd relations.xsd languages5.4.0.xsd mediatypes5.4.0.xsd ",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/schema-library/metadata-deposit-schema/",
"title": "Metadata deposit schema",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2025-03-17",
"lastmod_ts": 1742169600,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "The current recommended schema version is 5.4.0 but the versions listed below are available and supported as well.\nResource schema 4.4.2 Schema: doi_resources4.4.2.xsd Full documentation: doi_resource4.4.2\ndoi_resources4.4.2.xsd is included in bundle 0.1.0 and imports\ncommon4.4.2.xsd fundref.xsd AccessIndicators.xsd clinicaltrials.xsd relations.xsd Resource schema 4.3.6 Schema: doi_resources4.3.6.xsd Full documentation: doi_resource4.3.6\nCrossref included schema:\ncommon4.3.7.xsd fundref.xsd AccessIndicators.xsd clinicaltrials.xsd relations.xsd common4.3.5.xsd 4.8.1 Bundle 0.3.1 contains schema version 4.8.1 and associated files.\nSchema: crossref4.8.1.xsd Full documentation: 4.8.1\nCrossref included schema:\ncommon4.8.1.xsd fundref.xsd AccessIndicators.xsd clinicaltrials.xsd relations.xsd External imported schema:\n",
"content": "The current recommended schema version is 5.4.0 but the versions listed below are available and supported as well.\nResource schema 4.4.2 Schema: doi_resources4.4.2.xsd Full documentation: doi_resource4.4.2\ndoi_resources4.4.2.xsd is included in bundle 0.1.0 and imports\ncommon4.4.2.xsd fundref.xsd AccessIndicators.xsd clinicaltrials.xsd relations.xsd Resource schema 4.3.6 Schema: doi_resources4.3.6.xsd Full documentation: doi_resource4.3.6\nCrossref included schema:\ncommon4.3.7.xsd fundref.xsd AccessIndicators.xsd clinicaltrials.xsd relations.xsd common4.3.5.xsd 4.8.1 Bundle 0.3.1 contains schema version 4.8.1 and associated files.\nSchema: crossref4.8.1.xsd Full documentation: 4.8.1\nCrossref included schema:\ncommon4.8.1.xsd fundref.xsd AccessIndicators.xsd clinicaltrials.xsd relations.xsd External imported schema:\nMathML JATS Changes from 4.4.2\nrefactoring of schema relax regex rules for email addresses allow ISBN beginning with 979 update imported JATS schema to v. 1.3 relax regex rules for \u0026lt;given_name\u0026gt; element 4.4.2 Bundle 0.1.0 contains schema version 4.4.2 and associated files.\nSchema: crossref4.4.2.xsd Full documentation: 4.4.2\nCrossref included schema:\ncommon4.4.2.xsd fundref.xsd AccessIndicators.xsd clinicaltrials.xsd relations.xsd External imported schema:\nMathML JATS Changes from 4.4.1\nsupport for pending publication support for distributed usage logging (DUL) support for JATS 1.2 abstracts add abstract support to dissertations, reports, and allow multiple abstracts wherever available add support for multiple dissertation authors add acceptance_date element to journal article, books, book chapter, conference paper 4.4.1 Schema: crossref4.4.1.xsd Full documentation: 4.4.1\nCrossref included schema:\ncommon4.4.1.xsd fundref.xsd AccessIndicators.xsd clinicaltrials.xsd relations.xsd common4.3.5.xsd External imported schema:\nMathML JATS Changes from 4.4.0\nadds support for peer reviews 4.4.0 Schema: crossref4.4.0.xsd Full documentation: 4.4.0\nCrossref included schema:\ncommon4.4.0.xsd fundref.xsd AccessIndicators.xsd clinicaltrials.xsd relations.xsd common4.3.5.xsd External imported schema:\nMathML JATS Changes from 4.3.7\nadds support for posted content 4.3.7 Schema: crossref4.3.7.xsd\nFull documentation: 4.3.7\nOur schema:\ncommon4.3.7.xsd fundref.xsd accessIndicators.xsd clinicaltrials.xsd relations.xsd common4.3.5.xsd External imported schema:\nMathML JATS Changes from 4.3.6\nadds support for linked clinical trials adds support for journal deposits without ISSNs 4.3.6 Schema: doi_resources4.3.6.xsd Full documentation: doi_resource4.3.6\nCrossref included schema:\ncommon4.3.7.xsd fundref.xsd AccessIndicators.xsd clinicaltrials.xsd relations.xsd common4.3.5.xsd ",
"headings": ["Resource schema 4.4.2","Resource schema 4.3.6","4.8.1","4.4.2","4.4.1","4.4.0","4.3.7","4.3.6"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/research-nexus/books-and-chapters/",
"title": "Introduction to books and chapters",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2022-05-31",
"lastmod_ts": 1653955200,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "Why register books and chapters Registration of books and chapters maximizes reference linking between books and other record types including journals and conference proceedings, and ensures that we collect and distribute persistent identifiers and authoritative metadata for online books. There are seven benefits for our members to register book- and chapter-level metadata:\nincreased discoverability increased usage matching author expectations author exposure usage and citations reporting supporting authors with funding compliance and reporting understanding the hot topics within your books You can read about each of these in more detail on our blog.\n",
"content": "Why register books and chapters Registration of books and chapters maximizes reference linking between books and other record types including journals and conference proceedings, and ensures that we collect and distribute persistent identifiers and authoritative metadata for online books. There are seven benefits for our members to register book- and chapter-level metadata:\nincreased discoverability increased usage matching author expectations author exposure usage and citations reporting supporting authors with funding compliance and reporting understanding the hot topics within your books You can read about each of these in more detail on our blog.\nObligations and limitations Follow the books metadata best practices. You can register books and chapters using our web deposit form or via direct deposit of XML. Fees In addition to annual membership dues, all records attract a one-time registration fee. Read about the fees.\nHistory Books have been supported since 2003. The Books Interest Group provides guidance and advice for developing the books metadata we collect.\nKey links Books and chapters content metadata best practice How to register content via direct deposit of XML or the web deposit form. Books and chapters markup guide ",
"headings": ["Why register books and chapters","Obligations and limitations ","Fees ","History","Key links"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/research-nexus/conference-proceedings/",
"title": "Introduction to conference proceedings",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2022-05-06",
"lastmod_ts": 1651795200,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "Why register conference proceedings Conference proceedings are often one of the first ways that researchers communicate new, innovative, and emergent research to their peers and the scholarly community. While this record type can be a precursor to a more formal peer-reviewed journal article, conference proceedings are critical to communicating new concepts that further enrich the research nexus.\nObligations and limitations Follow the conference proceedings metadata best practices. The conference proceedings record type captures metadata about a single conference, such as date, acronym, and location. DOIs should be assigned to all papers associated with the conference, and a DOI may be assigned to the conference itself. Ongoing conferences published with an ISSN may be deposited as a series. You can register conference proceedings using our web deposit form or via direct deposit of XML. Fees In addition to annual membership dues, all records attract a one-time registration fee. Read about the fees.\n",
"content": "Why register conference proceedings Conference proceedings are often one of the first ways that researchers communicate new, innovative, and emergent research to their peers and the scholarly community. While this record type can be a precursor to a more formal peer-reviewed journal article, conference proceedings are critical to communicating new concepts that further enrich the research nexus.\nObligations and limitations Follow the conference proceedings metadata best practices. The conference proceedings record type captures metadata about a single conference, such as date, acronym, and location. DOIs should be assigned to all papers associated with the conference, and a DOI may be assigned to the conference itself. Ongoing conferences published with an ISSN may be deposited as a series. You can register conference proceedings using our web deposit form or via direct deposit of XML. Fees In addition to annual membership dues, all records attract a one-time registration fee. Read about the fees.\nHistory We\u0026rsquo;ve been supporting conference proceedings since 2003.\nKey links Conference proceedings metadata best practice How to register content via direct deposit of XML or the web deposit form. Conference proceeding markup guide ",
"headings": ["Why register conference proceedings","Obligations and limitations ","Fees ","History","Key links"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/research-nexus/datasets/",
"title": "Introduction to datasets",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2022-05-31",
"lastmod_ts": 1653955200,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "Why register datasets Datasets are important research outputs themselves and increasingly seen as a first-class object Registration helps ensure reproducibility and further solidifies the research nexus.\nObligations and limitations Follow the datasets metadata best practices. You can register datasets via direct deposit of XML. Fees In addition to annual membership dues, all records attract a one-time registration fee. Read about the fees for registering datasets.\nHistory Datasets have been supported since 2006.\n",
"content": "Why register datasets Datasets are important research outputs themselves and increasingly seen as a first-class object Registration helps ensure reproducibility and further solidifies the research nexus.\nObligations and limitations Follow the datasets metadata best practices. You can register datasets via direct deposit of XML. Fees In addition to annual membership dues, all records attract a one-time registration fee. Read about the fees for registering datasets.\nHistory Datasets have been supported since 2006.\nKey links Datasets content metadata best practice How to register content via direct deposit of XML Dataset markup guide ",
"headings": ["Why register datasets","Obligations and limitations ","Fees ","History","Key links"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/research-nexus/dissertations/",
"title": "Introduction to dissertations",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2022-05-31",
"lastmod_ts": 1653955200,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "Why register dissertations Like conference proceedings, dissertations are excellent sources of emergent research findings and innovations in the scholarly community. Dissertations are often robust works that serve to expand the research nexus.\nObligations and limitations Follow the dissertations metadata best practices.. You can register dissertations using our web deposit form or via direct deposit of XML. Fees In addition to annual membership dues, all records attract a one-time registration fee. Read about the fees.\n",
"content": "Why register dissertations Like conference proceedings, dissertations are excellent sources of emergent research findings and innovations in the scholarly community. Dissertations are often robust works that serve to expand the research nexus.\nObligations and limitations Follow the dissertations metadata best practices.. You can register dissertations using our web deposit form or via direct deposit of XML. Fees In addition to annual membership dues, all records attract a one-time registration fee. Read about the fees.\nHistory Dissertations have been supported since 2005.\nKey links Dissertations content metadata best practice How to register content using direct deposit of XML Dissertation markup guide ",
"headings": ["Why register dissertations","Obligations and limitations ","Fees ","History","Key links"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/research-nexus/grants/",
"title": "Introduction to grants",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2025-12-10",
"lastmod_ts": 1765324800,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "Funders are joining Crossref to register their grants so that they can more easily and accurately track the outputs connected to the research they support.\nOnce you\u0026rsquo;re a member, registering grants with us means giving us information about each awarded grant, including a DOI which uniquely and persistently identifies each record. You can use the new Metadata Manager tool or direct XML deposit methods to deposit and update grant metadata. This section focuses on grants, but research funders can also register other record types such as reports, data, and working papers.\n",
"content": "Funders are joining Crossref to register their grants so that they can more easily and accurately track the outputs connected to the research they support.\nOnce you\u0026rsquo;re a member, registering grants with us means giving us information about each awarded grant, including a DOI which uniquely and persistently identifies each record. You can use the new Metadata Manager tool or direct XML deposit methods to deposit and update grant metadata. This section focuses on grants, but research funders can also register other record types such as reports, data, and working papers.\nSomething to consider before you begin `` Decide which grants to register first, as you get into the swing of things. For example, pilot a particular country, or area of support. It’s better to start with newly-awarded grants, and then move on to older or long-running awards - these are cheaper to register, and are more likely to have produced research papers, so they’re great for demonstrating the full potential of connected research metadata.\nConstructing your identifiers (DOIs) `` A DOI is made up of a DOI resolver, a prefix, and a suffix. When you join Crossref as a member, we give you a DOI prefix. You combine this with a suffix of your choice to create a DOI. Although some funders choose to use their internal grant identifier as the DOI suffix, we advise you to make your suffix opaque, meaning that it does not encode or describe any information about the work. Your DOI becomes active once it is successfully registered with us. Read more about constructing your DOIs.\nGrant landing pages `` Your grant metadata records should link to a landing page where you can find information about the grant. Examples: https://doi.org/10.37717/220020589, https://doi.org/10.35802/107769. Read more about landing pages.\nShould a grant move to a new landing page, the URL in the grant’s metadata is updated to point to the new location. There’s no charge to update metadata for existing deposits.\nRegistering grant metadata `` Grants can be registered for all sorts of support provided to a research group or individual, such as awards, use of facilities, sponsorship, training, or salary awards. Here’s the section of our schema for grant metadata. If you’re working with a third-party system, such as Proposal Central or EuroPMC, they may be able to help with this piece of work.\nRegistering grant metadata using the grant registration form `` You can use the grant registration form to register grants, with no prior knowledge of XML. You fill out the form and the XML is created for you in the background. You enter your account credentials and the metadata is submitted directly.\nFormatting grant metadata for direct deposit `` If you\u0026rsquo;d prefer to work directly with XML, you may be able to map your own data and identifiers to our schema. See our example deposit file - this is a full example, and many of the fields it contains are optional, but we encourage you to provide as much information as you can. Rich metadata helps maximum reuse of the grant records you register with Crossref. This .xsd file helps explain what goes into each field, and the parameters (length, format) of what is accepted in each field. Here’s a less techy version.\nWhen you’ve created your XML files, use our checker to test them - this will show any potential errors with your files. For help with resolving problems, send your XML file and the error message to Support.\nUploading your files to Crossref `` Once you’re happy with your files, upload them to us using the admin tool, or submit them through HTTPS POST.\nVerify your registration, check the submission queue and log, and troubleshoot any errors.\nOnce your submission is successful, your grant DOIs are ‘live’ and ready to be used. It’s good practice to add the grant DOI to the landing page for the grant, as in this example for https://doi.org/10.37717/220020589:\nShow image × Spread the word about your grant identifiers `` Let your grant submission systems, awardees, and other parties know you are supporting Crossref grant identifiers, and that they should start collecting these identifiers too. Crossref grant metadata (including grant DOIs) is made openly available through our APIs, so it can be used by third parties (including publishers, grant tracking systems) to link grants to related research outputs.\n",
"headings": ["Something to consider before you begin ``","Constructing your identifiers (DOIs) ``","Grant landing pages ``","Registering grant metadata ``","Registering grant metadata using the grant registration form ``","Formatting grant metadata for direct deposit ``","Uploading your files to Crossref ``","Spread the word about your grant identifiers ``"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/research-nexus/journals-and-articles/",
"title": "Introduction to journals and articles",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2025-12-10",
"lastmod_ts": 1765324800,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "Why register journals and articles Journals and articles remain the starting point for researchers exploring previous research, and provide a great way to discover links and relationships with other parts of the research nexus. Registering your journals and articles with us ensures that metadata about them are shared across the scholarly ecosystem with library discovery systems, scholarly sharing networks, specialist databases, metrics and analytics tools and much more.\nObligations and limitations Follow the journals metadata best practices. You can register journals and articles using all our content registration tools. Fees In addition to annual membership dues, most records attract a one-time registration fee. Journal title records are free of charge, but there are fees for each journal articles registered. These fees are different depending on whether the article registered is current or back-year. Read about the fees.\n",
"content": "Why register journals and articles Journals and articles remain the starting point for researchers exploring previous research, and provide a great way to discover links and relationships with other parts of the research nexus. Registering your journals and articles with us ensures that metadata about them are shared across the scholarly ecosystem with library discovery systems, scholarly sharing networks, specialist databases, metrics and analytics tools and much more.\nObligations and limitations Follow the journals metadata best practices. You can register journals and articles using all our content registration tools. Fees In addition to annual membership dues, most records attract a one-time registration fee. Journal title records are free of charge, but there are fees for each journal articles registered. These fees are different depending on whether the article registered is current or back-year. Read about the fees.\nHistory Crossref has supported journal and journal article registration since we started registering content in 2000.\nKey links Journals metadata best practices How to register content - using the Crossref XML plugin for OJS, web deposit form, the new Metadata Manager tool (previously known as the record registration form), or direct deposit or XML. Journals and articles markup guide ",
"headings": ["Why register journals and articles","Obligations and limitations","Fees","History","Key links"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/research-nexus/peer-reviews/",
"title": "Introduction to peer reviews",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2022-02-04",
"lastmod_ts": 1643932800,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "Why register peer reviews More of our members are keen to expose evidence of the integrity of the editorial process, such as peer review. Registering peer reviews means:\nThe metadata can provide relevant information about the reviews such as whether they were part of peer review or post-publication. There is evidence of the contribution from reviewers. These reviews are connected to the original work and other related objects. Links to these documents persist over time for future generations. This metadata may also support enrichment of scholarly discussion, reviewer accountability, publishing transparency, and analysis or research on peer reviews.\n",
"content": "Why register peer reviews More of our members are keen to expose evidence of the integrity of the editorial process, such as peer review. Registering peer reviews means:\nThe metadata can provide relevant information about the reviews such as whether they were part of peer review or post-publication. There is evidence of the contribution from reviewers. These reviews are connected to the original work and other related objects. Links to these documents persist over time for future generations. This metadata may also support enrichment of scholarly discussion, reviewer accountability, publishing transparency, and analysis or research on peer reviews.\nObligations and limitations Members need to follow the peer review metadata best practices. All peer reviews must include relationship metadata linking the review with the item being reviewed. The item being reviewed must have a Crossref DOI. You can\u0026rsquo;t add components to peer review records. Crossmark is not currently supported for peer review records. You can only register peer reviews by direct deposit of XML, our helper tools do not currently support this record type. Fees In addition to annual membership dues, all records attract a one-time registration fee. For peer reviews, there is a different price for the first review of an article, and any subsequent reviews of the same article. Read about the fees.\nHistory Our members asked for the flexibility to register content for the reviews and discussions of scholarly content which they publish, so we\u0026rsquo;ve extended our infrastructure to support members who post them. We support a whole host of outputs made publicly available from the peer review history, as they vary greatly based on journal. This may include referee reports, decision letter, and author response. The overall set may include outputs from the initial submission only or those from all subsequent rounds of revisions. We also allow members to register content made up of discussions surrounding a journal article after it was published (e.g. post-publication reviews).\nThe following organisations consulted with us on the design and/or development of the peer review service:\nPublons PeerJ F1000 Research eLife BioMedCentral BMJ Copernicus EMBO Nature Communications Key links Peer review metadata best practices Direct deposit of XML Peer Review markup guide For full instructions and XML examples please visit our support article where you can also raise a ticket for any questions.\nIf you have questions please consult other users on our forum at community.crossref.org or open a ticket with our technical support team where we’ll reply within a few days.\n",
"headings": ["Why register peer reviews","Obligations and limitations ","Fees ","History","Key links"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/research-nexus/pending-publications/",
"title": "Introduction to pending publications",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2025-07-31",
"lastmod_ts": 1753920000,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "Pending publication is a way of creating a DOI and depositing metadata for a content item any time after a manuscript has been accepted but before it is published online. This is possible for all standard record types (such as articles, books, conference proceedings).\nBecause a pending publication has not yet been published, its DOI will resolve to a publicly-available Crossref-hosted landing page. Once the work is published online, this same DOI will resolve to the URL for that content.\n",
"content": "Pending publication is a way of creating a DOI and depositing metadata for a content item any time after a manuscript has been accepted but before it is published online. This is possible for all standard record types (such as articles, books, conference proceedings).\nBecause a pending publication has not yet been published, its DOI will resolve to a publicly-available Crossref-hosted landing page. Once the work is published online, this same DOI will resolve to the URL for that content.\nThe pending publication record type serves as a temporary placeholder for your content - like a \u0026ldquo;coming soon\u0026rdquo; or preview of the great work to come. For a pending publication, you register basic metadata for your content item before registering all the formal metadata that comes with a version of record. Take care not to share a DOI before it has been deposited with us, or it will not resolve for your readers, and will lead to a failed resolution in your resolution report. Learn more about the pending publication consultation.\nUse cases for pending publication Before the pending publication record type existed, we recommended you to register DOIs at the time content was published online, or shortly after. As the communication needs of our members (researchers, funders, institutions, and publishers) evolve, we have created this new solution to aid you and your work, and allow you to register DOIs before content is published online. With pending publication:\nMembers can: address timing issues related to press embargos publicly establish scholarly precedence for their articles meet the conditions in full for new funder policies and mandates, which focus on acceptance as a key event to report on ensure that institutional repositories use the DOI to link to the member-stewarded copy Researchers can provide formal evidence of all publications in employment and grant applications Funders can fully track all publications funded by their research grants Institutions can fully track the scholarly output of their faculty members Technology vendors that support scholarly research management can account for all outputs How does pending publication work? When registering your publication as pending there are two things you need to do:\nRegister a subset of the metadata (as a minimum: member name, journal title, and accepted date) under the Pending Publication record type. After you do this, the DOI will resolve to a Crossref-hosted landing page displaying your logo, a banner showing the manuscript has been accepted for publication, and the metadata you’ve provided. As with all registered content, pending publication metadata will be publicly available in our XML API (and updated as you update your metadata records). Unfortunately, we do not yet support pending publications in our REST API. Once your work is published, you need to register the full metadata for the work - this is not an automatic process. You must update the metadata for each pending publication DOI, so that each DOI will resolve directly to the content (and not the pending publication landing page). Pending publication workflow diagram Crossmark participants please note that you can deposit Crossmark metadata at any point, but during the Beta version of the pending publication rollout, the Crossmark badge will not be displayed to readers.\nShow image × Fees for pending publications Content Registration (metadata deposit) fees still apply, but there are no additional fees for using pending publication. So, you’ll be charged once when you register the pending publication, but any subsequent updates, including the update on publication, are not charged.\nHistory Pending publication has been supported since 2019 and was designed in response to community feedback:\nProposal PDF Original proposal blog post Community responses to proposal blog post Key links How to register content using direct deposit of XML Pending publication markup guide ",
"headings": ["Use cases for pending publication ","How does pending publication work? ","Pending publication workflow diagram ","Fees for pending publications ","History ","Key links"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/research-nexus/posted-content-includes-preprints/",
"title": "Introduction to posted content (includes preprints)",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2024-04-01",
"lastmod_ts": 1711929600,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "Why register posted content Posted content includes preprints, eprints, working papers, reports, dissertations, and many other types of content that has been posted but not formally published. Note that accepted manuscripts are not considered posted content.\nTo qualify as posted content, an item must be posted to a host platform where it will receive some level of stewardship. We’re all about persistence, so it’s vital that everything registered with us be maintained. A preprint should remain online once it has been posted, including once it has appeared in a journal or if an updated version becomes available. If different versions become available, the preprint owner should update the preprint metadata using relations tags. In exceptional cases where a preprint is removed, such as in the case of plagiarism or other misconduct, we recommend that the DOI resolves to a page containing at least the title, authors, and a short explanation of the removal. Preprint owners should refer to good practice for journal article retraction in this case. Note that we cannot remove preprint metadata from our records.\n",
"content": "Why register posted content Posted content includes preprints, eprints, working papers, reports, dissertations, and many other types of content that has been posted but not formally published. Note that accepted manuscripts are not considered posted content.\nTo qualify as posted content, an item must be posted to a host platform where it will receive some level of stewardship. We’re all about persistence, so it’s vital that everything registered with us be maintained. A preprint should remain online once it has been posted, including once it has appeared in a journal or if an updated version becomes available. If different versions become available, the preprint owner should update the preprint metadata using relations tags. In exceptional cases where a preprint is removed, such as in the case of plagiarism or other misconduct, we recommend that the DOI resolves to a page containing at least the title, authors, and a short explanation of the removal. Preprint owners should refer to good practice for journal article retraction in this case. Note that we cannot remove preprint metadata from our records.\nPublishing preprints is about more than simply getting a DOI Crossref can help you to clearly label content as a preprint using a preprint-specific schema. It’s not advisable to register preprints as data, components, articles, or anything else, because a preprint is not any of those things. Our service allows you to ensure the relationships between preprints and any eventual article are asserted in the metadata, and accurately readable by both humans and machines.\nBenefits of our custom support for preprints Persistent identifiers for preprints to ensure successful links to the scholarly record over the course of time The preprint-specific metadata we ask for reflects researcher workflows from preprint to formal publication Support for preprint versioning by providing relationships between metadata for different iterations of the same document. Notification of links between preprints and formal publications that may follow (such as journal articles, monographs) Reference linking for preprints, connecting up the scholarly record to associated literature Auto-update of ORCID records to ensure that preprint contributors are acknowledged for their work Preprints include funding data so people can report research contributions based on funder and grant identification Discoverability: we make the metadata available for machine and human access, across multiple interfaces (including our REST API, OAI-PMH, and Metadata Search. Obligations and limitations Follow the posted content metadata best practices. Designate a specific contact with us who will receive match notifications when an accepted manuscript (AM) or version of record (VOR) of the posted content has been registered. Link your posted content record to that other record within seven days of receiving an alert. Clearly label the manuscript as a preprint above the fold on its landing page, and ensure that any link to the AAM or VOR is also prominently displayed above the fold. Ensure that each version is assigned a new DOI, and associate the versions via a relationship with type isVersionOf - learn more about structural metadata and declaring relationship types Crossmark is not currently supported for posted content. You can\u0026rsquo;t add components to posted content. How to register content - using the Crossref Deposit Plugin for Open Preprint Systems (OPS) or direct deposit of XML. Fees In additional to annual membership dues, all records attract a one-time registration fee. Read about the fees.\nKey links Posted content metadata best practices How to register content via the Crossref Deposit Plugin for Open Preprint Systems (OPS) or direct deposit of XML Posted content markup guide Associating preprints with later published outputs Once a research object has been published from the posted content and a DOI has been assigned to it, the preprint publisher will update their metadata to associate the posted content with the DOI of the accepted manuscript (AM) or version of record (VOR).\nWe will notify the member who deposited metadata for the posted content when we find a match between the title and first author of two publications, so that the potential relationship can be reviewed. The posted content publisher must then update the preprint metadata record by declaring the AM/VOR relationship. The notification is delivered by email to the technical contact on file. Please contact us if you need the email notifications to be sent to a different address.\nDisplaying and labeling on posted content publications You must make it clear that posted content is unpublished and you must ensure that any link to the AM/VOR is prominently displayed, specifically:\nThe landing page (or equivalent) of the preprint must be labeled as not formally published (for example, preprint, unpublished manuscript). This label must appear above the fold (the part of a web page that is visible in a browser window when the page first loads) The landing page (or equivalent) of the preprint must link to the AM/VOR when it is made available. The link must be appropriately labeled (for example, Now published in [Journal Name], Version of record available in [Journal Name]) and appear above the fold. History We’ve been supporting registration of preprints and other posted content since 2016. The Preprints Advisory Group provides ongoing guidance and advice for developing the preprints metadata we collect.\nOur preprints record type was originally developed with advisors from bioRxiv and arXiv, PLOS, Elsevier, AIP, IOP, and ACM.\nYou can register posted content (includes preprints) by direct deposit of XML - learn more about markup examples for posted content (includes preprints).\n",
"headings": ["Why register posted content","Publishing preprints is about more than simply getting a DOI ","Benefits of our custom support for preprints ","Obligations and limitations ","Fees ","Key links","Associating preprints with later published outputs ","Displaying and labeling on posted content publications ","History"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/research-nexus/reports-and-working-papers/",
"title": "Introduction to reports and working papers",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 5,
"lastmod": "2022-04-11",
"lastmod_ts": 1649635200,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "Why register reports and working papers Researchers communicate with each other through increasing diverse channels, and our community sees more and more citations and links to reports and working papers such as white papers as an important part of the scholarly record. When these records are registered with Crossref, research can be traced from origin to practical implementation.\nObligations and limitations Follow the reports and working papers metadata best practices. Technical reports and working papers are typically assigned a single identifier, but identifiers may also be assigned to sub-sections of the report (such as chapters) as needed using the content_item element. Fees In additional to annual membership dues, all records attract a one-time registration fee. Fees for reports and working papers are different depending on whether the content registered is current or back-year. Read about the fees.\n",
"content": "Why register reports and working papers Researchers communicate with each other through increasing diverse channels, and our community sees more and more citations and links to reports and working papers such as white papers as an important part of the scholarly record. When these records are registered with Crossref, research can be traced from origin to practical implementation.\nObligations and limitations Follow the reports and working papers metadata best practices. Technical reports and working papers are typically assigned a single identifier, but identifiers may also be assigned to sub-sections of the report (such as chapters) as needed using the content_item element. Fees In additional to annual membership dues, all records attract a one-time registration fee. Fees for reports and working papers are different depending on whether the content registered is current or back-year. Read about the fees.\nHistory We\u0026rsquo;ve been supporting reports and working papers since 2005.\nKey links Reports and working papers metadata best practices How to register content using direct deposit of XML Reports and working paper markup guide ",
"headings": ["Why register reports and working papers","Obligations and limitations","Fees","History","Key links"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/research-nexus/standards/",
"title": "Introduction to standards",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2022-05-31",
"lastmod_ts": 1653955200,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "Why register standards Standards are often cited in research and registering these with Crossref means that these connections remain part of the scholarly record.\nObligations and limitations Follow the standards metadata best practices. You can only register standards by direct deposit of XML using schema version 4.3.6 and above. Our helper tools do not currently support this record type. Fees In additional to annual membership dues, all records attract a one-time registration fee. Fees for standards are different depending on whether the content registered is current or back-year. Read about the fees.\n",
"content": "Why register standards Standards are often cited in research and registering these with Crossref means that these connections remain part of the scholarly record.\nObligations and limitations Follow the standards metadata best practices. You can only register standards by direct deposit of XML using schema version 4.3.6 and above. Our helper tools do not currently support this record type. Fees In additional to annual membership dues, all records attract a one-time registration fee. Fees for standards are different depending on whether the content registered is current or back-year. Read about the fees.\nHistory Crossref began accepting metadata deposits for standards in 2005. Our input schema was modified significantly for standards with help from the Standards Technical Working Group. Significant changes to the deposit and indexing of designators were made with schema version 4.3.6, as a result standards may only be deposited using schema versions 4.3.6 and above.\nKey links Standards metadata best practices How to register content using direct deposit of XML Standards markup guide ",
"headings": ["Why register standards","Obligations and limitations","Fees","History","Key links"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/research-nexus/",
"title": "The research nexus",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2021-12-11",
"lastmod_ts": 1639180800,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "The \u0026lsquo;research nexus\u0026rsquo; is the vision to which we aspire:\nA rich and reusable open network of relationships connecting research organisations, people, things, and actions; a scholarly record that the global community can build on forever, for the benefit of society.\nThe research nexus goes beyond the basic idea of just having persistent identifiers for content. Objects and entities such as journal articles, book chapters, grants, preprints, data, software, statements, dissertations, protocols, affiliations, contributors, etc. should all be identified and that is still an important part of the picture. But what is most important is how they relate to each other and the context in which they make up the whole research ecosystem.\n",
"content": "The \u0026lsquo;research nexus\u0026rsquo; is the vision to which we aspire:\nA rich and reusable open network of relationships connecting research organisations, people, things, and actions; a scholarly record that the global community can build on forever, for the benefit of society.\nThe research nexus goes beyond the basic idea of just having persistent identifiers for content. Objects and entities such as journal articles, book chapters, grants, preprints, data, software, statements, dissertations, protocols, affiliations, contributors, etc. should all be identified and that is still an important part of the picture. But what is most important is how they relate to each other and the context in which they make up the whole research ecosystem.\nThe foundation of the research nexus is metadata; the richer and more comprehensive the metadata in Crossref records, the more value there is for our members and for others, including for future generations.\nCrossref Research Nexus Vision\nMetadata and relationships between research objects and entities can support the whole scholarly research ecosystem in many ways, including:\nResearch integrity: helping to provide signals about the trustworthiness of the work including provenance information such as who funded it (when and for how much), which organisations and people contributed what, whether something was updated or corrected, and whether it was checked for originality. All of these signals can be expressed through Crossref metadata.\nReproducibility: helping others to reproduce outcomes by adding relationships between literature, data, software, protocols and methods, and more. All of these relationships can be asserted through members\u0026rsquo; ongoing stewardship of their Crossref metadata records.\nReporting and assessment: helping organisations such as universities, funders, governments, to track and demonstrate the outcomes of investment; provide benchmarking information; show compliance with funder mandates; and decide what other research to fund. This kind of information can be included in Crossref metadata.\nDiscoverability: helping people and systems identify work through multiple angles. Registering content with Crossref makes it possible for work to be found and used. Thousands of systems use Crossref metadata, therefore the richer the records are, the more visibility there is likely to be of your work. Including metadata like abstracts and references are very simple ways to increase the visibility of your records.\nThe importance of relationships A big part of the research nexus is establishing connections between and among different research objects which establishes provenance over time. Adding relationships to your metadata records can convey much richer and more nuanced connections beyond traditional references.\nThese relationships may consist of versions, corrections, translations, data, formats, supplements, and components. There are no extra fees for including relationships in your metadata.\nCurrently relationships can only be established by direct deposit of XML. Read our relationships metadata best practice page and our relationships markup guide.\nWhat types of resources and records can be registered with Crossref? We are working to make our input schema more flexible so that almost any type of object can be registered and distributed openly through Crossref. At the moment, members tend to register the following:\nBooks, chapters, and reference works: includes book title and/or chapter-level records. Books can be registered as a monograph, series, or set. Conference proceedings: information about a single conference and records for each conference paper/proceeding. Datasets: includes database records or collections. Dissertations: includes single dissertations and theses, but not collections. Grants: includes both direct funding and other types of support such as the use of equipment and facilities. Journals and articles: at the journal title and article level, and includes supplemental materials as components. Peer reviews: any number of reviews, reports, or comments attached to any other work that has been registered with Crossref. Pending publications: a temporary placeholder record with minimal metadata, often used for embargoed work where a DOI needs to be shared before the full content is made available online. Preprints and posted content: includes preprints, eprints, working papers, reports, and other types of content that has been posted but not formally published. Reports and working papers: this includes content that is published and likely has an ISSN. Standards: includes publications from standards organisations. You can also establish relationships between different research objects (such as preprints, translations, and datasets) in your metadata. Learn more about all the metadata that can be included in these records with our schema library and markup guides.\n",
"headings": ["The importance of relationships","What types of resources and records can be registered with Crossref?"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/schema-library/markup-guide-record-types/books-and-chapters/",
"title": "Books and chapters markup guide",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2026-04-13",
"lastmod_ts": 1776038400,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "This guide gives markup examples for members registering books and chapters by direct deposit of XML. You can also register the books and chapters record types using one of our helper tools: web deposit form.\nOn this page, learn more about:\nBook structures Example of a book deposit containing a single book with chapters Example of a book series deposit Example of a book set deposit Book structures \u0026lt;book\u0026gt; is the container for all information about a single book volume and (optionally) the book chapters. Books may be deposited as a single book, a series, or a set, and the metadata requirements differ slightly for each type.\n",
"content": "This guide gives markup examples for members registering books and chapters by direct deposit of XML. You can also register the books and chapters record types using one of our helper tools: web deposit form.\nOn this page, learn more about:\nBook structures Example of a book deposit containing a single book with chapters Example of a book series deposit Example of a book set deposit Book structures \u0026lt;book\u0026gt; is the container for all information about a single book volume and (optionally) the book chapters. Books may be deposited as a single book, a series, or a set, and the metadata requirements differ slightly for each type.\nBook: a book is a single book (monograph) that is not part of a series or a set. The title-level metadata for the book is captured in \u0026lt;book_metadata\u0026gt;. Book series: books that are part of an ongoing series and have an ISSN assigned should be deposited as a book series. Book metadata is captured in \u0026lt;book_series_metadata\u0026gt;, with series-specific details such as ISSN and series title captured in \u0026lt;series_metadata\u0026gt;. A series-level and volume-level title must be supplied for each book submitted as part of a series. A series-level ISBN and/or DOI may optionally be assigned. Examples of books in series: Series: a sequence of books with certain characteristics in common that are formally identified together as a group. They may be released in successive parts once a year, or less often. For example, Loeb Classical Library or Oxford World’s Classics Monographs in series: if volumes can stand alone as separate books (if not, they are a book set). For example, Advances in Experimental Medicine and Biology Book set: book volumes that cannot stand alone as separate books must be deposited as a book set. A book set has a set-level title but does not require an ISSN. An ISBN and/or DOI may optionally be assigned at the set level. Example of a book set: Le Deuxième Sexe by Simone de Beauvoir, in two volumes: Les faits et les mythes and L\u0026rsquo;expérience vécue. Book metadata Book titles: Books with subtitles should use the \u0026lt;title\u0026gt; and \u0026lt;subtitle\u0026gt; tags to capture the appropriate segment of the title. Book title DOIs: A DOI is required for each book that you submit. It is not possible to submit DOI information for individual chapters without assigning a DOI to the entire work. ISBNs: ISBNs should be supplied when available. Both a print and electronic ISBN may be supplied for a book. If a book does not have an ISBN, the \u0026lt;noisbn\u0026gt; element is required. Contributors: If a book as a whole has a single set of authors, the author(s) should be included in the \u0026lt;contributors\u0026gt; section for the book itself. Editors may also be deposited. If each chapter has distinct authors and/or editors, the authors should also be included at the chapter (\u0026lt;content_item\u0026gt;) level. Editions: \u0026lt;edition_number\u0026gt;, when given, should include only a number and not additional text such as \u0026ldquo;edition\u0026rdquo;. For example, you should submit \u0026ldquo;3\u0026rdquo;, not \u0026ldquo;third edition\u0026rdquo;. Citations: \u0026lt;citation_list\u0026gt; should only be used in \u0026lt;book_metadata\u0026gt; instead of \u0026lt;content_item\u0026gt; when the reference list is a separate section of the book and chapters are not included in the deposit. Book language: The language of the book should be specified in the book_metadata language attribute using the ISO639 language code. If a book contains items in multiple languages this attribute should be set for the predominant language of the book. Individual items may have their language specified in content_item. If all content items are the same language, it is only necessary to specify the language at the book level. Book chapters: Book chapters are captured in the container element \u0026lt;content_item\u0026gt;. Book chapter DOIs are optional but strongly recommended if the book content will be commonly cited at the chapter level. Metadata supplied in the top-level book section (\u0026lt;book_metadata\u0026gt;, \u0026lt;book_set_metadata\u0026gt;, or \u0026lt;book_series_metadata\u0026gt;) will be applied to the chapters as well unless distinct information is supplied for a chapter. This includes contributors, citation lists, and publication dates.\nExample of a book deposit containing a single book with chapters Review the sample below or download an XML file from our GitLab repository.\n\u0026lt;doi_batch xmlns=\u0026#34;http://www.crossref.org/schema/4.3.7\u0026#34; xmlns:xsi=\u0026#34;http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance\u0026#34; version=\u0026#34;4.3.7\u0026#34; xsi:schemaLocation=\u0026#34;http://www.crossref.org/schema/4.3.7 http://www.crossref.org/schemas/crossref4.3.7.xsd\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;head\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi_batch_id\u0026gt;2004-10-19-10-04-31-1016001\u0026lt;/doi_batch_id\u0026gt; \u0026lt;timestamp\u0026gt;20082117100522\u0026lt;/timestamp\u0026gt; \u0026lt;depositor\u0026gt; \u0026lt;depositor_name\u0026gt;Sample Master\u0026lt;/depositor_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;email_address\u0026gt;support@crossref.org\u0026lt;/email_address\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/depositor\u0026gt; \u0026lt;registrant\u0026gt;CrossRef\u0026lt;/registrant\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/head\u0026gt; \u0026lt;body\u0026gt; \u0026lt;book book_type=\u0026#34;edited_book\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;book_metadata language=\u0026#34;en\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;titles\u0026gt; \u0026lt;title\u0026gt;Use of Recycled Materials\u0026lt;/title\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/titles\u0026gt; \u0026lt;publication_date\u0026gt; \u0026lt;year\u0026gt;2005\u0026lt;/year\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/publication_date\u0026gt; \u0026lt;isbn media_type=\u0026#34;electronic\u0026#34;\u0026gt;2912143691\u0026lt;/isbn\u0026gt; \u0026lt;publisher\u0026gt; \u0026lt;publisher_name\u0026gt;RILEM Publications SARL\u0026lt;/publisher_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/publisher\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi_data\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi\u0026gt;10.50505/book\u0026lt;/doi\u0026gt; \u0026lt;resource\u0026gt;http://www.crossref.org/hello\u0026lt;/resource\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/doi_data\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/book_metadata\u0026gt; \u0026lt;content_item component_type=\u0026#34;chapter\u0026#34; publication_type=\u0026#34;full_text\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;contributors\u0026gt; \u0026lt;person_name sequence=\u0026#34;first\u0026#34; contributor_role=\u0026#34;author\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;given_name\u0026gt;E.\u0026lt;/given_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;surname\u0026gt;Vázquez\u0026lt;/surname\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/person_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/contributors\u0026gt; \u0026lt;titles\u0026gt; \u0026lt;title\u0026gt;Miscellaneous\u0026lt;/title\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/titles\u0026gt; \u0026lt;pages\u0026gt; \u0026lt;first_page\u0026gt;53\u0026lt;/first_page\u0026gt; \u0026lt;last_page\u0026gt;55\u0026lt;/last_page\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/pages\u0026gt; \u0026lt;publisher_item\u0026gt; \u0026lt;item_number\u0026gt;rep030-006\u0026lt;/item_number\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/publisher_item\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi_data\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi\u0026gt;10.50505/m4\u0026lt;/doi\u0026gt; \u0026lt;resource\u0026gt; https://www.rilem.net/boutique/fiche.php?cat=book\u0026amp;reference=rep030-006 \u0026lt;/resource\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/doi_data\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/content_item\u0026gt; \u0026lt;content_item component_type=\u0026#34;chapter\u0026#34; publication_type=\u0026#34;full_text\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;contributors\u0026gt; \u0026lt;person_name sequence=\u0026#34;first\u0026#34; contributor_role=\u0026#34;author\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;given_name\u0026gt;L.\u0026lt;/given_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;surname\u0026gt;De Bock\u0026lt;/surname\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/person_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/contributors\u0026gt; \u0026lt;titles\u0026gt; \u0026lt;title\u0026gt;Recycled asphalt pavement\u0026lt;/title\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/titles\u0026gt; \u0026lt;pages\u0026gt; \u0026lt;first_page\u0026gt;45\u0026lt;/first_page\u0026gt; \u0026lt;last_page\u0026gt;51\u0026lt;/last_page\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/pages\u0026gt; \u0026lt;publisher_item\u0026gt; \u0026lt;item_number\u0026gt;rep030-005\u0026lt;/item_number\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/publisher_item\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi_data\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi\u0026gt;10.50505/m5\u0026lt;/doi\u0026gt; \u0026lt;resource\u0026gt; https://www.rilem.net/boutique/fiche.php?cat=book\u0026amp;reference=rep030-005 \u0026lt;/resource\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/doi_data\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/content_item\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/book\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/body\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/doi_batch\u0026gt; Example of a book series deposit Review the sample below or download an XML file from our GitLab repository.\n\u0026lt;doi_batch xmlns=\u0026#34;http://www.crossref.org/schema/4.3.7\u0026#34; xmlns:xsi=\u0026#34;http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance\u0026#34; version=\u0026#34;4.3.7\u0026#34; xsi:schemaLocation=\u0026#34;http://www.crossref.org/schema/4.3.7 http://www.crossref.org/schemas/crossref4.3.7.xsd\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;head\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi_batch_id\u0026gt;123456\u0026lt;/doi_batch_id\u0026gt; \u0026lt;timestamp\u0026gt;20082003110604\u0026lt;/timestamp\u0026gt; \u0026lt;depositor\u0026gt; \u0026lt;depositor_name\u0026gt;test data\u0026lt;/depositor_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;email_address\u0026gt;support@crossref.org\u0026lt;/email_address\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/depositor\u0026gt; \u0026lt;registrant\u0026gt;test data\u0026lt;/registrant\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/head\u0026gt; \u0026lt;body\u0026gt; \u0026lt;book book_type=\u0026#34;edited_book\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;book_series_metadata language=\u0026#34;en\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;series_metadata\u0026gt; \u0026lt;titles\u0026gt; \u0026lt;title\u0026gt;Electrochemistry\u0026lt;/title\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/titles\u0026gt; \u0026lt;issn\u0026gt;0305-9979\u0026lt;/issn\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/series_metadata\u0026gt; \u0026lt;contributors\u0026gt; \u0026lt;person_name sequence=\u0026#34;first\u0026#34; contributor_role=\u0026#34;editor\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;given_name\u0026gt;D\u0026lt;/given_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;surname\u0026gt;Pletcher\u0026lt;/surname\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/person_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/contributors\u0026gt; \u0026lt;titles\u0026gt; \u0026lt;title\u0026gt;Electrochemistry\u0026lt;/title\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/titles\u0026gt; \u0026lt;volume\u0026gt;8\u0026lt;/volume\u0026gt; \u0026lt;publication_date media_type=\u0026#34;print\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;year\u0026gt;1983\u0026lt;/year\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/publication_date\u0026gt; \u0026lt;isbn\u0026gt;978-0-85186-067-1\u0026lt;/isbn\u0026gt; \u0026lt;publisher\u0026gt; \u0026lt;publisher_name\u0026gt;Royal Society of Chemistry\u0026lt;/publisher_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;publisher_place\u0026gt;Cambridge\u0026lt;/publisher_place\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/publisher\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi_data\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi\u0026gt;10.50505/testdoi13\u0026lt;/doi\u0026gt; \u0026lt;resource\u0026gt;http://ebook.rsc.org/?DOI=10.1039/9781847557179\u0026lt;/resource\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/doi_data\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/book_series_metadata\u0026gt; \u0026lt;content_item component_type=\u0026#34;other\u0026#34; publication_type=\u0026#34;full_text\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;contributors\u0026gt; \u0026lt;person_name sequence=\u0026#34;first\u0026#34; contributor_role=\u0026#34;editor\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;given_name\u0026gt;D.\u0026lt;/given_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;surname\u0026gt;Pletcher\u0026lt;/surname\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/person_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/contributors\u0026gt; \u0026lt;titles\u0026gt; \u0026lt;title\u0026gt;Front cover\u0026lt;/title\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/titles\u0026gt; \u0026lt;pages\u0026gt; \u0026lt;first_page\u0026gt;X001\u0026lt;/first_page\u0026gt; \u0026lt;last_page\u0026gt;X002\u0026lt;/last_page\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/pages\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi_data\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi\u0026gt;10.50505/testdoi14\u0026lt;/doi\u0026gt; \u0026lt;resource\u0026gt; http://ebook.rsc.org/?DOI=10.1039/9781847557179-FX001 \u0026lt;/resource\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/doi_data\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/content_item\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/book\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/body\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/doi_batch\u0026gt; Example of a book set deposit Review the sample below or download an XML file from our GitLab repository.\n\u0026lt;doi_batch xmlns=\u0026#34;http://www.crossref.org/schema/4.3.7\u0026#34; xmlns:xsi=\u0026#34;http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance\u0026#34; version=\u0026#34;4.3.7\u0026#34; xsi:schemaLocation=\u0026#34;http://www.crossref.org/schema/4.3.7 http://www.crossref.org/schemas/crossref4.3.7.xsd\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;head\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi_batch_id\u0026gt;20080305081200\u0026lt;/doi_batch_id\u0026gt; \u0026lt;timestamp\u0026gt;200815071200\u0026lt;/timestamp\u0026gt; \u0026lt;depositor\u0026gt; \u0026lt;depositor_name\u0026gt;Sample Master\u0026lt;/depositor_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;email_address\u0026gt;support@crossref.org\u0026lt;/email_address\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/depositor\u0026gt; \u0026lt;registrant\u0026gt;Sample Data\u0026lt;/registrant\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/head\u0026gt; \u0026lt;body\u0026gt; \u0026lt;book book_type=\u0026#34;edited_book\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;book_set_metadata language=\u0026#34;en\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;set_metadata\u0026gt; \u0026lt;titles\u0026gt; \u0026lt;title\u0026gt;Sample Set Title\u0026lt;/title\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/titles\u0026gt; \u0026lt;isbn media_type=\u0026#34;print\u0026#34;\u0026gt;0 571 08989 5\u0026lt;/isbn\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/set_metadata\u0026gt; \u0026lt;titles\u0026gt; \u0026lt;title\u0026gt;Sample Volume Title\u0026lt;/title\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/titles\u0026gt; \u0026lt;volume\u0026gt;1\u0026lt;/volume\u0026gt; \u0026lt;publication_date media_type=\u0026#34;print\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;year\u0026gt;2007\u0026lt;/year\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/publication_date\u0026gt; \u0026lt;isbn media_type=\u0026#34;print\u0026#34;\u0026gt;0064410145\u0026lt;/isbn\u0026gt; \u0026lt;publisher\u0026gt; \u0026lt;publisher_name\u0026gt;Sample Publisher\u0026lt;/publisher_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/publisher\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/book_set_metadata\u0026gt; \u0026lt;content_item component_type=\u0026#34;chapter\u0026#34; level_sequence_number=\u0026#34;1\u0026#34; publication_type=\u0026#34;full_text\u0026#34; language=\u0026#34;en\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;contributors\u0026gt; \u0026lt;person_name sequence=\u0026#34;first\u0026#34; contributor_role=\u0026#34;author\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;given_name\u0026gt;Patricia\u0026lt;/given_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;surname\u0026gt;Feeney\u0026lt;/surname\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/person_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/contributors\u0026gt; \u0026lt;titles\u0026gt; \u0026lt;title\u0026gt;Sample Chapter Title\u0026lt;/title\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/titles\u0026gt; \u0026lt;publication_date media_type=\u0026#34;print\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;year\u0026gt;2007\u0026lt;/year\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/publication_date\u0026gt; \u0026lt;pages\u0026gt; \u0026lt;first_page\u0026gt;1\u0026lt;/first_page\u0026gt; \u0026lt;last_page\u0026gt;200\u0026lt;/last_page\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/pages\u0026gt; \u0026lt;publisher_item\u0026gt; \u0026lt;item_number item_number_type=\u0026#34;sequence-number\u0026#34;\u0026gt;S0091679X0861064X\u0026lt;/item_number\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/publisher_item\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi_data\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi\u0026gt;10.50505/testset1\u0026lt;/doi\u0026gt; \u0026lt;resource\u0026gt;http://www.crossref.org/\u0026lt;/resource\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/doi_data\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/content_item\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/book\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/body\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/doi_batch\u0026gt; ",
"headings": ["Book structures ","Book metadata","Example of a book deposit containing a single book with chapters ","Example of a book series deposit ","Example of a book set deposit "]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/schema-library/markup-guide-metadata-segments/abstracts/",
"title": "Abstracts",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2025-03-02",
"lastmod_ts": 1740873600,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "This guide gives markup examples of abstracts for members registering content by direct deposit of XML. Our helper tools support the registration of abstracts.\nAbstracts imported from JATS-formatted XML may be included in records deposited with us. A namespace prefix (jats:) must be used for the abstract and all child elements, and the namespace must be included in the schema declaration. MathML may be included in abstracts but must use a MathML-specific namespace prefix. Multiple abstracts may be included.\n",
"content": "This guide gives markup examples of abstracts for members registering content by direct deposit of XML. Our helper tools support the registration of abstracts.\nAbstracts imported from JATS-formatted XML may be included in records deposited with us. A namespace prefix (jats:) must be used for the abstract and all child elements, and the namespace must be included in the schema declaration. MathML may be included in abstracts but must use a MathML-specific namespace prefix. Multiple abstracts may be included.\nAbstracts may be registered for journal articles, books and book chapters, conference papers, posted content, dissertations, reports, and standards.\nAbstracts schema declaration \u0026lt;doi_batch xmlns:xsi=\u0026#34;http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance\u0026#34; xsi:schemaLocation=\u0026#34;http://www.crossref.org/schema/4.4.2 https://data.crossref.org/schemas/crossref4.4.2.xsd\u0026#34; xmlns=\u0026#34;http://www.crossref.org/schema/4.4.2\u0026#34; xmlns:jats=\u0026#34;http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/JATS1\u0026#34; xmlns:mml=\u0026#34;http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML\u0026#34;\u0026gt; Example of a JATS-formatted abstract \u0026lt;/person_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/contributors\u0026gt; \u0026lt;jats:abstract\u0026gt;\u0026lt;jats:p\u0026gt;Acute and chronic lung inflammation is associated with numerous important disease pathologies including asthma, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and silicosis. Lung fibroblasts are a novel and important target of anti-inflammatory therapy, as they orchestrate, respond to, and amplify inflammatory cascades and are the key cell in the pathogenesis of lung fibrosis. Peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor gamma (PPAR**\u0026lt;mml:math\u0026gt;\u0026lt;mml:mi\u0026gt;**γ**\u0026lt;/mml:mi\u0026gt;\u0026lt;/mml:math\u0026gt;**) ligands are small molecules that induce anti-inflammatory responses in a variety of tissues. Here, we report for the first time that PPAR**\u0026lt;mml:math\u0026gt;\u0026lt;mml:mi\u0026gt;**γ**\u0026lt;/mml:mi\u0026gt;\u0026lt;/mml:math\u0026gt;** ligands have potent anti-inflammatory effects on human lung fibroblasts. 2-cyano-3, 12-dioxoolean-1, 9-dien-28-oic acid (CDDO) and 15-deoxy-**\u0026lt;mml:math\u0026gt;\u0026lt;mml:msup\u0026gt;\u0026lt;mml:mi\u0026gt;**Δ**\u0026lt;/mml:mi\u0026gt;\u0026lt;mml:mrow\u0026gt;\u0026lt;mml:mn\u0026gt;**12**\u0026lt;/mml:mn\u0026gt;\u0026lt;mml:mo\u0026gt;**,**\u0026lt;/mml:mo\u0026gt;\u0026lt;mml:mn\u0026gt;**14**\u0026lt;/mml:mn\u0026gt;\u0026lt;/mml:mrow\u0026gt;\u0026lt;/mml:msup\u0026gt;\u0026lt;/mml:math\u0026gt;**-prostaglandin J\u0026lt;jats:sub\u0026gt;2\u0026lt;/jats:sub\u0026gt; (15d-PGJ\u0026lt;jats:sub\u0026gt;2\u0026lt;/jats:sub\u0026gt;) inhibit production of the inflammatory mediators interleukin-6 (IL-6), monocyte chemoattractant protein-1 (MCP-1), COX-2, and prostaglandin (PG)E\u0026lt;jats:sub\u0026gt;2\u0026lt;/jats:sub\u0026gt; in primary human lung fibroblasts stimulated with either IL-1**\u0026lt;mml:math\u0026gt;\u0026lt;mml:mi\u0026gt;**β**\u0026lt;/mml:mi\u0026gt;\u0026lt;/mml:math\u0026gt;** or silica. The anti-inflammatory properties of these molecules are not blocked by the PPAR**\u0026lt;mml:math\u0026gt;\u0026lt;mml:mi\u0026gt;**γ**\u0026lt;/mml:mi\u0026gt;\u0026lt;/mml:math\u0026gt;** antagonist GW9662 and thus are largely PPAR**\u0026lt;mml:math\u0026gt;\u0026lt;mml:mi\u0026gt;**γ**\u0026lt;/mml:mi\u0026gt;\u0026lt;/mml:math\u0026gt;** independent. However, they are dependent on the presence of an electrophilic carbon. CDDO and 15d-PGJ\u0026lt;jats:sub\u0026gt;2\u0026lt;/jats:sub\u0026gt;, but not rosiglitazone, inhibited NF-**\u0026lt;mml:math\u0026gt;\u0026lt;mml:mi\u0026gt;**κ**\u0026lt;/mml:mi\u0026gt;\u0026lt;/mml:math\u0026gt;**B activity. These results demonstrate that CDDO and 15d-PGJ\u0026lt;jats:sub\u0026gt;2\u0026lt;/jats:sub\u0026gt; are potent attenuators of proinflammatory responses in lung fibroblasts and suggest that these molecules should be explored as the basis for novel, targeted anti-inflammatory therapies in the lung and other organs.\u0026lt;/jats:p\u0026gt;\u0026lt;/jats:abstract\u0026gt; \u0026lt;publication_date media_type=\u0026#34;print\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;year\u0026gt;2000\u0026lt;/year\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/publication_date\u0026gt; ",
"headings": ["Abstracts schema declaration ","Example of a JATS-formatted abstract "]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/schema-library/markup-guide-record-types/components/",
"title": "Components",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2025-03-19",
"lastmod_ts": 1742342400,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "This guide gives markup examples for members registering books and chapters by direct deposit of XML. Component records are often registered for figures, tables, and supplemental materials associated with a journal article.\nConstructing component deposits Components may be deposited along with their parent DOI or they can be deposited by themselves in a separate XML file as a stand-alone component. Components have their own metadata which is distinct from that of the parent DOI(s).\n",
"content": "This guide gives markup examples for members registering books and chapters by direct deposit of XML. Component records are often registered for figures, tables, and supplemental materials associated with a journal article.\nConstructing component deposits Components may be deposited along with their parent DOI or they can be deposited by themselves in a separate XML file as a stand-alone component. Components have their own metadata which is distinct from that of the parent DOI(s).\nComponents may belong to more than one parent item. For example, two journal articles may include the same component DOI.\nExample of a stand-alone component deposit Review the sample below or download an XML file from our GitLab repository.\n\u0026lt;doi_batch xmlns=\u0026#34;http://www.crossref.org/schema/4.3.7\u0026#34; xmlns:xsi=\u0026#34;http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance\u0026#34; version=\u0026#34;4.3.7\u0026#34; xsi:schemaLocation=\u0026#34;http://www.crossref.org/schema/4.3.7 http://www.crossref.org/schema/deposit/crossref4.3.7.xsd\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;head\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi_batch_id\u0026gt;123456\u0026lt;/doi_batch_id\u0026gt; \u0026lt;timestamp\u0026gt;2015052016\u0026lt;/timestamp\u0026gt; \u0026lt;depositor\u0026gt; \u0026lt;depositor_name\u0026gt;Crossref sample deposit\u0026lt;/depositor_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;email_address\u0026gt;pfeeney@crossref.org\u0026lt;/email_address\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/depositor\u0026gt; \u0026lt;registrant\u0026gt;Crossref\u0026lt;/registrant\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/head\u0026gt; \u0026lt;body\u0026gt; \u0026lt;sa_component parent_doi=\u0026#34;10.5555/mrtest2\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;component_list\u0026gt; \u0026lt;component parent_relation=\u0026#34;isPartOf\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;titles\u0026gt; \u0026lt;title\u0026gt;iso-6892-1.xsd\u0026lt;/title\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/titles\u0026gt; \u0026lt;description\u0026gt;ISO 6892 XML Schema, Reference Implementation\u0026lt;/description\u0026gt; \u0026lt;format mime_type=\u0026#34;text/xml\u0026#34;/\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi_data\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi\u0026gt;10.5555/demo_1.1\u0026lt;/doi\u0026gt; \u0026lt;resource\u0026gt;http://tsturi.cen.eu/root/cwa_16200/iso-6892-1.xsd\u0026lt;/resource\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/doi_data\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/component\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/component_list\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/sa_component\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/body\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/doi_batch\u0026gt; ",
"headings": ["Constructing component deposits ","Example of a stand-alone component deposit "]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/schema-library/markup-guide-metadata-segments/affiliations/",
"title": "Affiliations and ROR",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2022-08-19",
"lastmod_ts": 1660867200,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "This guide gives markup examples for members registering affiliations by direct deposit of XML. As of schema version 5.3.0 we’ve introduced a new tag that supports both affiliated institution names and select identifiers, including ROR. This change is made across contributor metadata in all record types.\nAffiliation metadata consists of a repeatable element that contains the following:\nElement Description Limits institution container for institution metadata repeatable institution_name The full name of an institution repeatable, either institution_name or institution_id required institution_id and attribute(s): @type (values are ror, wikidata, isni) Identifier for an institution or organisation ID institution_acronym The acronym of an institution optional institution_place The primary city location of an institution 1 allowed, xsd:string institution_department The department within an institution 1 allowed, xsd:string Requirements: For each affiliation, you must at minimum include an institution identifier (institution_id) or an institution name (institution_name). A ROR ID is recommended as we plan to integrate ROR data into our APIs in the future. You should include an identifier wherever possible, to improve discovery, disambiguate, and make affiliations machine actionable. You may include optional metadata including an acronym (institution_acronym), a place (institution_place), and a department (institution_department). Most of this metadata is made redundant by identifiers, so include only if an identifier is not available or if the identifier is not sufficiently granular (as with departments). Institution identifiers We currently support 3 institution identifiers: ROR, Wikidata, and ISNI. We do some basic validation for each identifier provided in your XML:\n",
"content": "This guide gives markup examples for members registering affiliations by direct deposit of XML. As of schema version 5.3.0 we’ve introduced a new tag that supports both affiliated institution names and select identifiers, including ROR. This change is made across contributor metadata in all record types.\nAffiliation metadata consists of a repeatable element that contains the following:\nElement Description Limits institution container for institution metadata repeatable institution_name The full name of an institution repeatable, either institution_name or institution_id required institution_id and attribute(s): @type (values are ror, wikidata, isni) Identifier for an institution or organisation ID institution_acronym The acronym of an institution optional institution_place The primary city location of an institution 1 allowed, xsd:string institution_department The department within an institution 1 allowed, xsd:string Requirements: For each affiliation, you must at minimum include an institution identifier (institution_id) or an institution name (institution_name). A ROR ID is recommended as we plan to integrate ROR data into our APIs in the future. You should include an identifier wherever possible, to improve discovery, disambiguate, and make affiliations machine actionable. You may include optional metadata including an acronym (institution_acronym), a place (institution_place), and a department (institution_department). Most of this metadata is made redundant by identifiers, so include only if an identifier is not available or if the identifier is not sufficiently granular (as with departments). Institution identifiers We currently support 3 institution identifiers: ROR, Wikidata, and ISNI. We do some basic validation for each identifier provided in your XML:\nROR: must begin with https://ror.org/ (full regex used for validation is https://ror\\\\.org/0[^ilo]{6}\\\\d{2}) Wikidata: must begin with https://www.wikidata.org/entity/ (full regex used for validation is https://www\\\\.wikidata\\\\.org/entity/([qQ]|[pP]|[lL])\\\\d+) ISNI: should begin with https://isni.org/isni but https://www.isni.org/isni is also allowed (full regex used for validation is https://www\\\\.isni\\\\.org/isni/\\\\d{15}(x|[0-9]) Affiliation examples There are multiple ways to mark up an affiliation depending on what metadata is available - a ROR ID may be provided on its own as it\u0026rsquo;s all we need to identify an organisation:\n\u0026lt;affiliations\u0026gt; \u0026lt;institution\u0026gt; \u0026lt;institution_id type=\u0026#34;ror\u0026#34;\u0026gt;https://ror.org/05gq02987\u0026lt;/institution_id\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/institution\u0026gt; This example includes department information to supplement the ROR ID:\n\u0026lt;affiliations\u0026gt; \u0026lt;institution\u0026gt; \u0026lt;institution_id type=\u0026#34;ror\u0026#34;\u0026gt;https://ror.org/01bj3aw27\u0026lt;/institution_id\u0026gt; \u0026lt;institution_department\u0026gt;Office of Environmental Management\u0026lt;/institution_department\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/institution\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/affiliations\u0026gt; This affiliation does not have an identifier, so additional metadata is useful:\n\u0026lt;institution\u0026gt; \u0026lt;institution_name\u0026gt;Tinker Fan Club\u0026lt;/institution_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;institution_acronym\u0026gt;TinFC\u0026lt;/institution_acronym\u0026gt; \u0026lt;institution_place\u0026gt;Boston, MA\u0026lt;/institution_place\u0026gt; \u0026lt;institution_department\u0026gt;Office of Environmental Management\u0026lt;/institution_department\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/institution\u0026gt; As mentioned above a ROR identifier is preferred, but ISNI and Wikidata identifiers are also supported and will be passed on to our metadata users via our REST and XML APIs.\nCrossref and JATS Crossref affiliation metadata easily maps to JATS and the JATS4R affiliation recommendations. For example, a basic affiliation with name only is tagged in JATS as:\n\u0026lt;contrib-group\u0026gt; \u0026lt;contrib contrib-type=”author”\u0026gt; \u0026lt;name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;surname initials=”M”\u0026gt;Mitchell\u0026lt;/surname\u0026gt; \u0026lt;given-names initials=”AP”\u0026gt;Aaron P.\u0026lt;/given-names\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;aff\u0026gt;Carnegie Mellon University\u0026lt;/aff\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/contrib\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/contrib-group\u0026gt; and should be tagged for Crossref use as\n\u0026lt;affiliations\u0026gt; \u0026lt;institution\u0026gt; \u0026lt;institution_name\u0026gt;Carnegie Mellon University\u0026lt;/institution_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/institution\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/affiliations\u0026gt; This example contains a JATS-tagged affiliation with an institution ID:\n\u0026lt;aff id=\u0026#34;aff1\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;label\u0026gt;a\u0026lt;/label\u0026gt; \u0026lt;institution-wrap\u0026gt; \u0026lt;institution-id institution-id-type=”ror”\u0026gt;https://ror.org/03vek6s52 \u0026lt;/institution-id\u0026gt; \u0026lt;institution\u0026gt;Harvard University\u0026lt;/institution\u0026gt;\u0026lt;/institution-wrap\u0026gt; \u0026lt;institution-wrap\u0026gt; \u0026lt;institution-id institution-id-type=”ror”\u0026gt;https://ror.org/000cs1t14 \u0026lt;/institution-id\u0026gt; \u0026lt;institution\u0026gt;Harvard NeuroDiscovery Center\u0026lt;/institution\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/institution-wrap\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/aff\u0026gt; and should be tagged for Crossref use as:\n\u0026lt;affiliations\u0026gt; \u0026lt;institution\u0026gt; \u0026lt;institution_name\u0026gt;Harvard University\u0026lt;/institution_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;institution_id type=”ror”\u0026gt;https://ror.org/03vek6s52\u0026lt;/institution_id\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/institution\u0026gt; \u0026lt;institution\u0026gt; \u0026lt;institution_name\u0026gt;Harvard NeuroDiscovery Center\u0026lt;/institution_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;institution_id type=”ror”\u0026gt;https://ror.org/000cs1t14\u0026lt;/institution_id\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/institution\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/affiliations\u0026gt; Samples of full XML files containing our new affiliation metadata are available on our GitLab repository.\n",
"headings": ["Requirements:","Institution identifiers","Affiliation examples","Crossref and JATS"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/schema-library/markup-guide-metadata-segments/archive-locations/",
"title": "Archive locations",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2025-03-19",
"lastmod_ts": 1742342400,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "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.\nUnder our member obligations, you are asked to make best efforts to have your content archived by an archiving organisation, 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 organisation ceases.\n",
"content": "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.\nUnder our member obligations, you are asked to make best efforts to have your content archived by an archiving organisation, 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 organisation ceases.\nThe archives currently listed in our deposit schema section are:\n* Archives added with schema version 5.4.0:\nXML input Description ADS* Archaeology Data Service BL* British Library Cariniana Network* Cariniana Network CLOCKSS CLOCKSS DWT Deep Web Technologies (DWT) HathiTrust* HathiTrust Internet Archive Internet Archive KB Koninklijke Bibliotheek (KB) LOC* Library of Congress LOCKSS LOCKSS NAA* National Archives of Australia NARA* US National Archives and Records Administration NDPP* National Digital Preservation Program China NSK* National and University Library in Zagreb Portico Portico PKP PN* PKP Preservation Network PSNC* Poznan Supercomputing and Networking Center Scholars Portal* Scholars Portal TNA* The National Archives UK There\u0026rsquo;s a useful list of archive providers on the Keepers Registry.\nPlease contact us if you have archiving arrangements with an organisation that is not listed.\nTo include archiving metadata, insert the relevant archive information into your metadata above the doi_data section, for example:\n\u0026lt;archive_locations\u0026gt; \u0026lt;archive name=\u0026#34;CLOCKSS\u0026#34;/\u0026gt; \u0026lt;archive name=\u0026#34;Internet Archive\u0026#34;/\u0026gt; \u0026lt;archive name=\u0026#34;Portico\u0026#34;/\u0026gt; \u0026lt;archive name=\u0026#34;KB\u0026#34;/\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/archive_locations\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi_data\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi\u0026gt;10.32013/12345678\u0026lt;/doi\u0026gt; \u0026lt;resource\u0026gt;https://www.crossref.org/xml-samples/\u0026lt;/resource\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/doi_data\u0026gt; ",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/schema-library/markup-guide-record-types/conference-proceedings/",
"title": "Conference proceedings markup guide",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2025-03-19",
"lastmod_ts": 1742342400,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "This guide gives markup examples for members registering conference proceedings by direct deposit of XML. You can also register the conference proceedings record type using one of our helper tools: web deposit form.\nThe conference proceedings record type captures metadata about a single conference, such as date, acronym, and location. DOIs should be assigned to all papers associated with the conference, and a DOI may be assigned to the conference itself. Ongoing conferences published with an ISSN may be deposited as a series.\n",
"content": "This guide gives markup examples for members registering conference proceedings by direct deposit of XML. You can also register the conference proceedings record type using one of our helper tools: web deposit form.\nThe conference proceedings record type captures metadata about a single conference, such as date, acronym, and location. DOIs should be assigned to all papers associated with the conference, and a DOI may be assigned to the conference itself. Ongoing conferences published with an ISSN may be deposited as a series.\n\u0026lt;conference\u0026gt; is the container for all information about a single conference as well as the individual conference papers you are depositing for the conference. If you need to register articles for more than one conference, you must use multiple instances of \u0026lt;conference\u0026gt;.\nConference deposits require metadata about the event (captured in \u0026lt;event_metadata\u0026gt;) such as conference name (required) and theme, acronym, sponsor, location, and date (all optional), and proceedings-specific metadata such as a proceedings title, publisher, and date (all required) and subject (optional).\nA conference may be deposited as a single conference or as a conference series. A conference series requires an ISSN and series-level title.\nConference papers Conference paper metadata is captured in \u0026lt;conference_paper\u0026gt;. Contributor(s), title, and DOI are required. Abstracts, page numbers, publication date, citations, funding, license, and relationship metadata are optional but encouraged.\nExample of a single conference Review the sample below or download an XML file from our GitLab repository.\n\u0026lt;doi_batch xmlns=\u0026#34;http://www.crossref.org/schema/4.3.7\u0026#34; xmlns:xsi=\u0026#34;http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance\u0026#34; xsi:schemaLocation=\u0026#34;http://www.crossref.org/schema/4.3.7 http://www.crossref.org/schemas/crossref4.3.7.xsd\u0026#34; version=\u0026#34;4.3.7\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;head\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi_batch_id\u0026gt;1234\u0026lt;/doi_batch_id\u0026gt; \u0026lt;timestamp\u0026gt;20010910040315\u0026lt;/timestamp\u0026gt; \u0026lt;depositor\u0026gt; \u0026lt;depositor_name\u0026gt;Sample Master\u0026lt;/depositor_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;email_address\u0026gt;support@crossref.org\u0026lt;/email_address\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/depositor\u0026gt; \u0026lt;registrant\u0026gt;Association of Computing Machinery\u0026lt;/registrant\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/head\u0026gt; \u0026lt;body\u0026gt; \u0026lt;conference\u0026gt; \u0026lt;contributors\u0026gt; \u0026lt;person_name sequence=\u0026#34;first\u0026#34; contributor_role=\u0026#34;chair\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;given_name\u0026gt;Peter\u0026lt;/given_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;surname\u0026gt;Lee\u0026lt;/surname\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/person_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;person_name sequence=\u0026#34;additional\u0026#34; contributor_role=\u0026#34;chair\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;given_name\u0026gt;Fritz\u0026lt;/given_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;surname\u0026gt;Henglein\u0026lt;/surname\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/person_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;person_name sequence=\u0026#34;additional\u0026#34; contributor_role=\u0026#34;chair\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;given_name\u0026gt;Neil D.\u0026lt;/given_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;surname\u0026gt;Jones\u0026lt;/surname\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/person_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/contributors\u0026gt; \u0026lt;event_metadata\u0026gt; \u0026lt;conference_name\u0026gt;24th ACM SIGPLAN-SIGACT symposium\u0026lt;/conference_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;conference_theme\u0026gt;Algorithms \u0026amp; Computation Theory\u0026lt;/conference_theme\u0026gt; \u0026lt;conference_acronym\u0026gt;POPL \u0026#39;97\u0026lt;/conference_acronym\u0026gt; \u0026lt;conference_sponsor\u0026gt;L\u0026#39;École des Mines de Paris\u0026lt;/conference_sponsor\u0026gt; \u0026lt;conference_number\u0026gt;24\u0026lt;/conference_number\u0026gt; \u0026lt;conference_location\u0026gt;Paris, France\u0026lt;/conference_location\u0026gt; \u0026lt;conference_date start_month=\u0026#34;01\u0026#34; start_year=\u0026#34;1997\u0026#34; start_day=\u0026#34;15\u0026#34; end_year=\u0026#34;1997\u0026#34; end_month=\u0026#34;01\u0026#34; end_day=\u0026#34;17\u0026#34;/\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/event_metadata\u0026gt; \u0026lt;proceedings_metadata language=\u0026#34;en\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;proceedings_title\u0026gt; Proceedings of the 24th ACM SIGPLAN-SIGACT symposium on Principles of programming languages - POPL \u0026#39;97 \u0026lt;/proceedings_title\u0026gt; \u0026lt;proceedings_subject\u0026gt;Principles of programming languages\u0026lt;/proceedings_subject\u0026gt; \u0026lt;publisher\u0026gt; \u0026lt;publisher_name\u0026gt;ACM Press\u0026lt;/publisher_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;publisher_place\u0026gt;New York\u0026lt;/publisher_place\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/publisher\u0026gt; \u0026lt;publication_date\u0026gt; \u0026lt;year\u0026gt;1997\u0026lt;/year\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/publication_date\u0026gt; \u0026lt;isbn\u0026gt;0-89791-853-3\u0026lt;/isbn\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi_data\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi\u0026gt;10.1145/263699\u0026lt;/doi\u0026gt; \u0026lt;timestamp\u0026gt;20010910040315\u0026lt;/timestamp\u0026gt; \u0026lt;resource\u0026gt;http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?doid=263699\u0026lt;/resource\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/doi_data\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/proceedings_metadata\u0026gt; \u0026lt;conference_paper publication_type=\u0026#34;full_text\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;contributors\u0026gt; \u0026lt;person_name sequence=\u0026#34;first\u0026#34; contributor_role=\u0026#34;author\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;given_name\u0026gt;Marc\u0026lt;/given_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;surname\u0026gt;Shapiro\u0026lt;/surname\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/person_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;person_name sequence=\u0026#34;additional\u0026#34; contributor_role=\u0026#34;author\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;given_name\u0026gt;Susan\u0026lt;/given_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;surname\u0026gt;Horwitz\u0026lt;/surname\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/person_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/contributors\u0026gt; \u0026lt;titles\u0026gt; \u0026lt;title\u0026gt; Fast and accurate flow-insensitive points-to analysis \u0026lt;/title\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/titles\u0026gt; \u0026lt;publication_date\u0026gt; \u0026lt;year\u0026gt;1997\u0026lt;/year\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/publication_date\u0026gt; \u0026lt;pages\u0026gt; \u0026lt;first_page\u0026gt;1\u0026lt;/first_page\u0026gt; \u0026lt;last_page\u0026gt;14\u0026lt;/last_page\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/pages\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi_data\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi\u0026gt;10.1145/263699.263703\u0026lt;/doi\u0026gt; \u0026lt;resource\u0026gt; http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?doid=263699.263703 \u0026lt;/resource\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/doi_data\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/conference_paper\u0026gt; \u0026lt;conference_paper publication_type=\u0026#34;full_text\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;contributors\u0026gt; \u0026lt;person_name sequence=\u0026#34;first\u0026#34; contributor_role=\u0026#34;author\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;given_name\u0026gt;Erik\u0026lt;/given_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;surname\u0026gt;Ruf\u0026lt;/surname\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/person_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/contributors\u0026gt; \u0026lt;titles\u0026gt; \u0026lt;title\u0026gt;Partitioning dataflow analyses using types\u0026lt;/title\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/titles\u0026gt; \u0026lt;publication_date\u0026gt; \u0026lt;year\u0026gt;1997\u0026lt;/year\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/publication_date\u0026gt; \u0026lt;pages\u0026gt; \u0026lt;first_page\u0026gt;15\u0026lt;/first_page\u0026gt; \u0026lt;last_page\u0026gt;26\u0026lt;/last_page\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/pages\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi_data\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi\u0026gt;10.1145/263699.263705\u0026lt;/doi\u0026gt; \u0026lt;resource\u0026gt; http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?doid=263699.263705 \u0026lt;/resource\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/doi_data\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/conference_paper\u0026gt; \u0026lt;conference_paper publication_type=\u0026#34;full_text\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;contributors\u0026gt; \u0026lt;person_name sequence=\u0026#34;first\u0026#34; contributor_role=\u0026#34;author\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;given_name\u0026gt;Pascal\u0026lt;/given_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;surname\u0026gt;Fradet\u0026lt;/surname\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/person_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;person_name sequence=\u0026#34;additional\u0026#34; contributor_role=\u0026#34;author\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;given_name\u0026gt;Daniel\u0026lt;/given_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;surname\u0026gt;Le M\u0026amp;étayer\u0026lt;/surname\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/person_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/contributors\u0026gt; \u0026lt;titles\u0026gt; \u0026lt;title\u0026gt;Shape types\u0026lt;/title\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/titles\u0026gt; \u0026lt;publication_date\u0026gt; \u0026lt;year\u0026gt;1997\u0026lt;/year\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/publication_date\u0026gt; \u0026lt;pages\u0026gt; \u0026lt;first_page\u0026gt;27\u0026lt;/first_page\u0026gt; \u0026lt;last_page\u0026gt;39\u0026lt;/last_page\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/pages\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi_data\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi\u0026gt;10.1145/263699.263706\u0026lt;/doi\u0026gt; \u0026lt;resource\u0026gt; http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?doid=263699.263706 \u0026lt;/resource\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/doi_data\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/conference_paper\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/conference\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/body\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/doi_batch\u0026gt; Example of a conference that is part of a series Review the sample below or download an XML file.\n\u0026lt;doi_batch xmlns=\u0026#34;http://www.crossref.org/schema/4.3.7\u0026#34; xmlns:xsi=\u0026#34;http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance\u0026#34; xsi:schemaLocation=\u0026#34;http://www.crossref.org/schema/4.3.7 http://www.crossref.org/schemas/crossref4.3.7.xsd\u0026#34; version=\u0026#34;4.3.7\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;head\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi_batch_id\u0026gt;111111\u0026lt;/doi_batch_id\u0026gt; \u0026lt;timestamp\u0026gt;200503161011\u0026lt;/timestamp\u0026gt; \u0026lt;depositor\u0026gt; \u0026lt;depositor_name\u0026gt;Sample Master\u0026lt;/depositor_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;email_address\u0026gt;support@crossref.org\u0026lt;/email_address\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/depositor\u0026gt; \u0026lt;registrant\u0026gt;CrossRef\u0026lt;/registrant\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/head\u0026gt; \u0026lt;body\u0026gt; \u0026lt;conference\u0026gt; \u0026lt;event_metadata\u0026gt; \u0026lt;conference_name\u0026gt;Crossref Annual Meeting\u0026lt;/conference_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;conference_acronym\u0026gt;cam2005\u0026lt;/conference_acronym\u0026gt; \u0026lt;conference_date\u0026gt;Nov. 13, 2005\u0026lt;/conference_date\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/event_metadata\u0026gt; \u0026lt;proceedings_series_metadata\u0026gt; \u0026lt;series_metadata\u0026gt; \u0026lt;titles\u0026gt; \u0026lt;title\u0026gt;CrossRef Annual Meeting Dummy Proceedings\u0026lt;/title\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/titles\u0026gt; \u0026lt;issn\u0026gt;5555-5555\u0026lt;/issn\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/series_metadata\u0026gt; \u0026lt;proceedings_title\u0026gt;Annual Meeting of PILA\u0026lt;/proceedings_title\u0026gt; \u0026lt;volume\u0026gt;3\u0026lt;/volume\u0026gt; \u0026lt;publisher\u0026gt; \u0026lt;publisher_name\u0026gt;Crossref\u0026lt;/publisher_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/publisher\u0026gt; \u0026lt;publication_date media_type=\u0026#34;print\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;month\u0026gt;11\u0026lt;/month\u0026gt; \u0026lt;day\u0026gt;23\u0026lt;/day\u0026gt; \u0026lt;year\u0026gt;2004\u0026lt;/year\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/publication_date\u0026gt; \u0026lt;isbn\u0026gt;5555555555\u0026lt;/isbn\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi_data\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi\u0026gt;10.5555/cram05\u0026lt;/doi\u0026gt; \u0026lt;resource\u0026gt;http://www.crossref.org/cram05\u0026lt;/resource\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/doi_data\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/proceedings_series_metadata\u0026gt; \u0026lt;!-- ============== --\u0026gt; \u0026lt;conference_paper\u0026gt; \u0026lt;contributors\u0026gt; \u0026lt;person_name sequence=\u0026#34;first\u0026#34; contributor_role=\u0026#34;author\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;given_name\u0026gt;Jim\u0026lt;/given_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;surname\u0026gt;Jones\u0026lt;/surname\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/person_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/contributors\u0026gt; \u0026lt;titles\u0026gt; \u0026lt;title\u0026gt;Crossref Sample Title\u0026lt;/title\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/titles\u0026gt; \u0026lt;publication_date media_type=\u0026#34;print\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;month\u0026gt;12\u0026lt;/month\u0026gt; \u0026lt;day\u0026gt;31\u0026lt;/day\u0026gt; \u0026lt;year\u0026gt;2003\u0026lt;/year\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/publication_date\u0026gt; \u0026lt;pages\u0026gt; \u0026lt;first_page\u0026gt;3\u0026lt;/first_page\u0026gt; \u0026lt;last_page\u0026gt;4\u0026lt;/last_page\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/pages\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi_data\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi\u0026gt;10.5555/cdp0001\u0026lt;/doi\u0026gt; \u0026lt;resource\u0026gt;http://www.crossref.org/pubs/cdp0001\u0026lt;/resource\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/doi_data\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/conference_paper\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/conference\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/body\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/doi_batch\u0026gt; ",
"headings": ["Conference papers ","Example of a single conference ","Example of a conference that is part of a series "]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/schema-library/markup-guide-metadata-segments/article-ids/",
"title": "Article numbers or IDs",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2023-02-23",
"lastmod_ts": 1677110400,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "Adding other identifiers 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 \u0026lt;first_page\u0026gt; tag to capture the ID - instead, use the \u0026lt;item_number\u0026gt; tag with the item_number_type attribute value set to article_number.\nExample article number or ID \u0026lt;publication_date media_type=\u0026#34;online\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;month\u0026gt;5\u0026lt;/month\u0026gt; \u0026lt;day\u0026gt;10\u0026lt;/day\u0026gt; \u0026lt;year\u0026gt;2017\u0026lt;/year\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/publication_date\u0026gt; \u0026lt;publisher_item\u0026gt; \u0026lt;item_number item_number_type=\u0026#34;article_number\u0026#34;\u0026gt;3D9324F1-16B1-11D7- 8645000102C\u0026lt;/item_number\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/publisher_item\u0026gt; \u0026lt;crossmark\u0026gt; Internal and other identifiers You can include identifiers that are not explicitly defined in our deposit schema section within the optional \u0026lt;publisher_item\u0026gt; section. \u0026lt;publisher_item\u0026gt; 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.\n",
"content": "Adding other identifiers 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 \u0026lt;first_page\u0026gt; tag to capture the ID - instead, use the \u0026lt;item_number\u0026gt; tag with the item_number_type attribute value set to article_number.\nExample article number or ID \u0026lt;publication_date media_type=\u0026#34;online\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;month\u0026gt;5\u0026lt;/month\u0026gt; \u0026lt;day\u0026gt;10\u0026lt;/day\u0026gt; \u0026lt;year\u0026gt;2017\u0026lt;/year\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/publication_date\u0026gt; \u0026lt;publisher_item\u0026gt; \u0026lt;item_number item_number_type=\u0026#34;article_number\u0026#34;\u0026gt;3D9324F1-16B1-11D7- 8645000102C\u0026lt;/item_number\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/publisher_item\u0026gt; \u0026lt;crossmark\u0026gt; Internal and other identifiers You can include identifiers that are not explicitly defined in our deposit schema section within the optional \u0026lt;publisher_item\u0026gt; section. \u0026lt;publisher_item\u0026gt; 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.\nExamples of identifier types include:\nPII SICI DOI DAI Z39.23 ISO-std-ref std-designation report-number other Example of an identifier \u0026lt;publisher_item\u0026gt; \u0026lt;identifier id_type=\u0026#34;**pii**\u0026#34;\u0026gt;s00022098195001808\u0026lt;/identifier\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/publisher_item\u0026gt; ",
"headings": ["Adding other identifiers ","Example article number or ID ","Internal and other identifiers ","Example of an identifier "]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/schema-library/markup-guide-record-types/datasets/",
"title": "Datasets markup guide",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2025-03-19",
"lastmod_ts": 1742342400,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "This guide gives markup examples for members registering datasets by direct deposit of XML. It is not currently possible to register the datasets record type using one of our helper tools.\nDataset records capture information about one or more database records or collections. Dataset deposits do not contain the entire database record or collection, only descriptive metadata. The metadata can include:\nContributors: the author(s) of a database record or collection Title: the title of a database record or collection Date (within \u0026lt;database_date\u0026gt;): the creation date, publication date (if different from the creation date), and the date of last update of the record Record number or other identifier (within \u0026lt;publisher_item\u0026gt;): the record number of the dataset item. In this context, \u0026lt;publisher_item\u0026gt; can be used for the record number of each item in the database Description (within \u0026lt;description\u0026gt;): a brief summary description of the contents of the database Format: the format type of the dataset item if it includes files rather than just text. Note the format element here should not be used to describe the format of items deposited as part of the component_list Citations (within \u0026lt;citation_list\u0026gt;): a list of items (such as journal articles) cited by the dataset item. For example, dataset entry from a taxonomy might cite the article in which a species was first identified. The dataset_type attribute should be set to either record or collection to indicate the type of deposit. The default value of this attribute is record.\n",
"content": "This guide gives markup examples for members registering datasets by direct deposit of XML. It is not currently possible to register the datasets record type using one of our helper tools.\nDataset records capture information about one or more database records or collections. Dataset deposits do not contain the entire database record or collection, only descriptive metadata. The metadata can include:\nContributors: the author(s) of a database record or collection Title: the title of a database record or collection Date (within \u0026lt;database_date\u0026gt;): the creation date, publication date (if different from the creation date), and the date of last update of the record Record number or other identifier (within \u0026lt;publisher_item\u0026gt;): the record number of the dataset item. In this context, \u0026lt;publisher_item\u0026gt; can be used for the record number of each item in the database Description (within \u0026lt;description\u0026gt;): a brief summary description of the contents of the database Format: the format type of the dataset item if it includes files rather than just text. Note the format element here should not be used to describe the format of items deposited as part of the component_list Citations (within \u0026lt;citation_list\u0026gt;): a list of items (such as journal articles) cited by the dataset item. For example, dataset entry from a taxonomy might cite the article in which a species was first identified. The dataset_type attribute should be set to either record or collection to indicate the type of deposit. The default value of this attribute is record.\nConstructing dataset deposits \u0026lt;database\u0026gt; is the container for all information about a set of datasets. The top-level database may be a functional database or an abstraction acting as a collection (much like a journal is a collection of articles). Individual dataset entries are captured within the \u0026lt;dataset\u0026gt; element.\nDatasets that aren\u0026rsquo;t datasets The database record type is often used to capture metadata for items that do not fit into our currently defined record types. This may include online collections, videos, archives, and other items that aren\u0026rsquo;t cited or presented as articles, books, reports, or other defined types of content. Learn more about our supported record types.\nExample of a database deposit containing several datasets Review the sample below or download an XML file from our GitLab repository.\n\u0026lt;doi_batch xmlns=\u0026#34;http://www.crossref.org/schema/4.3.7\u0026#34; xmlns:xsi=\u0026#34;http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance\u0026#34; version=\u0026#34;4.3.7\u0026#34; xsi:schemaLocation=\u0026#34;http://www.crossref.org/schema/4.3.7 http://www.crossref.org/schemas/crossref4.3.7.xsd\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;head\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi_batch_id\u0026gt;2006-03-24-21-57-31-10023\u0026lt;/doi_batch_id\u0026gt; \u0026lt;timestamp\u0026gt;20060324215731\u0026lt;/timestamp\u0026gt; \u0026lt;depositor\u0026gt; \u0026lt;depositor_name\u0026gt;Sample Master\u0026lt;/depositor_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;email_address\u0026gt;support@crossref.org\u0026lt;/email_address\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/depositor\u0026gt; \u0026lt;registrant\u0026gt;CrossRef\u0026lt;/registrant\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/head\u0026gt; \u0026lt;body\u0026gt; \u0026lt;database\u0026gt; \u0026lt;database_metadata language=\u0026#34;en\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;titles\u0026gt; \u0026lt;title\u0026gt;NURSA Datasets\u0026lt;/title\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/titles\u0026gt; \u0026lt;institution\u0026gt; \u0026lt;institution_name\u0026gt;Nuclear Receptor Signaling Atlas\u0026lt;/institution_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;institution_acronym\u0026gt;NURSA\u0026lt;/institution_acronym\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/institution\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi_data\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi\u0026gt;10.1621/NURSA_dataset_home\u0026lt;/doi\u0026gt; \u0026lt;resource\u0026gt;http://www.nursa.org/template.cfm?threadId=10222\u0026lt;/resource\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/doi_data\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/database_metadata\u0026gt; \u0026lt;dataset dataset_type=\u0026#34;collection\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;contributors\u0026gt; \u0026lt;person_name contributor_role=\u0026#34;author\u0026#34; sequence=\u0026#34;first\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;given_name\u0026gt;D\u0026lt;/given_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;surname\u0026gt;Mangelsdorf\u0026lt;/surname\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/person_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/contributors\u0026gt; \u0026lt;titles\u0026gt; \u0026lt;title\u0026gt; Tissue-specific expression patterns of nuclear receptors \u0026lt;/title\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/titles\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi_data\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi\u0026gt;10.1621/datasets.02001\u0026lt;/doi\u0026gt; \u0026lt;resource\u0026gt; http://www.nursa.org/template.cfm?threadId=10222\u0026amp;dataType=Q-PCR\u0026amp;dataset=Tissue-specific%20expression%20patterns%20of%20nuclear%20receptors \u0026lt;/resource\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/doi_data\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/dataset\u0026gt; \u0026lt;dataset dataset_type=\u0026#34;collection\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;contributors\u0026gt; \u0026lt;person_name contributor_role=\u0026#34;author\u0026#34; sequence=\u0026#34;first\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;given_name\u0026gt;R\u0026lt;/given_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;surname\u0026gt;Evans\u0026lt;/surname\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/person_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/contributors\u0026gt; \u0026lt;titles\u0026gt; \u0026lt;title\u0026gt;Circadian expression patterns of nuclear receptors\u0026lt;/title\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/titles\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi_data\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi\u0026gt;10.1621/datasets.02002\u0026lt;/doi\u0026gt; \u0026lt;resource\u0026gt; http://www.nursa.org/template.cfm?threadId=10222\u0026amp;dataType=Q-PCR\u0026amp;dataset=Circadian%20expression%20patterns%20of%20nuclear%20receptors \u0026lt;/resource\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/doi_data\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/dataset\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/database\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/body\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/doi_batch\u0026gt; How to access data \u0026amp; software citations Crossref and DataCite make the data \u0026amp; software citations deposited by Crossref members and DataCite data repositories openly available for use for anyone within the research ecosystem (funders, research organisations, technology and service providers, research data frameworks such as Scholix, etc.).\nData citations from references can be accessed via a dedicated API. Citations included directly in the metadata by relation type can be accessed via our APIs.\nScholix Participation The goal of the Scholix (SCHOlarly LInk eXchange) initiative is to establish a high-level interoperability framework for exchanging information about the links between scholarly literature and data. Crossref members can participate by sharing article\u0026ndash;data links by including the relevant idenfiers in their deposited metadata in references and/or relationships as described above. You don’t need to sign up or let us know you’re going to start providing this information, just start to send it to us in your reference lists or in the relationship metadata.\nIf the reference metadata you are registering with us uses either Crossref or DataCite DOIs, the linkage between the publications/data is handled by us\u0026mdash;nothing more is needed.\nIf the data (or other research objects) uses DOIs from another source, or a different type of persistent identifier, then you need to create a relationship type record instead. This method also allows for the linkage of other research objects.\n",
"headings": ["Constructing dataset deposits ","Datasets that aren\u0026rsquo;t datasets ","Example of a database deposit containing several datasets ","How to access data \u0026amp; software citations","Scholix Participation"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/schema-library/markup-guide-metadata-segments/contributors/",
"title": "Contributors",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2023-10-28",
"lastmod_ts": 1698451200,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "This guide gives markup examples of contributor metadata for members registering content by direct deposit of XML. A contributor is a person or organisation that is considered the author of a work. A contributor may be a person or a group author (organization in our XML). Contributor metadata also includes affiliations, which have their own guide.\nORCID iDs An author\u0026rsquo;s ORCID iD should be included whenever possible. Providing an ORCID iD in a metadata record allows the author\u0026rsquo;s ORCID record to be automatically updated via our auto-update process. OJS users who have upgraded to version 3.1.2 or later can request authenticated iDs from both contributing authors and co-authors - learn more about the OJS-ORCID plugin.\n",
"content": "This guide gives markup examples of contributor metadata for members registering content by direct deposit of XML. A contributor is a person or organisation that is considered the author of a work. A contributor may be a person or a group author (organization in our XML). Contributor metadata also includes affiliations, which have their own guide.\nORCID iDs An author\u0026rsquo;s ORCID iD should be included whenever possible. Providing an ORCID iD in a metadata record allows the author\u0026rsquo;s ORCID record to be automatically updated via our auto-update process. OJS users who have upgraded to version 3.1.2 or later can request authenticated iDs from both contributing authors and co-authors - learn more about the OJS-ORCID plugin.\nContributor roles We currently support and require a single contributor role per contributor. Supported values are:\nauthor editor chair reviewer review-assistant stats-reviewer reviewer-external reader translator We intend to allow multiple roles per contributor and as expand our list of supported contributor roles in a future update.\nContributor order The \u0026lt;person_name\u0026gt; and \u0026lt;organization\u0026gt; elements both include required contributor role and sequence attributes. An author may be first or additional. Specific sequence numbering is not allowed, but many systems using our metadata assume that the order of authors as present in the metadata is the appropriate order for metadata display. * If a contributor has just one name, put it under the \u0026lt;surname\u0026gt; field\nNote that the data supplied in the \u0026lt;given_name\u0026gt; and \u0026lt;surname\u0026gt; fields is used for display and query matching and must be as accurate as possible.\n\u0026lt;person_name sequence=\u0026#34;first\u0026#34; contributor_role=\u0026#34;author\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;given_name\u0026gt;Minerva\u0026lt;/given_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;surname\u0026gt;Nipperson\u0026lt;/surname\u0026gt; \u0026lt;ORCID authenticated=\u0026#34;true\u0026#34;\u0026gt;https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4011-3590\u0026lt;/ORCID\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/person_name\u0026gt; Contributor example \u0026lt;contributors\u0026gt; \u0026lt;person_name sequence=\u0026#34;first\u0026#34; contributor_role=\u0026#34;author\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;given_name\u0026gt;Minerva\u0026lt;/given_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;surname\u0026gt;Nipperson\u0026lt;/surname\u0026gt; \u0026lt;suffix\u0026gt;III\u0026lt;/suffix\u0026gt; \u0026lt;affiliations\u0026gt; \u0026lt;institution\u0026gt; \u0026lt;institution_id type=\u0026#34;ror\u0026#34;\u0026gt;https://ror.org/01bj3aw27\u0026lt;/institution_id\u0026gt; \u0026lt;institution_department\u0026gt;Office of Environmental Management\u0026lt;/institution_department\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/institution\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/affiliations\u0026gt; \u0026lt;ORCID authenticated=\u0026#34;true\u0026#34;\u0026gt;https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4011-3590\u0026lt;/ORCID\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/person_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;person_name sequence=\u0026#34;additional\u0026#34; contributor_role=\u0026#34;author\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;given_name\u0026gt;Christopher \u0026lt;/given_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;surname\u0026gt;Personality\u0026lt;/surname\u0026gt; \u0026lt;affiliations\u0026gt; \u0026lt;institution\u0026gt; \u0026lt;institution_id type=\u0026#34;ror\u0026#34;\u0026gt;https://ror.org/01bj3aw27\u0026lt;/institution_id\u0026gt; \u0026lt;institution_department\u0026gt;Office of Environmental Management\u0026lt;/institution_department\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/institution\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/affiliations\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/person_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;person_name sequence=\u0026#34;additional\u0026#34; contributor_role=\u0026#34;author\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;given_name\u0026gt;Katharine \u0026lt;/given_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;surname\u0026gt;Mech\u0026lt;/surname\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/person_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/contributors\u0026gt; ",
"headings": ["ORCID iDs ","Contributor roles ","Contributor order ","Contributor example "]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/schema-library/markup-guide-metadata-segments/data-citation/",
"title": "Data and software citation deposit guide",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2026-02-20",
"lastmod_ts": 1771545600,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "Data and software citations link publications to their supporting data, making both the research itself and the research process more transparent and reproducible. Data citations are references to data just as bibliographic citations make reference to other scholarly sources.\nMembers are encouraged to include data and software citations in the deposit of bibliographic references for each publication. Follow the general process for depositing references and apply tags as applicable. Once deposited, data citations across journals (and publishers) are then aggregated and made freely available for the community to retrieve and reuse in a single, shared location.\n",
"content": "Data and software citations link publications to their supporting data, making both the research itself and the research process more transparent and reproducible. Data citations are references to data just as bibliographic citations make reference to other scholarly sources.\nMembers are encouraged to include data and software citations in the deposit of bibliographic references for each publication. Follow the general process for depositing references and apply tags as applicable. Once deposited, data citations across journals (and publishers) are then aggregated and made freely available for the community to retrieve and reuse in a single, shared location.\nData and software links may also be asserted in the relationship section of the metadata deposit. This is recommended when you want to establish a specific relationship, such as isSupplementedBy for supplemental material. The two methods are independent, and can be used individually or together.\nSending this metadata to Crossref makes it easier for the research community to see links between different research outputs and work with these outputs. It also makes it easier to see these citations, so that researchers can get credit for their data and the sharing of that data.\nWe collect these citations and make them freely available via our APIs in multiple interfaces (REST, OAI-­PMH, OpenURL) and formats (XML, JSON). Data is made openly available to a wide range of organisations and individuals across the extended research ecosystem including funders, research organisations, technology and service providers, indexers, and many others.\nBibliographic references As part of content registration, members add data and software citations into the bibliographic references, following the general process for depositing references.\nFull data or software citations can be deposited as unstructured references. See FORCE11’s community best practice: Joint Declaration of Data Citation Principles, Software Citation Principles, and advice on placement of citations.\nYou can employ any number of reference tags currently accepted by Crossref, but as good practice we recommend tagging the identifier for the code or dataset as shown below, and including the type attribute (supported as of schema version 5.4.0:\n\u0026lt;citation type=\u0026#34;dataset\u0026#34; key=\u0026#34;ref2\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi\u0026gt;10.5061/dryad.684v0\u0026lt;/doi\u0026gt; \u0026lt;cYear\u0026gt;2017\u0026lt;/cYear\u0026gt; \u0026lt;author\u0026gt;Morinha F, Dávila JA, Estela B, Cabral JA, Frías Ó, González JL, Travassos P, Carvalho D, Milá B, Blanco G\u0026lt;/author\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/citation\u0026gt; Providing the \u0026rsquo;type\u0026rsquo; attribute will help easily identify data and software citations, useful but essential for citations that may otherwise be difficult to match or define if a DOI is not provided.\nRelationships Establishing data and software citations via relation type enables precise tagging of the dataset and its specific relationship to the research results published. To tag the data and software citation in the metadata deposit, we ask for the description of the dataset and software (optional), dataset and software identifier and identifier type (DOI, PMID, PMCID, PURL, ARK, Handle, UUID, ECLI, and URI), and relationship type. In general, use the relation type references for data and software resources.\nTo specify that the data or software resource was generated as part of the research results, use isSupplementedBy. Being this specific is optional, but can support scientific validation and research funding management. See the list of controlled options for accepted identifier types.\nExamples of asserting a relationship to data and software in the metadata deposit Dataset Snippet of deposit XML containing link Dataset or software generated as part of research article: Data from: Extreme genetic structure in a social bird species despite high dispersal capacity. Database: Dryad Digital Repository``DOI: https://doi.org/10.5061/dryad.684v0 \u0026lt;program xmlns=\u0026quot;http://www.crossref.org/relations.xsd\u0026quot;\u0026gt; `\u0026lt;related_item\u0026gt;` \u0026lt;description\u0026gt;Data from: Extreme genetic structure in a social bird species despite high dispersal capacity\u0026lt;/description\u0026gt; `\u0026lt;inter_work_relation relationship-type=\u0026quot;isSupplementedBy\u0026quot; identifier-type=\u0026quot;doi\u0026quot;\u0026gt;10.5061/dryad.684v0\u0026lt;/inter_work_relation\u0026gt;` \u0026lt;/related_item\u0026gt; `` \u0026lt;/program\u0026gt; Example of data citation as relationship (full metadata deposit) \u0026lt;?xml version=\u0026#34;1.0\u0026#34; encoding=\u0026#34;UTF-8\u0026#34;?\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi_batch version=\u0026#34;4.4.0\u0026#34; xmlns=\u0026#34;http://www.crossref.org/schema/4.4.0\u0026#34; xmlns:xsi=\u0026#34;http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance\u0026#34; xsi:schemaLocation=\u0026#34;http://www.crossref.org/schema/4.4.0 http://www.crossref.org/schemas/crossref4.4.0.xsd\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;head\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi_batch_id\u0026gt;20170807\u0026lt;/doi_batch_id\u0026gt; \u0026lt;timestamp\u0026gt;2017080715731\u0026lt;/timestamp\u0026gt; \u0026lt;depositor\u0026gt; \u0026lt;depositor_name\u0026gt;Crossref\u0026lt;/depositor_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;email_address\u0026gt;support@crossref.org\u0026lt;/email_address\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/depositor\u0026gt; \u0026lt;registrant\u0026gt;Crossref\u0026lt;/registrant\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/head\u0026gt; \u0026lt;body\u0026gt; \u0026lt;journal\u0026gt; \u0026lt;journal_metadata language=\u0026#34;en\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;full_title\u0026gt;Molecular Ecology\u0026lt;/full_title\u0026gt; \u0026lt;abbrev_title\u0026gt;Mol Ecol\u0026lt;/abbrev_title\u0026gt; \u0026lt;issn\u0026gt;09621083\u0026lt;/issn\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/journal_metadata\u0026gt; \u0026lt;journal_issue\u0026gt; \u0026lt;publication_date media_type=\u0026#34;print\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;month\u0026gt;05\u0026lt;/month\u0026gt; \u0026lt;year\u0026gt;2017\u0026lt;/year\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/publication_date\u0026gt; \u0026lt;journal_volume\u0026gt; \u0026lt;volume\u0026gt;26\u0026lt;/volume\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/journal_volume\u0026gt; \u0026lt;issue\u0026gt;10\u0026lt;/issue\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/journal_issue\u0026gt; \u0026lt;journal_article publication_type=\u0026#34;full_text\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;titles\u0026gt; \u0026lt;title\u0026gt;Extreme genetic structure in a social bird species despite high dispersal capacity\u0026lt;/title\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/titles\u0026gt; \u0026lt;contributors\u0026gt; \u0026lt;person_name contributor_role=\u0026#34;author\u0026#34; sequence=\u0026#34;first\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;given_name\u0026gt;Francisco\u0026lt;/given_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;surname\u0026gt;Morinha\u0026lt;/surname\u0026gt; \u0026lt;affiliation\u0026gt;Laboratory of Applied Ecology; Centre for Research and Technology of Agro-Environment and Biological Sciences (CITAB); University of Trás-os-Montes and Alto Douro (UTAD); Quinta de Prados 5000-801 Vila Real Portugal\u0026lt;/affiliation\u0026gt; \u0026lt;affiliation\u0026gt;Morinha Lab - Laboratory of Biodiversity and Molecular Genetics; Rua Dr. José Figueiredo, lote L-2, Lj B5 5000-562 Vila Real Portugal\u0026lt;/affiliation\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/person_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;person_name contributor_role=\u0026#34;author\u0026#34; sequence=\u0026#34;additional\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;given_name\u0026gt;José A.\u0026lt;/given_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;surname\u0026gt;Dávila\u0026lt;/surname\u0026gt; \u0026lt;affiliation\u0026gt;Instituto de Investigación en Recursos Cinegéticos; IREC (CSIC, UCLM, JCCM); Ciudad Real Spain\u0026lt;/affiliation\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/person_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;person_name contributor_role=\u0026#34;author\u0026#34; sequence=\u0026#34;additional\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;given_name\u0026gt;Estela\u0026lt;/given_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;surname\u0026gt;Bastos\u0026lt;/surname\u0026gt; \u0026lt;affiliation\u0026gt;Laboratory of Applied Ecology; Centre for Research and Technology of Agro-Environment and Biological Sciences (CITAB); University of Trás-os-Montes and Alto Douro (UTAD); Quinta de Prados 5000-801 Vila Real Portugal\u0026lt;/affiliation\u0026gt; \u0026lt;affiliation\u0026gt;Department of Genetics and Biotechnology; School of Life and Environmental Sciences; University of Trás-os-Montes and Alto Douro (UTAD); Quinta de Prados 5000-801 Vila Real Portugal\u0026lt;/affiliation\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/person_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/contributors\u0026gt; \u0026lt;publication_date media_type=\u0026#34;print\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;month\u0026gt;05\u0026lt;/month\u0026gt; \u0026lt;year\u0026gt;2017\u0026lt;/year\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/publication_date\u0026gt; \u0026lt;publication_date media_type=\u0026#34;online\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;month\u0026gt;03\u0026lt;/month\u0026gt; \u0026lt;day\u0026gt;13\u0026lt;/day\u0026gt; \u0026lt;year\u0026gt;2017\u0026lt;/year\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/publication_date\u0026gt; \u0026lt;pages\u0026gt; \u0026lt;first_page\u0026gt;2812\u0026lt;/first_page\u0026gt; \u0026lt;last_page\u0026gt;2825\u0026lt;/last_page\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/pages\u0026gt; \u0026lt;program xmlns=\u0026#34;http://www.crossref.org/relations.xsd\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;related_item\u0026gt; \u0026lt;description\u0026gt;Data from: Extreme genetic structure in a social bird species despite high dispersal capacity\u0026lt;/description\u0026gt; \u0026lt;inter_work_relation relationship-type=\u0026#34;references\u0026#34; identifier-type=\u0026#34;doi\u0026#34;\u0026gt;10.5061/dryad.684v0\u0026lt;/inter_work_relation\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/related_item\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/program\u0026gt; \u0026lt;archive_locations\u0026gt; \u0026lt;archive name=\u0026#34;Portico\u0026#34;/\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/archive_locations\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi_data\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi\u0026gt;10.1111/mec.14069\u0026lt;/doi\u0026gt; \u0026lt;resource\u0026gt;http://doi.wiley.com/10.1111/mec.14069\u0026lt;/resource\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/doi_data\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/journal_article\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/journal\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/body\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/doi_batch\u0026gt; Example of data citation as relation (resource-only deposit) \u0026lt;?xml version=\u0026#34;1.0\u0026#34; encoding=\u0026#34;UTF-8\u0026#34;?\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi_batch version=\u0026#34;4.4.2\u0026#34; xmlns=\u0026#34;http://www.crossref.org/doi_resources_schema/4.4.2\u0026#34; xmlns:xsi=\u0026#34;http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance\u0026#34; xsi:schemaLocation=\u0026#34;http://www.crossref.org/doi_resources_schema/4.4.2 https://data.crossref.org/schemas/doi_resources4.4.2.xsd\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;head\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi_batch_id\u0026gt;123456\u0026lt;/doi_batch_id\u0026gt; \u0026lt;depositor\u0026gt; \u0026lt;depositor_name\u0026gt;Crossref\u0026lt;/depositor_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;email_address\u0026gt;support@crossref.org\u0026lt;/email_address\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/depositor\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/head\u0026gt; \u0026lt;body\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi_relations\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi\u0026gt;10.1111/xxxx.xxxx\u0026lt;/doi\u0026gt; \u0026lt;program xmlns=\u0026#34;https://www.crossref.org/relations.xsd\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;related_item\u0026gt; \u0026lt;description\u0026gt;Data from: Extreme genetic structure in a social bird species despite high dispersal capacity\u0026lt;/description\u0026gt; \u0026lt;inter_work_relation relationship-type=\u0026#34;references\u0026#34; identifier-type=\u0026#34;doi\u0026#34;\u0026gt;10.5061/dryad.684v0\u0026lt;/inter_work_relation\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/related_item\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/program\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/doi_relations\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/body\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/doi_batch\u0026gt; ",
"headings": ["Bibliographic references ","Relationships ","Examples of asserting a relationship to data and software in the metadata deposit ","Example of data citation as relationship (full metadata deposit) ","Example of data citation as relation (resource-only deposit) "]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/schema-library/markup-guide-record-types/dissertations/",
"title": "Dissertations markup guide",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2025-03-19",
"lastmod_ts": 1742342400,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "This guide gives markup examples for members registering dissertations by direct deposit of XML. You can also register the dissertations record type using one of our helper tools: web deposit form.\nDissertation records may be deposited for a single dissertation or thesis. DOIs are not assigned to collections of dissertations. The dissertation type should be used for content items which have not been published in books or journals. If a dissertation is published as a book or within a serial, it should be deposited with the appropriate record type.\n",
"content": "This guide gives markup examples for members registering dissertations by direct deposit of XML. You can also register the dissertations record type using one of our helper tools: web deposit form.\nDissertation records may be deposited for a single dissertation or thesis. DOIs are not assigned to collections of dissertations. The dissertation type should be used for content items which have not been published in books or journals. If a dissertation is published as a book or within a serial, it should be deposited with the appropriate record type.\nConstructing dissertation deposits A dissertation deposit requires a title, a single author (deposited as \u0026lt;person_name\u0026gt;), institution, and approval date. Degree, ISBN, and record number information may also be included.\nIf a Dissertation Abstracts International (DAI) number 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 \u0026lt;item_number\u0026gt;, and the item_number_type should be set to institution.\nSee also our dissertation example XML file.\n",
"headings": ["Constructing dissertation deposits "]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/schema-library/markup-guide-metadata-segments/face-markup/",
"title": "Face markup",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2020-04-08",
"lastmod_ts": 1586304000,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "Our schema supports minimal face markup in order to avoid ambiguity in certain disciplines, such as genetics, where the same text may be a gene (when italicized) or a protein (when not italicized).\nFace markup that appears in the title, subtitle, original_language_title, and unstructured_citation elements should be retained when depositing metadata. Face markup in other elements (such as small caps in author names) must be dropped. Face markup support includes bold (b), italic (i), underline (u), over-line (ovl), superscript (sup), subscript (sub), small caps (scp), and typewriter text (tt).\n",
"content": "Our schema supports minimal face markup in order to avoid ambiguity in certain disciplines, such as genetics, where the same text may be a gene (when italicized) or a protein (when not italicized).\nFace markup that appears in the title, subtitle, original_language_title, and unstructured_citation elements should be retained when depositing metadata. Face markup in other elements (such as small caps in author names) must be dropped. Face markup support includes bold (b), italic (i), underline (u), over-line (ovl), superscript (sup), subscript (sub), small caps (scp), and typewriter text (tt).\nExamples where inclusion of face markup is especially important include:\nItalics in titles for terms such as species names or genes Superscript and subscript in titles as part of chemical names (for example, H20) Superscript and subscript in simple inline mathematics (for example, x2 + y2 = z2) The schema supports nested face markup (for example: This text is bold and italic), which would be tagged as:\nThis text is \u0026lt;b\u0026gt;\u0026lt;i\u0026gt;bold and italic\u0026lt;/i\u0026gt;\u0026lt;/b\u0026gt; Correspondingly, superscript and subscript may be nested for correct representation of xyz. This expression should be tagged as:\nx\u0026lt;sup\u0026gt;y\u0026lt;sup\u0026gt;z\u0026lt;/sup\u0026gt;\u0026lt;/sup\u0026gt; We also support MathML markup in title elements.\n",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/schema-library/markup-guide-record-types/grants/",
"title": "Grants markup guide",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2023-09-15",
"lastmod_ts": 1694736000,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "All metadata records and identifiers registered with Crossref are submitted as XML formatted using our metadata input schema. Unlike other objects registered with Crossref, grants have their own grant-specific input schema. Version 0.2.0 of our Grants schema is available in our GitLab schema repository, as is a complete XML example.\nPlease note: as of version 0.1.1 a version attribute is required in the \u0026lt;doi_batch\u0026gt; schema declaration, for example:\n\u0026lt;doi_batch xmlns=\u0026#34;http://www.crossref.org/grant_id/0.1.1\u0026#34; xmlns:xsi=\u0026#34;http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance\u0026#34; xsi:schemaLocation=\u0026#34;http://www.crossref.org/grant_id/0.1.1 http://www.crossref.org/schemas/grant_id0.1.1.xsd\u0026#34; version=\u0026#34;0.1.1\u0026#34;\u0026gt; Members currently using version 0.0.1 do not need to provide a version number.\n",
"content": "All metadata records and identifiers registered with Crossref are submitted as XML formatted using our metadata input schema. Unlike other objects registered with Crossref, grants have their own grant-specific input schema. Version 0.2.0 of our Grants schema is available in our GitLab schema repository, as is a complete XML example.\nPlease note: as of version 0.1.1 a version attribute is required in the \u0026lt;doi_batch\u0026gt; schema declaration, for example:\n\u0026lt;doi_batch xmlns=\u0026#34;http://www.crossref.org/grant_id/0.1.1\u0026#34; xmlns:xsi=\u0026#34;http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance\u0026#34; xsi:schemaLocation=\u0026#34;http://www.crossref.org/grant_id/0.1.1 http://www.crossref.org/schemas/grant_id0.1.1.xsd\u0026#34; version=\u0026#34;0.1.1\u0026#34;\u0026gt; Members currently using version 0.0.1 do not need to provide a version number.\nGrant and project metadata Grant metadata by default includes a single or multiple projects. Multiple projects may be applied to a single grant but the DOI registered is applied at the grant level. Multiple grants may be included in a single XML file.\nThe metadata within each project includes basics like titles, descriptions, and investigator information (including affiliations), funding information such as funder names and identifiers from the Funder Registry, as well as information about funding types and amounts.\nWhen registering a grant:\nyou must include required project information (a project title, a funder name and identifier, and a funding type) as well as your internal grant or award number you should include a project description, language information, investigator details including ORCID IDs, ROR IDs within affiliations, and investigator country code; award amounts/currency, and project start and end dates and/or an award date (note that project or grant start/end dates are used to calculate current vs. back-year content registration fees). you may include multiple titles and descriptions as well as language information; a funding scheme, and planned project start and end dates. Project metadata Project: Project metadata includes titles and descriptions (abstracts). Both can be supplied multiple times to capture information in different languages.\nElement / attribute Description Limits project Container for project information. Multiple projects may be assigned to a single Grant ID. required; multiple allowed project-title Title of a project funded by the grant being registered required; multiple allowed description Used to capture an abstract or description of a project. optional; multiple allowed @xml:lang Use @xml:lang to identify language for each project-title or description. This allows you to provide multiple titles in different languages. optional Investigators: Investigators are not required, but all applicable investigators should be included. Optional start and end dates may be used to capture investigators whose involvement is limited to a specific timeframe.\nElement / attribute Description Limits investigators container for investigator information optional person container for individual investigator details at least 1 required, multiple allowed (unbounded) @role available roles are lead_investigator, co-lead_investigator, investigator required @start-date Date an investigator began work with the project optional @end-date Date an investigator ended work with the project optional givenName given or first name optional familyName family or surname optional alternateName alias or nickname used by the Investigator optional affiliation container for affiliation information optional, multiple allowed institution institution an investigator is affiliated with when associated with the project being defined. Multiple affiliations should be supplied where applicable 1 allowed, use multiple affiliation groups for investigators with multiple affiliations @country ISO 3166-1 alpha 2-letter country code, captures location (country) of affiliation optional ROR A ROR ID may be supplied to disambiguate affiliation information, expressed as a URL optional ORCID ORCID ID of the investigator, expressed as a URL optional Funding details: Funding details include award amount, currency, funder details, and funding type.\nElement / attribute Description Limits award-amount total overall amount awarded to project optional @currency ISO 4217 currency for value provided in award-amount required funding container for funding information. Use multiple funding sections as needed to specify different funding types required, multiple allowed @amount amount of funding provided by funder optional @currency ISO 4217 currency for value provided in @amount optional @funding-percentage percentage of overall funding optional @funding-type type of funding provided, values are limited required @null-amount supply for projects where an award amount is missing or can’t be disclosed - allowed values are: unknown, undisclosed, not-applicable other optional funder-name name of the funder required with funder-id funder-id funder identifier from our Funder Registry funder identifier required, either ROR or funder identifier required as of schema version 0.2.0 ROR ROR identifier supported with schema version 0.2.0 funding-scheme scheme for grant or award as provided by the funder optional Award dates: Dates can be applied at the project level (via award-date). An award-start-date may also be applied to the grant / award as a whole.\nElement / attribute Description Limits award-dates container for date information optional @start-date actual start date of award optional @end-date actual end date of the award optional @planned-start-date planned start date of award optional @planned-end-date planned end date of award optional Funding types: Types of funding are limited to the following values:\nAPC: article processing charge, added with schema version 0.2.0 award: a prize, award, or other type of general funding BPC: book processing charge, added with schema version 0.2.0 contract: agreement involving payment crowdfunding: funding raised via multiple sources, typically small amounts raised online endowment: gift of money that will provide an income equipment: use of or gift of equipment facilities: use of location, equipment, or other resources fellowship: grant given for research or study grant: a monetary award infrastructure: development of infrastructure to support research, added with schema version 0.2.0 loan: money or other resource given in anticipation of repayment other: award of undefined type prize: an award given for achievement salary-award: an award given as salary, includes intramural research funding secondment: detachment of a person or resource for temporary assignment elsewhere seed-funding: an investor invests capital in exchange for equity training-grant: grant given for training Grant metadata We collect grant-specific metadata that is separate from the project information. This includes the funder-specific award identifier (grant number), the (optional) start date of the grant, related items, and the DOI and URL being registered.\nElement / attribute Description Limits award-number funder-supplied award ID /grant number required award-start-date start date of grant funding optional relation (as rel:program) relationship metadata connecting grant to other items (other grants, funded research outputs) optional DOI DOI being registered required resource URL of grant landing page required ",
"headings": ["Grant and project metadata","Project metadata","Grant metadata"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/schema-library/markup-guide-metadata-segments/full-text-urls/",
"title": "Resource and full-text URLs",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2020-04-08",
"lastmod_ts": 1586304000,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "The resolution URL is a link to the web page you want users to see when they click on your DOI. This landing page needs to contain specific information including how to access your full-text content. For online works, this is often a link to content in HTML or PDF format, and for physical works, a catalog record including location details.\nAs well as the resolution URL, there are other URLs that you may include in the metadata for your content:\n",
"content": "The resolution URL is a link to the web page you want users to see when they click on your DOI. This landing page needs to contain specific information including how to access your full-text content. For online works, this is often a link to content in HTML or PDF format, and for physical works, a catalog record including location details.\nAs well as the resolution URL, there are other URLs that you may include in the metadata for your content:\nFull-text URLs for Similarity Check - these URLs allow Turnitin to index your content and include it in the iThenticate database. You’ll include these URLs if you want to participate in the Similarity Check service, or if you want to make sure your content is included when other users check submitted manuscripts for similarity to content that’s already been published. Learn more about Similarity Check. Full-text URL for text and data mining (TDM) - these URLs are provided specifically for researchers carrying out text and data mining. Learn more about text and data mining. ",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/schema-library/markup-guide-metadata-segments/funding-information/",
"title": "Funding information",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2026-05-26",
"lastmod_ts": 1779753600,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "Funding data can be included in metadata records to help link funding to research outputs.\nRead more about:\nThings to understand while collecting funding data Funding data structure Depositing funding metadata Updating or removing funding metadata Things to understand while collecting funding data Funder information:\nFunders can be represented three ways: 1) a funder name and funder identifier 2) a ROR ID or 3) just the funder name If a funder name is supplied without an identifier, Crossref will attempt to match the name to an existing identifier. Because names alone are very ambiguous, if a match is not found that portion of the funding information will not be considered valid until the record is updated with an identifier, meaning the funder name will be passed through to our XML and JSON outputs but will not be found using the filters on funding information that we support via our REST API, or show up in our Open Funder Registry search. Correct nesting of funder names and identifiers is essential as it significantly impacts how funders, funder identifiers, and award numbers are related to each other. Award and grant information:\n",
"content": "Funding data can be included in metadata records to help link funding to research outputs.\nRead more about:\nThings to understand while collecting funding data Funding data structure Depositing funding metadata Updating or removing funding metadata Things to understand while collecting funding data Funder information:\nFunders can be represented three ways: 1) a funder name and funder identifier 2) a ROR ID or 3) just the funder name If a funder name is supplied without an identifier, Crossref will attempt to match the name to an existing identifier. Because names alone are very ambiguous, if a match is not found that portion of the funding information will not be considered valid until the record is updated with an identifier, meaning the funder name will be passed through to our XML and JSON outputs but will not be found using the filters on funding information that we support via our REST API, or show up in our Open Funder Registry search. Correct nesting of funder names and identifiers is essential as it significantly impacts how funders, funder identifiers, and award numbers are related to each other. Award and grant information:\nYou should include a grant DOI and/or an award number in your funding metadata wherever possible - the grant DOI is recommended as it is a persistent identifier. Supplying Crossref grant DOIs will connect funding data with our Grant Linking System. When a grant DOI is included in funding data with the grant_doi attribute, a relationship (isFinancedBy) is automatically inserted into your metadata record. If the grant DOI is registered with Crossref, the relationship will be inserted into the grant record metadata as well. Funding data structure Funding data is supported in schema version 4.3.0 and up and has its own namespace (fr). The fundref namespace (xmlns:fr=https://www.crossref.org/fundref.xsd) must be included in the schema declaration:\n\u0026lt;doi_batch xmlns:xsi=\u0026#34;http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance\u0026#34; xsi:schemaLocation=\u0026#34;http://www.crossref.org/schema/5.4.0 https://data.crossref.org/schemas/crossref5.4.0.xsd\u0026#34; xmlns=\u0026#34;http://www.crossref.org/schema/5.4.0\u0026#34; xmlns:jats=\u0026#34;http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/JATS1\u0026#34; xmlns:fr=\u0026#34;http://www.crossref.org/fundref.xsd\u0026#34; xmlns:ai=\u0026#34;http://www.crossref.org/AccessIndicators.xsd\u0026#34; version=\u0026#34;5.4.0\u0026#34;\u0026gt; or within the \u0026lt;fr:program\u0026gt; section:\n\u0026lt;fr:program name=\u0026#34;fundref\u0026#34; xmlns:fr=\u0026#34;http://www.crossref.org/fundref.xsd\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;fr:assertion name=\u0026#34;fundgroup\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;fr:assertion name=\u0026#34;funder_name\u0026#34;\u0026gt;Crossref \u0026lt;fr:assertion name=\u0026#34;ror\u0026#34;\u0026gt;https://ror.org/02twcfp32\u0026lt;/fr:assertion\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/fr:assertion\u0026gt; \u0026lt;fr:assertion name=\u0026#34;grant_doi\u0026#34;\u0026gt;10.32013/vgvkuki\u0026lt;/fr:assertion\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/fr:assertion\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/fr:program\u0026gt; Funding data consists of a series of nested \u0026lt;fr:assertion\u0026gt; tags with enumerated name attributes. The name attributes are:\nfundgroup: used to group a funder and its associated award number(s) for items with multiple funders. funder_name: name of the funding agency as it appears in the Funder Registry. Funder names that do not match those in the registry will be accepted to cover instances where the funding organisation is not listed. ror: identifier of the funding agency as it appears in the Research Organisation Registry (ROR). funder_identifier: funding agency identifier from the Open Funder Registry. award_number: grant number or other fund identifier. grant_doi: Crossref grant ID or other grant DOI, may be provided as a DOI or prefixed with https://doi.org/. In addition to a funder_name, a ror or funder_identifier must be included for the funding data to be included in REST API filters and facets. Multiple funder_name, funder_identifier / ror, and award_number / grant_doi assertions may be included. Deposits with only an award_number assertion are not allowed.\nSome rules will be enforced by the deposit logic instead of the XML schema, including:\nNesting of \u0026lt;fr:assertion\u0026gt; elements: the schema allows infinite nesting of the assertion element to accommodate nesting of an element within itself. Deposit code will only allow 3 levels of nesting (with attribute values of fundgroup, funder_name, and funder_identifier). Values of different \u0026lt;fr:assertion\u0026gt; elements: funder_name, funder_identifier, ror, award_number and grant_doi have additional validation rules imposed: funder_identifier and grant_doi are DOIs and must follow the basic DOI format: 10.xxxx/(doi suffix) or https://doi.org/10.xxxx/(doi suffix). Only valid funder identifiers will be accepted: the funder_identifier value will be compared against the Open Funder Registry. If the funder_identifier is not found, the deposit will be rejected. Funder and award number hierarchy A relationship between a single funder and award_number or grant_doi is established by including assertions with a \u0026lt;fr:program\u0026gt;.\nIn this example, a single funder (National Institute on Drug Abuse with ROR ID https://ror.org/00fq5cm18) is associated with award number JQY0937263:\n\u0026lt;fr:program name=\u0026#34;fundref\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;fr:assertion name=\u0026#34;ror\u0026#34;\u0026gt;https://ror.org/00fq5cm18\u0026lt;/fr:assertion\u0026gt; \u0026lt;fr:assertion name=\u0026#34;award_number\u0026#34;\u0026gt;JQY0937263\u0026lt;/fr:assertion\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/fr:program\u0026gt; In this example, funder US Department of Energy with funder identifier https://doi.org/10.13039/100000015 is associated with grant DOI 10.46936/aps-182101/60010611:\n\u0026lt;fr:program name=\u0026#34;fundref\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;fr:assertion name=\u0026#34;funder_name\u0026#34;\u0026gt;US Department of Energy \u0026lt;fr:assertion name=\u0026#34;funder_identifier\u0026#34;\u0026gt;https://doi.org/10.13039/100000015\u0026lt;/fr:assertion\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/fr:assertion\u0026gt; \u0026lt;fr:assertion name=\u0026#34;grant_doi\u0026#34;\u0026gt;10.46936/aps-182101/60010611\u0026lt;/fr:assertion\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/fr:program\u0026gt; If multiple funder and award combinations exist, each combination should be deposited within a fundgroup to ensure that the award number is associated with the appropriate funder(s). In this example, two groups exist:\nFunder National Science Foundation with ROR ID https://ror.org/021nxhr62 is associated with award numbers CBET-106 and CBET-106, and Funder Basic Energy Sciences, Office of Science, U.S. Department of Energy with funder identifier https://doi.org/10.13039/100006151 is associated with award number 1245-ABDS. \u0026lt;fr:program name=\u0026#34;fundref\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;fr:assertion name=\u0026#34;fundgroup\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;fr:assertion name=\u0026#34;ror\u0026#34;\u0026gt;https://ror.org/021nxhr62\u0026lt;/fr:assertion\u0026gt; \u0026lt;fr:assertion name=\u0026#34;award_number\u0026#34;\u0026gt;CBET-106\u0026lt;/fr:assertion\u0026gt; \u0026lt;fr:assertion name=\u0026#34;award_number\u0026#34;\u0026gt;CBET-7259\u0026lt;/fr:assertion\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/fr:assertion\u0026gt; \u0026lt;fr:assertion name=\u0026#34;fundgroup\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;fr:assertion name=\u0026#34;funder_name\u0026#34;\u0026gt;Basic Energy Sciences, Office of Science, U.S. Department of Energy \u0026lt;fr:assertion name=\u0026#34;funder_identifier\u0026#34;\u0026gt;https://doi.org/10.13039/100006151\u0026lt;/fr:assertion\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/fr:assertion\u0026gt; \u0026lt;fr:assertion name=\u0026#34;grant_doi\u0026#34;\u0026gt;10.46936/rapd.proj.2016.49526/60006021\u0026lt;/fr:assertion\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/fr:assertion\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/fr:program\u0026gt; Nesting of names An Open Funder Registry identifier may be provided alone or with a funder name. To associate a name with an identifier, the identifier must be nested within the funder_name assertion. If not nested, the name and identifier will be treated as two separate funders.\nIn this example, funder National Science Foundation is associated with the funder identifier https://doi.org/10.13039/100000001:\n\u0026lt;fr:assertion name=\u0026#34;funder_name\u0026#34;\u0026gt;National Science Foundation \u0026lt;fr:assertion name=\u0026#34;funder_identifier\u0026#34;\u0026gt;https://doi.org/10.13039/100000001\u0026lt;/fr:assertion\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/fr:assertion\u0026gt; In this example, funder National Science Foundation is only identified by name. This submission will be successful but will not be included in REST API filters or the Open Funder Registry search unless the name provided can be matched with a funder identifier:\n\u0026lt;fr:assertion name=\u0026#34;funder_name\u0026#34;\u0026gt;National Science Foundation\u0026lt;/fr:assertion\u0026gt; Here, the funder name and funder identifier are not nested - these assertions will be indexed as separate funders:\n\u0026lt;fr:assertion name=\u0026#34;funder_name\u0026#34;\u0026gt;National Science Foundation\u0026lt;/assertion\u0026gt; \u0026lt;fr:assertion name=\u0026#34;funder_identifier\u0026#34;\u0026gt;https://doi.org/10.13039/100000001\u0026lt;/fr:assertion\u0026gt; Here, the funder name and ROR id will be indexed as separate funders:\n\u0026lt;fr:assertion name=\u0026#34;funder_name\u0026#34;\u0026gt;National Science Foundation\u0026lt;/assertion\u0026gt; \u0026lt;fr:assertion name=\u0026#34;ror\u0026#34;\u0026gt;https://ror.org/021nxhr62\u0026lt;/fr:assertion\u0026gt; Award numbers and grant DOIs Award numbers (award_number) and grant DOIs (grant_doi) may be provided alone or in combination. A grant DOI is sufficient to identify an individual grant but an award number may be supplied as well provided the award number is nested within the grant_doi assertion.\nHere, the award number ABC-123 is nested within grant DOI 10.32013/501100002241:\n\u0026lt;fr:program name=\u0026#34;fundref\u0026#34; xmlns:fr=\u0026#34;http://www.crossref.org/fundref.xsd\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;fr:assertion name=\u0026#34;funder_name\u0026#34;\u0026gt;American Academy of Clinical Toxicology \u0026lt;fr:assertion name=\u0026#34;funder_identifier\u0026#34;\u0026gt;http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/100009524\u0026lt;/fr:assertion\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/fr:assertion\u0026gt; \u0026lt;fr:assertion name=\u0026#34;grant_doi\u0026#34;\u0026gt;10.32013/501100002241 \u0026lt;fr:assertion name=\u0026#34;award_number\u0026#34;\u0026gt;ABC-123\u0026lt;/fr:assertion\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/fr:assertion\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/fr:program\u0026gt; Relationships and grant DOIs When a grant DOI is included in a grant_doi assertion, relationship metadata is automatically inserted into the XML and JSON metadata record of the item being registered or updated.\nIn the XML, the grant DOI is included in UNIXSD outputs as a crm-item:\n\u0026lt;doi type=\u0026#34;journal_article\u0026#34;\u0026gt;10.32013/0pZYqjcXd4m\u0026lt;/doi\u0026gt; \u0026lt;crm-item name=\u0026#34;publisher-name\u0026#34; type=\u0026#34;string\u0026#34;\u0026gt;Society of Psychoceramics\u0026lt;/crm-item\u0026gt; \u0026lt;crm-item name=\u0026#34;prefix-name\u0026#34; type=\u0026#34;string\u0026#34;\u0026gt;Society of Psychoceramics\u0026lt;/crm-item\u0026gt; \u0026lt;crm-item name=\u0026#34;member-id\u0026#34; type=\u0026#34;number\u0026#34;\u0026gt;17333\u0026lt;/crm-item\u0026gt; \u0026lt;crm-item name=\u0026#34;citation-id\u0026#34; type=\u0026#34;number\u0026#34;\u0026gt;168234014\u0026lt;/crm-item\u0026gt; \u0026lt;crm-item name=\u0026#34;journal-id\u0026#34; type=\u0026#34;number\u0026#34;\u0026gt;458334\u0026lt;/crm-item\u0026gt; \u0026lt;crm-item name=\u0026#34;deposit-timestamp\u0026#34; type=\u0026#34;number\u0026#34;\u0026gt;22025013010101022\u0026lt;/crm-item\u0026gt; \u0026lt;crm-item name=\u0026#34;owner-prefix\u0026#34; type=\u0026#34;string\u0026#34;\u0026gt;10.32013\u0026lt;/crm-item\u0026gt; \u0026lt;crm-item name=\u0026#34;last-update\u0026#34; type=\u0026#34;date\u0026#34;\u0026gt;2026-02-18T14:01:27Z\u0026lt;/crm-item\u0026gt; \u0026lt;crm-item name=\u0026#34;created\u0026#34; type=\u0026#34;date\u0026#34;\u0026gt;2024-12-03T11:34:11Z\u0026lt;/crm-item\u0026gt; \u0026lt;crm-item name=\u0026#34;citedby-count\u0026#34; type=\u0026#34;number\u0026#34;\u0026gt;0\u0026lt;/crm-item\u0026gt; \u0026lt;crm-item name=\u0026#34;relation\u0026#34; type=\u0026#34;doi\u0026#34; claim=\u0026#34;isFinancedBy\u0026#34;\u0026gt;10.32013/vGVkUKI\u0026lt;/crm-item\u0026gt; This allows the relationship(s) to be inserted into JSON outputs:\nrelation: { \u0026#34;is-financed-by\u0026#34;: [ { \u0026#34;id-type\u0026#34;: \u0026#34;doi\u0026#34;, \u0026#34;id\u0026#34;: \u0026#34;10.32013/vGVkUKI\u0026#34;, \u0026#34;asserted-by\u0026#34;: \u0026#34;object\u0026#34; } ] }, Fundgroups fundgroup assertions are used to group different funder and award combinations. When contained within a single fundgroup, all funder name/ID combinations and awards (funder-specific awards or Grant DOIs) within the fundgroup will be associated together.\nIn the example below, funder National Institutes of Health is the funder of awards HL104101 and RO1HL137094. Dravet Foundation is in a distinct fundgroup and will not be associated with items in the first fundgroup.\nShow image × In the example below, the funder name Queen Mary, University of London and funder identifier http://doi.org/10.13039/501100000851 are considered to be two separate funders, and are not associated with an award number. The funder National Institutes of Health and funder identifier http://doi.org/10.13039/100000002 are also considered to be two separate funders and are each appearing to fund award DK055679\nShow image × Depositing funding metadata Funding metadata can be deposited with Crossref in two ways:\nIn a stand-alone deposit where just the funding metadata is provided. As part of the full set of metadata for an article. When funding data is successfully deposited, an inserted identifier will appear as a message (\u0026lt;msg\u0026gt;) within the submission log:\n\u0026lt;record_diagnostic status=\u0026#34;Success\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi\u0026gt;10.1016/j.apcatb.2018.04.081\u0026lt;/doi\u0026gt; \u0026lt;msg\u0026gt;Inserted identifier: 501100001809 for name: \u0026#34;the National Natural Science Foundation of China\u0026#34; \u0026lt;/msg\u0026gt; Resource-only deposit Resource-only deposits may be used to append or replace funding data for an existing metadata record. The deposit XML file contains just the DOI of the article and the specific funding data. Please note the following:\nIf the DOI record currently has any funding data it will be fully overwritten by the new data. If the DOI currently has any Crossmark data, the new funding data will be inserted within the existing (previously deposited) Crossmark data. Review this sample or download an XML file.\n\u0026lt;?xml version=\u0026#34;1.0\u0026#34; encoding=\u0026#34;UTF-8\u0026#34;?\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi_batch version=\u0026#34;4.4.2\u0026#34; xmlns=\u0026#34;http://www.crossref.org/doi_resources_schema/4.4.2\u0026#34; xmlns:xsi=\u0026#34;http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance\u0026#34; xsi:schemaLocation=\u0026#34;http://www.crossref.org/doi_resources_schema/4.4.2 doi_resources4.4.2.xsd\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;head\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi_batch_id\u0026gt;arg_123_954\u0026lt;/doi_batch_id\u0026gt; \u0026lt;depositor\u0026gt; \u0026lt;depositor_name\u0026gt;Crossref\u0026lt;/depositor_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;email_address\u0026gt;example@crossref.org\u0026lt;/email_address\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/depositor\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/head\u0026gt; \u0026lt;body\u0026gt; \u0026lt;fundref_data\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi\u0026gt;10.32013/12345678\u0026lt;/doi\u0026gt; \u0026lt;program xmlns=\u0026#34;http://www.crossref.org/fundref.xsd\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;assertion name=\u0026#34;fundgroup\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;assertion name=\u0026#34;ror\u0026#34;\u0026gt;https://ror.org/021nxhr62\u0026lt;/assertion\u0026gt; \u0026lt;assertion name=\u0026#34;grant_doi\u0026#34;\u0026gt;10.46936/aps-182101/60010611\u0026lt;/assertion\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/assertion\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/program\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/fundref_data\u0026gt; \u0026lt;fundref_data\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi\u0026gt;10.32013/879fk3\u0026lt;/doi\u0026gt; \u0026lt;program xmlns=\u0026#34;http://www.crossref.org/fundref.xsd\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;assertion name=\u0026#34;fundgroup\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;assertion name=\u0026#34;ror\u0026#34;\u0026gt;https://ror.org/021nxhr62\u0026lt;/assertion\u0026gt; \u0026lt;assertion name=\u0026#34;award_number\u0026#34;\u0026gt;CHE-1152342\u0026lt;/assertion\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/assertion\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/program\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/fundref_data\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/body\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/doi_batch\u0026gt; Full metadata deposit Funding data may be deposited as part of a normal ‘full’ metadata XML deposit for a DOI.\n\u0026lt;?xml version=\u0026#34;1.0\u0026#34; encoding=\u0026#34;UTF-8\u0026#34;?\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi_batch version=\u0026#34;4.4.0\u0026#34; xmlns=\u0026#34;http://www.crossref.org/schema/4.4.0\u0026#34; xmlns:xsi=\u0026#34;http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance\u0026#34; xsi:schemaLocation=\u0026#34;http://www.crossref.org/schema/4.4.0 http://www.crossref.org/schema/deposit/crossref4.4.0.xsd\u0026#34; xmlns:fr=\u0026#34;http://www.crossref.org/fundref.xsd\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;head\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi_batch_id\u0026gt;7ce0adc7155c63a5e2b-3ebc\u0026lt;/doi_batch_id\u0026gt; \u0026lt;timestamp\u0026gt;201610241300\u0026lt;/timestamp\u0026gt; \u0026lt;depositor\u0026gt; \u0026lt;depositor_name\u0026gt;Crossref Support\u0026lt;/depositor_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;email_address\u0026gt;support@crossref.org\u0026lt;/email_address\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/depositor\u0026gt; \u0026lt;registrant\u0026gt;Crossref\u0026lt;/registrant\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/head\u0026gt; \u0026lt;body\u0026gt; \u0026lt;journal\u0026gt; \u0026lt;journal_metadata language=\u0026#34;en\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;full_title\u0026gt;Applied Physics Letters\u0026lt;/full_title\u0026gt; \u0026lt;abbrev_title\u0026gt;Appl. Phys. Lett.\u0026lt;/abbrev_title\u0026gt; \u0026lt;issn media_type=\u0026#34;print\u0026#34;\u0026gt;00036951\u0026lt;/issn\u0026gt; \u0026lt;coden\u0026gt;APPLAB\u0026lt;/coden\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/journal_metadata\u0026gt; \u0026lt;journal_issue\u0026gt; \u0026lt;publication_date media_type=\u0026#34;print\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;month\u0026gt;09\u0026lt;/month\u0026gt; \u0026lt;day\u0026gt;10\u0026lt;/day\u0026gt; \u0026lt;year\u0026gt;2012\u0026lt;/year\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/publication_date\u0026gt; \u0026lt;journal_volume\u0026gt; \u0026lt;volume\u0026gt;101\u0026lt;/volume\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/journal_volume\u0026gt; \u0026lt;issue\u0026gt;11\u0026lt;/issue\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/journal_issue\u0026gt; \u0026lt;journal_article publication_type=\u0026#34;full_text\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;titles\u0026gt; \u0026lt;title\u0026gt;Total energy loss to fast ablator-ions and target capacitance of direct-drive implosions on OMEGA\u0026lt;/title\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/titles\u0026gt; \u0026lt;contributors\u0026gt; \u0026lt;person_name sequence=\u0026#34;first\u0026#34; contributor_role=\u0026#34;author\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;given_name\u0026gt;N.\u0026lt;/given_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;surname\u0026gt;Sinenian\u0026lt;/surname\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/person_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;person_name sequence=\u0026#34;additional\u0026#34; contributor_role=\u0026#34;author\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;given_name\u0026gt;A. B.\u0026lt;/given_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;surname\u0026gt;Zylstra\u0026lt;/surname\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/person_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/contributors\u0026gt; \u0026lt;publication_date media_type=\u0026#34;online\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;month\u0026gt;09\u0026lt;/month\u0026gt; \u0026lt;day\u0026gt;10\u0026lt;/day\u0026gt; \u0026lt;year\u0026gt;2012\u0026lt;/year\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/publication_date\u0026gt; \u0026lt;pages\u0026gt; \u0026lt;first_page\u0026gt;114102\u0026lt;/first_page\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/pages\u0026gt; \u0026lt;program xmlns=\u0026#34;http://www.crossref.org/fundref.xsd\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;assertion name=\u0026#34;ror\u0026#34;\u0026gt;https://ror.org/021nxhr62\u0026lt;/assertion\u0026gt; \u0026lt;assertion name=\u0026#34;grant_doi\u0026#34;\u0026gt;10.46936/aps-182101/60010611\u0026lt;/assertion\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/program\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi_data\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi\u0026gt;10.1063/1.4752012\u0026lt;/doi\u0026gt; \u0026lt;timestamp\u0026gt;20130806074500\u0026lt;/timestamp\u0026gt; \u0026lt;resource\u0026gt; http://scitation.aip.org/content/aip/journal/apl/101/11/10.1063/1.4752012 \u0026lt;/resource\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/doi_data\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/journal_article\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/journal\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/body\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/doi_batch\u0026gt; Updating or removing funding metadata If funding metadata is incorrect or out-of-date, it may be updated by redepositing the funding metadata. Be sure to redeposit all available metadata for an item, not just the elements being updated. A DOI may be updated without resubmitting funding metadata, as previously deposited funding metadata will remain associated with the DOI.\nUpdating funding metadata by resubmitting complete record Funding metadata may be deleted by redepositing an item with an empty \u0026lt;fr:program name=\u0026quot;fundref\u0026quot;\u0026gt; element in a full metadata deposit/resubmission:\n\u0026lt;publication_date media_type=\u0026#34;print\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;year\u0026gt;2011\u0026lt;/year\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/publication_date\u0026gt; \u0026lt;pages\u0026gt; \u0026lt;first_page\u0026gt;15\u0026lt;/first_page\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/pages\u0026gt; \u0026lt;fr:program name=\u0026#34;fundref\u0026#34; /\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi_data\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi\u0026gt;10.5555/cm_test_1.1\u0026lt;/doi\u0026gt; \u0026lt;resource\u0026gt;https://www.crossref.org/crossmark/index.html\u0026lt;/resource\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/doi_data\u0026gt; Updating funding metadata by submitting resource-only deposit Alternatively, funding metadata may be deleted by submitting an item with an empty \u0026lt;program xmlns=\u0026quot;http://www.crossref.org/fundref.xsd\u0026quot;/\u0026gt; element via a resource-only deposits:\n\u0026lt;?xml version=\u0026#34;1.0\u0026#34; encoding=\u0026#34;UTF-8\u0026#34;?\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi_batch xmlns=\u0026#34;http://www.crossref.org/doi_resources_schema/5.4.0\u0026#34; xmlns:xsi=\u0026#34;http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance\u0026#34; version=\u0026#34;5.4.0\u0026#34; xsi:schemaLocation=\u0026#34;http://www.crossref.org/doi_resources_schema/5.4.0 doi_resources5.4.0.xsd\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;head\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi_batch_id\u0026gt;arg_129_647\u0026lt;/doi_batch_id\u0026gt; \u0026lt;depositor\u0026gt; \u0026lt;depositor_name\u0026gt;Crossref\u0026lt;/depositor_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;email_address\u0026gt;example@crossref.org\u0026lt;/email_address\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/depositor\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/head\u0026gt; \u0026lt;body\u0026gt; \u0026lt;fundref_data\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi\u0026gt;10.32013/12345678\u0026lt;/doi\u0026gt; \u0026lt;program xmlns=\u0026#34;http://www.crossref.org/fundref.xsd\u0026#34;/\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/fundref_data\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/body\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/doi_batch\u0026gt; ",
"headings": ["Things to understand while collecting funding data ","Funding data structure ","Funder and award number hierarchy","Nesting of names","Award numbers and grant DOIs","Relationships and grant DOIs","Fundgroups","Depositing funding metadata ","Resource-only deposit","Full metadata deposit","Updating or removing funding metadata ","Updating funding metadata by resubmitting complete record","Updating funding metadata by submitting resource-only deposit"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/schema-library/markup-guide-record-types/journals-and-articles/",
"title": "Journals and articles markup guide",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2025-12-10",
"lastmod_ts": 1765324800,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "This guide gives markup examples for members registering journals and articles by direct deposit of XML. You can also register the journals and articles record types using our helper tools: the new Metadata Manager tool (previously known as the record registration form), web deposit form, or third party Crossref XML plugin for OJS.\nDOIs may be assigned to journal titles, volumes, issues, and (of course) journal articles.\nAssign DOIs to supplemental materials associated with journal articles using our component record type.\n",
"content": "This guide gives markup examples for members registering journals and articles by direct deposit of XML. You can also register the journals and articles record types using our helper tools: the new Metadata Manager tool (previously known as the record registration form), web deposit form, or third party Crossref XML plugin for OJS.\nDOIs may be assigned to journal titles, volumes, issues, and (of course) journal articles.\nAssign DOIs to supplemental materials associated with journal articles using our component record type.\nCreating journal deposits \u0026lt;journal\u0026gt; is the container for all information about a single journal and the articles you are depositing for the journal. Within a single \u0026lt;journal\u0026gt; instance you may register articles for a single issue. If you need to register articles for more than one issue, you must use multiple instances of \u0026lt;journal\u0026gt;. These may be included within the same deposit file.\nIf you have articles that have not been assigned to an issue (or you do not use issue numbering) you may register them within a single journal instance. In this case, do not include \u0026lt;journal_issue\u0026gt; metadata.\nIf you publish in volumes only you must include \u0026lt;journal_issue\u0026gt; and the child element \u0026lt;journal_volume\u0026gt; but omit the \u0026lt;issue\u0026gt; number.\nExamples A journal may be created with an ISSN or without. A DOI is not required but is strongly recommended and should remain consistent for all articles registered for the journal. Example title-only deposit files are available here: with ISSN | without ISSN.\nExample of a journal deposit containing several articles and issues Review the sample below or download an XML file.\n\u0026lt;doi_batch xmlns=\u0026#34;http://www.crossref.org/schema/4.4.0\u0026#34; xmlns:xsi=\u0026#34;http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance\u0026#34; version=\u0026#34;4.4.0\u0026#34; xsi:schemaLocation=\u0026#34;http://www.crossref.org/schema/4.4.0 http://www.crossref.org/schemas/crossref4.4.0.xsd\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;head\u0026gt; / contains information related to submission file \u0026lt;doi_batch_id\u0026gt;123456\u0026lt;/doi_batch_id\u0026gt; / required, used to track submissions \u0026lt;timestamp\u0026gt;19990628123304\u0026lt;/timestamp\u0026gt; / required, must be incremented with each metadata record update \u0026lt;depositor\u0026gt; \u0026lt;depositor_name\u0026gt;Bob Surname\u0026lt;/depositor_name\u0026gt; / person or entity submitting deposit \u0026lt;email_address\u0026gt;someone@crossref.org\u0026lt;/email_address\u0026gt; / we\u0026#39;ll send a submission log to this address \u0026lt;/depositor\u0026gt; \u0026lt;registrant\u0026gt;CrossRef\u0026lt;/registrant\u0026gt; / entity responsible for content being registered \u0026lt;/head\u0026gt; \u0026lt;body\u0026gt; \u0026lt;journal\u0026gt; \u0026lt;journal_metadata language=\u0026#34;en\u0026#34;\u0026gt; / captures journal-level metadata \u0026lt;full_title\u0026gt;Applied Physics Letters\u0026lt;/full_title\u0026gt; / required, full title of the journal \u0026lt;abbrev_title\u0026gt;Appl. Phys. Lett.\u0026lt;/abbrev_title\u0026gt; / abbreviated or alternate title \u0026lt;issn media_type=\u0026#34;print\u0026#34;\u0026gt;0003-6951\u0026lt;/issn\u0026gt; / multiple ISSN may be supplied \u0026lt;coden\u0026gt;applab\u0026lt;/coden\u0026gt; / optional \u0026lt;/journal_metadata\u0026gt; \u0026lt;journal_issue\u0026gt; / captures volume and/or issue level metadata \u0026lt;publication_date media_type=\u0026#34;print\u0026#34;\u0026gt; / publication year is required, month and day are encouraged \u0026lt;year\u0026gt;1999\u0026lt;/year\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/publication_date\u0026gt; \u0026lt;journal_volume\u0026gt; \u0026lt;volume\u0026gt;74\u0026lt;/volume\u0026gt; / volume number \u0026lt;/journal_volume\u0026gt; \u0026lt;issue\u0026gt;16\u0026lt;/issue\u0026gt; / issue number \u0026lt;/journal_issue\u0026gt; \u0026lt;journal_article publication_type=\u0026#34;full_text\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;titles\u0026gt; \u0026lt;title\u0026gt; Sub-5-fs visible pulse generation by pulse-front-matched noncollinear optical parametric amplification \u0026lt;/title\u0026gt; / article title \u0026lt;/titles\u0026gt; \u0026lt;contributors\u0026gt; / author names \u0026lt;person_name sequence=\u0026#34;first\u0026#34; contributor_role=\u0026#34;author\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;given_name\u0026gt;Ann P.\u0026lt;/given_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;surname\u0026gt;Shirakawa\u0026lt;/surname\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/person_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;organization sequence=\u0026#34;additional\u0026#34; contributor_role=\u0026#34;author\u0026#34;\u0026gt;Sample Organization\u0026lt;/organization\u0026gt; / an organization that has authored the article \u0026lt;/contributors\u0026gt; \u0026lt;publication_date media_type=\u0026#34;print\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;year\u0026gt;1999\u0026lt;/year\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/publication_date\u0026gt; \u0026lt;pages\u0026gt; \u0026lt;first_page\u0026gt;2268\u0026lt;/first_page\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/pages\u0026gt; \u0026lt;publisher_item\u0026gt; \u0026lt;identifier id_type=\u0026#34;pii\u0026#34;\u0026gt;S000369519903216\u0026lt;/identifier\u0026gt; / optional, internal identifier \u0026lt;/publisher_item\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi_data\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi\u0026gt;10.9876/S000369519903216\u0026lt;/doi\u0026gt; \u0026lt;resource\u0026gt;http://ojps.crossref.org/link/?apl/74/2268/ab\u0026lt;/resource\u0026gt; / the URL of your DOI landing page \u0026lt;/doi_data\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/journal_article\u0026gt; \u0026lt;journal_article publication_type=\u0026#34;full_text\u0026#34;\u0026gt; / a second journal article in the same issue \u0026lt;titles\u0026gt; \u0026lt;title\u0026gt;Ultrafast (GaIn)(NAs)/GaAs vertical-cavity surface-emitting laser\u0026lt;/title\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/titles\u0026gt; \u0026lt;contributors\u0026gt; \u0026lt;person_name sequence=\u0026#34;first\u0026#34; contributor_role=\u0026#34;author\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;given_name\u0026gt;M\u0026lt;/given_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;surname\u0026gt;van Exter\u0026lt;/surname\u0026gt; \u0026lt;suffix\u0026gt;III\u0026lt;/suffix\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/person_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/contributors\u0026gt; \u0026lt;publication_date media_type=\u0026#34;print\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;year\u0026gt;1999\u0026lt;/year\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/publication_date\u0026gt; \u0026lt;pages\u0026gt; \u0026lt;first_page\u0026gt;2274\u0026lt;/first_page\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/pages\u0026gt; \u0026lt;publisher_item\u0026gt; \u0026lt;identifier id_type=\u0026#34;pii\u0026#34;\u0026gt;S0003695199038164\u0026lt;/identifier\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/publisher_item\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi_data\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi\u0026gt;10.9876/S0003695199034166\u0026lt;/doi\u0026gt; \u0026lt;resource\u0026gt;http://ojps.aip.org/link/?apl/74/2271/ab\u0026lt;/resource\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/doi_data\u0026gt; \u0026lt;citation_list\u0026gt; / a citation list for the content being registered \u0026lt;citation key=\u0026#34;key-10.9876/S0003695199034166-1\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;issn\u0026gt;0027-8424\u0026lt;/issn\u0026gt; \u0026lt;journal_title\u0026gt;Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.\u0026lt;/journal_title\u0026gt; \u0026lt;author\u0026gt;West\u0026lt;/author\u0026gt; \u0026lt;volume\u0026gt;98\u0026lt;/volume\u0026gt; \u0026lt;issue\u0026gt;20\u0026lt;/issue\u0026gt; \u0026lt;first_page\u0026gt;11024\u0026lt;/first_page\u0026gt; \u0026lt;cYear\u0026gt;2001\u0026lt;/cYear\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/citation\u0026gt; \u0026lt;citation key=\u0026#34;key-10.9876/S0003695199034166-2\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;journal_title\u0026gt;Space Sci. Rev.\u0026lt;/journal_title\u0026gt; \u0026lt;author\u0026gt;Heber\u0026lt;/author\u0026gt; \u0026lt;volume\u0026gt;97\u0026lt;/volume\u0026gt; \u0026lt;first_page\u0026gt;309\u0026lt;/first_page\u0026gt; \u0026lt;cYear\u0026gt;2001\u0026lt;/cYear\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/citation\u0026gt; \u0026lt;citation key=\u0026#34;key-10.9876/S0003695199034166-3\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi\u0026gt;10.1029/2002GL014944\u0026lt;/doi\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/citation\u0026gt; \u0026lt;citation key=\u0026#34;key-10.9876/S0003695199034166-4\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;journal_title\u0026gt;Dev. Dyn.\u0026lt;/journal_title\u0026gt; \u0026lt;author\u0026gt;Tufan\u0026lt;/author\u0026gt; \u0026lt;cYear\u0026gt;2002\u0026lt;/cYear\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/citation\u0026gt; \u0026lt;citation key=\u0026#34;key-10.9876/S0003695199034166-5\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;journal_title\u0026gt;J. Plankton Res.\u0026lt;/journal_title\u0026gt; \u0026lt;author\u0026gt;Bocher\u0026lt;/author\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/citation\u0026gt; \u0026lt;citation key=\u0026#34;key-10.9876/S0003695199034166-6\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;issn\u0026gt;0169-6009\u0026lt;/issn\u0026gt; \u0026lt;journal_title\u0026gt;Bone. Miner.\u0026lt;/journal_title\u0026gt; \u0026lt;author\u0026gt; Proyecto Multicéntrico de Investigación de Osteoporosis \u0026lt;/author\u0026gt; \u0026lt;volume\u0026gt;17\u0026lt;/volume\u0026gt; \u0026lt;first_page\u0026gt;133\u0026lt;/first_page\u0026gt; \u0026lt;cYear\u0026gt;1992\u0026lt;/cYear\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/citation\u0026gt; \u0026lt;citation key=\u0026#34;key-10.9876/S0003695199034166-7\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;volume_title\u0026gt;Neuropharmacological Basis of Reward\u0026lt;/volume_title\u0026gt; \u0026lt;author\u0026gt;Carr\u0026lt;/author\u0026gt; \u0026lt;first_page\u0026gt;265\u0026lt;/first_page\u0026gt; \u0026lt;cYear\u0026gt;1989\u0026lt;/cYear\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/citation\u0026gt; \u0026lt;citation key=\u0026#34;key-10.9876/S0003695199034166-8\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;volume_title\u0026gt;The Metabolic and Molecular Bases of Inherited Disease \u0026lt;/volume_title\u0026gt; \u0026lt;author\u0026gt;Mahley\u0026lt;/author\u0026gt; \u0026lt;edition_number\u0026gt;7\u0026lt;/edition_number\u0026gt; \u0026lt;first_page\u0026gt;1953\u0026lt;/first_page\u0026gt; \u0026lt;cYear\u0026gt;1995\u0026lt;/cYear\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/citation\u0026gt; \u0026lt;citation key=\u0026#34;key-10.9876/S0003695199034166-9\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;series_title\u0026gt;Genome Analysis\u0026lt;/series_title\u0026gt; \u0026lt;volume_title\u0026gt;Genetic and Physical Mapping\u0026lt;/volume_title\u0026gt; \u0026lt;author\u0026gt;Rinchik\u0026lt;/author\u0026gt; \u0026lt;volume\u0026gt;1\u0026lt;/volume\u0026gt; \u0026lt;first_page\u0026gt;121\u0026lt;/first_page\u0026gt; \u0026lt;cYear\u0026gt;1990\u0026lt;/cYear\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/citation\u0026gt; \u0026lt;citation key=\u0026#34;key-10.9876/S0003695199034166-10\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;volume_title\u0026gt;Molecular Cloning: A Laboratory Manual\u0026lt;/volume_title\u0026gt; \u0026lt;author\u0026gt;Sambrook\u0026lt;/author\u0026gt; \u0026lt;cYear\u0026gt;1989\u0026lt;/cYear\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/citation\u0026gt; \u0026lt;citation key=\u0026#34;key-10.9876/S0003695199034166-11\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;volume_title\u0026gt;Immunocytochemistry: Theory and Practice\u0026lt;/volume_title\u0026gt; \u0026lt;author\u0026gt;Larsson\u0026lt;/author\u0026gt; \u0026lt;first_page\u0026gt;41\u0026lt;/first_page\u0026gt; \u0026lt;cYear\u0026gt;1988\u0026lt;/cYear\u0026gt; \u0026lt;component_number\u0026gt;2\u0026lt;/component_number\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/citation\u0026gt; \u0026lt;citation key=\u0026#34;key-10.9876/S0003695199034166-12\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;volume_title\u0026gt; Proceedings of the XXVth International Conference on Animal Genetics \u0026lt;/volume_title\u0026gt; \u0026lt;author\u0026gt;Roenen\u0026lt;/author\u0026gt; \u0026lt;first_page\u0026gt;105\u0026lt;/first_page\u0026gt; \u0026lt;cYear\u0026gt;1996\u0026lt;/cYear\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/citation\u0026gt; \u0026lt;citation key=\u0026#34;key-10.9876/S0003695199034166-13\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;volume_title\u0026gt; Proceedings of the Corn and Sorghum Industry Research Conference \u0026lt;/volume_title\u0026gt; \u0026lt;author\u0026gt;Beavis\u0026lt;/author\u0026gt; \u0026lt;first_page\u0026gt;250\u0026lt;/first_page\u0026gt; \u0026lt;cYear\u0026gt;1994\u0026lt;/cYear\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/citation\u0026gt; \u0026lt;citation key=\u0026#34;key-10.9876/S0003695199034166-14\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;unstructured_citation\u0026gt;L. Reynolds, Three dimensional reflection and transmission equations for optical diffusion in blood, MS Thesis. Seattle, Washington: University of Washington (1970).\u0026lt;/unstructured_citation\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/citation\u0026gt; \u0026lt;citation key=\u0026#34;key-10.9876/S0003695199034166-15\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;unstructured_citation\u0026gt;T. J. Dresse, U.S. Patent 308, 389 [\u0026lt;i\u0026gt;CA 82\u0026lt;/i\u0026gt;, 73022 (1975)].\u0026lt;/unstructured_citation\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/citation\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/citation_list\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/journal_article\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/journal\u0026gt; \u0026lt;journal\u0026gt; / start of a new journal submission \u0026lt;journal_metadata language=\u0026#34;en\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;full_title\u0026gt;Applied Physics Letters\u0026lt;/full_title\u0026gt; \u0026lt;abbrev_title\u0026gt;Appl. Phys. Lett.\u0026lt;/abbrev_title\u0026gt; \u0026lt;issn media_type=\u0026#34;print\u0026#34;\u0026gt;0003-6951\u0026lt;/issn\u0026gt; \u0026lt;coden\u0026gt;applab\u0026lt;/coden\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/journal_metadata\u0026gt; \u0026lt;journal_issue\u0026gt; \u0026lt;publication_date media_type=\u0026#34;print\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;year\u0026gt;1999\u0026lt;/year\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/publication_date\u0026gt; \u0026lt;journal_volume\u0026gt; \u0026lt;volume\u0026gt;74\u0026lt;/volume\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/journal_volume\u0026gt; \u0026lt;issue\u0026gt;1\u0026lt;/issue\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/journal_issue\u0026gt; \u0026lt;journal_article publication_type=\u0026#34;full_text\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;titles\u0026gt; \u0026lt;title\u0026gt;Working with metadata\u0026lt;/title\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/titles\u0026gt; \u0026lt;contributors\u0026gt; \u0026lt;person_name sequence=\u0026#34;first\u0026#34; contributor_role=\u0026#34;author\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;given_name\u0026gt;D L\u0026lt;/given_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;surname\u0026gt;Peng\u0026lt;/surname\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/person_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;person_name sequence=\u0026#34;additional\u0026#34; contributor_role=\u0026#34;author\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;given_name\u0026gt;K\u0026lt;/given_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;surname\u0026gt;Sumiyama\u0026lt;/surname\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/person_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;person_name sequence=\u0026#34;additional\u0026#34; contributor_role=\u0026#34;author\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;given_name\u0026gt;S\u0026lt;/given_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;surname\u0026gt;Sumiyama\u0026lt;/surname\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/person_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;person_name sequence=\u0026#34;additional\u0026#34; contributor_role=\u0026#34;author\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;given_name\u0026gt;T\u0026lt;/given_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;surname\u0026gt;Hihara\u0026lt;/surname\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/person_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;person_name sequence=\u0026#34;additional\u0026#34; contributor_role=\u0026#34;author\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;given_name\u0026gt;T J\u0026lt;/given_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;surname\u0026gt;Konno\u0026lt;/surname\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/person_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/contributors\u0026gt; \u0026lt;publication_date media_type=\u0026#34;print\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;year\u0026gt;1999\u0026lt;/year\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/publication_date\u0026gt; \u0026lt;pages\u0026gt; \u0026lt;first_page\u0026gt;76\u0026lt;/first_page\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/pages\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi_data\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi\u0026gt;10.9876/S0003695199019014\u0026lt;/doi\u0026gt; \u0026lt;resource\u0026gt;http://ojps.crossref.org:18000/link/?apl/74/1/76/ab\u0026lt;/resource\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/doi_data\u0026gt; \u0026lt;component_list\u0026gt; / component (supplemental material) registration records \u0026lt;component parent_relation=\u0026#34;isPartOf\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;description\u0026gt;Figure 1: This is the caption of the first figure...\u0026lt;/description\u0026gt; \u0026lt;format mime_type=\u0026#34;image/jpeg\u0026#34;\u0026gt;Web resolution image\u0026lt;/format\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi_data\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi\u0026gt;10.9876/S0003695199019014/f1\u0026lt;/doi\u0026gt; \u0026lt;resource\u0026gt;http://ojps.crossref.org:18000/link/?apl/74/1/76/f1\u0026lt;/resource\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/doi_data\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/component\u0026gt; \u0026lt;component parent_relation=\u0026#34;isReferencedBy\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;description\u0026gt;Video 1: This is a description of the video...\u0026lt;/description\u0026gt; \u0026lt;format mime_type=\u0026#34;video/mpeg\u0026#34;/\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi_data\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi\u0026gt;10.9876/S0003695199019014/video1\u0026lt;/doi\u0026gt; \u0026lt;resource\u0026gt;http://ojps.crossref.org:18000/link/?apl/74/1/76/video1\u0026lt;/resource\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/doi_data\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/component\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/component_list\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/journal_article\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/journal\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/body\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/doi_batch\u0026gt; ",
"headings": ["Creating journal deposits ","Examples","Example of a journal deposit containing several articles and issues "]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/schema-library/markup-guide-record-types/peer-reviews/",
"title": "Peer reviews markup guide",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2023-10-28",
"lastmod_ts": 1698451200,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "This guide gives markup examples for members registering peer reviews by direct deposit of XML. It is not currently possible to register the peer reviews record type using one of our helper tools.\nGetting started with registering peer reviews Registration of peer reviews is supported as of schema version 4.4.1. Peer reviews include referee reports, decision letters, and author responses. You may also register post-publication reviews using our peer review record type.\n",
"content": "This guide gives markup examples for members registering peer reviews by direct deposit of XML. It is not currently possible to register the peer reviews record type using one of our helper tools.\nGetting started with registering peer reviews Registration of peer reviews is supported as of schema version 4.4.1. Peer reviews include referee reports, decision letters, and author responses. You may also register post-publication reviews using our peer review record type.\nPeer review metadata includes a number of review-specific elements. Many are optional to accommodate differences in review practices, but please include all elements relevant to your reviews when submitting your metadata records.\nOur schema includes support for the following fields:\ncontributor, to capture reviewer name and role, choose from: reviewer review-assistant stats-reviewer reviewer-external reader translator anonymous title review_date institution competing_interest_statement running_number license data relations stage type recommendation revision-round language Note that all reviews must include relationship metadata linking the review with the item being reviewed. Learn more about obligations and limitations for peer review registration.\nElement Description Limits contributor, includes person_name or anonymous Captures reviewer name and role. If anonymous, must capture as \u0026lt;anonymous/\u0026gt;.\nPeer review roles are: reviewer, review-assistant, stats-reviewer, reviewer-external, reader, translator, author, editor optional title Title of review. If you don’t have a review-specific title convention, we recommend that you include Review (or member’s own term for review) in your peer review registration, as well as a revision and review number.\nFor example, a review pattern of Review: title of article (Revision number/Review number) will be:\nReview: Analysis of the effects of bad metadata on discoverability (R2/RC3) required review_date Date of review, including month, day, year year is required institution Organization (member or other) submitting the peer review, strongly advised if submitter differs from publisher of item being reviewed optional, may include up to 5 competing_interest_statement Competing interest statement provided by review author during review process optional running_number Internal number/identifier used to identify specific review optional license data Text or data mining license info optional relations Relate review to item being reviewed through relationships - must supply the DOI of item being reviewed as an inter-work relation with review type isReviewOf required Some metadata is captured as attributes with specific enumerated values:\nAttributes Description Limits stage Options are pre-publication and post-publication optional type Types of report include: referee-report, editor-report, author-comment, community-comment, aggregate, recommendation optional recommendation Values are: major-revision, minor-revision, reject, reject-with-resubmit, accept optional revision-round Revision round number, first submission is defined as revision round 0 optional language Language of review optional The types are refer to the following categories of peer reviews:\nreferee-report: also commonly known as a reviewer report - comments provided by someone who has been verified as an expert in the field of the work, usually invited by an editor. Note that we treat the terms reviewer and referee as interchangeable. editor-report: comments by an editor representing the journal or platform where the work is submitted. It might contain feedback on other peer reviews or a decision on whether to accept the work for publication. author-comment: a response by one or more authors to peer review reports on their work. community-comment: comments made on a work from the community at large. These are usually part of a public call for reviews, rather than personally invited. aggregate: a summary of a review process, for example collating the responses of several referees and/or editors. recommendation: Reporting an editorial decision on a peer review with one of the values: major-revision, minor-revision, reject, reject-with-resubmit, accept. Example of connecting a review to the reviewed item through relations \u0026lt;program xmlns=\u0026#34;http://www.crossref.org/relations.xsd\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;related_item\u0026gt; \u0026lt;description\u0026gt;Referee report of Treatment of plaque psoriasis with an ointment formulation of the Janus kinase inhibitor, tofacitinib: a Phase 2b randomized clinical trial\u0026lt;/description\u0026gt; \u0026lt;inter_work_relation relationship-type=\u0026#34;isReviewOf\u0026#34; identifier-type=\u0026#34;doi\u0026#34; \u0026gt;10.1186/s12895-016-0051-4\u0026lt;/inter_work_relation\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/related_item\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/program\u0026gt; Example of a complete review \u0026lt;?xml version=\u0026#34;1.0\u0026#34; encoding=\u0026#34;UTF-8\u0026#34;?\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi_batch xmlns:xsi=\u0026#34;http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance\u0026#34; xsi:schemaLocation=\u0026#34;http://www.crossref.org/schema/4.4.2 http://www.crossref.org/schema/crossref4.4.2.xsd\u0026#34; xmlns=\u0026#34;http://www.crossref.org/schema/4.4.2\u0026#34; version=\u0026#34;4.4.2\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;head\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi_batch_id\u0026gt;20170807\u0026lt;/doi_batch_id\u0026gt; \u0026lt;timestamp\u0026gt;2017080715731\u0026lt;/timestamp\u0026gt; \u0026lt;depositor\u0026gt; \u0026lt;depositor_name\u0026gt;Crossref\u0026lt;/depositor_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;email_address\u0026gt;support@crossref.org\u0026lt;/email_address\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/depositor\u0026gt; \u0026lt;registrant\u0026gt;Crossref\u0026lt;/registrant\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/head\u0026gt; \u0026lt;body\u0026gt; \u0026lt;peer_review stage=\u0026#34;pre-publication\u0026#34; revision-round=\u0026#34;1\u0026#34; recommendation=\u0026#34;accept\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;contributors\u0026gt; \u0026lt;person_name contributor_role=\u0026#34;reviewer\u0026#34; sequence=\u0026#34;first\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;given_name\u0026gt;Wilson\u0026lt;/given_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;surname\u0026gt;Liao\u0026lt;/surname\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/person_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/contributors\u0026gt; \u0026lt;titles\u0026gt; \u0026lt;title\u0026gt;Review: Treatment of plaque psoriasis with an ointment formulation of the Januskinase inhibitor, tofacitinib: a Phase 2b randomized clinical trial. V1\u0026lt;/title\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/titles\u0026gt; \u0026lt;review_date\u0026gt; \u0026lt;month\u0026gt;08\u0026lt;/month\u0026gt; \u0026lt;day\u0026gt;19\u0026lt;/day\u0026gt; \u0026lt;year\u0026gt;2016\u0026lt;/year\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/review_date\u0026gt; \u0026lt;competing_interest_statement\u0026gt; There were no competing interests\u0026lt;/competing_interest_statement\u0026gt; \u0026lt;running_number\u0026gt;RC1 \u0026lt;/running_number\u0026gt; \u0026lt;program xmlns=\u0026#34;http://www.crossref.org/relations.xsd\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;related_item\u0026gt; \u0026lt;description\u0026gt;Referee report of Treatment of plaque psoriasis with an ointment formulation of the Janus kinase inhibitor, tofacitinib: a Phase 2b randomized clinical trial\u0026lt;/description\u0026gt; \u0026lt;inter_work_relation relationship-type=\u0026#34;isReviewOf\u0026#34; identifier-type=\u0026#34;doi\u0026#34; \u0026gt;10.1186/s12895-016-0051-4 \u0026lt;/inter_work_relation\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/related_item\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/program\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi_data\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi\u0026gt;10.5555/abc123\u0026lt;/doi\u0026gt; \u0026lt;resource\u0026gt;https://www.example.org/openpeerreview/art%3A10.1186%2Fs12895-016-0051-4/12895_2016_51_ReviewerReport_V2_R1.pdf\u0026lt;/resource\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/doi_data\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/peer_review\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/body\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/doi_batch\u0026gt; ",
"headings": ["Getting started with registering peer reviews ","Example of connecting a review to the reviewed item through relations ","Example of a complete review "]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/schema-library/markup-guide-metadata-segments/issn-isbn/",
"title": "ISSNs and ISBNs",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2020-04-08",
"lastmod_ts": 1586304000,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "An International Standard Serial Number (ISSN) or International Standard Book Number (ISBN) is a number used to uniquely identify a serial or book publication. To obtain an ISSN, you need to register with the ISSN International Centre; and for an ISBN, with your national ISBN agency.\nISSNs/ISBNs are useful in distinguishing between serials or books with the same title. If a publication with the same content is published in more than one format, a different identifier is assigned to each media type. For example, a journal may have a print ISSN and an electronic ISSN, and print and ebooks have different ISBNs.\n",
"content": "An International Standard Serial Number (ISSN) or International Standard Book Number (ISBN) is a number used to uniquely identify a serial or book publication. To obtain an ISSN, you need to register with the ISSN International Centre; and for an ISBN, with your national ISBN agency.\nISSNs/ISBNs are useful in distinguishing between serials or books with the same title. If a publication with the same content is published in more than one format, a different identifier is assigned to each media type. For example, a journal may have a print ISSN and an electronic ISSN, and print and ebooks have different ISBNs.\nInclude the title and ISSN/ISBN when you first deposit metadata for a content item in our system (if applicable) Include both print and electronic ISSNs/ISBNs (if applicable) If the journal does not have an ISSN at the time of registering content for it, include a title-level DOI for the journal. Once the ISSN is known, deposits should include both the ISSN and the journal-level DOI. Ideally, you would also update the metadata for all the previously registered content to include the ISSN. If you have any queries, please contact us.\nWe do not verify your title and ISSN combination with an external agency, but we carry out a check digit validation on every ISSN deposited. Once a title or ISSN is deposited, a new publication with the same title or ISSN can\u0026rsquo;t be created. If you try to make another deposit using a title and ISSN combination that does not match the combination in our system, the deposit will not work. Learn more about updating title records, including ISSNs/ISBNs.\n",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/schema-library/markup-guide-metadata-segments/license-information/",
"title": "License information",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2024-02-16",
"lastmod_ts": 1708041600,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "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.\nIncluding 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.\n",
"content": "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.\nIncluding 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.\nExamples of licenses BMJ - Text and Data Mining (TDM) Policy and License Copyright Clearance Center’s About Copyright Creative Commons - Share your work DOAJ - Licensing guide Elsevier - Copyright IEEE - License Agreements JISC Collections - Guide to the Model license PKP - Contributor License Agreement An additional element (\u0026lt;ai:program\u0026gt;) has been added from schema version 4.3.2 to support the access indicators schema (AccessIndicators.xsd).\nLicense information metadata collected includes:\nfree-to-read status (free_to_read) license URL element (license_ref) start_date attribute, optional, date format YYYY-MM-DD applies_to attribute, optional, allowed values are: vor (version of record) am (accepted manuscript) tdm (text mining) stm-asf (Article Sharing Framework) 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.\nAccess indicators may be included in a metadata deposit, submitted as a resource-only deposit, or as a supplemental metadata upload, and may be included with Crossmark metadata where applicable. The ai namespace must be included in the schema declaration, for example:\n\u0026lt;doi_batch xmlns:xsi=\u0026#34;http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance\u0026#34; xsi:schemaLocation=\u0026#34;http://www.crossref.org/schema/4.4.2 https://data.crossref.org/schemas/crossref4.4.2.xsd\u0026#34; xmlns=\u0026#34;http://www.crossref.org/schema/4.4.2\u0026#34; xmlns:jats=\u0026#34;http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/JATS1\u0026#34; xmlns:fr=\u0026#34;http://www.crossref.org/fundref.xsd\u0026#34; xmlns:ai=\u0026#34;http://www.crossref.org/AccessIndicators.xsd\u0026#34; version=\u0026#34;4.4.2\u0026#34;\u0026gt; Best practice for license information This guidance for members on how to register better license metadata with us 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.\nInstitutions 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.\nOur 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.\nIn this section, learn more about:\nHow we collect license information Example: Green OA with Creative Commons license Example: Green OA with member-defined post-embargo license Example: Gold OA Use cases How to populate your metadata with license information How we collect license information A single Crossref DOI can be associated with metadata relating to multiple versions of a work: the author\u0026rsquo;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 registered with us 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 our 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:\n\u0026lt;license_ref applies_to=\u0026#34;vor\u0026#34; start_date=\u0026#34;2019-01-01\u0026#34;\u0026gt; http://www.publisherwebsite.com/general_terms_and_conditions \u0026lt;/license_ref\u0026gt; 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.\nExample: 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. Green OA with Creative Commons license\nBy using a Creative Commons license with a start date, the embargo end date can be unambiguously deduced from the metadata.\nExample: 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. Green OA with member-defined post-embargo license\nRepository 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:\n\u0026lt;license_ref applies_to=\u0026#34;am\u0026#34; start_date=\u0026#34;2019-01-01\u0026#34;\u0026gt; http://www.publisherwebsite.com/am_ general_terms \u0026lt;/license_ref\u0026gt; This would not allow institutions to unambiguously determine the embargo end date and license, and so should be avoided.\nExample: 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. Gold OA license\nUse cases Having clear, unambiguous license metadata helps institutions use the content within your terms and conditions. For example, an institution could query our APIs 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.\nHow to add license information to your Crossref metadata There are multiple ways that members can add license information to the metadata they deposit/have deposited with us:\nAdd license information to your regular deposits Register license information as part of a resource-only deposit with only license information to populate existing metadata records - learn more about resource-only deposits Use a .csv file with license information to populate existing metadata records and view an example .csv file for license metadata How to register license information as part of a metadata deposit \u0026lt;publication_date media_type=\u0026#34;print\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;year\u0026gt;2013\u0026lt;/year\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/publication_date\u0026gt; \u0026lt;pages\u0026gt; \u0026lt;first_page\u0026gt;13\u0026lt;/first_page\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/pages\u0026gt; \u0026lt;ai:program name=\u0026#34;AccessIndicators\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;ai:free_to_read start_date=\u0026#34;2011-02-11\u0026#34;/\u0026gt; \u0026lt;ai:license_ref applies_to=\u0026#34;vor\u0026#34; start_date=\u0026#34;2011-02-11\u0026#34;\u0026gt;https://www.crossref.org/license\u0026lt;/ai:license_ref\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/ai:program\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi_data\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi\u0026gt;10.5555/openAI_test2\u0026lt;/doi\u0026gt; \u0026lt;resource\u0026gt;https://www.crossref.org/test\u0026lt;/resource\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/doi_data\u0026gt; How to register license information as part of a resource-only deposit \u0026lt;body\u0026gt; \u0026lt;!-- license updates with dates / free to read info included--\u0026gt; \u0026lt;lic_ref_data\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi\u0026gt;10.5555/pubdate1\u0026lt;/doi\u0026gt; \u0026lt;ai:program name=\u0026#34;AccessIndicators\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;ai:free_to_read/\u0026gt; \u0026lt;ai:license_ref applies_to=\u0026#34;vor\u0026#34; start_date=\u0026#34;2011-01-11\u0026#34;\u0026gt;https://www.crossref.org/vor-license\u0026lt;/ai:license_ref\u0026gt; \u0026lt;ai:license_ref applies_to=\u0026#34;am\u0026#34; start_date=\u0026#34;2012-01-11\u0026#34;\u0026gt;https://www.crossref.org/am-license\u0026lt;/ai:license_ref\u0026gt; \u0026lt;ai:license_ref applies_to=\u0026#34;tdm\u0026#34; start_date=\u0026#34;2012-01-11\u0026#34;\u0026gt;https://www.crossref.org/tdm-license\u0026lt;/ai:license_ref\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/ai:program\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/lic_ref_data\u0026gt; \u0026lt;!-- license updates with just license URL included--\u0026gt; \u0026lt;lic_ref_data\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi\u0026gt;10.5555/pubdate1\u0026lt;/doi\u0026gt; \u0026lt;ai:program name=\u0026#34;AccessIndicators\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;ai:free_to_read/\u0026gt; \u0026lt;ai:license_ref\u0026gt;https://www.crossref.org/vor-license\u0026lt;/ai:license_ref\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/ai:program\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/lic_ref_data\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/body\u0026gt; ",
"headings": ["Examples of licenses ","Best practice for license information ","How we collect license information ","Example: Green OA with Creative Commons license ","Example: Green OA with member-defined post-embargo license ","Example: Gold OA ","Use cases ","How to add license information to your Crossref metadata ","How to register license information as part of a metadata deposit ","How to register license information as part of a resource-only deposit "]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/schema-library/markup-guide-record-types/pending-publications/",
"title": "Pending publications markup guide",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2023-10-28",
"lastmod_ts": 1698451200,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "This guide gives markup examples for members registering pending publications by direct deposit of XML. It is not currently possible to register the pending publications record type using one of our helper tools.\nHow to make changes to records How to update records - for Crossmark users Crossmark service users can add the withdrawal to the Crossmark metadata as a scholarly update assertion (using the update type withdrawal). Update the landing page by updating the metadata record you provide us, using the same DOI in the assertion. See example of a full deposit for an XML example. If you choose, you can publish a separate update, and then link to the new DOI in the Crossmark metadata.\n",
"content": "This guide gives markup examples for members registering pending publications by direct deposit of XML. It is not currently possible to register the pending publications record type using one of our helper tools.\nHow to make changes to records How to update records - for Crossmark users Crossmark service users can add the withdrawal to the Crossmark metadata as a scholarly update assertion (using the update type withdrawal). Update the landing page by updating the metadata record you provide us, using the same DOI in the assertion. See example of a full deposit for an XML example. If you choose, you can publish a separate update, and then link to the new DOI in the Crossmark metadata.\nThe green banner saying Manuscript has been accepted will change to a red banner saying Accepted manuscript has been withdrawn. See the following withdrawn pending publication example landing page with its associated metadata deposit.\nHow to update records - for non Crossmark users Our system will not be able to identify your pending publication as withdrawn, which means the green Manuscript has been accepted banner will remain on the landing page. Therefore it is critical that you write a clear statement about the withdrawal in the Intent to Publish statement. The Intent to Publish statement is supplied in the XML element - see the default Intent to publish statement message below.\nCustomizations You can personalize the display of the Crossref-hosted landing page with the following information:\nmember/society/journal logo custom wording for the intent to publish statement display of all provided optional extra metadata such as article title, funder identifiers, ORCID iDs, license information Crossmark to handle the rare occasions when a member rescinds acceptance. If you’d like to display a custom logo on your pending publication landing page, please email us the logo, and include your member name, prefix, and a note indicating that the logo is to be used for pending publication. We accept both JPEG and PNG files (dimensions should be 112px by 112px).\nIntent to publish statement This is the default intent to publish statement shown on the landing page:\nThis paper has been accepted for publication so its publisher has pre-registered a Crossref DOI. This persistent identifier and link [DOI INSERTED HERE] can already be shared by authors and readers, as it will redirect to the published article when available.\nWe encourage you to provide your own custom statement in the metadata which will replace the default statement.\nThe intent to publish statement can be used to convey any information you’d like to share about the forthcoming publication event (such as process, timeline). In the event that you delay publication or withdraw the publication, this statement may be very informative for your community - both the readers on your platform as well as the systems that consume Crossref metadata.\nMetadata reference examples for pending publication Here are three examples of pending publication records. The full record contains the full range of metadata accepted for pending publication. The basic record has the bare minimum metadata required. The withdrawn record is for a pending publication that the member has decided not to publish.\nDOI Description Links Full This record contains the full range of metadata accepted for a pending publication. Deposit XML, XML API Basic This basic record contains only the required metadata for a pending publication. We apply the default Intent to Publish statement in the absence of a custom message. Here, some authors have ORCID iDs with affiliation data; others do not. Deposit XML, XML API Withdrawn In this record of a withdrawn pending publication, the member has registered a pending publication and then updated the record to reflect the withdrawal. This example is an in situ scholarly update with no separate update published. Deposit XML, XML API Example of a full deposit \u0026lt;doi_batch xmlns=\u0026#34;http://www.crossref.org/schema/4.4.2\u0026#34; xmlns:fr=\u0026#34;http://www.crossref.org/fundref.xsd\u0026#34; xmlns:jats=\u0026#34;http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/JATS1\u0026#34; xmlns:mml=\u0026#34;http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML\u0026#34; xmlns:xsi=\u0026#34;http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance\u0026#34; version=\u0026#34;4.4.2\u0026#34; xsi:schemaLocation=\u0026#34;http://www.crossref.org/schema/4.4.2 https://www.crossref.org/schemas/crossref4.4.2.xsd\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;head\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi_batch_id\u0026gt;org.crossref.early.001\u0026lt;/doi_batch_id\u0026gt; \u0026lt;timestamp\u0026gt;000001\u0026lt;/timestamp\u0026gt; \u0026lt;depositor\u0026gt; \u0026lt;depositor_name\u0026gt;Crossref\u0026lt;/depositor_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;email_address\u0026gt;support@crossref.org\u0026lt;/email_address\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/depositor\u0026gt; \u0026lt;registrant\u0026gt;Crossref\u0026lt;/registrant\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/head\u0026gt; \u0026lt;body\u0026gt; \u0026lt;pending_publication\u0026gt; \u0026lt;contributors\u0026gt; \u0026lt;person_name sequence=\u0026#34;first\u0026#34; contributor_role=\u0026#34;author\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;given_name\u0026gt;Josiah\u0026lt;/given_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;surname\u0026gt;Carberry\u0026lt;/surname\u0026gt; \u0026lt;ORCID\u0026gt;https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1825-0097\u0026lt;/ORCID\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/person_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;person_name sequence=\u0026#34;additional\u0026#34; contributor_role=\u0026#34;author\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;given_name\u0026gt;Megan\u0026lt;/given_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;surname\u0026gt;Strongjackplum\u0026lt;/surname\u0026gt; \u0026lt;affiliation\u0026gt;University of Los Angeles\u0026lt;/affiliation\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/person_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;person_name sequence=\u0026#34;additional\u0026#34; contributor_role=\u0026#34;author\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;given_name\u0026gt;Sonder\u0026lt;/given_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;surname\u0026gt;Meander\u0026lt;/surname\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/person_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;person_name sequence=\u0026#34;additional\u0026#34; contributor_role=\u0026#34;editor\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;given_name\u0026gt;Matt\u0026lt;/given_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;surname\u0026gt;Techthespian\u0026lt;/surname\u0026gt; \u0026lt;affiliation\u0026gt;New York Institute of Technology\u0026lt;/affiliation\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/person_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/contributors\u0026gt; \u0026lt;publication\u0026gt; \u0026lt;full_title\u0026gt;Journal of Psychoceramics\u0026lt;/full_title\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi\u0026gt;10.5555/1234567890\u0026lt;/doi\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/publication\u0026gt; \u0026lt;titles\u0026gt; \u0026lt;title\u0026gt;Processing Fragmented Postmodernity: Cake for the Disenchanted\u0026lt;/title\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/titles\u0026gt; \u0026lt;acceptance_date\u0026gt; \u0026lt;month\u0026gt;07\u0026lt;/month\u0026gt; \u0026lt;day\u0026gt;27\u0026lt;/day\u0026gt; \u0026lt;year\u0026gt;2018\u0026lt;/year\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/acceptance_date\u0026gt; \u0026lt;intent_statement\u0026gt; This article has been peer reviewed and accepted for publication by Crossref University Press. It is slated to publish on Dec 11.\u0026lt;/intent_statement\u0026gt; \u0026lt;fr:program xmlns:fr=\u0026#34;http://www.crossref.org/fundref.xsd\u0026#34; name=\u0026#34;fundref\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;fr:assertion name=\u0026#34;fundgroup\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;fr:assertion name=\u0026#34;funder_name\u0026#34;\u0026gt; National Science Foundation \u0026lt;fr:assertion name=\u0026#34;funder_identifier\u0026#34; \u0026gt;https://doi.org/10.13039/100000001\u0026lt;/fr:assertion\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/fr:assertion\u0026gt; \u0026lt;fr:assertion name=\u0026#34;award_number\u0026#34;\u0026gt;CNS-1228930\u0026lt;/fr:assertion\u0026gt; \u0026lt;fr:assertion name=\u0026#34;award_number\u0026#34;\u0026gt;CNS-2345567\u0026lt;/fr:assertion\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/fr:assertion\u0026gt; \u0026lt;fr:assertion name=\u0026#34;fundgroup\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;fr:assertion name=\u0026#34;funder_name\u0026#34;\u0026gt; Eva Crane Trust \u0026lt;fr:assertion name=\u0026#34;funder_identifier\u0026#34;\u0026gt;10.13039/100012660\u0026lt;/fr:assertion\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/fr:assertion\u0026gt; \u0026lt;fr:assertion name=\u0026#34;award_number\u0026#34;\u0026gt;ECTA20160303\u0026lt;/fr:assertion\u0026gt; \u0026lt;fr:assertion name=\u0026#34;award_number\u0026#34;\u0026gt;ECTA30498\u0026lt;/fr:assertion\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/fr:assertion\u0026gt; \u0026lt;fr:assertion name=\u0026#34;fundgroup\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;fr:assertion name=\u0026#34;funder_name\u0026#34;\u0026gt;Financial Authority\u0026lt;/fr:assertion\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/fr:assertion\u0026gt; \u0026lt;fr:assertion name=\u0026#34;fundgroup\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;fr:assertion name=\u0026#34;funder_name\u0026#34;\u0026gt;Federal Wilderness Commission\u0026lt;/fr:assertion\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/fr:assertion\u0026gt; \u0026lt;fr:assertion name=\u0026#34;fundgroup\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;fr:assertion name=\u0026#34;funder_name\u0026#34;\u0026gt;Foundation of Minor Health\u0026lt;/fr:assertion\u0026gt; \u0026lt;fr:assertion name=\u0026#34;award_number\u0026#34;\u0026gt;MED00001234\u0026lt;/fr:assertion\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/fr:assertion\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/fr:program\u0026gt; \u0026lt;program xmlns=\u0026#34;http://www.crossref.org/AccessIndicators.xsd\u0026#34; name=\u0026#34;AccessIndicators\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;license_ref applies_to=\u0026#34;vor\u0026#34; start_date=\u0026#34;2018-12-11\u0026#34; \u0026gt;http://psychoceramics.labs.crossref.org/\u0026lt;/license_ref\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/program\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi\u0026gt;10.5555/pending-publication-multi-author-funder-test\u0026lt;/doi\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/pending_publication\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/body\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/doi_batch\u0026gt; Example of a basic deposit \u0026lt;doi_batch xmlns=\u0026#34;http://www.crossref.org/schema/4.4.2\u0026#34; xmlns:fr=\u0026#34;http://www.crossref.org/fundref.xsd\u0026#34; xmlns:jats=\u0026#34;http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/JATS1\u0026#34; xmlns:mml=\u0026#34;http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML\u0026#34; xmlns:xsi=\u0026#34;http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance\u0026#34; version=\u0026#34;4.4.2\u0026#34; xsi:schemaLocation=\u0026#34;http://www.crossref.org/schema/4.4.2 https://www.crossref.org/schemas/crossref4.4.2.xsd\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;head\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi_batch_id\u0026gt;org.crossref.early.001\u0026lt;/doi_batch_id\u0026gt; \u0026lt;timestamp\u0026gt;000002\u0026lt;/timestamp\u0026gt; \u0026lt;depositor\u0026gt; \u0026lt;depositor_name\u0026gt;Crossref\u0026lt;/depositor_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;email_address\u0026gt;support@crossref.org\u0026lt;/email_address\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/depositor\u0026gt; \u0026lt;registrant\u0026gt;Crossref\u0026lt;/registrant\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/head\u0026gt; \u0026lt;body\u0026gt; \u0026lt;pending_publication\u0026gt; \u0026lt;contributors\u0026gt; \u0026lt;person_name sequence=\u0026#34;first\u0026#34; contributor_role=\u0026#34;author\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;given_name\u0026gt;Josiah\u0026lt;/given_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;surname\u0026gt;Carberry\u0026lt;/surname\u0026gt; \u0026lt;ORCID\u0026gt;https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1825-0097\u0026lt;/ORCID\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/person_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;person_name sequence=\u0026#34;additional\u0026#34; contributor_role=\u0026#34;author\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;given_name\u0026gt;Fran\u0026lt;/given_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;surname\u0026gt;Whitmorsup\u0026lt;/surname\u0026gt; \u0026lt;affiliation\u0026gt;University of Los Angeles\u0026lt;/affiliation\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/person_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;person_name sequence=\u0026#34;additional\u0026#34; contributor_role=\u0026#34;author\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;given_name\u0026gt;Sandra\u0026lt;/given_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;surname\u0026gt;Questcheck\u0026lt;/surname\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/person_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/contributors\u0026gt; \u0026lt;publication\u0026gt; \u0026lt;full_title\u0026gt;Journal of Psychoceramics\u0026lt;/full_title\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi\u0026gt;10.5555/1234567890\u0026lt;/doi\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/publication\u0026gt; \u0026lt;titles\u0026gt; \u0026lt;title\u0026gt;Theorizing Interfering Appropriation: Headphones for All Ears\u0026lt;/title\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/titles\u0026gt; \u0026lt;acceptance_date\u0026gt; \u0026lt;month\u0026gt;07\u0026lt;/month\u0026gt; \u0026lt;day\u0026gt;28\u0026lt;/day\u0026gt; \u0026lt;year\u0026gt;2018\u0026lt;/year\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/acceptance_date\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi\u0026gt;10.5555/pending-publication-multi-author-crossmark-test\u0026lt;/doi\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/pending_publication\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/body\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/doi_batch\u0026gt; Example of a withdrawal \u0026lt;doi_batch xmlns=\u0026#34;http://www.crossref.org/schema/4.4.2\u0026#34; xmlns:fr=\u0026#34;http://www.crossref.org/fundref.xsd\u0026#34; xmlns:jats=\u0026#34;http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/JATS1\u0026#34; xmlns:mml=\u0026#34;http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML\u0026#34; xmlns:xsi=\u0026#34;http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance\u0026#34; version=\u0026#34;4.4.2\u0026#34; xsi:schemaLocation=\u0026#34;http://www.crossref.org/schema/4.4.2 https://www.crossref.org/schemas/crossref4.4.2.xsd\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;head\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi_batch_id\u0026gt;org.crossref.early.001\u0026lt;/doi_batch_id\u0026gt; \u0026lt;timestamp\u0026gt;000001\u0026lt;/timestamp\u0026gt; \u0026lt;depositor\u0026gt; \u0026lt;depositor_name\u0026gt;Crossref\u0026lt;/depositor_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;email_address\u0026gt;support@crossref.org\u0026lt;/email_address\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/depositor\u0026gt; \u0026lt;registrant\u0026gt;Crossref\u0026lt;/registrant\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/head\u0026gt; \u0026lt;body\u0026gt; \u0026lt;pending_publication\u0026gt; \u0026lt;contributors\u0026gt; \u0026lt;person_name sequence=\u0026#34;first\u0026#34; contributor_role=\u0026#34;author\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;given_name\u0026gt;Josiah\u0026lt;/given_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;surname\u0026gt;Carberry\u0026lt;/surname\u0026gt; \u0026lt;ORCID\u0026gt;https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1825-0097\u0026lt;/ORCID\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/person_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/contributors\u0026gt; \u0026lt;publication\u0026gt; \u0026lt;full_title\u0026gt;Journal of Psychoceramics\u0026lt;/full_title\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi\u0026gt;10.5555/1234567890\u0026lt;/doi\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/publication\u0026gt; \u0026lt;titles\u0026gt; \u0026lt;title\u0026gt;Categorizing Belligerent Violence: Rockets and/in the Other \u0026lt;/title\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/titles\u0026gt; \u0026lt;acceptance_date\u0026gt; \u0026lt;month\u0026gt;07\u0026lt;/month\u0026gt; \u0026lt;day\u0026gt;28\u0026lt;/day\u0026gt; \u0026lt;year\u0026gt;2018\u0026lt;/year\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/acceptance_date\u0026gt; \u0026lt;intent_statement\u0026gt;The article has been withdrawn according to the Crossref Policy on Article in Press Withdrawal.\u0026lt;/intent_statement\u0026gt; \u0026lt;crossmark\u0026gt; \u0026lt;crossmark_version\u0026gt;1\u0026lt;/crossmark_version\u0026gt; \u0026lt;crossmark_policy\u0026gt;10.5555/crossmark_policy\u0026lt;/crossmark_policy\u0026gt; \u0026lt;crossmark_domains\u0026gt; \u0026lt;crossmark_domain\u0026gt; \u0026lt;domain\u0026gt;psychoceramics.labs.crossref.org\u0026lt;/domain\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/crossmark_domain\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/crossmark_domains\u0026gt; \u0026lt;crossmark_domain_exclusive\u0026gt;true\u0026lt;/crossmark_domain_exclusive\u0026gt; \u0026lt;updates\u0026gt; \u0026lt;update type=\u0026#34;withdrawal\u0026#34; date=\u0026#34;2018-07-28\u0026#34; \u0026gt;10.5555/crossmark-withdrawal-test-for-pendingpub\u0026lt;/update\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/updates\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/crossmark\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi\u0026gt;10.5555/crossmark-withdrawal-test-for-pendingpub\u0026lt;/doi\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/pending_publication\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/body\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/doi_batch\u0026gt; ",
"headings": ["How to make changes to records ","How to update records - for Crossmark users ","How to update records - for non Crossmark users ","Customizations ","Intent to publish statement ","Metadata reference examples for pending publication ","Example of a full deposit ","Example of a basic deposit ","Example of a withdrawal "]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/schema-library/markup-guide-metadata-segments/mathml/",
"title": "MathML",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2020-04-08",
"lastmod_ts": 1586304000,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "MathML may be included in the title, subtitle, original_language_title, and abstract elements. The MathML namespace (mml) must be defined in the schema declaration, for example:\n\u0026lt;doi_batch xmlns:xsi=\u0026#34;http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance\u0026#34; xsi:schemaLocation=\u0026#34;http://www.crossref.org/schema/4.4.2 https://data.crossref.org/schemas/crossref4.4.2.xsd\u0026#34; xmlns=\u0026#34;http://www.crossref.org/schema/4.4.2\u0026#34; xmlns:jats=\u0026#34;http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/JATS1\u0026#34; xmlns:mml=\u0026#34;http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML\u0026#34;​\u0026gt; Note that all MathML markup must include an mml namespace prefix:\n\u0026lt;journal_article publication_type=\u0026#34;full_text\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;titles\u0026gt; \u0026lt;title\u0026gt;Selectron production at an \u0026lt;mml:math\u0026gt;\u0026lt;mml:msup\u0026gt;\u0026lt;mml:mi\u0026gt;e\u0026lt;/mml:mi\u0026gt;\u0026lt;mml:mo\u0026gt;\u0026amp;#x02212;\u0026lt;/mml:mo\u0026gt;\u0026lt;/mml:msup\u0026gt;\u0026lt;mml:msup\u0026gt;\u0026lt;mml:mi\u0026gt;e\u0026lt;/mml:mi\u0026gt;\u0026lt;mml:mo\u0026gt;\u0026amp;#x02212;\u0026lt;/mml:mo\u0026gt;\u0026lt;/mml:msup\u0026gt;\u0026lt;/mml:math\u0026gt; linear collider with transversely polarized beams\u0026lt;/title\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/titles\u0026gt; ",
"content": "MathML may be included in the title, subtitle, original_language_title, and abstract elements. The MathML namespace (mml) must be defined in the schema declaration, for example:\n\u0026lt;doi_batch xmlns:xsi=\u0026#34;http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance\u0026#34; xsi:schemaLocation=\u0026#34;http://www.crossref.org/schema/4.4.2 https://data.crossref.org/schemas/crossref4.4.2.xsd\u0026#34; xmlns=\u0026#34;http://www.crossref.org/schema/4.4.2\u0026#34; xmlns:jats=\u0026#34;http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/JATS1\u0026#34; xmlns:mml=\u0026#34;http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML\u0026#34;​\u0026gt; Note that all MathML markup must include an mml namespace prefix:\n\u0026lt;journal_article publication_type=\u0026#34;full_text\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;titles\u0026gt; \u0026lt;title\u0026gt;Selectron production at an \u0026lt;mml:math\u0026gt;\u0026lt;mml:msup\u0026gt;\u0026lt;mml:mi\u0026gt;e\u0026lt;/mml:mi\u0026gt;\u0026lt;mml:mo\u0026gt;\u0026amp;#x02212;\u0026lt;/mml:mo\u0026gt;\u0026lt;/mml:msup\u0026gt;\u0026lt;mml:msup\u0026gt;\u0026lt;mml:mi\u0026gt;e\u0026lt;/mml:mi\u0026gt;\u0026lt;mml:mo\u0026gt;\u0026amp;#x02212;\u0026lt;/mml:mo\u0026gt;\u0026lt;/mml:msup\u0026gt;\u0026lt;/mml:math\u0026gt; linear collider with transversely polarized beams\u0026lt;/title\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/titles\u0026gt; ",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/schema-library/markup-guide-record-types/posted-content-includes-preprints/",
"title": "Posted content (includes preprints) markup guide",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2025-07-12",
"lastmod_ts": 1752278400,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "This guide gives markup examples for members registering posted content (includes preprints) by direct deposit of XML. It is not currently possible to register the posted content (includes preprints) record type using one of our helper tools.\nDepositing and updating posted content Posted content is a Crossref record type available starting with schema version 4.4.0. The schema updates include a number of posted content-specific elements. The top level element is called posted_content and has an attribute called type. This attribute is given a value from an enumerated list that defines the nature of the posted content. The current set of enumerations are:\n",
"content": "This guide gives markup examples for members registering posted content (includes preprints) by direct deposit of XML. It is not currently possible to register the posted content (includes preprints) record type using one of our helper tools.\nDepositing and updating posted content Posted content is a Crossref record type available starting with schema version 4.4.0. The schema updates include a number of posted content-specific elements. The top level element is called posted_content and has an attribute called type. This attribute is given a value from an enumerated list that defines the nature of the posted content. The current set of enumerations are:\npreprint letter other The default value is preprint. Please contact us if you want to deposit metadata for a posted record type which is not on this list.\nMetadata elements The posted record type contains the following elements (* = required ** available as of schema version 5.4.0):\nElement Description group_title The hosting platform may organize its posted content into categories or subject areas. This field is used to name the container for the posted item contributors Container for author information titles* The titles (title and subtitle) of the posted content posted_date* The date when the posted content became available online on the hosting platform acceptance_date The date the content item was submitted to and accepted by the hosting platform institution Container for information about an organization that sponsored or hosted an item, such as a repository or preprint server institution_name name of an organization that sponsored or hosted an item institution_id PID of the sponsoring or hosting institution (supported values are ror, wikidata, isni) status** status of preprint (withdrawn or removed) version_info, version, description** version number and description of version changes program: funding Source of funding applicable to research related to the posted content program: access indicators License terms program: relations Relationships (other than bibliographic citation) to other works, such as found in acknowledgments or list of supplemental material doi_data* Container for persistent identifier and URL citation_list Posted content bibliography listing of citations to other works Updating metadata with relationship to AAM/VoR Once a posted content item has been published, the posted content publisher must update their publication metadata with the AAM/VoR DOI using the isPreprintOf relation type.\n\u0026lt;program xmlns=\u0026#34;https://www.crossref.org/relations.xsd\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;related_item\u0026gt; \u0026lt;!--DOI of the AM / VOR--\u0026gt; \u0026lt;intra_work_relation relationship-type=\u0026#34;isPreprintOf\u0026#34; identifier-type=\u0026#34;doi\u0026#34;\u0026gt;10.5555/preprint_sample_doi_vor\u0026lt;/intra_work_relation\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/related_item\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/program\u0026gt; The relationship metadata may be updated with either a full metadata deposit (existing metadata plus the ‘relationship’ metadata) or as a resource-only deposit. Metadata deposited using the resource schema will be appended to the existing metadata.\nPosted content and conflicts When a posted content item is submitted for a published item that has a registered metadata record, a conflict is created. The conflict is resolved when the posted content item is updated with the relationship metadata for the published item\u0026rsquo;s DOI. Learn more about the conflict report.\nPosted content and Cited-by matches When you query for Cited-by matches, you can choose to include posted content matches in your results. By default, posted content is not included. To retrieve matches including posted content:\nHTTPS queries Add the include_postedcontent=true parameter to your query, for example:\nhttps://doi.crossref.org/servlet/getForwardLinks?usr=XXXX\u0026amp;pwd=XXXX\u0026amp;doi=10.5555/12345678\u0026amp;include_postedcontent=true XML queries Add the include_postedcontent=\u0026quot;true\u0026quot; attribute to your fl_query element, for example:\n\u0026lt;?xml version = \u0026#34;1.0\u0026#34; encoding=\u0026#34;UTF-8\u0026#34;?\u0026gt; \u0026lt;query_batch version=\u0026#34;2.0\u0026#34; xmlns = \u0026#34;https://www.crossref.org/qschema/2.0\u0026#34; xmlns:xsi=\u0026#34;http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;head\u0026gt;\u0026lt;doi_batch_id\u0026gt;eXtyles Request AMP.dodge0724.doc__76\u0026lt;/doi_batch_id\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/head\u0026gt; \u0026lt;body\u0026gt; \u0026lt;fl_query include_postedcontent=\u0026#34;true\u0026#34;\u0026gt;\u0026lt;doi\u0026gt;10.5555/12345678\u0026lt;/doi\u0026gt;\u0026lt;/fl_query\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/body\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/query_batch\u0026gt; Example of a posted content deposit Review the sample below or download an XML examplefrom our GitLab repository.\n\u0026lt;posted_content type=\u0026#34;preprint\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;!--group_title: Prepublication content items may be organized into groups which reflect a topic or subject area. --\u0026gt; \u0026lt;group_title\u0026gt;Metadata Quality\u0026lt;/group_title\u0026gt; \u0026lt;contributors\u0026gt; \u0026lt;person_name sequence=\u0026#34;first\u0026#34; contributor_role=\u0026#34;author\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;given_name\u0026gt;Dorothy\u0026lt;/given_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;surname\u0026gt;Depositor\u0026lt;/surname\u0026gt; \u0026lt;ORCID\u0026gt;http\\://orcid.org/0000-0002-4011-3590\u0026lt;/ORCID\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/person_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/contributors\u0026gt; \u0026lt;titles\u0026gt; \u0026lt;title\u0026gt;Mind your \u0026amp;lt; and \u0026amp;gt;: why XML needs to be valid\u0026lt;/title\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/titles\u0026gt; \u0026lt;!--posted_date: The date when the posted content became available online on the hosting platform (required)--\u0026gt; \u0026lt;posted_date\u0026gt; \u0026lt;month\u0026gt;01\u0026lt;/month\u0026gt; \u0026lt;day\u0026gt;15\u0026lt;/day\u0026gt; \u0026lt;year\u0026gt;1971\u0026lt;/year\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/posted_date\u0026gt; \u0026lt;!--acceptance date: date the content item was submitted to and accepted by the hosting platform. (optional) --\u0026gt; \u0026lt;acceptance_date\u0026gt; \u0026lt;month\u0026gt;01\u0026lt;/month\u0026gt; \u0026lt;day\u0026gt;01\u0026lt;/day\u0026gt; \u0026lt;year\u0026gt;1971\u0026lt;/year\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/acceptance_date\u0026gt; \u0026lt;!-- institution information (preprint server, optional)--\u0026gt; \u0026lt;institution\u0026gt; \u0026lt;institution_name\u0026gt;Crossref Preprints\u0026lt;/institution_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;institution_id type=\u0026#34;ror\u0026#34;\u0026gt;https://ror.org/02twcfp32\u0026lt;/institution_id\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/institution\u0026gt; \u0026lt;!--optional funding and license data--\u0026gt; \u0026lt;program name=\u0026#34;fundref\u0026#34; xmlns=\u0026#34;http://www.crossref.org/fundref.xsd\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;assertion name=\u0026#34;fundgroup\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;assertion name=\u0026#34;funder_name\u0026#34;\u0026gt; U.S. Department of Energy \u0026lt;assertion name=\u0026#34;funder_identifier\u0026#34;\u0026gt;100000015\u0026lt;/assertion\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/assertion\u0026gt; \u0026lt;assertion name=\u0026#34;award_number\u0026#34;\u0026gt;DE-FG03-03SF22691\u0026lt;/assertion\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/assertion\u0026gt; \u0026lt;assertion name=\u0026#34;fundgroup\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;assertion name=\u0026#34;funder_name\u0026#34;\u0026gt; U.S. Department of Energy \u0026lt;assertion name=\u0026#34;funder_identifier\u0026#34;\u0026gt;100000015\u0026lt;/assertion\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/assertion\u0026gt; \u0026lt;assertion name=\u0026#34;award_number\u0026#34;\u0026gt;DE-AC52-06NA27279\u0026lt;/assertion\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/assertion\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/program\u0026gt; \u0026lt;program xmlns=\u0026#34;http://www.crossref.org/AccessIndicators.xsd\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;free_to_read start_date=\u0026#34;2016-01-01\u0026#34;/\u0026gt; \u0026lt;license_ref\u0026gt;http://some.co.org/license_page.html\u0026lt;/license_ref\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/program\u0026gt; \u0026lt;!--DOI and URL (required)--\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi_data\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi\u0026gt;10.50505/preprint_sample_doi_1\u0026lt;/doi\u0026gt; \u0026lt;resource\u0026gt;http://www.crossref.org/index.html\u0026lt;/resource\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/doi_data\u0026gt; \u0026lt;!--citation list for the item (optional)--\u0026gt; \u0026lt;citation_list\u0026gt; \u0026lt;citation key=\u0026#34;pp1\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi\u0026gt;10.5555/12345678\u0026lt;/doi\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/citation\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/citation_list\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/posted_content\u0026gt; Example of a posted content deposit containing a relationship to a VOR Review the sample below or download an XML examplefrom our GitLab repository.\n\u0026lt;!-- relationship established with VOR DOI (required when VOR is identified)--\u0026gt; \u0026lt;program xmlns=\u0026#34;https://www.crossref.org/relations.xsd\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;related_item\u0026gt; \u0026lt;intra_work_relation relationship-type=\u0026#34;isPreprintOf\u0026#34; identifier-type=\u0026#34;doi\u0026#34;\u0026gt;10.5555/preprint_sample_doi_vor\u0026lt;/intra_work_relation\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/related_item\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/program\u0026gt; \u0026lt;!--DOI and URL (required)--\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi_data\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi\u0026gt;10.50505/preprint_sample_doi_1\u0026lt;/doi\u0026gt; \u0026lt;resource\u0026gt;https://www.crossref.org/index.html\u0026lt;/resource\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/doi_data\u0026gt; Example of a journal article deposit that includes a relationship to posted content Review the sample below or download an XML file.\n\u0026lt;publication_date\u0026gt; \u0026lt;year\u0026gt;2016\u0026lt;/year\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/publication_date\u0026gt; \u0026lt;!--relationship established with posted content (preprint) DOI--\u0026gt; \u0026lt;program xmlns=\u0026#34;https://www.crossref.org/relations.xsd\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;related_item\u0026gt; \u0026lt;intra_work_relation relationship-type=\u0026#34;hasPreprint\u0026#34; identifier-type=\u0026#34;doi\u0026#34;\u0026gt;10.50505/preprint_sample_doi_1\u0026lt;/intra_work_relation\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/related_item\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/program\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi_data\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi\u0026gt;10.5555/preprint_sample_doi_vor\u0026lt;/doi\u0026gt; \u0026lt;resource\u0026gt;https://www.crossref.org/index.html\u0026lt;/resource\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/doi_data\u0026gt; Example of email notification of posted content match Member Example Publishing has deposited DOI 10.5555/preprint_sample_doi_vor (http://doi.org/10.5555/preprint_sample_doi_vor) claiming it is the VoR for your posted content DOI 10.50505/preprint_sample_doi_1. Please display a link to the Version of Record from your posted content online. Linking posted content to the published record is critical to enabling the full history of scholarly results, and ensuring that the citation record is clear and up-to-date. If you have questions please contact support@crossref.org and one of our colleagues (in the EST timezone) will get back to you. Many thanks, Crossref\n",
"headings": ["Depositing and updating posted content ","Metadata elements ","Updating metadata with relationship to AAM/VoR ","Posted content and conflicts ","Posted content and Cited-by matches ","HTTPS queries ","XML queries ","Example of a posted content deposit ","Example of a posted content deposit containing a relationship to a VOR ","Example of a journal article deposit that includes a relationship to posted content ","Example of email notification of posted content match "]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/schema-library/markup-guide-metadata-segments/multi-language/",
"title": "Translated and multi-language materials",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2023-01-18",
"lastmod_ts": 1674000000,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "Much of the content in Crossref is English language, but we encourage members to register content in the appropriate language for the content being registered. We support UTF-8 encoded character sets and in many cases you will be able to supply multiple versions of titles, abstracts, and other metadata.\nMulti-language content We currently provide limited support for multi-language content. If you consider your content to be multi-language and not a translation (meaning it will be cited as a single item) register one DOI for the item, and include titles and abstracts in multiple languages in your metadata record as allowed (Note that support for this currently varies by record type). Order is important in input metadata - if the English title is provided as the first title in your metadata, then the English title will be displayed in citations generated from our metadata.\n",
"content": "Much of the content in Crossref is English language, but we encourage members to register content in the appropriate language for the content being registered. We support UTF-8 encoded character sets and in many cases you will be able to supply multiple versions of titles, abstracts, and other metadata.\nMulti-language content We currently provide limited support for multi-language content. If you consider your content to be multi-language and not a translation (meaning it will be cited as a single item) register one DOI for the item, and include titles and abstracts in multiple languages in your metadata record as allowed (Note that support for this currently varies by record type). Order is important in input metadata - if the English title is provided as the first title in your metadata, then the English title will be displayed in citations generated from our metadata.\nTranslated content If your content is translated register separate DOIs for each translation, and connect translations with relationship metadata using the relationship hasTranslation. This is essential if translate items have differing metadata such as article IDs or page numbers.\nIf the translations are registered and connected via a relationships, it is not necessary to include titles and other metadata in multiple languages. Note that for items with separate DOIs, we do not aggregate cited-by matches or search results.\n\u0026lt;titles\u0026gt; \u0026lt;title\u0026gt;When your best metadata isn\u0026#39;t good enough: working with an imperfect specification\u0026lt;/title\u0026gt; \u0026lt;original_language_title language=\u0026#34;fr\u0026#34;\u0026gt;Quand vos meilleures métadonnées ne\tsuffisent pas: travailler avec une spécification imparfaite\u0026lt;/original_language_title\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/titles\u0026gt; ",
"headings": ["Multi-language content","Translated content"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/schema-library/markup-guide-metadata-segments/references/",
"title": "References",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2025-07-11",
"lastmod_ts": 1752192000,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "Registering references means submitting them as part of your metadata deposit. It is optional but strongly encouraged, especially if you use our Cited-by service.\nNote that registering references is not the same as reference linking - learn more about the differences.\nThe benefits of registering references as part of your metadata include:\nmaking your content more discoverable enabling evaluation of research, and helping with citation counts. Whenever you register content with us, make sure you include your references in the submission.\n",
"content": "Registering references means submitting them as part of your metadata deposit. It is optional but strongly encouraged, especially if you use our Cited-by service.\nNote that registering references is not the same as reference linking - learn more about the differences.\nThe benefits of registering references as part of your metadata include:\nmaking your content more discoverable enabling evaluation of research, and helping with citation counts. Whenever you register content with us, make sure you include your references in the submission.\nIncluding references (or adding them to an existing deposit) can be done by:\nCrossref XML plugin for OJS: You must first enable References as a submission metadata field and then enable the Crossref reference linking plugin, to include references in your initial deposit, or add them later. Web deposit form: The web deposit form can’t currently be used to add references when you first register your content, but you can use Simple Text Query to match references and add them to an existing record. Metadata Manager: Our new Metadata Manager tool (previously known as the record registration form) has a built-in field for adding references. Learn more about how to use this tool. Direct deposit of XML: you can include references in your original deposit, or add them later. Learn more at how to deposit references for users of direct deposit of XML. Detailed information for users of direct deposit of XML In this section, learn more about:\nCurrent elements for citation tagging Metadata deposit example Resource-only deposit example When depositing references as part of your content registration XML, mark up individual citations according to our deposit schema section. For example:\n\u0026lt;citation type=\u0026#34;journal_article\u0026#34; key=\u0026#34;ref1\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;journal_title\u0026gt;Current Opinion in Oncology\u0026lt;/journal_title\u0026gt; \u0026lt;author\u0026gt;Chauncey\u0026lt;/author\u0026gt; \u0026lt;volume\u0026gt;13\u0026lt;/volume\u0026gt; \u0026lt;first_page\u0026gt;21\u0026lt;/first_page\u0026gt; \u0026lt;cYear\u0026gt;2001\u0026lt;/cYear\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/citation\u0026gt; Marking up each element allows us to be very precise when identifying potential matches with registered DOIs.\nIf you know the DOIs of individual citations, include them. We\u0026rsquo;ll use the metadata deposited for the DOI when generating Cited-by matches:\n\u0026lt;citation type=\u0026#34;dataset\u0026#34; key=\u0026#34;ref2\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi\u0026gt;10.5555/small_md_0001\u0026lt;/doi\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/citation\u0026gt; References may also be included as an unstructured citation. This option is not as precise as including an already-matched DOI or marking up a citation into individual elements.\n\u0026lt;citation type=\u0026#34;journal_article\u0026#34; key=\u0026#34;ref=3\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;unstructured_citation\u0026gt;Clow GD, McKay CP, Simmons Jr. GM, and Wharton RA, Jr. 1988. Climatological observations and predicted sublimation rates at Lake Hoare, Antarctica. Journal of Climate 1:715-728.\u0026lt;/unstructured_citation\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/citation\u0026gt; A type attribute has been added to the \u0026lt;citation\u0026gt; element with schema version 5.4.0. This allows citations to be labeled with a specific type, like data, software, ore journal article. A full list of types is available below.\nAs well as for depositing conventional references, data and software citations can also be deposited by inserting them into an item’s references metadata. To do so, follow the general process for depositing references as described above. Members can deposit the full data or software citation as an unstructured reference, or they can employ any number of reference tags currently accepted by us. It’s always best to include the DOI (either DataCite or Crossref) for the dataset if possible.\nCurrent elements for citation tagging \u0026lt;issn\u0026gt;: ISSN of a series (print or electronic) \u0026lt;journal_title\u0026gt; \u0026lt;author\u0026gt;: first author of an article or other publication \u0026lt;volume\u0026gt;: volume number (journal or book set) \u0026lt;issue\u0026gt;: journal issue \u0026lt;first_page\u0026gt; \u0026lt;cYear\u0026gt;: year of publication \u0026lt;article_title\u0026gt;: journal article, conference paper, or book chapter title \u0026lt;isbn\u0026gt; \u0026lt;series_title\u0026gt;: title of a book or conference series \u0026lt;volume_title\u0026gt;: book or conference proceeding title \u0026lt;edition_number\u0026gt; \u0026lt;article_title\u0026gt; \u0026lt;std_designator\u0026gt; \u0026lt;standards_body_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;standards_body_acronym\u0026gt; \u0026lt;component_number\u0026gt;: the chapter, section, part number for a content item in a book \u0026lt;unstructured_citation\u0026gt;: citations for which no structured data is available. Our ability to process unstructured citations is limited (learn more about querying with formatted citations) \u0026lt;doi\u0026gt;: include the DOI wherever possible All citation elements are optional, but please submit as much information as you can to help us match your citations to DOIs.\nJournal citations should include either \u0026lt;issn\u0026gt; or \u0026lt;journal_title\u0026gt; or both. \u0026lt;journal_title\u0026gt; only is preferred over \u0026lt;issn\u0026gt; only. In addition the first author (\u0026lt;author\u0026gt;) and \u0026lt;first_page number\u0026gt; should be submitted. \u0026lt;first_page\u0026gt; number is preferred, but for those citations that are \u0026ldquo;in press\u0026rdquo;, the author should be submitted.\nWhen submitting a book or conference citation, you should include an \u0026lt;isbn\u0026gt;, \u0026lt;series_title\u0026gt;, \u0026lt;volume_title\u0026gt;, or any combination of these three elements as may be available.\nA citation for a standard must include a standard designator (\u0026lt;std_designator\u0026gt;) as well as the name and acronym of a standards body (\u0026lt;standards_body_name\u0026gt;, \u0026lt;standards_body_acronym\u0026gt;). These elements are required for identifying a citation of a standard.\nCitation types Citation types are supported as of schema version 5.4.0 and help identify citations that may otherwise be difficult to match or define if a DOI is not provided. The list of types is comprised of currently supported record types, commonly cited objects, and items that are often registered with Crossref but not yet fully supported.\nXML JSON Description blog blog use when citing a blog blog_post blog-post use when citing an individual blog post book book use for all types of books book_chapter book-chapter use for all parts of books including chapters, sections, definitions, reference entries collection collection an aggregation of resources, commonly used with data conference_paper conference-paper a single conference paper conference_proceedings conference-proceedings a single conference proceeding dataset dataset a single dataset dissertation dissertation dissertation or thesis journal journal a journal or volume/issue of a journal journal_article journal-article a single journal article of any type other other use to capture types not otherwise defined patent patent peer_review peer-review a single peer review report or aggregation of peer reviews poster poster a single conference poster preprint preprint protocol protocol a single research protocol registered_report registered-report research article where methods and protocols are registered and reviewed before research is performed report report report or working paper software software piece of software being cited standard standard a single standard web_resource web-resource a web page or web site Metadata deposit example References may be included with a metadata deposit. The references are included within the \u0026lt;citation_list\u0026gt; element. Review the example below or download an XML file.\n\u0026lt;doi_batch xmlns=\u0026#34;http://www.crossref.org/schema/5.4.0\u0026#34; xmlns:xsi=\u0026#34;http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance\u0026#34; version=\u0026#34;5.4.0\u0026#34; xsi:schemaLocation=\u0026#34;http://www.crossref.org/schema/5.4.0 http://www.crossref.org/schema/deposit/crossref5.4.0.xsd\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;head\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi_batch_id\u0026gt;1dbb27d1030c6c9d9d-7ff0\u0026lt;/doi_batch_id\u0026gt; \u0026lt;timestamp\u0026gt;200504260247\u0026lt;/timestamp\u0026gt; \u0026lt;depositor\u0026gt; \u0026lt;depositor_name\u0026gt;your name\u0026lt;/depositor_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;email_address\u0026gt;your@email.com\u0026lt;/email_address\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/depositor\u0026gt; \u0026lt;registrant\u0026gt;WEB-FORM\u0026lt;/registrant\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/head\u0026gt; \u0026lt;body\u0026gt; \u0026lt;journal\u0026gt; \u0026lt;journal_metadata\u0026gt; \u0026lt;full_title\u0026gt;Test Publication\u0026lt;/full_title\u0026gt; \u0026lt;abbrev_title\u0026gt;TP\u0026lt;/abbrev_title\u0026gt; \u0026lt;issn media_type=\u0026#34;print\u0026#34;\u0026gt;12345678\u0026lt;/issn\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/journal_metadata\u0026gt; \u0026lt;journal_issue\u0026gt; \u0026lt;publication_date media_type=\u0026#34;print\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;month\u0026gt;12\u0026lt;/month\u0026gt; \u0026lt;day\u0026gt;1\u0026lt;/day\u0026gt; \u0026lt;year\u0026gt;2005\u0026lt;/year\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/publication_date\u0026gt; \u0026lt;journal_volume\u0026gt; \u0026lt;volume\u0026gt;12\u0026lt;/volume\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/journal_volume\u0026gt; \u0026lt;issue\u0026gt;1\u0026lt;/issue\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/journal_issue\u0026gt; \u0026lt;!--This is the article\u0026#39;s metadata--\u0026gt; \u0026lt;journal_article publication_type=\u0026#34;full_text\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;titles\u0026gt; \u0026lt;title\u0026gt;Article 12292005 9:32\u0026lt;/title\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/titles\u0026gt; \u0026lt;contributors\u0026gt; \u0026lt;person_name sequence=\u0026#34;first\u0026#34; contributor_role=\u0026#34;author\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;given_name\u0026gt;Bob\u0026lt;/given_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;surname\u0026gt;Surname\u0026lt;/surname\u0026gt; \u0026lt;ORCID\u0026gt;http\\://orcid.org/0000-0002-4011-3590\u0026lt;/ORCID\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/person_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/contributors\u0026gt; \u0026lt;publication_date media_type=\u0026#34;print\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;month\u0026gt;12\u0026lt;/month\u0026gt; \u0026lt;day\u0026gt;1\u0026lt;/day\u0026gt; \u0026lt;year\u0026gt;2004\u0026lt;/year\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/publication_date\u0026gt; \u0026lt;pages\u0026gt; \u0026lt;first_page\u0026gt;100\u0026lt;/first_page\u0026gt; \u0026lt;last_page\u0026gt;200\u0026lt;/last_page\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/pages\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi_data\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi\u0026gt;10.50505/test_20051229930\u0026lt;/doi\u0026gt; \u0026lt;resource\u0026gt;http://www.crossref.org/\u0026lt;/resource\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/doi_data\u0026gt; \u0026lt;!--the list of references cited in the above article--\u0026gt; \u0026lt;citation_list\u0026gt; \u0026lt;citation type=\u0026#34;journal_article\u0026#34; key=\u0026#34;ref1\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;journal_title\u0026gt;Current Opinion in Oncology\u0026lt;/journal_title\u0026gt; \u0026lt;author\u0026gt;Chauncey\u0026lt;/author\u0026gt; \u0026lt;volume\u0026gt;13\u0026lt;/volume\u0026gt; \u0026lt;first_page\u0026gt;21\u0026lt;/first_page\u0026gt; \u0026lt;cYear\u0026gt;2001\u0026lt;/cYear\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/citation\u0026gt; \u0026lt;citation type=\u0026#34;dataset\u0026#34; key=\u0026#34;ref2\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi\u0026gt;10.5555/small_md_0001\u0026lt;/doi\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/citation\u0026gt; \u0026lt;citation type=\u0026#34;journal_article\u0026#34; key=\u0026#34;ref=3\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;unstructured_citation\u0026gt;Clow GD, McKay CP, Simmons Jr. GM, and Wharton RA, Jr. 1988. Climatological observations and predicted sublimation rates at Lake Hoare, Antarctica. Journal of Climate 1:715-728.\u0026lt;/unstructured_citation\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/citation\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/citation_list\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/journal_article\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/journal\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/body\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/doi_batch\u0026gt; Resource-only deposit example References may be added to an existing metadata record using a resource-only deposit. Review the example below or download an XML file.\n\u0026lt;doi_batch xmlns=\u0026#34;http://www.crossref.org/doi_resources_schema/4.3.6\u0026#34; xmlns:xsi=\u0026#34;http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance\u0026#34; version=\u0026#34;4.3.6\u0026#34; xsi:schemaLocation=\u0026#34;http://www.crossref.org/doi_resources_schema/4.3.6 http://www.crossref.org/schema/deposit/doi_resources4.3.6.xsd\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;head\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi_batch_id\u0026gt;123456\u0026lt;/doi_batch_id\u0026gt; \u0026lt;depositor\u0026gt; \u0026lt;depositor_name\u0026gt;your name\u0026lt;/depositor_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;email_address\u0026gt;support@crossref.org\u0026lt;/email_address\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/depositor\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/head\u0026gt; \u0026lt;body\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi_citations\u0026gt; \u0026lt;!--The DOI of the article that contains the citations --\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi\u0026gt;10.5555/small_md_0001\u0026lt;/doi\u0026gt; \u0026lt;!--The list of references cited in the above article --\u0026gt; \u0026lt;citation_list\u0026gt; \u0026lt;citation type=\u0026#34;journal_article\u0026#34; key=\u0026#34;ref1\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;journal_title\u0026gt;Current Opinion in Oncology\u0026lt;/journal_title\u0026gt; \u0026lt;author\u0026gt;Chauncey\u0026lt;/author\u0026gt; \u0026lt;volume\u0026gt;13\u0026lt;/volume\u0026gt; \u0026lt;first_page\u0026gt;21\u0026lt;/first_page\u0026gt; \u0026lt;cYear\u0026gt;2001\u0026lt;/cYear\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/citation\u0026gt; \u0026lt;citation type=\u0026#34;dataset\u0026#34; key=\u0026#34;ref2\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi\u0026gt;10.5555/small_md_0001\u0026lt;/doi\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/citation\u0026gt; \u0026lt;citation type=\u0026#34;journal_article\u0026#34; key=\u0026#34;ref=3\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;unstructured_citation\u0026gt;Clow GD, McKay CP, Simmons Jr. GM, and Wharton RA, Jr. 1988. Climatological observations and predicted sublimation rates at Lake Hoare, Antarctica. Journal of Climate 1:715-728.\u0026lt;/unstructured_citation\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/citation\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/citation_list\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/doi_citations\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/body\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/doi_batch\u0026gt; ",
"headings": ["Detailed information for users of direct deposit of XML ","Current elements for citation tagging ","Citation types","Metadata deposit example ","Resource-only deposit example "]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/schema-library/markup-guide-record-types/reports-and-working-papers/",
"title": "Reports and working papers markup guide",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 5,
"lastmod": "2020-04-08",
"lastmod_ts": 1586304000,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "This page gives markup examples for members registering reports and working papers by direct deposit of XML. You can also register the reports and working papers record type using one of our helper tools: web deposit form.\n\u0026lt;report-paper\u0026gt; is the container for all information about a single report or working paper. If you need to register articles for more than one report, you must use multiple instances of \u0026lt;report-paper\u0026gt;. These may be included within the same deposit file.\n",
"content": "This page gives markup examples for members registering reports and working papers by direct deposit of XML. You can also register the reports and working papers record type using one of our helper tools: web deposit form.\n\u0026lt;report-paper\u0026gt; is the container for all information about a single report or working paper. If you need to register articles for more than one report, you must use multiple instances of \u0026lt;report-paper\u0026gt;. These may be included within the same deposit file.\nTechnical reports and working papers are typically assigned a single identifier, but identifiers may also be assigned to sub-sections of the report (such as chapters) as needed using the \u0026lt;content_item\u0026gt; element. Report registration files may include a publisher name (within \u0026lt;publisher\u0026gt;) and/or institution name (within \u0026lt;institution\u0026gt; depending on the organization issuing the report.\nReports/working papers may also be deposited as a series.\nExample of a single report Review the sample below or download an XML file.\n\u0026lt;doi_batch xmlns=\u0026#34;http://www.crossref.org/schema/4.3.7\u0026#34; xmlns:xsi=\u0026#34;http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance\u0026#34; version=\u0026#34;4.3.7\u0026#34; xsi:schemaLocation=\u0026#34;http://www.crossref.org/schema/4.3.7 http://www.crossref.org/schemas/crossref4.3.7.xsd\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;head\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi_batch_id\u0026gt;123456\u0026lt;/doi_batch_id\u0026gt; \u0026lt;timestamp\u0026gt;20050606110604\u0026lt;/timestamp\u0026gt; \u0026lt;depositor\u0026gt; \u0026lt;depositor_name\u0026gt;Sample Master\u0026lt;/depositor_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;email_address\u0026gt;support@crossref.org\u0026lt;/email_address\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/depositor\u0026gt; \u0026lt;registrant\u0026gt;CrossRef\u0026lt;/registrant\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/head\u0026gt; \u0026lt;body\u0026gt; \u0026lt;report-paper\u0026gt; \u0026lt;report-paper_metadata language=\u0026#34;en\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;contributors\u0026gt; \u0026lt;person_name sequence=\u0026#34;first\u0026#34; contributor_role=\u0026#34;author\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;given_name\u0026gt;D.S.\u0026lt;/given_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;surname\u0026gt;McShane\u0026lt;/surname\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/person_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/contributors\u0026gt; \u0026lt;titles\u0026gt; \u0026lt;title\u0026gt; Title Sludge Handling System Conceptual Design Document \u0026lt;/title\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/titles\u0026gt; \u0026lt;edition_number\u0026gt;0\u0026lt;/edition_number\u0026gt; \u0026lt;publication_date media_type=\u0026#34;online\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;month\u0026gt;03\u0026lt;/month\u0026gt; \u0026lt;day\u0026gt;03\u0026lt;/day\u0026gt; \u0026lt;year\u0026gt;2001\u0026lt;/year\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/publication_date\u0026gt; \u0026lt;publisher\u0026gt; \u0026lt;publisher_name\u0026gt;Office of Scientific and Technical Information\u0026lt;/publisher_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;publisher_place\u0026gt;Washington, DC\u0026lt;/publisher_place\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/publisher\u0026gt; \u0026lt;institution\u0026gt; \u0026lt;institution_name\u0026gt;United States Department of Energy\u0026lt;/institution_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;institution_acronym\u0026gt;USDOE(EM)\u0026lt;/institution_acronym\u0026gt; \u0026lt;institution_place\u0026gt;Washington, DC\u0026lt;/institution_place\u0026gt; \u0026lt;institution_department\u0026gt;Office of Environmental Management\u0026lt;/institution_department\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/institution\u0026gt; \u0026lt;institution\u0026gt; \u0026lt;institution_name\u0026gt;Fluor Daniel Northwest\u0026lt;/institution_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;institution_acronym\u0026gt;FDNW\u0026lt;/institution_acronym\u0026gt; \u0026lt;institution_place\u0026gt;Aliso Viejo, CA\u0026lt;/institution_place\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/institution\u0026gt; \u0026lt;publisher_item\u0026gt; \u0026lt;identifier id_type=\u0026#34;report-number\u0026#34;\u0026gt;abc123\u0026lt;/identifier\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/publisher_item\u0026gt; \u0026lt;contract_number\u0026gt;AC06-96RL13200\u0026lt;/contract_number\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi_data\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi\u0026gt;10.9999/osti-806888\u0026lt;/doi\u0026gt; \u0026lt;resource\u0026gt; http://198.232.211.23/pdwdocs/fsd0001/osti/2001/I0004856.pdf \u0026lt;/resource\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/doi_data\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/report-paper_metadata\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/report-paper\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/body\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/doi_batch\u0026gt; Example of a report with ‘chapters’ Review the sample below or download an XML file.\n\u0026lt;?xml version=\u0026#34;1.0\u0026#34; encoding=\u0026#34;UTF-8\u0026#34;?\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi_batch version=\u0026#34;4.3.7\u0026#34; xmlns=\u0026#34;http://www.crossref.org/schema/4.3.7\u0026#34; xmlns:xsi=\u0026#34;http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance\u0026#34; xsi:schemaLocation=\u0026#34;http://www.crossref.org/schema/4.3.7 http://www.crossref.org/schemas/crossref4.3.7.xsd\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;head\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi_batch_id\u0026gt;123456\u0026lt;/doi_batch_id\u0026gt; \u0026lt;timestamp\u0026gt;20050606110604\u0026lt;/timestamp\u0026gt; \u0026lt;depositor\u0026gt; \u0026lt;depositor_name\u0026gt;Sample Master\u0026lt;/depositor_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;email_address\u0026gt;support@crossref.org\u0026lt;/email_address\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/depositor\u0026gt; \u0026lt;registrant\u0026gt;CrossRef\u0026lt;/registrant\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/head\u0026gt; \u0026lt;body\u0026gt; \u0026lt;report-paper\u0026gt; \u0026lt;report-paper_metadata language = \u0026#34;en\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;contributors\u0026gt; \u0026lt;person_name sequence = \u0026#34;first\u0026#34; contributor_role = \u0026#34;author\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;given_name\u0026gt;D.S.\u0026lt;/given_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;surname\u0026gt;McShane\u0026lt;/surname\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/person_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/contributors\u0026gt; \u0026lt;titles\u0026gt; \u0026lt;title\u0026gt;Title Sludge Handling System Conceptual Design Document\u0026lt;/title\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/titles\u0026gt; \u0026lt;edition_number\u0026gt;0\u0026lt;/edition_number\u0026gt; \u0026lt;publication_date media_type = \u0026#34;online\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;month\u0026gt;03\u0026lt;/month\u0026gt; \u0026lt;day\u0026gt;03\u0026lt;/day\u0026gt; \u0026lt;year\u0026gt;2001\u0026lt;/year\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/publication_date\u0026gt; \u0026lt;publisher\u0026gt; \u0026lt;publisher_name\u0026gt;Office of Scientific and Technical Information\u0026lt;/publisher_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;publisher_place\u0026gt;Washington, DC\u0026lt;/publisher_place\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/publisher\u0026gt; \u0026lt;institution\u0026gt; \u0026lt;institution_name\u0026gt;United States Department of Energy\u0026lt;/institution_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;institution_acronym\u0026gt;USDOE(EM)\u0026lt;/institution_acronym\u0026gt; \u0026lt;institution_place\u0026gt;Washington, DC\u0026lt;/institution_place\u0026gt; \u0026lt;institution_department\u0026gt;Office of Environmental Management\u0026lt;/institution_department\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/institution\u0026gt; \u0026lt;institution\u0026gt; \u0026lt;institution_name\u0026gt;Fluor Daniel Northwest\u0026lt;/institution_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;institution_acronym\u0026gt;FDNW\u0026lt;/institution_acronym\u0026gt; \u0026lt;institution_place\u0026gt;Aliso Viejo, CA\u0026lt;/institution_place\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/institution\u0026gt; \u0026lt;publisher_item\u0026gt; \u0026lt;identifier id_type=\u0026#34;report-number\u0026#34;\u0026gt;abc123\u0026lt;/identifier\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/publisher_item\u0026gt; \u0026lt;contract_number\u0026gt;AC06-96RL13200\u0026lt;/contract_number\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi_data\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi\u0026gt;10.9999/abcd-806888\u0026lt;/doi\u0026gt; \u0026lt;resource\u0026gt;http://www.crossref.org/pdwdocs/fsd0001/osti/2001/I0004856.pdf\u0026lt;/resource\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/doi_data\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/report-paper_metadata\u0026gt; \u0026lt;content_item component_type=\u0026#34;part\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;titles\u0026gt;\u0026lt;title\u0026gt;Introduction\u0026lt;/title\u0026gt;\u0026lt;/titles\u0026gt; \u0026lt;pages\u0026gt;\u0026lt;first_page\u0026gt;3\u0026lt;/first_page\u0026gt;\u0026lt;/pages\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi_data\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi\u0026gt;10.9999/abcd-806888.p1\u0026lt;/doi\u0026gt; \u0026lt;resource\u0026gt;http://www.crossref.org/pdwdocs/fsd0001/osti/2001/p1\u0026lt;/resource\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/doi_data\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/content_item\u0026gt; \u0026lt;content_item component_type=\u0026#34;part\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;titles\u0026gt;\u0026lt;title\u0026gt;A chapter title\u0026lt;/title\u0026gt;\u0026lt;/titles\u0026gt; \u0026lt;pages\u0026gt;\u0026lt;first_page\u0026gt;17\u0026lt;/first_page\u0026gt;\u0026lt;/pages\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi_data\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi\u0026gt;10.9999/abcd-806888.p2\u0026lt;/doi\u0026gt; \u0026lt;resource\u0026gt;http://www.crossref.org/pdwdocs/fsd0001/osti/2001/p2\u0026lt;/resource\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/doi_data\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/content_item\u0026gt; \u0026lt;content_item component_type=\u0026#34;part\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;titles\u0026gt;\u0026lt;title\u0026gt;Appendix\u0026lt;/title\u0026gt;\u0026lt;/titles\u0026gt; \u0026lt;pages\u0026gt;\u0026lt;first_page\u0026gt;32\u0026lt;/first_page\u0026gt;\u0026lt;/pages\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi_data\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi\u0026gt;10.9999/abcd-806888.p3\u0026lt;/doi\u0026gt; \u0026lt;resource\u0026gt;http://www.crossref.org/pdwdocs/fsd0001/osti/2001/p3\u0026lt;/resource\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/doi_data\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/content_item\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/report-paper\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/body\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/doi_batch\u0026gt; Example of a report series Review the sample below or download an XML file.\n\u0026lt;doi_batch xmlns=\u0026#34;http://www.crossref.org/schema/4.3.7\u0026#34; xmlns:xsi=\u0026#34;http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance\u0026#34; version=\u0026#34;4.3.7\u0026#34; xsi:schemaLocation=\u0026#34;http://www.crossref.org/schema/4.3.7 http://www.crossref.org/schemas/crossref4.3.7.xsd\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;head\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi_batch_id\u0026gt;123456\u0026lt;/doi_batch_id\u0026gt; \u0026lt;timestamp\u0026gt;20050606110604\u0026lt;/timestamp\u0026gt; \u0026lt;depositor\u0026gt; \u0026lt;depositor_name\u0026gt;CrossRef\u0026lt;/depositor_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;email_address\u0026gt;support@crossref.org\u0026lt;/email_address\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/depositor\u0026gt; \u0026lt;registrant\u0026gt;CrossRef\u0026lt;/registrant\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/head\u0026gt; \u0026lt;body\u0026gt; \u0026lt;report-paper\u0026gt; \u0026lt;report-paper_series_metadata language=\u0026#34;en\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;series_metadata\u0026gt; \u0026lt;titles\u0026gt; \u0026lt;title\u0026gt;CrossRef Report Series\u0026lt;/title\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/titles\u0026gt; \u0026lt;issn\u0026gt;5555-5555\u0026lt;/issn\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/series_metadata\u0026gt; \u0026lt;contributors\u0026gt; \u0026lt;person_name sequence=\u0026#34;first\u0026#34; contributor_role=\u0026#34;author\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;given_name\u0026gt;Bob\u0026lt;/given_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;surname\u0026gt;Surname\u0026lt;/surname\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/person_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/contributors\u0026gt; \u0026lt;titles\u0026gt; \u0026lt;title\u0026gt;Depositing report series with CrossRef\u0026lt;/title\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/titles\u0026gt; \u0026lt;edition_number\u0026gt;0\u0026lt;/edition_number\u0026gt; \u0026lt;publication_date media_type=\u0026#34;online\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;month\u0026gt;03\u0026lt;/month\u0026gt; \u0026lt;day\u0026gt;03\u0026lt;/day\u0026gt; \u0026lt;year\u0026gt;2009\u0026lt;/year\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/publication_date\u0026gt; \u0026lt;publisher\u0026gt; \u0026lt;publisher_name\u0026gt;Publishers International Linking Association\u0026lt;/publisher_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;publisher_place\u0026gt;Lynnfield, MA\u0026lt;/publisher_place\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/publisher\u0026gt; \u0026lt;institution\u0026gt; \u0026lt;institution_name\u0026gt;CrossRef\u0026lt;/institution_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;institution_acronym\u0026gt;CR\u0026lt;/institution_acronym\u0026gt; \u0026lt;institution_place\u0026gt;Lynnfield, MA\u0026lt;/institution_place\u0026gt; \u0026lt;institution_department\u0026gt;Metadata Quality\u0026lt;/institution_department\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/institution\u0026gt; \u0026lt;publisher_item\u0026gt; \u0026lt;item_number item_number_type=\u0026#34;Report Number\u0026#34;\u0026gt;IMA-RPT\u0026lt;/item_number\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/publisher_item\u0026gt; \u0026lt;contract_number\u0026gt;AC06-96RL13200\u0026lt;/contract_number\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi_data\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi\u0026gt;10.5555/sampledoi\u0026lt;/doi\u0026gt; \u0026lt;resource\u0026gt;http://www.crossref.org/report/\u0026lt;/resource\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/doi_data\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/report-paper_series_metadata\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/report-paper\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/body\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/doi_batch\u0026gt; ",
"headings": ["Example of a single report ","Example of a report with ‘chapters’ ","Example of a report series "]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/schema-library/markup-guide-metadata-segments/relationships/",
"title": "Relationships",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2020-04-08",
"lastmod_ts": 1586304000,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "We maintain an expansive set of relationship types to support the various content items that a research object, like a journal article, might link to. For data and software, we ask you to provide the following information:\nidentifier of the dataset/software identifier type: DOI, Accession, PURL, ARK, URI, Other (additional identifier types are also accepted beyond those used for data or software, including ARXIV, ECLI, Handle, ISSN, ISBN, PMID, PMCID, and UUID) relationship type: isSupplementedBy or references (use the former if it was generated as part of the research results) description of dataset or software We and DataCite both use this kind of linking. Data repositories which register their content with DataCite follow the same process and apply the same metadata tags. This means that we achieve direct data interoperability with links in the reverse direction (data and software repositories to journal articles).\n",
"content": "We maintain an expansive set of relationship types to support the various content items that a research object, like a journal article, might link to. For data and software, we ask you to provide the following information:\nidentifier of the dataset/software identifier type: DOI, Accession, PURL, ARK, URI, Other (additional identifier types are also accepted beyond those used for data or software, including ARXIV, ECLI, Handle, ISSN, ISBN, PMID, PMCID, and UUID) relationship type: isSupplementedBy or references (use the former if it was generated as part of the research results) description of dataset or software We and DataCite both use this kind of linking. Data repositories which register their content with DataCite follow the same process and apply the same metadata tags. This means that we achieve direct data interoperability with links in the reverse direction (data and software repositories to journal articles).\nYou can see illustrations and examples of this schema in our data and software citation guide.\nDeclaring relationship types The possible relationship types between content items can be as varied as the items themselves. We use a controlled vocabulary to define these relationships, in order to construct an orderly mapped network of content.\nThis is achieved by (i) an implicit approach where the relation type is a function of a specific service and is declared in the structure of the deposited XML, and (ii) in an explicit approach where the relation type is selected as a value within the deposited metadata.\nReference linking and Cited-by: implicitly creates cites and isCitedBy relationships between a content item and the items in its bibliography Crossmark: explicit creation of update relations between an item and other items that materially affect it (for example, a retraction) Funding data: implicit creation of isFundedBy and hasAward relationships between an item and the funding source that supported the underlying research Linked clinical trials: implicit creation of a belongsTo relationship between and item and a registered clinical trial Components: implicit creation of a isChildOf relationship between an item and its elemental parts that are assigned their own DOI (limited parent relation typing) General typed relations: explicitly typed relation between an item with a Crossref DOI and an item with one of several possible identifiers. Relationship types for associated research objects: intra-work (within a work) Description Reciprocal relationship types Expression isExpressionOf, hasExpression Format isFormatOf, hasFormat Identical isIdenticalTo Manifestation isManifestationOf, hasManifestation Manuscript isManuscriptOf, hasManuscript Preprint isPreprintOf, hasPreprint Replacement isReplacedBy, Replaces Translation isTranslationOf, hasTranslation Variant isVariantFormOf, isOriginalFormOf Version isVersionOf, hasVersion Relationship types for associated research objects: inter-work (between works) Description Reciprocal relationship types Basis isBasedOn, isBasisFor Comment isCommentOn, hasComment Continuation isContinuedBy, Continues Derivation isDerivedFrom, hasDerivation Documentation isDocumentedBy, Documents Funding finances, isFinancedBy Part isPartOf, hasPart Peer review isReviewOf, hasReview References references, isReferencedBy Related material, such as a protocol isRelatedMaterial, hasRelatedMaterial Reply isReplyTo, hasReply Requirement requires, isRequiredBy Software compilation isCompiledBy, compiles Supplement, such as a dataset generated as part of research results isSupplementTo, isSupplementedBy General typed relations This service allows for the creation of a typed relationship between an item with a Crossref DOI and another content item. The other item may be represented by another Crossref DOI, a DOI from some other Registration Agency, or an item not identified with a DOI. When DOIs are used, the deposit process will fail if the DOI does not exist. Non-DOI identifiers are not verified.\n\u0026lt;xsd:attributeGroup name=\u0026#34;relations_type.atts\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;xsd:attribute name=\u0026#34;identifier-type\u0026#34; use=\u0026#34;required\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;xsd:simpleType\u0026gt; \u0026lt;xsd:restriction base=\u0026#34;xsd:string\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;xsd:enumeration value=\u0026#34;doi\u0026#34;/\u0026gt; \u0026lt;xsd:enumeration value=\u0026#34;issn\u0026#34;/\u0026gt; \u0026lt;xsd:enumeration value=\u0026#34;isbn\u0026#34;/\u0026gt; \u0026lt;xsd:enumeration value=\u0026#34;uri\u0026#34;/\u0026gt; \u0026lt;xsd:enumeration value=\u0026#34;pmid\u0026#34;/\u0026gt; \u0026lt;xsd:enumeration value=\u0026#34;pmcid\u0026#34;/\u0026gt; \u0026lt;xsd:enumeration value=\u0026#34;purl\u0026#34;/\u0026gt; \u0026lt;xsd:enumeration value=\u0026#34;arxiv\u0026#34;/\u0026gt; \u0026lt;xsd:enumeration value=\u0026#34;ark\u0026#34;/\u0026gt; \u0026lt;xsd:enumeration value=\u0026#34;handle\u0026#34;/\u0026gt; \u0026lt;xsd:enumeration value=\u0026#34;uuid\u0026#34;/\u0026gt; \u0026lt;xsd:enumeration value=\u0026#34;ecli\u0026#34;/\u0026gt; \u0026lt;xsd:enumeration value=\u0026#34;accession\u0026#34;/\u0026gt; \u0026lt;xsd:enumeration value=\u0026#34;other\u0026#34;/\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/xsd:restriction\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/xsd:simpleType\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/xsd:attribute\u0026gt; When DOIs are used, a bidirectional relation is automatically created by us when a relation is created in the deposit of one item in a pair. The DOI with metadata creating the relation is said to be the claimant, the other item does not need to have its metadata directly contain the relationship.\nExample: translated article A single journal article is published in two languages with each being assigned its own DOI. In this example, both are published in the same journal. The original language instance has metadata that contains no indication of the translation instance. The alternative language instance includes in its metadata a relation to the original language instance. Here is a screenshot of the relevant section in the code. Please refer to the code snippet below to see it in context.\nShow image × \u0026lt;journal_article publication_type=\u0026#34;full_text\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;titles\u0026gt; \u0026lt;title\u0026gt;Um artigo na língua original, que passa a ser o inglês\u0026lt;/title\u0026gt; \u0026lt;original_language_title language=\u0026#34;en\u0026#34;\u0026gt;An article in its original language which happens to be English\u0026lt;/original_language_title\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/titles\u0026gt; \u0026lt;contributors\u0026gt; \u0026lt;person_name sequence=\u0026#34;first\u0026#34; contributor_role=\u0026#34;author\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;given_name\u0026gt;Daniel\u0026lt;/given_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;surname\u0026gt;Stepputtis\u0026lt;/surname\u0026gt; \u0026lt;ORCID authenticated=\u0026#34;true\u0026#34;\u0026gt;http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4824-1631\u0026lt;/ORCID\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/person_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/contributors\u0026gt; \u0026lt;publication_date media_type=\u0026#34;online\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;month\u0026gt;02\u0026lt;/month\u0026gt; \u0026lt;day\u0026gt;28\u0026lt;/day\u0026gt; \u0026lt;year\u0026gt;2013\u0026lt;/year\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/publication_date\u0026gt; \u0026lt;program xmlns=\u0026#34;http://www.crossref.org/relations.xsd\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;related_item\u0026gt; \u0026lt;description\u0026gt;Portuguese translation of an article\u0026lt;/description\u0026gt; \u0026lt;intra_work_relation relationship-type=\u0026#34;isTranslationOf\u0026#34; identifier-type=\u0026#34;doi\u0026#34;\u0026gt;10.5555/original_language\u0026lt;/intra_work_relation\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/related_item\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/program\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi_data\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi\u0026gt;10.5555/translation\u0026lt;/doi\u0026gt; \u0026lt;resource\u0026gt;https://www.crossref.org/\u0026lt;/resource\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/doi_data\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/journal_article\u0026gt; Example: book review This example has a book review published as an article in the journal The Holocene. The article\u0026rsquo;s title, taken from the publisher\u0026rsquo;s site is \u0026ldquo;Book Review: Understanding the Earth system: compartments, processes and interactions\u0026rdquo; where this book has the DOI https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-56843-5.\nA: The current metadata for the review article gives no indication of the actual book being reviewed: \u0026lt;journal\u0026gt; \u0026lt;journal_metadata language=\u0026#34;en\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;full_title\u0026gt;The Holocene\u0026lt;/full_title\u0026gt; \u0026lt;abbrev_title\u0026gt;The Holocene\u0026lt;/abbrev_title\u0026gt; \u0026lt;issn media_type=\u0026#34;print\u0026#34;\u0026gt;0959-6836\u0026lt;/issn\u0026gt; \u0026lt;issn media_type=\u0026#34;electronic\u0026#34;\u0026gt;1477-0911\u0026lt;/issn\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/journal_metadata\u0026gt; \u0026lt;journal_issue\u0026gt; \u0026lt;publication_date media_type=\u0026#34;online\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;month\u0026gt;07\u0026lt;/month\u0026gt; \u0026lt;day\u0026gt;27\u0026lt;/day\u0026gt; \u0026lt;year\u0026gt;2016\u0026lt;/year\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/publication_date\u0026gt; \u0026lt;publication_date media_type=\u0026#34;print\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;month\u0026gt;05\u0026lt;/month\u0026gt; \u0026lt;year\u0026gt;2002\u0026lt;/year\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/publication_date\u0026gt; \u0026lt;journal_volume\u0026gt; \u0026lt;volume\u0026gt;12\u0026lt;/volume\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/journal_volume\u0026gt; \u0026lt;issue\u0026gt;4\u0026lt;/issue\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/journal_issue\u0026gt; \u0026lt;journal_article publication_type=\u0026#34;full_text\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;titles\u0026gt; \u0026lt;title\u0026gt;Book Review: Understanding the Earth system: compartments, processes and interactions\u0026lt;/title\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/titles\u0026gt; \u0026lt;contributors\u0026gt; \u0026lt;person_name sequence=\u0026#34;first\u0026#34; contributor_role=\u0026#34;author\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;given_name\u0026gt;Ian\u0026lt;/given_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;surname\u0026gt;Fairchild\u0026lt;/surname\u0026gt; \u0026lt;affiliation\u0026gt;Keele University\u0026lt;/affiliation\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/person_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/contributors\u0026gt; \u0026lt;publication_date media_type=\u0026#34;online\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;month\u0026gt;07\u0026lt;/month\u0026gt; \u0026lt;day\u0026gt;27\u0026lt;/day\u0026gt; \u0026lt;year\u0026gt;2016\u0026lt;/year\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/publication_date\u0026gt; \u0026lt;publication_date media_type=\u0026#34;print\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;month\u0026gt;05\u0026lt;/month\u0026gt; \u0026lt;year\u0026gt;2002\u0026lt;/year\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/publication_date\u0026gt; \u0026lt;pages\u0026gt; \u0026lt;first_page\u0026gt;505\u0026lt;/first_page\u0026gt; \u0026lt;last_page\u0026gt;505\u0026lt;/last_page\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/pages\u0026gt; \u0026lt;publisher_item\u0026gt; \u0026lt;identifier id_type=\u0026#34;doi\u0026#34;\u0026gt;10.1191/0959683602hl565xx\u0026lt;/identifier\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/publisher_item\u0026gt; \u0026lt;ai:program xmlns:ai=\u0026#34;http://www.crossref.org/AccessIndicators.xsd\u0026#34; name=\u0026#34;AccessIndicators\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;ai:license_ref applies_to=\u0026#34;tdm\u0026#34;\u0026gt;http://journals.sagepub.com/page/policies/text-and-data-mining-license\u0026lt;/ai:license_ref\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/ai:program\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi_data\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi\u0026gt;10.1191/0959683602hl565xx\u0026lt;/doi\u0026gt; B: Modifications to the review\u0026rsquo;s metadata show how it would include a relationship to the book Here is a screenshot of the relevant section in the code. Please refer to the code snippet below to see it in context.\nShow image × \u0026lt;journal\u0026gt; \u0026lt;journal_metadata language=\u0026#34;en\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;full_title\u0026gt;The Holocene\u0026lt;/full_title\u0026gt; \u0026lt;abbrev_title\u0026gt;The Holocene\u0026lt;/abbrev_title\u0026gt; \u0026lt;issn media_type=\u0026#34;print\u0026#34;\u0026gt;0959-6836\u0026lt;/issn\u0026gt; \u0026lt;issn media_type=\u0026#34;electronic\u0026#34;\u0026gt;1477-0911\u0026lt;/issn\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/journal_metadata\u0026gt; \u0026lt;journal_issue\u0026gt; \u0026lt;publication_date media_type=\u0026#34;online\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;month\u0026gt;07\u0026lt;/month\u0026gt; \u0026lt;day\u0026gt;27\u0026lt;/day\u0026gt; \u0026lt;year\u0026gt;2016\u0026lt;/year\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/publication_date\u0026gt; \u0026lt;publication_date media_type=\u0026#34;print\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;month\u0026gt;05\u0026lt;/month\u0026gt; \u0026lt;year\u0026gt;2002\u0026lt;/year\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/publication_date\u0026gt; \u0026lt;journal_volume\u0026gt; \u0026lt;volume\u0026gt;12\u0026lt;/volume\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/journal_volume\u0026gt; \u0026lt;issue\u0026gt;4\u0026lt;/issue\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/journal_issue\u0026gt; \u0026lt;journal_article publication_type=\u0026#34;full_text\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;titles\u0026gt; \u0026lt;title\u0026gt;Book Review: Understanding the Earth system: compartments, processes and interactions\u0026lt;/title\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/titles\u0026gt; \u0026lt;contributors\u0026gt; \u0026lt;person_name sequence=\u0026#34;first\u0026#34; contributor_role=\u0026#34;author\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;given_name\u0026gt;Ian\u0026lt;/given_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;surname\u0026gt;Fairchild\u0026lt;/surname\u0026gt; \u0026lt;affiliation\u0026gt;Keele University\u0026lt;/affiliation\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/person_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/contributors\u0026gt; \u0026lt;publication_date media_type=\u0026#34;online\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;month\u0026gt;07\u0026lt;/month\u0026gt; \u0026lt;day\u0026gt;27\u0026lt;/day\u0026gt; \u0026lt;year\u0026gt;2016\u0026lt;/year\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/publication_date\u0026gt; \u0026lt;publication_date media_type=\u0026#34;print\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;month\u0026gt;05\u0026lt;/month\u0026gt; \u0026lt;year\u0026gt;2002\u0026lt;/year\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/publication_date\u0026gt; \u0026lt;pages\u0026gt; \u0026lt;first_page\u0026gt;505\u0026lt;/first_page\u0026gt; \u0026lt;last_page\u0026gt;505\u0026lt;/last_page\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/pages\u0026gt; \u0026lt;publisher_item\u0026gt; \u0026lt;identifier id_type=\u0026#34;doi\u0026#34;\u0026gt;10.1191/0959683602hl565xx\u0026lt;/identifier\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/publisher_item\u0026gt; \u0026lt;program xmlns=\u0026#34;http://www.crossref.org/relations.xsd\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;related_item\u0026gt; \u0026lt;inter_work_relation relationship-type=\u0026#34;isReviewOf\u0026#34; identifier-type=\u0026#34;doi\u0026#34;\u0026gt; 10.1007/978-3-642-56843-5 \u0026lt;/inter_work_relation\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/related_item\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/program\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi_data\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi\u0026gt;10.1191/0959683602hl565xx\u0026lt;/doi\u0026gt; C: Meanwhile, the book\u0026rsquo;s deposited metadata shows no indication of the relation to the review article: \u0026lt;book book_type=\u0026#34;other\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;book_metadata language=\u0026#34;en\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;contributors\u0026gt; \u0026lt;person_name contributor_role=\u0026#34;editor\u0026#34; sequence=\u0026#34;first\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;given_name\u0026gt;Eckart\u0026lt;/given_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;surname\u0026gt;Ehlers\u0026lt;/surname\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/person_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;person_name contributor_role=\u0026#34;editor\u0026#34; sequence=\u0026#34;additional\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;given_name\u0026gt;Thomas\u0026lt;/given_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;surname\u0026gt;Krafft\u0026lt;/surname\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/person_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/contributors\u0026gt; \u0026lt;titles\u0026gt; \u0026lt;title\u0026gt;Understanding the Earth System\u0026lt;/title\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/titles\u0026gt; \u0026lt;publication_date media_type=\u0026#34;print\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;year\u0026gt;2001\u0026lt;/year\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/publication_date\u0026gt; \u0026lt;isbn media_type=\u0026#34;print\u0026#34;\u0026gt;978-3-540-67515-0\u0026lt;/isbn\u0026gt; \u0026lt;isbn media_type=\u0026#34;electronic\u0026#34;\u0026gt;978-3-642-56843-5\u0026lt;/isbn\u0026gt; \u0026lt;publisher\u0026gt; \u0026lt;publisher_name\u0026gt;Springer Berlin Heidelberg\u0026lt;/publisher_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;publisher_place\u0026gt;Berlin, Heidelberg\u0026lt;/publisher_place\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/publisher\u0026gt; \u0026lt;ai:program xmlns:ai=\u0026#34;http://www.crossref.org/AccessIndicators.xsd\u0026#34; name=\u0026#34;AccessIndicators\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;ai:license_ref applies_to=\u0026#34;tdm\u0026#34;\u0026gt;http://www.springer.com/tdm\u0026lt;/ai:license_ref\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/ai:program\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi_data\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi\u0026gt;10.1007/978-3-642-56843-5\u0026lt;/doi\u0026gt; D: Book DOI\u0026rsquo;s metadata showing the relationship Here is a screenshot of the relevant section in the code. Please refer to the code snippet below to see it in context.\nShow image × \u0026lt;query status=\u0026#34;resolved\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi type=\u0026#34;journal_article\u0026#34;\u0026gt;10.7554/eLife.42135\u0026lt;/doi\u0026gt; \u0026lt;crm-item name=\u0026#34;publisher-name\u0026#34; type=\u0026#34;string\u0026#34;\u0026gt;eLife Sciences Publications, Ltd\u0026lt;/crm-item\u0026gt; \u0026lt;crm-item name=\u0026#34;prefix-name\u0026#34; type=\u0026#34;string\u0026#34;\u0026gt;eLife Sciences Publications, Ltd.\u0026lt;/crm-item\u0026gt; \u0026lt;crm-item name=\u0026#34;member-id\u0026#34; type=\u0026#34;number\u0026#34;\u0026gt;4374\u0026lt;/crm-item\u0026gt; \u0026lt;crm-item name=\u0026#34;citation-id\u0026#34; type=\u0026#34;number\u0026#34;\u0026gt;104997326\u0026lt;/crm-item\u0026gt; \u0026lt;crm-item name=\u0026#34;journal-id\u0026#34; type=\u0026#34;number\u0026#34;\u0026gt;189365\u0026lt;/crm-item\u0026gt; \u0026lt;crm-item name=\u0026#34;deposit-timestamp\u0026#34; type=\u0026#34;number\u0026#34;\u0026gt;20190402090010\u0026lt;/crm-item\u0026gt; \u0026lt;crm-item name=\u0026#34;owner-prefix\u0026#34; type=\u0026#34;string\u0026#34;\u0026gt;10.7554\u0026lt;/crm-item\u0026gt; \u0026lt;crm-item name=\u0026#34;last-update\u0026#34; type=\u0026#34;date\u0026#34;\u0026gt;2019-04-02T09:00:31Z\u0026lt;/crm-item\u0026gt; \u0026lt;crm-item name=\u0026#34;created\u0026#34; type=\u0026#34;date\u0026#34;\u0026gt;2019-02-25T13:00:23Z\u0026lt;/crm-item\u0026gt; \u0026lt;crm-item name=\u0026#34;citedby-count\u0026#34; type=\u0026#34;number\u0026#34;\u0026gt;3\u0026lt;/crm-item\u0026gt; \u0026lt;crm-item name=\u0026#34;relation\u0026#34; type=\u0026#34;doi\u0026#34; claim=\u0026#34;isPreprintOf\u0026#34;\u0026gt;10.1101/425587\u0026lt;/crm-item\u0026gt; \u0026lt;crm-item name=\u0026#34;relation\u0026#34; type=\u0026#34;doi\u0026#34; claim=\u0026#34;isReviewOf\u0026#34;\u0026gt;10.3410/f.735157928.793558703\u0026lt;/crm-item\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi_record\u0026gt; \u0026lt;crossref xmlns=\u0026#34;http://www.crossref.org/xschema/1.1\u0026#34; xsi:schemaLocation=\u0026#34;http://www.crossref.org/xschema/1.1 http://doi.crossref.org/schemas/unixref1.1.xsd\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;journal\u0026gt; \u0026lt;journal_metadata language=\u0026#34;en\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;full_title\u0026gt;eLife\u0026lt;/full_title\u0026gt; Example: linked dataset An article with a Crossref DOI identifies that data represented by a DataCite DOI was used in the research and was mentioned in the article\u0026rsquo;s acknowledgment section.\nThe article\u0026rsquo;s Crossref deposited XML:\n\u0026lt;doi_record\u0026gt; \u0026lt;crossref xmlns=\u0026#34;http://www.crossref.org/xschema/1.1\u0026#34; xsi:schemaLocation=\u0026#34;http://www.crossref.org/xschema/1.1 http://doi.crossref.org/schemas/unixref1.1.xsd\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;journal\u0026gt; \u0026lt;journal_metadata language=\u0026#34;en\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;full_title\u0026gt;Journal of Psychoceramics\u0026lt;/full_title\u0026gt; \u0026lt;abbrev_title\u0026gt;Journal of Psychoceramics\u0026lt;/abbrev_title\u0026gt; \u0026lt;issn media_type=\u0026#34;electronic\u0026#34;\u0026gt;0264-3561\u0026lt;/issn\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/journal_metadata\u0026gt; \u0026lt;journal_issue\u0026gt; \u0026lt;publication_date media_type=\u0026#34;online\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;month\u0026gt;05\u0026lt;/month\u0026gt; \u0026lt;day\u0026gt;06\u0026lt;/day\u0026gt; \u0026lt;year\u0026gt;2012\u0026lt;/year\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/publication_date\u0026gt; \u0026lt;publication_date media_type=\u0026#34;print\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;month\u0026gt;05\u0026lt;/month\u0026gt; \u0026lt;day\u0026gt;06\u0026lt;/day\u0026gt; \u0026lt;year\u0026gt;2012\u0026lt;/year\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/publication_date\u0026gt; \u0026lt;journal_volume\u0026gt; \u0026lt;volume\u0026gt;5\u0026lt;/volume\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/journal_volume\u0026gt; \u0026lt;issue\u0026gt;11\u0026lt;/issue\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/journal_issue\u0026gt; \u0026lt;journal_article publication_type=\u0026#34;full_text\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;titles\u0026gt; \u0026lt;title\u0026gt; Dog: A Methodology for the Development of Simulated Annealing \u0026lt;/title\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/titles\u0026gt; \u0026lt;contributors\u0026gt; \u0026lt;person_name sequence=\u0026#34;first\u0026#34; contributor_role=\u0026#34;author\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;given_name\u0026gt;Josiah\u0026lt;/given_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;surname\u0026gt;Carberry\u0026lt;/surname\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/person_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/contributors\u0026gt; \u0026lt;publication_date media_type=\u0026#34;online\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;month\u0026gt;05\u0026lt;/month\u0026gt; \u0026lt;day\u0026gt;06\u0026lt;/day\u0026gt; \u0026lt;year\u0026gt;2012\u0026lt;/year\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/publication_date\u0026gt; \u0026lt;publication_date media_type=\u0026#34;print\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;month\u0026gt;05\u0026lt;/month\u0026gt; \u0026lt;day\u0026gt;06\u0026lt;/day\u0026gt; \u0026lt;year\u0026gt;2012\u0026lt;/year\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/publication_date\u0026gt; \u0026lt;pages\u0026gt; \u0026lt;first_page\u0026gt;1\u0026lt;/first_page\u0026gt; \u0026lt;last_page\u0026gt;3\u0026lt;/last_page\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/pages\u0026gt; \u0026lt;crossmark\u0026gt; \u0026lt;crossmark_policy\u0026gt;10.5555/crossmark_policy\u0026lt;/crossmark_policy\u0026gt; \u0026lt;crossmark_domains\u0026gt; \u0026lt;crossmark_domain\u0026gt; \u0026lt;domain\u0026gt;psychoceramics.labs.crossref.org\u0026lt;/domain\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/crossmark_domain\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/crossmark_domains\u0026gt; \u0026lt;crossmark_domain_exclusive\u0026gt;false\u0026lt;/crossmark_domain_exclusive\u0026gt; \u0026lt;updates\u0026gt; \u0026lt;update type=\u0026#34;correction\u0026#34; date=\u0026#34;2012-05-12\u0026#34;\u0026gt;10.5555/12345681\u0026lt;/update\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/updates\u0026gt; \u0026lt;custom_metadata/\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/crossmark\u0026gt; \u0026lt;program xmlns=\u0026#34;http://www.crossref.org/relations.xsd\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;related_item\u0026gt; \u0026lt;description\u0026gt;Acknowledgement mention of dataset use.\u0026lt;/description\u0026gt; \u0026lt;inter_work_relation relationship-type=\u0026#34;isBasedOn\u0026#34; identifier-type=\u0026#34;doi\u0026#34;\u0026gt;10.5284/1000389\u0026lt;/inter_work_relation\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/related_item\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/program\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi_data\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi\u0026gt;10.5555/12345681\u0026lt;/doi\u0026gt; \u0026lt;timestamp\u0026gt;201601211508\u0026lt;/timestamp\u0026gt; \u0026lt;resource\u0026gt; http://psychoceramics.labs.crossref.org/10.5555-12345681.html \u0026lt;/resource\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/doi_data\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/journal_article\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/journal\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/crossref\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/doi_record\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/query\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/body\u0026gt; You can also see the article\u0026rsquo;s deposited metadata in JSON.\n",
"headings": ["Declaring relationship types ","Relationship types for associated research objects: intra-work (within a work) ","Relationship types for associated research objects: inter-work (between works) ","General typed relations ","Example: translated article ","Example: book review ","A: The current metadata for the review article gives no indication of the actual book being reviewed:","B: Modifications to the review\u0026rsquo;s metadata show how it would include a relationship to the book","C: Meanwhile, the book\u0026rsquo;s deposited metadata shows no indication of the relation to the review article:","D: Book DOI\u0026rsquo;s metadata showing the relationship","Example: linked dataset "]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/schema-library/markup-guide-record-types/standards/",
"title": "Standards markup guide",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2022-05-31",
"lastmod_ts": 1653955200,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "This page gives markup examples for members registering standards by direct deposit of XML. It is not currently possible to register the standards record type using one of our helper tools.\n\u0026lt;standard\u0026gt; is the top-level element for deposit of metadata about standards developed by Standards Development Organizations (SDOs) or consortia. Standards are assigned a DOI at the title level and may also have DOIs assigned to lower level content-items. Standards deposits contain several pieces of standard-specific metadata, including standard designators and standards body information. Standards may only be deposited with schema version 4.3.6 and above.\n",
"content": "This page gives markup examples for members registering standards by direct deposit of XML. It is not currently possible to register the standards record type using one of our helper tools.\n\u0026lt;standard\u0026gt; is the top-level element for deposit of metadata about standards developed by Standards Development Organizations (SDOs) or consortia. Standards are assigned a DOI at the title level and may also have DOIs assigned to lower level content-items. Standards deposits contain several pieces of standard-specific metadata, including standard designators and standards body information. Standards may only be deposited with schema version 4.3.6 and above.\nDesignator types All standards have a designator that is used as a primary identifier. crossref4.3.6.xsd allows for a number of designator types to be applied to a DOI. A primary designator must be included in each metadata deposit. One of the following designator types must be supplied:\nAs-published: captured in \u0026lt;std_designator\u0026gt; (child of \u0026lt;std_as_published\u0026gt;), designator for the standard being deposited. This is an item-level designator. Typically includes the year of initial publication plus additional information such as amendment number and/or revision/reaffirmation year, for example: ASTM D6/D6M-95(2011)e1 is a designator for an ASTM standard. Any undated, family, and set designators related to the designator supplied in \u0026lt;std_designator\u0026gt; may be recorded in the corresponding attributes, for example: \u0026lt;std_designator undated=\u0026#34;ASTM D6/D6M-95\u0026#34;\u0026gt; ASTM D6/D6M-95(2011)\u0026lt;/std_designator\u0026gt; Optional: an alternative as-published designator may be recorded in \u0026lt;std_alt_as_published\u0026gt;.This is intended to accommodate minor changes to a standard that do not merit assigning a new DOI. A variant form designator (see below) may also be supplied to accommodate differing forms of a designator Undated: captured in \u0026lt;std_undated_designator\u0026gt;. An undated designator removes the year component that specifies a particular revision. Undated designators refer to a single document series. For example: ASTM C90, IEC 60601-2-11, ISO/IEC 19757-2 Family: captured in \u0026lt;std_family_designator\u0026gt;, a collection of standards which are conceptually grouped together where that grouping is not necessarily reflected in the designator in an obvious way.For example, the ISO 9000 family includes ISO 9001, ISO 9004, ISO 19011 Set: captured in \u0026lt;std_set_designator\u0026gt;. A set, also referred to as truncated form, is composed of several parts (standards that are divided into separate documents). For example, ISO 19757 is a standard in 11 parts, with the individual documents known as ISO 19757-2 where the \u0026ldquo;-\u0026rdquo; denotes a part. Optional designators Some optional designators may be supplied in deposits in addition to a required dated, undated, family, or set designator. They are supplied to accommodate query matching but are not considered title-level designators. These are:\nVariant form: Alternative versions of a designator may be supplied in \u0026lt;std_variant_form\u0026gt;. Variant form captures stylized forms that don’t accurately reflect the true standard designator but are needed due to business practices (for example, IEEE formal designators have \u0026ldquo;std\u0026rdquo; while the display of them does not). Variant forms may be applied to \u0026lt;std_alt_as_published\u0026gt;, \u0026lt;std_as_published\u0026gt;, \u0026lt;std_set_designator\u0026gt; and \u0026lt;std_undated_designator\u0026gt; Alternative script: captured in \u0026lt;std_alt_script\u0026gt;, accommodates designators that are published using multiple character sets Supersedes: captured in \u0026lt;std_supersedes\u0026gt;. Designator for standard being replaced by the standard being deposited. Adopted from: captured in \u0026lt;std_adopted_from\u0026gt;. Designator for standard from which the current deposit is adopted. Revision of: captured in \u0026lt;std_revision_of\u0026gt;. Designator for the previous revision of the standard being deposited. Standards body information The \u0026lt;standards_body\u0026gt; wrapper element has two children:\n\u0026lt;standards_body_name\u0026gt;: the full name of the standards body \u0026lt;standards_body_acronym\u0026gt;: acronym of the standards body Both child elements are required and should reflect the standards body name and acronym used when the standard was published. Changes in standards body names and acronyms over time will be accounted for within Crossref’s query mechanism.\nHistory Crossref began accepting metadata deposits for standards in 2005. The schema was modified significantly for standards with the inception of the Standards Technical Working Group. Significant changes to the deposit and indexing of designators were made with schema version 4.3.6, as a result standards may only be deposited schema versions 4.3.6 and above.\nExample of a standard deposit Review the sample below or download an XML file.\n\u0026lt;doi_batch xmlns=\u0026#34;http://www.crossref.org/schema/4.3.7\u0026#34; xmlns:xsi=\u0026#34;http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance\u0026#34; version=\u0026#34;4.3.7\u0026#34; xsi:schemaLocation=\u0026#34;http://www.crossref.org/schema/4.3.7 http://www.crossref.org/schemas/crossref4.3.7.xsd\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;head\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi_batch_id\u0026gt;123456\u0026lt;/doi_batch_id\u0026gt; \u0026lt;timestamp\u0026gt;20050606110604\u0026lt;/timestamp\u0026gt; \u0026lt;depositor\u0026gt; \u0026lt;depositor_name\u0026gt;CrossRef\u0026lt;/depositor_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;email_address\u0026gt;pfeeney@crossref.org\u0026lt;/email_address\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/depositor\u0026gt; \u0026lt;registrant\u0026gt;CrossRef\u0026lt;/registrant\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/head\u0026gt; \u0026lt;body\u0026gt; \u0026lt;standard\u0026gt; \u0026lt;standard_metadata language=\u0026#34;en\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;contributors\u0026gt; \u0026lt;organization sequence=\u0026#34;first\u0026#34; contributor_role=\u0026#34;author\u0026#34;\u0026gt;CrossRef Standards TWG\u0026lt;/organization\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/contributors\u0026gt; \u0026lt;titles\u0026gt; \u0026lt;title\u0026gt;Fun with standards\u0026lt;/title\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/titles\u0026gt; \u0026lt;designators\u0026gt; \u0026lt;std_as_published\u0026gt; \u0026lt;std_designator\u0026gt;CR 1234\u0026lt;/std_designator\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/std_as_published\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/designators\u0026gt; \u0026lt;approval_date\u0026gt; \u0026lt;month\u0026gt;04\u0026lt;/month\u0026gt; \u0026lt;day\u0026gt;17\u0026lt;/day\u0026gt; \u0026lt;year\u0026gt;1995\u0026lt;/year\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/approval_date\u0026gt; \u0026lt;publisher\u0026gt; \u0026lt;publisher_name\u0026gt;CrossRef\u0026lt;/publisher_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;publisher_place\u0026gt;Bethesda, MD\u0026lt;/publisher_place\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/publisher\u0026gt; \u0026lt;standards_body\u0026gt; \u0026lt;standards_body_name\u0026gt;CrossRef\u0026lt;/standards_body_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;standards_body_acronym\u0026gt;CRABC\u0026lt;/standards_body_acronym\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/standards_body\u0026gt; \u0026lt;publisher_item\u0026gt; \u0026lt;item_number item_number_type=\u0026#34;designation\u0026#34;\u0026gt;12083\u0026lt;/item_number\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/publisher_item\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi_data\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi\u0026gt;10.5555/standard1\u0026lt;/doi\u0026gt; \u0026lt;resource\u0026gt;http://www.crossref.org/abc\u0026lt;/resource\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/doi_data\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/standard_metadata\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/standard\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/body\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/doi_batch\u0026gt; ",
"headings": ["Designator types ","Optional designators ","Standards body information ","History ","Example of a standard deposit "]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/schema-library/markup-guide-metadata-segments/titles/",
"title": "Titles",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2020-04-08",
"lastmod_ts": 1586304000,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "This information relates to the title of a work, such as a journal article, book or book chapter, or conference paper. For advice on registering the title of a series, such as a journal, book series, or conference proceedings, learn more about journal title management.\nThe title of your work is used for citation matching, so follow these best practices to make sure your metadata can be used correctly by reference management tools:\n",
"content": "This information relates to the title of a work, such as a journal article, book or book chapter, or conference paper. For advice on registering the title of a series, such as a journal, book series, or conference proceedings, learn more about journal title management.\nThe title of your work is used for citation matching, so follow these best practices to make sure your metadata can be used correctly by reference management tools:\nReview how the title is treated or changed throughout the various stages of your production workflow Title must be in title or sentence case (not ALL CAPS) Title field must not include other metadata such as author, price, volume numbers Use separate title elements for different language titles - do not cram multiple titles in multiple languages into one element Subtitles should be recorded in a separate subtitle element Use UTF-8 encoding May include face markup, LaTeX, or MathML where appropriate If you need to update or correct a title, learn more about updating title records.\n",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/register-maintain-records/verify-your-registration/",
"title": "Verify your registration",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2025-12-10",
"lastmod_ts": 1765324800,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "The quickest way to test whether your DOI and its associated metadata have been registered successfully (and your DOI is now active) is to enter your DOI link (DOI displayed as a link, such as https://doi.org/10.13003/5jchdy) into a browser window, and check if it resolves correctly. DOI 10.13003/5jchdy has been registered so it is resolving to that DOI\u0026rsquo;s landing page (or, resolution URL). DOIs that have not been registered will resolve to a DOI NOT FOUND error message on doi.org, such as https://doi.org/10.13003/unregisteredDOI.\n",
"content": "The quickest way to test whether your DOI and its associated metadata have been registered successfully (and your DOI is now active) is to enter your DOI link (DOI displayed as a link, such as https://doi.org/10.13003/5jchdy) into a browser window, and check if it resolves correctly. DOI 10.13003/5jchdy has been registered so it is resolving to that DOI\u0026rsquo;s landing page (or, resolution URL). DOIs that have not been registered will resolve to a DOI NOT FOUND error message on doi.org, such as https://doi.org/10.13003/unregisteredDOI.\nIf your DOI doesn\u0026rsquo;t resolve successfully, read on for more information about the process your submission goes through, why there might be a delay, and which messages you’ll receive depending on your submission method.\nVerify your registration - web deposit form Verify your registration - new Metadata Manager Verify your registration - direct deposit of XML using our admin tool Verify your registration - XML deposit using HTTPS POST Verify your registration - Crossref XML plugin for OJS Verify your registration - web deposit form If you register your content using the web deposit form, your submission is sent to a submission queue. You’ll see a “success” message in the web deposit form confirming that your submission has been successfully sent to our submission queue, but this doesn’t mean that your registration is complete.\nShow image × As your submission is processed in the queue, we send you two messages:\nXML record email, subject line: Crossref WebDeposit - XML. This email includes the XML created by the web deposit form. Do keep this information, as it may be useful in the future. Receiving this email is a confirmation that your file has been received for processing, and entered into our submission queue. submission log email, subject line: Crossref Submission ID. This email is sent once your XML has made it through the queue, includes your submission ID, tells you if your deposit has been successful, and provides the reason for any failure. If your submission log email tells you that your submission was successful, your DOI is now live and active (or your update to metadata for an existing DOI has worked).\nIf your submission failed, please address the errors flagged in the confirmation, and resubmit. Learn more about error messages.\nIf you don’t receive your submission log email immediately, it’s probably because your submission is still in the queue. It can stay in the queue between several minutes and several hours depending on how large your submission file is, and how busy our submission queue is at that time. Learn more about how to view the submission queue.\nIf you don’t receive your submission log email and you can’t see your submission in the queue, it may be that your access to register content has been suspended due to unpaid invoices. If this is the case, please contact us.\nVerify your registration - new Metadata Manager The new Metadata Manager tool (previously known as the record registration form) registers your record in real time, with no queueing or delay. If your submission has been successful, you’ll see a “success” message, which means your DOI is now live and active or your update to an existing record has worked.\nYour “success” message will also contain a submission ID. If you need to, you can log into our admin tool using your account credentials and use this submission to view your deposit.\nIf your submission hasn’t been successful, you’ll see an error message explaining the problem.\nVerify your registration - direct deposit of XML using our admin tool Submissions using our admin tool are sent to a submission queue. Once your submission has been accepted into the queue we display a SUCCESS - Your batch submission was successfully received message. This means that your deposit has been submitted to our processing queue, but it has not yet been processed.\nShow image × Registration of your content only occurs after your submission has worked its way through the queue, when you will receive an email with the subject line Crossref Submission ID, which includes your submission ID, tells you if your deposit has been successful, and provides the reason for any failure.\nIf your deposit has been successful, then your new DOI is live and active (or your update to metadata for an existing DOI has worked).\nIf your submission failed, please address the errors flagged in the email, and resubmit. Not sure what the error messages mean and what you need to do? Learn more about error messages.\nIf you don’t receive your submission log email immediately, it’s probably because your submission is still in the queue. It can stay in the queue between several minutes and several hours depending on how large your submission file is, and how busy our submission queue is at that time. Learn more about how to view the submission queue.\nIf you don’t receive your submission log email and you can’t see your submission in the queue, it may be that your access to register content has been suspended due to unpaid invoices. If this is the case, please contact us.\nVerify your registration - XML deposit using HTTPS POST Most items registered with us are submitted via HTTPS POST. When files are POSTed to our system, you’ll receive a 200 status message to confirm that we’ve received it. Your files are then added to a submission queue to await processing, and once your submission has been processed, you’ll receive a submission log (either by email or through the notification callback service if you have that enabled).\nIf your submission log shows a success, then your DOI is live and active (or your update to metadata for an existing DOI has worked).\nIf your submission log shows a failure, please address the errors flagged in the email, and resubmit. Not sure what the error messages mean and what you need to do? Learn more about error messages.\nThere may be a delay between your submission being received by the queue and completing processing. It can stay in the queue between several minutes and several hours depending on how large your submission file is, and how busy our submission queue is at that time. Learn more about how to view the submission queue.\nVerify your registration - Crossref XML plugin for OJS If you are using the Crossref XML plugin for OJS to create an XML file that you upload through our admin tool, please follow Verify your registration - direct deposit of XML using our admin tool.\nIf you are using the Crossref XML plugin for OJS to send your submission to us directly, check the status of your deposit by clicking the Articles tab at the top of the plugin settings page.\n",
"headings": ["Verify your registration - web deposit form ","Verify your registration - new Metadata Manager ","Verify your registration - direct deposit of XML using our admin tool ","Verify your registration - XML deposit using HTTPS POST ","Verify your registration - Crossref XML plugin for OJS "]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/register-maintain-records/verify-your-registration/submission-queue-and-log/",
"title": "Submission queue and log",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2025-12-10",
"lastmod_ts": 1765324800,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "If you register content with us using the web deposit form, XML upload via our admin tool, or XML deposit using HTTPS POST, your submission will be placed in our submission queue.\nWhen your deposit has been processed, we’ll email you a submission log containing the final status of your submission. You should review these submission logs to make sure your content was registered or updated successfully.\nIf you register content with us by sending the files to us directly using the Crossref XML plugin for OJS, or if you’re using the new Metadata Manager, your submission is processed immediately (it isn’t placed in our submission queue). We don’t send you a submission log to show the final status of your submission; instead, you’ll see a message within the interface of the tool you are using. But a submission log is still generated, and you can log in to our admin tool using your account credentials to view the submission log for your deposit.\n",
"content": "If you register content with us using the web deposit form, XML upload via our admin tool, or XML deposit using HTTPS POST, your submission will be placed in our submission queue.\nWhen your deposit has been processed, we’ll email you a submission log containing the final status of your submission. You should review these submission logs to make sure your content was registered or updated successfully.\nIf you register content with us by sending the files to us directly using the Crossref XML plugin for OJS, or if you’re using the new Metadata Manager, your submission is processed immediately (it isn’t placed in our submission queue). We don’t send you a submission log to show the final status of your submission; instead, you’ll see a message within the interface of the tool you are using. But a submission log is still generated, and you can log in to our admin tool using your account credentials to view the submission log for your deposit.\nThe submission queue If you’ve registered some content with us using the web deposit form, XML upload via our admin tool, or XML deposit using HTTPS POST, and you don’t receive your submission log email immediately, it is likely that your deposit is waiting in the submission queue.\nTo see the submission queue, log in to the admin tool using your account credentials, and click Show My Submission Queue on the opening page (or click Submissions, then Show System Queue).\nAt the top of the page, you will see all 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.\nThe submissions that are still waiting to be processed are displayed at the bottom of the page. They are grouped by the role used to submit the files. 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.\nShow image × 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 there is a problem with the submission queue, we usually post an update - please check our status page for updates. If you\u0026rsquo;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.\nSubmission logs Submission logs are delivered through these channels:\nEmail The admin tool - you can view submission logs for past deposits or see the deposit history for a DOI using the admin tool. Polling - see using HTTPS to retrieve logs Notification callback service Submission log emails We email you an XML-formatted log for records that are submitted through the web deposit form or Simple Text Query, uploaded via our admin tool, or sent to us through HTTPS POST.\nThe log is sent to the email address you provided when using the web deposit form or Simple Text Query, or included in the \u0026lt;email_address\u0026gt; field in your deposit XML.\nThe email will have the subject line: Crossref Submission ID and it’s sent once your submission has made it through the queue. It includes your submission ID, tells you if your deposit has been successful, and provides the reason for any failure.\nView submission logs for past deposits If you didn\u0026rsquo;t receive a submission log email, you can use the admin tool to search for submission logs for past deposits:\nLog in to the admin tool using your account credentials Click the Submissions tab, then the Administration sub-tab Click Search at the bottom of the screen, and you\u0026rsquo;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:\nSelect 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\u0026rsquo;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 resources will limit results to resource-only deposits, including references, Similarity Check full-text URLs, funding metadata, and license metadata Conflict Management 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.\nTo view a DOI history report:\nLog in to the admin tool using your account credentials 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:\nShow image × 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 using HTTPS. You need to include your account credentials in the URL.\nIf you are using organisation-wide shared role credentials, please use this version of the query, and swop \u0026ldquo;role\u0026rdquo; for your role, and \u0026ldquo;password\u0026rdquo; for your password.\nhttps://doi.crossref.org/servlet/submissionDownload?usr=_role_\u0026amp;pwd=_password_\u0026amp;doi_batch_id=_doi batch id_\u0026amp;file_name=filename\u0026amp;type=_submission type_ If you are using personal, unique user credentials, please use this version of the query, and swop \u0026ldquo;name@someplace.com\u0026rdquo; for your email address, \u0026ldquo;role\u0026rdquo; for your role, and \u0026ldquo;password\u0026rdquo; for your personal password.\nhttps://doi.crossref.org/servlet/submissionDownload?usr=name@someplace.com/role\u0026amp;pwd=_password_\u0026amp;doi_batch_id=_doi batch id_\u0026amp;file_name=filename\u0026amp;type=_submission type_ In both versions of the query, you can choose to track a submission by either its doi_batch_id or by its file_name. We recommend choosing file_name.\nThe 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.\nTo use this feature effectively, make sure each tracking ID (doi_batch_id or file_name) is unique as only the first match is returned.\nFinally, you need to add in the type of data you want back. Use result to retrieve submission results (deposit log) or use contents to retrieve the XML file.\n",
"headings": ["The submission queue ","Submission logs ","Submission log emails ","View submission logs for past deposits ","View the history of a DOI ","Use HTTPS to retrieve logs "]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/register-maintain-records/verify-your-registration/interpret-submission-logs/",
"title": "Interpret submission logs",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2022-07-22",
"lastmod_ts": 1658448000,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "Submission logs contain 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.\nYour 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.\nExamples of a log:\n",
"content": "Submission logs contain 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.\nYour 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.\nExamples of a log:\nfor a successful deposit with deposit errors with XML validation error with warnings containing references Example of a log for a successful deposit Note that the \u0026lt;failure_count\u0026gt; = 0 and that the \u0026lt;record_count\u0026gt; = \u0026lt;success_count\u0026gt;.\n\u0026lt;?xml version=\u0026#34;1.0\u0026#34; encoding=\u0026#34;UTF-8\u0026#34;?\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi_batch_diagnostic\u0026gt; \u0026lt;submission_id\u0026gt;9349810\u0026lt;/submission_id\u0026gt; \u0026lt;batch_id\u0026gt;FINAL_001\u0026lt;/batch_id\u0026gt; \u0026lt;record_diagnostic status=\u0026#34;Success\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi\u0026gt;10.5555/second_conflict_003\u0026lt;/doi\u0026gt; \u0026lt;msg\u0026gt;Successfully added\u0026lt;/msg\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/record_diagnostic\u0026gt; \u0026lt;batch_data\u0026gt; \u0026lt;record_count\u0026gt;1\u0026lt;/record_count\u0026gt; \u0026lt;success_count\u0026gt;1\u0026lt;/success_count\u0026gt; \u0026lt;warning_count\u0026gt;0\u0026lt;/warning_count\u0026gt; \u0026lt;failure_count\u0026gt;0\u0026lt;/failure_count\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/batch_data\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/doi_batch_diagnostic\u0026gt; Example of a log with deposit errors This is an example of a deposit containing errors. In the example, note that the \u0026lt;success_count\u0026gt; and \u0026lt;record_count\u0026gt; do not match. A status of \u0026ldquo;Failure\u0026rdquo; indicates the record was rejected and the DOI was not registered or updated. The \u0026lt;record_diagnostic\u0026gt; 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.\n\u0026lt;?xml version=\u0026#34;1.0\u0026#34; encoding=\u0026#34;UTF-8\u0026#34;?\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi_batch_diagnostic status=\u0026#34;completed\u0026#34; sp=\u0026#34;cr5.crossref.org\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;submission_id\u0026gt;394260418\u0026lt;/submission_id\u0026gt; \u0026lt;batch_id\u0026gt;314668373.xml\u0026lt;/batch_id\u0026gt; \u0026lt;record_diagnostic status=\u0026#34;Failure\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi\u0026gt;10.5555/11111\u0026lt;/doi\u0026gt; \u0026lt;msg\u0026gt;Record not processed because submitted version: 20070904093839 is less or equal to\tpreviously submitted version (DOI match)\u0026lt;/msg\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/record_diagnostic\u0026gt; \u0026lt;record_diagnostic status=\u0026#34;Failure\u0026#34; msg_id=\u0026#34;4\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi\u0026gt;10.5555/44444\u0026lt;/doi\u0026gt; \u0026lt;msg\u0026gt;Record not processed because submitted version: 20070904093839 is less or equal to\tpreviously submitted version (DOI match)\u0026lt;/msg\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/record_diagnostic\u0026gt; \u0026lt;record_diagnostic status=\u0026#34;Success\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi\u0026gt;10.5555/55555\u0026lt;/doi\u0026gt; \u0026lt;msg\u0026gt;Successfully added\u0026lt;/msg\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/record_diagnostic\u0026gt; \u0026lt;batch_data\u0026gt; \u0026lt;record_count\u0026gt;3\u0026lt;/record_count\u0026gt; \u0026lt;success_count\u0026gt;1\u0026lt;/success_count\u0026gt; \u0026lt;warning_count\u0026gt;0\u0026lt;/warning_count\u0026gt; \u0026lt;failure_count\u0026gt;2\u0026lt;/failure_count\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/batch_data\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/doi_batch_diagnostic\u0026gt; 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 \u0026lt;record_count\u0026gt; and \u0026lt;failure_count\u0026gt; both equal 1. This will be true no matter how many DOIs were actually included in the submission. Learn more about error and warning messages.\n\u0026lt;?xml version=\u0026#34;1.0\u0026#34; encoding=\u0026#34;UTF-8\u0026#34;?\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi_batch_diagnostic status=\u0026#34;completed\u0026#34; sp=\u0026#34;ds3.crossref.org\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;submission_id\u0026gt;394260418\u0026lt;/submission_id\u0026gt; \u0026lt;batch_id\u0026gt;314668373.xml\u0026lt;/batch_id\u0026gt; \u0026lt;record_diagnostic status=\u0026#34;Failure\u0026#34; msg_id=\u0026#34;29\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi /\u0026gt; \u0026lt;msg\u0026gt;Deposited XML is not well-formed or does not validate: Error on line 1: Content is not allowed in prolog.\u0026lt;/msg\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/record_diagnostic\u0026gt; \u0026lt;batch_data\u0026gt; \u0026lt;record_count\u0026gt;1\u0026lt;/record_count\u0026gt; \u0026lt;success_count\u0026gt;0\u0026lt;/success_count\u0026gt; \u0026lt;warning_count\u0026gt;0\u0026lt;/warning_count\u0026gt; \u0026lt;failure_count\u0026gt;1\u0026lt;/failure_count\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/batch_data\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/doi_batch_diagnostic\u0026gt; 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.\n\u0026lt;?xml version=\u0026#34;1.0\u0026#34; encoding=\u0026#34;UTF-8\u0026#34;?\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi_batch_diagnostic status=\u0026#34;completed\u0026#34; sp=\u0026#34;ds4.crossref.org\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;submission_id\u0026gt;394260418\u0026lt;/submission_id\u0026gt; \u0026lt;batch_id\u0026gt;314668373.xml\u0026lt;/batch_id\u0026gt; \u0026lt;record_diagnostic status=\u0026#34;Success\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi\u0026gt;10.5555/11112\u0026lt;/doi\u0026gt; \u0026lt;msg\u0026gt;Successfully added\u0026lt;/msg\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/record_diagnostic\u0026gt; \u0026lt;record_diagnostic status=\u0026#34;Warning\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi\u0026gt;10.5555/11113\u0026lt;/doi\u0026gt; \u0026lt;msg\u0026gt;Added with conflict\u0026lt;/msg\u0026gt; \u0026lt;conflict_id\u0026gt;5166446\u0026lt;/conflict_id\u0026gt; \u0026lt;dois_in_conflict\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi\u0026gt;10.5555/22223\u0026lt;/doi\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/dois_in_conflict\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/record_diagnostic\u0026gt; \u0026lt;record_diagnostic status=\u0026#34;Success\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi\u0026gt;10.5555/11114\u0026lt;/doi\u0026gt; \u0026lt;msg\u0026gt;Successfully added\u0026lt;/msg\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/record_diagnostic\u0026gt; \u0026lt;record_diagnostic status=\u0026#34;Warning\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi\u0026gt;10.5555/11115\u0026lt;/doi\u0026gt; \u0026lt;msg\u0026gt;Added with conflict\u0026lt;/msg\u0026gt; \u0026lt;conflict_id\u0026gt;5166447\u0026lt;/conflict_id\u0026gt; \u0026lt;dois_in_conflict\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi\u0026gt;10.5555/22225\u0026lt;/doi\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/dois_in_conflict\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/record_diagnostic\u0026gt; \u0026lt;batch_data\u0026gt; \u0026lt;record_count\u0026gt;4\u0026lt;/record_count\u0026gt; \u0026lt;success_count\u0026gt;2\u0026lt;/success_count\u0026gt; \u0026lt;warning_count\u0026gt;2\u0026lt;/warning_count\u0026gt; \u0026lt;failure_count\u0026gt;0\u0026lt;/failure_count\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/batch_data\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/doi_batch_diagnostic\u0026gt; Example of a log containing references 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.\n\u0026lt;?xml version=\u0026#34;1.0\u0026#34; encoding=\u0026#34;UTF-8\u0026#34;?\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi_batch_diagnostic status=\u0026#34;completed\u0026#34; sp=\u0026#34;ds5.crossref.org\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;submission_id\u0026gt;03480197\u0026lt;/submission_id\u0026gt; \u0026lt;batch_id\u0026gt;XYZ00000000\u0026lt;/batch_id\u0026gt; \u0026lt;record_diagnostic status=\u0026#34;Success\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi\u0026gt;10.5555/example\u0026lt;/doi\u0026gt; \u0026lt;msg\u0026gt;Successfully updated\u0026lt;/msg\u0026gt; \u0026lt;citations_diagnostic\u0026gt; \u0026lt;citation key=\u0026#34;10.5555/example_bb0030\u0026#34; status=\u0026#34;error\u0026#34;\u0026gt;Either ISSN or Journal title or Proceedings title must be supplied.\u0026lt;/citation\u0026gt; \u0026lt;citation key=\u0026#34;10.5555/example_bb0005\u0026#34; status=\u0026#34;stored_query\u0026#34;\u0026gt;\u0026lt;/citation\u0026gt; \u0026lt;citation key=\u0026#34;10.5555/example_bb0010\u0026#34; status=\u0026#34;stored_query\u0026#34;\u0026gt;\u0026lt;/citation\u0026gt; \u0026lt;citation key=\u0026#34;10.5555/example_bb0015\u0026#34; status=\u0026#34;resolved_reference\u0026#34;\u0026gt;10.1590/S0006-87051960000100077\u0026lt;/citation\u0026gt; \u0026lt;citation key=\u0026#34;10.5555/example_bb0045\u0026#34; status=\u0026#34;stored_query\u0026#34;\u0026gt;\u0026lt;/citation\u0026gt; \u0026lt;citation key=\u0026#34;10.5555/example_bb0050\u0026#34; status=\u0026#34;resolved_reference\u0026#34;\u0026gt;10.1007/BF01916741\u0026lt;/citation\u0026gt; \u0026lt;citation key=\u0026#34;10.5555/example_bb0075\u0026#34; status=\u0026#34;stored_query\u0026#34;\u0026gt;\u0026lt;/citation\u0026gt; \u0026lt;citation key=\u0026#34;10.5555/example_bb0080\u0026#34; status=\u0026#34;resolved_reference\u0026#34;\u0026gt;10.1093/jxb/4.3.403\u0026lt;/citation\u0026gt; \u0026lt;citation key=\u0026#34;10.5555/example_bb0085\u0026#34; status=\u0026#34;stored_query\u0026#34;\u0026gt;\u0026lt;/citation\u0026gt; \u0026lt;citation key=\u0026#34;10.5555/example_bb0090\u0026#34; status=\u0026#34;stored_query\u0026#34;\u0026gt;\u0026lt;/citation\u0026gt; \u0026lt;citation key=\u0026#34;10.5555/example_bb0095\u0026#34; status=\u0026#34;stored_query\u0026#34;\u0026gt;\u0026lt;/citation\u0026gt; \u0026lt;citation key=\u0026#34;10.5555/example_bb0100\u0026#34; status=\u0026#34;stored_query\u0026#34;\u0026gt;\u0026lt;/citation\u0026gt; \u0026lt;citation key=\u0026#34;10.5555/example_bb0105\u0026#34; status=\u0026#34;resolved_reference\u0026#34;\u0026gt;10.1038/181424b0\u0026lt;/citation\u0026gt; \u0026lt;citation key=\u0026#34;10.5555/example_bb0110\u0026#34; status=\u0026#34;resolved_reference\u0026#34;\u0026gt;10.1038/1831600a0\u0026lt;/citation\u0026gt; \u0026lt;citation key=\u0026#34;10.5555/example_bb0115\u0026#34; status=\u0026#34;resolved_reference\u0026#34;\u0026gt;10.1007/BF01912405\u0026lt;/citation\u0026gt; \u0026lt;citation key=\u0026#34;10.5555/example_bb0120\u0026#34; status=\u0026#34;resolved_reference\u0026#34;\u0026gt;10.1038/185699a0\u0026lt;/citation\u0026gt; \u0026lt;citation key=\u0026#34;10.5555/example_bb0125\u0026#34; status=\u0026#34;stored_query\u0026#34;\u0026gt;\u0026lt;/citation\u0026gt; \u0026lt;citation key=\u0026#34;10.5555/example_bb0150\u0026#34; status=\u0026#34;stored_query\u0026#34;\u0026gt;\u0026lt;/citation\u0026gt; \u0026lt;citation key=\u0026#34;10.5555/example_bb0155\u0026#34; status=\u0026#34;stored_query\u0026#34;\u0026gt;\u0026lt;/citation\u0026gt; \u0026lt;citation key=\u0026#34;10.5555/example_bb0160\u0026#34; status=\u0026#34;resolved_reference\u0026#34;\u0026gt;10.1038/1781359a0\u0026lt;/citation\u0026gt; \u0026lt;citation key=\u0026#34;10.5555/example_bb0165\u0026#34; status=\u0026#34;resolved_reference\u0026#34;\u0026gt;10.1093/jxb/13.1.75\u0026lt;/citation\u0026gt; \u0026lt;citation key=\u0026#34;10.5555/example_bb0170\u0026#34; status=\u0026#34;stored_query\u0026#34;\u0026gt;\u0026lt;/citation\u0026gt; \u0026lt;citation key=\u0026#34;10.5555/example_bb0175\u0026#34; status=\u0026#34;resolved_reference\u0026#34;\u0026gt;10.2134/agronj1960.00021962005200080014x\u0026lt;/citation\u0026gt; \u0026lt;citation key=\u0026#34;10.5555/example_bb0180\u0026#34; status=\u0026#34;resolved_reference\u0026#34;\u0026gt;10.2134/agronj1960.00021962005200080015x\u0026lt;/citation\u0026gt; \u0026lt;citation key=\u0026#34;10.5555/example_bb0185\u0026#34; status=\u0026#34;stored_query\u0026#34;\u0026gt;\u0026lt;/citation\u0026gt; \u0026lt;citation key=\u0026#34;10.5555/example_bb0190\u0026#34; status=\u0026#34;stored_query\u0026#34;\u0026gt;\u0026lt;/citation\u0026gt; \u0026lt;citation key=\u0026#34;10.5555/example_bb0195\u0026#34; status=\u0026#34;resolved_reference\u0026#34;\u0026gt;10.1007/BF00622243\u0026lt;/citation\u0026gt; \u0026lt;citation key=\u0026#34;10.5555/example_bb0200\u0026#34; status=\u0026#34;resolved_reference\u0026#34;\u0026gt;10.4141/cjps58-055\u0026lt;/citation\u0026gt; \u0026lt;citation key=\u0026#34;10.5555/example_bb0205\u0026#34; status=\u0026#34;stored_query\u0026#34;\u0026gt;\u0026lt;/citation\u0026gt; \u0026lt;citation key=\u0026#34;10.5555/example_bb0210\u0026#34; status=\u0026#34;stored_query\u0026#34;\u0026gt;\u0026lt;/citation\u0026gt; \u0026lt;citation key=\u0026#34;10.5555/example_bb0215\u0026#34; status=\u0026#34;resolved_reference\u0026#34;\u0026gt;10.1038/178601a0\u0026lt;/citation\u0026gt; \u0026lt;citation key=\u0026#34;10.5555/example_bb0220\u0026#34; status=\u0026#34;stored_query\u0026#34;\u0026gt;\u0026lt;/citation\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/citations_diagnostic\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/record_diagnostic\u0026gt; \u0026lt;batch_data\u0026gt; \u0026lt;record_count\u0026gt;1\u0026lt;/record_count\u0026gt; \u0026lt;success_count\u0026gt;1\u0026lt;/success_count\u0026gt; \u0026lt;warning_count\u0026gt;0\u0026lt;/warning_count\u0026gt; \u0026lt;failure_count\u0026gt;0\u0026lt;/failure_count\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/batch_data\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/doi_batch_diagnostic\u0026gt; ",
"headings": ["Example of a log for a successful deposit ","Example of a log with deposit errors ","Example of a log with XML validation error ","Example of a log with warnings ","Example of a log containing references "]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/register-maintain-records/verify-your-registration/troubleshooting-submissions/",
"title": "Troubleshooting submissions",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2025-12-10",
"lastmod_ts": 1765324800,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "If you register your content with us using the web deposit form, XML file upload using our admin tool, or XML deposit using HTTPS POST, you’ll receive a submission log email from us. This email lets you know if your submission was successful, and if not, will provide error messages to explain more.\nIf you register your content with us using the third party Crossref XML plugin for OJS, or if you’re using the new Metadata Manager tool, you won’t automatically receive a submission log, and instead the success or error message will show in your interface. However, you can still log in to the admin tool using your Crossref account credentials to retrieve submission logs if you wish.\n",
"content": "If you register your content with us using the web deposit form, XML file upload using our admin tool, or XML deposit using HTTPS POST, you’ll receive a submission log email from us. This email lets you know if your submission was successful, and if not, will provide error messages to explain more.\nIf you register your content with us using the third party Crossref XML plugin for OJS, or if you’re using the new Metadata Manager tool, you won’t automatically receive a submission log, and instead the success or error message will show in your interface. However, you can still log in to the admin tool using your Crossref account credentials to retrieve submission logs if you wish.\nHere are some examples of submission logs - read on to find out more about a specific error message and how to fix the problem.\nDOIs that return a Warning status in your submission logs have been deposited, but may need extra attention. A Failure status means that either a particular DOI has not been deposited, or the entire deposit file was unable to be processed due to some error.\nWarnings Errors in title records Errors in titles Errors in title-level DOIs Errors in title ownership General title record discrepancy error Invalid ISSN or ISBN error Errors in DOI suffixes Errors in the XML Errors in timestamps Other types of errors Warnings Warning Meaning Solution Added with conflict The DOI was deposited; however, there was already another DOI in our system with identical metadata. This often occurs when an article is published ahead of print and deposited with no page numbers Review DOIs with warnings and resolve all conflicts Errors in title records In order to prevent duplicate records, and to ensure that DOIs are being assigned by the appropriate member, our deposit system includes certain checks on titles, ISSNs, and ISBNs.\nWhen you submit the very first deposit for a work associated with a title, a title record is created in our system. This record includes the title, ISSNs or ISBNs, (optional) title-level DOI, record type, and the details of the associated member.\nIn all subsequent deposits, the title, ISSNs or ISBNs, and (if included) title-level DOI must match this existing record exactly.\nThere are several errors that you may see in your submission logs that may indicate that there isn’t a match.\nErrors in titles ISSN \u0026quot;[ISSN]\u0026quot; has already been assigned, issn ([ISSN]) is assigned to another title ([title])\nProblem: The title in your submission is slightly different from the existing title record we hold.\nYou may think that the title you are depositing is the same as the title record we hold, but there are some common reasons why it may not be, such as:\nPunctuation, easily-confused characters, and punctuation marks that look similar: An em-dash looks like this —, its UTF-8 (hex) representation is e2 80 94 and in Unicode it’s U+2014. An en-dash looks like this –, its UTF-8 (hex) representation is e2 80 93 and in Unicode it’s U+2013. The default dash-like character on some keyboards is a hyphen, but on others is an en-dash, so they can easily be confused. A hyphen looks like this ‐, its UTF-8 (hex) representation is e2 80 90, and in Unicode it’s U+2010. Use of Cyrillic Х (Cyrillic Ha) instead of Latin X. While the Cyrillic Х (U+0425 in Unicode) looks almost exactly like the Latin X (U+0058 in Unicode), they are not the same letter. Language: if your journal is in more than one language, you need to choose one version of the title as the master entry. Typos, such as The Journal of Thigns, in the spelling of your journal title Variant spellings of your journal title, such as The Journal of Things and Journal of Things Solution 1: Change the title in your current submission to match the previously registered title and resubmit.\nSolution 2: Change the title in the existing title record - you’ll need to contact us for help with this.\nErrors in title-level DOIs Deposit contains title error: The journal has a different DOI assigned; If you want to change the journal's DOI please contact Crossref support: title=Journal of Metadata; current-doi=10.14393/JoM; deposited-doi=10.14393/JoM.1.1\nProblem: The journal level DOI that you have in your submission is slightly different from the journal level DOI in our title record.\nSolution 1: Change the journal level DOI in your submission to match the previously registered journal level DOI and resubmit.\nSolution 2 : Change the journal level DOI in the existing title record - you’ll need to contact us for help with this.\nErrors in title ownership ISSN \u0026quot;{ISSN}\u0026quot; has already been assigned to a different publisher {publisher name}({publisher prefix})\nISBN \u0026quot;{ISBN}\u0026quot; has already been assigned to a different publisher {publisher name}({publisher prefix})\nISSN \u0026quot;[ISSN]\u0026quot; has already been assigned, title/issn: [journal title]/[issn] is owned by publisher: [prefix]\nProblem: These errors indicate that the title you are depositing is owned by another member or prefix in our system.\nSolution: If you are the correct member for the title being deposited, please follow the procedures indicated in establishing and transferring ownership to have the title record transferred to your member/prefix.\nGeneral title record discrepancy error ISSN \u0026quot;{ISSN}\u0026quot; has already been assigned to a different title/publisher/record type\nProblem: This error indicates the ISSN(s), title, or publisher in your deposit do not match the data we have on record for that ISSN.\nSolution: To verify the data in the title record with a given ISSN, please search for that ISSN on the Crossref title list. Resubmit with the correct information. If you need to change your title, get in touch with us. If there are any discrepancies between the title, ISSN(s), publisher, or record type that need to be updated, please contact Support and include the submission ID for your deposit.\nInvalid ISSN or ISBN error ISSN \u0026quot;{ISSN}\u0026quot; is invalid\nISBN \u0026quot;{ISBN}\u0026quot; is invalid\nProblem: This error indicates that the ISSN or ISBN in your deposit is incorrect. All valid ISSNs and ISBNs use a check digit which is algorithmically validated by our deposit system.\nSolution: If your deposit fails with this error, please verify the ISSN or ISBN, and resubmit the deposit with the correct number.\nErrors in DOI suffixes If you see \u0026lt;msg\u0026gt;DOI: 10.5555/2411?3417 , contains invalid characters\u0026lt;/msg\u0026gt; in your submission log, your deposit has failed because within your DOI suffix 2411?3417, there is a non-approved character, indicated by the ?. You can learn more about approved characters for DOI suffixes, but here are the two most common problems:\nProblem 1: Using an em-dash or en-dash instead of a hyphen. An em-dash looks like this —, its UTF-8 (hex) representation is e2 80 94 and in Unicode it’s U+2014. An en-dash looks like this –, its UTF-8 (hex) representation is e2 80 93 and in Unicode it’s U+2013. The default dash-like character on some keyboards is a hyphen, but on others is an en-dash, so they can easily be confused.\nSolution 1: reconfigure your DOI so it doesn\u0026rsquo;t include an em- or en-dash, or replace the em- or en-dash with a hyphen. A hyphen looks like this ‐, its UTF-8 (hex) representation is e2 80 90, and in Unicode it’s U+2010.\nProblem 2: Use of Cyrillic Х (Cyrillic Ha) instead of Latin X. While the Cyrillic Х (U+0425 in Unicode) looks almost exactly like the Latin X (U+0058 in Unicode), they are not the same letter.\nSolution 2: change the Х to the Latin X or another approved character, and then resubmit your deposit.\nErrors in the XML Deposited XML is not well-formed or does not validate: Error on line 538\nProblem: This error means that the XML is poorly formatted against our schema, or as an XML file in general. For example, it may contain self-closing tags, or invalid values.\nSolution: Check your XML file for mistakes. Be sure to edit it in an XML editor and not a word processing program. Check you have saved the file correctly (as an .xml file), and deposit it again. If it still fails, contact Support for help. We also have a collection of XML examples you may use as a template.\nErrors in timestamps Record not processed because submitted version: 201907242206 is less or equal to previously submitted version 201907242206\nProblem: The timestamp in this deposit file is numerically smaller than the timestamp in a previous deposit for this same DOI.\nSolution: Every deposit has a \u0026lt;timestamp\u0026gt; value, and that value needs to be incremented each time the DOI is updated. This is done automatically for you in the Crossref XML plugin for OJS as well as our helper tools. But if you’re updating an existing DOI by sending us the whole XML file again, you need to make sure that you update the timestamp as well as the field you’re trying to update.\nTo fix this, simply increment the timestamp value to be larger than the current timestamp value, and resubmit your XML file. Timestamps can be found by reviewing past deposits, in the depositor report, or by retrieving the DOI\u0026rsquo;s metadata record.\nOther types of errors When processing a metadata deposit, we do a number of checks to prevent the introduction of bad data to our system.\nError Meaning Solution User with ID: {0} can\u0026rsquo;t submit into handle, please contact the Crossref admin The handle system username and password assigned to this prefix is incorrect in the Crossref system This is usually a clerical error. Please contact Support and include the submission ID in your email User not allowed to add records for prefix: {0} The role that was used to submit this deposit does not have permissions to deposit DOIs beginning with this prefix Confirm that you are using the correct prefix and Crossref credentials. If you’re still having trouble, please contact Support and include the submission ID in your email All prefixes in a submission must match (DOI[{0}]) All DOIs included in a single deposit submission must have the same prefix, regardless of ownership Revise submission, and split the single file into multiple deposits, each with a single prefix. Then resubmit the new deposit files title \u0026ldquo;{title}\u0026rdquo; was previously deleted by a Crossref admin The title record being deposited or updated was deleted from our system, usually at the publisher\u0026rsquo;s request Review your title and compare to previous deposits for that type of content. If you’re still having trouble, please contact Support and include the submission ID in your email user not allowed to add or update records for the title \u0026ldquo;{title}\u0026rdquo; The Crossref account that was used to submit this deposit does not have permissions to deposit for this title Review title to confirm that you are using the appropriate account and prefix. If you’re still having trouble, please contact Support and include the submission ID in your email [error] :286:24:Invalid content starting with element {element name}\u0026rsquo;. The content must match \u0026lsquo;((https://data.crossref.org/reports/help/schema_doc/doi_resources4.4.2/index.html: item_number) {0-3}, (https://data.crossref.org/reports/help/schema_doc/doi_resources4.4.2/index.html: identifier) {0-10}) This is an example of a parsing error being reported in the log file. Since this output comes directly from the Xerces parser the actual message will vary depending on the error Review file at line / column indicated (in this example: line 286 column 24), edit, and resubmit. If you’re still having trouble, please contact Support and include the submission ID in your email org.jdom.input.JDOMParseException: Error on line 312 of document file:///export/home/resin/journals/crossref/inprocess/395032106: The content of elements must consist of well-formed character data or markup Unacceptable markup in file Review the file as indicated, correct, and resubmit [fatal error] :1:1: Content is not allowed in prolog Characters precede the XML declaration. This is almost always a Byte Order Mark (BOM) which most often occurs when word processing programs are used to edit XML files Open file in a text or XML editor and remove characters (usually ). If the encoding is shown as UTF-8 With BOM, change this to UTF-8 or UTF-8 Without BOM. Then resubmit the deposit. java.io.UTFDataFormatException: invalid byte 1 of 1-byte \u0026gt; UTF-8 sequence (0x92) There is a badly encoded character. Locate and correct the bad character encoding Learn more about using special characters in your XML java.sql.SQLException: ORA-00001: unique constraint (ATYPON.NDX1_CIT_RELS) violated Two files containing the same DOIs have been submitted simultaneously. The system attempts to process both deposits, but only one deposit will be successful. The unsuccessful deposit will generate this error Review DOI metadata to be sure it was updated correctly java.lang.NullPointerException Most often this means a citation-only deposit or multiple resolution resource-only deposit has been uploaded as a metadata deposit (or vice-versa) Resubmit deposit as DOI Resources or doDOICitUpload. If this does not apply to your deposit, please contact Support and include the submission ID in your email Submission version NULL is invalid Schema declaration is incorrect Resubmit with correct schema declaration Invalid namespace/version Wrong operation type, or submitted file is not XML Submit with correct operation type cvc-pattern-valid: Value \u0026lsquo;https://orcid.org/0000-0001-XXX-XXX' is not facet-valid with respect to pattern \u0026lsquo;https?://orcid.org/[0-9]{4}-[0-9]{4}-[0-9]{4}-[0-9]{3}[X0-9]{1}\u0026rsquo; for type \u0026lsquo;orcid_t\u0026rsquo; The ORCID ID you have included doesn\u0026rsquo;t match the expected pattern. The most common reason for this is a trailing space Remove the space (or update the ORCID ID to the correct format) and re-submit cvc-enumeration-valid: Value \u0026lsquo;VoR\u0026rsquo; is not facet-valid with respect to enumeration \u0026lsquo;[vor, am, tdm]\u0026rsquo;. It must be a value from the enumeration. Some elements have a pre-defined list of values in our schema, and the submission must match these values exactly - they are even case sensitive. Here, the submission included the attribute of \u0026lsquo;version of record\u0026rsquo; as VoR, but the schema defines that value as vor. Correct to vor and resubmit. ",
"headings": ["Warnings ","Errors in title records ","Errors in titles ","Errors in title-level DOIs ","Errors in title ownership ","General title record discrepancy error ","Invalid ISSN or ISBN error ","Errors in DOI suffixes ","Errors in the XML ","Errors in timestamps ","Other types of errors "]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/register-maintain-records/verify-your-registration/notification-callback-service/",
"title": "Notification callback service",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2025-09-16",
"lastmod_ts": 1757980800,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "Notification callback is a service you can use to notify you when a submission log, either in the test or production admin tool, is available for a metadata, batch query, or Cited-by query submission. Notification is provided in the form of a HTTP(S) URL where the log can be retrieved. If the notification callback service is enabled, you will no longer receive submission log emails.\nOn this page, learn more about:\nHow the notification callback service works Setting up an endpoint Example of a notification Querying for past callbacks A note on trusting Let\u0026rsquo;s Encrypt Glossary of notification callback service terms Can the service be enabled just for our main, administrative sponsor account, and will this setting then apply to all our sponsored members? Is there a current range of IP addresses from which these callbacks will originate? What is your retry policy? What is the estimated timeframe for activating the service? How the notification callback service works The callback will be an HTTP(S) request to a URL (notify-url) provided by the member with all data relayed via HTTPS headers. The notification specifies the availability of the result, some context of the request, and an HTTP(S) URL from which to get the result. ​The submission log may then be retrieved using the HTTP(S) URL.\n",
"content": "Notification callback is a service you can use to notify you when a submission log, either in the test or production admin tool, is available for a metadata, batch query, or Cited-by query submission. Notification is provided in the form of a HTTP(S) URL where the log can be retrieved. If the notification callback service is enabled, you will no longer receive submission log emails.\nOn this page, learn more about:\nHow the notification callback service works Setting up an endpoint Example of a notification Querying for past callbacks A note on trusting Let\u0026rsquo;s Encrypt Glossary of notification callback service terms Can the service be enabled just for our main, administrative sponsor account, and will this setting then apply to all our sponsored members? Is there a current range of IP addresses from which these callbacks will originate? What is your retry policy? What is the estimated timeframe for activating the service? How the notification callback service works The callback will be an HTTP(S) request to a URL (notify-url) provided by the member with all data relayed via HTTPS headers. The notification specifies the availability of the result, some context of the request, and an HTTP(S) URL from which to get the result. ​The submission log may then be retrieved using the HTTP(S) URL.\nThe headers use the simple name and value structure; that is, the value has no additional structure that divides it into parts. To ensure that all Unicode values can be accommodated all header values will be UTF-8 encoded.\nWhen the notify-url is used the following HTTPS headers are provided:\nCROSSREF-NOTIFY-ENDPOINT: the notify-endpoint (required) is just the name used to identify the specific notification (more on this below) CROSSREF-EXTERNAL-ID: the id given by the member with regards to the request. For metadata deposits, for example, it is the value of the doi_batch_id element (Optional) CROSSREF-INTERNAL-ID: the id given by us with regards to the request (Optional) CROSSREF-RETRIEVE-URL: the URL for the member to use to retrieve the request\u0026rsquo;s result. Since the HTTPS header value is UTF-8 encoded, the URL will contain no URI encodings. For example, an Á will not be encoded as %C3%81 CROSSREF-SERVICE-DATE: the date and time stamp of the service request. Learn more about format specification in RFC 2616. CROSSREF-RETRIEVE-URL-EXPIRATION-DATE: the timestamp after which service result is no longer available at the given retrieve-url. Setting up an endpoint You\u0026rsquo;ll need to set up and register an endpoint to receive callbacks.\nCreate an endpoint using cURL: curl -s -D - \u0026#34;https://doi.crossref.org/notification-callback/exec/setNotifyEndpoint\\ ?usr=ROLE\\ \u0026amp;pwd=PASSWORD\\ \u0026amp;endpoint=com.foo.1\\ \u0026amp;url=http://foo.com/crossref/callback Test your endpoint: curl -s -D - \u0026#34;https://doi.crossref.org/notification-callback/exec/createNotificationCallback\\ ?usr=USERNAME\\ \u0026amp;pwd=PASSWORD\\ \u0026amp;notifyEndpoint=com.foo.1\\ \u0026amp;notifyPayloadContentType=text/plain\\ \u0026amp;notifyPayloadContent=this+is+test+1\\ \u0026amp;externalTrackingId=test-1\u0026#34; After a few minutes your end-point will receive a callback with your test payload message.\nThis is an example of the test payload message that will be delivered to your end-point: https://doi.crossref.org/retrieve/f41557cf-f2f2-4f33-9d4c-3848fcc42187.\n{ \u0026#34;id\u0026#34; : 918323, \u0026#34;status\u0026#34; : \u0026#34;N\u0026#34;, \u0026#34;completed\u0026#34; : null, \u0026#34;serviced\u0026#34; : \u0026#34;2022-05-03 15:13:54.0\u0026#34;, \u0026#34;notifyEndpoint\u0026#34; : \u0026#34;org.jonmstark.submission\u0026#34;, \u0026#34;notifyPayloadId\u0026#34; : \u0026#34;f41557cf-f2f2-4f33-9d4c-3848fcc42187\u0026#34;, \u0026#34;notifyPayloadExpiration\u0026#34; : \u0026#34;2022-05-10 15:13:54.0\u0026#34;, \u0026#34;internalTrackingId\u0026#34; : \u0026#34;jms-test-1\u0026#34;, \u0026#34;externalTrackingId\u0026#34; : \u0026#34;jms-test-1\u0026#34;, \u0026#34;recordCreated\u0026#34; : \u0026#34;2022-05-03 15:13:54.0\u0026#34;, \u0026#34;recordUpdated\u0026#34; : null } Contact us to activate the service - we’ll need: your endpoint info (notify-endpoint and notify-url) \u0026ndash; the notify-endpoint is just a name to identify the specific notification. The notify-endpoint should be something you can recognize so when you receive responses that include the endpoint name, it is easy to know which of the callback feeds it is coming from. Thenotify-url has to be the actual URL of your callback receiver, as that is where the notification callback transmits to via http/https the services you’re activating the service for (metadata submissions, batch querying, Cited-by alerts) the username and/or DOI prefix you’ll be using if configuring the notification callback service for Cited-by alerts, you\u0026rsquo;ll need to provide us with the email address that was used to set your fl_query alerts Make sure you inform us of any changes to your endpoint: if a message fails to send we will retry for up to a week after which you will no longer be able to receive it.\nExample of a notification For the submission 1368966558 the notification would be as follows (new lines have been added between header name and header value to improve readability):\nCROSSREF-NOTIFY-ENDPOINT: F8DD070C-89A9-4B82-B77E-1CADCD989DAE CROSSREF-EXTERNAL-ID: apsxref:7ca42f54-093f-11e4-b65b-005056b31eb6 CROSSREF-INTERNAL-ID: 1368966558 CROSSREF-SERVICE-DATE: Fri, 11 Jul 2014 21:08:24 GMT CROSSREF-RETRIEVE-URL-EXPIRATION-DATE: Fri, 18 Jul 2014 21:08:24 GMT CROSSREF-RETRIEVE-URL: https://doi.crossref.org/notification/retrieve/67BCBED2-7AE2-4FD7-B90E-514E19B1DE49 Querying for past callbacks The notification callback service can be queried for past callbacks. The query is implemented as an HTTPS service (access control and limits to end-points and time frames TBD).\nThe query takes 3 criteria, the notify-endpoints, an inclusive from timestamp, and an exclusive until timestamp. All timestamps use the ISO 8061 format YYYY-MM-DD’T’hh:mm:ss’Z, for example, 2014-07-23T14:43:01Z.\nThe query results in a JSON array of callbacks. For example, querying for the single endpoint \u0026ldquo;1CFA094C-4876-497E-976B-6A6404652FC2\u0026rdquo; returns:\n[ { \u0026#34;notify-endpoint\u0026#34;: \u0026#34;1CFA094C-4876-497E-976B-6A6404652FC2\u0026#34;, \u0026#34;external-id\u0026#34;: \u0026#34;apsxref:7ca42f54-093f-11e4-b65b-005056b31eb6\u0026#34;, \u0026#34;service-date\u0026#34;: \u0026#34;2014-07-14T21:08:24Z\u0026#34;, \u0026#34;retrieve-url\u0026#34;: \u0026#34;https://doi.crossref.org/.../67...49\u0026#34;, \u0026#34;retrieve-url-expiration-date\u0026#34;: \u0026#34;2014-07-11T21:08:24Z\u0026#34;, \u0026#34;audit\u0026#34;: [ { \u0026#34;notify-url\u0026#34; : \u0026#34;http://abc.org/crossref/callbacks\u0026#34;, \u0026#34;date\u0026#34; : \u0026#34;2014-07-14T21:09:00Z\u0026#34;, \u0026#34;explanation\u0026#34;: \u0026#34;http status 200\u0026#34; } ] }, { \u0026#34;notify-endpoint\u0026#34;: \u0026#34;1CFA094C-4876-497E-976B-6A6404652FC2\u0026#34;, \u0026#34;external-id\u0026#34;: ... }, ... ] A flat structure is used to aid processing the result as a stream. There is no order defined.\nThe audit item is a record of attempted callbacks. It details the notify-endpoint\u0026rsquo;s notify-url used at the time of the callback, the timestamp of the callback, and the HTTPS status of the callback. If more than one attempt has been tried then the audit array will contain multiple elements; there is no order defined.\nThe query service is currently available at:\nhttps://doi.crossref.org/notification-callback/exec/findNotificationCallbackAttempts?usr=USER\u0026amp;pwd=PASSWORD\u0026amp;notifyEndpoints=ENDPOINT\u0026amp;from=2014-01-01\u0026amp;until=2014-12-31 The usr and pwd are your Crossref username and password. The ENDPOINT value is a notify-endpoint or a space separated set of notify-endpoints.\nA note on trusting Let\u0026rsquo;s Encrypt We use Let\u0026rsquo;s Encrypt, a global Certificate Authority, to enable secure HTTPS connections. Please ensure your local certificate library is updated to include the letsencrypt root certificate before requesting a notification callback for your account/prefix.\nGlossary of notification callback service terms notify-url: the URL that the member provides and is used to notify them of the availability of a service request\u0026rsquo;s result. How the URL is provided to us will depend on the service. notify-endpoint: an opaque token used to select a notify-url. The token will be anonymous and difficult to guess. The notify-endpoint is provided by the member. The notify-endpoint is associated with one notify-url (many notify-endpoints can be associated with the same notify-url). retrieve-url: the URL that we provides that is used by the member to get the service request result. notify-payload: the data that specifies what service request this notification is for. This payload will use HTTPS headers so as to be HTTPS method-neutral (such as POST, PUT). retrieve-payload: the service result. Each service will define its own result content-type (that is very much like what would be sent in email today). notification-authentication: This is the method of authentication we will use with the notify-url. Credentials are provided by the member. retrieval-authentication: This is the method of authentication the member will use with the retrieve-url. The account credentials are provided by us. Can the service be enabled just for our main, administrative sponsor account, and will this setting then apply to all our sponsored members? No. We can enable the notification callback service by role and/or DOI prefix. We have to enable those roles and/or DOI prefixes one at a time.\nIP addresses can change; is there a current range of IP addresses from which these callbacks will originate? Yes. Please contact us at support@crossref.org so we can share the IP addresses that should be safelisted for this service.\nDo you have a retry policy? Specifically, how many retries are attempted and at what intervals? Yes, we do. All callbacks are created with a seven-day expiration date. They are attempted every seven to ten minutes until they receive a success, fatal failure, or they expire. Success is a http status code 200 (success) returned by the member, which then results in the callback being marked as completed.\nAn http status code 500 (server error) from the member is deemed as undeliverable and the callback is marked as shelved and is no longer attempted. All other responses are ignored and callbacks a retried each seven to ten minutes until the expiration is reached and the callback is marked as expired.\nWhat is the estimated timeframe for activating the service? Once we receive everything we need - email us the details to support@crossref.org - it takes us seven to ten business days to activate the service.\n",
"headings": ["How the notification callback service works ","Setting up an endpoint ","Example of a notification ","Querying for past callbacks ","A note on trusting Let\u0026rsquo;s Encrypt ","Glossary of notification callback service terms ","Can the service be enabled just for our main, administrative sponsor account, and will this setting then apply to all our sponsored members? ","IP addresses can change; is there a current range of IP addresses from which these callbacks will originate? ","Do you have a retry policy? Specifically, how many retries are attempted and at what intervals? ","What is the estimated timeframe for activating the service? "]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/register-maintain-records/creating-and-managing-dois/",
"title": "Creating and managing DOIs",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2020-04-08",
"lastmod_ts": 1586304000,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "Creating DOIs A DOI is registered for each new content item by its owner as it\u0026rsquo;s published. This single DOI would then remain associated with the content item forever. DOIs become active once they and their associated metadata are registered with us. Find out more about:\nConstructing your DOIs Ways to register your content Managing and updating the metadata for your existing DOIs Once you have registered your DOIs, you can update the metadata associated with them at any time, free of charge. Here are some examples of metadata maintenance tasks.\n",
"content": "Creating DOIs A DOI is registered for each new content item by its owner as it\u0026rsquo;s published. This single DOI would then remain associated with the content item forever. DOIs become active once they and their associated metadata are registered with us. Find out more about:\nConstructing your DOIs Ways to register your content Managing and updating the metadata for your existing DOIs Once you have registered your DOIs, you can update the metadata associated with them at any time, free of charge. Here are some examples of metadata maintenance tasks.\nChanging or deleting DOIs Because DOIs are designed to be persistent, a DOI string can’t be changed once registered, and DOIs can’t be fully deleted. You can always update the metadata associated with a DOI, but the DOI string itself can’t change. Find out more.\nTransferring titles or prefixes between members Find out what to do if a title with existing DOIs is acquired by a member with a different DOI prefix.\nMultiple resolution Multiple resolution is used where many members host the same content.\n",
"headings": ["Creating DOIs","Managing and updating the metadata for your existing DOIs","Changing or deleting DOIs","Transferring titles or prefixes between members","Multiple resolution"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/register-maintain-records/creating-and-managing-dois/changing-or-deleting-dois/",
"title": "Changing or deleting DOIs",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2020-04-08",
"lastmod_ts": 1586304000,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "Because DOIs are designed to be persistent, a DOI string can’t be changed once registered, and DOIs can’t be fully deleted. You can always update the metadata associated with a DOI, but the DOI string itself can’t change, and once it’s been registered, it will be included in your next content registration invoice. It’s important that you only register a DOI that you definitely want to use.\nHowever, since mistakes happen, here are some work-around solutions to common problems.\n",
"content": "Because DOIs are designed to be persistent, a DOI string can’t be changed once registered, and DOIs can’t be fully deleted. You can always update the metadata associated with a DOI, but the DOI string itself can’t change, and once it’s been registered, it will be included in your next content registration invoice. It’s important that you only register a DOI that you definitely want to use.\nHowever, since mistakes happen, here are some work-around solutions to common problems.\nYour deposited DOI does not match the DOI you published If you\u0026rsquo;ve registered the wrong DOI for an item, it’s not possible to change the suffix of a DOI after it has been deposited. Instead, you\u0026rsquo;ll need to do the following:\nDeposit the correct DOI Alias the incorrect DOI to the correct DOI (or ask support to do this for you) The incorrect DOI will then be redirected to the newly-registered DOI.\nIf you need to update a title-level book or journal DOI please contact us as we will need to make adjustments to allow the update submission to pass.\nYou deposited a DOI by mistake It’s not possible to fully delete a DOI, but in some circumstances we can direct a DOI to a deleted DOI page. The metadata for the DOI is updated to disconnect the DOI from any identifying metadata. This process should only be applied to DOIs that have not been distributed or otherwise used for linking. DOIs for items that have been retracted or otherwise withdrawn should be directed to a retraction or withdrawal notice on the publisher\u0026rsquo;s website.\nIf you think your DOI needs to be deleted, please contact us with details.\n",
"headings": ["Your deposited DOI does not match the DOI you published ","You deposited a DOI by mistake "]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/register-maintain-records/creating-and-managing-dois/transferring-responsibility-for-dois/",
"title": "Transferring responsibility for titles and DOIs",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2026-03-05",
"lastmod_ts": 1772668800,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "We enforce a concept of ownership for the titles you register through us.\nWe allow members to freely register records for titles that do not yet exist in our system. Term 2c of our membership terms states:\nRights to Content. The Member will not deposit or register Metadata for any Content for which the Member does not have legal rights to do so.\nThis means that either the journal owner or their appointed publisher can register DOI records for a title.\n",
"content": "We enforce a concept of ownership for the titles you register through us.\nWe allow members to freely register records for titles that do not yet exist in our system. Term 2c of our membership terms states:\nRights to Content. The Member will not deposit or register Metadata for any Content for which the Member does not have legal rights to do so.\nThis means that either the journal owner or their appointed publisher can register DOI records for a title.\nWhen the first submission for that title is processed, a title record is added to our database. This title record ties the title to the prefix belonging to the member who was the first record registrant. The member who owns that prefix is then the only member allowed to create new DOIs for that title (or update the metadata on existing DOIs for that title).\nIf a title is acquired by a member with a different prefix, we have to move ownership of the title in our system from the original owner member (the \u0026ldquo;transferring member\u0026rdquo;) to the new owner member (the \u0026ldquo;receiving member\u0026rdquo;). We have two options here. The most common option is that we update the title record to associate the title with the receiving member\u0026rsquo;s prefix going forward. But if the receiving member has acquired all of the transferring member\u0026rsquo;s titles, we can also move the transferring member\u0026rsquo;s entire DOI prefix over to the receiving member.\nOn this page, find out more about:\nTitle ownership transfers - updating a title record to a new prefix belonging to a different member How to request a title ownership transfer (and what to do next) Title ownership dispute resolution Prefix ownership transfers - moving an entire prefix and all titles to a different member Requesting a prefix ownership transfer Title ownership transfers In a standard title ownership transfer, Member B acquires a single title from Member A. (In this example, we would call Member A the \u0026ldquo;transferring member\u0026rdquo;, and Member B is the \u0026ldquo;receiving member\u0026rdquo;).\nWe transfer title ownership in our system for this title from Member A\u0026rsquo;s prefix over to Member B\u0026rsquo;s prefix.\nMember B can then register new content for that title on their own prefix going forward. But they also inherit control of all the existing DOI records for this title. In the future, Member B will show in the metadata of these existing DOI records as the publisher of this title, even though these DOIs are on the prefix belonging to Member A, and Member A was the one who initially registered these records.\nThis also means that Member B can update the metadata associated with any existing DOI records for this title - even though the DOIs are on Member A\u0026rsquo;s prefix. For example, Member B could update the resolution URLs for all existing DOI records for this title so they now resolve to Member B\u0026rsquo;s website rather than Member A\u0026rsquo;s website.\nMember B should continue to display and use the existing DOIs and they SHOULD NOT register a new DOI for content that already has a DOI. Once a DOI has been registered for an item, that DOI needs to remain the persistent identifier for that item - forever. Registering new DOIs for content that already has DOIs contravenes clause 2 i 3 of the Crossref membership terms, and causes confusion and inaccuracies for the organisations and individuals using Crossref metadata.\nHere\u0026rsquo;s an example of how this works. Let\u0026rsquo;s say that DOI 10.1234/abcd is for an article in a title that\u0026rsquo;s acquired by a new member. The new members prefix is 10.5678, and so ownership for that whole title is assigned to prefix 10.5678.\nThis means that the existing DOI for that article will continue to be 10.1234/abcd. The difference is that the member responsible for prefix 10.5678 is also able to update the metadata record for 10.1234/abcd. For example, they may need to update the resolution URL to point at their website.\nThis process means that back-year records and current records for articles in the same journal may have different prefixes — and that’s OK!\nLearn more about what can often change, but always stays the same?\nUnusual ownership title transfers - transferring a title without taking responsibility for existing DOIs Typically, when a title is acquired by a member, all existing content is also acquired. We move the title itself, AND ownership of all existing DOI records for that title to the receiving member in our system.\nHowever, we can also assign ownership to individual records within a title. This is sometimes necessary when content ownership or hosting responsibility is assigned to different chunks of content for the same title.\nFor example, current issues of Journal A may be published by a member with prefix 10.1234. Issues of Journal A published prior to 2010 are hosted and maintained by a member with prefix 10.5678. Journal A is owned by prefix 10.1234, but the member with prefix 10.5678 retains control of the back issue DOIs owned by prefix 10.5678.\nHow to request a title ownership transfer There are several steps to a title transfer.\nStep 1. Transferring and receiving publisher confirm that all published DOIs have definitely been registered with Crossref and agree financial arrangement for registration of DOIs.\nPrior to the transfer, it\u0026rsquo;s important to make sure that any DOIs that have been displayed publicly on the transferring publisher\u0026rsquo;s prefix have definitely been successfully registered with Crossref. Once a DOI has been publicly displayed, it may have already been used by an author to cite this work, so it\u0026rsquo;s vital that it gets registered with Crossref. It will be very complicated to get a new DOI registered on the transferring member\u0026rsquo;s prefix after we\u0026rsquo;ve moved ownership of the title to a different member prefix, so make sure everything has been successfully registered with us before you start the title transfer process.\nStep 2. Transferring or receiving publisher contacts us to request a title ownership transfer.\nWe need to receive a title transfer notification to confirm that the current owners of this title in our system are happy with the ownership transfer. There are several different ways to do this:\nOption A (preferred): If a title transfer has been posted to the Enhanced Transfer Alerting Service (TAS), simply let us know and we’ll proceed with the transfer without further confirmation. Option B: If you don\u0026rsquo;t participate in TAS, please send us confirmation that the transferring publisher is aware of and agrees with the title ownership transfer in the Crossref system. The confirmation may be a forwarded email from the transferring publisher to the receiving publisher acknowledging the transfer. The forwarded email must contain the original sender details. Option C: Alternatively, if there is an announcement about the title ownership change on the website of the transferring publisher, that works too. We would identify the transferring publisher website by looking at the resolution URL for the existing DOIs Whichever option you use, please be specific about what is being transferred - include ISSNs, ISBNs, and when you need the transfer to occur (if applicable). Do be specific about which prefix the title is being transferred to, as some publishers have more than one prefix. By default we will transfer both the title record and all associated DOIs to the receiving publisher. Please let us know if you need a different arrangement - for example, if the receiving publisher is not taking on responsibility for back-year records, so just needs the ability to register DOIs for future content on their own prefix, but doesn\u0026rsquo;t want to take on responsibility for existing DOIs.\n(NB: We used to allow transferring publishers to transfer titles themselves through the Metadata Manager tool, but this service has been deprecated).\nStep 3. We update the title record in our system and confirm when this is complete.\nWe will update the title record in our system to associate the title with the receiving publisher\u0026rsquo;s prefix going forward. This means that the receiving publisher will be able to register new DOIs on their own prefix in the future.\nAfter the transfer is complete, it\u0026rsquo;s extremely important that the receiving publisher doesn\u0026rsquo;t register new DOIs for content that already has an existing DOI registered by the transferring publisher. Once a DOI has been registered for an item, that DOI needs to remain the persistent identifier for that item - forever. Registering new DOIs for content that already has DOIs contravenes clause 2 i 3 of the Crossref membership terms. The receiving publisher should continue to display and use the existing DOIs, despite the fact that they aren\u0026rsquo;t on their prefix. The receiving publisher will now be able to update all the metadata associated with these existing DOIs, even though they aren\u0026rsquo;t on their prefix.\nWe will provide the receiving publisher with a link to all the DOIs that have been previously registered for this title.\nStep 4. Receiving publisher updates the metadata on existing DOIs as required\nAfter the title ownership transfer in our system, the receiving publisher will be able to update metadata records for the existing DOIs for this title on the transferring publisher prefix, and create new DOI records on their own prefix for future published content.\nAs the receiving publisher, you should review the full metadata records provided by the transferring publisher, and remove or update any member-specific metadata such as text and data mining license and full-text URLs, Similarity Check full-text URLs, or Crossmark data. If the metadata supplied by the previous member is complete and accurate, you’ll only need to update the resolution URLs to ensure that the DOIs resolve to your website going forward.\nLearn more about our top tips for a pain-free title transfer.\nTitle transfer request form Ready to transfer a journal or another material to another Crossref member? You can use the form below to request a transfer straightaway. Note that you will need to provide one of the three types of permission outlined in Step 2 above. You can also open the form in a new window.\nTitle ownership dispute resolution Only one member can register DOIs for a title at any one time. Very rarely, title ownership may come into dispute when two members claim ownership of a single publication. You can find out title ownership dispute resolution process here.\nPrefix ownership transfers In a prefix transfer, Member D acquires Member C and all their titles. We move the entire prefix belonging to Member C (and all relevant reports) over to Member D. Member D can then continue to assign DOIs on Member C’s old prefix (the original prefix). If Member D uses a service provider to deposit metadata on their behalf, we will simply enable the service provider\u0026rsquo;s account credentials to work with the newly acquired prefix.\nRequesting a prefix ownership transfer DOI prefixes may be moved from one member to another with the consent of the current prefix owner. This may happen as part of a merger or acquisition. Prefixes may also be moved from one DOI registration agency to another. Please contact us to start a prefix transfer.\nPrefix permissions If a prefix moves between members, note that the permissions associated with all DOIs currently owned by that prefix will transfer as well. This includes permissions related to Cited-by matches. You may transfer ownership of individual DOIs to a different prefix as needed.\n",
"headings": ["Title ownership transfers ","Unusual ownership title transfers - transferring a title without taking responsibility for existing DOIs ","How to request a title ownership transfer ","Title transfer request form ","Title ownership dispute resolution ","Prefix ownership transfers ","Requesting a prefix ownership transfer ","Prefix permissions "]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/register-maintain-records/creating-and-managing-dois/prefix-transfers-other-ra/",
"title": "Transferring prefixes between different Registration Agencies",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2022-04-14",
"lastmod_ts": 1649894400,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "Alongside Crossref, there are other agencies of the DOI Foundation. Many focus on specific regions of the world (mEDRA, JaLC, CNKI, KISTI, et al) or on the needs of institutional repositories rather than publishers (eg DataCite).\nIt\u0026rsquo;s important to carefully research which agency you want to join so you start with the right agency for you and continue to work with them for the long term. If you do start to work with one agency and need to move to another agency later, this is possible and prefixes can be transferred between Registration Agencies. But there\u0026rsquo;s extra work for you to make this happen, so it\u0026rsquo;s much better to start with the right agency. Do contact us for advice.\n",
"content": "Alongside Crossref, there are other agencies of the DOI Foundation. Many focus on specific regions of the world (mEDRA, JaLC, CNKI, KISTI, et al) or on the needs of institutional repositories rather than publishers (eg DataCite).\nIt\u0026rsquo;s important to carefully research which agency you want to join so you start with the right agency for you and continue to work with them for the long term. If you do start to work with one agency and need to move to another agency later, this is possible and prefixes can be transferred between Registration Agencies. But there\u0026rsquo;s extra work for you to make this happen, so it\u0026rsquo;s much better to start with the right agency. Do contact us for advice.\nIf you do wish to move between agencies and transfer your prefix:\nContact the Registration Agency that you are moving to - the one that will be receiving the prefix. So to transfer a prefix from DataCite to Crossref for example, contact us. To transfer a prefix from Crossref to DataCite, contact DataCite. The two agencies will work together to confirm if the prefix can be transferred. This is usually possible, but if the prefix is shared or belongs to a generalist repository then it won\u0026rsquo;t be able to be transferred and we\u0026rsquo;ll need to take a different approach. If the prefix can be transferred, then the two Registration Agencies will liaise to make this happen. Once the prefix has been transferred, you will need to re-register all your existing DOIs with the new Registration Agency. This ensures that all metadata relating to your titles is with the same registration agency, you can manage all your DOIs in one central place, all your citation tracking will be centralized, and you can be sure that the thousands of organisations and individuals using Crossref metadata via our API have full information about your titles, helping to improve your discoverability. Re-registration is not optional - it\u0026rsquo;s an obligation of the transfer. At Crossref, we will work with you to ensure that you are not charged for any content that you are re-registering with us after transferring a prefix from another agency. ",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/register-maintain-records/creating-and-managing-dois/multiple-resolution/",
"title": "Multiple resolution",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2026-04-22",
"lastmod_ts": 1776816000,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "Ideally, a DOI is registered for each new content item by its owner prior to or at the time it is published. This single DOI would then remain associated with the content item forever. However, because content can travel from place to place online, and it can live in multiple locations, a content item may exist at more than one URL. With multiple resolution, you can assign multiple URLs to a single metadata record. Members often use multiple resolution for co-hosted content or content in transition from one platform to another. Instead of resolving directly to a single page, a multiple resolution-enabled link will instead land on an interim page hosted by Crossref. The interim page presents a list of link choices to the end-user.\n",
"content": "Ideally, a DOI is registered for each new content item by its owner prior to or at the time it is published. This single DOI would then remain associated with the content item forever. However, because content can travel from place to place online, and it can live in multiple locations, a content item may exist at more than one URL. With multiple resolution, you can assign multiple URLs to a single metadata record. Members often use multiple resolution for co-hosted content or content in transition from one platform to another. Instead of resolving directly to a single page, a multiple resolution-enabled link will instead land on an interim page hosted by Crossref. The interim page presents a list of link choices to the end-user.\nThere are no fees associated with multiple resolution. To get started, please let us know who and what content is involved in your multiple resolution project, and send us your additional URLs. Learn more about how to set up multiple resolution.\nIf the content you are working with does not already have DOIs and is not published by you, please contact us.\nOn this page, learn more about:\nTypical use cases for the service How to set up multiple resolution Unlocking DOIs for multiple resolution Registering secondary URLs How to update multiple resolution URLs Reversing multiple resolution DOI resolution by country code The role of the DOI proxy in multiple resolution What if I want to do multiple resolution but sometimes want to send people directly to my site? How does multiple resolution affect my resolution statistics? Typical use cases for multiple resolution Typically, there are two use cases for multiple resolution:\nA single member registering multiple URLs for a DOI usually present on two or more of their own sub-domains, like this example DOI from Oxford University Press: https://doi.org/10.1093/he/9780198869917.001.0001. In this use case, since the single member should know the locations of the multiple URLs, they may opt to unlock and register their secondary URLs with a full XML submission using the main deposit schema.\nThe content in question is available on multiple URLs owned/stewarded by and requiring coordination between several members. One member needs to deposit the DOIs and metadata as the primary depositor. The primary depositor is typically the DOI prefix owner of the content being registered, and will commit to maintaining the metadata record. If second (or third) parties are involved, they will only be able to add and update secondary URLs for existing records. In this use case, the primary depositor typically unlocks their DOIs for multiple resolution and those second (or, third parties) register secondary URLs using a targeted, resource-only XML submission. An example of a DOI that is using multiple resolution for this use case is from the Journal of the Geological Society: https://doi.org/10.1144/jgs2024-291.\nHow to set up multiple resolution Multiple resolution typically involves two (or more) members involved in a co-hosting agreement. For the purposes of multiple resolution, the primary depositor is the member responsible for the prefix of the multiple resolution content being registered. The secondary depositor has been authorized by the content owner to also host content and assign additional URLs (called secondary URLs) to DOIs. We’ll always defer to the primary depositor’s instructions regarding changes to a metadata record including all assigned URLs.\nFollow these steps to coordinate and implement multiple resolution:\nEstablish permissions - contact us to let us know what organisations and content will be involved in your multiple resolution project and we’ll adjust permissions as needed. You can skip this step if you are implementing multiple resolution without a secondary depositor or intend to supply the secondary URLs yourself (as you are by default enabled to register multiple resolution URLs for your own content). The primary depositor must notify us of the intention to implement multiple resolution for their metadata records, as well as all titles and/or prefixes involved. The secondary depositor may coordinate multiple resolution activity with permission from the primary depositor - this can be an email stating, for example: XYZ Publishing has permission to coordinate multiple resolution activity on our behalf for titles (\u0026hellip;). Primary depositors can create metadata records and deposit primary and secondary URLs. Secondary depositors may only register secondary URLs for existing records. The secondary depositor will be assigned a new system account to be used for multiple resolution deposits only. Unlock your DOIs - you must enable each metadata record for multiple resolution by sending us an ‘unlock’ flag for each DOI. This can be included in your files or sent separately as a resource-only deposit, like this example file. Register your secondary URLs. Secondary URLs are usually added to an existing metadata record using a resource-only deposit. The secondary URL registration file contains the DOI(s) being updated, the secondary URL, and a label. The label value is case-sensitive and must be a minimum of 6 characters (no spaces). Create an interim page template We provide a standard interim page when a reader clicks on a DOI that is in a multiple resolution relationship. This means that users can be confident that they’ll see consistent behaviour across all Crossref DOIs that are in multiple resolution. Depositors don’t need to do anything to create this interim page, it will generate automatically for a DOI when the multiple resolution relationship is created.\nClicking on these DOIs will take you to examples of the interim pages:\nhttps://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-6209-116-0\nhttps://doi.org/10.1049/cp.2018.1305\nhttps://doi.org/10.18574/nyu/9781479845309.003.0004\nNote that the logos are pulled from a service called Clearbit who curate company logo and other information. These are not hosted and curated by Crossref.\nUnlock DOIs for multiple resolution The primary depositor must enable (or unlock) each multiple resolution DOI before secondary URLs can be deposited. You can do this using either a metadata deposit or a resource-only deposit (details below). It is expected that once a content owner gives permission for multiple resolution to be attached to DOIs of a given title, or to all their content, that the content owner will routinely enable multiple resolution when creating or updating their DOIs.\nUnlocking a DOI does not change the linking behavior of a DOI - an unlocked DOI will continue to resolve to the URL supplied during registration until a secondary URL has been registered.\nUnlock DOIs using the main deposit schema This mode should be used for all new DOIs created after the content owner has recognized that secondary deposits will be taking place. It allows the primary content owner to enable the DOI multiple resolution permission at the same time as the DOI is initially created.\nThe XML used by the content owner to create (or update) the DOI must include an a element with the multi-resolution attribute set to unlock.\n\u0026lt;?xml version=\u0026#34;1.0\u0026#34; encoding=\u0026#34;UTF-8\u0026#34;?\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi_batch version=\u0026#34;4.3.0\u0026#34; xmlns=\u0026#34;http://www.crossref.org/schema/4.3.0\u0026#34; xmlns:xsi=\u0026#34;http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance\u0026#34; xsi:schemaLocation=\u0026#34;http://www.crossref.org/schema/4.3.0 http://www.crossref.org/schemas/crossref4.3.0.xsd\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;head\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi_batch_id\u0026gt;123456\u0026lt;/doi_batch_id\u0026gt; \u0026lt;timestamp\u0026gt;19990628123304\u0026lt;/timestamp\u0026gt; \u0026lt;depositor\u0026gt; \u0026lt;name\u0026gt;xyz\u0026lt;/name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;email_address\u0026gt;support@crossref.org\u0026lt;/email_address\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/depositor\u0026gt; \u0026lt;registrant\u0026gt;Crossref Test\u0026lt;/registrant\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/head\u0026gt; \u0026lt;body\u0026gt; \u0026lt;journal\u0026gt; \u0026lt;journal_metadata language=\u0026#34;en\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;full_title\u0026gt;Sample Journal\u0026lt;/full_title\u0026gt; \u0026lt;abbrev_title\u0026gt;SJ\u0026lt;/abbrev_title\u0026gt; \u0026lt;issn media_type=\u0026#34;print\u0026#34;\u0026gt;55555555\u0026lt;/issn\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/journal_metadata\u0026gt; \u0026lt;journal_issue\u0026gt; \u0026lt;publication_date media_type=\u0026#34;print\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;year\u0026gt;2008\u0026lt;/year\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/publication_date\u0026gt; \u0026lt;journal_volume\u0026gt; \u0026lt;volume\u0026gt;10\u0026lt;/volume\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/journal_volume\u0026gt; \u0026lt;issue\u0026gt;10\u0026lt;/issue\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/journal_issue\u0026gt; \u0026lt;journal_article publication_type=\u0026#34;full_text\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;titles\u0026gt; \u0026lt;title\u0026gt;Sample Article\u0026lt;/title\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/titles\u0026gt; \u0026lt;contributors\u0026gt; \u0026lt;person_name sequence=\u0026#34;first\u0026#34; contributor_role=\u0026#34;author\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;given_name\u0026gt;Firstname\u0026lt;/given_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;surname\u0026gt;Surname\u0026lt;/surname\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/person_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/contributors\u0026gt; \u0026lt;publication_date media_type=\u0026#34;print\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;year\u0026gt;2008\u0026lt;/year\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/publication_date\u0026gt; \u0026lt;pages\u0026gt; \u0026lt;first_page\u0026gt;1\u0026lt;/first_page\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/pages\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi_data\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi\u0026gt;10.50505/mrtest\u0026lt;/doi\u0026gt; \u0026lt;resource\u0026gt;http://www.crossref.org/hello/\u0026lt;/resource\u0026gt; \u0026lt;collection property=\u0026#34;list-based\u0026#34; multi-resolution=\u0026#34;unlock\u0026#34; /\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/doi_data\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/journal_article\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/journal\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/body\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/doi_batch\u0026gt; Unlock DOIs using the DOI resources schema This approach can be used for all existing records or can be used for new records if the content owner does not wish to include this metadata in their main metadata deposit. Resource-only deposits should be uploaded as \u0026lsquo;DOI Resources\u0026rsquo; when using the admin tool or operation=doDOICitUpload when doing a programmed HTTPS transaction.\n\u0026lt;?xml version=\u0026#34;1.0\u0026#34; encoding=\u0026#34;UTF-8\u0026#34;?\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi_batch version=\u0026#34;4.3.0\u0026#34; xmlns=\u0026#34;http://www.crossref.org/doi_resources_schema/4.3.0\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;head\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi_batch_id\u0026gt;123456\u0026lt;/doi_batch_id\u0026gt; \u0026lt;depositor\u0026gt; \u0026lt;name\u0026gt;xyz\u0026lt;/name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;email_address\u0026gt;support@crossref.org\u0026lt;/email_address\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/depositor\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/head\u0026gt; \u0026lt;body\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi_resources\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi\u0026gt;10.50505/mrtest\u0026lt;/doi\u0026gt; \u0026lt;collection property=\u0026#34;list-based\u0026#34; multi-resolution=\u0026#34;unlock\u0026#34; /\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/doi_resources\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi_resources\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi\u0026gt;10.50505/mrtest2\u0026lt;/doi\u0026gt; \u0026lt;collection property=\u0026#34;list-based\u0026#34; multi-resolution=\u0026#34;unlock\u0026#34; /\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/doi_resources\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi_resources\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi\u0026gt;10.50505/mrtest3\u0026lt;/doi\u0026gt; \u0026lt;collection property=\u0026#34;list-based\u0026#34; multi-resolution=\u0026#34;unlock\u0026#34; /\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/doi_resources\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/body\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/doi_batch\u0026gt; Example of a multiple-resolution unlock resource-only deposit Unlock DOIs using the Multiple Resolution helper tool If you prefer not to edit XML files directly, there is also a helper tool available for generating resource-only XML from a spreadsheet (CSV file) for unlocking DOIs for Multiple Resolution. You will need your Crossref credentials to login to the helper tool.\nRegister secondary URLs When more than one URL is registered for a DOI, the DOI becomes a multiple resolution DOI. The primary URL is registered through a primary metadata deposit, but secondary URLs are typically submitted as a resource-only deposit by a secondary depositor. The secondary URL deposit consists of the DOI being updated, the secondary URL(s), and a label. No item-level metadata is required:\n\u0026lt;doi_resources\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi\u0026gt;10.50505/mrtest\u0026lt;/doi\u0026gt; \u0026lt;collection property=\u0026#34;list-based\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;item label=\u0026#34;SECONDARY_X\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;resource\u0026gt;https://www.crossref.org/test1\u0026lt;/resource\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/item\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/collection\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/doi_resources\u0026gt; The label value is case-sensitive, the label must be a minimum of 6 characters (no spaces).\nExample of a secondary URL resource-only deposit Example of secondary URLs as part of a primary metadata deposit Upload secondary URLs A secondary URL resource-only deposit must be uploaded with type doDOICitUpload for HTTPS POST (or DOI Resources when using the admin tool. The secondary depositor must have permission to add URLs to the primary depositor\u0026rsquo;s DOIs.\nRegister secondary URLs using the Multiple Resolution helper tool If you prefer not to edit XML files directly, there is also a helper tool available for generating resource-only XML from a spreadsheet (CSV file) for uploading secondary resolution URLs for unlocked DOIs. You will need your Crossref credentials to login to the helper tool.\nHow to update multiple resolution URLs If you are the primary depositor, the primary URL may be updated in the standard way. If you need to update a secondary URL you’ll need to re-send the secondary XML file to us with the updated URLs included. When updating, please note that the item label value and the depositor role must be consistent with those used in the previous update - this is how we know what URL to update.\nReverse multiple resolution Multiple resolution can be reversed if the service is no longer needed for a DOI. When multiple resolution is reversed, the content owner should also lock the multiple resolution DOIs, preventing any future multiple resolution deposits.\nTo remove secondary URLs and lock DOIs, submit a resource-only deposit with a closed collection element, for example:\n\u0026lt;?xml version=\u0026#34;1.0\u0026#34; encoding=\u0026#34;UTF-8\u0026#34;?\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi_batch version=\u0026#34;4.3.0\u0026#34; xmlns=\u0026#34;http://www.crossref.org/doi_resources_schema/4.3.0\u0026#34; xmlns:xsi=\u0026#34;http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance\u0026#34; xsi:schemaLocation=\u0026#34;http://www.crossref.org/doi_resources_schema/4.3.0 http://www.crossref.org/schemas/doi_resources4.3.0.xsd\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;head\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi_batch_id\u0026gt;123456\u0026lt;/doi_batch_id\u0026gt; \u0026lt;depositor\u0026gt; \u0026lt;name\u0026gt;xyz\u0026lt;/name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;email_address\u0026gt;xyz@crossref.org\u0026lt;/email_address\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/depositor\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/head\u0026gt; \u0026lt;body\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi_resources\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi\u0026gt;10.50505/mrtest1\u0026lt;/doi\u0026gt; \u0026lt;collection property=\u0026#34;list-based\u0026#34; multi-resolution=\u0026#34;lock\u0026#34; /\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/doi_resources\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/body\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/doi_batch\u0026gt; DOI resolution by country code Crossref\u0026rsquo;s implementation of multiple resolution supports a form of appropriate copy based on the country of origin of the user requesting the resolution service. This service allows a content owner to deposit multiple URLs for a single DOI, each of which is intended to service users from a particular country. The DOI resolver will determine the resolution request\u0026rsquo;s country of origin and select the appropriate URL target based on country codes (see list.\nThe country code and URL information are supplied within \u0026lt;collection\u0026gt; (learn more about the collection element), and can be deposited as part of a primary metadata deposit or as a resource-only deposit. If a country code is not supplied, the DOI will resolve to the URL supplied in the top level resource element.\nMetadata deposit example for multiple resolution \u0026lt;doi_data\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi\u0026gt;10.5555/ilovedois\u0026lt;/doi\u0026gt; \u0026lt;resource\u0026gt;https://www.crossref.org/hello\u0026lt;/resource\u0026gt; default URL \u0026lt;collection property=\u0026#34;country-based\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;item country=\u0026#34;US\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;resource\u0026gt;https://www.crossref.org/howdy\u0026lt;/resource\u0026gt; USA URL \u0026lt;/item\u0026gt; \u0026lt;item country=\u0026#34;SE\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;resource\u0026gt;https://www.crossref.org/hej\u0026lt;/resource\u0026gt; Sweden URL \u0026lt;/item\u0026gt; \u0026lt;item country=\u0026#34;KE\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;resource\u0026gt;https://www.crossref.org/hujambo\u0026lt;/resource\u0026gt; Kenya URL \u0026lt;/item\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/collection\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/doi_data\u0026gt; Resource-only deposit example for multiple resolution \u0026lt;doi_resources\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi\u0026gt;10.5555/ilovedois\u0026lt;/doi\u0026gt; \u0026lt;collection property=\u0026#34;country-based\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;item country=\u0026#34;US\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;resource\u0026gt;https://www.crossref.org/howdy\u0026lt;/resource\u0026gt; USA URL \u0026lt;/item\u0026gt; \u0026lt;item country=\u0026#34;SE\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;resource\u0026gt;https://www.crossref.org/hej\u0026lt;/resource\u0026gt; Sweden URL \u0026lt;/item\u0026gt; \u0026lt;item country=\u0026#34;KE\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;resource\u0026gt;https://www.crossref.org/hujambo\u0026lt;/resource\u0026gt; Kenya URL \u0026lt;/item\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/collection\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/doi_resources\u0026gt; Role of the DOI proxy in multiple resolution The DOI proxy is maintained by CNRI on behalf of the IDF. Multiple resolution required the introduction of an additional Handle property for DOIs, called 10320/loc, which is itself a Handle.\nExample Handle record Show image × In the sample handle record the default URL is set to represent the content\u0026rsquo;s primary location. This is typically the platform of the content owner, or its primary publisher. The presence of property 10320/loc, containing an XML snippet, indicates to the proxy that multiple resolution is enabled for this DOI. The XML is interpreted as follows:\n\u0026lt;locations\u0026gt; element, chooseby: specifies the order of rules to be applied by the proxy when selecting from the \u0026lt;location\u0026gt; elements. locatt: used if the DOI request specifies a specific location item country: used if any location item specifies a specific country which must match the country of the requester weight: a weighted random selection from those \u0026lt;location\u0026gt; elements having weight values \u0026lt;location\u0026gt; element identifies a specific location id: a unique ID given to each location element cr_type: a Crossref property that specifies the type of multiple resolution to support cr_src: a Crossref property that identifies which user deposited the location value label: used by us to identify the co-host href: the URL of the location weight: the weighted value to use when applying the weighted-random selection process The presence or absence of a rule in the chooseby property will enable or disable that type of selection process by the proxy.\nWhat if I want to do multiple resolution but sometimes want to send people directly to my site? DOI resolution requests may be structured to bypass our interim page using features built into the proxy\u0026rsquo;s multiple resolution capabilities.\nYou can bypass the interim page by appending a label parameter to your DOI link. To force the DOI to resolve to the primary (original) host location, add the locatt=mode:legacy parameter to the end of the URL, for example:\nhttps://doi.org/10.50505/200806091300?locatt=mode:legacy To force the DOI to resolve to a secondary URL, add locatt=label:HOST-XYZ to the end of the URL, where HOST-XYZ is the label supplied in the secondary URL deposit, for example:\nhttps://doi.org/10.50505/200806091300?locatt=label:HOST-XYZ Learn more about the role of the DOI proxy in multiple resolution.\nHow does multiple resolution affect my resolution statistics? A click on a multiple resolution DOI is still a single click, it’s just that the clicks will be coming from an interim page instead of the DOI resolver, and your resolution reports will reflect that.\n",
"headings": ["Typical use cases for multiple resolution ","How to set up multiple resolution ","Create an interim page template ","Unlock DOIs for multiple resolution ","Unlock DOIs using the main deposit schema ","Unlock DOIs using the DOI resources schema ","Unlock DOIs using the Multiple Resolution helper tool ","Register secondary URLs ","Upload secondary URLs ","Register secondary URLs using the Multiple Resolution helper tool ","How to update multiple resolution URLs ","Reverse multiple resolution ","DOI resolution by country code ","Metadata deposit example for multiple resolution ","Resource-only deposit example for multiple resolution ","Role of the DOI proxy in multiple resolution ","Example Handle record ","What if I want to do multiple resolution but sometimes want to send people directly to my site? ","How does multiple resolution affect my resolution statistics? "]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/register-maintain-records/maintaining-your-metadata/",
"title": "Maintaining your metadata",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2022-07-22",
"lastmod_ts": 1658448000,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "When you become a member of Crossref, you’re joining a community of organisations who have committed to link their content to each other persistently, and to share their metadata with each other and with the scholarly community.\nYou’re committing to:\nStewarding your DOIs and their associated metadata for the long term; Making sure that the DOI always resolves to a live landing page; Keeping the scholarly community aware of any changes to your content (such as withdrawals or retractions); Adding to, updating, and perhaps even deleting some metadata to keep your metadata useful to the whole community and to make your content even more discoverable. This means that the work doesn\u0026rsquo;t stop after you first register your records - you should ensure that you continue to maintain this metadata record for the long term. There\u0026rsquo;s no charge to update the metadata after a record has first been registered, and you should aim to keep your records clean, complete and up-to-date.\n",
"content": "When you become a member of Crossref, you’re joining a community of organisations who have committed to link their content to each other persistently, and to share their metadata with each other and with the scholarly community.\nYou’re committing to:\nStewarding your DOIs and their associated metadata for the long term; Making sure that the DOI always resolves to a live landing page; Keeping the scholarly community aware of any changes to your content (such as withdrawals or retractions); Adding to, updating, and perhaps even deleting some metadata to keep your metadata useful to the whole community and to make your content even more discoverable. This means that the work doesn\u0026rsquo;t stop after you first register your records - you should ensure that you continue to maintain this metadata record for the long term. There\u0026rsquo;s no charge to update the metadata after a record has first been registered, and you should aim to keep your records clean, complete and up-to-date.\nKeep your records clean Identify and correct any errors.\nUse our reports to help you identify problems. If you have omitted or provided any incorrect metadata, just update your metadata to make corrections, remove incorrect metadata, or provide missing data. Pay particular attention to the titles of journals, books, and conference proceedings - our support team may need to help you with corrections here. Although you can remove metadata elements from a record, it\u0026rsquo;s not possible to fully delete the records or DOIs, as they are designed to be persistent. Read more about changing or deleting DOIs, and contact us with the details of your situation so we can help. Keep your records complete Add information for additional fields, and don’t forget to do this for your back-year records too.\nGo beyond basic bibliographic metadata, and deposit as much rich metadata as possible. Richer metadata includes information such as: References ORCID iDs Funding information, including funder registry IDs and funding award numbers Crossmark metadata Text and data mining URLs License information Similarity Check URLs Abstracts Check your participation report to see what metadata is missing from your records. Keep your records up-to-date Metadata may change over time, and ownership of records may change, so make sure your metadata is updated with these changes.\nUpdate your resolution URLs if the location of your landing pages or full-text content changes - for example: if your website domain changes; if a journal moves from one hosting platform to another; or if a journal ceases to publish and the content must be accessed through an archive. Keep the community up-to-date with updates, retractions, or withdrawals by registering updates. Change the ownership of deposited DOIs when the ownership of the published research object changes. ",
"headings": ["Keep your records clean","Keep your records complete","Keep your records up-to-date"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/reference-linking/how-do-i-create-reference-links/",
"title": "How do I find and create reference links?",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2025-08-15",
"lastmod_ts": 1755216000,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "For Reference Linking, you need to find the existing DOIs for each work in your reference list, and then display the DOI for that item in your reference list.\nStep 1: Find DOIs for the referenced works.\nThere are a few different options:\nCrossref Reference Linking plugin in the OJS platform - if you\u0026rsquo;re using the OJS platform, make sure to add and enable the Crossref Reference Linking Plugin. The plugin will use the Crossref API to check against your plain-text references and locate possible DOIs. It will then display the reference lists with DOIs on the article landing page.\n",
"content": "For Reference Linking, you need to find the existing DOIs for each work in your reference list, and then display the DOI for that item in your reference list.\nStep 1: Find DOIs for the referenced works.\nThere are a few different options:\nCrossref Reference Linking plugin in the OJS platform - if you\u0026rsquo;re using the OJS platform, make sure to add and enable the Crossref Reference Linking Plugin. The plugin will use the Crossref API to check against your plain-text references and locate possible DOIs. It will then display the reference lists with DOIs on the article landing page.\nSimple Text Query - paste your reference lists into this web form, and it will return matches. This is a manual interface, and is suitable for low-volume querying.\nXML API - submit XML formatted according to the query schema section to our system as individual requests or as a batch upload. This method requires API skills, and allows you significant control over your query execution and results.\nStep 2: Display the DOIs in your reference lists.\nOnce you have retrieved the relevant DOIs, display them as URLs in your reference lists (following our DOI display guidelines).\nShow image\r×\r",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/cited-by/cited-by-participation/",
"title": "How to participate in Cited-by",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2023-04-28",
"lastmod_ts": 1682640000,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "Members can participate in Cited-by by completing the following steps:\nDeposit references for one or more prefixes as part of your content registration process. Use your Participation Report to see your progress with depositing references. This step is not mandatory, but highly recommended to ensure that your citation counts are complete. We will match the metadata in the references to DOIs to establish Cited-by links in the database. As new content is registered, we automatically update the citations and, for those members with Cited-by alerts enabled, we notify you of the new links. Retrieve citations through a URL query or the admin tool. Display the links on your website. We recommend displaying citations you retrieve on DOI landing pages, for example: Show image × If you are a member through a Sponsor, you may have access to Cited-by through your sponsor – please contact them for more details. OJS users can use the Cited-by plugin. If you need more help, you can learn more from PKP’s Cited-by (OJS Scopus/Crossref plugin) - as of OJS 3.2, this third-party plugin allows journals to display citations and citation counts (using article DOIs) from Scopus and/or Crossref.\n",
"content": "Members can participate in Cited-by by completing the following steps:\nDeposit references for one or more prefixes as part of your content registration process. Use your Participation Report to see your progress with depositing references. This step is not mandatory, but highly recommended to ensure that your citation counts are complete. We will match the metadata in the references to DOIs to establish Cited-by links in the database. As new content is registered, we automatically update the citations and, for those members with Cited-by alerts enabled, we notify you of the new links. Retrieve citations through a URL query or the admin tool. Display the links on your website. We recommend displaying citations you retrieve on DOI landing pages, for example: Show image × If you are a member through a Sponsor, you may have access to Cited-by through your sponsor – please contact them for more details. OJS users can use the Cited-by plugin. If you need more help, you can learn more from PKP’s Cited-by (OJS Scopus/Crossref plugin) - as of OJS 3.2, this third-party plugin allows journals to display citations and citation counts (using article DOIs) from Scopus and/or Crossref.\nCitation matching Members sometimes submit references without including a DOI tag for the cited work. When this happens, we look for a match based on the metadata provided. If we find one, the reference metadata is updated with the DOI and we add the \u0026quot;doi-asserted-by\u0026quot;: \u0026quot;crossref\u0026quot; tag. If we don’t find a match immediately, we will try again at a later date.\nThere are some references for which we won’t find matches, for example where a DOI has been registered with an agency other than Crossref (such as DataCite) or if the reference refers to an object without a DOI, including conferences, manuals, blog posts, and some journals’ articles.\nTo perform matching, we first check if a DOI tag is included in the reference metadata. If so, we assume it is correct and link the corresponding work. If there isn’t a DOI tag, we perform a search using the metadata supplied and select candidate results by thresholding. The best match is found through a further validation process. Learn more about how we match references. The same process is used for the results shown on our Simple Text Query tool.\nAll citations to a work are returned in the corresponding Cited-by query.\n",
"headings": ["Citation matching "]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/cited-by/retrieve-citations/",
"title": "Retrieve citations using Cited-by",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2023-04-28",
"lastmod_ts": 1682640000,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "There are a number of methods through which to retrieve citations:\nInput Query for Output Admin tool DOI List of citing DOIs HTTPS doi.crossref.org DOI, prefix XML XML DOI XML OAI-PMH oai.crossref.org prefix, title XML There are two additional options to receive a \u0026ldquo;push\u0026rdquo; notification any time one of your deposited works is cited:\nInput Output Email notification Email sent to an address provided by the member Notification callback Sent to an HTTP(S) URL endpoint hosted by the member Note that we don’t provide a plugin to directly display Cited-by results on a publisher website, although a community-developed plugin is available for OJS. The data from our APIs is delivered in XML or JSON format and needs to be parsed for display on a webpage.\n",
"content": "There are a number of methods through which to retrieve citations:\nInput Query for Output Admin tool DOI List of citing DOIs HTTPS doi.crossref.org DOI, prefix XML XML DOI XML OAI-PMH oai.crossref.org prefix, title XML There are two additional options to receive a \u0026ldquo;push\u0026rdquo; notification any time one of your deposited works is cited:\nInput Output Email notification Email sent to an address provided by the member Notification callback Sent to an HTTP(S) URL endpoint hosted by the member Note that we don’t provide a plugin to directly display Cited-by results on a publisher website, although a community-developed plugin is available for OJS. The data from our APIs is delivered in XML or JSON format and needs to be parsed for display on a webpage.\nOn this page, learn more about:\nRetrieving citation matches using: HTTPS POST XML queries the admin tool OJS Plugin OAI-PMH Citation notifications Troubleshooting Cited-by queries Retrieve citation matches using HTTPS POST Using a URL, you can retrieve all citations for a single DOI or prefix within a date range. You will need to provide your Crossref account credentials in the query.\nIf you use personal, individual user credentials, queries have the following format:\nhttps://doi.crossref.org/servlet/getForwardLinks?usr=email@address.com/role\u0026amp;pwd=password\u0026amp;doi=doi\u0026amp;startDate=YYYY-MM-DD\u0026amp;endDate=YYYY-MM-DD where:\nemail@address.com is your user credential email address role is the role corresponding to the prefix or title being retrieved password is your user credential password doi can be a full DOI or a prefix If you use shared, organisation-wide role credentials, queries have the following format:\nhttps://doi.crossref.org/servlet/getForwardLinks?usr=username\u0026amp;pwd=password\u0026amp;doi=doi\u0026amp;startDate=YYYY-MM-DD\u0026amp;endDate=YYYY-MM-DD where:\nusername is the shared role and password is the shared password for the prefix or title being retrieved; doi can be a full DOI or a prefix. On both versions of the query, date range is optional. Dates in the query refer to when the citation match was made (usually shortly after the DOI of the citing article was registered), not the publication date of the articles being queried for: all citations found in the given period will be returned, regardless of when the cited articles were originally deposited. Queries can also be made for a single day, in which case use the following format:\nhttps://doi.crossref.org/servlet/getForwardLinks?usr=role\u0026amp;pwd=password\u0026amp;doi=prefix\u0026amp;date=YYYY-MM-DD By default, citations from posted content (including preprints) are not included. To retrieve them as well, include \u0026amp;include_postedcontent=true in the query URL:\nhttps://doi.crossref.org/servlet/getForwardLinks?usr=role\u0026amp;pwd=password\u0026amp;doi=prefix\u0026amp;date=YYYY-MM-DD\u0026amp;include_postedcontent=true Output is XML formatted according to Crossref’s query schema.\nIf the query times out, we recommend using a smaller query, for example by using a narrower date range or splitting prefixes into individual DOIs. This is unlikely to affect most users, however if you frequently experience timeouts due to large query results get in touch.\nHere is some example output:\n\u0026lt;crossref_result xmlns=\u0026#34;http://www.crossref.org/qrschema/2.0\u0026#34; xmlns:xsi=\u0026#34;http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance\u0026#34; version=\u0026#34;2.0\u0026#34; xsi:schemaLocation=\u0026#34;http://www.crossref.org/qrschema/2.0 http://www.crossref.org/qrschema/crossref_query_output2.0.xsd\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;query_result\u0026gt; \u0026lt;head\u0026gt; \u0026lt;email_address\u0026gt;none\u0026lt;/email_address\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi_batch_id\u0026gt;none\u0026lt;/doi_batch_id\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/head\u0026gt; \u0026lt;body\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/forward_link\u0026gt; \u0026lt;forward_link doi=\u0026#34;10.1021/jacs.9b09811\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;journal_cite fl_count=\u0026#34;0\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;issn type=\u0026#34;print\u0026#34;\u0026gt;2161-1653\u0026lt;/issn\u0026gt; \u0026lt;issn type=\u0026#34;electronic\u0026#34;\u0026gt;2161-1653\u0026lt;/issn\u0026gt; \u0026lt;journal_title\u0026gt;ACS Macro Letters\u0026lt;/journal_title\u0026gt; \u0026lt;journal_abbreviation\u0026gt;ACS Macro Lett.\u0026lt;/journal_abbreviation\u0026gt; \u0026lt;article_title\u0026gt;Critical Role of Ion Exchange Conditions on the Properties of Network Ionic Polymers\u0026lt;/article_title\u0026gt; \u0026lt;contributors\u0026gt; \u0026lt;contributor first-author=\u0026#34;true\u0026#34; sequence=\u0026#34;first\u0026#34; contributor_role=\u0026#34;author\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;given_name\u0026gt;Naisong\u0026lt;/given_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;surname\u0026gt;Shan\u0026lt;/surname\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/contributor\u0026gt; \u0026lt;contributor first-author=\u0026#34;false\u0026#34; sequence=\u0026#34;additional\u0026#34; contributor_role=\u0026#34;author\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;given_name\u0026gt;Chengtian\u0026lt;/given_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;surname\u0026gt;Shen\u0026lt;/surname\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/contributor\u0026gt; \u0026lt;contributor first-author=\u0026#34;false\u0026#34; sequence=\u0026#34;additional\u0026#34; contributor_role=\u0026#34;author\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;given_name\u0026gt;Christopher M.\u0026lt;/given_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;surname\u0026gt;Evans\u0026lt;/surname\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/contributor\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/contributors\u0026gt; \u0026lt;volume\u0026gt;9\u0026lt;/volume\u0026gt; \u0026lt;issue\u0026gt;12\u0026lt;/issue\u0026gt; \u0026lt;first_page\u0026gt;1718\u0026lt;/first_page\u0026gt; \u0026lt;year\u0026gt;2020\u0026lt;/year\u0026gt; \u0026lt;publication_type\u0026gt;full_text\u0026lt;/publication_type\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi type=\u0026#34;journal_article\u0026#34;\u0026gt;10.1021/acsmacrolett.0c00678\u0026lt;/doi\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/journal_cite\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/forward_link\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/body\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/query_result\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/crossref_result\u0026gt; Note that the fl_count property gives the number of times the citing article has itself been cited.\nRetrieve citation matches using an XML query Citations can be retrieved through an XML query. The query contains only the DOI of the cited article stored in the fl_query element. Each XML file must contain only a single DOI.\nIf you submit a batch query submission with more than one DOI per query, the remaining DOIs in that query will return the message \u0026ldquo;exceeded limit of forward link queries per submission.\u0026rdquo; So, any DOIs after the first will not have alerts enabled.\nSetting the alert attribute to “true” instructs the system to remember this query and to send new Cited-by link results to the specified email address when they occur. Note that an email address cannot be unset from receiving notifications, so only use this option for email addresses that will continue to receive notifications on a long-term basis.\nHere is an example XML query:\nhttps://doi.crossref.org/servlet/query?usr=ROLE\u0026amp;pwd=PASSWORD\u0026amp;qdata=\u0026lt;?xml version=\u0026#34;1.0\u0026#34;?\u0026gt; \u0026lt;query_batch version=\u0026#34;2.0\u0026#34; xmlns = \u0026#34;http://www.crossref.org/qschema/2.0\u0026#34; xmlns:xsi=\u0026#34;http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance\u0026#34; xsi:schemaLocation=\u0026#34;http://www.crossref.org/qschema/2.0 http://www.crossref.org/qschema/crossref_query_input2.0.xsd\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;head\u0026gt; \u0026lt;email_address\u0026gt;EMAIL\u0026lt;/email_address\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi_batch_id\u0026gt;fl_001\u0026lt;/doi_batch_id\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/head\u0026gt; \u0026lt;body\u0026gt; \u0026lt;fl_query alert=\u0026#34;false\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi\u0026gt;10.1021/acs.joc.7b01326\u0026lt;/doi\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/fl_query\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/body\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/query_batch\u0026gt; By default, citations from posted content (including preprints) are not included. To retrieve them as well, use \u0026lt;fl_query include_postedcontent=\u0026quot;true\u0026quot;\u0026gt; in the body of the query.\nHere is an example of the output XML:\n\u0026lt;crossref_result xmlns=\u0026#34;http://www.crossref.org/qrschema/2.0\u0026#34; xmlns:xsi=\u0026#34;http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance\u0026#34; version=\u0026#34;2.0\u0026#34; xsi:schemaLocation=\u0026#34;http://www.crossref.org/qrschema/2.0 http://www.crossref.org/qrschema/crossref_query_output2.0.xsd\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;query_result\u0026gt; \u0026lt;head\u0026gt; \u0026lt;email_address\u0026gt;{email}\u0026lt;/email_address\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi_batch_id\u0026gt;fl_001\u0026lt;/doi_batch_id\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/head\u0026gt; \u0026lt;body\u0026gt; \u0026lt;forward_link doi=\u0026#34;10.5555/ums71316\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;journal_cite fl_count=\u0026#34;0\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;issn type=\u0026#34;print\u0026#34;\u0026gt;1070-3632\u0026lt;/issn\u0026gt; \u0026lt;issn type=\u0026#34;electronic\u0026#34;\u0026gt;1608-3350\u0026lt;/issn\u0026gt; \u0026lt;journal_title\u0026gt;Russian Journal of General Chemistry\u0026lt;/journal_title\u0026gt; \u0026lt;journal_abbreviation\u0026gt;Russ J Gen Chem\u0026lt;/journal_abbreviation\u0026gt; \u0026lt;article_title\u0026gt;Simultaneous Formation of Cage and Spirane Pentaalkoxyphosphoranes in Reaction of 5,5-Dimethyl-2-(2-oxo-1,2-diphenylethoxy)-1,3,2-dioxaphosphorinane with Hexafluoroacetone\u0026lt;/article_title\u0026gt; \u0026lt;contributors\u0026gt; \u0026lt;contributor first-author=\u0026#34;true\u0026#34; sequence=\u0026#34;first\u0026#34; contributor_role=\u0026#34;author\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;given_name\u0026gt;V. F.\u0026lt;/given_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;surname\u0026gt;Mironov\u0026lt;/surname\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/contributor\u0026gt; \u0026lt;contributor first-author=\u0026#34;false\u0026#34; sequence=\u0026#34;additional\u0026#34; contributor_role=\u0026#34;author\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;given_name\u0026gt;M. N.\u0026lt;/given_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;surname\u0026gt;Dimukhametov\u0026lt;/surname\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/contributor\u0026gt; \u0026lt;contributor first-author=\u0026#34;false\u0026#34; sequence=\u0026#34;additional\u0026#34; contributor_role=\u0026#34;author\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;given_name\u0026gt;Ya. S.\u0026lt;/given_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;surname\u0026gt;Blinova\u0026lt;/surname\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/contributor\u0026gt; \u0026lt;contributor first-author=\u0026#34;false\u0026#34; sequence=\u0026#34;additional\u0026#34; contributor_role=\u0026#34;author\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;given_name\u0026gt;F. Kh.\u0026lt;/given_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;surname\u0026gt;Karataeva\u0026lt;/surname\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/contributor\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/contributors\u0026gt; \u0026lt;volume\u0026gt;90\u0026lt;/volume\u0026gt; \u0026lt;issue\u0026gt;11\u0026lt;/issue\u0026gt; \u0026lt;first_page\u0026gt;2080\u0026lt;/first_page\u0026gt; \u0026lt;year\u0026gt;2020\u0026lt;/year\u0026gt; \u0026lt;publication_type\u0026gt;full_text\u0026lt;/publication_type\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi type=\u0026#34;journal_article\u0026#34;\u0026gt;10.1134/S1070363220110109\u0026lt;/doi\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/journal_cite\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/forward_link\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/body\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/query_result\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/crossref_result\u0026gt; Retrieve citation matches using the admin tool You can find citations to single DOIs using our admin tool. Log in using your Crossref account credentials, click on the Queries tab, then Cited By Links. This returns a list of DOIs:\nShow image\r×\rRetrieve citation matches using the OJS Cited-by plugin For members who manage their journal using OJS v3.1.2.4 or later, you can install a Cited-by plugin from the plugin gallery. It pulls data from the Cited-by API and can display it directly on article webpages. This plugin has been generously contributed by the community and is not maintained by Crossref.\nIf you are not using OJS but use another third party software to manage your journal there is a good chance that there is also a plugin available. We don\u0026rsquo;t maintain a comprehensive list of Cited-by plugins, but you can contact your software provider for details.\nRetrieve citation matches using OAI-PMH Note that the OAI-PMH API returns matches for the following article types: Journals, Books, Book Series, and Components. Other types are not included. To get complete results, we recommend using the HTTPS POST or an XML query (see the two sections above) for retrieving Cited-by matches rather than OAI-PMH.\nThis format retrieves Cited-by matches established within a date range for a prefix or title. Queries have the following format:\nhttps://oai.crossref.org/OAIHandler?verb=ListRecords\u0026amp;usr=role\u0026amp;pwd=password\u0026amp;set=record type:prefix:pubID\u0026amp;from=YYYY-MM-DD\u0026amp;until=YYYY-MM-DD\u0026amp;metadataPrefix=cr_citedby\u0026amp;include_postedcontent=false where:\nrole and password are the role credentials for the prefix or title being retrieved; record type is a single letter. Use J for journal; B for books, conference proceedings, datasets, reports, standards, or dissertations; and S for series; prefix is the owning prefix of the title being retrieved; pubID is the publication identification number of the title. This is optional: to query for all titles related to a prefix, simply omit the pubID; metadataPrefix=cr_citedby indicates that the results should include Cited-by matches rather than item metadata. The from and until parameters are optional and define a date range using YYYY-MM-DD format (ISO 8601). Items returned were cited at least once in the period. All citations for these items are returned, not only those that occurred between the two dates. Note that the date range does not refer to the publication date of the cited works, but the dates they were cited. By default, citations from posted content (including preprints) are not included. To retrieve them as well, add \u0026amp;include_postedcontent=true to the query URL.\nOutput is XML formatted according to our query schema and contains a list of the DOIs that cited the specified article or prefix.\nSome OAI-PMH requests are too big to be retrieved in a single transaction. If a given response contains a resumption token, the user must make an additional request to retrieve the rest of the data. Learn more about resumption tokens, and OAI-PMH requests.\nAn example OAI-PMH query response is as follows:\n\u0026lt;?xml version=\u0026#34;1.0\u0026#34; encoding=\u0026#34;UTF-8\u0026#34;?\u0026gt; \u0026lt;OAI-PMH xmlns=\u0026#34;http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/\u0026#34; xmlns:xsi=\u0026#34;http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance\u0026#34; xsi:schemaLocation=\u0026#34;http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/ http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/OAI-PMH.xsd\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;responseDate\u0026gt;2020-12-21T10:38:26\u0026lt;/responseDate\u0026gt; \u0026lt;request verb=\u0026#34;ListRecords\u0026#34; from=\u0026#34;2020-01-01\u0026#34; until=\u0026#34;2020-01-02\u0026#34; set=\u0026#34;J:10.1021\u0026#34; metadataPrefix=\u0026#34;CR_CITEDBY\u0026#34; resumptionToken=\u0026#34;78da6164be33c5fb\u0026#34; \u0026gt;http://oai.crossref.org/oai\u0026lt;/request\u0026gt; \u0026lt;!-- recipient 1234 abc --\u0026gt; \u0026lt;ListRecords\u0026gt; \u0026lt;record\u0026gt; \u0026lt;header\u0026gt; \u0026lt;identifier\u0026gt;info:doi/10.1016/1044-0305(94)80016-2\u0026lt;/identifier\u0026gt; \u0026lt;datestamp\u0026gt;2020-12-18\u0026lt;/datestamp\u0026gt; \u0026lt;setSpec\u0026gt;J:10.1021\u0026lt;/setSpec\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/header\u0026gt; \u0026lt;metadata\u0026gt; \u0026lt;citations\u0026gt; \u0026lt;citation xmlns=\u0026#34;http://www.crossref.org/schema/crossref_citations_1.0.0\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi\u0026gt;10.1023/1051-030580416\u0026lt;/doi\u0026gt; \u0026lt;citations-cited-by\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi type=\u0026#34;journal-article\u0026#34;\u0026gt;10.1021/acs.jproteome.0c00464\u0026lt;/doi\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi type=\u0026#34;conference-paper\u0026#34;\u0026gt;10.1007/978-1-0716-0943-9_16\u0026lt;/doi\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi type=\u0026#34;journal-article\u0026#34;\u0026gt;10.1038/s41598-020-78800-6\u0026lt;/doi\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi type=\u0026#34;posted-content\u0026#34;\u0026gt;10.1101/2020.12.01.407270\u0026lt;/doi\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi type=\u0026#34;journal-article\u0026#34;\u0026gt;10.1007/s11120-020-00803-1\u0026lt;/doi\u0026gt; \u0026lt;citations-cited-by\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/citation\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/citations\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/metadata\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/record\u0026gt; \u0026lt;resumptionToken \u0026gt;78da6164be33c5fb\u0026lt;/resumptionToken\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/ListRecords\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/OAI-PMH\u0026gt; OAI-PMH queries return the DOI of each citation. You can use our REST API or XML API to retrieve the full bibliographic data for each citation.\nCitation notifications You can receive citation notifications by email or an endpoint notification. In both cases the text of the message is the same: it contains the same output as an XML query, containing details of the citing and cited works.\nTo select an email address for Cited-by notifications, see the XML query section.\nTroubleshooting Cited-by queries Sometimes citations don’t show up in Cited-by when you would expect them. There could be several reasons for this:\nThe references haven’t been included in the metadata. We don’t use article PDFs or crawl websites to retrieve references, we rely on them being deposited as metadata by our members. Check the metadata of the citing work using our APIs to see whether references have been included. The DOI of the cited work wasn’t included in the reference and there was either an error in the metadata or insufficient information for us to make a reliable match. In this case, check the metadata for any errors and contact the owner of the citing work to redeposit the references. If the citing article was registered very recently it can take time to update the cited article’s metadata. If this happens, wait for a few days before trying again. Note that citations are only retrieved from works with a Crossref DOI and will differ from citation counts provided by other services. Not all scholarly publications are registered with us and not all publishers opt to deposit references, so we can\u0026rsquo;t claim that citation counts are comprehensive.\nIf you have difficulty accessing citation matches for your own content, try checking first with the admin tool and see if you can replicate the results there using one of the API options above.\n",
"headings": ["Retrieve citation matches using HTTPS POST ","Retrieve citation matches using an XML query ","Retrieve citation matches using the admin tool ","Retrieve citation matches using the OJS Cited-by plugin ","Retrieve citation matches using OAI-PMH ","Citation notifications ","Troubleshooting Cited-by queries "]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/funder-registry/accessing-the-funder-registry/",
"title": "Accessing the Open Funder Registry",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2021-04-09",
"lastmod_ts": 1617926400,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "The list is available to download as an RDF file from the Open Funder Registry GitLab repository, and is freely available under a CC0 license. The RDF file provides the funder preferred name, alternate name(s), country, type (government, private), subtype, and any relationship to another entity. Private funding subtypes include: academic, corporate, foundation, international, other non-profit (private), professional associations and societies. Government funding subtypes include: federal (national government), government non-federal (state/provincial government). You can therefore easily build funding metadata into your own tools such as manuscript tracking systems, or analytics services.\n",
"content": "The list is available to download as an RDF file from the Open Funder Registry GitLab repository, and is freely available under a CC0 license. The RDF file provides the funder preferred name, alternate name(s), country, type (government, private), subtype, and any relationship to another entity. Private funding subtypes include: academic, corporate, foundation, international, other non-profit (private), professional associations and societies. Government funding subtypes include: federal (national government), government non-federal (state/provincial government). You can therefore easily build funding metadata into your own tools such as manuscript tracking systems, or analytics services.\nYou may also download a .csv file of the funder names and identifiers in the Open Funder Registry, and download a list of funders in JSON format.\nOpen Funder Registry updates The current and previous versions of the Registry are available from the Open Funder Registry GitLab repository. The registry is usually updated monthly.\nYou can request to have a missing funder added to the Open Funder Registry by using our contact form. Please include the name of the funder, its website address, country, and if possible any DOIs of research articles that already acknowledge this funder.\n",
"headings": ["Open Funder Registry updates "]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/funder-registry/funding-data-overview/",
"title": "Funding data overview",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2025-12-15",
"lastmod_ts": 1765756800,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "Add funder information, including the funder’s unique identifier from the Open Funder Registry, and help build connections between funders and research outputs.\nLinking 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 and salary awards.\nMembers can contribute by depositing select information from funding acknowledgements from their publications as part of their standard metadata. This includes funder names, ROR or funder IDs, and associated grant numbers.\n",
"content": "Add funder information, including the funder’s unique identifier from the Open Funder Registry, and help build connections between funders and research outputs.\nLinking 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 and salary awards.\nMembers can contribute by depositing select information from funding acknowledgements from their publications as part of their standard metadata. This includes funder names, ROR or funder IDs, and associated grant numbers.\nFunding 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.\nHow to collect and register funding data Review the funding data markup guide if you are submitting funding data via XML. 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. Include a ROR ID as a funder identifier, or match funder names to their corresponding Funder ID in the Open Funder Registry. Deposit with one or more funder names, a ROR ID or Crossref funder ID(s), and Crossref grant ID(s) for each metadata record. If a grant ID is not available, include the funder-supplied award or grant number. You can deposit funding data as a resource deposit (useful for back-year records) 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 to see the percentage of your deposits that have funding data (and other key metadata elements) registered. ",
"headings": ["Linking research funding and published outcomes ","How to collect and register funding data "]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/funder-registry/updating-funding-deposits-with-new-registry-info/",
"title": "Updating funding deposits with new registry info",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2020-04-08",
"lastmod_ts": 1586304000,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "The Funder Registry is growing rapidly. New funders are continually being evaluated for inclusion, and the Registry is updated almost every month. Once added, a funder name is given a DOI, making it an official Registry entry. Check regularly and add funder IDs to existing records where no funder ID was available at the time of first deposit.\nUpdating deposited data to reflect registry changes `` If an appropriate identifier did not exist in the registry (or a match could not be made) at the time of deposit, metadata will need to be updated to include new identifiers and better registry metadata.\n",
"content": "The Funder Registry is growing rapidly. New funders are continually being evaluated for inclusion, and the Registry is updated almost every month. Once added, a funder name is given a DOI, making it an official Registry entry. Check regularly and add funder IDs to existing records where no funder ID was available at the time of first deposit.\nUpdating deposited data to reflect registry changes `` If an appropriate identifier did not exist in the registry (or a match could not be made) at the time of deposit, metadata will need to be updated to include new identifiers and better registry metadata.\nDepositing funding and license metadata using a .csv file `` We support the deposit of funding and text and data mining license metadata in .csv format through our web deposit form - learn how to do a supplemental metadata upload using a .csv file.\n",
"headings": ["Updating deposited data to reflect registry changes ``","Depositing funding and license metadata using a .csv file ``"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/funder-registry/funder-data-via-the-api/",
"title": "Funder data via the API",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2020-04-08",
"lastmod_ts": 1586304000,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "Funding data can be accessed via the Crossref REST API. The API is openly available, and there is no requirement to register or be a Crossref member in order to use it. Funder IDs are DOIs that share a common prefix, so for API queries, only the DOI suffix should be used. Learn more about the structure of a DOI.\nUseful queries `` All funders listed in the Open Funder Registry - https://api.crossref.org/funders Find the funder ID for a specific funding body - https://api.crossref.org/funders?query={name}. For example: https://api.crossref.org/funders?query=wellcome List of DOIs associated with a specific funder - https://api.crossref.org/funders/{funder ID}/works. For example: https://api.crossref.org/funders/100004440/works Metadata for DOIs that cite a specific award/grant number - https://api.crossref.org/works?filter=award.number:{grant number}. For example: https://api.crossref.org/works?filter=award.number:CBET-0756451 Learn more in our REST API documentation, including detailed instructions on constructing further API queries.\n",
"content": "Funding data can be accessed via the Crossref REST API. The API is openly available, and there is no requirement to register or be a Crossref member in order to use it. Funder IDs are DOIs that share a common prefix, so for API queries, only the DOI suffix should be used. Learn more about the structure of a DOI.\nUseful queries `` All funders listed in the Open Funder Registry - https://api.crossref.org/funders Find the funder ID for a specific funding body - https://api.crossref.org/funders?query={name}. For example: https://api.crossref.org/funders?query=wellcome List of DOIs associated with a specific funder - https://api.crossref.org/funders/{funder ID}/works. For example: https://api.crossref.org/funders/100004440/works Metadata for DOIs that cite a specific award/grant number - https://api.crossref.org/works?filter=award.number:{grant number}. For example: https://api.crossref.org/works?filter=award.number:CBET-0756451 Learn more in our REST API documentation, including detailed instructions on constructing further API queries.\n",
"headings": ["Useful queries ``"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/similarity-check/participate/",
"title": "How to participate in Similarity Check",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2020-05-19",
"lastmod_ts": 1589846400,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "When you apply for the Similarity Check service, you must ensure you have full-text URLs for Similarity Check present in the metadata of at least 90% of your registered articles (across all your journal prefixes). These URLs will be used by Turnitin to index your content into the iThenticate database, making you eligible for reduced-rate access to iThenticate through the Similarity Check service.\nThe URLs must point directly to your full-text PDF, HTML, or plain text content, and you must continue to include these links in all future deposits. If you aren’t registering any journal articles and instead are registering other record types (such as conference papers), please contact us.\n",
"content": "When you apply for the Similarity Check service, you must ensure you have full-text URLs for Similarity Check present in the metadata of at least 90% of your registered articles (across all your journal prefixes). These URLs will be used by Turnitin to index your content into the iThenticate database, making you eligible for reduced-rate access to iThenticate through the Similarity Check service.\nThe URLs must point directly to your full-text PDF, HTML, or plain text content, and you must continue to include these links in all future deposits. If you aren’t registering any journal articles and instead are registering other record types (such as conference papers), please contact us.\nThe metadata you deposit with Crossref is available to be searched and retrieved by everyone, and this includes Similarity Check full-text URLs. If your content is paywalled, please make sure that your Similarity Check URLs prompt an authentication step before allowing a user to access full-text content. You’ll also need to ensure that your hosting provider has safelisted the Turnitin IP range to ensure that the content is available for them to index.\nWhere should Similarity Check URLs point? These URLs will be used to index your content, so they need to resolve directly to the content itself - the full-text PDF, HTML or plain text content. PDFs in a frame can\u0026rsquo;t be indexed, and neither can content that\u0026rsquo;s wrapped in javascript. The URL must point directly to the location of the full-text content, and not to the article landing page (even if the content is available via a link on that page). Most members supply the PDF download link.\nLearn more about how to include these full-text URLs in your new deposits or add them to content that you’ve previously registered.\nSafelisting the Turnitin IP address Once you\u0026rsquo;ve added your Similarity Check URLs to your metadata, the Turnitin indexing crawler will index your content. If your content is openly available, the crawler will be able to access and index your content without further work on your side. But if your content is protected by authentication, you may need to safelist Turnitin\u0026rsquo;s IP address and UserAgent so they can do this.\nIf your content is protected by authentication, please ask your hosting provider to safelist the following IP address and UserAgent:\nIP address range: 199.47.87.132 to 199.47.87.135 AND 199.47.82.0 to 199.47.82.15. UserAgent: TurnitinBot/ContentIngest (http://www.turnitin.com/robot/crawlerinfo.html)\n",
"headings": ["Where should Similarity Check URLs point? ","Safelisting the Turnitin IP address "]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/similarity-check/participate/eligibility/",
"title": "Checking your eligibility and applying",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2020-05-19",
"lastmod_ts": 1589846400,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "Update 2024: We are no longer able to offer the Similarity Check service to members based in Russia. Find out more.\nSimilarity Check is only available to Crossref members who have full-text URLs for Similarity Check present in the metadata of at least 90% of their registered articles (across all journal prefixes). These URLs must point directly to the full-text PDF, HTML, or plain text content and if your content is behind authentication, you need to safelist the Turnitin IP address. Learn more about how to participate.\n",
"content": "Update 2024: We are no longer able to offer the Similarity Check service to members based in Russia. Find out more.\nSimilarity Check is only available to Crossref members who have full-text URLs for Similarity Check present in the metadata of at least 90% of their registered articles (across all journal prefixes). These URLs must point directly to the full-text PDF, HTML, or plain text content and if your content is behind authentication, you need to safelist the Turnitin IP address. Learn more about how to participate.\nYou can check the percentage of Similarity Check URLs already included in your metadata using the widget below - just start typing your account name in the box, select the correct one from the list, and your result will be automatically calculated. Don’t worry, you don’t need to know your Member ID.\nIf you do meet the threshold, the widget will link you to a form where you can apply for Similarity Check and click to accept the service terms. If you don’t meet the threshold, the widget will provide a .csv file to download which shows all your DOIs that don’t have Similarity Check full-text URLs. It will also provide instructions for how to add the missing full-text URLs.\nMember Name\rMember ID\rGood news - you’re eligible to apply for our Similarity Check service. You can now apply here and accept the service terms.\nOnce we receive your application, we’ll work with the team at Turnitin to confirm that they can access your content. If they can\u0026rsquo;t access your content, we won\u0026rsquo;t be able to continue with your application until this problem is solved, but we\u0026rsquo;ll work with you to fix any issues. Don’t forget, if your full-text content is protected by authentication, then you\u0026rsquo;ll need to ask your hosting provider to safelist Turnitin’s IP range to ensure your content is accessible for indexing purposes. Do make sure that this is done before you apply.\nWe’ll also send you a pro-rated invoice for your first year subscription to the service.\nWe’re sorry, but you are not eligible to register for our Similarity Check service just yet. To be eligible you need to register full-text urls for Similarity Check pointing to the full text article for more than 90% of your content. Find out how to add these full-text urls for Similarity Check to your existing content. To see exactly which content items are missing the full text article, simply click the “Generate CSV” button above. Please note, this CSV can only show the first 10k content items. If you have more than 10k content items missing DOIs, please contact us and we'll be able to provide you with the full list. We’re sorry, but you are not eligible to register for our Similarity Check service just yet. It looks as though you haven’t registered any content with us yet. To be eligible for Similarity Check you need to be registering content with us and including URLs for Similarity Check that point to the full text article for at least 90% of your content. Find out more about how to register content and learn more about full-text URLs for Similarity Check. Please note - if you aren\u0026rsquo;t registering ANY journal articles at all and are only registering non-journal content (eg conference papers, books) then the tool may not give accurate results. Please contact our support team for more help.\nUnfortunately, you aren’t currently eligible for the Similarity Check service as you don’t have Similarity Check URLs in the metadata of over 90% of your content. As you have so many DOIs registered, we can’t provide a CSV file showing which DOIs are missing the Similarity Check URLs. Please contact our support team with our team and they’ll be able to provide you with the CSV file. ",
"headings": ["Running for [[membername]] (ID:[[memberid]])","Running for [[membername]] (ID:[[memberid]])","Results for [[membername]] (ID:[[memberid]])","[[simCheckTotal]]/[[journalTotal]] = [[percentage]]%"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/similarity-check/participate/urls-for-new-deposits/",
"title": "Adding full-text URLs to new deposits",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2025-12-10",
"lastmod_ts": 1765324800,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "If you’re planning to participate in Similarity Check in the future, it’s best to include Similarity Check URLs in your deposits from the start. You can deposit Similarity Check URLs using our helper tools, or by including them in your XML deposits.\nHelper tools Our helper tools all contain a specific field where you can add your full-text URL specifically for Similarity Check:\nCrossref XML plugin for OJS: OJS automatically includes the Similarity Check URL as part of your deposit. Web deposit form: select Add Similarity Check URL New Metadata Manager (previously known as the record registration form): add under Similarity Check full text URL Direct XML deposit The full-text URL can be included as part of your standard metadata. For Similarity Check, the full-text URL needs to be deposited within the crawler-based collection property, with item crawler value iParadigms for schema versions 5.3.1 and below, and value similarity-check beginning with schema version 5.4.0. Here\u0026rsquo;s an example:\n",
"content": "If you’re planning to participate in Similarity Check in the future, it’s best to include Similarity Check URLs in your deposits from the start. You can deposit Similarity Check URLs using our helper tools, or by including them in your XML deposits.\nHelper tools Our helper tools all contain a specific field where you can add your full-text URL specifically for Similarity Check:\nCrossref XML plugin for OJS: OJS automatically includes the Similarity Check URL as part of your deposit. Web deposit form: select Add Similarity Check URL New Metadata Manager (previously known as the record registration form): add under Similarity Check full text URL Direct XML deposit The full-text URL can be included as part of your standard metadata. For Similarity Check, the full-text URL needs to be deposited within the crawler-based collection property, with item crawler value iParadigms for schema versions 5.3.1 and below, and value similarity-check beginning with schema version 5.4.0. Here\u0026rsquo;s an example:\n\u0026lt;doi_data\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi\u0026gt;10.5555/sampledoi\u0026lt;/doi\u0026gt; \u0026lt;resource\u0026gt;http://www.yoururl.org/article1_.html\u0026lt;/resource\u0026gt; \u0026lt;collection property=\u0026#34;crawler-based\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;item crawler=\u0026#34;similarity-check\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;resource\u0026gt;http://www.yoururl.org/article1_.html\u0026lt;/resource\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/item\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/collection\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/doi_data\u0026gt; Use our widget to check the percentage of Similarity Check URLs included in your metadata.\n",
"headings": ["Helper tools ","Direct XML deposit "]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/similarity-check/participate/urls-for-existing-deposits/",
"title": "Adding full-text URLs to existing deposits",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2025-06-20",
"lastmod_ts": 1750377600,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "If you\u0026rsquo;ve previously registered content without including your full-text URLs for Similarity Check, don\u0026rsquo;t worry - you can still add them later. Here are the options for adding full-text URLs for Similarity Check for existing deposits:\nUse the web deposit form’s supplemental metadata upload using a .csv file option If you have a large number of DOIs to update, it\u0026rsquo;s easiest to upload a .csv file of the DOIs and their Similarity Check full-text URLs using the web deposit form\u0026rsquo;s supplemental metadata upload using a .csv file option.\n",
"content": "If you\u0026rsquo;ve previously registered content without including your full-text URLs for Similarity Check, don\u0026rsquo;t worry - you can still add them later. Here are the options for adding full-text URLs for Similarity Check for existing deposits:\nUse the web deposit form’s supplemental metadata upload using a .csv file option If you have a large number of DOIs to update, it\u0026rsquo;s easiest to upload a .csv file of the DOIs and their Similarity Check full-text URLs using the web deposit form\u0026rsquo;s supplemental metadata upload using a .csv file option.\nUpload a resource-only deposit If you deposit Crossref metadata by sending us the XML directly, you may wish to update your existing XML using a resource-only deposit, as in this example XML file. Learn how to upload resource-only deposits to add metadata to an existing record.\nA full redeposit (update) Run a standard metadata deposit by adding the Similarity Check URLs, as in this example. Don\u0026rsquo;t forget to update your timestamp!\nUse our widget to check the percentage of Similarity Check URLs included in your metadata.\n",
"headings": ["Use the web deposit form’s supplemental metadata upload using a .csv file option ","Upload a resource-only deposit ","A full redeposit (update) "]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/similarity-check/ithenticate-account-setup/",
"title": "Setting up your iThenticate v1 account (admins only)",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2022-07-15",
"lastmod_ts": 1657843200,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "This section is for Similarity Check account administrators using iThenticate v1. You need to follow the steps in this section before you start to set up your users and share the account with your colleagues.\nIf you are using iThenticate 2.0 rather than iThenticate v1, there are separate instructions for you.\nUsing iThenticate 2.0 directly in the browser - go to setting up iThenticate 2.0. Integrating iThenticate 2.0 with your MTS - go to setting up your MTS integration. Not sure if you\u0026rsquo;re using iThenticate v1 or iThenticate 2.0? More here.\n",
"content": "This section is for Similarity Check account administrators using iThenticate v1. You need to follow the steps in this section before you start to set up your users and share the account with your colleagues.\nIf you are using iThenticate 2.0 rather than iThenticate v1, there are separate instructions for you.\nUsing iThenticate 2.0 directly in the browser - go to setting up iThenticate 2.0. Integrating iThenticate 2.0 with your MTS - go to setting up your MTS integration. Not sure if you\u0026rsquo;re using iThenticate v1 or iThenticate 2.0? More here.\nYour personal administrator account in iThenticate v1 Once Turnitin has enabled iThenticate v1 for your organisation, the main editorial contact provided on your application form will become the iThenticate account administrator. As an administrator, you create and manage the users on your account, and you decide how your organisation uses the iThenticate tool.\nTo start with, you need to login to iThenticate and set your password.\nLog in to your administrator account (v1) Start from the link in the invitation email from noreply@ithenticate.com with the subject line “Account Created” and click Login Enter your username and single-use password Click to agree to the terms of the end-user license agreement. These terms govern your personal use of the service. They’re separate from the central Similarity Check service agreement that your organisation has agreed to. You will be prompted to choose a new password Click ​Change Password​ to save. How do you know if you’re an account administrator? Once you\u0026rsquo;ve logged in, you will only be able to see the Manage Users tab if you\u0026rsquo;re an account administrator.\nShow image × So if you can\u0026rsquo;t see Manage Users or Users, you’re not an account administrator, and you can skip ahead to the user instructions for iThenticate v1.\nUpdating your personal email address or password Changing your email address or updating your password is the same for admins and other users. There\u0026rsquo;s more information in the user instructions for iThenticate v1.\n",
"headings": ["Your personal administrator account in iThenticate v1","Log in to your administrator account (v1) ","How do you know if you’re an account administrator?","Updating your personal email address or password"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/similarity-check/ithenticate-account-setup/administrator-checklist/",
"title": "Administrator checklist",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2020-05-19",
"lastmod_ts": 1589846400,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "This section is for Similarity Check account administrators using iThenticate v1.\nIf you are using iThenticate 2.0 rather than iThenticate v1, there are separate instructions for you.\nUsing iThenticate 2.0 directly in the browser - go to setting up iThenticate 2.0. Integrating iThenticate 2.0 with your MTS - go to setting up your MTS integration. Not sure if you\u0026rsquo;re using iThenticate v1 or iThenticate 2.0? More here.\nNot sure whether you\u0026rsquo;re an account administrator? Check here.\n",
"content": "This section is for Similarity Check account administrators using iThenticate v1.\nIf you are using iThenticate 2.0 rather than iThenticate v1, there are separate instructions for you.\nUsing iThenticate 2.0 directly in the browser - go to setting up iThenticate 2.0. Integrating iThenticate 2.0 with your MTS - go to setting up your MTS integration. Not sure if you\u0026rsquo;re using iThenticate v1 or iThenticate 2.0? More here.\nNot sure whether you\u0026rsquo;re an account administrator? Check here.\nAdministrator Checklist for iThenticate v1 As an administrator, you create and manage the users on your account, and you decide how your organisation uses the iThenticate tool. You’ll find the system easier to use if you set it up correctly to start with, so do read through the checklist below carefully and make sure you\u0026rsquo;ve set up your account how you want it before inviting any users to your account.\nHow do you want to manage users? How will you use the folders in iThenticate? How will you use the exclusions functionality? Which iThenticate repositories will you want to check your manuscripts against? How will you budget for your document checking fees? 1. How do you want to manage users? (v1) You can set up users individually, or put them into groups and manage their settings at group level.\nHow many users do you need to set up? Do you need them to have different permissions or access to different folders? Do you want users to be able to see each other’s folders? Do you want to set up groups to manage the users? Do you want to be the only account administrator, or do you want to add other administrators? Learn more about how to manage users.\n2. How will you use the folders in iThenticate? (v1) If you set up different folders in iThenticate to manage the manuscripts you’re checking, you’ll be able to:\nAssign different users or groups to each folder Set up different exclusions on each folder Choose which repositories to include in each folder Report separately on different folders. You may choose to set up different folders for different titles or years of publication, for example.\nLearn more about how to manage folders.\n3. How will you use the exclusions functionality? (v1) Exclusions allow you to set iThenticate to ignore particular phrases, document sections, common words, and URLs, so that they are not flagged in your account’s Similarity Reports.\nWe recommend starting without any exclusions to avoid excluding anything important. Once your users are experienced enough to identify words and phrases that appear frequently but are not potentially problematic matches (and can therefore be ignored) in a Similarity Report, you can start carefully making use of this feature.\nAt account level, administrators can set phrase exclusions and URL filters. At folder level, administrators can exclude quotes, bibliography, phrases, small matches, small sources, abstracts, and methods and materials. Users can also edit filters and exclusions for existing folders. Users can set exclusions when setting up a new folder and adjust some settings at Similarity Report level. Set clear guidelines for your users so they understand the settings you have already applied, and can make skilful use of the options they can choose for themselves at report level.\n4. Which iThenticate repositories will you want to check your manuscripts against? (v1) iThenticate has a number of content repositories, grouped by the type of content they contain, including: Crossref, Crossref posted content, Internet, Publications, Your Indexed Documents.\nYou can choose which of iThenticate’s repositories you’re checking your manuscripts against. We recommend including them all to start with.\nThe person (whether an administrator or a user) who sets up a folder selects the repositories to check against for that folder. When the folder is shared, other users cannot adjust the repositories selected. Learn more about choosing which repositories to search against.\n5. How will you budget for your document checking fees? (v1) There’s a charge for each document checked, and you’ll receive an invoice in January each year for the documents you’ve checked in the previous year. If you\u0026rsquo;re a member of Crossref through a Sponsor, your Sponsor will receive this invoice.\nAs well as setting a Similarity Check document fees budget for your account each year, it’s useful to monitor document checking and see if you’re on track. You can monitor your usage in the reports section of the iThenticate platform. Ask yourself:\nHow many documents do you plan to check? How often do you want to monitor usage? Set yourself a reminder to check your usage reports periodically. How do you want to segment your report? You can report separately by groups of users, so think about what types of groups would make sense for your circumstances. Learn more about how usage reports can help you monitor the number of documents checked on your account.\nIt’s a good idea to come back to these questions periodically, consider how your use of the tool is evolving, and make changes accordingly.\n",
"headings": ["Administrator Checklist for iThenticate v1 ","1. How do you want to manage users? (v1) ","2. How will you use the folders in iThenticate? (v1) ","3. How will you use the exclusions functionality? (v1) ","4. Which iThenticate repositories will you want to check your manuscripts against? (v1) ","5. How will you budget for your document checking fees? (v1) "]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/similarity-check/ithenticate-account-setup/settings/",
"title": "Admin settings",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2020-05-19",
"lastmod_ts": 1589846400,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "This section shows Similarity Check account administrators using iThenticate v1 how to update their account admin settings. You need to follow the steps in this section before you start to set up your users and share the account with your colleagues.\nIf you are using iThenticate 2.0 rather than iThenticate v1, there are separate instructions for you.\nUsing iThenticate 2.0 directly in the browser - go to setting up iThenticate 2.0. Integrating iThenticate 2.0 with your MTS - go to setting up your MTS integration. Not sure if you\u0026rsquo;re using iThenticate v1 or iThenticate 2.0? More here.\n",
"content": "This section shows Similarity Check account administrators using iThenticate v1 how to update their account admin settings. You need to follow the steps in this section before you start to set up your users and share the account with your colleagues.\nIf you are using iThenticate 2.0 rather than iThenticate v1, there are separate instructions for you.\nUsing iThenticate 2.0 directly in the browser - go to setting up iThenticate 2.0. Integrating iThenticate 2.0 with your MTS - go to setting up your MTS integration. Not sure if you\u0026rsquo;re using iThenticate v1 or iThenticate 2.0? More here.\nNot sure whether you\u0026rsquo;re an account administrator? Check here.\nThe Settings tab controls general, document, and report display options. These options include the number of documents shown for each page, default report view, and controlling email notifications.\nShow image × General settings (v1) Show image × Use General settings to set your home folder - this is the folder will open by default when you log in to iThenticate. Choose your home folder from the drop-down menu.\nFrom the Number of documents to show drop-down, choose how many uploaded documents are listed in your folders before a new page is created.\nChoose what is displayed after you upload a document to iThenticate: Display the upload folder (to see the processing of the document you have just uploaded), or Upload another document (returns you to the upload form).\nYou can also choose the time zone and language for your account - the language you choose will set the language of your user interface.\nClick Update Settings to save your changes.\nDocuments settings (v1) Show image × Use Documents settings to choose the default way iThenticate sorts your uploaded documents: by processed date, title, Similarity Score, and author. Choose your preferred option from the drop-down menu.\nYou can set the threshold at which the Similarity Score color changes, based on the percentage of similarity. All Similarity Scores above the percentage you set will appear in the folder in blue, all those beneath the percentage will appear in gray. This visual distinction helps you easily identify matches above a given threshold. Learn more about how to interpret the Similarity Score.\nClick Update Settings to save your changes.\nReports settings (v1) Show image × Use Reports settings to adjust your email notifications, choose whether to color-code your reports, and view available document repositories for your account.\nEmail notifications tell you when a Similarity Report has exceeded particular thresholds, including Similarity Reports in shared folders. Email notifications are sent to the email address you used to sign up to iThenticate.\nReport email frequency: choose whether to receive notifications, chose how often you would like to receive them every hour, once a day, every other day, or once a week Similarity Report threshold: this refers to a paper’s overall Similarity Score. If the Similarity Score of a paper in your account exceeds the threshold set, you will receive an email notification. The default setting is \u0026lsquo;don\u0026rsquo;t notify me\u0026rsquo;. Content tracking report threshold: this refers to the All Sources section of the Similarity Report. If a single source for a paper in your account exceeds the similarity threshold set, you will receive an email notification. The default setting is don\u0026rsquo;t notify me. Color code report: color-coding the Similarity Report can make viewing matches easier. Choose Yes or No to enable or disable this feature.\nAvailable document repositories: this section shows the available repositories for your account. Modify them in the folder settings.\n",
"headings": ["General settings (v1) ","Documents settings (v1) ","Reports settings (v1) "]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/similarity-check/ithenticate-account-setup/account-info/",
"title": "Account information",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2022-07-15",
"lastmod_ts": 1657843200,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "This section is for Similarity Check account administrators using iThenticate v1.\nIf you are using iThenticate v2 rather than iThenticate v1, there are separate instructions for you.\nUsing iThenticate v2 directly in the browser - go to setting up iThenticate v2. Integrating iThenticate v2 with your MTS - go to setting up your MTS integration. Not sure if you\u0026rsquo;re using iThenticate v1 or iThenticate v2? More here.\nNot sure whether you\u0026rsquo;re an account administrator? Check here.\n",
"content": "This section is for Similarity Check account administrators using iThenticate v1.\nIf you are using iThenticate v2 rather than iThenticate v1, there are separate instructions for you.\nUsing iThenticate v2 directly in the browser - go to setting up iThenticate v2. Integrating iThenticate v2 with your MTS - go to setting up your MTS integration. Not sure if you\u0026rsquo;re using iThenticate v1 or iThenticate v2? More here.\nNot sure whether you\u0026rsquo;re an account administrator? Check here.\nManage your admin account Manage your admin account using the Account Information tab. From here, you can make changes to your details in My Profile, set up URL filters and phrase exclusions across the whole account, and set up API access to connect your iThenticate account to your manuscript submission system.\nShow image × Your admin account profile (v1) The Account Information section shows important information about your iThenticate account, including your account name, account ID, and user ID. Please ignore the iThenticate account expiry date - we’re working with iThenticate to have this removed. The iThenticate account expiry date is set to 1 June 2022 by default.\nShow image × From Account Info, then My Profile, you can:\nUpdate your profile: this form shows your current details. To make changes, enter your password in the Current Password field at the top of the form. Change the name attributed to your account: enter the first and last name in the relevant fields. These fields are required, you cannot leave them blank. Change your email address: enter your email into the email field. This email address is used to send you important account information, so please make sure it is valid. This field is required, you cannot leave it blank. Add a photo to your account: click Choose File, and select the image file you want to upload. Change your password: enter your current password in the Current Password field, enter your new password in the Change Password field, and enter it again in the Confirm Password field. Click Update Profile to save your changes. URL filters (v1) This tab only appears if you are an account administrator.\nUse URL filters to apply URL exclusion filters across your account. Any URLs that you add here will be ignored when the system checks your manuscript against the iThenticate database, and it will apply across your whole account. If you want to let individual users decide which URLs to exclude instead, they can do this themselves at folder level.\nURL filters at the account level works in the same way as at the folder level. Learn more about exclusion settings when setting up a new folder, editing filters and exclusions in existing folders, filters and exclusions within the Similarity Report, and URL filters and phrase exclusions for account administrators.\nAdd a URL to be filtered, and click Add URL. Don’t forget to include / at the end of your URL. Click the X icon to the right of the URL to remove it.\nShow image × Phrase exclusions (v1) This tab only appears if you are an account administrator.\nUse Phrase Exclusions to apply phrase exclusion filters across your account. Any phrases that you add here will be ignored when the system checks your manuscript against the iThenticate database, and it will apply across your whole account. If you want to let individual users decide which phrases to exclude instead, they can do this themselves at folder level.\nPhrase exclusions at the account level works in the same way as at the folder level. Learn more about exclusion settings when setting up a new folder, editing filters and exclusions in existing folders, filters and exclusions within the Similarity Report, and URL filters and phrase exclusions for account administrators.\nClick Add a new phrase, enter the phrase you would like to exclude in the Phrase text field, and click Create. You can add another phrase, go Back to List, or go Back to Account.\nShow image × From the main Phrase Exclusions page, you can view, edit, or remove a phrase.\n",
"headings": ["Manage your admin account","Your admin account profile (v1) ","URL filters (v1) ","Phrase exclusions (v1) "]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/similarity-check/ithenticate-account-setup/manage-users/",
"title": "Manage users",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2020-05-19",
"lastmod_ts": 1589846400,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "This section shows Similarity Check account administrators using iThenticate v1 how to set up their users.\nIf you are using iThenticate 2.0 rather than iThenticate v1, there are separate instructions for you.\nUsing iThenticate 2.0 directly in the browser - go to setting up iThenticate 2.0. Integrating iThenticate 2.0 with your MTS - go to setting up your MTS integration. This tab only appears if you are an account administrator. If you can’t see this tab, please start from your Similarity Check user account.\n",
"content": "This section shows Similarity Check account administrators using iThenticate v1 how to set up their users.\nIf you are using iThenticate 2.0 rather than iThenticate v1, there are separate instructions for you.\nUsing iThenticate 2.0 directly in the browser - go to setting up iThenticate 2.0. Integrating iThenticate 2.0 with your MTS - go to setting up your MTS integration. This tab only appears if you are an account administrator. If you can’t see this tab, please start from your Similarity Check user account.\nShow image × On this page, learn more about:\nProfiles - add, remove and update users on your account. Groups - create groups and add users Reports - access statistics for your account and help plan your budget Sharing preferences - manage what sharing options are available to your users Email - customise your welcome email Profiles (v1) Within user profiles, you can:\nAdd a user: from Add User, click Add New User. On the User Information form, enter the new user\u0026rsquo;s details. Use the Reporting Group drop-down to assign them to a reporting group. Choose a time zone and language (this will be the language they see in the user interface and welcome email). You may upload an image to be attributed to the user - click Choose File to choose an image file from your device. Under the User Permissions section, choose whether this user may: submit documents or only be a reader of shared documents, select a reporting group to which to assign documents when uploading, share their folders with other users, update their profile information, and whether you would like to make this user an account administrator. Click Create to add the user to the iThenticate account. Add a list of users: from Add User, choose Upload User List. To see an example of a correctly-formatted user list, click examples. Click Browse, choose your file, and click Upload. Click View profile to adjust the settings for each user. Edit a user\u0026rsquo;s information: click Edit to the right of the user\u0026rsquo;s email to make changes to a user’s details and permissions Resend an activation email: when a new user is added, they are sent an activation email. To resend their activation email, click Send Activation. Deactivate a user: from the User Information page, click Deactivate User. A deactivated user may no longer log in to iThenticate, but all files associated with them are retained, and still viewable by administrators. Click Activate User to reactivate a user and restore their access to the account and all of their submitted documents and folders. Delete a user: from the User Information page, click Delete User to permanently delete this user from the account. Once a user has been deleted, all the documents they submitted are no longer accessible by the account administrator or shared users. If you accidentally delete a user, click undo in the banner beneath the top menu. If you navigate away from the page, Delete User cannot be undone. Search for a user: enter the user’s name into the search field and click Search. Groups (v1) Use Groups to create reporting groups and add users to groups. By grouping users, you can track usage statistics of a group.\nTo create a new group, enter a name for the new group in the Add New Group field and click Add Report Group. Show image × Add users to the group by going to the user’s profile, and use the Reporting Group drop-down menu to add them to a group. Delete a reporting group from your account by clicking the X icon to the right of the group name, and click OK to confirm. Show image × Change the name of a group by clicking the group’s name, edit the Update Group Name field, and click Update Group Name to save the new group name. Show image × Reports (v1) Under the Reports tab, you can access statistics for your account, reporting groups, and individual account users.\nShow image × View usage statistics by user/group, month, or date range. Click a group name to see more detailed usage statistics for the users in that group. Click a user’s name within a group to see their individual usage report, including document submissions, page count per month, and total submissions made. Click your organisation name to see your organisation’s usage report, including statistics of all submissions by all account users. This will help you budget for the per-document invoice you’ll receive each January for the documents you’ve checked in the previous year. Learn more about fees for Similarity Check. Click change by a report’s date range to change the date range. Enter dates in YYYY-MM-DD format or click the calendar icon to choose a date, then click Update Date Range Please note that the report will display a maximum of 150,000 lines/submissions. If your volume of submissions checked is higher than this for the time period you\u0026rsquo;ve entered, you\u0026rsquo;ll need to adjust the date range to smaller increments. Reporting on estimated usage for budgeting (v1) Each January you\u0026rsquo;ll be invoiced two separate fees for Similarity Check. There\u0026rsquo;s the annual service fee (which is included in your annual membership invoice) and your annual per document checking fees for all the documents you\u0026rsquo;ve checked in the previous year.\nWe know it’s difficult to keep an eye on how many documents you’re checking, particularly if you have more than one person at your organisation using the service. However, do monitor your usage against the budget you set for Similarity Check. As the account administrator, you can keep up-to-date with how many documents have been checked in the Reports section under Manage Users. This can help you to estimate what you\u0026rsquo;ll be invoiced at the end of the year.\nShow image\r×\rOnce in the the Reports section under Manage Users, click Set Date Range, choose your date range, and then click Update Date Range.\nWhat you see next will depend on how you’ve set up your iThenticate account.\nAll accounts will see an orange link in the name of your account, with the number of submissions and documents checked in the selected date range next to it. You can drill down into more information by clicking on the orange link - this will show documents checked by month across your account, split up by individual users.\nIf you’ve created groups, you’ll see a list of your groups with the number of submissions and documents checked in the date range for each group. You can drill down into more information by clicking on each group.\nShow image\r×\rThe difference between submissions and documents and why this report is just an estimate (v1) There are two key columns on this table - Submissions and Document count.\nThe Submissions column shows the number of files you’ve submitted in iThenticate in your chosen date range, and the Document count shows how many documents these submissions are counted as. Some submissions include files that are so large that they\u0026rsquo;re considered two or more documents. Your per document fees invoice will be based on the Document count column.\nWhile this report provides an estimate for the per document fees invoice you\u0026rsquo;ll receive in January, it won\u0026rsquo;t be an exact match. For example, we don\u0026rsquo;t charge you for the first 100 documents you check each year, and we try to avoid charging you if you accidentally submit the same document within a 24 hour period. You can find out more about these differences in our billing section.\nSharing preferences (v1) From the Sharing tab, choose the type of sharing you would like to have for your account:\nView only folders shared by other users (default) View ALL users\u0026rsquo; folders View folders of selected users To change the sharing type, select your preferred sharing type and click Update Sharing.\nIf you select the View folders of selected users option, you must also choose the users’ folders to be shared - to select a user, click the check-box next to their name, and click Update Sharing.\nSet which non-administrator users may share folders by adjusting their permissions (learn more about user profiles.\nCustomize welcome email (v1) A welcome email is sent to new users you add to your account. To customize this welcome message, start from the Email tab.\nThe customized message is prefixed to the automated email, but does not replace it. The text of the automated email cannot be changed, as it contains important information about your account.\nEdit the Custom Email Subject and Custom Message fields as you wish, and click Set Custom Message. The Example \u0026ldquo;Welcome\u0026rdquo; Email Message will update to show you a preview of the welcome email.\n",
"headings": ["Profiles (v1) ","Groups (v1) ","Reports (v1) ","Reporting on estimated usage for budgeting (v1) ","The difference between submissions and documents and why this report is just an estimate (v1) ","Sharing preferences (v1) ","Customize welcome email (v1) "]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/similarity-check/ithenticatev2-account-setup/",
"title": "Setting up your iThenticate 2.0 account for use directly in the browser (admins only)",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2022-07-15",
"lastmod_ts": 1657843200,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "This section is for Similarity Check account administrators only. It explains how administrators need to set up the iThenticate 2.0 account for their organisations if they are planning to use iThenticate in the browser. You need to follow the steps in this section before you start to set up your users and share the account with your colleagues.\nIf you are using iThenticate v1 rather than iThenticate 2.0, take a look at the section for v1 account administrators. If you intend to access iThenticate 2.0 through an integration with your Manuscript Submission System (MTS) instead, go to setting up your MTS integration. Your personal administrator account in iThenticate 2.0 Once Turnitin has enabled iThenticate 2.0 for your organisation, the main editorial contact provided on your application form will become the iThenticate account administrator.\n",
"content": "This section is for Similarity Check account administrators only. It explains how administrators need to set up the iThenticate 2.0 account for their organisations if they are planning to use iThenticate in the browser. You need to follow the steps in this section before you start to set up your users and share the account with your colleagues.\nIf you are using iThenticate v1 rather than iThenticate 2.0, take a look at the section for v1 account administrators. If you intend to access iThenticate 2.0 through an integration with your Manuscript Submission System (MTS) instead, go to setting up your MTS integration. Your personal administrator account in iThenticate 2.0 Once Turnitin has enabled iThenticate 2.0 for your organisation, the main editorial contact provided on your application form will become the iThenticate account administrator.\nYou will receive an email from Turnitin with a link to set your credentials. The email will look like this:\nClick on the blue ‘Set up my account’ button at the bottom of the email. This will bring you to a page which looks something like this:\nFill out your username and password, and don’t forget to tick to agree to the terms and conditions. You will then arrive at your new iThenticate 2.0 account.\nHow do you know if you’re an account administrator? When you are logged in to iThenticate, what tabs can you see?\nIf you\u0026rsquo;re using iThenticate 2.0, you will only be able to see Users on the menu if you\u0026rsquo;re an account administrator.\nShow image × So if you can\u0026rsquo;t see Manage Users or Users, you’re not an account administrator, and you can just read the user instructions for iThenticate 2.0 on the Turnitin website.\nUpdating your email address, username or password in the future If you need to change your personal email address, username or password in the future, you can find instructions on the Turnitin website.\nUpdating your email address or username Changing your password Forgot password? If you forgot your password and have never signed into your new 2.0 account, you\u0026rsquo;ll need to reach out directly to Turnitin\u0026rsquo;s support to have your password resent to you from Turnitin.\nIf you\u0026rsquo;ve already signed into your 2.0 account, but can\u0026rsquo;t remember your password, you can simply use the Forgot Password link on the login screen of your unique 2.0 website (https://crossref-xxx.turnitin.com, with xxx being your member ID).\n",
"headings": ["Your personal administrator account in iThenticate 2.0","How do you know if you’re an account administrator?","Updating your email address, username or password in the future","Forgot password?"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/similarity-check/ithenticatev2-account-setup/administrator-checklist/",
"title": "Administrator checklist",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2022-07-15",
"lastmod_ts": 1657843200,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "As an administrator, you create and manage the users on your account, and you decide how your organisation uses the iThenticate tool. You’ll find the system easier to use if you set it up correctly to start with, so do read through the checklist below carefully and make sure you\u0026rsquo;ve set up your account how you want it before inviting any users to your account.\nThis section is for Similarity Check account administrators using iThenticate 2.0 through the browser.\n",
"content": "As an administrator, you create and manage the users on your account, and you decide how your organisation uses the iThenticate tool. You’ll find the system easier to use if you set it up correctly to start with, so do read through the checklist below carefully and make sure you\u0026rsquo;ve set up your account how you want it before inviting any users to your account.\nThis section is for Similarity Check account administrators using iThenticate 2.0 through the browser.\nUsing iThenticate v1 instead? Go to the v1 account administrators section. Integrating iThenticate 2.0 with your Manuscript Submission System (MTS) instead? Go to setting up your MTS integration. Not sure if you\u0026rsquo;re using iThenticate v1 or iThenticate 2.0? More here. Not sure whether you\u0026rsquo;re an account administrator? Find out here. As an administrator, you decide how your organisation uses the iThenticate tool. You’ll find the system easier to use if you set it up correctly to start with, so do read through the checklist below carefully and make sure you\u0026rsquo;ve set up your account how you want it before inviting any users to your account.\nDecide how to manage your users and folders Decide on your exclusions Decide if you want to use the Submitted Works repository (or Private Repository) Decide how you\u0026rsquo;ll budget for your document checking fees Make sure you stay eligible for the Similarity Check service. 1. How do you want to manage your users and folders? How many users do you need to set up? Do you need them to have different permissions or access to different folders? Do you want users to be able to see each other’s folders? Do you want to be the only account administrator, or do you want to add other administrators? If you set up different folders in iThenticate to manage the manuscripts you’re checking, you’ll be able to assign different users to each folder. For example, you may choose to set up different folders for different titles or years of publication. Learn more about how to manage users and folders on the Turnitin website.\n2. Decide on your exclusions You can decide to exclude preprints, certain websites, or even specific sections of text. We recommend starting without any exclusions to avoid excluding anything important. Once your users are experienced enough to identify words and phrases that appear frequently but are not potentially problematic matches (and can therefore be ignored) in a Similarity Report, you can start carefully making use of this feature.\nFind out more in the Exclusions section.\n3. Decide if you want to use the Submitted Works repository (or Private Repository) The Submitted Works repository (or Private Repository) allows users to find similarity not just across Turnitin’s extensive Content Database but also across all previous manuscripts submitted to your iThenticate account for all the journals you work on. This would allow you to find collusion between authors or potential cases of duplicate submissions but it also means you could share sensitive data between users, so you need to think very carefully about how you will use this feature. Find out more.\n4. Decide how you\u0026rsquo;ll budget for your document checking fees There’s a charge for each document checked, and you’ll receive an invoice in January each year for the documents you’ve checked in the previous year. If you\u0026rsquo;re a member of Crossref through a Sponsor, your Sponsor will receive this invoice.\nAs well as setting a Similarity Check document fees budget for your account each year, it’s useful to monitor document checking and see if you’re on track. You can monitor your usage in your Statistics section. Ask yourself:\nHow many documents do you plan to check? How often do you want to monitor usage? Set yourself a reminder to check your Statistics periodically. It’s a good idea to come back to these questions periodically, consider how your use of the tool is evolving, and make changes accordingly.\n5. Make sure you can stay eligible for the Similarity Check service Your organisation gets reduced rate access to the iThenticate tool through the Similarity Check service because you make your own published content available to be indexed into the iThenticate database. You do this by providing full text URLs specifically for this service in the metadata that you register with Crossref. Talk to your colleagues who are responsible for registering your DOIs with Crossref, and make sure that they continue to include full text URLs for Similarity Check in the metadata they register with us.\n",
"headings": ["1. How do you want to manage your users and folders? ","2. Decide on your exclusions ","3. Decide if you want to use the Submitted Works repository (or Private Repository) ","4. Decide how you\u0026rsquo;ll budget for your document checking fees ","5. Make sure you can stay eligible for the Similarity Check service "]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/similarity-check/ithenticatev2-account-setup/exclusions/",
"title": "Exclusions",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2022-07-15",
"lastmod_ts": 1657843200,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "This section is for Similarity Check account administrators using iThenticate 2.0 through the browser, and describes how you can manage exclusions within your account settings..\nUsing iThenticate v1 instead? Go to the v1 account administrators section. Integrating iThenticate 2.0 with your Manuscript Submission System (MTS) instead? Go to setting up your MTS integration Not sure if you\u0026rsquo;re using iThenticate v1 or iThenticate 2.0? More here. Not sure whether you\u0026rsquo;re an account administrator? Find out here. Exclusions If you want to exclude items from your Similarity Report results, you can do this by clicking on Settings in the left hand menu in iThenticate 2.0 homepage. There are two tabs where you can change different items - one is labelled Crossref Web, and the other is labelled Web and API. Here are the various items you can exclude.\n",
"content": "This section is for Similarity Check account administrators using iThenticate 2.0 through the browser, and describes how you can manage exclusions within your account settings..\nUsing iThenticate v1 instead? Go to the v1 account administrators section. Integrating iThenticate 2.0 with your Manuscript Submission System (MTS) instead? Go to setting up your MTS integration Not sure if you\u0026rsquo;re using iThenticate v1 or iThenticate 2.0? More here. Not sure whether you\u0026rsquo;re an account administrator? Find out here. Exclusions If you want to exclude items from your Similarity Report results, you can do this by clicking on Settings in the left hand menu in iThenticate 2.0 homepage. There are two tabs where you can change different items - one is labelled Crossref Web, and the other is labelled Web and API. Here are the various items you can exclude.\nPreprint Label and Exclusions iThenticate 2.0 introduces a new feature which will automatically identify preprint sources within your Similarity Report. This will allow you to easily identify preprints so your editors can make a quick decision as to whether to investigate this source further or exclude it from the report.\nIn order to start using this feature you will need to configure it within the iThenticate settings by logging directly into your iThenticate account. You can find instructions on how to configure this feature in Turnitin\u0026rsquo;s help documentation.\nYou also have the option to automatically exclude all preprint sources from reports. All excluded preprints will still be available within the Similarity Exclusions panel of your Similarity Report and can be reincluded in the report.\nFurther details of how preprints appear within the Similarity Report can be found in Turnitin\u0026rsquo;s help documentation .\nHere’s more information about things to consider when you find a match to a preprint in your Similarity Report.\nWebsite Exclusions The Website Exclusions setting will allow you to automatically exclude all matches to specific websites. Instructions on how to turn on and configure this feature can be found in Turnitin\u0026rsquo;s help documentation.\nThis feature will only exclude matches in the Internet repository. If a journal website is added to the list of excluded websites then all pages which have been crawled and indexed into Turnitin’s Internet repository will be excluded. However, journal articles from that journal which appear in the Crossref repository will not be excluded.\nThis feature will apply to all submissions made to the iThenticate account; including all web submissions and submissions made through any integration.\nAll excluded matches will still be available within the Similarity Exclusions panel of your Similarity Report and can be reincluded in the report. Further details of how these exclusions will appear can be found in Turnitin\u0026rsquo;s help documentation.\nCustomized Exclusions A new feature in iThenticate 2.0 is Customized Exclusions. The Customized Exclusions setting allows administrators to create sections of text that can be excluded from the Similarity Report. Administrators can tailor these keywords and phrases to best meet the needs of their organisation (for example, ‘Further Acknowledgments’).\nMore details of how to turn on and configure this feature can be found in Turnitin\u0026rsquo;s help documentation.\n",
"headings": ["Exclusions","Preprint Label and Exclusions","Website Exclusions","Customized Exclusions"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/similarity-check/ithenticatev2-account-setup/private-repository/",
"title": "Private repository",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2022-07-15",
"lastmod_ts": 1657843200,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "This section is for Similarity Check account administrators using iThenticate 2.0 through the browser.\nUsing iThenticate v1 instead? Go to the v1 account administrators section. Integrating iThenticate 2.0 with your Manuscript Submission System (MTS) instead? Go to setting up your MTS integration Not sure if you\u0026rsquo;re using iThenticate v1 or iThenticate 2.0? More here. Not sure whether you\u0026rsquo;re an account administrator? Find out here. The Submitted Works repository (or Private Repository) is a new feature in iThenticate 2.0, which is now available to Crossref members. This feature allows users to find similarity not just across Turnitin’s extensive Content Database but also across all previous manuscripts submitted to your iThenticate account for all the journals you work on. This would allow you to find collusion between authors or potential cases of duplicate submissions.\n",
"content": "This section is for Similarity Check account administrators using iThenticate 2.0 through the browser.\nUsing iThenticate v1 instead? Go to the v1 account administrators section. Integrating iThenticate 2.0 with your Manuscript Submission System (MTS) instead? Go to setting up your MTS integration Not sure if you\u0026rsquo;re using iThenticate v1 or iThenticate 2.0? More here. Not sure whether you\u0026rsquo;re an account administrator? Find out here. The Submitted Works repository (or Private Repository) is a new feature in iThenticate 2.0, which is now available to Crossref members. This feature allows users to find similarity not just across Turnitin’s extensive Content Database but also across all previous manuscripts submitted to your iThenticate account for all the journals you work on. This would allow you to find collusion between authors or potential cases of duplicate submissions.\nHow does this work? You have received a manuscript from Author 1 and have decided to index this manuscript into your Submitted Works repository. At some point later you receive a new manuscript from Author 2. When generating your Similarity Report, you have decided to check against your Submitted Works repository. There is a paragraph in the manuscript from Author 2 which matches a paragraph in the manuscript from Author 1. This would be highlighted within your Similarity Report as a match against your Submitted Works repository.\nBy clicking on this match you can see the full text of the submission you’ve matched against:\nAnd details about the submission, such as the name and email address of the user who submitted it, the date it was submitted and the title of the submission:\nThe ability to see the full source text and the details can both be switched off individually.\nAs with all matches, they can be excluded from the Sources Overview panel or you can turn off matches against all Submitted Works from the settings:\nSetting up the Submitted Works repository There are instructions on how you can set up your Submitted Works settings in Turnitin\u0026rsquo;s help documentation.\nSubmitted Works repository FAQs Q. How much does this feature cost to use?\nThis feature comes free with every 2.0 account.\nQ. How many submissions can I index to my private repository?\nThere is no limit to the number of submissions you can index.\nQ. Can I delete submissions from my private repository?\nYes. An Administrator can find and delete a submission using the Paper Lookup Tool. Go to Turnitin\u0026rsquo;s help documentation for more information.\n",
"headings": ["How does this work?","Setting up the Submitted Works repository","Submitted Works repository FAQs","Q. How much does this feature cost to use?\n","Q. How many submissions can I index to my private repository?\n","Q. Can I delete submissions from my private repository?\n"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/similarity-check/ithenticatev2-account-setup/manage-users/",
"title": "Manage users and folders",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2020-05-19",
"lastmod_ts": 1589846400,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "This section is for Similarity Check account administrators using iThenticate 2.0 through the browser.\nUsing iThenticate v1 instead? Go to the v1 account administrators section. Integrating iThenticate 2.0 with your Manuscript Submission System (MTS) instead? Go to setting up your MTS integration. Not sure if you\u0026rsquo;re using iThenticate v1 or iThenticate 2.0? More here. Not sure whether you\u0026rsquo;re an account administrator? Find out here. Setting up users You can find instructions on how to set up users here.\n",
"content": "This section is for Similarity Check account administrators using iThenticate 2.0 through the browser.\nUsing iThenticate v1 instead? Go to the v1 account administrators section. Integrating iThenticate 2.0 with your Manuscript Submission System (MTS) instead? Go to setting up your MTS integration. Not sure if you\u0026rsquo;re using iThenticate v1 or iThenticate 2.0? More here. Not sure whether you\u0026rsquo;re an account administrator? Find out here. Setting up users You can find instructions on how to set up users here.\nUser groups Users can be added to a User Group in order to help facilitate collaboration. Instructions on how to set up new User Groups can be found here.\nUser settings Once a user has been set up they can change exclusion settings in the Similarity report which will apply to all submissions they make. Users should be encouraged to review their settings before making any new submissions. Instructions on how to update these settings can be found here.\nShared folders Shared Folders can be created when accessing iThenticate through the browser in order to help collaboration between users. Often a Shared Folder will be created for each journal so that all submissions sent to that folder can be accessed by each user from that journal. Folders can be shared either with individual users or with whole User Groups.\nInstructions on how to share a folder can be found in Turnitin\u0026rsquo;s help documentation.\n",
"headings": ["Setting up users","User groups","User settings","Shared folders"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/similarity-check/ithenticatev2-mts-account-setup/",
"title": "Setting up your iThenticate 2.0 account MTS integration (admins only)",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2022-07-15",
"lastmod_ts": 1657843200,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "This section of our documentation is for Similarity Check account administrators who plan to access iThenticate 2.0 through their Manuscript Submission System (MTS).\nIf you are using iThenticate v1 rather than iThenticate 2.0, take a look at the section for v1 account administrators. If you intend to use iThenticate 2.0 directly in the browser (and not through an integration with your Manuscript Submission System (MTS) please skip to the section on setting up iThenticate 2.0 for browser users for iThenticate administrators. Your personal administrator account in iThenticate 2.0 Once Turnitin has enabled iThenticate 2.0 for your organisation, the main editorial contact provided on your application form will become the iThenticate account administrator.\n",
"content": "This section of our documentation is for Similarity Check account administrators who plan to access iThenticate 2.0 through their Manuscript Submission System (MTS).\nIf you are using iThenticate v1 rather than iThenticate 2.0, take a look at the section for v1 account administrators. If you intend to use iThenticate 2.0 directly in the browser (and not through an integration with your Manuscript Submission System (MTS) please skip to the section on setting up iThenticate 2.0 for browser users for iThenticate administrators. Your personal administrator account in iThenticate 2.0 Once Turnitin has enabled iThenticate 2.0 for your organisation, the main editorial contact provided on your application form will become the iThenticate account administrator.\nYou will receive an email from Turnitin with a link to set your credentials. The email will look like this:\nClick on the blue ‘Set up my account’ button at the bottom of the email. This will bring you to a page which looks something like this:\nFill out your username and password, and don’t forget to tick to agree to the terms and conditions. You will then arrive at your new iThenticate 2.0 account.\nHow do you know if you’re an account administrator? When you are logged in to iThenticate, what tabs can you see?\nIf you\u0026rsquo;re using iThenticate 2.0, you will only be able to see Users on the menu if you\u0026rsquo;re an account administrator.\nShow image × So if you can\u0026rsquo;t see Manage Users or Users, you’re not an account administrator, and you can just read the user instructions for iThenticate 2.0 on the Turnitin website.\nUpdating your email address, username or password in the future If you need to change your personal email address, username or password in the future, you can find instructions on the Turnitin website.\nUpdating your email address or username Changing your password Forgot password? If you forgot your password and have never signed into your new 2.0 account, you\u0026rsquo;ll need to reach out to Turnitin\u0026rsquo;s support to have your password resent to you from Turnitin.\nIf you\u0026rsquo;ve already signed into your 2.0 account, but can\u0026rsquo;t remember your password, you can simply use the Forgot Password link on the login screen of your unique 2.0 website (https://crossref-xxx.turnitin.com, with xxx being your member ID).\n",
"headings": ["Your personal administrator account in iThenticate 2.0","How do you know if you’re an account administrator?","Updating your email address, username or password in the future","Forgot password?"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/similarity-check/ithenticatev2-mts-account-setup/administrator-checklist/",
"title": "Administrator checklist",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2022-07-15",
"lastmod_ts": 1657843200,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "This section of our documentation is for Similarity Check account administrators who plan to access iThenticate 2.0 through their Manuscript Submission System (MTS).\nUsing iThenticate v1 instead? Go to the v1 account administrators section. Using iThenticate 2.0 through a browser instead? Go to setting up iThenticate 2.0 for browser users. Not sure if you\u0026rsquo;re using iThenticate v1 or iThenticate 2.0? More here. Not sure whether you\u0026rsquo;re an account administrator? Find out here. As an administrator, you decide how your organisation uses the iThenticate tool. You’ll find the system easier to use if you set it up correctly to start with, so do read through the checklist below carefully and make sure you\u0026rsquo;ve set up your account as you want it before you start checking your manuscripts.\n",
"content": "This section of our documentation is for Similarity Check account administrators who plan to access iThenticate 2.0 through their Manuscript Submission System (MTS).\nUsing iThenticate v1 instead? Go to the v1 account administrators section. Using iThenticate 2.0 through a browser instead? Go to setting up iThenticate 2.0 for browser users. Not sure if you\u0026rsquo;re using iThenticate v1 or iThenticate 2.0? More here. Not sure whether you\u0026rsquo;re an account administrator? Find out here. As an administrator, you decide how your organisation uses the iThenticate tool. You’ll find the system easier to use if you set it up correctly to start with, so do read through the checklist below carefully and make sure you\u0026rsquo;ve set up your account as you want it before you start checking your manuscripts.\nSet up your integration with your MTS Decide on your exclusions DO NOT set up users or folders Decide if you want to use the Submitted Works repository (or Private Repository) Decide how you\u0026rsquo;ll budget for your document checking fees Make sure you stay eligible for the Similarity Check service 1. Set up your integration with your MTS To set up your integration, you need to create an API key by logging into iThenticate through the browser. You will then share this API key and the URL of your iThenticate 2.0 account with your MTS. Find out more.\nIf you are using OJS and want to use the iThenticate plugin, you\u0026rsquo;ll need to ensure that you\u0026rsquo;re on OJS version 3.3, 3.4, or 3.5. For instructions on how to upgrade your OJS instance, please visit PKP\u0026rsquo;s documentation here or here, depending on which version you\u0026rsquo;re currently running.\n2. Decide on your exclusions You can decide to exclude preprints, certain websites, or even specific sections of text. We recommend starting without any exclusions to avoid excluding anything important. Once your users are experienced enough to identify words and phrases that appear frequently but are not potentially problematic matches (and can therefore be ignored) in a Similarity Report, you can start carefully making use of this feature.\nFind out more in the Exclusions section.\n3. DO NOT set up users or folders If you are integrating iThenticate 2.0 with your MTS, you don\u0026rsquo;t need to set up more users or folders in your iThenticate - everything will be managed from your MTS. Find out more.\n4. Decide if you want to use the Submitted Works repository (or Private Repository) The Submitted Works repository (or Private Repository) allows users to find similarity not just across Turnitin’s extensive Content Database but also across all previous manuscripts submitted to your iThenticate account for all the journals you work on. This would allow you to find collusion between authors or potential cases of duplicate submissions but it also means you could share sensitive data between users, so you need to think very carefully about how you will use this feature. This feature is currently only available to those integrating with ScholarOne Manuscripts. Find out more.\n5. Decide how you\u0026rsquo;ll budget for your document checking fees There’s a charge for each document checked, and you’ll receive an invoice in January each year for the documents you’ve checked in the previous year. If you\u0026rsquo;re a member of Crossref through a Sponsor, your Sponsor will receive this invoice.\nAs well as setting a Similarity Check document fees budget for your account each year, it’s useful to monitor document checking and see if you’re on track. You can monitor your usage in your Statistics section. Ask yourself:\nHow many documents do you plan to check? How often do you want to monitor usage? Set yourself a reminder to check your Statistics periodically. It’s a good idea to come back to these questions periodically, consider how your use of the tool is evolving, and make changes accordingly.\n6. Make sure you can stay eligible for the Similarity Check service Your organisation gets reduced rate access to the iThenticate tool through the Similarity Check service because you make your own published content avaialble to be indexed into the iThenticate database. You do this by providing full text URLs specifically for this service in the metadata that you register with Crossref. Talk to your colleagues who are responsible for registering your DOIs with Crossref, and make sure that they continue to include full text URLs for Similarity Check in the metadata they register with us.\n",
"headings": ["1. Set up your integration with your MTS ","2. Decide on your exclusions ","3. DO NOT set up users or folders ","4. Decide if you want to use the Submitted Works repository (or Private Repository) ","5. Decide how you\u0026rsquo;ll budget for your document checking fees ","6. Make sure you can stay eligible for the Similarity Check service "]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/similarity-check/ithenticatev2-mts-account-setup/api-key/",
"title": "Setting up your MTS integration with an API key",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2022-07-18",
"lastmod_ts": 1658102400,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "This section of our documentation is for Similarity Check account administrators who plan to access iThenticate 2.0 through their Manuscript Submission System (MTS).\nUsing iThenticate v1 instead? Go to the v1 account administrators section. Using iThenticate 2.0 through a browser instead? Go to setting up iThenticate 2.0 for browser users. Not sure if you\u0026rsquo;re using iThenticate v1 or iThenticate 2.0? More here. Not sure whether you\u0026rsquo;re an account administrator? Find out here. To set up your integration with your MTS, you need to create an API key by logging into iThenticate through the browser. You will then share this API key and the URL of your iThenticate 2.0 account with your MTS.\n",
"content": "This section of our documentation is for Similarity Check account administrators who plan to access iThenticate 2.0 through their Manuscript Submission System (MTS).\nUsing iThenticate v1 instead? Go to the v1 account administrators section. Using iThenticate 2.0 through a browser instead? Go to setting up iThenticate 2.0 for browser users. Not sure if you\u0026rsquo;re using iThenticate v1 or iThenticate 2.0? More here. Not sure whether you\u0026rsquo;re an account administrator? Find out here. To set up your integration with your MTS, you need to create an API key by logging into iThenticate through the browser. You will then share this API key and the URL of your iThenticate 2.0 account with your MTS.\nPlease note: If you are sponsored by Biteca, please contact your sponsor who will help you with this.\nStep One: Decide how many API scopes and API keys you need Within iThenticate, you can set up different API Scopes, and within that, different API keys. Most members will just need one API Scope and one API key. However, some members may need more than one.\nIf you need to integrate with more than one Manuscript Tracking System (MTS), you will need a different API Scope for each MTS. If you publish on behalf of societies or work with other organisations who want to keep their activities separate from each other, you will need a different API Scope and API key for each society. If at some point in the future, you need to change your API key for an existing MTS integration, you must generate a new API key under the same scope that you originally used for this integration. Step Two: Create your API Scope and API key(s) Click on “Integrations” in the menu.\nThis will bring you to the Integrations section. Click on the “Generate API Scope” key.\nYou will then give your API Scope a name.\nFor example, this may be the name of a particular MTS, or of a particular society.\nUnder your new API Scope, you can then set up your first API key.\nOnce you add the key name, you will be able to click on the “Create and view” button. The system will then generate your key.\nStep three: Add your API key into your Manuscript Tracking System (MTS) In order to integrate your new iThenticate 2.0 account and your Manuscript Tracking system(s), your MTS will require from you:\nAt least one API key Your unique iThenticate URL containing your Crossref membership number using the following format: https://crossref-xxx.turnitin.com. (For example, if your Crossref Membership number is 1234, your URL will be: https://crossref-1234.turnitin.com. If you are not sure what your Crossref Membership number is, please ask us. Follow the instructions below for the relevant MTS:\nOJS Follow the instructions found on PKP\u0026rsquo;s website. You\u0026rsquo;ll need to ensure that you\u0026rsquo;re on OJS version 3.3, 3.4, or 3.5. For instructions on how to upgrade your OJS instance, please visit PKP\u0026rsquo;s documentation here or here, depending on which version you\u0026rsquo;re currently running. Editorial Manager Enter your iThenticate API key(s) and your iThenticate 2.0 account URL into the iThenticate configuration page in Editorial Manager. There are instructions available from Aries Systems here. eJournal Press Email your API key(s) and your iThenticate 2.0 account URL to support@ejpress.com and the team at eJournal Press will set up the integration for you. ScholarOne If you are already using iThenticate with ScholarOne and are upgrading from iThenticate v1 to iThenticate 2.0, please email your API key(s) and your iThenticate 2.0 account URL to s1help@clarivate.com, and the team at ScholarOne will make the change for you. Please put “Product Management” in the subject line of your email. If you are a new subscriber to Similarity Check and you haven’t used iThenticate before, you don\u0026rsquo;t need to email the team at ScholarOne. Just enter your iThenticate API key(s) and your iThenticate 2.0 account URL into the iThenticate configuration page in ScholarOne. Scholastica The team at Scholastica will set up the integration for you. Give them your API key(s) and your iThenticate 2.0 account URL by filling out this form. The team at Scholastica will also set up any exclusions for you, so in the form they\u0026rsquo;ll ask you which sort of content you want to exclude from displaying as a match. ",
"headings": ["Step One: Decide how many API scopes and API keys you need","Step Two: Create your API Scope and API key(s)","Step three: Add your API key into your Manuscript Tracking System (MTS)","OJS","Editorial Manager","eJournal Press","ScholarOne","Scholastica"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/similarity-check/ithenticatev2-mts-account-setup/exclusions/",
"title": "Exclusions",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2022-07-15",
"lastmod_ts": 1657843200,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "This section of our documentation is for Similarity Check account administrators who plan to access iThenticate 2.0 through their Manuscript Submission System (MTS).\nUsing iThenticate v1 instead? Go to the v1 account administrators section. Using iThenticate 2.0 through a browser instead? Go to setting up iThenticate 2.0 for browser users. Not sure if you\u0026rsquo;re using iThenticate v1 or iThenticate 2.0? More here. Not sure whether you\u0026rsquo;re an account administrator? Find out here. Exclusions If you are integrating iThenticate 2.0 with your MTS, there are some exclusions that you need to set directly in the iThenticate account in the browser before you configure your settings in your MTS integration.\n",
"content": "This section of our documentation is for Similarity Check account administrators who plan to access iThenticate 2.0 through their Manuscript Submission System (MTS).\nUsing iThenticate v1 instead? Go to the v1 account administrators section. Using iThenticate 2.0 through a browser instead? Go to setting up iThenticate 2.0 for browser users. Not sure if you\u0026rsquo;re using iThenticate v1 or iThenticate 2.0? More here. Not sure whether you\u0026rsquo;re an account administrator? Find out here. Exclusions If you are integrating iThenticate 2.0 with your MTS, there are some exclusions that you need to set directly in the iThenticate account in the browser before you configure your settings in your MTS integration.\nWithin iThenticate, you need to click on Settings in the left hand menu in iThenticate 2.0 homepage and go to the Web and API tab. Here are the various items you can exclude.\nPreprint Label and Exclusions iThenticate 2.0 can automatically identify preprint sources within your Similarity Report. This will allow you to easily identify preprints so your editors can make a quick decision as to whether to investigate this source further or exclude it from the report.\nIn order to start using this feature you will need to configure it within the iThenticate settings by logging directly into your iThenticate account. You can find instructions on how to configure this feature in Turnitin\u0026rsquo;s help documentation.\nYou also have the option to automatically exclude all preprint sources from reports. All excluded preprints will still be available within the Similarity Exclusions panel of your Similarity Report and can be reincluded in the report.\nOnce this is done, you also need to edit your integration configuration within your Manuscript Submission System to exclude preprints.\nFurther details of how preprints appear within the Similarity Report can be found in Turnitin\u0026rsquo;s help documentation .\nHere’s more information about things to consider when you find a match to a preprint in your Similarity Report.\nWebsite Exclusions The Website Exclusions setting allows to automatically exclude all matches to specific websites. Instructions on how to turn on and configure this feature can be found in Turnitin\u0026rsquo;s help documentation.\nThis feature will only exclude matches in the Internet repository. If a journal website is added to the list of excluded websites then all pages which have been crawled and indexed into Turnitin’s Internet repository will be excluded. However, journal articles from that journal which appear in the Crossref repository will not be excluded.\nThis feature will apply to all submissions made to the iThenticate account; including all web submissions and submissions made through any integration.\nAll excluded matches will still be available within the Similarity Exclusions panel of your Similarity Report and can be reincluded in the report. Further details of how these exclusions will appear can be found in Turnitin\u0026rsquo;s help documentation.\nCustomized Exclusions A feature in iThenticate 2.0 is Customized Exclusions. The Customized Exclusions setting allows administrators to create sections of text that can be excluded from the Similarity Report. Administrators can tailor these keywords and phrases to best meet the needs of their organisation (for example, ‘Further Acknowledgments’).\nStart by configuring this feature directly in your iThenticate account in the browser . More details can be found in Turnitin\u0026rsquo;s help documentation. Once this is done, you then need to edit the integration configuration in your MTS to exclude customized sections.\n",
"headings": ["Exclusions","Preprint Label and Exclusions","Website Exclusions","Customized Exclusions"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/similarity-check/ithenticatev2-mts-account-setup/private-repository/",
"title": "Private repository",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2022-07-15",
"lastmod_ts": 1657843200,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "This section is for Similarity Check account administrators who plan to access iThenticate 2.0 through their Manuscript Submission System (MTS).\nUsing iThenticate v1 instead? Go to the v1 account administrators section. Using iThenticate 2.0 through a browser instead? Go to setting up iThenticate 2.0 for browser users. Not sure if you\u0026rsquo;re using iThenticate v1 or iThenticate 2.0? More here. Not sure whether you\u0026rsquo;re an account administrator? Find out here. Private Repository - ScholarOne only The Submitted Works repository (or Private Repository) is a new feature in iThenticate 2.0. The only MTS that currently integrates with this feature is ScholarOne. This feature allows users to find similarity not just across Turnitin’s extensive Content Database but also across all previous manuscripts submitted to your iThenticate account for all the journals you work on. This would allow you to find collusion between authors or potential cases of duplicate submissions.\n",
"content": "This section is for Similarity Check account administrators who plan to access iThenticate 2.0 through their Manuscript Submission System (MTS).\nUsing iThenticate v1 instead? Go to the v1 account administrators section. Using iThenticate 2.0 through a browser instead? Go to setting up iThenticate 2.0 for browser users. Not sure if you\u0026rsquo;re using iThenticate v1 or iThenticate 2.0? More here. Not sure whether you\u0026rsquo;re an account administrator? Find out here. Private Repository - ScholarOne only The Submitted Works repository (or Private Repository) is a new feature in iThenticate 2.0. The only MTS that currently integrates with this feature is ScholarOne. This feature allows users to find similarity not just across Turnitin’s extensive Content Database but also across all previous manuscripts submitted to your iThenticate account for all the journals you work on. This would allow you to find collusion between authors or potential cases of duplicate submissions.\nHow does this work? You have received a manuscript from Author 1 and have decided to index this manuscript into your Submitted Works repository. At some point later you receive a new manuscript from Author 2. When generating your Similarity Report, you have decided to check against your Submitted Works repository. There is a paragraph in the manuscript from Author 2 which matches a paragraph in the manuscript from Author 1. This would be highlighted within your Similarity Report as a match against your Submitted Works repository.\nBy clicking on this match you can see the full text of the submission you’ve matched against:\nAnd details about the submission, such as the name and email address of the user who submitted it, the date it was submitted and the title of the submission:\nThe ability to see the full source text and the details can both be switched off individually.\nSetting up the Submitted Works repository If you are using a third party integration then you should have options inside your MTS when setting up your configuration with iThenticate to decide whether submissions will be indexed to the Submitted Works repository and whether generated Similarity Reports will match against the Submitted Works.\nImportant: This feature means that sensitive data could be shared between different journals using your iThenticate account The Submitted Works repository is shared across your entire iThenticate account. This means regardless of whether a submission was made natively from the iThenticate website or through an integration, all Similarity Reports which match against the Submitted Works repository will potentially match against any submissions which were indexed within it. This means that an editor working on one journal may be able to view submissions for another journal. If you are worried about giving your users access to sensitive data, we recommend switching this functionality off.\nSubmitted Works repository FAQs Q. How much does this feature cost to use?\nThis feature comes free with every iThenticate 2.0 account.\nQ. How many submissions can I index to my private repository?\nThere is no limit to the number of submissions you can index.\nQ. Can I delete submissions from my private repository?\nYes. An Administrator can find and delete a submission using the Paper Lookup Tool. Go to Turnitin\u0026rsquo;s help documentation for more information.\n",
"headings": ["Private Repository - ScholarOne only","How does this work?","Setting up the Submitted Works repository","Important: This feature means that sensitive data could be shared between different journals using your iThenticate account","Submitted Works repository FAQs","Q. How much does this feature cost to use?\n","Q. How many submissions can I index to my private repository?\n","Q. Can I delete submissions from my private repository?\n"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/similarity-check/ithenticatev2-mts-account-setup/manage-users/",
"title": "Manage users and folders",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2022-07-18",
"lastmod_ts": 1658102400,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "This section is for Similarity Check account administrators who intend to access iThenticate 2.0 through their Manuscript Submission System (MTS)\nUsing iThenticate v1 instead? Go to the v1 account administrators section. Using iThenticate 2.0 through a browser instead? Go to setting up iThenticate 2.0 for browser users. Not sure if you\u0026rsquo;re using iThenticate v1 or iThenticate 2.0? More here. Not sure whether you\u0026rsquo;re an account administrator? Find out here. No need to create users with an integration with an MTS If you are using iThenticate through an integration with an MTS, then you do not need to set up any other users on your new iThenticate account. This is because all the submissions from your MTS will be made by the API key you’ve set, rather than individual users. The only person who will need credentials for the iThenticate account is the administrator.\n",
"content": "This section is for Similarity Check account administrators who intend to access iThenticate 2.0 through their Manuscript Submission System (MTS)\nUsing iThenticate v1 instead? Go to the v1 account administrators section. Using iThenticate 2.0 through a browser instead? Go to setting up iThenticate 2.0 for browser users. Not sure if you\u0026rsquo;re using iThenticate v1 or iThenticate 2.0? More here. Not sure whether you\u0026rsquo;re an account administrator? Find out here. No need to create users with an integration with an MTS If you are using iThenticate through an integration with an MTS, then you do not need to set up any other users on your new iThenticate account. This is because all the submissions from your MTS will be made by the API key you’ve set, rather than individual users. The only person who will need credentials for the iThenticate account is the administrator.\nNo need to create folders with an integration with an MTS If you previously used iThenticate v1, you might be used to creating folders in iThenticate to integrate with your MTS. However, you no longer need to create folders. Everything will be handled through the integration panel in your MTS.\n",
"headings": ["No need to create users with an integration with an MTS","No need to create folders with an integration with an MTS"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/similarity-check/ithenticate-account-use/",
"title": "Using your iThenticate account",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2020-05-19",
"lastmod_ts": 1589846400,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "iThenticate v1 or iThenticate 2.0?\nTo work out which version you\u0026rsquo;re on, take a look at the website address that you use to access iThenticate. If you go to ithenticate.com then you are using v1. If you use a bespoke URL, https://crossref-[your member ID].turnitin.com/ then you are using iThenticate 2.0.\niThenticate 2.0 using your iThenticate account\nv1 using your iThenticate account, keep reading:\nWelcome to your Similarity Check user account!\nWhen your organisation signs up for Similarity Check, a central contact at your organisation will become your Similarity Check account administrator. They will set up all the users on your account.\n",
"content": "iThenticate v1 or iThenticate 2.0?\nTo work out which version you\u0026rsquo;re on, take a look at the website address that you use to access iThenticate. If you go to ithenticate.com then you are using v1. If you use a bespoke URL, https://crossref-[your member ID].turnitin.com/ then you are using iThenticate 2.0.\niThenticate 2.0 using your iThenticate account\nv1 using your iThenticate account, keep reading:\nWelcome to your Similarity Check user account!\nWhen your organisation signs up for Similarity Check, a central contact at your organisation will become your Similarity Check account administrator. They will set up all the users on your account.\nWhen your administrator adds you as a user, you’ll receive an email from noreply@ithenticate.com with the subject line “Account Created” containing a username and a single-use password. You may only log in once with the single-use password, and you must change it the first time you log in.\nLog in to your user account (v1) Start from the link in the invitation email from noreply@ithenticate.com with the subject line “Account Created” and click Login Enter your username and single-use password Click to agree to the terms of the end-user license agreement. These terms govern your personal use of the service. They’re separate from the central Similarity Check service agreement that your organisation has agreed to. You will be prompted to choose a new password Click ​Change Password​ to save. Your user account profile (v1) Manage your user account using the Account Info tab. Learn more about your Similarity Check user account.\nReset your password (v1) Start from iThenticate Click Login, then click Forgot Password. Enter your email address and click Submit You\u0026rsquo;ll receive a password reset link by email. Click the link in the email, choose a new password, and click Reset Password. Change your email address or password (v1) Start from iThenticate Enter your username and password Go to Profile. To change your email address, remove your current address from the ​Email​ field, enter your new email in the same field, and click ​Update Profile​ to save. To change your password, enter a new password in the Change Password field, repeat it in the Confirm Password field, and click ​Update Profile​ to save. Find your way around for users (v1) In the main navigation bar at the top of the screen, you will see several tabs:\nFolders: this is the main area of iThenticate, where you upload, manage, and view documents for checking Settings: configure the iThenticate interface Account Info: manage your account, including your user profile and account usage Show image × ",
"headings": ["Log in to your user account (v1) ","Your user account profile (v1) ","Reset your password (v1) ","Change your email address or password (v1) ","Find your way around for users (v1) "]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/similarity-check/ithenticate-account-use/folders/",
"title": "Folders",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2020-05-19",
"lastmod_ts": 1589846400,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "iThenticate v1 or iThenticate 2.0?\nTo work out which version you\u0026rsquo;re on, take a look at the website address that you use to access iThenticate. If you go to ithenticate.com then you are using v1. If you use a bespoke URL, https://crossref-[your member ID].turnitin.com/ then you are using iThenticate 2.0.\niThenticate 2.0 Folders\nv1 Folders, keep reading:\nThe Folders page contains the main functionality of iThenticate, the service which powers Crossref Similarity Check. It is where folders are created, browsed and shared with other users, where documents are submitted within a folder to be checked against the iThenticate database for similarity, and where documents can be deleted or moved from one folder to another.\n",
"content": "iThenticate v1 or iThenticate 2.0?\nTo work out which version you\u0026rsquo;re on, take a look at the website address that you use to access iThenticate. If you go to ithenticate.com then you are using v1. If you use a bespoke URL, https://crossref-[your member ID].turnitin.com/ then you are using iThenticate 2.0.\niThenticate 2.0 Folders\nv1 Folders, keep reading:\nThe Folders page contains the main functionality of iThenticate, the service which powers Crossref Similarity Check. It is where folders are created, browsed and shared with other users, where documents are submitted within a folder to be checked against the iThenticate database for similarity, and where documents can be deleted or moved from one folder to another.\nStart from iThenticate, and log in.\nOn this page, learn more about how to:\nCreate a new folder Exclusions Repositories to search against Save your new folder Create a new folder group Organize folders Move folders Delete folders Share folders Edit folder settings Automatic exclusion of bibliography sections Automatic exclusion of quotations Create a new folder (v1) Look for the New Folder section on the right of the screen, and click New Folder\nShow image × On the Create A New Folder page, use Folder Groups to specify the group where you’d like to save your new folder, then enter a name in Folder Name.\nShow image × Exclusions (v1) You can choose to exclude certain text from the Similarity Check for all documents uploaded into this folder. Learn more about filters and exclusions within the Similarity Report, and URL filters and phrase exclusions for account administrators.\nUse the relevant tick boxes to exclude quotes, bibliography, certain phrases (set these under Account Info), small matches, and small sources.\nShow image × To exclude small matches, you set an exclusion threshold. Any match with fewer words than the threshold will be excluded from the Similarity Check. This affects the Match Overview view in Document Viewer. Modify this option from within Document Viewer.\nShow image × To exclude small sources, you set a word count or a percentage exclusion threshold. Any matches with fewer words, or lower than a certain percentage matched will be excluded from the Similarity Check. This affects the All Sources view in Document Viewer. Modify this option from within Document Viewer.\nShow image × Think carefully about using percentage thresholds if you are working with large documents, where a set percentage of 1% may exclude very large matches/sources. For example, 1% of a 100-page document is one full page.\nThe exclude sections option allows you to exclude longer abstracts or methods and materials sections from being picked up by the Similarity Check.\nShow image × Please be aware that section exclusion may not work properly if documents contain:\nWatermarks Unevenly spaced line numbering Sub-headings that are indistinguishable from the Methods and Materials heading Abstract or Methods and Materials section appearing within a table Section headings and body text using the same font, font size, and font treatment Repositories to search against (v1) Choose which collections to include in the Similarity Check. Here are the currently available repositories:\nCrossref - research articles, books, and conference proceedings provided by publishers of scholarly content all over the world Crossref posted content - preprints, eprints, working papers, reports, dissertations, and many other types of content that has not been formally published but has been registered with Crossref Internet - a database of archived and live publicly-available web pages, including billions of pages of existing content, and with tens of thousands of new pages added each day Publications - third-party periodical, journal, and publication content including many major professional journals, periodicals, and business publications Show image × To buy the option to create a customizable database source with your own content to submit to and search against, please contact sales@ithenticate.com.\nSave your new folder (v1) Once you are satisfied with the changes you’ve made, click Create at the bottom of the form to create your new folder.\nCreate a new folder group (v1) Start from the New folder section to the right of the page, and click New Folder Group.\nShow image × On the Create A New Folder Group screen, name your new folder group, and click Create.\nNow you have an empty folder group. To add a folder to this folder group, click Create a folder. To delete an empty folder group, click Remove this empty group.\nOrganize folders (v1) Folders in the folder group are shown in alphabetical order. To see a folder group’s content, go to the My Folders section on the left, and click My Folders.\nShow image × You can choose to organize the folders within a folder group by title, or by date processed:\nTo sort the folders by title, click the Title header in the title column. A down arrow shows that the folders have been arranged in alphabetical order. Click the down arrow again to put the folders in reverse alphabetical order. To sort the folders by date created, click the Date Created header in the date created column. A down arrow shows that the folders have been arranged by date created, with the most recent first (reverse chronological order). Click the down arrow again to put the folders in chronological order. Show image × Move folders (v1) To move folders to another folder group, go to the folder group containing the folders you wish to move. Click the tick box beside the folder you want to move. From the drop-down menu, use Move selected to\u0026hellip; to choose the destination folder group, and click Move.\nShow image × The drop-down menu will not show unless you have created other folders to make it possible to move a document.\nDelete folders (v1) Start from the My Folders side menu, and hover over the folder you wish to delete. Click the trash can icon to move the folder to the Trash folder group.\nShow image × To delete multiple folders, go to the folder group, and check the tick boxes for each folder you wish to delete. Click Trash in the menu bar above to move the folders to the Trash folder group.\nOnce a folder has been moved to the trash, you can review it before you delete it permanently. From the My Folders menu on the left, click the Trash folder group. In the trash, you can see all the folders you have moved here. To remove a folder from the trash, check its tick box, and use Move selected to\u0026hellip; to move the folder to another location.\nTo permanently delete a folder, check its tick box, and click Delete in the menu bar above. Once you have permanently deleted a folder from Trash, you will not be able to get it back.\nShare folders (v1) Depending on how your account administrator has set up sharing permissions, you may be able to (a) view only folders shared by other users, (b) view all users\u0026rsquo; folders, or (c) view folders of selected users. If you cannot automatically view others’ folders, use the sharing feature to share folders with other users within the same account.\nStart from the folder you want to share, and click the Sharing tab.\nShow image × You will see a list of users with whom you can share the folder. Check the box next to the users’ names, and click ​Update Sharing​. Sharing a folder with another user allows them to view the Similarity Report only. It does not allow them to submit a document to the folder.\nOnce a folder has been shared, there are two ways to unshare the folder:\nby the user who shared it: uncheck the box next to the user’s name, and click ​Update Sharing by the user with whom it is being shared: in the user’s directory, hover the cursor over the folder name, and an X icon will appear to the right of the folder name. Click the X icon to remove the shared folder. Account administrators can enable or disable sharing access based on the organisation’s internal guidelines. If the sharing feature is disabled, users will not be able to view previously shared documents.\nEdit folder settings (v1) To customize a folder’s settings, use the Settings tab within the folder. Folder settings includes three tabs: Folder Options, Report Filters, and Phrase Exclusions.\nShow image × Use Folder Options to view and modify the options you chose when you created the folder. Use Report Filters to manage the list of URLs that are filtered out from comparison checking for that folder. Use Add URL to add a URL to be filtered, and click Add URL. The URL you add may be as specific or general as you wish, for example: http://example.com/ (don’t forget to include the trailing “/”) - to exclude an entire site http://example.com/docs/ - to exclude a specific directory http://example.com/docs/paper.pdf - to exclude a specific document To remove a URL, click the X icon to the right of the URL. Show image × Use Phrase Exclusions to add and remove phrases to exclude from comparison checking for every submission in this folder. To add a new phrase, click Add a new phrase, enter the phrase you wish to exclude in the Phrase text box, and click Create. If you don’t want to create a phrase to exclude, click Back to list to return to the Phrase Exclusions tab, or Back to folder to return to the folder view. Show image × Automatic exclusion of bibliography sections (v1) iThenticate detects the following keywords and ignores any matches after the keyword:\nreference, references reference list reference cited, references cited reference and note, reference and notes references and note, references and notes reference \u0026amp; note, references \u0026amp; note reference \u0026amp; notes, references \u0026amp; notes references and further reading resource, resources resources directory bibliography bibliographic information works cited, work cited citations literature literature cited When it reaches any of the following words in the paper, it resumes the Similarity Check:\nappendix appendices glossary table tables acknowledgement, acknowledgements exhibits figure figures chart charts Automatic exclusion of quotations (v1) Supported marks: iThenticate recognizes these quotation marks and will ignore any matches that use them:\n\u0026ldquo;\u0026hellip;\u0026rdquo; «\u0026hellip;» »\u0026hellip;« „…“ 《\u0026hellip;》 〈\u0026hellip;〉 『\u0026hellip;』 Unsupported marks: iThenticate does not recognize these quotation marks and will flag any matches that use them:\n\u0026lsquo;\u0026hellip;\u0026rsquo; This applies even when (single) \u0026lsquo;quotes\u0026rsquo; appear within (double) \u0026ldquo;quotes\u0026rdquo;. For example:\n\u0026ldquo;This text would be excluded \u0026lsquo;but this text would not be excluded\u0026rsquo; \u0026ldquo;then this text would also be excluded.\u0026rdquo;\niThenticate will also exclude formatted block quotations (indented blocks of text) in .doc or .docx files.\n",
"headings": ["Create a new folder (v1) ","Exclusions (v1) ","Repositories to search against (v1) ","Save your new folder (v1) ","Create a new folder group (v1) ","Organize folders (v1) ","Move folders (v1) ","Delete folders (v1) ","Share folders (v1) ","Edit folder settings (v1) ","Automatic exclusion of bibliography sections (v1) ","Automatic exclusion of quotations (v1) "]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/similarity-check/ithenticate-account-use/documents-overview/",
"title": "Documents overview",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2020-05-19",
"lastmod_ts": 1589846400,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "iThenticate v1 or iThenticate 2.0?\nTo work out which version you\u0026rsquo;re on, take a look at the website address that you use to access iThenticate. If you go to ithenticate.com then you are using v1. If you use a bespoke URL, https://crossref-[your member ID].turnitin.com/ then you are using iThenticate 2.0.\niThenticate 2.0 Documents overview\nv1 Documents overview, keep reading:\nWithin a folder, the Documents tab shows all the submitted documents for that folder.\n",
"content": "iThenticate v1 or iThenticate 2.0?\nTo work out which version you\u0026rsquo;re on, take a look at the website address that you use to access iThenticate. If you go to ithenticate.com then you are using v1. If you use a bespoke URL, https://crossref-[your member ID].turnitin.com/ then you are using iThenticate 2.0.\niThenticate 2.0 Documents overview\nv1 Documents overview, keep reading:\nWithin a folder, the Documents tab shows all the submitted documents for that folder.\nShow image × Each document submitted generates a Similarity Report after the document has been through the Similarity Check. If more documents are present than can be displayed at once, the pages feature will appear beneath the documents - click the page number to display, or click Next to move to the next page of documents.\nYou can submit documents in three ways:\nupload a file - to submit a single file zip file upload - to submit a zip file containing multiple documents, up to a maximum of 100MB or 1,000 files. Larger files may take longer to upload cut \u0026amp; paste - to submit text directly into the submission box. Use this to copy and paste a submission from a file format that is not supported. This method supports plain text only (no images or non-text information) iThenticate currently accepts the following file types for document upload:\nMicrosoft Word® (.doc and .docx) Word XML plain text (.txt) Adobe PostScript® Portable Document Format (.pdf) HTML Corel WordPerfect® (.wpd) Rich Text Format (.rtf) Each file may not exceed 400 pages, and each file size may not exceed 100 MB. Reduce the size of larger files by removing non-text content. You can’t upload or submit to iThenticate files that are password-protected, encrypted, hidden, system files, or read-only.\n.pdf documents must contain text - if they contain only images of text, they will be rejected during the upload attempt. To check, copy and paste a section of the .pdf into a plain-text editor such as Microsoft Notepad® or Apple TextEdit®. If no text is copied over, the selection does not contain text.\nTo convert scanned images of a document, or an image saved as a .pdf, use Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software to convert the image to text. The conversion software can introduce errors, so manually check and correct the converted document.\nSome document formats can contain multiple data types, such as text, images, embedded information from another file, and formatting. Non-text information that is not saved directly within the document will not be included in a file upload, for example, references to a Microsoft Excel® spreadsheet included within a Microsoft Office Word® document.\nUse a word-processing program to save your file as one of the accepted types listed above, such as .rtf or .txt. Neither file type supports images or non-text data within the file. Plain text format does not support any formatting, and rich text format allows only limited formatting.\nWhen converting a file to a new format, save it with a different name from the original, to avoid accidentally overwriting the original file. This is especially important when converting to plain text or rich text formats, to prevent permanent loss of the original formatting or image content of the file.\n",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/similarity-check/ithenticate-account-use/documents-submit/",
"title": "Submit a document",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2020-05-19",
"lastmod_ts": 1589846400,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "iThenticate v1 or iThenticate 2.0?\nTo work out which version you\u0026rsquo;re on, take a look at the website address that you use to access iThenticate. If you go to ithenticate.com then you are using v1. If you use a bespoke URL, https://crossref-[your member ID].turnitin.com/ then you are using iThenticate 2.0.\niThenticate 2.0 Submit a document\nv1 Submit a document, keep reading:\nYou can submit a document by simple upload, zip file upload, or cut and paste. Once uploaded, you can edit the document information.\n",
"content": "iThenticate v1 or iThenticate 2.0?\nTo work out which version you\u0026rsquo;re on, take a look at the website address that you use to access iThenticate. If you go to ithenticate.com then you are using v1. If you use a bespoke URL, https://crossref-[your member ID].turnitin.com/ then you are using iThenticate 2.0.\niThenticate 2.0 Submit a document\nv1 Submit a document, keep reading:\nYou can submit a document by simple upload, zip file upload, or cut and paste. Once uploaded, you can edit the document information.\nUploading your file (v1) Upload a File allows you to submit a single document from a variety of document types. From the Submit a document menu, click Upload a File, and the Upload a file form opens.\nShow image × Under Destination Folder, choose the folder to which you wish to upload the file. Its Similarity Report will be added to the same folder. Complete Author First Name, Author Last Name, and Document Title fields. If Document Title is left blank, the document’s filename will be used. Click Choose File, and locate the file to upload. Use Add another file to add more files, up to a total of ten. Click Upload to proceed with with uploading the selected document(s), or click Cancel to cancel the upload. Zip file upload (v1) iThenticate allows you to submit multiple documents from a variety of document types in a compressed zip file. The zip file may be up to approximately 100MB in size and contain up to 1,000 individual files. If the zip file exceeds either limit, it will be rejected. Check that your zip file contains only accepted file types, and no duplicate copies of the same file.\nShow image × Click Zip File Upload from the Submit a document menu. Choose your Destination Folder from the drop-down. The Similarity Report for the file will also be found here. The information you enter in the Author First Name and Author Last Name fields will be applied to all the documents in the zip file. You can manually change these once the document is uploaded to the folder. Click Choose file, locate the zip file on your device, and click Upload. The title of the each document in the zip files will be the default title of each submission.\nCut and paste (v1) Use the cut and paste submission option to submit information from non-supported file types, or to submit only specific parts or areas of a document.\nOnly text can be submitted using this method - any graphics, graphs, images, and formatting are lost when pasting into the text submission box.\nShow image × Click Cut \u0026amp; Paste from the Submit a document menu. Choose your Destination Folder from the drop-down. The Similarity Report for the file will also be found here. Complete the Author First Name, Author Last Name, and Document Title fields. If no title is given, the default title “Pasted Document” will be used. Copy your desired text for checking, paste it into the Paste your document in the area below text box, and click Upload. To view recent uploads, go to the Submit a document menu, click Recent Uploads, and you will see recent uploads listed in reverse chronological order (most recent first). Click the Date \u0026amp; Time header to see the uploads in chronological order (oldest first).\nEdit document information (v1) To edit a document’s information (title and author name), click the edit icon to the right of a document in a folder. You will see the Document Properties page. Edit the fields, and click Update to save your changes.\n",
"headings": ["Uploading your file (v1) ","Zip file upload (v1) ","Cut and paste (v1) ","Edit document information (v1) "]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/similarity-check/ithenticate-account-use/similarity-report-create/",
"title": "Creating and finding your Similarity Report",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2020-05-19",
"lastmod_ts": 1589846400,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "iThenticate v1 or iThenticate 2.0?\nTo work out which version you\u0026rsquo;re on, take a look at the website address that you use to access iThenticate. If you go to ithenticate.com then you are using v1. If you use a bespoke URL, https://crossref-[your member ID].turnitin.com/ then you are using iThenticate 2.0.\niThenticate 2.0 Creating and finding your Similarity Report\nv1 Creating and finding your Similarity Report, keep reading:\nFor each document you submit for checking, the Similarity Report provides an overall similarity breakdown. This is displayed in the form of percentage of similarity between the document and existing published content in the iThenticate database. iThenticate’s repositories include the published content provided by Crossref members, plus billions of web pages (both current and archived content), work that has previously been submitted to Turnitin, and a collection of works including thousands of periodicals, journals, publications.\n",
"content": "iThenticate v1 or iThenticate 2.0?\nTo work out which version you\u0026rsquo;re on, take a look at the website address that you use to access iThenticate. If you go to ithenticate.com then you are using v1. If you use a bespoke URL, https://crossref-[your member ID].turnitin.com/ then you are using iThenticate 2.0.\niThenticate 2.0 Creating and finding your Similarity Report\nv1 Creating and finding your Similarity Report, keep reading:\nFor each document you submit for checking, the Similarity Report provides an overall similarity breakdown. This is displayed in the form of percentage of similarity between the document and existing published content in the iThenticate database. iThenticate’s repositories include the published content provided by Crossref members, plus billions of web pages (both current and archived content), work that has previously been submitted to Turnitin, and a collection of works including thousands of periodicals, journals, publications.\nMatches are highlighted, and the best matches are listed in the report sidebar. Other matches are called underlying sources, and these are listed in the content tracking mode. Learn more about the different viewing modes (Similarity Report mode, Content tracking mode, Summary report mode, Largest matches mode).\nIf two sources have exactly the same amount of matching text, the best match depends on which content repository contains the source of the match. For example, for two identical internet source matches, the most recently crawled internet source would be the best match. If an identical match is found to an internet source and a publication source, the publication source would be the best match.\nAccessing the Similarity Report (v1) To access the Similarity Report through iThenticate, start from the folder that contains the submission, and go to the Documents tab. In the Report column, you will see a button - click this Similarity Score to open the document in the Document Viewer.\nShow image × The Document Viewer (v1) The Document Viewer screen opens in the last used viewing mode. There are three sections:\nAlong the top of the screen, the document information bar shows details about the submitted document. This includes the document title, the date the report was processed, the word count and the number of matching sources found in the selected databases. The left panel is the document text. This shows the full text of the submitted document, highlighting areas of overlap with existing published content. The colors correspond to the matching sources, listed in the sources panel on the right. Show image × The layout will depend on your chosen report mode:\nMatch Overview (show highest matches together) shows the best matches between the submitted document and content from the selected search repositories. Matches are color-coded and listed from highest to lowest percentage of matching word area. Only the top or best matches are shown - you can see all other matches in the Match Breakdown and All Sources modes. All Sources shows matches between the submission and a specifically selected source from the content repositories. This is the full list of all matches found, not just the top matches per area of similarity, including those not seen in the Match Overview because they are the same or similar to other areas which are better matches. Match Breakdown shows all matches, including those that are hidden by a top source and therefore don’t appear in Match Overview. To see the underlying sources, hover over a match, and click the arrow icon. Select a source to highlight the matching text in the submitted document. Click the back arrow next to Match Breakdown to return to Match Overview mode. Side-By-Side Comparison is an in-depth view that shows a document’s match compared side-by-side with the original source from the content repositories. From the All Sources view, choose a source from the sources panel, and a source box highlights on the submitted document similar content within a snippet of the text from the repository source. In Match Overview, select the colored number at the start of the highlighted text to open this source box. To see the entire repository source, click Full Source View, which opens the full-text of the repository source in the sources panel and all the matching instances. The sidebar shows the source’s full text with each match to the document highlighted in red. Click the X icon in the top right corner of the full source text panel to close it. Use the view mode icons to switch between the Match Overview (default, left icon) and All Sources Similarity Report viewing modes. Click the right icon to change the Similarity Report view mode to All Sources.\nShow image × Viewing live web pages for a source (v1) You may access web-based sources by clicking on the source title/URL. If there are multiple matches to this source, use the arrow icons to quickly navigate through them.\nIf a source is restricted or paywalled (for example, subscription-based academic resources), you won’t be able to view the full-text of the source, but you’ll still see the source box snippet for context. Some internet sources may no longer be live.\nFrom Match Overview, click the colored number at the start of a piece of highlighted text on the submitted document. A source box will appear on the document text showing the similar content highlighted within a snippet of the text from the repository source. The source website will be in blue above the source snippet - click the link to access it.\nShow image × From Match Breakdown or All Sources, select the source for which you want to view the website, and a diagonal icon will appear to the right of the source. Click this to access it.\nShow image × ",
"headings": ["Accessing the Similarity Report (v1) ","The Document Viewer (v1) ","Viewing live web pages for a source (v1) "]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/similarity-check/ithenticate-account-use/similarity-report-use/",
"title": "Working with your Similarity Report",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2020-05-19",
"lastmod_ts": 1589846400,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "iThenticate v1 or iThenticate 2.0?\nTo work out which version you\u0026rsquo;re on, take a look at the website address that you use to access iThenticate. If you go to ithenticate.com then you are using v1. If you use a bespoke URL, https://crossref-[your member ID].turnitin.com/ then you are using iThenticate 2.0.\niThenticate 2.0 Working with your Similarity Report\nv1 Working with your Similarity Report, keep reading:\nOnce you have accessed your Similarity Report, you can:\n",
"content": "iThenticate v1 or iThenticate 2.0?\nTo work out which version you\u0026rsquo;re on, take a look at the website address that you use to access iThenticate. If you go to ithenticate.com then you are using v1. If you use a bespoke URL, https://crossref-[your member ID].turnitin.com/ then you are using iThenticate 2.0.\niThenticate 2.0 Working with your Similarity Report\nv1 Working with your Similarity Report, keep reading:\nOnce you have accessed your Similarity Report, you can:\nDownload Similarity Report PDF Apply filters and exclusions in individual Similarity Reports Exclude a match Excluded sources list Access the text-only report Download Similarity Report PDF (v1) To download a Similarity Report as a print-friendly .pdf document, click the print icon at the bottom left of the Document Viewer.\nShow image × The .pdf created is based on the current view of the Similarity Report, so a version created while in Match Overview will create a .pdf with color-coded highlights.\nFilters and exclusions in individual Similarity Reports (v1) You can use filters and exclusions to remove certain elements from being checked for similarity, and help you focus on more significant matches. The functions for excluding material are approximate - they are not perfectly accurate. Take care when choosing what to exclude, as you may miss important matches. At folder level, all users can set filters and exclusions, and administrators can also set URL filters and phrase exclusions. These settings will apply to any documents within the folder. But you can also set filters and exclusions on an individual document, so they only apply to the Similarity Report for that specific document.\nStart from the Document Viewer, and click the filters icon at the bottom of the sidebar to see the Filters \u0026amp; Settings menu.\nShow image × The filters and exclusions options are:\nExclude quoted or bibliographic material: Click the check-box next to Exclude Quotes or Exclude Bibliography, then click Apply Changes at the bottom of the Filter \u0026amp; Settings sidebar. Exclude small sources: Click the check-box for excluding by words or %, and enter a numerical value for sources to be excluded from this Similarity Report. To turn off excluding small sources, select Don’t exclude by size. Click Apply Changes at the bottom of the Filter \u0026amp; Settings sidebar. This setting will affect the All Sources view of the side panel. Exclude small matches: Under Exclude matches that are less than, choose words, and enter the numerical value for match instances to be excluded from this Similarity Report. To turn off excluding small matches, select Don’t exclude. Click Apply Changes at the bottom of the Filter \u0026amp; Settings sidebar. This setting will affect the Match Overview view of the side panel. Exclude sections: Under Exclude Sections, choose the sections you would like to exclude: abstract methods and materials (including variations) iThenticate will exclude sections of the submitted document with headers containing the excluded words: \u0026lsquo;abstract\u0026rsquo;, \u0026lsquo;method and materials\u0026rsquo;, \u0026lsquo;methods\u0026rsquo;, \u0026lsquo;method\u0026rsquo;, \u0026lsquo;materials\u0026rsquo;, and \u0026lsquo;materials and methods\u0026rsquo;. Exclude a match (v1) If you decide that a match does not need to be flagged, you can exclude the source from the Similarity Report through Match Breakdown or All Sources. The Similarity Score will be recalculated, and may change the current percentage of the Similarity Report.\nTo access Match Breakdown from Match Overview, hover over the match for which you would like to view the underlying sources, and click the arrow icon.\nShow image × In Match Breakdown, click Exclude Sources, and select the sources you would like to remove by selecting the check-box next to each, then click the Exclude button.\nShow image × To exclude an entire source match from All Sources, select Exclude Sources, select the sources you would like to remove by selecting the check-box next to each, then click the Exclude button.\nExcluded sources lis (v1) The excluded sources list shows all sources excluded from the Similarity Report. To see the excluded sources list, click the excluded sources icon at the bottom of the sidebar.\nShow image × Click the check-box next to any source you would like to re-include in the Similarity Report, and click the Restore button to include the source in the Similarity Report. To restore all of the sources that were excluded from the report, click the Restore All button. The Similarity Score will be recalculated.\nShow image × The text-only report (v1) Start in the Document Viewer, and click the Text-Only Report button at the bottom right to see the Similarity Report without document formatting. The report will stay in text-only view mode (even if you close and reopen it) until you click Document Viewer to return to that mode.\nShow image × Along the top of the screen, the document information bar shows important details about the submitted document (including the date the report was processed, word count, the folder the document was submitted from, the number of matching documents found in the selected databases and the similarity index), and a menu bar with various options. Use the information bar drop-down to switch between uploaded documents in the same folder.\nShow image × The menu bar beneath the information bar has a mode selection drop-down menu, options to exclude quotes, bibliography, small sources, and small matches, as well as options to print and download.\nChoose a viewing mode from the mode drop-down menu:\nSimilarity Report (default) - this mode has a similar layout to the Document Viewer. You will see the document\u0026rsquo;s text on the left of the screen, with similarities highlighted. On the right are the sources, color-coded and listed from highest to lowest percentage of matching words. Only the top or best matches are shown - choose Content Tracking mode to see all underlying matches. Content tracking mode lists all the matches between the submitted document and the databases. Regular updates means that there may be many matches from the same source, some of which may be partially or completely hidden due to the content appearing in a higher matched source. The sources that are the same will specify from where they were taken and when. Summary report mode offers a simple, printable list of the matches found followed by the paper with the matching areas highlighted. It shows the sources first, with the document text below. Largest matches mode shows the percentage of words that are a part of a matching text string (with some limited flexibility). In some cases, strings from the same source may overlap, in which case, the longer string in the largest match view will be displayed. You have options to filter and exclude:\nExclude quoted or bibliographic material - click Exclude Quotes or Exclude Bibliography from the menu bar. Exclude phrases - click enable this setting for a folder means that any submission made to that folder will exclude the phrases specified in the folder settings. If you would like to include these phrases in the report, click Do not Exclude Phrases in the menu bar. Exclude a match - use this to exclude a source from the Similarity Report in either the Similarity Report or largest matches viewing modes. To exclude a match, view the report in Similarity Report or largest matches mode. Each source listed has an X icon to its right - click this to exclude the source. Any underlying source, if present, will replace the excluded source. Once a source has been excluded it can be re-included in the Similarity Report through the content tracking mode, which lists all sources with content matching that of the submission. In this view mode, excluded sources have a + icon to the right of their name - click this to re-include the source in the Similarity Report. Exclude small sources and matches - click Exclude small sources or Exclude small matches in the menu bar. Exclude small sources - To exclude a small source, enter a value into the word count or percentage field to set an exclusion threshold. Any source below the word court or match percentage threshold will be excluded from the record. Click Update to save the exclusion setting. Exclude small matches - To exclude a small match, enter a value into the word count field to set an exclusion threshold. Any match below that threshold will be excluded from the report. Click Update to save the exclusion setting. Making these changes may change the percentage of matching text found within the submission. Deselect an option to include it again.\nLearn more about exclusion settings when setting up a new folder, editing filters and exclusions in existing folders, filters and exclusions within the Similarity Report, and URL filters and phrase exclusions for account administrators.\n",
"headings": ["Download Similarity Report PDF (v1) ","Filters and exclusions in individual Similarity Reports (v1) ","Exclude a match (v1) ","Excluded sources lis (v1) ","The text-only report (v1) "]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/similarity-check/ithenticate-account-use/doc-to-doc-comparison/",
"title": "Doc-to-doc comparison",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2020-05-19",
"lastmod_ts": 1589846400,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "iThenticate v1 or iThenticate 2.0?\nTo work out which version you\u0026rsquo;re on, take a look at the website address that you use to access iThenticate. If you go to ithenticate.com then you are using v1. If you use a bespoke URL, https://crossref-[your member ID].turnitin.com/ then you are using iThenticate 2.0.\nUse doc-to-doc comparison to compare a primary uploaded document with up to five comparison uploaded documents. Any documents that you upload to doc-to-doc comparison will not be indexed and will not be searchable against any future submissions.\n",
"content": "iThenticate v1 or iThenticate 2.0?\nTo work out which version you\u0026rsquo;re on, take a look at the website address that you use to access iThenticate. If you go to ithenticate.com then you are using v1. If you use a bespoke URL, https://crossref-[your member ID].turnitin.com/ then you are using iThenticate 2.0.\nUse doc-to-doc comparison to compare a primary uploaded document with up to five comparison uploaded documents. Any documents that you upload to doc-to-doc comparison will not be indexed and will not be searchable against any future submissions.\nUploading a primary document to doc-to-doc comparison will cost you a single document submission, but the comparison documents uploaded will not cost you any submissions.\niThenticate 2.0 Doc-to-doc comparison\nv1 Doc-to-doc comparison, keep reading:\nHow to use doc-to-doc comparison (v1) Start from Folders, go to the Submit a document menu, and click Doc-to-Doc Comparison.\nShow image × The doc-to-doc comparison screen allows you to choose one primary document and up to five comparison documents. Choose the destination folder for the documents you will upload. The Similarity Report for the comparison will be added to the same folder.\nFor your primary document, provide the author’s first name, last name, and document title. If you do not provide these details, the filename will be used for the title, and the author details will stay blank.\nIf you have administrator permissions, you can assign the Similarity Report for the comparison to a reporting group by selecting one from the Reporting Group drop-down. Learn more about reporting groups.\nClick Choose File, and select the file you want to upload as your primary document. See the file requirements for both the primary and comparison documents on the right of the screen.\nYou can choose up to five comparison documents to check against your primary document. These do not need to be given titles and author details. Each of the filenames must be unique. Click Choose Files, and select the files you would like to upload as comparison documents. To remove a file from the comparison before you upload it, click the X icon next to the file. To upload your files for comparison, click Upload.\nOnce your document has been uploaded and compared against the comparison documents, it will appear in your chosen destination folder.\nThis upload will have ‘Doc-to-Doc Comparison’ beneath the document title to show that this is a comparison upload and has not been indexed.\nShow image × The upload will be given a Similarity Score against the selected comparison documents, which is also displayed in the report column. Click the similarity percentage to open the doc-to-doc comparison in the Document Viewer.\nThe Document Viewer is separated into three sections:\nAlong the top of the screen, the paper information bar shows details about the primary document, including document title, author, date the report was processed, word count, number of comparison documents provided, and how many of those documents matched with the primary document. On the left panel is the paper text - this is the text of your primary document. Matching text is highlighted in red. Your comparison documents will appear in the sources panel to the right, showing instances of matching text within the submitted documents. By default, the doc-to-doc comparison will open the Document Viewer in the All Sources view. This view lists all the comparison documents you uploaded. Each comparison document has a percentage showing the amount of content within them that is similar to the primary document. If a comparison document has no matching text with the primary document, it has 0% next to it.\nDoc-to-doc comparison can also be viewed in Match Overview mode. In this view, the comparison documents are listed with highest match percentage first, and all the sources are shown together, color-coded, on the paper text.\n",
"headings": ["How to use doc-to-doc comparison (v1) "]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/similarity-check/ithenticate-account-use/account-info/",
"title": "Your Similarity Check user account",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2020-05-19",
"lastmod_ts": 1589846400,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "iThenticate v1 or iThenticate 2.0?\nTo work out which version you\u0026rsquo;re on, take a look at the website address that you use to access iThenticate. If you go to ithenticate.com then you are using v1. If you use a bespoke URL, https://crossref-[your member ID].turnitin.com/ then you are using iThenticate 2.0.\niThenticate 2.0 Similarity Check user account\nv1 Similarity Check user account, keep reading:\nManage your user account using the Account Information tab.\n",
"content": "iThenticate v1 or iThenticate 2.0?\nTo work out which version you\u0026rsquo;re on, take a look at the website address that you use to access iThenticate. If you go to ithenticate.com then you are using v1. If you use a bespoke URL, https://crossref-[your member ID].turnitin.com/ then you are using iThenticate 2.0.\niThenticate 2.0 Similarity Check user account\nv1 Similarity Check user account, keep reading:\nManage your user account using the Account Information tab.\nShow image × Your user account profile (v1) The Account Information section shows important information about your iThenticate account, including your account name, account ID, and user ID. Please ignore the iThenticate account expiry date - we’re working with iThenticate to have this removed. The iThenticate account expiry date is set to 1 June 2022 by default.\nShow image × From Account Info, then My Profile, you can:\nUpdate your profile: this form shows your current details. To make changes, enter your password in the Current Password field at the top of the form. Change the name attributed to your account: enter the first and last name in the relevant fields. These fields are required, you cannot leave them blank. Change your email address: enter your email into the email field. This email address is used to send you important account information, so please make sure it is valid. This field is required, you cannot leave it blank. Add a photo to your account: click Choose File, and select the image file you want to upload. Change your password: enter your current password in the Current Password field, enter your new password in the Change Password field, and enter it again in the Confirm Password field. Click Update Profile to save your changes. ",
"headings": ["Your user account profile (v1) "]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/similarity-check/ithenticate-account-use/settings/",
"title": "Settings",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2020-05-19",
"lastmod_ts": 1589846400,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "iThenticate v1 or iThenticate 2.0?\nTo work out which version you\u0026rsquo;re on, take a look at the website address that you use to access iThenticate. If you go to ithenticate.com then you are using v1. If you use a bespoke URL, https://crossref-[your member ID].turnitin.com/ then you are using iThenticate 2.0.\niThenticate 2.0 User Settings\nv1 User Settings, keep reading:\nThe Settings tab controls general, document, and report display options. These options include the number of documents shown for each page, default report view, and controlling email notifications.\n",
"content": "iThenticate v1 or iThenticate 2.0?\nTo work out which version you\u0026rsquo;re on, take a look at the website address that you use to access iThenticate. If you go to ithenticate.com then you are using v1. If you use a bespoke URL, https://crossref-[your member ID].turnitin.com/ then you are using iThenticate 2.0.\niThenticate 2.0 User Settings\nv1 User Settings, keep reading:\nThe Settings tab controls general, document, and report display options. These options include the number of documents shown for each page, default report view, and controlling email notifications.\nShow image × General settings (v1) Show image × Use General settings to set your home folder - this is the folder will open by default when you log in to iThenticate. Choose your home folder from the drop-down menu.\nFrom the Number of documents to show drop-down, choose how many uploaded documents are listed in your folders before a new page is created.\nChoose what is displayed after you upload a document to iThenticate: Display the upload folder (to see the processing of the document you have just uploaded), or Upload another document (returns you to the upload form).\nYou can also choose the time zone and language for your account - the language you choose will set the language of your user interface.\nClick Update Settings to save your changes.\nDocuments settings (v1) Show image × Use Documents settings to choose the default way iThenticate sorts your uploaded documents: by processed date, title, Similarity Score, and author. Choose your preferred option from the drop-down menu.\nYou can set the threshold at which the Similarity Score color changes, based on the percentage of similarity. All Similarity Scores above the percentage you set will appear in the folder in blue, all those beneath the percentage will appear in gray. This visual distinction helps you easily identify matches above a given threshold. Learn more about how to interpret the Similarity Score.\nClick Update Settings to save your changes.\nReports settings (v1) Show image × Use Reports settings to adjust your email notifications, choose whether to color-code your reports, and view available document repositories for your account.\nEmail notifications tell you when a Similarity Report has exceeded particular thresholds, including Similarity Reports in shared folders. Email notifications are sent to the email address you used to sign up to iThenticate.\nReport email frequency: choose whether to receive notifications, chose how often you would like to receive them every hour, once a day, every other day, or once a week Similarity Report threshold: this refers to a paper’s overall Similarity Score. If the Similarity Score of a paper in your account exceeds the threshold set, you will receive an email notification. The default setting is \u0026lsquo;don\u0026rsquo;t notify me\u0026rsquo;. Content tracking report threshold: this refers to the All Sources section of the Similarity Report. If a single source for a paper in your account exceeds the similarity threshold set, you will receive an email notification. The default setting is don\u0026rsquo;t notify me. Color code report: color-coding the Similarity Report can make viewing matches easier. Choose Yes or No to enable or disable this feature.\nAvailable document repositories: this section shows the available repositories for your account. Modify them in the folder settings.\n",
"headings": ["General settings (v1) ","Documents settings (v1) ","Reports settings (v1) "]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/similarity-check/similarity-report-understand/",
"title": "Understanding your Similarity Report",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2020-05-19",
"lastmod_ts": 1589846400,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "How is the Similarity Score calculated? The below information will help you understand how to interpret your Similarity Report, whether you\u0026rsquo;re using iThenticate v1 or iThenticate 2.0.\nTo calculate the Similarity Score, iThenticate scans your submitted document’s text, and checks it against each of the repositories you’ve chosen. The system takes the number of matching words found within the document and divides it by the document’s total word count to produce the Similarity Score percentage for the report.\n",
"content": "How is the Similarity Score calculated? The below information will help you understand how to interpret your Similarity Report, whether you\u0026rsquo;re using iThenticate v1 or iThenticate 2.0.\nTo calculate the Similarity Score, iThenticate scans your submitted document’s text, and checks it against each of the repositories you’ve chosen. The system takes the number of matching words found within the document and divides it by the document’s total word count to produce the Similarity Score percentage for the report.\nIf you apply exclusion options to the document, the system removes all matches for the exclusion option logic and recalculates the Similarity Score percentage.\nLearn more about exclusion settings when setting up a new folder (v1 only), editing filters and exclusions in existing folders (v1 only), filters and exclusions within the Similarity Report (v1 or iThenticate 2.0), and URL filters (v1 or iThenticate 2.0) for account administrators.\nHow to interpret the Similarity Report iThenticate does not check for plagiarism; it checks for similarity. Where a section of the submission’s content is similar or identical to one or more sources, it will be flagged for review. This doesn’t automatically mean plagiarism, however - just similarity.\nIt’s perfectly natural for a submission to match against some sources in the database. A high degree of overlap may indicate a well-researched document with many references to existing work, and as long as these sources are quoted and referenced correctly, this is perfectly acceptable. A high degree of overlap may also be present where an author has already shared their work on a preprint repository. If the author(s) are the same, this is not a problem.\nIt’s important that you don’t set a Similarity Score over which you automatically reject manuscripts - where there’s a high degree of overlap, your editors and reviewers should decide if the match is acceptable or not, as part of their general review process.\nSimilarity Reports and preprints It is entirely possible (and acceptable) for an author to submit an article to a journal even though they’ve previously made the article available as a preprint. In this case, we expect a high degree of similarity between the preprint and author’s submitted manuscript.\nTherefore, if you find a high degree of similarity between a manuscript you’re checking in iThenticate and a preprint by the same author(s), this is likely to be because the manuscript is a match with its own preprint. However, if the manuscript and preprint do not have the same author(s), this may indicate a problem, and you should investigate further.\nSome preprints can be found in iThenticate’s Crossref Posted Content repository, so take this into account if you are checking against this repository. But even if you have excluded the Crossref Posted Content repository in your settings (v1or iThenticate 2.0), it is still possible for preprints to appear as matches to a submission, because iThenticate also crawls preprint repositories on the web.\nWe recommend including preprints in your results to ensure you are checking that preprints haven’t been plagiarised by a different author, but if you see a pre-print match for the same author, this isn\u0026rsquo;t plagiarism.\n",
"headings": ["How is the Similarity Score calculated? ","How to interpret the Similarity Report ","Similarity Reports and preprints "]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/similarity-check/upgrading/",
"title": "Upgrading from iThenticate v1 to iThenticate 2.0",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2022-07-15",
"lastmod_ts": 1657843200,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "Background The Similarity Check service gives Crossref members reduced rate access to the iThenticate tool from Turnitin, and there\u0026rsquo;s now a new version of iThenticate available for some subscribers. iThenticate 2.0 has lots of new and improved features, including:\nThe ability to identify content on preprint servers more easily A “red flag” feature that signals the detection of hidden text such as text/quotation marks in white font, or suspicious character replacement A faster, more user-friendly and responsive Similarity Report interface For those members who integrate their iThenticate account with a Manuscript Tracking Service (MTS) there are even more benefits - you can now submit your manuscripts and view your Similarity Report from within the MTS, and you can also manage your exclusions from within your MTS too. There are also some important changes in how you manage users.\n",
"content": "Background The Similarity Check service gives Crossref members reduced rate access to the iThenticate tool from Turnitin, and there\u0026rsquo;s now a new version of iThenticate available for some subscribers. iThenticate 2.0 has lots of new and improved features, including:\nThe ability to identify content on preprint servers more easily A “red flag” feature that signals the detection of hidden text such as text/quotation marks in white font, or suspicious character replacement A faster, more user-friendly and responsive Similarity Report interface For those members who integrate their iThenticate account with a Manuscript Tracking Service (MTS) there are even more benefits - you can now submit your manuscripts and view your Similarity Report from within the MTS, and you can also manage your exclusions from within your MTS too. There are also some important changes in how you manage users.\nYou can find out more about the benefits of iThenticate 2.0 on our blog.\nWho can upgrade from iThenticate v1 to iThenticate 2.0? Any member already subscribed to the Similarity Check service and providing full-text Similarity Check URLs for 90% of their registered content is eligible to upgrade. We have begun the process of reaching out to members so that they can take advantage of Turnitin\u0026rsquo;s migration tool to aide in transferring content and users between iThenticate v1 and iThenticate 2.0. If you haven\u0026rsquo;t heard from us yet, don\u0026rsquo;t worry; we have just begun this process in mid-2025 and will be working our way through all our Similarity Check subscribers.\nNot sure if you\u0026rsquo;re currently using iThenticate v1 or iThenticate 2.0? Here\u0026rsquo;s how to check.\nThe upgrade process We will be reaching out to those Similarity Check subscribers who have fallen below the 90% eligibility threshold. This means that we will check that you are still providing Similarity Check URLs for at least 90% of the content you have registered with Crossref, and that the team at Turnitin can continue to index this content into the iThenticate database.\nWhen you are able to upgrade from iThenticate v1 to iThenticate 2.0, we will contact the Similarity Check editorial contact on your account and ask you to complete a form. Once that form is complete, Turnitin will send you an email with information on how to set up a Migration Setup Account. This is a temporary iThenticate 2.0 account where you can test the new features and interface. Any submissions checked during this testing period will not be saved. You will then schedule your migration and work with Turnitin to get set up with your new, permanent iThenticate 2.0 account. For more detailed information on this process, please visit Turnitin\u0026rsquo;s documentation here.\nOnce you have administrator access to your new iThenticate 2.0 account, you can follow the instructions for getting set up. There are a different set of instructions depending on whether:\nYou will be using iThenticate directly in the browser - more here. You will be integrating iThenticate with your Manuscript Tracking System (MTS) - more here. If you have any follow up questions after your upgrade, do read our upgrade FAQs.\n",
"headings": ["Background","Who can upgrade from iThenticate v1 to iThenticate 2.0?","The upgrade process"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/similarity-check/upgrading/v1-or-v2/",
"title": "iThenticate v1 or iThenticate 2.0?",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2022-07-15",
"lastmod_ts": 1657843200,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "Not sure if you are currently using iThenticate v1 or iThenticate 2.0?\niThenticate v1 iThenticate v1 looks like this:\nShow image × If you access iThenticate through the browser, you will use the address ithenticate.com.\niThenticate 2.0 iThenticate 2.0 looks like this:\nIf you access iThenticate through the browser, you will use a bespoke URL: https://crossref-[your member ID].turnitin.com\n",
"content": "Not sure if you are currently using iThenticate v1 or iThenticate 2.0?\niThenticate v1 iThenticate v1 looks like this:\nShow image × If you access iThenticate through the browser, you will use the address ithenticate.com.\niThenticate 2.0 iThenticate 2.0 looks like this:\nIf you access iThenticate through the browser, you will use a bespoke URL: https://crossref-[your member ID].turnitin.com\n",
"headings": ["iThenticate v1","iThenticate 2.0"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/similarity-check/upgrading/faqs/",
"title": "Upgrade FAQs",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2025-06-30",
"lastmod_ts": 1751241600,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": " Differences between iThenticate v1 and iThenticate 2.0 Upgrading from a iThenticate v1 to iThenticate 2.0 Problems after upgrading from v1 to 2.0 Differences between iThenticate v1 and iThenticate 2.0 Q. What are the big differences between iThenticate v1 and 2.0 for all users? As well as the faster, more user-friendly and responsive interface there are a few new features in iThenticate 2.0 which everyone can benefit from.\nThe Submitted Works repository (or Private Repository) The Submitted Works Repository (or Private Repository) is a new feature in iThenticate 2.0 which is now available to Crossref members. This feature allows users to find similarity not just across Turnitin’s extensive Content Database but also across all previous manuscripts submitted to your iThenticate account for all the journals you work on. This would allow you to find collusion between authors or potential cases of duplicate submissions.\n",
"content": " Differences between iThenticate v1 and iThenticate 2.0 Upgrading from a iThenticate v1 to iThenticate 2.0 Problems after upgrading from v1 to 2.0 Differences between iThenticate v1 and iThenticate 2.0 Q. What are the big differences between iThenticate v1 and 2.0 for all users? As well as the faster, more user-friendly and responsive interface there are a few new features in iThenticate 2.0 which everyone can benefit from.\nThe Submitted Works repository (or Private Repository) The Submitted Works Repository (or Private Repository) is a new feature in iThenticate 2.0 which is now available to Crossref members. This feature allows users to find similarity not just across Turnitin’s extensive Content Database but also across all previous manuscripts submitted to your iThenticate account for all the journals you work on. This would allow you to find collusion between authors or potential cases of duplicate submissions.\nUsing iThenticate 2.0 in the browser? Find out more about the Submitted Works Repository.\nUsing iThenticate 2.0 through an integration with your MTS? This feature is currently only available to ScholarOne Manuscripts users. Find out more about the Submitted Works Repository. Better identification of preprints Using iThenticate 2.0 in the browser? Find out more about Preprint labels and exclusions.\nUsing iThenticate 2.0 through an integration with your MTS? Find out more about Preprint labels and exclusions. Identification of hidden text or suspicious character replacement The new “red flag” feature signals the detection of hidden text such as text/quotation marks in white font, or suspicious character replacement. Find out more about the flags.\nNo need to manually exclude bibliography or citations In iThenticate 2.0, there is no need to choose to exclude the bibliography or citations in papers written in English, as Turnitin will automatically exclude these from your Similarity Report. For more information, please see Turnitin\u0026rsquo;s documentation here.\nPlease note, if you using an MTS integration and you find that the bibliography or citations are not being excluded, please reach out to your MTS, as they will need to adjust the settings on their end to ensure these exclusions are in place.\nQ. Are there other differences between v1 and iThenticate 2.0 that those who integrate with an MTS will also notice? Yes, there are some other big improvements to iThenticate for members who integrate iThenticate with their MTS.\nView your Similarity Reports within your MTS You can now both submit your manuscripts AND view your Similarity Report from within your MTS.\nNo folders if you integrate with an MTS If you are using iThenticate through an integration then there is no need to set up any folders within your iThenticate account. Unlike in iThenticate v1, integrations will not send submissions to a folder which is accessible by logging into iThenticate through your browser. Submissions created by your MTS will only be accessible through your MTS.\nNo individual users in iThenticate if you integrate with an MTS If you are using iThenticate through an integration with an MTS, then you do not need to set up any new users on your new iThenticate account. This is because all the submissions from your MTS will be made by the API key you’ve set, rather than individual users.\nQ. Is AI detection available with iThenticate 2.0 through Similarity Check? We\u0026rsquo;re not currently offering the iThenticate AI add-on to Crossref members as part of the Similarity Check service. This is based on feedback from our members who tested its functionality.\nWe do hope to offer the AI feature in the future though, and we’ll revisit the decision as the service develops. Keep an eye out for announcements on our community forum.\nUpgrading from iThenticate v1 to iThenticate 2.0 Q. Can I move my existing users over from iThenticate v1 to iThenticate 2.0 when I upgrade? Yes. By using Turnitin\u0026rsquo;s migration tool, you\u0026rsquo;ll be able to move your users from your iThenticate v1 account to your new iThenticate 2.0 account. This is a good time to review the users on your account and ensure that they are correct.\nQ. When I move to iThenticate 2.0, will I immediately lose access to iThenticate v1? Yes, but you will have a chance to test out iThenticate 2.0 through Turnitin\u0026rsquo;s migration process with a temporary Migration Setup Account. During this migration process, you will schedule the date for your migration, and you will continue to have access to your historical Similarity reports from your v1 account. For more information about the migration process, please see our documentation here and Turnitin\u0026rsquo;s documentation here.\nQ. Can I still view my previous submissions from iThenticate v1 in iThenticate 2.0? The submissions you made through iThenticate v1 will not be accessible directly through iThenticate 2.0. However, you will still be able to access your historical reports.\nQ. Is there an extra charge for using iThenticate 2.0? There is no charge to upgrade to iThenticate 2.0, and the costs to check your manuscripts are the same as in iThenticate v1. If you are using iThenticate 2.0 for some of your journals, but continue to use iThenticate v1 for some of your other journals, your volume discounts will apply across both instances.\nHowever, it\u0026rsquo;s important to note that we can\u0026rsquo;t tell if you check the same document in both iThenticate v1 and iThenticate 2.0. If you do this, you will be charged twice.\nQ. Can I upgrade from v1 to 2.0 if I use the OJS platform from PKP? Yes, the OJS platform does have an integration with iThenticate 2.0. Please note, you\u0026rsquo;ll need to be on OJS version 3.3, 3.4, or 3.5 to use the integration. If you need to upgrade your OJS instance, please visit PKP\u0026rsquo;s website for documentation.\nProblems after upgrading from v1 to iThenticate 2.0 Q. I can\u0026rsquo;t login to my new iThenticate 2.0 account If you are the main Similarity Check contact on your member account, you should have received an email from Turnitin to set up your administrator password. Have you received the email and set up your new credentials yet? More information here.\nIf you have already received the email and set up your credentials and are still having problems, please check that you are going to the right place to access your iThenticate 2.0 account. Your old iThenticate v1 account and your new iThenticate 2.0 account are completely different, and you will get to them using a different URL. Some members accidentally try to login to their new 2.0 account on the URL for their old v1 account by mistake. To make sure that you are definitely going to the right place for 2.0, follow these instructions.\nQ. I can\u0026rsquo;t share links to allow others to go directly to Similarity Check reports within my iThenticate 2.0 instance This is deliberate - being able to share links to the system was a security risk and this functionality has been deliberately removed by Turnitin. You can however download and email Similarity Reports to others.\n",
"headings": ["Differences between iThenticate v1 and iThenticate 2.0","Q. What are the big differences between iThenticate v1 and 2.0 for all users?","The Submitted Works repository (or Private Repository)","Better identification of preprints","Identification of hidden text or suspicious character replacement","No need to manually exclude bibliography or citations","Q. Are there other differences between v1 and iThenticate 2.0 that those who integrate with an MTS will also notice?","View your Similarity Reports within your MTS","No folders if you integrate with an MTS","No individual users in iThenticate if you integrate with an MTS","Q. Is AI detection available with iThenticate 2.0 through Similarity Check?","Upgrading from iThenticate v1 to iThenticate 2.0","Q. Can I move my existing users over from iThenticate v1 to iThenticate 2.0 when I upgrade?","Q. When I move to iThenticate 2.0, will I immediately lose access to iThenticate v1?","Q. Can I still view my previous submissions from iThenticate v1 in iThenticate 2.0?","Q. Is there an extra charge for using iThenticate 2.0?","Q. Can I upgrade from v1 to 2.0 if I use the OJS platform from PKP?","Problems after upgrading from v1 to iThenticate 2.0","Q. I can\u0026rsquo;t login to my new iThenticate 2.0 account","Q. I can\u0026rsquo;t share links to allow others to go directly to Similarity Check reports within my iThenticate 2.0 instance"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/similarity-check/get-help/",
"title": "Get help with Similarity Check",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2020-05-19",
"lastmod_ts": 1589846400,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "Do start by reading the documentation on this website.\nHelp with initial set up for iThenticate administrators Setting up your iThenticate v1 account Setting up your iThenticate 2.0 account to use directly in the browser Setting up your iThenticate 2.0 account to use with your Manuscript Tracking System Help using the iThenticate tool Using your iThenticate account Understanding your Similarity Report Help with upgrading from iThenticate v1 to iThenticate 2.0 Upgrading from iThenticate v1 to iThenticate 2.0 If you still don\u0026rsquo;t understand how to use the iThenticate tool, the team at Crossref can help - just contact us.\n",
"content": "Do start by reading the documentation on this website.\nHelp with initial set up for iThenticate administrators Setting up your iThenticate v1 account Setting up your iThenticate 2.0 account to use directly in the browser Setting up your iThenticate 2.0 account to use with your Manuscript Tracking System Help using the iThenticate tool Using your iThenticate account Understanding your Similarity Report Help with upgrading from iThenticate v1 to iThenticate 2.0 Upgrading from iThenticate v1 to iThenticate 2.0 If you still don\u0026rsquo;t understand how to use the iThenticate tool, the team at Crossref can help - just contact us.\nIf you encounter a technical issue (such as an error message or a bug), please contact the Turnitin team directly at tiisupport@turnitin.com.\nEmail: tiisupport@turnitin.com Phone: +1 866 816 5046, extension 241 To find out about outages or planned maintenance that affect the iThenticate system, check the Turnitin status page or Turnitin\u0026rsquo;s X feed. These pages display information on service outages, maintenance alerts, or incidents related to the performance of iThenticate. You can also subscribe to the notifications feed to automatically receive updates. For known bugs in the iThenticate software, please visit Turnitin\u0026rsquo;s known issues page.\n",
"headings": ["Help with initial set up for iThenticate administrators","Help using the iThenticate tool","Help with upgrading from iThenticate v1 to iThenticate 2.0"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/principles-practices/best-practices/versioning/",
"title": "Version control, corrections, and retractions",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2025-08-13",
"lastmod_ts": 1755043200,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "Version control is the management of changes to a document, file, or dataset. Versions of a document may include the following:\nDraft Preprint - early draft or manuscript shared by researcher in a preprint repository or dedicated channel (outside of a specific journal) Pending publication (PP) - a manuscript which has been accepted but has not yet been published online Advanced online publication or ahead of print (AOP) - early release of publication which publisher makes available to readers on their platform (prior to typesetting or before final published form) Author accepted manuscript (AAM) - accepted version which has been peer reviewed but not typeset or copyedited Version of record (VoR) - typeset, copyedited, and published version Updated - adding supplementary data or making corrections to the file, or its retraction. Version control is important for:\n",
"content": "Version control is the management of changes to a document, file, or dataset. Versions of a document may include the following:\nDraft Preprint - early draft or manuscript shared by researcher in a preprint repository or dedicated channel (outside of a specific journal) Pending publication (PP) - a manuscript which has been accepted but has not yet been published online Advanced online publication or ahead of print (AOP) - early release of publication which publisher makes available to readers on their platform (prior to typesetting or before final published form) Author accepted manuscript (AAM) - accepted version which has been peer reviewed but not typeset or copyedited Version of record (VoR) - typeset, copyedited, and published version Updated - adding supplementary data or making corrections to the file, or its retraction. Version control is important for:\ntraceability (following the development of the document), identifiability (connecting documents to decisions, contributions, contributors, and time), clarity (distinguishing between multiple versions of documents, and identifying the latest version), reduced duplication (removing out-of-date versions), and reduced errors (clearly indicating to readers which is the current version). Publication stages and DOIs How do I decide if I should assign a DOI to a work, and at what stage? This table sets out seven publication stages of a research object (a publication such as a journal article, book, or dataset). A work may not go through all of these seven stages, so you only need to consider the stages relevant to your publication.\nPublication stage Eligible for a DOI? Which DOI? 1 Draft No DOI for draft item n/a 2 Preprint Yes DOI A 3 Pending publication (PP) Yes DOI B 4 Advanced online publication/ahead of print (AOP) Yes DOI B 5 Author accepted manuscript (AAM) Yes DOI B 6 Version of record (VoR) Yes DOI B 7 Updated Yes DOI C A DOI should not be assigned to a draft (unpublished) work. A preprint should have its own DOI (DOI A). Accepted versions (including PP, AOP, AAM, and VoR) should have a separate DOI (DOI B). Establish a relationship between DOI B and DOI A to show the connection between them, such as DOI B \u0026ldquo;hasPreprint\u0026rdquo; DOI A. In the case of a significant change to the published version, a notice should be published explaining the correction/update/retraction. The updated version should have a new DOI (DOI C). Updates should only be deposited for changes that are likely to affect the interpretation or crediting of the work (editorially significant changes), and instead of simply asserting a relationship, these should be recorded as updates. See the following section for more information on updates. Best practices for handling retractions and other post-publication updates Research can undergo changes after it is published for various reasons. For example, it may be withdrawn, corrected, or retracted. It’s important that these changes are accurately reflected in the scholarly record, so that readers know how to find the most up-to-date work, as well as what research can be relied upon and cited.\nWhen an editorially significant update is made to a document, you should not modify the original document, but instead issue a separate document (such as a correction or retraction notice) which explains the change. This separate document will have a different DOI and different metadata from the document that it updates. This process is complementary to versioning.\nShow image × The metadata for the update should include a link to the item being updated, as well as information on the type of update, as part of the Crossmark section of the metadata:\n\u0026lt;updates\u0026gt; \u0026lt;update type=\u0026#34;retraction\u0026#34; label=\u0026#34;Retraction\u0026#34; date=\u0026#34;2009-09-14\u0026#34;\u0026gt;10.5555/12345678\u0026lt;/update\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/updates\u0026gt; A full example of an XML file following best practice can be found here. If you are not comfortable editing XML, you can also register Crossmark metadata using our Web Deposit Form.\nNote that you don\u0026rsquo;t need to use all aspects of Crossmark to register updates. Learn more about the different ways of registering updates in our documentation.\nYou should also reflect the status of the work in the original DOI’s metadata record by adding “RETRACTED:” in front of the article title. We recommend doing the same for the title listed on the item’s landing page. You may also want to replace the abstract of the work with a retraction statement in both the metadata and on your website or publishing platform.\nFinally, if you participate in the Similarity Check service, you should remove the full-text URL from the item\u0026rsquo;s metadata. To get a retracted work to be removed from the Similarity Check text comparison database, get in touch with Turnitin at tiisupport@turnitin.com.\nReading list COPE guidelines for retracting articles - from the Committee on Publication Ethics Communication of Retractions, Removals, and Expressions of Concern: Recommendations of the NISO CREC Working Group (opens .pdf file) Journal Article Versions: Recommendations of the NISO/ALPSP JAV Technical Working Group (opens .pdf file) Errata, Retractions, and Other Linked Citations in PubMed Webinar recording: Crossref and CREC: how publishers can meet the CREC recommendations using open infrastructure (passcode: 1EuTA$7$) ",
"headings": ["Publication stages and DOIs ","Best practices for handling retractions and other post-publication updates ","Reading list "]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/crossmark/participating-in-crossmark/",
"title": "Participating in Crossmark",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2025-12-10",
"lastmod_ts": 1765324800,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "Implementing Crossmark includes several stages, some of which require technical knowledge to modify websites or PDFs.\nFull implementation means that you\u0026rsquo;ll need to include Crossmark-specific metadata when registering content and add the Crossmark button to your website and PDFs. If you are not able to finish the process, that\u0026rsquo;s ok, make a start and continue when you have the expertise to do so.\nOn this page, learn more about:\nStep one: Designate an update policy page and assign it a DOI Step two: Include the policy page in all your registered content Step three: Register published updates Step four: Implement Crossmark on your HTML pages Step five: Apply Crossmark to your PDF content Further options: adding more Crossmark information Step one: Designate an update policy page and assign it a DOI You will need to explain to your readers how your content is updated after publication and indicate when this has happened. The first step is to have a single page on your website explaining these processes. This page should be registered and have a DOI to enable persistent linking. It must include your policies on corrections, retractions, withdrawals and other updates. It can include links to other relevant policies such as author submission guidelines and peer review guidelines, and may contain definitions and explanations of additional custom metadata fields you have used. You may already have a suitable page on your website, but don\u0026rsquo;t forget to assign it a DOI and register the metadata with us.\n",
"content": "Implementing Crossmark includes several stages, some of which require technical knowledge to modify websites or PDFs.\nFull implementation means that you\u0026rsquo;ll need to include Crossmark-specific metadata when registering content and add the Crossmark button to your website and PDFs. If you are not able to finish the process, that\u0026rsquo;s ok, make a start and continue when you have the expertise to do so.\nOn this page, learn more about:\nStep one: Designate an update policy page and assign it a DOI Step two: Include the policy page in all your registered content Step three: Register published updates Step four: Implement Crossmark on your HTML pages Step five: Apply Crossmark to your PDF content Further options: adding more Crossmark information Step one: Designate an update policy page and assign it a DOI You will need to explain to your readers how your content is updated after publication and indicate when this has happened. The first step is to have a single page on your website explaining these processes. This page should be registered and have a DOI to enable persistent linking. It must include your policies on corrections, retractions, withdrawals and other updates. It can include links to other relevant policies such as author submission guidelines and peer review guidelines, and may contain definitions and explanations of additional custom metadata fields you have used. You may already have a suitable page on your website, but don\u0026rsquo;t forget to assign it a DOI and register the metadata with us.\nLearn more about creating an update policy page.\nStep two: Add the policy page DOI to all of your content It’s important to apply Crossmark to all of your current content, not just content that has updates. When an item is published, you don’t know if it will be updated in the future. Therefore, a researcher may download a PDF article today without a Crossmark button, and if the article is subsequently updated they have no way of knowing if their locally-saved version is still current. If you\u0026rsquo;re using the Crossmark service, we expect you to display the Crossmark button on all your content, whether it has an update or not.\nAt a minimum, you will need to include the update policy page in each metadata record that you register. Here\u0026rsquo;s how to do that via several registration methods:\nXML deposit If you register content with us in XML format using either the admin tool or HTTPS POST, you can include Crossmark metadata in your initial deposit. You can also add Crossmark metadata to existing DOIs using a resource-only-XML deposit.\nWe provide sample a sample XML file with the fields you need to include.\nUsing the web deposit form Using the web deposit form you can register Crossmark metadata for journal articles.\nShow image × Fill in the \u0026lsquo;Policy page DOI\u0026rsquo; field (and other fields if they are relevant). Note that Crossmark metadata for types other than journal articles (such as books or preprints) is not supported by the web deposit form.\nStep three: Add metadata that reflects any updates to specific items If a registered item is updated, you need to register a different metadata record for the update. This is only necessary for editorially significant changes\u0026mdash;those that are likely to affect the interpretation or crediting of the work, and where a separate update notice is usually published. Minor changes can be made directly to the content without notifying Crossref, including cases such as minor spelling corrections or formatting changes that don\u0026rsquo;t affect the metadata.\nThere are 12 defined types of update accepted in our schema:\naddendum clarification correction corrigendum erratum expression_of_concern new_edition new_version partial_retraction removal retraction withdrawal If an update does not fall into one of these categories, it should instead be placed in the more information section of the pop-up box in the web deposit form by being deposited as an assertion.\nWhen deposited content corrects or updates earlier content, the DOI(s) of the corrected content must be supplied in the Crossmark metadata. See the Crossref unixref documentation section on updates for examples of how this is recorded in the Crossmark metadata. When a correction is made in situ (that is, it replaces the earlier version completely), then the DOI of the corrected content will be the same as the DOI for the original Crossref deposit. In situ updates are not considered best practice as they obscure the scholarly record.\nStep four: Apply the Crossmark button to your HTML pages There are two options for applying Crossmark to your website.\nAdd the Crossmark logo with a link. Install a JavaScript widget that creates a Crossmark popup. These are explained in the following sections.\nAdd a logo with a link This is the simplest way to implement Crossmark on websites. Simply add a version of the Crossmark logo to the landing page for each of your registered items (usually the page where the abstract is shown) and link the logo to the Crossmark page of the relevant DOI.\nThere are several variations of the Crossmark logo, for example you can use:\nCROSSMARK_Color_square.eps CROSSMARK_Color_horizontal.eps The link needs to be specific to each landing page. Here is an example:\nhttps://crossmark.crossref.org/dialog?doi=10.5555/abcdef\u0026amp;domain=html\u0026amp;date_stamp=2008-08-14\ndoi is the DOI of the content item domain tells the Crossmark system what kind of static content the link is coming from, and will change for different static formats (such as html, pdf, epub) date_stamp tells the Crossmark system the date on which a last Major Version of the PDF was generated. In most cases, this will be the date the article was published. However, when a member makes significant corrections to a PDF in-situ (no notice issued, and no new version of the work with a new DOI) then the date_stamp should reflect when the PDF was regenerated with the corrections. The system will then use the date_stamp in order to tell whether the reader needs to be alerted to updates or not. The date_stamp argument should be recorded in the form YYYY-MM-DD (learn more about ISO 8601). The final result will look like this:\nClicking the logo will open a new tab or window displaying the Crossmark information.\nA Crossmark popup A different solution that is more technical to implement enables a popup containing Crossmark information. It has the advantage that readers do not leave your website when clicking the button.\nWe supply a templated HTML/JavaScript code widget which will embed the Crossmark button and functionality into your web pages. The latest version of the widget (v2.0) is below. Ensure you are using the latest version and that it points to our production server. Do not alter the script or host the button locally.\n\u0026lt;!-- Start Crossmark Snippet v2.0 --\u0026gt; \u0026lt;script src=\u0026#34;https://crossmark-cdn.crossref.org/widget/v2.0/widget.js\u0026#34;\u0026gt;\u0026lt;/script\u0026gt; \u0026lt;a data-target=\u0026#34;crossmark\u0026#34;\u0026gt;\u0026lt;img src=\u0026#34;https://crossmark-cdn.crossref.org/widget/v2.0/logos/CROSSMARK_BW_horizontal.svg\u0026#34; width=\u0026#34;150\u0026#34; /\u0026gt;\u0026lt;/a\u0026gt; \u0026lt;!-- End Crossmark Snippet --\u0026gt; Select one of the variations of the Crossmark button available. You can change the Crossmark button that is used simply by changing the src attribute of the img element to point to one of the following, for example:\nCROSSMARK_Color_square.eps CROSSMARK_Color_horizontal.eps Alternatively, check the source on this page to see the correct link for each style of button.\nThe button can be resized according to your design needs by changing the image width in the image tag but do follow the Crossmark button guidelines.\nThe Crossmark popup needs to have a DOI to reference in order to pull in the relevant information. This needs to be embedded in the head of the HTML metadata for all content to which Crossmark buttons are being applied as follows:\n\u0026lt;meta name=\u0026quot;dc.identifier\u0026quot; content=\u0026quot;doi:10.5555/12345678\u0026quot;/\u0026gt;\nStep five: Apply the Crossmark button to your PDF content To implement Crossmark in PDF files, the solution is very similar to that for the first website solution above:\nSelect a suitable Crossmark logo. Add the logo to your PDF files with a link to the correct Crossmark link, for example https://crossmark.crossref.org/dialog?doi=10.5555/abcdef\u0026amp;domain=pdf\u0026amp;date_stamp=2008-08-14. Optional updates to PDF metadata For additional transparency and to enable easier machine-reading of Crossmark metadata, you can modify the metadata of your PDFs. This is best done during production before the final PDF has been created and any security has been added to the document.\nA minimal XMP file for the above PDF would look like this:\n\u0026lt;?xml version=\u0026#34;1.0\u0026#34; encoding=\u0026#34;UTF-8\u0026#34;?\u0026gt; \u0026lt;?xpacket begin=\u0026#34;?\u0026#34; id=\u0026#34;W5M0MpCehiHzreSzNTczkc9d\u0026#34;?\u0026gt; \u0026lt;x:xmpmeta xmlns:x=\u0026#34;adobe:ns:meta/\u0026#34; x:xmptk=\u0026#34;Adobe XMP Core 4.0-c316 44.253921, Sun Oct 01 2006 17:14:39\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;rdf:RDF xmlns:rdf = \u0026#34;http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#\u0026#34; xmlns:pdfx = \u0026#34;http://ns.adobe.com/pdfx/1.3/\u0026#34; xmlns:pdfaid = \u0026#34;http://www.aiim.org/pdfa/ns/id/\u0026#34; xmlns:xap = \u0026#34;http://ns.adobe.com/xap/1.0/\u0026#34; xmlns:xapRights = \u0026#34;http://ns.adobe.com/xap/1.0/rights/\u0026#34; xmlns:dc = \u0026#34;http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/\u0026#34; xmlns:dcterms = \u0026#34;http://purl.org/dc/terms/\u0026#34; xmlns:prism = \u0026#34;http://prismstandard.org/namespaces/basic/2.0/\u0026#34; xmlns:crossmark = \u0026#34;http://crossref.org/crossmark/2.0/\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;rdf:Description rdf:about=\u0026#34;\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;dc:identifier\u0026gt;doi:10.5555/12345678\u0026lt;/dc:identifier\u0026gt; \u0026lt;prism:doi\u0026gt;10.5555/12345678\u0026lt;/prism:doi\u0026gt; \u0026lt;prism:url\u0026gt;http://dx.doi.org/10.5555/12345678\u0026lt;/prism:url\u0026gt; \u0026lt;crossmark:MajorVersionDate\u0026gt;2015-08-14\u0026lt;/crossmark:MajorVersionDate\u0026gt; \u0026lt;crossmark:DOI\u0026gt;10.5555/12345678\u0026lt;/crossmark:DOI\u0026gt; \u0026lt;pdfx:doi\u0026gt;10.5555/12345678\u0026lt;/pdfx:doi\u0026gt; \u0026lt;pdfx:CrossmarkMajorVersionDate\u0026gt;2015-08-14\u0026lt;/pdfx:CrossmarkMajorVersionDate\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/rdf:Description\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/rdf:RDF\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/x:xmpmeta\u0026gt; \u0026lt;?xpacket end=\u0026#34;w\u0026#34;?\u0026gt; It may appear redundant to apply Crossmark elements both in their own Crossmark namespace as well in the pdfx namespace, but the latter is necessary to ensure the Crossmark elements appear in the PDF dictionary, a specific requirement for some search engines. Any metadata found in the pdfx namespace will be copied over to the document info dictionary. Simply make sure that Crossmark metadata is in the pdfx namespace in the XMP provided to the tool.\nFurther options: adding more information to the Crossmark button The Crossmark box has a section for you to show any additional non-bibliographic information about the content. You decide what to include here, and you are not required to add anything. In this section, Crossmark participants often include publication history dates, details of the peer review process used, and links to supporting information.\nTo add custom metadata, use the assertion element in your XML.\nSeveral metadata elements will automatically display in the Crossmark box if you are registering them:\nAuthor names and their ORCID iDs (learn more about contributors) Funding information (learn more about funding information) License URLs (learn more about license information) If you are already registering this additional metadata at the time you implement Crossmark, there is nothing more you need to do. If you start to register these metadata elements after you have set up Crossmark, they will automatically be put into the Crossmark box.\nPlease note that @order is an optional attribute. If @order is absent, it will return results in the order in which you list them in your deposit, but this is not guaranteed. If you want to be sure of the order, then you can use @order. Learn more about the Crossmark deposit elements (including what is optional) in the schema.\n",
"headings": ["Step one: Designate an update policy page and assign it a DOI ","Step two: Add the policy page DOI to all of your content ","XML deposit","Using the web deposit form","Step three: Add metadata that reflects any updates to specific items ","Step four: Apply the Crossmark button to your HTML pages ","Add a logo with a link","A Crossmark popup","Step five: Apply the Crossmark button to your PDF content ","Optional updates to PDF metadata","Further options: adding more information to the Crossmark button "]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/crossmark/crossmark-policy-page/",
"title": "Update policy page",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2020-04-08",
"lastmod_ts": 1586304000,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "To participate in Crossmark, you must create an update policy page on your website that has been assigned a DOI and registered with us. You may choose to have one policy page for all of your titles, or a separate policy page for each title.\nWe recommend that the following appear on the update policy page. These are guidelines only, there may be variations due to common practice in your field or region:\n",
"content": "To participate in Crossmark, you must create an update policy page on your website that has been assigned a DOI and registered with us. You may choose to have one policy page for all of your titles, or a separate policy page for each title.\nWe recommend that the following appear on the update policy page. These are guidelines only, there may be variations due to common practice in your field or region:\nA link to, or description of, editorial policies. How is content reviewed prior to publication? Are there guidelines for reviewers or editors? Link to any ethical guidelines or standards authors should adhere to. How can readers report potential issues with published content? Under what circumstances works might be updated or retracted after publication? What happens to retracted or corrected works? Are updated publications replaced, does the original remain available? You may add the information directly to the registered page or link to additional pages that contain the details, for example you may already have a separate page about how retractions are handled.\nIf you have fully implemented Crossmark, you may also include (or adapt) the following text:\nCrossmark, from Crossref, provides a standard way for readers to locate the current version of a piece of content. By clicking the Crossmark button, readers can determine whether changes have been made after publication. Depositing Crossmark policy page(s) Crossmark policy pages should be deposited as datasets with a \u0026ldquo;database\u0026rdquo; called \u0026ldquo;PublisherName Crossmark Policy Statement\u0026rdquo;. If you have multiple policy pages (for example, different policy pages for different journals) you should include them in the database deposit as multiple datasets.\nSee an example of a member’s Crossmark policy page (section 19 Permanency of content).\n",
"headings": ["Depositing Crossmark policy page(s) "]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/crossmark/crossmark-button-guidelines/",
"title": "Crossmark button guidelines",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2020-04-08",
"lastmod_ts": 1586304000,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "It’s important that all members use the Crossmark button consistently, to make sure it is familiar to readers and can be easily recognised.\nThe Crossmark button is available in color and monochrome versions, and can be resized to suit your website or PDFs. It must not otherwise be altered or adapted. We recommend using the color button on HTML pages, and either the color or monochrome button on PDFs for maximum user recognition.\n",
"content": "It’s important that all members use the Crossmark button consistently, to make sure it is familiar to readers and can be easily recognised.\nThe Crossmark button is available in color and monochrome versions, and can be resized to suit your website or PDFs. It must not otherwise be altered or adapted. We recommend using the color button on HTML pages, and either the color or monochrome button on PDFs for maximum user recognition.\nThe Crossmark button should be used in two contexts: on HTML abstract pages and PDF files.\nCROSSMARK_BW_horizontal.eps CROSSMARK_BW_square.eps CROSSMARK_BW_square_no_text.eps CROSSMARK_Color_horizontal.eps CROSSMARK_Color_square.eps CROSSMARK_Color_square_no_text.eps Do Place the Crossmark button close to the title of the article, preferably next to or above the title. Use our button (View Source of that page to see the embed code) and do not modify or adapt it. For web and PDF there are three versions of the button. We recommend you use one of the two buttons with the Check for updates text. Please be careful not to make them so small they become illegible. If you need a smaller button, use the square one with no text.\nDon’t Modify the colors or text of the button. Create your own version of the Crossmark button. Download JavaScript or image assets and serve them from your own site. Doing this will prevent us from providing software updates and could cause the dialog to stop working properly. Adjust the ratios of the buttons. ",
"headings": ["Do ","Don’t "]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/crossmark/linked-clinical-trials/",
"title": "Linked clinical trials",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2020-04-08",
"lastmod_ts": 1586304000,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossmark can be used to display the relationships between different publications that report on a common clinical trial. This section describes the steps a member needs to take to participate in this initiative. Learn more about the background to the project.\nClinical trial numbers should be extracted from the paper by the publisher or supplied by the author on submission.\nThere are three elements to the metadata that members need to deposit to participate in linked clinical trials:\n",
"content": "Crossmark can be used to display the relationships between different publications that report on a common clinical trial. This section describes the steps a member needs to take to participate in this initiative. Learn more about the background to the project.\nClinical trial numbers should be extracted from the paper by the publisher or supplied by the author on submission.\nThere are three elements to the metadata that members need to deposit to participate in linked clinical trials:\nThe registry in which the clinical trial has been registered (required) Clinical trials should be registered with one of the WHO-approved national trial registries or with ClinicalTrials.gov. Crossref maintains a list of these approved registries, and has assigned a DOI to each one. This ID should be deposited. The registry ID is used in combination with the trial number to identify trials correctly. The registered clinical trial number (required) The trial number, including its prefix, for example, ISRCTN00757750 The relationship of the publication to the clinical trial (optional) This field is optional but encouraged. The three allowed elements are \u0026ldquo;pre-results\u0026rdquo;, \u0026ldquo;results\u0026rdquo; and \u0026ldquo;post-results\u0026rdquo;, indicating which stage of the trial the publication is reporting on. These fields should be included within the custom metadata section of the Crossmark deposit. When clinical trial metadata is deposited, the Clinical Trials section of the Crossmark box will automatically appear and be populated.\nExample deposit for linked clinical trials \u0026lt;clinicaltrial_data\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi\u0026gt;10.5555/12345678\u0026lt;/doi\u0026gt; \u0026lt;ct:program\u0026gt; \u0026lt;ct:clinical-trial-number registry=\u0026#34;10.18810/isrctn\u0026#34; type=\u0026#34;results\u0026#34;\u0026gt;ISRCTN1234\u0026lt;/ct:clinical-trial-number\u0026gt; \u0026lt;ct:clinical-trial-number registry=\u0026#34;10.18810/isrctn\u0026#34; type=\u0026#34;results\u0026#34;\u0026gt;ISRCTN9999\u0026lt;/ct:clinical-trial-number\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/ct:program\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/clinicaltrial_data\u0026gt; ",
"headings": ["Example deposit for linked clinical trials "]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/crossmark/crossmark-and-transferring-responsibility-for-dois/",
"title": "Crossmark and transferring responsibility for DOIs",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2020-04-08",
"lastmod_ts": 1586304000,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "If content moves from a member that participates in Crossmark to one that does not, the Crossmark button needs to be removed from that content. Although the button can be removed, the Crossmark metadata will remain in the system to enable simple reactivation if the new hosting member chooses to participate in Crossmark.\nIt is likely that Crossmark-associated content will continue to exist, for example, on readers’ local drives. Clicking on these Crossmark buttons will show a message stating that the content is no longer being tracked in Crossmark, and the current status of the content is unknown.\n",
"content": "If content moves from a member that participates in Crossmark to one that does not, the Crossmark button needs to be removed from that content. Although the button can be removed, the Crossmark metadata will remain in the system to enable simple reactivation if the new hosting member chooses to participate in Crossmark.\nIt is likely that Crossmark-associated content will continue to exist, for example, on readers’ local drives. Clicking on these Crossmark buttons will show a message stating that the content is no longer being tracked in Crossmark, and the current status of the content is unknown.\nLearn more about transferring responsibility for DOIs.\n",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/crossmark/crossmark-terms/",
"title": "Crossmark terms",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2020-04-08",
"lastmod_ts": 1586304000,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": " CROSSMARK® SERVICE. Crossmark is an optional service for Crossref members in good standing. Anything assigned a Crossref DOI that the publisher is taking responsibility for and stewarding can be registered in the Crossmark system.\nOBLIGATIONS OF CROSSMARK PARTICIPANTS. Crossref members participating in the Crossmark Service (\u0026ldquo;Participating Publishers\u0026rdquo;) will be obligated to:\nInclude the Crossmark button as a clickable link in digital formats (HTML, PDF, and, at the Participating Publishers option, ePub) of the abstract and full text of all current content deposited at Crossref by the Participating Publisher. For purposes of these terms and conditions, \u0026ldquo;current content\u0026rdquo; is defined as content published after the date that the Participating Publisher begins to participate in the CrossMark system. The Participating Publisher may include the Crossmark button in content, published prior to that date. In such event, the button must be included in the HTML version of the abstract and full text (and the ePub file if relevant). Inclusion in the PDF versions of previously published research outputs is encouraged but not required. Maintain the content and register as promptly as reasonably possible any major updates in the Crossmark system, which updates shall include at a minimum corrections, retractions and withdrawals and other updates that have an impact upon the crediting or interpretation of the work. Comply with the guidelines for the use of the Crossmark button issued from time to time by Crossref. Learn more about the Crossmark button guidelines METADATA. For each content item registered in the Crossmark system, Participating Publishers must deposit the minimum Crossmark metadata and keep it up-to-date. Participating Publishers may deposit additional optional metadata and must keep it up-to-date. Crossref will make all Crossmark metadata deposited by Participating Publishers openly available from time-to-time in standard formats for harvesting at no charge, and the Participating Publisher hereby gives Crossref permission to release the data for such purposes.\n",
"content": " CROSSMARK® SERVICE. Crossmark is an optional service for Crossref members in good standing. Anything assigned a Crossref DOI that the publisher is taking responsibility for and stewarding can be registered in the Crossmark system.\nOBLIGATIONS OF CROSSMARK PARTICIPANTS. Crossref members participating in the Crossmark Service (\u0026ldquo;Participating Publishers\u0026rdquo;) will be obligated to:\nInclude the Crossmark button as a clickable link in digital formats (HTML, PDF, and, at the Participating Publishers option, ePub) of the abstract and full text of all current content deposited at Crossref by the Participating Publisher. For purposes of these terms and conditions, \u0026ldquo;current content\u0026rdquo; is defined as content published after the date that the Participating Publisher begins to participate in the CrossMark system. The Participating Publisher may include the Crossmark button in content, published prior to that date. In such event, the button must be included in the HTML version of the abstract and full text (and the ePub file if relevant). Inclusion in the PDF versions of previously published research outputs is encouraged but not required. Maintain the content and register as promptly as reasonably possible any major updates in the Crossmark system, which updates shall include at a minimum corrections, retractions and withdrawals and other updates that have an impact upon the crediting or interpretation of the work. Comply with the guidelines for the use of the Crossmark button issued from time to time by Crossref. Learn more about the Crossmark button guidelines METADATA. For each content item registered in the Crossmark system, Participating Publishers must deposit the minimum Crossmark metadata and keep it up-to-date. Participating Publishers may deposit additional optional metadata and must keep it up-to-date. Crossref will make all Crossmark metadata deposited by Participating Publishers openly available from time-to-time in standard formats for harvesting at no charge, and the Participating Publisher hereby gives Crossref permission to release the data for such purposes.\nOBLIGATIONS AFTER PARTICIPATION IN CROSSMARK CEASES. If a Participating Publisher stops participating in the Crossmark service for any reason use of the Crossmark logo must stop and the logo must be removed from all content to the extent practicable. All metadata deposited through participation in the Crossmark system will remain in the databases maintained by Crossref and may be used by Crossref as provided in Section 3 above. In the event that either the cessation of participation in Crossmark by a Participating Publisher or the transfer by the Participating Publisher of ownership of a content item to a non-participating publisher results in the failure to maintain the Crossmark metadata, Crossref may add language to the Crossmark status message indicating that the data provided may no longer be up-to-date.\nPROMOTION OF CROSSMARK SERVICE. The Participating Publisher agrees to use reasonable commercial efforts to promote awareness of the Crossmark Service within the scholarly community (i.e. among scholars, researchers and librarians), and Crossref will, upon request, provide the Participating Publisher with digital and print marketing materials for use in such promotional activities.\nLICENSE TO USE THE CROSSMARK BUTTON.\nIn consideration of its agreement to abide by these Terms and Conditions, the Participating Publisher is hereby granted a limited, non-exclusive, non-transferable license to include the Crossmark button with its content, on the terms and conditions and for the purposes set forth herein. The Participating Publisher may give permission to a third party to display the Crossmark button in connection with the content provided that the Participating Publisher conditions such permission on the third-party’s agreement that it will not remove or alter the button. The Participating Publisher must display the Crossmark button on all formats of the abstract and full text of at least one publisher-maintained copy of current Crossmark registered content. BILLING. There is no annual service fee for Crossmark.\n",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/metadata-plus/metadata-plus-keys/",
"title": "Metadata Plus keys",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2023-08-29",
"lastmod_ts": 1693267200,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "To access all of the features of Metadata Plus, you’ll need to create an API Key. Once you’ve subscribed to Plus, your technical contact will receive an email to set a password to access key manager. This is where you’ll create and manage API keys for Metadata Plus access. If you subscribed to Plus before August 2023, you\u0026rsquo;ll be using a token.\nCreate a new API Key Login to key manager Under API Keys, click “Add New” Give the key a name (description) Copy the API Key (Note: The key will only be displayed once, so you must copy and paste it somewhere safe) Delete an API Key Note: a deleted key cannot be recovered.\n",
"content": "To access all of the features of Metadata Plus, you’ll need to create an API Key. Once you’ve subscribed to Plus, your technical contact will receive an email to set a password to access key manager. This is where you’ll create and manage API keys for Metadata Plus access. If you subscribed to Plus before August 2023, you\u0026rsquo;ll be using a token.\nCreate a new API Key Login to key manager Under API Keys, click “Add New” Give the key a name (description) Copy the API Key (Note: The key will only be displayed once, so you must copy and paste it somewhere safe) Delete an API Key Note: a deleted key cannot be recovered.\nUnder API Keys, find the correct key and click the three dots to its right Choose “Delete” from the drop down menu Type DELETE in the modal and click ok. The key now cannot be used to access Plus services. The key cannot be recovered. It may take up to 60 seconds for this to propagate through the system. Edit a key’s description Under API Keys, find the correct key and click the three dots to its right Choose “Edit” from the drop down menu Edit the key’s description and click ok. Use an API Key API Keys can be used to access Metadata Plus services. When making requests to the REST API (including for snapshots) or OAI-PMH, put your API Key (or other token) in the Crossref-Plus-API-Token HTTPS header of all your requests. The example below shows how this should be formatted, with XXX replaced by your key:\nCrossref-Plus-API-Token: Bearer XXX\nFor full information on how to use the REST API, see the documentation at api.crossref.org.\n",
"headings": ["Create a new API Key","Delete an API Key","Edit a key’s description","Use an API Key"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/metadata-plus/metadata-plus-snapshots/",
"title": "Metadata Plus snapshots",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2020-04-08",
"lastmod_ts": 1586304000,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "Metadata Plus snapshots provide access to our \u0026gt;170 million metadata records in a single file, providing an easy way to retrieve an up-to-date copy of our records. The files are made available via a /snapshots route in the REST API which offers a compressed .tar file (tar.gz) containing the full extract of the metadata corpus in either JSON or XML formats.\nHow to access snapshots New snapshots are created each month, available by the 5th day, providing all records up to and including the previous month.\n",
"content": "Metadata Plus snapshots provide access to our \u0026gt;170 million metadata records in a single file, providing an easy way to retrieve an up-to-date copy of our records. The files are made available via a /snapshots route in the REST API which offers a compressed .tar file (tar.gz) containing the full extract of the metadata corpus in either JSON or XML formats.\nHow to access snapshots New snapshots are created each month, available by the 5th day, providing all records up to and including the previous month.\nIf you’re looking for the most up-to-date snapshot (all records up to and including the previous month), you can use the following URLs which will always alias to the current month:\nJSON output: https://api.crossref.org/snapshots/monthly/latest/all.json.tar.gz XML output: https://api.crossref.org/snapshots/monthly/latest/all.xml.tar.gz If you want to test to see if a particular snapshot is available, you can do a HTTPS HEAD request using the following URL patterns:\nJSON output: https://api.crossref.org/snapshots/monthly/{YYYY/MM}/all.json.tar.gz XML output: https://api.crossref.org/snapshots/monthly/{YYYY/MM}/all.xml.tar.gz Please note that XML snapshots are available in UNIXSD format only.\nAs snapshots are available to Metadata Plus users only, you will need to identify yourself in the request by using a \u0026ldquo;Crossref-Plus-API-Token\u0026rdquo; HTTPS header with your access token. The example below shows how this should be formatted, with XXX replaced by your token:\nCrossref-Plus-API-Token: Bearer XXX\nThe files will be very large (\u0026gt;200GB) so may take a while to download depending on the speed of your internet connection.\nPlease contact us if you’re unable to access snapshots.\nKeeping your data current For applications where you want to keep a copy of our metadata records current, use OAI-PMH Plus (as described above) or the REST API to query for new records at your preferred interval.\nSnapshots FAQs Are snapshots for ‘all time’ available? Snapshots are available for current and previous quarters. With each new snapshot, we may remove files older than the current and previous quarters. For example, on 1 April the files from the previous October, November, and December may be removed.\nI’m seeing a 404 error when I request the URL If you’re looking for the current month, this may be because the archive hasn’t yet been created for that month. Snapshots are usually available by the 5th of each month.\nIf you’re looking for a month that’s more than 6 months old, it may be that the snapshot has been deleted. If the archive you looking isn’t particularly new or old and you’re still seeing a 404 error, please contact us.\nI’m seeing a 401 error when I request the URL Snapshots are only available to Metadata Plus users. This 401 message means that the system doesn’t recognise you as a Metadata Plus user. If you’re already a Metadata Plus user, make sure you’re using your correct token in the header of your query. If you’re still having problems, please contact us.\nI need a full snapshot mid-month Snapshot archives are provided at the start of each month. The archive contains all the registered content received by Crossref up until that time. (Really? Yeah, all of it.) If you need a snapshot mid-month, you should download and ingest the latest archive and then harvest and ingest the registered content that has changed since then.\nTo get the registered content that has changed since an archive was created, use OAI-PMH Plus or the REST API. For example, if the archive was created on January 31, 2018 then the OAI-PMH Plus harvest’s initial URL is\nhttps://oai.crossref.org/oai?verb=ListRecords\u0026amp;set=J\u0026amp;from=2018-01-31\u0026amp;metadataPrefix=cr_unixsd This will harvest journal data. If you are interested in book data then use the \u0026ldquo;B\u0026rdquo; set.\nhttps://oai.crossref.org/oai?verb=ListRecords\u0026amp;set=B\u0026amp;from=2018-01-31\u0026amp;metadataPrefix=cr_unixsd If you are interested in series data then use the \u0026ldquo;S\u0026rdquo; set.\nhttps://oai.crossref.org/oai?verb=ListRecords\u0026amp;set=S\u0026amp;from=2018-01-31\u0026amp;metadataPrefix=cr_unixsd It is important to use the created date and not the completed date. It takes time to build the archive, so changes will occur during the build. Using the created date ensures those changes are harvested too.\n",
"headings": ["How to access snapshots ","Keeping your data current ","Snapshots FAQs ","Are snapshots for ‘all time’ available? ","I’m seeing a 404 error when I request the URL ","I’m seeing a 401 error when I request the URL ","I need a full snapshot mid-month "]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/register-maintain-records/maintaining-your-metadata/updating-your-metadata/",
"title": "Updating your metadata",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2025-12-10",
"lastmod_ts": 1765324800,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "Because DOIs are designed to be persistent, a DOI string can’t be changed once registered, and DOIs cannot be deleted.\nHowever, you can update metadata associated with your registered DOIs, and we encourage you to do this as often as required. No fees are charged for updating existing metadata records.\nTo add, change, or remove metadata from your existing records, you generally just need to resubmit your complete metadata record with the changes included.\n",
"content": "Because DOIs are designed to be persistent, a DOI string can’t be changed once registered, and DOIs cannot be deleted.\nHowever, you can update metadata associated with your registered DOIs, and we encourage you to do this as often as required. No fees are charged for updating existing metadata records.\nTo add, change, or remove metadata from your existing records, you generally just need to resubmit your complete metadata record with the changes included.\nThere are a few exceptions where you can\u0026rsquo;t just resubmit your records using your chosen content registration method, or where there is an easier option, and you need to do something different:\nExceptions to standard metadata updates Crossmark: if you want to update or replace (not just delete) metadata for Crossmark and your deposit method is web deposit form or direct deposit of XML, you can\u0026rsquo;t just resubmit the new information. Follow a two-step process to (1) actively delete the relevant metadata by redepositing the record but with the Crossmark field blank (markup example for users of direct deposit of XML), then (2) add the new Crossmark metadata in another redeposit. Funding, license, and Similarity Check full-text URLs: you can add this metadata to multiple DOIs at once by uploading a csv file to the web deposit form using the supplemental metadata upload. References can be added in a few different ways - learn more about adding references to your metadata record Relationships: if you want to update or replace (not just delete) metadata for relationships and your deposit method is direct deposit of XML, you can\u0026rsquo;t just resubmit the new information. Follow a two-step process to (1) actively delete the relevant metadata by sending us a full redeposit but with the relationship field blank, then (2) add the new relationship metadata in another full redeposit. Resolution URLs: you may update resolution URLs in bulk using a tab-separated .txt file. See full details below. Titles: to update the title for a book, journal, or other content associated with an ISSN or ISBN, you will need to contact us as we may need to make some changes on our side. Some non-bibliographic metadata may be updated, added to, or removed from a metadata record independently using a resource-only deposit. This might make things easier for those of you who send us XML files directly. Updating bibliographic metadata by resubmitting your complete record Most metadata changes can be done by resubmitting your complete metadata record, but there are some exceptions - please check the exceptions list above.\nOJS: find the record you wish to update, leave the relevant field blank to delete it, or add in your new metadata to update it, and deposit it again using the Crossref import/export plugin. You must be running at least OJS 3.1.2 and have the Crossref import/export plugin enabled Web deposit form: re-enter all the metadata including the changes - leave the relevant field blank to delete it, or add in your new metadata to update it - and resubmit New Metadata Manager: our new Metadata Manager tool allows you to edit the metadata for any journal article or grant record you have registered using the same tool, the web deposit form, or the deprecated legacy Metadata Manager. Click \u0026ldquo;Edit Record\u0026rdquo; and select the appropriate record, then make the required changes - leave the relevant field blank to delete it, or add in your new metadata to update it - and resubmit Depositing XML files with Crossref: make changes to your XML file and resubmit it to Crossref. When making an update, you must supply all the bibliographic metadata for the record being updated, not just the fields that need to be changed. During the update process we overwrite the existing metadata with the new information you submit, and insert null values for any fields not supplied in the update. This means, for example, that if you’ve supplied an online publication date in your initial deposit, you’ll need to include that date in subsequent deposits if you wish to retain it. Note that the value included in the \u0026lt;timestamp\u0026gt; element must be incremented each time a DOI is updated. Updating your resolution URLs If your content moves and you need to update all of your URLs, you can update them in bulk to make sure that all your DOIs resolve to your content persistently.\nReasons for resource resolution URL updates Platform migration: if you know that your URLs are going to need to be updated in the future as you’re planning a platform migration, use our handy guide and checklist to help you manage this effectively. Title transfers: if you’ve acquired a title from another Crossref member, you’ll need to update your resolution URLs. Do make sure to also check the inherited metadata for other fields, as this may also need to be updated. Learn more about updating inherited DOIs and metadata after a title transfer. No longer hosting the content: if the worst happens and you are no longer able to host your content, it’s invaluable to have an archive provider as a backup. We encourage all Crossref members to use best efforts to engage an archive provider, and to include information about archiving arrangements in their metadata. How to update your resolution URLs If you only have a few URLs to update, you can just resubmit your record.\nIf you have a long list of URLs that need updating (for example, you’ve just finished a platform migration, or you’ve acquired a new title), you can do a bulk resource URL update using the instructions below. If you have more than 50,000 DOIs to update, do get in contact with us and we can coordinate timing of the update and help you manage the process efficiently.\nCreate a tab-separated list (formatted as a text (.txt) file) of DOIs and their new URLs, and apply the following header:\nH: email=youremail@email.com;fromPrefix=10.xxxx\nwhere youremail@email.com is your email address and 10.xxxx is the owner prefix (this should be the prefix associated with the username you\u0026rsquo;ll be processing this request with) for the DOIs you\u0026rsquo;re updating.\nOnly DOIs of the same owning prefix may be updated together using this header. For example, if you have DOIs against two owning prefixes, you\u0026rsquo;ll need to separate your submissions and use the appropriate 10.xxxx prefix for each set of your DOIs.\nThis is what your tab-separated list should look like:\nH: email=youremail@email.com;fromPrefix=10.5555\n10.5555/doi1 http://www.yourdomain.com/newurl1\n10.5555/doi2 http://www.yourdomain.com/newurl2\n10.5555/doi3 http://www.yourdomain.com/newurl3\nNote: the fromPrefix above is the prefix that currently owns or maintains the DOI in question, so if ownership of the DOI has transferred, the new owner\u0026rsquo;s DOI prefix should be included in the fromPrefix of the header .txt file.\nYou can upload the file to the admin tool or use the upload tool. To use the admin tool, login and navigate to Submissions\u0026gt;Upload. Upload your file, choose \u0026ldquo;Bulk URL Update\u0026rdquo; as the Type, and click Upload.\nIf you have more than 3,000 URLs to update, you should break them into smaller files. The file upload size limit for this operation is 400 KB.\nWe can provide a list of your existing DOIs and URLs if needed.\nUpdating title records When a new journal, book, conference proceeding, standard, report, or dissertation is registered with Crossref, we create a title record in our database from the metadata provided in the submission. Titles associated with an ISSN or ISBN must be consistent from registration to registration (inconsistencies in title-level metadata submitted will lead to deposit errors). This means that if you need to change the title of a journal or a book, we will need to modify the title record in our system before you can update your metadata for that title.\nAlthough members can\u0026rsquo;t edit titles once they have been deposited, our support team can do the following when necessary - please send us the details, and we’ll update the records:\nAdd or adjust ISSNs - correct ISSN errors or add additional ISSNs. Add or adjust alternative spellings of titles - alternative title spellings and abbreviations are recorded for each title and used in query matching. They can be included in the \u0026lt;abbrev\u0026gt; elements, or we can add them for you. Correct title spelling - we\u0026rsquo;ll need to correct these for you, please open a support ticket. Merge titles - if two title entries have been created in error, we\u0026rsquo;ll merge the titles entries into one upon request. Delete titles - titles submitted by mistake can be deleted, once the DOIs assigned to the title have been migrated to another title. The adjustments above affect only the title record - you\u0026rsquo;ll also need to update your metadata for any existing content records related to this title to update the title within that metadata record.\nJournal title and ISSN changes The ISSN International Centre recommends applying for a new ISSN if the publication’s medium changes (for example, a print magazine becomes an online magazine), or if the publication’s title changes. A change of ISSN is not required for other changes such as change of publisher, publication location, frequency, editorial policy.\nIn the case of a significant title change, such as “The Journal of Things” to “International Journal of Important Stuff”, DOIs registered for the original title should stay associated with that title, and all new DOIs should be registered to the new title (and new ISSN and journal-title-level DOI).\nFor a minor title change, such as “The Journal of Things” to “Things Journal”, keep the existing ISSN and update the title record. Ask us to update the journal title record in our system, then you update all DOIs previously registered for this title. Once all records associated with that title have been updated to include the new title, the journal title in your submissions will match the one in our records, and no longer trigger deposit errors (such as “This error indicates the ISSN(s), title, or publisher in your deposit do not match the data we have on record for that ISSN”).\n",
"headings": ["Exceptions to standard metadata updates ","Updating bibliographic metadata by resubmitting your complete record ","Updating your resolution URLs ","Reasons for resource resolution URL updates ","How to update your resolution URLs ","Updating title records ","Journal title and ISSN changes "]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/register-maintain-records/maintaining-your-metadata/add-references/",
"title": "Adding references to your metadata record",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2024-09-06",
"lastmod_ts": 1725580800,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "We encourage you to include references (citation lists, bibliographies, data and software citations) with all content you register. A key benefit is that they will appear in Cited-by query results. You can include references when your first register your DOI records, or you can add them to existing DOI records later. Learn more about the benefits of registering your references.\nIncluding references (or adding them to an existing deposit) can be done by:\n",
"content": "We encourage you to include references (citation lists, bibliographies, data and software citations) with all content you register. A key benefit is that they will appear in Cited-by query results. You can include references when your first register your DOI records, or you can add them to existing DOI records later. Learn more about the benefits of registering your references.\nIncluding references (or adding them to an existing deposit) can be done by:\nCrossref XML plugin for OJS: You must first enable References as a submission metadata field and then enable the Crossref reference linking plugin, to include references in your initial deposit, or add them later. Web deposit form: The web deposit form can’t currently be used to add references when you first register your content, but you can use Simple Text Query to match references and add them to an existing record. Metadata Manager: Our new Metadata Manager tool (previously known as the record registration form) has a built-in field for adding references. Learn more about how to use this tool. Direct deposit of XML: you can include references in your original deposit, or add them later. Learn more at how to deposit references for users of direct deposit of XML. Using Simple Text Query to match and deposit references WATCH A VIDEO TUTORIAL - ADDING REFERENCES - STQ FORM\nMatching and depositing references using Simple Text Query is a suitable method for helper tool users. If your content registration method is direct deposit of XML, see how to deposit references for users of direct deposit of XML.\nSimple Text Query allows you to both find the DOIs for your references and add them to the metadata for a DOI that you have already registered with Crossref. Please note that this method will overwrite any references previously deposited for the content item - if you’ve previously added references to an item, and want to add more references using Simple Text Query, you need to include both the existing and the new references in your deposit.\nStart at Simple Text Query Enter your references into the form. Don\u0026rsquo;t check List all possible DOIs per reference. Click submit Select the Deposit button and complete the fields your email address - this is used to send you a submission log after your reference deposit has been processed the parent DOI is the DOI of the content item for which you are adding references. It must already be registered with Crossref your Crossref account credentials Click Deposit again. If your details have been entered correctly, you will see a success message, showing that your deposit has been submitted to the system queue for processing. When the reference deposit has been submitted, you will receive an email containing the XML deposit generated by the form. After that submission has been processed (usually within minutes of your submission), you will receive a submission log by email with the results of your submission.\nNon-members can also use Simple Text Query to match references with DOIs.\n",
"headings": ["Using Simple Text Query to match and deposit references "]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/register-maintain-records/maintaining-your-metadata/resource-only-deposit/",
"title": "Resource-only deposit",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2022-08-01",
"lastmod_ts": 1659312000,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "A resource-only deposit is a way of adding or updating certain elements in an existing metadata deposit without having to do a full metadata redeposit. Resource-only deposits use the resource-only section of the schema (with the exception of stand-alone components which use the main deposit section of the schema).\nWhether you use a helper tool or submit your own XML to Crossref, you may find a resource-only deposit useful for adding the following:\n",
"content": "A resource-only deposit is a way of adding or updating certain elements in an existing metadata deposit without having to do a full metadata redeposit. Resource-only deposits use the resource-only section of the schema (with the exception of stand-alone components which use the main deposit section of the schema).\nWhether you use a helper tool or submit your own XML to Crossref, you may find a resource-only deposit useful for adding the following:\nReferences Funder information Crossmark License information Relationships between different research objects A resolution URL must be included in all metadata records and cannot be updated using a resource-only deposit. However, the following additional URLs may be added using a resource-only deposit: Similarity Check full-text URLs multiple resolution secondary URLs text and data mining URLs Uploading resource-only deposits Resource-only deposits may only be submitted for existing Crossref DOIs. Deposits using the resource-only section of the schema must be uploaded with type doDOICitUpload for HTTPS POST, or DOI Resources if you are using the admin tool.\n",
"headings": ["Uploading resource-only deposits "]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/register-maintain-records/maintaining-your-metadata/registering-updates/",
"title": "Registering updates",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2024-05-27",
"lastmod_ts": 1716768000,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "Typically, when an editorially significant update is made to a document, the publisher will not modify the original document, but will instead issue a separate document (such as a correction or retraction notice) which explains the change. This separate document will have a different DOI from the document that it corrects and will therefore have different metadata. This process is complementary to versioning.\nShow image × In this example, article A (with the DOI 10.5555/12345678) is eventually retracted by a retraction notice RN (with the DOI 10.5555/24242424x). Each document has Crossmark metadata, but the fact that RN updates article A is only recorded in the RN\u0026rsquo;s Crossmark deposit. The Crossmark internal API has to tie the two documents together and indicate in metadata of the original document (A), that it has been updated_by the second document (RN).\n",
"content": "Typically, when an editorially significant update is made to a document, the publisher will not modify the original document, but will instead issue a separate document (such as a correction or retraction notice) which explains the change. This separate document will have a different DOI from the document that it corrects and will therefore have different metadata. This process is complementary to versioning.\nShow image × In this example, article A (with the DOI 10.5555/12345678) is eventually retracted by a retraction notice RN (with the DOI 10.5555/24242424x). Each document has Crossmark metadata, but the fact that RN updates article A is only recorded in the RN\u0026rsquo;s Crossmark deposit. The Crossmark internal API has to tie the two documents together and indicate in metadata of the original document (A), that it has been updated_by the second document (RN).\nThe Crossmark part of the metadata schema is used to register updates, but this doesn\u0026rsquo;t mean that you need to have implemented other parts of Crossmark to deposit updates. In the examples below, in the \u0026lt;crossmark\u0026gt; section you can use only the \u0026lt;update\u0026gt; field in the deposit XML if you don\u0026rsquo;t usually deposit other Crossmark metadata.\nExample 1: simple retraction This is a simple example of article A being retracted by a retraction notice RN where both A and RN have Crossmark metadata deposited.\nFirst, the PDF is produced and the XML deposited to Crossref.\nArticle A Deposit XML Article A Landing Page Article A XMP Article A PDF When the retraction is issued, it is issued as a separate \u0026ldquo;retraction notice\u0026rdquo; with its own DOI, PDF, and Crossref metadata.\nRetraction Notice of A Deposit XML Retraction Notice of A Landing Page Retraction Notice of A XMP Retraction Notice of A PDF Example 2: simple correction This is a simple example of article B being corrected by a correction notice CN where both B and CN have Crossmark metadata deposited. The only real difference between this and the previous example is that we are creating a different kind of update.\nArticle B Deposit XML Article B Landing Page Article B XMP Article B PDF Correction notice of article B Deposit XML Correction notice of article B Landing Page Correction notice of article B XMP Correction notice of article B PDF Example 3: in-situ correction When a member does not issue a separate update/correction/retraction notice and instead just makes the change to the document (without changing its DOI either), this is called an in-situ update. In-situ updates or corrections are not recommended because they tend to obscure the scholarly record. How do you tell what the differences are between what you downloaded and the update? How do you differentiate them when citing them (remember, we are only talking about \u0026ldquo;significant updates\u0026rdquo; here)? However, some members need to support in-situ updates, and this is how they can be supported.\nArticle D Deposit XML before correction issued Article D Deposit XML after correction issued Article D Landing Page Article D XMP generated before correction issued Article D XMP generated after correction issued Article D PDF generated before correction issued Article D PDF generated after correction issued Example 4: correction of article that has no Crossmark metadata deposited If you deposit Crossmark metadata for a retraction or and update notice which, in turn, points at an article that does not have Crossmark metadata assigned to it, we will generate a \u0026ldquo;stub\u0026rdquo; Crossmark for the item being updated. The stub metadata will simply copy essential Crossmark metadata. This metadata can be queried via our API, but won’t activate anything on your site unless you add the Crossmark widget to the corresponding page of the item being updated.\nArticle E Deposit XML (has no Crossmark metadata) Article E Landing Page (again, no Crossmark button) Article E XMP (none exists because it doesn’t have Crossmark metadata) Article E PDF (has no Crossmark button or metadata) Still, note that if you query Crossmark metadata for Article E, you will get a Crossmark stub which has been automatically been generated by Crossref.\nThe procedure for updating the content follows the same pattern as a simple correction or retraction:\nCorrection of Article E Deposit XML Correction of Article E Landing Page Correction of Article E XMP Correction of Article E PDF Example 5: correction notice that corrected multiple documents Sometimes members issue correction or clarification notices which provide corrections for multiple documents. This too can be supported by Crossmark. In the following example, one correction/clarification document provides updates to two documents (F and G)\nArticle F Deposit XML Article F Landing Page Article F XMP Article F PDF Article G Deposit XML Article G Landing Page Article G XMP Article G PDF Correction Notice of F and G Deposit XML Correction Notice of F and G Landing Page Correction Notice of F and G XMP Correction Notice of F and G PDF ",
"headings": ["Example 1: simple retraction ","Example 2: simple correction ","Example 3: in-situ correction ","Example 4: correction of article that has no Crossmark metadata deposited ","Example 5: correction notice that corrected multiple documents "]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/register-maintain-records/maintaining-your-metadata/metadata-removal-markup-guide/",
"title": "Metadata removal markup guide",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2020-10-06",
"lastmod_ts": 1601942400,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "For most metadata elements, you can just update the record to delete elements. However, if you are sending us XML, there are some non-bibliographic metadata elements where you have to go through a two-stage process - firstly send us a submission to delete this element, and then send us a further submission to add in the replacement data.\nMetadata that needs to be explicitly deleted includes:\nCrossmark data Funding, clinical trial, or license data from Crossmark Funding data License data Relationship data Text and data mining, Similarity Check, and multiple resolution URLs References You can also delete non-bibliographic metadata by supplying an empty parent element (see examples below), and include it in a metadata update or submit it as a resource-only deposit. Note that metadata submitted as part of a Crossmark update needs to be removed within Crossmark metadata (see examples below).\n",
"content": "For most metadata elements, you can just update the record to delete elements. However, if you are sending us XML, there are some non-bibliographic metadata elements where you have to go through a two-stage process - firstly send us a submission to delete this element, and then send us a further submission to add in the replacement data.\nMetadata that needs to be explicitly deleted includes:\nCrossmark data Funding, clinical trial, or license data from Crossmark Funding data License data Relationship data Text and data mining, Similarity Check, and multiple resolution URLs References You can also delete non-bibliographic metadata by supplying an empty parent element (see examples below), and include it in a metadata update or submit it as a resource-only deposit. Note that metadata submitted as part of a Crossmark update needs to be removed within Crossmark metadata (see examples below).\nRemove all Crossmark data Remove all Crossmark data from a record by supplying an empty Crossmark element in a metadata deposit:\n\u0026lt;first_page\u0026gt;1\u0026lt;/first_page\u0026gt; \u0026lt;last_page\u0026gt;3\u0026lt;/last_page\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/pages\u0026gt; \u0026lt;crossmark/\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi_data\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi\u0026gt;10.5555/12345678\u0026lt;/doi\u0026gt; \u0026lt;resource\u0026gt;http://psychoceramics.labs.crossref.org/10.5555-12345678.html\u0026lt;/resource\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/doi_data\u0026gt; or as part of a resource-only deposit:\n\u0026lt;crossmark_data\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi\u0026gt;10.5555/12345678\u0026lt;/doi\u0026gt; \u0026lt;crossmark/\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/crossmark_data\u0026gt; Remove funding, clinical trial, or license data from Crossmark Funding, license, and clinical trial data may all be supplied as part of a Crossmark update. If you need to remove funding, license, or clinical trial metadata from your Crossmark metadata, you must submit the appropriate empty element within a Crossmark update. Note the other Crossmark metadata must be present as well to be retained.\nIn this example, funding data is removed from a Crossmark update:\n\u0026lt;crossmark\u0026gt; \u0026lt;crossmark_version\u0026gt;1\u0026lt;/crossmark_version\u0026gt; \u0026lt;crossmark_policy\u0026gt;10.5555/crossmark_policy\u0026lt;/crossmark_policy\u0026gt; \u0026lt;crossmark_domains\u0026gt; \u0026lt;crossmark_domain\u0026gt; \u0026lt;domain\u0026gt;psychoceramics.labs.crossref.org\u0026lt;/domain\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/crossmark_domain\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/crossmark_domains\u0026gt; \u0026lt;crossmark_domain_exclusive\u0026gt;true\u0026lt;/crossmark_domain_exclusive\u0026gt; \u0026lt;custom_metadata\u0026gt; \u0026lt;assertion name=\u0026#34;orcid\u0026#34; label=\u0026#34;ORCID\u0026#34; group_name=\u0026#34;identifiers\u0026#34; group_label=\u0026#34;Identifiers\u0026#34; order=\u0026#34;0\u0026#34; href=\u0026#34;http\\://orcid.org/0000-0002-1825-0097\u0026#34;\u0026gt;http\\://orcid.org/0000-0002-1825-0097\u0026lt;/assertion\u0026gt; \u0026lt;assertion name=\u0026#34;received\u0026#34; label=\u0026#34;Received\u0026#34; group_name=\u0026#34;publication_history\u0026#34; group_label=\u0026#34;Publication History\u0026#34; order=\u0026#34;0\u0026#34;\u0026gt;2012-07-24\u0026lt;/assertion\u0026gt; \u0026lt;assertion name=\u0026#34;accepted\u0026#34; label=\u0026#34;Accepted\u0026#34; group_name=\u0026#34;publication_history\u0026#34; group_label=\u0026#34;Publication History\u0026#34; order=\u0026#34;1\u0026#34;\u0026gt;2012-08-29\u0026lt;/assertion\u0026gt; \u0026lt;assertion name=\u0026#34;published\u0026#34; label=\u0026#34;Published\u0026#34; group_name=\u0026#34;publication_history\u0026#34; group_label=\u0026#34;Publication History\u0026#34; order=\u0026#34;2\u0026#34;\u0026gt;2012-09-10\u0026lt;/assertion\u0026gt; \u0026lt;program xmlns=\u0026#34;https://www.crossref.org/fundref.xsd\u0026#34;/\u0026gt; \u0026lt;program xmlns=\u0026#34;https://www.crossref.org/AccessIndicators.xsd\u0026#34;/\u0026gt; \u0026lt;program \u0026#34;https://www.crossref.org/clinicaltrials.xsd\u0026#34;/\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/custom_metadata\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/crossmark\u0026gt; Remove funding data Remove funding data from a non-Crossmark record by supplying an empty fundref program element in a metadata deposit:\n\u0026lt;first_page\u0026gt;1\u0026lt;/first_page\u0026gt; \u0026lt;last_page\u0026gt;3\u0026lt;/last_page\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/pages\u0026gt; \u0026lt;program xmlns=\u0026#34;https://www.crossref.org/fundref.xsd\u0026#34;/\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi_data\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi\u0026gt;10.5555/12345678\u0026lt;/doi\u0026gt; \u0026lt;resource\u0026gt;http://psychoceramics.labs.crossref.org/10.5555-12345678.html\u0026lt;/resource\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/doi_data\u0026gt; or as part of a resource-only deposit:\n\u0026lt;fundref_data\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi\u0026gt;10.5555/12345678\u0026lt;/doi\u0026gt; \u0026lt;program xmlns=\u0026#34;https://www.crossref.org/fundref.xsd\u0026#34;/\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/fundref_data\u0026gt; Remove license data Remove license data from a non-Crossmark record by supplying an empty AccessIndicators program element in a metadata deposit:\n\u0026lt;first_page\u0026gt;1\u0026lt;/first_page\u0026gt; \u0026lt;last_page\u0026gt;3\u0026lt;/last_page\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/pages\u0026gt; \u0026lt;program xmlns=\u0026#34;https://www.crossref.org/AccessIndicators.xsd\u0026#34;/\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi_data\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi\u0026gt;10.5555/12345678\u0026lt;/doi\u0026gt; \u0026lt;resource\u0026gt;http://psychoceramics.labs.crossref.org/10.5555-12345678.html\u0026lt;/resource\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/doi_data\u0026gt; or as part of a resource-only deposit:\n\u0026lt;lic_ref_data\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi\u0026gt;10.5555/12345678\u0026lt;/doi\u0026gt; \u0026lt;program xmlns=\u0026#34;https://www.crossref.org/AccessIndicators.xsd\u0026#34;/\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/lic_ref_data\u0026gt; Remove relationship data Remove relationship data by supplying an empty relationship program element in a metadata deposit:\n\u0026lt;first_page\u0026gt;1\u0026lt;/first_page\u0026gt; \u0026lt;last_page\u0026gt;3\u0026lt;/last_page\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/pages\u0026gt; \u0026lt;program xmlns=\u0026#34;https://www.crossref.org/relations.xsd\u0026#34;/\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi_data\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi\u0026gt;10.5555/12345678\u0026lt;/doi\u0026gt; \u0026lt;resource\u0026gt;http://psychoceramics.labs.crossref.org/10.5555-12345678.html\u0026lt;/resource\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/doi_data\u0026gt; or as part of a resource-only deposit:\n\u0026lt;doi_relations\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi\u0026gt;10.5555/12345678\u0026lt;/doi\u0026gt; \u0026lt;program xmlns=\u0026#34;https://www.crossref.org/relations.xsd\u0026#34;/\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/doi_relations\u0026gt; Remove text and data mining, Similarity Check, and multiple resolution URLs Text and data mining and multiple resolution secondary URLs may be removed from a record by submitting an update containing an empty collection tag that includes the appropriate property:\nText and data mining uses property text-mining Similarity Check URLs use the property crawler-based Multiple resolution secondary URLs use the property list-based The country-code resolution feature uses the property country-based For example, to remove text and data mining URLs from a record submit the following as part of a metadata deposit:\n\u0026lt;doi_data\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi\u0026gt;10.5555/515151\u0026lt;/doi\u0026gt; \u0026lt;resource\u0026gt;http://annalsofpsychoceramics.labs.crossref.org/abstract/515151/\u0026lt;/resource\u0026gt; \u0026lt;collection property=\u0026#34;text-mining\u0026#34;/\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/doi_data\u0026gt; They may be included in a metadata deposit (above) or as part of a resource-only deposit:\n\u0026lt;doi_resources\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi\u0026gt;10.5555/515151\u0026lt;/doi\u0026gt; \u0026lt;collection property=\u0026#34;text-mining\u0026#34;/\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/doi_resources\u0026gt; Remove references Remove a reference list from a record by supplying an empty citation_list element in a metadata deposit:\n\u0026lt;first_page\u0026gt;1\u0026lt;/first_page\u0026gt; \u0026lt;last_page\u0026gt;3\u0026lt;/last_page\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/pages\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi_data\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi\u0026gt;10.5555/12345678\u0026lt;/doi\u0026gt; \u0026lt;resource\u0026gt;http://psychoceramics.labs.crossref.org/10.5555-12345678.html\u0026lt;/resource\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/doi_data\u0026gt; \u0026lt;citation_list/\u0026gt; or as part of a resource-only deposit:\n\u0026lt;doi_citations\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi\u0026gt;10.5555/12345678\u0026lt;/doi\u0026gt; \u0026lt;citation_list/\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/doi_citations\u0026gt; ",
"headings": ["Remove all Crossmark data ","Remove funding, clinical trial, or license data from Crossmark ","Remove funding data ","Remove license data ","Remove relationship data ","Remove text and data mining, Similarity Check, and multiple resolution URLs ","Remove references "]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/register-maintain-records/maintaining-your-metadata/updating-after-title-transfer/",
"title": "Updating metadata for inherited DOIs after a title transfer",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2020-10-06",
"lastmod_ts": 1601942400,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "If you’ve acquired titles from another publisher, you may have also acquired existing DOIs and metadata that were previously registered. Although these DOIs won\u0026rsquo;t be on your prefix, these DOIs will now be your responsibility and you\u0026rsquo;ll be able to update the metadata associated with them.\nDon\u0026rsquo;t try to register new DOIs on your prefix for content that already has a DOI. Instead, you should just update the metadata for these DOIs if you want to change something.\n",
"content": "If you’ve acquired titles from another publisher, you may have also acquired existing DOIs and metadata that were previously registered. Although these DOIs won\u0026rsquo;t be on your prefix, these DOIs will now be your responsibility and you\u0026rsquo;ll be able to update the metadata associated with them.\nDon\u0026rsquo;t try to register new DOIs on your prefix for content that already has a DOI. Instead, you should just update the metadata for these DOIs if you want to change something.\nConfirming your acquired DOIs If you aren\u0026rsquo;t sure which DOIs have already been registered for a particular title, look at the depositor report for the title. Please note: the depositor report updates at 0100 UTC each day, so a new publisher may need to wait until the next day to see its newly acquired titles.\nGo to the depositor report and look for your organisation name. You might need to wait a while for the page to load properly - it\u0026rsquo;s a bit slow. Click on your name and you\u0026rsquo;ll see the list of titles associated with your organisation. Click on the recently acquired title and you\u0026rsquo;ll see all the DOIs that are currently registered for it.\nUpdating the existing metadata for acquired titles When you acquire a title from another publisher and we perform a title transfer for you, the publisher name will update in the metadata automatically.\nHowever, there are likely to be some elements that you need to update yourself. For example, you may need to change the resolution URLs. And you may also need to change the full-text URLs for text and data mining or Similarity Check URLs if the previous publisher has submitted them. Or you may need to change a license URL that the previous publisher has submitted.\nTo add, change, or remove information from your metadata records, you generally need to resubmit your complete metadata record with the changes included.\nHowever, there are a few exceptions to this, and changes to resolution URLs is an important one - you may need our help here. Learn more about updating your resolution URLs.\nFinding the existing XML for acquired DOIs If you wish to see what is in the metadata that you have inherited, you can retrieve the metadata as an XML file using either the deposit harvester, or one of these REST API queries. If you plan to use a REST API query, we suggest installing a JSON formatter in your browser.\nTo retrieve all items by ISSN, use this API query: http://api.crossref.org/works?filter=issn:2090-8091\u0026amp;rows=1000 and replace 2090-8091 with the ISSN for your title To retrieve all items by title, use this API query: http://api.crossref.org/works?query.container-title=Connections and replace Connections with your title You can adjust the API query to retrieve just one element per DOI, such as full-text links (including for Similarity Check) - replace 2090-8091 with the ISSN for your title: http://api.crossref.org/works?filter=issn:2090-8091\u0026amp;rows=1000\u0026amp;select=DOI,link To transform the JSON to XML for individual records, append your API call with .xml, like this: (unsupported, so please do not rely on this feature) https://api.crossref.org/works/10.12794/journals.ntjur.v1i1.68 (JSON) https://api.crossref.org/works/10.12794/journals.ntjur.v1i1.68.xml (XML) If you register your content with us by sending us XML files, you can just edit this XML to remove or replace metadata, and then redeposit the XML.\nNote: for most metadata elements, you can just update the XML record and resubmit to delete elements. However, there are some non-bibliographic metadata elements where you have to go through a two-step process - firstly send us a submission to delete this element, and then send us a further submission to add in the replacement data. Learn more about updating your metadata.\n",
"headings": ["Confirming your acquired DOIs ","Updating the existing metadata for acquired titles ","Finding the existing XML for acquired DOIs "]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/members-area/update-contacts/",
"title": "Keep your account details up-to-date",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2022-07-28",
"lastmod_ts": 1658966400,
"section": "Hello, members",
"tags": [],
"description": "To make sure that we are contacting the right people at your organisation, and to make sure that we include the correct information on your invoices, we need to know if anything changes for you.\nPlease let us know by completing our contact form if any of the following changes:\nYour organisation name Your mailing or billing address (If you are using our payment portal, you can update the billing address associated with your credit card there, but if you need a different billing address to appear on your invoice, you will need to let us know.) A significant change to your organisations\u0026rsquo;s annual publishing revenue (this may mean that we need to change your annual member fee tier.) A change to one or more of the key contacts on your account. Five key contacts for each account When you join Crossref, you provide contact details for (ideally) at least three different people at your organisation to undertake five roles. These are key to making your relationship with Crossref and the rest of the community a success, so do think carefully about who will take on each of these roles. These will be the people we contact to confirm any changes to your account.\n",
"content": "To make sure that we are contacting the right people at your organisation, and to make sure that we include the correct information on your invoices, we need to know if anything changes for you.\nPlease let us know by completing our contact form if any of the following changes:\nYour organisation name Your mailing or billing address (If you are using our payment portal, you can update the billing address associated with your credit card there, but if you need a different billing address to appear on your invoice, you will need to let us know.) A significant change to your organisations\u0026rsquo;s annual publishing revenue (this may mean that we need to change your annual member fee tier.) A change to one or more of the key contacts on your account. Five key contacts for each account When you join Crossref, you provide contact details for (ideally) at least three different people at your organisation to undertake five roles. These are key to making your relationship with Crossref and the rest of the community a success, so do think carefully about who will take on each of these roles. These will be the people we contact to confirm any changes to your account.\nThe Primary contact - this person will be our key contact at your organisation. They receive product and service updates, and we contact them about things like changes to terms or service agreements. They also receive our monthly resolution reports showing failed resolutions on your DOIs. (Those of you who have been members for a while will know this contact as the Business contact). The Voting contact - this person will vote in our board elections on behalf of your organization, so needs to be someone at your member organization. The Voting contact is often the same person as the Primary contact. We do need a specific person\u0026rsquo;s name for the voting contact, but you can provide a generic email address. The Voting contact can\u0026rsquo;t be the voting contact on another member account. The Technical contact - this person will receive technical updates, DOI error reports, and conflict reports to help you solve problems with your content quickly. We encourage you to use a shared, generic email address for this contact. The Metadata quality contact - this person will be responsible for fixing any metadata errors that are spotted by the scholarly community. The Metadata Quality contact is often the same person as the Technical contact, and we encourage you to use a shared, generic email address for this contact. The Billing contact - this person will receive invoices from us by email and pay the annual membership and ongoing content registration fees. They will also receive reminder emails about unpaid invoices. We encourage you to use a shared, generic email address for this contact. If your billing platform has an email address to send invoices to, please use this. But do note that we are unable to manually upload invoices into a payment platform. If you work with Crossref through a sponsor, we only need a Primary contact and a Voting contact from you.\nBack to members area\n",
"headings": ["Five key contacts for each account "]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/reports/browsable-title-list/",
"title": "Browsable title list",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2024-07-22",
"lastmod_ts": 1721606400,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "The browsable title list provides an alphabetical list of journals, books, and conference proceedings for which Crossref has metadata, and is updated weekly. Browsing and searching may be limited by genre (all, journals, books, or conference proceedings) or search type (title, ISSN/ISBN, subject, or publisher). To search for a specific title, enclose the title in quotes, or search by ISSN.\nAccess the browsable title list\nSearch results will include the following (when available):\n",
"content": "The browsable title list provides an alphabetical list of journals, books, and conference proceedings for which Crossref has metadata, and is updated weekly. Browsing and searching may be limited by genre (all, journals, books, or conference proceedings) or search type (title, ISSN/ISBN, subject, or publisher). To search for a specific title, enclose the title in quotes, or search by ISSN.\nAccess the browsable title list\nSearch results will include the following (when available):\nTitle (Journal/Book/Conf Proc): Title name. Journal titles are gray, book titles are green, and conference proceedings titles are purple. Publisher: Publisher of the title as registered with us. Print ISSN/ISBN: ISSN or ISBN (indicated by color) of the print version of the title. Electronic ISSN/ISBN: ISSN or ISBN (indicated by color) of the electronic version of the title. DOI: DOI assigned at the title level. To review the results:\nClick the icon to view the year(s), volume(s), and issue(s) deposited with Crossref for a title Click the icon to view alternative title information, abbreviated titles (if any), other ISSNs or ISBNs, subjects covered, and any coverage notes for this content item. This information is obtained from a third party and may not match data deposited with Crossref To request a missed conflict report for a title, click the icon at the far right of the row You can also download a comma-separated journal coverage list (warning: large file).\n",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/reports/conflict-report/",
"title": "Conflict report",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2024-11-13",
"lastmod_ts": 1731456000,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": " The conflict report shows where two (or more) DOIs have been submitted with the same metadata, indicating that you may have duplicate DOIs. You’ll start receiving conflict reports if you have at least one conflict. As you know, a DOI is a unique identifier — so there should only ever be one DOI for each content item.\nFix conflicts as soon as you can as they could lead to problems in the future. Having two separate DOIs for the same content means researchers won’t know which one to cite, and this risks splitting your citation count. You may also forget you have two DOIs, and update only one of them if your URLs change. This means anyone using the DOI you haven’t updated will come to a dead link. The good news is that it’s very quick to eliminate this bad metadata and solve the problem.\n",
"content": " The conflict report shows where two (or more) DOIs have been submitted with the same metadata, indicating that you may have duplicate DOIs. You’ll start receiving conflict reports if you have at least one conflict. As you know, a DOI is a unique identifier — so there should only ever be one DOI for each content item.\nFix conflicts as soon as you can as they could lead to problems in the future. Having two separate DOIs for the same content means researchers won’t know which one to cite, and this risks splitting your citation count. You may also forget you have two DOIs, and update only one of them if your URLs change. This means anyone using the DOI you haven’t updated will come to a dead link. The good news is that it’s very quick to eliminate this bad metadata and solve the problem.\nAccess the conflict report\nConflicts most often occur for two reasons:\nThe metadata registered for content isn\u0026rsquo;t sufficient to distinguish between two items. For example, items like Book Reviews, Letters, and Errata often share a single page and have no author Two or more records have the same metadata (but different identifiers), suggesting that duplicate records have been created. Conflicts are flagged in your submission log when a conflict is created. We also record all current conflicts in the conflict report on our website - if you do not see your member name on the conflict report page, you have no outstanding conflicts. If you have active conflicts, we’ll remind you via email each month. However, if your conflict level has increased by 500+ then we’ll let you know right away, as this indicates a bigger problem. If your organisation has more than one prefix, you’ll receive a separate email for each prefix.\nWhat should I do with my conflict report? On the conflict reports page, you can locate your organisation to see the conflicts. Please be patient, as the page can take a long time to load. You can view conflict details as an XML file or by title (see View conflicts by title below) as a simple .txt report.\nClick your organisation’s name to see which titles have the problem.\nShow image × Click each title to show a report that displays the DOIs in conflict.\nAlternatively, you can see the conflict reports for your whole prefix by clicking on the .xml link.\nOther information includes:\nconflict ID is the unique ID number for the conflict. cause ID is the deposit submission of the DOI causing the conflict. other ID is the deposit submission of the affected DOI. Example conflict report XML \u0026lt;conflict_report prefix=\u0026#34;10.3201\u0026#34; date=\u0026#34;Sep 20,2016\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;conflict id=\u0026#34;4532830\u0026#34; created=\u0026#34;2013-09-09 15:26:11.0\u0026#34; causeID=\u0026#34;1361422379\u0026#34; otherIDs=\u0026#34;1360220986,\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi_data\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi\u0026gt;10.3201/eid.1811.121112\u0026lt;/doi\u0026gt; \u0026lt;metadata\u0026gt; \u0026lt;journal_title\u0026gt;Emerging Infectious Diseases\u0026lt;/journal_title\u0026gt; \u0026lt;volume\u0026gt;18\u0026lt;/volume\u0026gt; \u0026lt;issue\u0026gt;11\u0026lt;/issue\u0026gt; \u0026lt;first_page/\u0026gt; \u0026lt;year\u0026gt;2012\u0026lt;/year\u0026gt; \u0026lt;article_title/\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/metadata\u0026gt; \u0026lt;other_conflicts\u0026gt; \u0026lt;conflict id=\u0026#34;4532830\u0026#34; status=\u0026#34;N\u0026#34;/\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/other_conflicts\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/doi_data\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi_data\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi\u0026gt;10.3201/eid1811.121112\u0026lt;/doi\u0026gt; \u0026lt;metadata/\u0026gt; \u0026lt;other_conflicts\u0026gt; \u0026lt;conflict id=\u0026#34;4532830\u0026#34; status=\u0026#34;N\u0026#34;/\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/other_conflicts\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/doi_data\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/conflict\u0026gt; View conflicts by title You can also examine the conflicts for a particular publication by clicking on the title in the expanded view. This will display a text file where:\nConfID is the unique ID number for the conflict. CauseID is the deposit submission of the DOI causing the conflict. OtherID is the deposit submission of the affected DOI. JT is the publication’s title. MD is metadata for the DOIs. Metadata for DOIs in conflict will be the same. DOI is the DOI involved in the conflict. Parenthetical value following the DOI (such as Journal and 4508537-N in this example) lists all the conflicts in which the DOI is involved and the resolution status of that conflict. ALERT, if it appears, indicates that the DOIs have more than one conflict, which can occur if they were deposited repeatedly with the same metadata. This field lists the other conflict IDs and their status: null – Not resolved A – Made an alias P – Made a prime U – Resolved by a metadata update R – Manually erased or resolved Show image × Resolving conflicts There are three scenarios to cause two (or more) DOIs to be submitted with the same metadata.\nScenario 1: You assigned two DOIs to distinct content items, but accidentally submitted the same metadata for both of them. In this case, one of the DOIs has incorrect metadata. If you update and resubmit the deposit to correct that DOI\u0026rsquo;s metadata, the conflict will be resolved.\nScenario 2: You assigned two DOIs to the same content item. In this case, you can resolve the conflict by assigning one of the DOIs as primary and the other as its alias. The alias DOI will automatically redirect to the primary DOI, so you\u0026rsquo;ll only need to maintain the primary. Learn more about creating aliases between DOIs.\nScenario 3: The two DOIs refer to different content items, but their metadata is so similar that a conflict was flagged. This happens when items have very little metadata included. The best thing to do is to register more metadata to remove the conflict. If you can’t do this, you can accept the conflict - learn more about accepting conflicts as-is.\nIf you have any further questions about your conflict report, please contact us.\nUpdate your metadata If a conflict exists because the metadata you\u0026rsquo;ve deposited is sparse, you should re-register your content with additional metadata. The conflict status will be resolved when one (or both) items are re-registered with distinctive metadata. To be sure that the system updates the correct record, include the relevant DOI in your submission.\nWhen making an update, you must supply all the metadata for the content item, not just the fields that need to be changed. During the update process, the system completely overwrites the existing metadata with the information you submit, including inserting null values for any fields not supplied in the update.\nIf the new metadata resolves the conflict, the system returns a message such as this one (which resulted from a redeposit of the metadata for DOI 10.50505/200702271050-conflict):\n\u0026lt;record_diagnostic status=\u0026#34;Success\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi\u0026gt;10.50505/200702271050-conflict\u0026lt;/doi\u0026gt; \u0026lt;msg\u0026gt;Successfully updated\u0026lt;/msg\u0026gt; **\u0026lt;resolved_conflict_ids\u0026gt;352052\u0026lt;/resolved_conflict_ids\u0026gt;** \u0026lt;/record_diagnostic\u0026gt; Create aliases between DOIs If you have registered multiple records for the same content, you can alias the duplicate items to the (primary) record you intend to maintain. Records are aliased at the identifier (DOI) level. When DOIs are aliased, one DOI is flagged as the \u0026lsquo;primary\u0026rsquo; DOI - the DOI you intend to maintain in the future. The remaining DOIs are aliased to the primary DOI at the DOI resolver level. This means that when someone clicks on an aliased DOI link, the user is automatically redirected to the URL registered for the primary DOI.\nFor example, if the metadata for 10.1103/PhysRev.69.674 and 10.1103/PhysRev.69.674.2 are the same, you might make 10.1103/PhysRev.69.674 the primary DOI. In this case, metadata queries that match both DOIs will resolve to 10.1103/PhysRev.69.674, and DOI queries for either 10.1103/PhysRev.69.674 or 10.1103/PhysRev.69.674.2 will both return results.\nYou can assign primary status to DOIs in conflict one-by-one using the admin tool, or you can assign primary or alias status to multiple DOIs by uploading a .txt file.\nConflicts involving DOIs owned by other members must be resolved by Crossref - please contact us for help with this.\nAssigning primary status from within the admin tool Log in to the admin tool using your Crossref account credentials Click Metadata Admin tab Click Conflict tab (if necessary) In the appropriate box, enter the submission ID, the conflict ID, or the DOI Click Submit to see the DOIs associated with the conflict Select the DOI that you want to make primary Click Make selected DOI primary in all conflicts Show image × If you make a mistake, you can undo it by returning to this page and clicking Unresolve all conflicts Assigning primary or alias status to multiple DOIs by uploading a .txt file The status you assign applies to all conflicts that involve the DOIs.\nTo assign DOIs primary status, create a .txt file with the header H:email={email address};op=primary, for example: H:email=youremail@address.com;op=primary 10.1016/0032-1028(80)90001-2 10.1016/0032-1028(80)90002-4 10.1016/0032-1028(80)90003-6 10.1016/0032-1028(80)90004-8 10.1016/0032-1028(80)90005-X 10.1016/0032-1028(80)90006-1 10.1016/0368-3281(63)90014-7 Use op=alias when the primary DOIs are not known. If there are more than two DOIs involved in the conflict, the operation will be rejected because the system cannot determine which DOI to make primary.\nLog in to the admin tool using your Crossref account credentials Click Submissions tab Click Upload tab (if necessary) Locate and select the metadata file Select Conflict Management Click Upload All the DOIs listed in the file will be assigned the status you specified in the op element. The system will send you a message like this one for an individual DOI:\n\u0026lt;record_diagnostic doi=\u0026#34;10.1088/0368-3281/5/6/313\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;conflict status=\u0026#34;Success\u0026#34; ids=\u0026#34;48983,49365,49783,50243,51067\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;msg\u0026gt;Marked as alias\u0026lt;/msg\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi_list\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi\u0026gt;10.1016/0368-3281(63)90014-7\u0026lt;/doi\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/doi_list\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/conflict\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/record_diagnostic\u0026gt; or this one for multiple DOIs: \u0026lt;?xml version=\u0026#34;1.0\u0026#34; encoding=\u0026#34;UTF-8\u0026#34;?\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi_batch_diagnostic\u0026gt; \u0026lt;submission_id\u0026gt;1181263946\u0026lt;/submission_id\u0026gt; \u0026lt;record_diagnostic doi=\u0026#34;10.5555/prime\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;conflict status=\u0026#34;Success\u0026#34; ids=\u0026#34;23135669,2311211\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;msg\u0026gt;Marked as alias\u0026lt;/msg\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi_list\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi\u0026gt;10.5555/a1\u0026lt;/doi\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi\u0026gt;10.5555/a2\u0026lt;/doi\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/doi_list\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/conflict\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/record_diagnostic\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/doi_batch_diagnostic\u0026gt; Accept conflicts as-is If you\u0026rsquo;ve determined that the content flagged with conflicts are not duplicate items, you can remove the conflict status by setting the status to \u0026lsquo;resolved\u0026rsquo;. This has no impact on the metadata records or DOIs but will remove the conflicts from our conflict report.\nIn some cases, you may want to leave conflicting or ambiguous records in our metadata database. You can do this within our admin tool, or by uploading a .txt file to our admin tool.\nAccepting a conflict as-is using the admin tool To accept conflicts:\nLog in to the admin tool using your Crossref account credentials Click Metadata Admin tab Click Conflict tab (if necessary) In the appropriate box, enter the submission ID, the conflict ID, or the DOI Select Show Consolidated Conflicts (if available) Click Submit to see the DOIs associated with the conflict. Click Mark All Conflicts as Resolved Accepting a conflict as-is by uploading conflict management submissions to the admin tool If you have a large number of DOIs to resolve, you can submit a text file to the admin tool.\nCreate a .txt file with the following header (include your email address): H:email=youremail@address.com;op=resolve 10.1016/0032-1028(80)90001-2 10.1016/0032-1028(80)90002-4 10.1016/0032-1028(80)90003-6 10.1016/0032-1028(80)90004-8 10.1016/0032-1028(80)90005-X 10.1016/0032-1028(80)90006-1 10.1016/0368-3281(63)90014-7 Log in to the admin tool using your Crossref account credentials Click Submissions tab Click Upload tab (if necessary) Locate and select the metadata file Select Live Select Conflict Management Click Upload Your conflict resolution file will be added to our submission queue and processed. A log will be sent to the email address you provided in the file header. Be sure to review the log to make sure your conflicts were resolved correctly.\nForcing prime/alias You can force a DOI to be an alias of another DOI even if the DOIs are not in conflict. Please contact us to discuss if this would be a suitable solution for your situation.\nExtreme care MUST be taken when using this feature. Normally two DOIs are put into a prime/alias pair when their metadata is the same and a conflict is created. In this case, a metadata query will find both DOIs but because of the forced aliasing will return the prime DOI. If an aliased DOI has very different metadata from a primary DOI, the match may be a false positive.\nTo force an alias between two DOIs, create a text file as described below and upload to the admin tool.\nCreate the .txt file with tab-separated pairs of DOIs as follows: H:email=youremail@address.com;op=force_alias;delim=tab 10.xxxx/primary1 10.xxxx/alias1 10.xxxx/primary2 10.xxxx/alias2 10.xxxx/primary3 10.xxxx/alias3 Log in to the admin tool using your Crossref account credentials Click Submissions Click Upload, if necessary Next to FileName, select Choose File Locate and select the force alias file Select Type Conflict Management Click Upload Removing a forced prime and/or alias (\u0026ldquo;un-aliasing\u0026rdquo;) Only DOIs that have been aliased need to be un-aliased. Supplying op=unalias allows you to unalias previously forced aliases.\nH:email=youremail@address.com;op=unalias;delim=tab 10.xxxx/alias1 10.xxxx/alias2 10.xxxx/alias3 ",
"headings": ["The conflict report shows where two (or more) DOIs have been submitted with the same metadata, indicating that you may have duplicate DOIs. You’ll start receiving conflict reports if you have at least one conflict.","What should I do with my conflict report? ","Example conflict report XML ","View conflicts by title ","Resolving conflicts ","Update your metadata ","Create aliases between DOIs ","Assigning primary status from within the admin tool ","Assigning primary or alias status to multiple DOIs by uploading a .txt file ","Accept conflicts as-is ","Accepting a conflict as-is using the admin tool ","Accepting a conflict as-is by uploading conflict management submissions to the admin tool ","Forcing prime/alias ","Removing a forced prime and/or alias (\u0026ldquo;un-aliasing\u0026rdquo;) "]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/reports/depositor-report/",
"title": "Depositor report",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2024-07-19",
"lastmod_ts": 1721347200,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "The depositor report is used for checking basic info about your DOI registrations.\nDepositor reports list all DOIs by member and title for journals, books, and conference proceedings. We currently have depositor reports for journals, books, and conference proceedings (but not for other record types). The index page is updated weekly. Title-level reports are updated as your metadata is updated with us.\nDepositor reports by record type Access journals depositor report Access books depositor report Access conference proceedings depositor report Each title-level report lists all DOIs registered for the title as well as (for each DOI) the owning prefix, the deposit timestamp, the date the record was last updated, and the number of Cited-by matches. To view each title-level report, select the member name then the appropriate title.\n",
"content": "The depositor report is used for checking basic info about your DOI registrations.\nDepositor reports list all DOIs by member and title for journals, books, and conference proceedings. We currently have depositor reports for journals, books, and conference proceedings (but not for other record types). The index page is updated weekly. Title-level reports are updated as your metadata is updated with us.\nDepositor reports by record type Access journals depositor report Access books depositor report Access conference proceedings depositor report Each title-level report lists all DOIs registered for the title as well as (for each DOI) the owning prefix, the deposit timestamp, the date the record was last updated, and the number of Cited-by matches. To view each title-level report, select the member name then the appropriate title.\nField/missing metadata report: You can also see what basic bibliographic metadata fields are populated for your journal articles - click on the green triangle to the right of each member name to view a field / missing metadata report. DOI crawler: We crawl a broad sample of journal DOIs to make sure the DOIs are resolving to the appropriate page. For each journal crawled, a sample of DOIs that equals 5% of the total DOIs for the journal up to a maximum of 50 DOIs is selected. You can access the crawler details for a given journal by selecting the linked date in the ‘last crawl date’ column. Click on a member name in the report, and you will see a list of that member’s titles below the name. Click on any publication title to open a text file which list all DOIs for that title.\nThe initial view shows:\nName: name of the member. Members with more than one prefix will appear multiple times Journal/Book/Conf Proc count: number of journal, book, or conference proceeding titles associated with the member Total DOIs: total number of DOIs deposited for the selected title Field report: shows missing metadata fields for each member, select the icon to view The expanded view shows:\nName of each journal, book, or conference proceeding with DOI names deposited by the member DOIs: Total number of DOIs registered for each journal, book, or conference proceeding deposited by the member Last crawl date: date of last crawler report (if available) Show image × Depositor report title view Select a journal, book, or conference proceeding title to retrieve a list of DOIs for the title (DOI), the owner prefix of the DOI (OWNER), the timestamp value for the DOI (DEPOSIT-TIMESTAMP) the date the DOI was last updated (LAST-UPDATED), and the number of Cited-by matches for the DOI:\nShow image × Title-level depositor report data may also be retrieved using format=doilist - learn more about retrieving DOIs by title.\n",
"headings": ["Depositor report title view "]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/reports/doi-crawler-report/",
"title": "DOI crawler report",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2024-07-19",
"lastmod_ts": 1721347200,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "We test a broad sample of DOIs to ensure resolution. For each journal crawled, a sample of DOIs that equals 5% of the total DOIs for the journal up to a maximum of 50 DOIs is selected. The selected DOIs span prefixes and issues.\nThe results are recorded in crawler reports, which you can access from the depositor report expanded view (access the depositor reports by type at the links below).\n",
"content": "We test a broad sample of DOIs to ensure resolution. For each journal crawled, a sample of DOIs that equals 5% of the total DOIs for the journal up to a maximum of 50 DOIs is selected. The selected DOIs span prefixes and issues.\nThe results are recorded in crawler reports, which you can access from the depositor report expanded view (access the depositor reports by type at the links below).\nDepositor reports by record type Access journals depositor report Access books depositor report Access conference proceedings depositor report If a title has been crawled, the last crawl date is shown in the appropriate column. Crawled DOIs that generate errors will appear as a bold link:\nShow image × Click Last Crawl Date to view a crawler status report for a title:\nShow image × The crawler status report lists the following:\nTotal DOIs: Total number of DOI names for the title in system on last crawl date Checked: number of DOIs crawled Confirmed: crawler found both DOI and article title on landing page Semi-confirmed: crawler found either the DOI or the article title on the landing page Not Confirmed: crawler did not find DOI nor article title on landing page Bad: page contains known phrases indicating article is not available (for example, article not found, no longer available) Login Page: crawler is prompted to log in, no article title or DOI Exception: indicates error in crawler code httpCode: resolution attempt results in error (such as 400, 403, 404, 500) httpFailure: http server connection failed Select each number to view details. Select re-crawl and enter an email address to crawl again.\n",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/reports/doi-error-report/",
"title": "DOI error report",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2024-07-19",
"lastmod_ts": 1721347200,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": " The DOI error report is sent immediately when a user informs us that they’ve seen a DOI somewhere which doesn’t resolve to a website. The DOI error report is used for making sure your DOI links go where they’re supposed to. When a user clicks on a DOI that has not been registered, they are sent to a form that collects the DOI, the user’s email address, and any comments the user wants to share. We compile the DOI error report daily using those reports and comments, and send it via email to the technical contact at the member responsible for the DOI prefix as a .csv attachment.\n",
"content": " The DOI error report is sent immediately when a user informs us that they’ve seen a DOI somewhere which doesn’t resolve to a website. The DOI error report is used for making sure your DOI links go where they’re supposed to. When a user clicks on a DOI that has not been registered, they are sent to a form that collects the DOI, the user’s email address, and any comments the user wants to share. We compile the DOI error report daily using those reports and comments, and send it via email to the technical contact at the member responsible for the DOI prefix as a .csv attachment.\nShow image × If you would like the DOI error report to be sent to a different person, please contact us.\nThe DOI error report .csv file contains (where provided by the user):\nDOI - the DOI being reported URL - the referring URL REPORTED-DATE - date the DOI was initially reported USER-EMAIL - email of the user reporting the error COMMENTS We find that approximately 2/3 of reported errors are ‘real’ problems. Common reasons why you might get this report include:\nyou’ve published/distributed a DOI but haven’t registered it the DOI you published doesn’t match the registered DOI a link was formatted incorrectly (a . at the end of a DOI, for example) a user has made a mistake (confusing 1 for l or 0 for O, or cut-and-paste errors) What should I do with my DOI error report? Review the .csv file attached to your emailed report, and make sure that no legitimate DOIs are listed. Any legitimate DOIs found in this report should be registered immediately. When a DOI reported via the form is registered, we’ll send out an alert to the reporting user (if they’ve shared their email address with us).\nI keep getting DOI error reports for DOIs that I have not published, what do I do about this? It’s possible that someone is trying to link to your content with the wrong DOI. If you do a web search for the reported DOI you may find the source of your problem - we often find incorrect linking from user-provided content like Wikipedia, or from DOIs inadvertently distributed by members to PubMed. If it’s still a mystery, please contact us.\n",
"headings": ["The DOI error report is sent immediately when a user informs us that they’ve seen a DOI somewhere which doesn’t resolve to a website.","What should I do with my DOI error report? ","I keep getting DOI error reports for DOIs that I have not published, what do I do about this? "]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/reports/field-or-missing-metadata-report/",
"title": "Field or missing metadata report",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2024-07-19",
"lastmod_ts": 1721347200,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "The field or missing metadata report gives details on metadata completeness and can be accessed by selecting the icon next to each member name in the depositor report (access the depositor reports by type at the links below). The fields checked are volume, issue, page, author, article title, and Similarity Check URL.\nDepositor reports by record type Access journals depositor report Access books depositor report Access conference proceedings depositor report To see your field or missing metadata report, use this URL but replace 10.5555 with your prefix:\n",
"content": "The field or missing metadata report gives details on metadata completeness and can be accessed by selecting the icon next to each member name in the depositor report (access the depositor reports by type at the links below). The fields checked are volume, issue, page, author, article title, and Similarity Check URL.\nDepositor reports by record type Access journals depositor report Access books depositor report Access conference proceedings depositor report To see your field or missing metadata report, use this URL but replace 10.5555 with your prefix:\nhttps://apps.crossref.org/myCrossref?report=missingmetadata\u0026amp;datatype=j\u0026amp;prefix=10.5555 Show image × Select a title to retrieve a list of DOIs for the title, and flagged fields for each DOI. For example, the DOIs in this report lack page and author information:\nShow image × Although the deposit section of the schema specifies that some bibliographic metadata is optional for content registration purposes, we strongly encourage members to register comprehensive metadata for each item registered.\n",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/reports/missed-conflict-report/",
"title": "Missed conflict report",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2024-07-22",
"lastmod_ts": 1721606400,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "Learn more about conflicts and the conflict report. Conflicts are usually flagged upon deposit, but sometimes this doesn\u0026rsquo;t happen, creating a missed conflict.\nAccess the conflict report\nA missed conflict may occur for several reasons:\nTwo DOIs are deposited for the same item, but the metadata is slightly different (DOI A deposited with an online publication date of 2011, DOI B deposited with a print publication date of 1972) DOIs were deposited with a unique item number. Before 2008, DOIs containing unique item numbers (supplied in the \u0026lt;publisher_item\u0026gt; element) were not checked for conflicts. The missed conflict report compares article titles across data for a specified journal or journals. To retrieve a missed conflict report for a title:\n",
"content": "Learn more about conflicts and the conflict report. Conflicts are usually flagged upon deposit, but sometimes this doesn\u0026rsquo;t happen, creating a missed conflict.\nAccess the conflict report\nA missed conflict may occur for several reasons:\nTwo DOIs are deposited for the same item, but the metadata is slightly different (DOI A deposited with an online publication date of 2011, DOI B deposited with a print publication date of 1972) DOIs were deposited with a unique item number. Before 2008, DOIs containing unique item numbers (supplied in the \u0026lt;publisher_item\u0026gt; element) were not checked for conflicts. The missed conflict report compares article titles across data for a specified journal or journals. To retrieve a missed conflict report for a title:\nStart from the browsable title list and search or browse for the title Click the icon at the far right of the title The missed conflict interface will pop up in a second window. Enter your email address in the appropriate field. Multiple title IDs can be included in a single request if needed A report will be emailed to the email address you provided. This report lists all DOIs with identical article titles that have not been flagged as conflicts.\n",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/reports/participation-reports/",
"title": "Participation Reports",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2025-12-10",
"lastmod_ts": 1765324800,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "Participation Reports are a visualization of the metadata that’s available via our free REST API. There’s a separate participation report for each member, and each report shows what percentage of that member’s metadata records include 11 key metadata elements. These key elements add context and richness, and help to open up content to easier discovery and wider and more varied use. As a member, you can use Participation Reports to see for yourself where the gaps in your organisation\u0026rsquo;s metadata are, and perhaps compare your performance to others. These reports are free and open to everyone.\n",
"content": "Participation Reports are a visualization of the metadata that’s available via our free REST API. There’s a separate participation report for each member, and each report shows what percentage of that member’s metadata records include 11 key metadata elements. These key elements add context and richness, and help to open up content to easier discovery and wider and more varied use. As a member, you can use Participation Reports to see for yourself where the gaps in your organisation\u0026rsquo;s metadata are, and perhaps compare your performance to others. These reports are free and open to everyone.\nAccess Participation Reports\nHow a Participation Report works There’s a separate participation report for each member. Visit Participation Reports and start typing the name of a member under Find a Crossref Member. A list of member names will appear for you to select from. Behind the scenes, our REST API will pull together a report and output it in a clear, visual way. Please note - it should usually take a maximum of 24 hours for you to see changes to your participation report if you\u0026rsquo;ve added new records or updated the metadata in your existing records.\nYou can use the dropdown menu near the top of the page to see reports for different time periods. Current records includes any records published or issued in the current calendar year or up to two years previously. For example, in 2025, current records are those with a publication date in 2025, 2024, or 2023. Anything published or issued in 2022 or earlier is considered a back record.\nShow image × By default, the participation report will display coverage statistics for the member\u0026rsquo;s most common work type. Simply click on the corresponding filter underneath the date dropdown to see the scores for a different work type.\nWhen viewing a report for Journal Articles, you can also drill down further to see the coverage statistics for a single journal title. Simply begin typing the title of a journal that belongs to the member whose report you are viewing. Note that only journals with an ISSN can be selected here.\nYou can also download a gap report, which is a CSV file listing the DOIs of all of the selected member\u0026rsquo;s records that are missing any of the metadata fields you are interested in.\nShow image × Near the top of the screen, click Download Gap Report and select the fields, record type, and time period you wish to include in the report. The CSV file will then be downloaded to your computer, which may take a while if there are many records missing the selected field(s). The gap report includes up to 5000 records per field and lists each record\u0026rsquo;s DOI alongside the date that it was published or issued. Note that a single DOI will be listed multiple times if several of the selected fields are missing in the associated metadata.\nThe work types currently covered by Participation Reports are:\nJournal articles Conference papers Books Book chapters Grants Posted content (including preprints) Reports Datasets Standards The 11 key metadata elements for which Participation Reports calculate each member’s coverage are:\nReferences Abstracts ORCID iDs Affiliations ROR IDs Funder Registry IDs Funding award numbers Crossmark enabled Text mining URLs License URLs Similarity Check URLs References Percentage of records that include reference lists in their metadata.\nWhy is this important? Your references are a big part of the story of your content, highlighting its provenance and where it sits in the scholarly map. References give researchers and other users of Crossref metadata a vital data point through which to find your content, which in turn increases the chances of your content being read and used.\nWhere can I learn more? Cited-by service How can I improve my percentage? Whenever you register records with us, make sure you include your references in the submission. Find out more here.\nYou can also add references to your existing records.\nAbstracts Percentage of records that include the abstract in the metadata, giving further insights into the content of the work.\nWhy is this important? The abstract gives more information to the user about your content, making your items more discoverable.\nWhere can I learn more? Abstracts How can I improve my percentage? Make sure you include abstracts when you register your content - it’s available for everything other than dissertations and reports. For existing records, you can add abstracts by running a full metadata redeposit (update).\nORCID iDs Percentage of records containing ORCID iDs. These persistent identifiers enable users to precisely identify a researcher’s work - even when that researcher shares a name with someone else, or if they change their name.\nWhy is this important? Researcher names are inherently ambiguous. People share names. People change names. People record names differently in different circumstances.\nGovernments, funding agencies, and institutions are increasingly seeking to account for their research investments. They need to know precisely what research outputs are being produced by the researchers that they fund or employ. ORCID iDs allow this reporting to be done automatically and accurately.\nFor some funders, ORCID iDs are critical for their research investment auditing, and they are starting to mandate that researchers use ORCID iDs.\nResearchers who do not have ORCID iDs included in their Crossref metadata risk not being counted in these audits and reports.\nWhere can I learn more? ORCID Open letter: list of funders supporting ORCID Open letter: list of publishers supporting ORCID ORCID adoption through national consortia in Italy, New Zealand and Norway Ten reasons to get - and use - an ORCID iD! How can I improve my percentage? Make sure you ask your authors for their ORCID iD through your submission system and include them when you register your content. There’s a specific element in the XML for ORCID iDs if you register via XML. If you use one of our helper tools, there’s a specific field to complete.\nTo add ORCID iDs to existing records, you need to update your metadata.\nAffiliations The percentage of registered records that include affiliation metadata for at least one contributor.\nWhy is this important? Affiliation metadata ensures that contributor institutions can be identified and research outputs can be traced by institution.\nWhere can I learn more? Affiliations and ROR How can I improve my percentage? Make sure you collect affiliation details from authors via your submission system and include them in your future Crossref deposits.\nFor existing records, you can add affiliation metadata by running a full metadata redeposit (update).\nROR IDs The percentage of registered records that include at least one ROR ID, e.g. in the contributor metadata.\nWhy is this important? Affiliation metadata ensures that contributor institutions can be identified and research outputs can be traced by institution.\nA ROR ID is a single, unambiguous, standardized organisation identifier that will always stay the same. This means that contributor affiliations can be clearly disambiguated and greatly improves the usability of your metadata.\nWhere can I learn more? Affiliations and ROR How can I improve my percentage? If the submission system you use does not yet support ROR, or if you don’t use a submission system, you’ll still be able to provide ROR IDs in your Crossref metadata. ROR IDs can be added to JATS XML, and many Crossref helper tools support the deposit of ROR IDs. There’s also an OpenRefine reconciler that can map your internal identifiers to ROR identifiers.\nIf you find that an organisation you are looking for is not yet in ROR, please submit a curation request.\nFor existing records, you can add affiliation metadata by running a full metadata redeposit (update).\nFunder Registry IDs The percentage of registered records that contain the name and Funder Registry ID of at least one of the organisations that funded the research.\nWhy is this important? Funding acknowledgements give vital context for users and consumers of your content. Extracting these acknowledgements from your content and adding them to your metadata allows funding organisations to better track the published results of their grants, and allows publishers to analyze the sources of funding for their authors and ensure compliance with funder mandates. And, by using the unique funder IDs from our central Funder Registry, you can help ensure the information is consistent across publishers.\nWhere can I learn more? Funder Registry How can I improve my percentage? Make sure you collect funder names from authors via your submission system, or extract them from acknowledgement sections. Match the names with the corresponding Funder IDs from our Funder Registry and make sure you include them in your future Crossref deposits.\nIf your funder isn’t yet in the Funder Registry, please let us know.\nTo add funder information to records you’ve already registered, you can do a full metadata redeposit (update), or use our supplemental metadata upload method.\nFunding award numbers The percentage of registered records that contain at least one funding award number - a number assigned by the funding organisation to identify the specific piece of funding (the award or grant).\nWhy is this important? Funding organisations are able to better track the published results of their grants Research institutions are able to track the published outputs of their employees Publishers are able to analyze the sources of funding for their authors and ensure compliance with funder mandates Everyone benefits from greater transparency on who funded the research, and what the results of the funding were. Where can I learn more? Funder Registry How can I improve my percentage? Make sure you collect grant IDs from authors via your submission system, or extract them from acknowledgement sections. Make sure you include them in your future Crossref deposits and add them to your existing records using our supplemental metadata upload method.\nCrossmark enabled Percentage of records using the Crossmark service, which gives readers quick and easy access to the current status of an item of content - whether it’s been updated, corrected, or retracted.\nWhy is this important? Crossmark gives quick and easy access to the current status of an item of content. With one click, you can see if the content has been updated, corrected, or retracted and can access extra metadata provided by the publisher. It allows you to reassure readers that you’re keeping content up-to-date, and showcases any additional metadata you want readers to view while reading the content.\nWhere can I learn more? Crossmark How can I improve my percentage? Learn more about participating in Crossmark.\nText mining URLs The percentage of registered records containing full-text URLs in the metadata to help researchers easily locate your content for text and data mining.\nWhy is this important? Researchers are increasingly interested in carrying out text and data mining of scholarly content - the automatic analysis and extraction of information from large numbers of documents. If you can make it easier for researchers to mine your content, you will massively increase your discoverability.\nThere are technical and logistical barriers to text and data mining for scholarly researchers and publishers alike. It is impractical for researchers to negotiate many different websites to locate the full-text that they need. And it doesn’t make sense for each publisher to have a different set of instructions about how to best find the full-text in the required format. All parties benefit from the support of standard APIs and data representations in order to enable text and data mining across both open access and subscription-based publishers.\nOur API can be used by researchers to locate the full text of content across publisher sites. Members register these URLs - often including multiple links for different formats such as PDF or XML - and researchers can request them programmatically.\nThe member remains responsible for actually delivering the full-text of the content requested. This means that open access publishers can simply deliver the requested content, while subscription publishers use their existing access control systems to manage access to full-text content.\nWhere can I learn more? Text and Data Mining information from LIBER Crossref support for text and data mining How can I improve my percentage? Make sure you include full-text URLs in your future Crossref deposits and add them to your existing records using a resource-only deposit.\nLicense URLs The percentage of registered records that contain URLs that point to a license that explains the terms and conditions under which readers can access content.\nWhy is this important? Adding the full-text URL into your metadata is of limited value if the researchers can’t determine what they are permitted to do with the full text. This is where the license URLs come in. Members include a link to their use and reuse conditions: whether their own proprietary license, or an open license such as Creative Commons.\nWhere can I learn more? License information How can I improve my percentage? Make sure you include license URLs in your future Crossref deposits, and add them to your existing records using a resource-only deposit, or by using a supplemental metadata upload.\nSimilarity Check URLs The percentage of registered records that include full-text links for the Similarity Check service.\nWhy is this important? The Similarity Check service helps you to prevent scholarly and professional plagiarism by providing editorial teams with access to Turnitin’s powerful text comparison tool.\nSimilarity Check members contribute their own published content to iThenticate’s database of full-text literature via Similarity Check URLs, and this is an obligation of using the service. If members aren’t registering these, they can’t take part in the Similarity Check service.\nWhere can I learn more? Similarity Check How can I improve my percentage? For future records, make sure you include these URLs as part of your standard metadata deposit. They need to be deposited within the crawler-based collection property, with item crawler iParadigms.\nYou can add these URLs into your already-deposited records by editing individual records in the new Metadata Manager (journal articles only), by using a resource-only deposit, or by using the Supplemental-Metadata Upload option available with our web deposit form.\n",
"headings": ["How a Participation Report works ","References ","Why is this important? ","Where can I learn more? ","How can I improve my percentage? ","Abstracts ","Why is this important? ","Where can I learn more? ","How can I improve my percentage? ","ORCID iDs ","Why is this important? ","Where can I learn more? ","How can I improve my percentage? ","Affiliations ","Why is this important? ","Where can I learn more? ","How can I improve my percentage? ","ROR IDs ","Why is this important? ","Where can I learn more? ","How can I improve my percentage? ","Funder Registry IDs ","Why is this important? ","Where can I learn more? ","How can I improve my percentage? ","Funding award numbers ","Why is this important? ","Where can I learn more? ","How can I improve my percentage? ","Crossmark enabled ","Why is this important? ","Where can I learn more? ","How can I improve my percentage? ","Text mining URLs ","Why is this important? ","Where can I learn more? ","How can I improve my percentage? ","License URLs ","Why is this important? ","Where can I learn more? ","How can I improve my percentage? ","Similarity Check URLs ","Why is this important? ","Where can I learn more? ","How can I improve my percentage? "]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/reports/resolution-report/",
"title": "Resolution report",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2025-08-07",
"lastmod_ts": 1754524800,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": " The monthly resolution report shows the number of successful and failed DOI resolutions for the previous month. What is a resolution? When a researcher clicks on a DOI link for an article and the link resolves to the article, that counts as one DOI resolution. For example, clicking on https://doi.org/10.1038/nature02426 counts as one resolution to Nature. No information is captured about the user, and these numbers are not a precise measure of traffic to a member\u0026rsquo;s website, but they provide a measure of the effectiveness of a member\u0026rsquo;s participation in Crossref.\n",
"content": " The monthly resolution report shows the number of successful and failed DOI resolutions for the previous month. What is a resolution? When a researcher clicks on a DOI link for an article and the link resolves to the article, that counts as one DOI resolution. For example, clicking on https://doi.org/10.1038/nature02426 counts as one resolution to Nature. No information is captured about the user, and these numbers are not a precise measure of traffic to a member\u0026rsquo;s website, but they provide a measure of the effectiveness of a member\u0026rsquo;s participation in Crossref.\nIf a researcher clicks on a DOI link for an article and it doesn\u0026rsquo;t resolve, that counts as a failed resolution.\nWhat\u0026rsquo;s in your Resolution report? Resolution reports are sent out to members via email at the beginning of each month, and include statistics about all DOI resolutions from the preceding month. By default, resolution reports are sent to the Primary contact for your organisation (previously known as the business contact), but we can add or change the recipient(s) as needed. We’ll send you a separate report for each DOI prefix you’re responsible for.\nThe report includes:\nResolution failure rate: the percentage of DOI resolution attempts that failed. The prefix failure rate and the overall failure rate (for all Crossref members) are also included so you can see how you compare to others. Resolutions by month: total number of resolutions per month for the past 12 months, by prefix (count) and overall (all members). Resolution stats: resolution counts for the report prefix. Top ten DOIs: list of the ten DOIs with the highest number of successful resolutions for the month, and the number of times each DOI was successfully resolved. Failed DOIs: a list of DOI resolution attempts that failed (i.e. resolved to a Handle error page). This list is presented as a .csv file attached to the report email and contains both the failed DOI and number of failures. Resolution counts by publication title: the number of total DOI resolutions per title What should I do with my resolution report? The resolution report gives you an overview of DOI resolution traffic, and can help identify problems with your DOI links or your DOI registration process. The failed DOI.csv linked to your resolution report email contains a list of all DOIs with failed resolution attempts - if a user clicks on a DOI with your DOI prefix and the DOI is not registered, it will be included on this report.\nThere’s a certain amount of noise with these reports (resolutions from crawlers or automated processes) but do check any DOIs with a high number of failures, and look out for significant changes in your resolution failure rate.\nTroubleshooting: possible reasons for DOI failures and how to fix them The DOI has never been registered with Crossref - if your DOI has never been successfully registered with us, then you will see failed resolutions. Make sure you (or your suppliers) are definitely successfully registering your DOIs. Learn more about how to verify your registration. DOI publication and registration are out of sync - if you publish your DOIs on your website before you register them with us, this will lead to DOI resolution failures. DOIs should be registered and distributed simultaneously. If this is not possible, the gap should be hours or a day, not days or weeks. The DOIs are displayed incorrectly on others websites - sometimes others may copy your DOIs and display them on their own website, but they make a mistake with the display. They may add a period to the end, or cut off the final digit. If others then try to resolve that incorrect DOI, you will see resolution failures. You can find this out by googling any DOIs with problems from your Resolution Report and seeing where you find them online. You can then decide if you wish to contact the website owners to ask them to update the DOI to the correct one. User error - users sometimes make mistakes when typing or copying DOIs. If you often see failures that you think are caused by user error, review how your DOIs are displayed. Some common user errors are: Confusing O and 0, or l and 1 - this is more common for DOIs on print publications, because have to type them, rather than clicking on a link. If your DOI failures often contain DOIs with O being confused with 0, or l with 1, consider changing your DOI suffix. Long strings of letters and numbers can cause problems as well DOIs ending with \u0026lsquo;.\u0026rsquo; - if a viable DOI has a \u0026lsquo;.\u0026rsquo; appended, it will fail to resolve. This is often caused by the DOI being linked from references that end with a \u0026lsquo;.\u0026rsquo; DOIs with special characters instead of ‘-’ - this commonly happens when a user pastes a DOI from a PDF DOIs with special characters such as \u0026lt;, \u0026gt;, #, * and + (Crossref no longer accepts deposits with special characters). Problems with URL-encoded DOIs - the handle resolver supports URL-encoded DOIs. The resolution logs sometimes misrepresent the encoded characters. As a result, some badly-encoded DOIs will appear in your resolution log as correctly-encoded DOIs. This typically happens when an already-encoded DOI is mistakenly encoded again. For example, DOI 10.5555/example would be correctly encoded as 10.5555%2Fexample (the / is encoded as %2F). If the DOI is encoded again, the % in the DOI becomes %25, making the DOI 10.5555%252Fexample. This DOI will not resolve but will appear in the failed DOI report as 10.5555%2Fexample (a valid DOI). Bot activity - automated actions performed by software programs called bots. These actions can be malicious or helpful. An increase in the number of resolutions (failed and/or successful) can be related to bot activity, including errors made by large language models (LLMs) (i.e., AI hallucinations). Resolution Report FAQs +- Where do the resolution report statistics come from?\rResolution statistics are based on the number of DOI resolutions made through the DOI proxy server on a month-by-month basis. These statistics give an indication of the traffic generated by users clicking DOIs. CNRI (the organisation that manages the DOI resolver) sends us resolution logs at the end of every month.\n+- When can I expect to receive my monthly resolution report?\rEach month we deliver resolution reports to the primary contact on your account (or, anyone else affiliated with your account who has been added as a recipient). In the past, you could expect these reports somewhere between the 5th and 10th day of each month. We\u0026rsquo;d receive logs from the Corporation for National Research Initiatives (CNRI) and then use those logs to generate your reports. As more and more content is registered with us and resolutions logged with CNRI, that means both CNRI and Crossref have more and more data to process.\nThe volume of resolutions for DOIs registered with us continues to grow, which means you can and should expect that reports will arrive to you later than they may have arrived in the past. Once we begin the report, it takes our system three to five days to distribute those reports to the contacts on each account.\nThus, we think it\u0026rsquo;s realistic that distribution of resolution reports (to be completed to all of our members) will be the second week of each month.\n+- What do you mean by \u0026#39;unique DOI?\u0026#39;\rThe unique DOI number is the number of distinct DOIs that have been resolved. If your report lists 20 resolutions and 1 unique DOI, this means 1 DOI was resolved 20 times.\n+- My resolution report tells me I have a high failure rate - what should I do?\rThe ideal failure rate is 0%, but 2-3% is the norm. If you are new to Crossref, or have only deposited metadata for a small number of content items, you may have a high failure percentage (for example, 1 failure and 9 successes = 10% failure rate).\nIf your overall resolution failure rate is higher than around 2-4%, look closely at the .csv file of failed DOIs for your account, and make sure the DOIs listed have definitely been registered. Our troubleshooting section will help with other possible reasons for a high failure rate.\n+- This DOI is registered - why is it on my failed DOI list?\rWe send you all failed resolutions from the preceding month, even if the content has subsequently been registered. If an unregistered DOI is clicked on December 5 but not registered until December 6, we count that as a resolution failure. If you find a lot of registered DOIs in your failed DOI list, you should make sure you aren’t distributing your DOIs before they have been registered.\n+- Will a high failure rate affect my membership?\rIt won’t affect your membership status (unless you’re truly negligent and regularly distribute DOIs without registering them) but a Crossref membership is of limited value if you don’t register your DOIs and provide quality metadata.\nLearn more about the history and current state of our popular monthly resolution reports.\n",
"headings": ["The monthly resolution report shows the number of successful and failed DOI resolutions for the previous month.","What is a resolution?","What\u0026rsquo;s in your Resolution report?","What should I do with my resolution report? ","Troubleshooting: possible reasons for DOI failures and how to fix them ","Resolution Report FAQs "]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/reports/schematron-report/",
"title": "Schematron report",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2024-07-19",
"lastmod_ts": 1721347200,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": " A Schematron report tells you if there’s a metadata quality issue with your records. Schematron is a pattern-based XML validation language. We try to stop the deposit of metadata with obvious issues, but we can’t catch everything because publication practices are so varied. For example, most family names in our database that end with jr are the result of a publisher including a suffix (Jr) in a family name, but there are of course surnames ending with ‘jr’.\n",
"content": " A Schematron report tells you if there’s a metadata quality issue with your records. Schematron is a pattern-based XML validation language. We try to stop the deposit of metadata with obvious issues, but we can’t catch everything because publication practices are so varied. For example, most family names in our database that end with jr are the result of a publisher including a suffix (Jr) in a family name, but there are of course surnames ending with ‘jr’.\nWe do a weekly post-registration metadata quality check on all journal, book, and conference proceedings submissions, and record the results in the schematron report. If we spot a problem we’ll alert your technical contact via email. Any identified errors may affect overall metadata quality and negatively affect queries for your content. Errors are aggregated and sent out weekly via email in the schematron report.\nWhat should I do with my schematron report? The report contains links (organized by title) to .xml files containing error details. The XML files can be downloaded and processed programmatically, or viewed in a web browser:\nShow image × Download Crossref\u0026rsquo;s Schematron rules for batch processing\n",
"headings": ["A Schematron report tells you if there’s a metadata quality issue with your records.","What should I do with my schematron report? "]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/members-area/all-about-invoicing-and-payment/",
"title": "All about invoicing and payment",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2025-04-01",
"lastmod_ts": 1743465600,
"section": "Hello, members",
"tags": [],
"description": "The payment portal gives members a way to view, download and pay their invoices. Crossref utilizes a third party application to operate our online payment portal and as such are subject to blacked out access in some regions. We apologize for any inconvenience this may cause.\nAs a not-for-profit membership organisation, we are sustained by fees. We have a duty to remain sustainable and manage our finances in a responsible way. Financial sustainability means we can keep the organisation afloat and keep our dedicated service to scholarly communications running.\n",
"content": "The payment portal gives members a way to view, download and pay their invoices. Crossref utilizes a third party application to operate our online payment portal and as such are subject to blacked out access in some regions. We apologize for any inconvenience this may cause.\nAs a not-for-profit membership organisation, we are sustained by fees. We have a duty to remain sustainable and manage our finances in a responsible way. Financial sustainability means we can keep the organisation afloat and keep our dedicated service to scholarly communications running.\nAs a member (or a Sponsor who represents members), you\u0026rsquo;ll receive your annual membership fee invoice each January. If you participate in Similarity Check, this invoice will contain your Similarity Check annual service charge, and you\u0026rsquo;ll also receive a separate Similarity Check document-checking invoice for the documents you\u0026rsquo;ve checked in the previous year. We invoice for content registration on a quarterly basis. If you are a member through a sponsor, all Crossref billing goes to your Sponsor. If you are a service provider or use a paid-for metadata retrieval service, you\u0026rsquo;ll receive your annual invoice in January too. We send out invoices by email to the billing contact on your account - please do update us immediately if you need to change your billing contact. Invoices have a due date of net 45 days, and you can always view both paid and unpaid invoices in our payment portal. You\u0026rsquo;ll need login credentials for the payment portal - these are different from the account credentials that you use to register your content with us. The billing contact for each member account is automatically sent credentials for the portal, and you can request payment portal login credentials for others at your organisation too.\nWhen you receive invoices from us you will see a pay now link in the body of the email. This link takes you to our payment portal where you can pay using a credit/debit card or by ACH. You\u0026rsquo;ll also be able to see any outstanding invoices in one central place. If you aren\u0026rsquo;t able to pay using the payment portal, you have the option to pay by wire or check from a US bank.\nAn important part of our accounting process is the automated invoice reminder schedule. We send out automated reminders to the billing contact 7 days before the due date, and then 15 days past the invoice due date. If you still have unpaid invoices after this, we\u0026rsquo;ll send a further email to all the contacts we hold on your account (Billing, Primary, Voting, Technical and Metadata Quality) to notify you that your service is at risk of suspension. If your invoices remain unpaid after this, we suspend your account and remove your access to register content.\nIf an account becomes suspended for non-payment, then your membership of Crossref becomes at risk of being ‘revoked’. If your membership is revoked, you need to contact our membership specialist to discuss whether you can rejoin Crossref. You would need to pay any outstanding invoices before you can re-apply.\nWe understand there are many factors that can make prompt payment a challenge for some people: international transfer delays, for example, funding for your publishing operations may end, change of contacts, problems receiving our emails, etc. We really don\u0026rsquo;t want to see you go, so our billing team works closely with members to make sure they can pay their invoices promptly. We send numerous notifications/reminders before suspension or termination takes place, and we can always be reached at billing@crossref.org for any invoice inquiries you may have - please include your account name, prefix, and invoice number.\nTips for smoother payments Here are some things you can do to help speed up, or simplify payments:\nPay with a credit card, using our online payment portal. This is fast, convenient, and lower in fees. Always reference an invoice number on the payment to ensure that it’s applied to your account efficiently. Be sure to make billing@crossref.org a ‘safe’ email address, so that you receive our invoices and reminders. Always keep us up-to-date with any contact changes at your organisation, to ensure that we have accurate information for invoicing and other communication. We recommend giving us a generic email address for the billing contact on your account (such as accounts@publisher.com) rather than the email address for one person. This means that if one person leaves your billing team, invoices can still get through to your organisation. Billing FAQs Here are the answers to some frequently asked questions about:\nInitial subscription order for your first year of membership General billing processes The payment portal Content registration invoices Similarity Check invoices Unpaid invoices and suspensions The Global Equitable Membership Program Initial subscription order for your first year of membership +- The subscription order is for less than I expected - is this a mistake?\rDon’t worry, this isn’t a mistake.\nWhen you first apply to join Crossref, you’ll receive a pro-rated Subscription Order for the remainder of that calendar year. So depending on when you join, you’ll only pay for the remaining months of that year.\nThe calculation will also reflect whether you apply in the first or second half of the month. For example, if you join before the middle of July (15th of the month), your membership order will be for six months. If you join after the middle of July, your membership order will be for five months.\nThen, in the following January, you’ll receive an invoice for the whole of that calendar year, and will continue to receive invoices every subsequent January.\n+- Can you change \u0026#39;subscription order\u0026#39; on the document to \u0026#39;subscription invoice\u0026#39;?\rUnfortunately, no, we cannot change the document type. We have hundreds of organisations that apply for membership with good intentions, but then decide that timing, or other factors, delay them from completing the joining process. For this reason, we issue a Subscription Order instead of a Subscription Invoice, as an order more accurately reflects the status of the joining process in our accounting system.\nGeneral billing processes +- When will I be billed?\rMembers There are two different types of invoice that all members receive from us - your annual membership fee invoice, and your content registration fee invoices. If you participate in Similarity Check, there\u0026rsquo;s a third invoice you\u0026rsquo;ll receive - your Similarity Check document checking fees invoice.\nIf you are a member of Crossref through a Sponsor, your Sponsor will pay these invoices on your behalf. They may charge you for their services, so you need to discuss their invoicing schedule with them.\nYour annual membership fee invoice This allows you to remain a member of our organisation and take advantage of our services and the reciprocal relationship with other members. Members receive this invoice in January each year to cover their membership for that year - so in January 2026 you\u0026rsquo;ll receive a membership invoice for 2026. If you participate in Similarity Check, your annual service fee for Similarity Check will also be included in this invoice.\nContent registration invoices There\u0026rsquo;s a charge for each item you register with Crossref, and we invoice for this in arrears - this means that we send you the invoice after you\u0026rsquo;ve registered the content, so we know exactly how much to charge.\nThese invoices are usually sent out on a quarterly basis and cover the deposit fees for the content you registered with us during the previous quarter:\nIn early April, you’ll receive an invoice for the content you registered in the first quarter of the year (January - March) In early July, you’ll receive an invoice for the content you registered in the second quarter of the year (April - June) In early October, you’ll receive an invoice for the content you registered in the third quarter of the year (July - September) In early January you’ll receive an invoice for the content you registered in the fourth quarter of the previous year (October - December) However, you may not receive an invoice every single quarter. If your content registration charges are below USD 100 for a quarter, those charges will roll forward to the next quarter. This is to avoid members having to pay lots of smaller invoices which may incur international charges.\nThese charges don\u0026rsquo;t roll on past a full year though - so even if your total content registration fees haven\u0026rsquo;t hit USD 100 by the end of the year, you\u0026rsquo;ll receive a content registration invoice in January to cover all your content registration fees for the previous year.\nTo put it another way - you’ll be invoiced when your total charges exceed USD 100, or in the last quarter of the year, whichever occurs first.\nSimilarity Check document checking invoices If you participate in the Similarity Check service, you\u0026rsquo;ll receive an extra invoice each January to cover the fees for all the documents you\u0026rsquo;ve checked in the previous year. Your first 100 documents are free though, so if you check fewer than 100 documents, you won\u0026rsquo;t receive an invoice.\nMetadata subscribers You\u0026rsquo;ll receive your annual subscription invoice each January.\n+- What are the payment terms - how long do I have to pay?\rPayment is due 45 days after the date of the invoice.\n+- What are your current fees?\rOur current fees are always available on our fees page.\n+- How do I pay - what are the payment methods?\rWe usually send out invoices by email to your named billing contact. The email will include full payment details including account numbers, but here are the basic payment methods. Please note we can only accept payment in US dollars.\n1 Credit or debit card payment using our payment portal We recommend using our payment portal where possible, as other payment methods incur fees. We send out payment portal credentials to the billing contact on each new member account. If you don\u0026rsquo;t already have credentials for our payment portal, please contact us. Please note: your username and password for the payment portal is different from the Crossref account credentials you use to register your content with us.\nThe portal accepts most major credit cards, plus debit cards with a VISA or Mastercard symbol. The credit/debit card needs to be able to make international payments in USD.\nMembers based in the US can also make ACH payments through the payment portal.\nYou can find the answer to frequently asked questions about the payment portal here.\n2 Other payment methods If you aren\u0026rsquo;t able to pay using our payment portal, we offer two other payment methods.\nBank transfers\nWe accept wire transfers from most banks. We can also accept Automated Clearing House (ACH) payments from US banks. There are no extra fees for ACH payments from US banks. Checks from banks We prefer checks drawn on US banks. If you are sending payment from a USD bank account outside the US, please add USD 50 to your payment to cover processing fees. Please mail checks, with a copy of the invoice or with the invoice number referenced on the check, to:\nPublishers International Linking Association, Inc. dba Crossref 50 Salem St. Building A Suite 304 Lynnfield, MA 01940.\nIf you have not been receiving invoices, please contact our membership team to update the billing email address for your account. We recommend you give us a generic departmental email address such as accounts@company.org to avoid emails bouncing back from the accounts of colleagues who have left your organisation. Thank you!\n+- Can I get copies of my invoices?\rYou can find copies of your invoices in our payment portal. You can download them and print them off if required.\nFor more information about our payment portal, take a look at our payment portal FAQs.\n+- Can you make a change to my invoice after I’ve received it?\rWhat we can change If the invoice hasn’t yet been paid, we can make the following changes:\nWe can update your organisation name or address if this has changed. We can update the detail if there’s an error on the invoice. For example, if you’ve been charged for current content when you should have been charged for back-year records (due to an error in registering the publication date), we can amend the invoice once you’ve updated your metadata. What we can’t change\nWe can’t change dates and due dates, so please pay the invoices as soon as you receive them. +- Will any tax be added to my invoice?\rNo tax will be added to your invoice - there\u0026rsquo;s no tax on membership fees or any of the services we offer.\nThe payment portal The payment portal is a third party tool that we use to give members a way to view, download and pay their invoices.\n+- How do I get access to the payment portal?\rThe billing contact on each member account is automatically set up with access to our payment portal. After a new organisation joins, their billing contact is sent an email with a link where they can set their password. Once this password is set, the billing contact will be able to login to the portal using their email address as their username.\n(Please note - this email address and password for the payment portal is separate and different from the credentials you\u0026rsquo;ll use to access our other systems to register your content).\nYou can request that others at your organisation have access to the payment portal too by contacting our billing team. This request will need to come from one of the key contacts that we hold for the account. The people who also need access to the payment portal will then each be sent an email with a link where they can set their own password. Once they\u0026rsquo;ve created their own password, they will be able to access the payment portal for their organisation using their own email address and the password. This means that different contacts at your organisation will have their own separate set of credentials for the payment portal.\n+- Where do I find my invoices in the payment portal?\rOn the menu on the left hand side of the portal you\u0026rsquo;ll see the following:\nOpen invoices - these are your unpaid invoices Paid invoices - these are the invoices that you\u0026rsquo;ve paid in the past +- Can I find the invoices that I\u0026#39;ve already paid in the portal?\rYes you can. In the menu on the left hand side of the portal you will have an option that says \u0026ldquo;Paid invoices\u0026rdquo;. Click here to see the invoices that you have paid in the past.\n+- How do I pay for invoices in the portal?\rYou can use the portal to pay using your credit card or most major debit cards. If you are located in the US, you can also set up an ACH in the portal.\n+- How do I reset my password in the payment portal?\rIf you\u0026rsquo;ve forgotten your password or you need to reset it in future, you can do this by clicking on the \u0026ldquo;forgot password\u0026rdquo; link on the portal homepage. This will send an email to you with a link to reset your password.\n+- I\u0026#39;ve received a link to reset my password, but it only lasts for 4 hours and it\u0026#39;s expired\rDon\u0026rsquo;t worry - you can just request another link by clicking on the \u0026ldquo;forgot password\u0026rdquo; link on the portal homepage. This will send another email to you with a link to reset your password.\n+- I thought I used account ID for my username, not my email address?\rIn our old payment portal, everyone at a member organisation shared one set of credentials, and the username was the account ID.\nHowever, in our new payment portal, each person at each member organisation will access the portal using different credentials based on their personal email address. This will keep things secure, and if you forget your password, you can request that a reset link is sent to your inbox using the portal - you don\u0026rsquo;t have to ask our billing team to send one to you. This should make things much faster for you.\n+- Can I update our organisation billing address in the portal?\rNo. In the portal, you can only change details related to your payment card.\nIf you want to update the billing address that appears on your invoice, you\u0026rsquo;ll need to contact our membership team.\n+- I\u0026#39;m having problems accessing the portal. I\u0026#39;m based in Russia/China/Iraq.\rOur payment portal is provided by a third party, and unfortunately they have blocked access to organisations in Russia, China and Iraq. We recommend that members in these regions use other methods to pay us, or reach out to our billing team to discuss other options.\nContent registration invoices +- Can you explain my content registration invoice to me?\rThere’s a charge for each item you register with Crossref and we invoice for this in arrears - this means you receive the invoice after you’ve registered the content so we know exactly how much to charge.\nThese invoices are usually sent out on a quarterly basis, and cover the deposit fees for the content you’ve registered with us during the previous quarter. However, we do sometimes roll smaller charges on to the next quarter, so you may not receive an invoice every single quarter - and the next quarter you might find charges in your invoice from previous quarters.\nThe information on your Content Registration invoice will look something like this:\nItem Description Unit Quantity Unit price Amount 40801 CY Journal 08/2020: 10.5555 : CY Journal article (users: aelt) EA 30 $1.00 $30.00 40802 BY Journal 08/2020: 10.5555: BY Journal article (users: aelt) EA 10 $0.15 $1.50 40816 CY Book Titles 08/2020: 10.5555: CY Book title (users: aelt) EA 12 $1.00 $12.00 40801 CY Journal 09/2020: 10.5555 : CY Journal article (users: aelt) EA 27 $1.00 $27.00 40802 BY Journal 09/2020: 10.5555: BY Journal article (users: aelt, fort) EA 30 $0.15 $4.50 Sub total $75.00 You’ll see there are different lines on the invoice, and a total at the end.\nYour content registration fees are split out onto separate lines on your invoice by:\nPrefix Month the content was registered Content type Whether the content is current (CY) or back-year (BY). This is because there are different charges for different record types, and different charges depending on whether the publication date of the content is current or back-year. Learn more about content registration fees.\nYou can also see on the invoice which role or roles were used to register the content you’re being charged for.\nHere\u0026rsquo;s a bit more information about each section of the invoice.\nShow image\r×\rThis part of the invoice shows the type of content that this charge relates to, and whether the content is current or back-year. In the example above, the charge is for current year (CY) journal articles.\nShow image\r×\rThis part of the invoice shows the month that this content was registered. In the example above, this content was registered in August 2020.\nShow image\r×\rThis part of the invoice shows which prefix the content was registered with. In the example above, the content was registered under the prefix 10.5555.\nShow image\r×\rThis part of the invoice shows which role was used to register the content. In the example above, the role was aelt.\nShow image\r×\rSometimes more than one role has been used to register content. In the example above, both aelt and fort have been used.\nShow image\r×\rAll prices are in USD, and we can only accept payment in USD.\n+- Why haven’t I received a content registration invoice this quarter?\rWe send invoices for the metadata you register with us on a quarterly basis. However, if the amount comes to less than USD 100, we roll it on to the next quarter. If you haven’t reached USD 100 in fees by the last quarter of the year, we send out an invoice anyway.\n+- What do the *CY* and *BY* stand for on my content registration invoice?\rCY stands for Current Year, and BY stands for Back Year. You’re charged a different amount depending on the record type you’re registering, and also whether the content is current (CY) or back-year (BY).\nCurrent content is anything registered with us with a publication date in the current year, or up to two years previously. For example, for content registered with us in 2026, current content is anything with a publication date in 2026, 2025 or 2024. For content registered with us in 2025, current content is anything with a publication date in 2025, 2024 or 2023.\nBack-year records are anything registered with us with a publication date older than this. So for content registered with us in 2025, back-year records are anything with a publication date of 2023 or ealier. For content registered with us in 2025, back-year was anything with a publication date of 2022 or earlier.\n+- Why was I charged the CY fee for BY articles?\rContent Registration fees differ according to whether the content you register is current (published during this year or the previous two years) or back-year (older than that).\nA record is determined to be either back-year or current based on the publication date in your metadata. If you have different dates for print and online (for example, if you\u0026rsquo;re registering archival content), then we look at the print date.\nIf you use our helper tools, the system looks at the information you’ve entered into the publication dates field(s). If you deposit XML directly with us, the system looks at the date in the \u0026lt;publication_date\u0026gt; element. And we look at each individual item separately—so even if you’ve put a publication date at the journal level, you still need to put it at the journal article level too.\nIf you’ve been charged \u0026lsquo;current\u0026rsquo; fees for content that is actually back-year, it’s probably because the wrong date was put in the publication date field. We have had instances where members have accidentally put the date they registered the content into that field, rather than the date of publication.\nYou can fix this by updating your metadata with the correct publication dates. Please let us know as soon as you’ve done this so we can provide you with an amended invoice.\n+- It\u0026#39;s January, and I\u0026#39;ve just received a content registration invoice. I haven\u0026#39;t received one before - why have I received one now?\rThere are two sets of fees associated with Crossref membership - the annual membership fee (which covers your membership) and the content registration fees (which are a one-off fee for each item you register with us). The membership invoice is sent out at the beginning of each year to cover the forthcoming year, and the content registration invoices are sent out quarterly in arrears.\nHowever, you won\u0026rsquo;t necessarily receive a content registration invoice every single quarter. If the amount of content you register in a quarter comes to less than USD 100, we roll it on to the next quarter. But even if you haven’t reached USD 100 in fees by the last quarter of the year, we send out an invoice anyway. This means that if you\u0026rsquo;ve only registered a small number of DOIs in your first year, you won\u0026rsquo;t receive an invoice until right at the end of the year, in your Q4 invoice which is sent out the following January. So you might go a full year before you receive a content registration invoice from us.\nSimilarity Check invoices +- When will I receive my Similarity Check invoices?\rThere are two sets of fees for the Similarity Check service - the annual service fee, and document checking fees.\nAnnual service fee This will be included in the annual membership invoice you receive each January.\nDocument checking fees You will be sent this invoice in January each year.\n+- Why doesn\u0026#39;t my Similarity Check document checking invoice exactly match the number of submissions/documents I\u0026#39;ve checked in iThenticate?\rUsers of our Similarity Check service receive an invoice each January for the documents they\u0026rsquo;ve checked in the previous year. The Similarity Check administrator for each organisation can monitor their spend throughout the year by checking the reports section of the iThenticate platform (under the Manage Users tab).\nHowever, sometimes you may see a difference between the number of documents that you\u0026rsquo;re invoiced for and the number that the report in iThenticate tells you that you\u0026rsquo;ve checked. There are a few possible reasons for this.\nDocuments above a certain size are considered more than one document\nFor billing purposes, a single document is considered anything of 25,000 words or fewer.\nSo if you check a document of 25,001-50,000 words, it will be considered 2 document checks. If you check a document of 50,001-75,000 words, it will be considered 3 document checks. And so on.\nCheck the \u0026lsquo;documents\u0026rsquo; column in the iThenticate report and not the \u0026lsquo;submissions\u0026rsquo; column as you are invoiced for the number of documents checked and not files submitted.\nNo charge for accidental duplicates\nIf you accidentally check the same document several times, we treat this as a duplicate and don\u0026rsquo;t charge you for it. This includes any documents with exactly the same filename and exactly the same Similarity Score that are submitted within the same 24 hour period. The \u0026lsquo;Manage Users\u0026rsquo; report in iThenticate isn\u0026rsquo;t able to detect this but these are detected and removed from your invoice before we send it.\nThis means that you may see slightly fewer document checks on your invoice than you see in your iThenticate report.\nYour first 100 documents are free of charge\nYour first 100 documents are free of charge, so you\u0026rsquo;ll see 100 fewer document checks on your invoice than you see in your iThenticate report.\nUnpaid invoices and suspensions +- My service has been suspended due to unpaid invoices - can you extend the payment deadline?\rUnfortunately not. A suspension is not a termination of your membership, it just temporarily suspends your ability to register content with us. As soon as payment for past due balances is received, your service will be restored and you will be able to register content again.\nThe Global Equitable Membership Program (GEM) +- What is the Global Equitable Membership Program?\rThe Global Equitable Membership (GEM) program offers relief from membership and content registration fees for members in the least economically-advantaged countries in the world. Eligibility for the program is based on a member’s country. We have curated the list of eligible countries based on the International Development Association list (provided by the World Bank) and excluded anywhere we are bound by international sanctions. Find out more.\n+- When did the GEM Program begin?\rThe GEM Program began on 1st January 2023. Existing members who were eligible for the GEM program were not sent a membership fee invoice for 2023, and will not be charged for content registered after 1st January 2023. They will still be responsible for any fees incurred before 1st January 2023 however, and they will also continue to be invoiced for any optional paid-for services that they subscribe to, such as Similarity Check. Find out more.\nSri Lanka entered the GEM Program in March 2023 after the country was newly added to the IDA list.\n+- Does the GEM Program cover all Crossref fees?\rNot all. The annual membership fee and content registration fees are waived for GEM-eligible members from 1st January 2023. But participation in other paid services, such as Similarity Check and Metadata Plus, will be charged at the usual fees.\n+- Do GEM members get sent any invoices?\rWe don\u0026rsquo;t send out annual membership invoices or content registration invoice to members who are eligible for the GEM Program.\nIf GEM-eligible members subscribe to any additional paid-for services such as Similarity Check, they will be sent an invoice for these services.\nBack to members area\n",
"headings": ["Tips for smoother payments ","Billing FAQs ","Initial subscription order for your first year of membership ","General billing processes ","Members","Metadata subscribers","1 Credit or debit card payment using our payment portal","2 Other payment methods","The payment portal ","Content registration invoices ","Similarity Check invoices ","Unpaid invoices and suspensions ","The Global Equitable Membership Program (GEM) "]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/members-area/canceling/",
"title": "Canceling your membership",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2022-11-23",
"lastmod_ts": 1669161600,
"section": "Hello, members",
"tags": [],
"description": "We expect organisations to remain members of Crossref for the long run - by committing to our membership terms, you’ve committed to the long-term stewardship of your metadata and content.\nHowever, there are sometimes reasons why members need to cancel. Perhaps your organisation has ceased publishing, or been acquired, or perhaps you are no longer able to afford the fees.\nIf you can no longer afford the fees, do take a look at our Global Equitable Membership (GEM) Program page before canceling, to see if you qualify for assistance, or if working with a sponsor will help.\n",
"content": "We expect organisations to remain members of Crossref for the long run - by committing to our membership terms, you’ve committed to the long-term stewardship of your metadata and content.\nHowever, there are sometimes reasons why members need to cancel. Perhaps your organisation has ceased publishing, or been acquired, or perhaps you are no longer able to afford the fees.\nIf you can no longer afford the fees, do take a look at our Global Equitable Membership (GEM) Program page before canceling, to see if you qualify for assistance, or if working with a sponsor will help.\nImportant: you need to tell us that you want to cancel To cancel, contact us by filling out this form and providing as much information about your account as possible (account name, prefix, etc) and the reason for the cancellation. This is extremely important - you aren’t able to pause your membership, so if you just stop using the service and don’t tell us that you want to cancel, we will still continue to send you annual membership fee invoices. And if you then want to start using the service again in future years, you will need to pay these outstanding membership invoices. But if you actually contact us to cancel your membership, we can stop these annual membership invoices from being created.\nWhat happens to your DOIs after you cancel your membership? We have responsibilities after you cancel your membership. We will ensure that the DOIs that you have already registered with us will continue to exist and to resolve to your registered landing page, and that your metadata will continue to be openly shared through our APIs. That’s what makes your DOI a persistent identifier! However, after you cancel, you won’t be able to update this metadata, or register any more DOIs.\nYou also have responsibilities after you cancel your membership. You must ensure that you don’t display any new, unregistered DOIs. You also need to make sure that your existing DOIs continue to resolve to a live landing page - and we can help with that.\nHow to ensure that your DOIs continue to resolve to a live landing page There are different options here depending on your situation.\n1. You’re not going to be publishing any new content but are continuing to host your existing content If you continue hosting your content in the same location, this is fine. The DOIs that you’ve already registered will continue to resolve to the resource resolution URL that you’ve registered with us. If this changes in future, please get in contact. We will be able to help update your resource resolution URLs, even if you are no longer a member.\n2. You’re not going to be publishing any new content and will no longer be hosting your existing content We recommend that all members work with an archive provider. If you can no longer host your content, we will be able to work with the archive to get your resource resolution URLs to resolve to the archive version, ensuring that the DOIs continue to resolve to a version of the content.\n3. One or more of your journals has been acquired by another publisher If your content has been acquired by a different publisher, we will be able to work with you and the acquiring publisher to transfer ownership of your title(s) to the new owner in our system.\nThis will transfer ownership of all your existing DOIs to the new publisher. The new publisher will then be able to update the metadata (and resource resolution URLs) for these existing DOIs, even though these DOIs are based on your DOI prefix. This means that the DOIs that you originally registered for this content will remain the persistent identifier for the content for the long term. And if the new publisher needs to register new DOIs for new content on their own prefix, they can do this. You can read more about our title transfer policy here. Our colleague Isaac also gives more background on this subject in this blog post.\n4. Your organisation has been acquired by another publisher If your organisation has been acquired by another publisher, we will be able to work with you and the acquiring publisher to transfer ownership of your prefix(es) and existing DOIs to them. They can then choose whether they want to continue to use your prefix to register new DOIs, or transfer your titles to their prefix and use their own prefix for future DOIs. Either way, your existing DOIs will continue to work and should continue to be used. Find out more about prefix transfers.\nBack to members area\n",
"headings": ["Important: you need to tell us that you want to cancel","What happens to your DOIs after you cancel your membership?","How to ensure that your DOIs continue to resolve to a live landing page","1. You’re not going to be publishing any new content but are continuing to host your existing content","2. You’re not going to be publishing any new content and will no longer be hosting your existing content","3. One or more of your journals has been acquired by another publisher","4. \tYour organisation has been acquired by another publisher"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/community/service-provider-thank-you/",
"title": "Thank you for your application",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2026-06-12",
"lastmod_ts": 1781222400,
"section": "Get involved",
"tags": [],
"description": "Thank you for your interest in the Crossref Service Provider program. We will now review your application and will get in touch soon with feedback and next steps.\n",
"content": "Thank you for your interest in the Crossref Service Provider program. We will now review your application and will get in touch soon with feedback and next steps.\n",
"headings": ["Thank you for your interest in the Crossref Service Provider program."]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/archives/2026/",
"title": "2026",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Archives",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/archives/",
"title": "Archives",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Archives",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/authors/",
"title": "Authors",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Authors",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/categories/",
"title": "Categories",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Categories",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/authors/catherine-ahearn/",
"title": "Catherine Ahearn",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Authors",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/categories/collaboration/",
"title": "Collaboration",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Categories",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/collaboration-with-knowledge-futures-to-build-support-for-high-volume-doi-registration/",
"title": "Collaboration with Knowledge Futures to build support for high-volume DOI registration",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2026-06-08",
"lastmod_ts": 1780876800,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "Cross-posted from the Knowledge Futures blog.\nFor many years, PubPub has made it possible for communities to assign DOIs to a range of outputs and component Pubs. Knowledge Futures and Crossref are building together to test the limits of what’s possible for high-volume, high-granularity DOI management. That means fast prototypes, real building, and learning through the process.\n",
"content": "Cross-posted from the Knowledge Futures blog.\nFor many years, PubPub has made it possible for communities to assign DOIs to a range of outputs and component Pubs. Knowledge Futures and Crossref are building together to test the limits of what’s possible for high-volume, high-granularity DOI management. That means fast prototypes, real building, and learning through the process.\nWhat this looks like We’re starting by building. The goal is to get working prototypes in front of real use cases as quickly as we can, and let the technical, UX, operational, and infrastructure questions get answered through that process. What does it take to register and manage DOIs at a level of volume and granularity that goes beyond what most existing tools support? We’ll find out by trying.\nA broader orientation for KF This is also an example of where Knowledge Futures is headed more generally. We’re taking what we’ve learned from building publishing infrastructure and applying it across different parts of the scholarly communication ecosystem. Not siloed within PubPub development, but open to building more broadly and collaborating across organizational lines.\nWe’ve spent close to a decade learning what it takes to build and maintain reliable infrastructure for knowledge communities. That experience doesn’t have to live inside one product. We think working this way puts us in a stronger position as stewards of the things we maintain, and it opens the door to more collaboration across the ecosystem.\nAligned direction with Crossref As Crossref adoption has skyrocketed, enabling DOIs for a vast range of research objects and organizations, they are looking to support these objects at scale and further upstream than traditional outputs. Alongside its fee remodelling effort begun in 2023, Crossref is backing this work with a $258k investment, partnering with Knowledge Futures to explore new models for the future of open research infrastructure.\nGet involved We’d love to hear your thoughts about high-volume, high-granularity DOIs. What’s your use case? What would it unlock for your community? Want to be involved in the design process? This collaboration with Crossref is just one piece of where we’re headed. If you’re curious about what we’re up to, or have something you’d like to share with us, get in touch. We’d love to tell you what we’re working on and hear what excites you too.\n",
"headings": ["What this looks like","A broader orientation for KF","Aligned direction with Crossref","Get involved"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/categories/dois/",
"title": "DOIs",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Categories",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/authors/ginny-hendricks/",
"title": "Ginny Hendricks",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Authors",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/categories/infrastructure/",
"title": "Infrastructure",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Categories",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/categories/news-release/",
"title": "News Release",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Categories",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/categories/publishing/",
"title": "Publishing",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Categories",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/categories/repositories/",
"title": "Repositories",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Categories",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/authors/travis-rich/",
"title": "Travis Rich",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Authors",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/co-access-deprecation-is-coming-are-you-ready/",
"title": "Co-access deprecation is coming: are you ready?",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2026-06-01",
"lastmod_ts": 1780272000,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "Last September, we announced we’d be deprecating co-access and encouraging its ~100 users to use our multiple resolution service. We announced that no new DOIs will be placed in co-access from 1st of July 2026 and that the ensuing 6 months should be spent cleaning up records already in co-access and moving them over to multiple resolution. We’re here with a reminder: co-access is being deprecated\u0026hellip;and with an update: To help with the transition to multiple resolution, we offer a tool that simplifies the process and documentation about how to set up multiple resolution. ",
"content": "Last September, we announced we’d be deprecating co-access and encouraging its ~100 users to use our multiple resolution service. We announced that no new DOIs will be placed in co-access from 1st of July 2026 and that the ensuing 6 months should be spent cleaning up records already in co-access and moving them over to multiple resolution. We’re here with a reminder: co-access is being deprecated\u0026hellip;and with an update: To help with the transition to multiple resolution, we offer a tool that simplifies the process and documentation about how to set up multiple resolution. We’re sure you have questions and we have answers:\nWhat will happen if I need to update metadata about an existing book in co-access after 1 July 2026? Metadata records about books already in co-access can still be updated, until co-access is fully deprecated in January 2027.\nWhat is multiple resolution and why should I use it instead of co-access? Multiple resolution allows for more than one resolution URL to be registered to a single DOI. A user resolving the DOI is presented with an interim page, allowing them to choose from the various content sources registered with this DOI. Unlike co-access, multiple resolution allows for the creation of a single DOI for each item, regardless of where it might be hosted, which results in more accurate citation counts and usage statistics.\nHow can I migrate existing content from co-access to multiple resolution? You and the other entities involved in the co-access relationship need to establish (or, agree on) the DOI of record to be used for that book going forward (i.e., the definitive DOI that should be shared, cited, and used on your landing pages). We propose that the DOI associated with the publisher be used as the definitive DOI for the book and its chapters. All other DOIs should be aliased to that definitive DOI (we also call definitive DOIs primary DOIs in the primary/alias relationship of duplicate DOIs). Members with co-access DOIs can email a tab-separated list of definitive DOIs and their aliases to us for aliasing to support@crossref.org. From there, members can use our new multiple resolution tool to unlock DOIs for multiple resolution and register secondary URLs for the definitive DOIs in question. Our new tool helps with both. [You will need your Crossref credentials to login to the tool.]\nExample tab-separated list of definitive DOIs and aliases H:email=youremail@address.com;op=force_alias;delim=tab 10.5555/primarybook1 10.9876/alias1book1 10.5555/primarybook1 10.50505/alias2book1 10.5555/primarybook2 10.9876/alias1book2 What will happen if I try to register a duplicate DOI for a book that has been previously registered (i.e., the process that would have previously triggered co-access) after 1 July 2026? Your deposit will return an error, letting you know co-access has been deprecated. The initial registration of a book will be processed free of errors (thus, the publisher with the rights to publish the book really should be the Crossref member determining and registering the book\u0026rsquo;s DOI of record). Any registration of a duplicate DOI for that same book will result in a failed submission with an error highlighting the previously registered DOI. Have more questions that weren’t answered? We’re happy to help. Head over to our community forum to continue the conversation.\n",
"headings": ["What will happen if I need to update metadata about an existing book in co-access after 1 July 2026?","What is multiple resolution and why should I use it instead of co-access?","How can I migrate existing content from co-access to multiple resolution?","Example tab-separated list of definitive DOIs and aliases","What will happen if I try to register a duplicate DOI for a book that has been previously registered (i.e., the process that would have previously triggered co-access) after 1 July 2026?"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/categories/coaccess/",
"title": "Coaccess",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Categories",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/categories/community/",
"title": "Community",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Categories",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/authors/isaac-farley/",
"title": "Isaac Farley",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Authors",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/authors/paul-davis/",
"title": "Paul Davis",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Authors",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/authors/sara-bowman/",
"title": "Sara Bowman",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Authors",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/labs/retraction-watch/",
"title": "Retraction Watch data in Labs",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2026-05-29",
"lastmod_ts": 1780012800,
"section": "",
"tags": [],
"description": " Note: The Retraction Watch data is now available through Crossref\u0026rsquo;s production services, and this experiment is no longer running. If you still use the Labs API to get Retraction Watch data, you will get out-of-date data.\nThe documentation below has been changed to point to the relevant production services, if you were using the Labs API to access Retraction Watch data we recommend you switch to these as soon as possible.\n",
"content": " Note: The Retraction Watch data is now available through Crossref\u0026rsquo;s production services, and this experiment is no longer running. If you still use the Labs API to get Retraction Watch data, you will get out-of-date data.\nThe documentation below has been changed to point to the relevant production services, if you were using the Labs API to access Retraction Watch data we recommend you switch to these as soon as possible.\nHow can I find the Retraction Watch data now? The full dataset is being released through Gitlab as a .csv file to download: https://gitlab.com/crossref/retraction-watch-data.\nThe Crossref REST API also displays information about retractions in the /works/ route, such as https://api.crossref.org/works/10.1021/am300292v. See the updated-by field to know if a particular record has been retracted and when.\nMore information about Retraction Watch data in current production services is available here.\n",
"headings": ["How can I find the Retraction Watch data now?"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/categories/citation/",
"title": "Citation",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Categories",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/authors/dominika-tkaczyk/",
"title": "Dominika Tkaczyk",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Authors",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/authors/jason-portenoy/",
"title": "Jason Portenoy",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Authors",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/authors/kornelia-korzec/",
"title": "Kornelia Korzec",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Authors",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/categories/metadata/",
"title": "Metadata",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Categories",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/categories/research-nexus/",
"title": "Research Nexus",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Categories",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/categories/schema/",
"title": "Schema",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Categories",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/two-billion-citation-links-in-crossref-help-research-travel-further/",
"title": "Two billion citation links in Crossref help research travel further",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2026-05-26",
"lastmod_ts": 1779753600,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "We\u0026rsquo;ve recently reached an important milestone for the research nexus: the works in our metadata corpus are now connected with over 2 billion citation links! This is a great opportunity to share a dedicated dataset and discuss why these are important for science.\n",
"content": "We\u0026rsquo;ve recently reached an important milestone for the research nexus: the works in our metadata corpus are now connected with over 2 billion citation links! This is a great opportunity to share a dedicated dataset and discuss why these are important for science.\nThe reference metadata is a lifeline of discoverability. Scholars use citations to critique and build on existing research. They acknowledge the contributions of others through references. Our members can then deposit those references as part of metadata with Crossref, and we use those to link the cited and citing objects. This results in complex thematic networks that can be explored by interested researchers. Many tools for research discovery use the linked reference metadata in Crossref to support searches of related content.\nThe citation links are derived from bibliographic references in the metadata of one work that include DOIs of materials it cites (scholarly works, data, code, etc.). It’s always best if the members can deposit these relationships in full. In a recent post, we shared that nearly half of these links are asserted by our members through metadata deposits, and the other half are created thanks to our automated matching. This form of metadata enrichment happens when members include some information about the references but without the DOI of the cited work, and it’s enough to automatically find and add that DOI. The enrichment supports making data more useful for the community.\nThe most important impact of citation links is the increased discoverability of connected works. Reference metadata is an important tool for improving visibility and readership of our members’ content. These links are also the foundation of our Cited-by service, which enables implementing members to display citation counts of the work they published on their landing pages.\nThe chart below shows the cumulative count of citations over time, by the created date of the citing DOI\u0026rsquo;s record. These include records linked by DOI either through member-submitted metadata or matched by Crossref, as well as records that are unmatched. Unmatched records can include records that we were unable to match with the information we have, but also records that truly have no DOI to link to. You can explore the full citation dataset of all 2 billion citation links between Crossref DOIs available now as a (somewhat hefty) download.\nCumulative count of references deposited to Crossref by created date of citing DOI\nThe push for open citation data is something that has unfolded over the last few decades, making more and more of these relationships public. Notably, the growth in citation links reflects not just the output of new scholarship, but also a sustained effort to extend coverage of the historical scholarly record. We can see evidence of this playing out over time by looking at our historical data—periodic snapshots of Crossref’s metadata going back to 2019. When comparing successive snapshots and examining the publication dates of citing and cited works, we can classify each newly appearing citation as either a new paper citation, or a retrospective one. A new citation is where the citing work was published since the previous snapshot, representing real growth in the scholarly record. A retrospective citation is where both papers already existed but the link between them had not yet been captured by Crossref, and these represent indexing catchup rather than new publishing activity.\nThe chart below shows the cumulative count of citations added in each category since 2019. In the early years of our data, retrospective backfill was the dominant source: the blue line climbs steeply from 2019 to 2021 as a large volume of previously uncaptured historical citation relationships entered the corpus. Over time, however, that rate of backfilling has levelled off. New paper citations, meanwhile, have grown steadily throughout the period, and by 2025 they surpassed the cumulative retrospective total. The open citation ecosystem continues recovering historical links, but the citation network\u0026rsquo;s growth is now increasingly driven by the natural momentum of scholarly publishing itself.\nCumulative citations added to Crossref by type, 2019–2026. Retrospective citations (blue) represent links to and from works that existed before the previous snapshot; new paper citations (green) come from works published since the last snapshot.\nCombined with other metadata for more context, reference metadata supports bibliographic and meta-research on different aspects of the scholarly process, and can support judgements about research integrity and conflicts of interest.\nStereotypically, when talking about references, we consider links to published works (whether preprints, journal articles, or books). However all types of records in Crossref can be cited. Thanks to the changes in our latest schema, members can now signal the types of content that is being referenced. And with our new Data citations endpoint, the community can explore specifically links from Crossref-registered records to research data, including citation links to works within Crossref, as well as DataCite’s corpus.\nClose to half of all records registered with Crossref still have none or not enough reference information to make such connections. We invite members to regular Metadata health-check webinars to support them in improving completeness of their records for increased transparency and visibility.\n",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/categories/annual-meeting/",
"title": "Annual Meeting",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Categories",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/categories/board/",
"title": "Board",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Categories",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/categories/elections/",
"title": "Elections",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Categories",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/express-your-interest-in-joining-our-board-of-directors/",
"title": "Express your interest in joining our Board of Directors",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2026-05-22",
"lastmod_ts": 1779408000,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "The Crossref Nominating Committee is inviting expressions of interest to join the Board of Directors of Crossref for the term starting in January 2027. 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.\nExpressions of interest will be due Monday, June 22, 2026\n",
"content": "The Crossref Nominating Committee is inviting expressions of interest to join the Board of Directors of Crossref for the term starting in January 2027. 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.\nExpressions of interest will be due Monday, June 22, 2026\nThis is an exciting time to join the board, as we have a number of active projects underway. Our focus is on how our community and metadata can contribute to ensuring the integrity of the scholarly record. We are redesigning our content system to better serve the changing needs of our community. We’re broadening our metadata record to capture richer funding and institutional affiliations. We envision a future where the scholarly record prioritizes relationships between research outputs to build a holistic research nexus. The board helps guide this work.\nAbout our board elections The board is elected through the “one member, one vote” policy wherein every member organization of Crossref has a single vote to elect representatives to the Crossref board. Board terms are for three years, and this year, there are seven seats open for election.\nThe board maintains a balance of seats, with eight seats for smaller members and eight seats for larger members (based on total revenue to Crossref). This is an effort to ensure that the scholarly community\u0026rsquo;s diversity of experiences and perspectives is represented in decisions made at Crossref.\nThis year, we will elect one large seat (membership tiers $600 and above) and six small member seats (membership tiers $550 and below). You don’t need to specify which seat you are applying for; we will provide that information to the Nominating Committee.\nThe board election takes place online and will open in September, with results announced at the annual meeting on October 22nd. New members will begin their term in January 2027.\nAbout the Nominating Committee The Nominating Committee reviews the expressions of interest and selects a slate of candidates for election. This year’s committee includes:\nNick Lindsay*, MIT Press, chair Oscar Donde*, Pan Africa Science Journal Shaharima Parvin, East West University Nicolas Mejia Torres, Universidad de la Sabana Amanda Ward*, Taylor \u0026amp; Francis Staff liaison: Lucy Ofiesh, Crossref\n(*) indicates Crossref board member\nBoard roles and responsibilities Crossref’s services provide a central infrastructure for scholarly communications. Crossref’s board helps shape the future of our services and by extension, impacts the broader scholarly ecosystem. We are looking for board members to contribute their experience and perspective.\nThe 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 executive team, with the key responsibilities being:\nSetting the strategic direction for the organization; Providing financial oversight; and Approving new policies and services. The board is representative of our membership base and guides the staff leadership team on trends affecting scholarly communications.\nThe work of the board takes place in board meetings and board committees. Board members attend four meetings each year that typically take place in January, March, July, and November. January, March, and November board meetings are held virtually, and all committee meetings take place virtually. The July meeting is in-person and takes place in a variety of international locations; travel support is provided when needed. Each board member sits on at least one Crossref committee. Care is taken to accommodate the wide range of time zones in which our board members live.\nWhile the expressions of interest are specific to an individual, the seat that is elected to the board belongs to the member organization. The primary board member also names an alternate who may attend meetings in the event that the primary board member is unable to. There is no personal financial obligation to sit on the board. The member organization must remain in good standing.\nBoard members are expected to be comfortable assuming the responsibilities listed above and to prepare and participate in board meeting discussions.\nWho can apply to join the board? Any active member of Crossref can apply to join the board. Crossref membership is open to organizations that produce content, such as academic presses, commercial publishers, standards organizations, and research funders. If you\u0026rsquo;re considering submitting an expression of interest to serve on our Board of Directors, attend our drop-in session on 17 June at 12:00 UTC.\nWhat does the committee look for? The committee looks for skills and experience that will complement the rest of the board. Candidates from countries and regions not currently reflected on the board are strongly encouraged to apply. Successful candidates often have some or all of these characteristics:\nDemonstrate a commitment to or understanding of our strategic agenda or the Principles of Open Scholarly Infrastructure; Have expertise that may be underrepresented on the board currently; Hold decision-making positions in their organizations; Have experience with governance and/or community involvement; Represent member organizations that are active in the scholarly communications ecosystem; Demonstrate metadata best practices as shown in the member’s participation report The committee aims to build a slate that represents a range of professional backgrounds, global diversity, and organizational sizes and types\nWhat does the application evaluation process look like? Open call for board interest, May 22nd to June 22nd: Any active member in good standing can apply for a seat on the board. This includes direct members, sponsored members, and GEM members. Sponsoring organisations, service providers, and Metadata Plus subscribers who are not also members are not eligible to sit on the board.\nApplication review, June through August: Applications will be reviewed by our Nominating Committee. We also gather internal information about the member organization, such as metadata habits, history with Crossref, any previous experience in Crossref working groups or community initiatives.\nBrief interviews with final candidates, August: The committee will hold brief virtual interviews with the top candidates before finalising the slate of nominations.\nAnnouncement of the slate and election, September: The committee will announce the final slate of candidates in September and the online election will begin, culminating at the annual meeting at the end of October.\nHow to apply Please click here to submit your expression of interest.\nThe goal of the expressions of interest is to get to know the candidates. We will not use AI tools to evaluate your application. We ask that if you use AI tools to assist in writing your application that you please disclose how you’ve used them. We want to hear your original ideas, but understand the tools may be used to refine and polish your statement, provide support for translation, proofread for grammar, and improve readability.\nPlease contact me with any questions at voting@crossref.org\n",
"headings": ["About our board elections","About the Nominating Committee","Board roles and responsibilities","Who can apply to join the board?","What does the committee look for?","What does the application evaluation process look like?","Open call for board interest, May 22nd to June 22nd:","Application review, June through August:","Brief interviews with final candidates, August:","Announcement of the slate and election, September:","How to apply"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/categories/governance/",
"title": "Governance",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Categories",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/authors/lucy-ofiesh/",
"title": "Lucy Ofiesh",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Authors",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/categories/member-briefing/",
"title": "Member Briefing",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Categories",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/categories/accessibility/",
"title": "Accessibility",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Categories",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/categories/crossmark/",
"title": "Crossmark",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Categories",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/authors/lena-stoll/",
"title": "Lena Stoll",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Authors",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/categories/metadata-manager/",
"title": "Metadata Manager",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Categories",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/mission-accessible-building-better-user-interfaces-for-everyone/",
"title": "Mission Accessible: building better user interfaces for everyone",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2026-05-21",
"lastmod_ts": 1779321600,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "Today is Global Accessibility Awareness Day, and accessibility has been on our minds lately. We\u0026rsquo;ve recently completed an internal audit of all our user interfaces, and have added a new accessibility page to our website, where you can find the accessibility documentation that we put together as part of the audit.\n",
"content": "Today is Global Accessibility Awareness Day, and accessibility has been on our minds lately. We\u0026rsquo;ve recently completed an internal audit of all our user interfaces, and have added a new accessibility page to our website, where you can find the accessibility documentation that we put together as part of the audit.\nWhy accessibility matters Of course we want to keep the barriers to participation in Crossref as low as possible for users with various disabilities. But also, more accessible tools work better for everyone. A person\u0026rsquo;s access needs can change really quickly: even if you consider yourself to be relatively able-bodied, you are only one minor inconvenience away from at least a temporary disability. All it takes is some dazzling sunlight hitting your eye or your phone screen, or perhaps your dog going after a rabbit in an awkward direction while you are holding the lead (ask me how I know!) - and before you know it, you will be relying on accessibility features to navigate the digital and/or physical world for a while.\nAn accessible user interface is one that you can navigate and interact with by various methods, including a mouse or touchpad, keyboard, screen reader, voice control, and other assistive technologies. It can be used on various screen sizes and supports zooming in or out without losing any content or functionality. It has sufficient colour contrast, doesn\u0026rsquo;t flash fast-moving images at you, and has a clear structure that can be understood by both humans and machines.\nWhere we are today It is worth mentioning that we didn\u0026rsquo;t only start thinking about accessibility when we started tackling the full audit of our user interfaces in March 2026. For example, Patrick Vale has previously written in this blog about a browser extension he has created to improve the accessibility of DOI links anywhere on the Internet. And we have known for a long time that there were accessibility gaps in many of our tools, but we didn\u0026rsquo;t have this centrally documented anywhere.\nWhen we did begin testing all our interfaces for compliance with level AA of the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG 2.2) as part of the audit, we knew that some of what we would find was not going to be pretty. In the 26+ years of working with and for the scholarly community, Crossref has built countless tools and reports to offer to members and users, many of which we still maintain today. These are often decades old and have been built in a way that makes it virtually impossible to make them more accessible without rebuilding them entirely. So we know that we will continue to have accessibility gaps for the foreseeable future, but at least now we have a better idea of the scale of the challenge.\nIt\u0026rsquo;s also not all doom and gloom: more recently created user interfaces, such our new Metadata Manager, performed much better in the audit than legacy alternatives such as the web deposit form. We found a similar trend when looking at our report interfaces. To illustrate this, compare what happens when running the axe DevTools extension for Google Chrome on a member\u0026rsquo;s participation report - this is a user interface that was completely re-implemented in 2025. Doing this brings up 26 issues:\nMeanwhile, the browsable title list, which has completed a few more trips around the sun, has 254 issues listed:\nBeyond WCAG If you\u0026rsquo;ve read this far, I hope you are convinced that accessibility is more than just ticking boxes on a conformance report. But especially for a global community like ours, there are other, less technical barriers to participation that we have to consider. For example, language is a major accessibility factor: much of what we as Crossref staff write and say is in English. When we host community events, we enable captions, and we try to leave space for these captions at the bottom of our slides.\nWe have also started experimenting with simultaneous interpretation during our online events, such as our recent project showcase event for the 2026 metadata sprint in São Paulo. You can find recordings of this event in Spanish, Portuguese, and English on our YouTube channel to see the promising results of these efforts.\nWhat we are working on next We are currently addressing the accessibility issues identified in our audit of the Crossmark service. Many Crossref members have implemented the Crossmark button and pop-up on their own platforms and websites, so we thought this was a great place to start the remediation efforts following our audit.\nWe are also in the process of redesigning our main website, www.crossref.org, following an information architecture review completed in 2025. Making changes to the design and navigation of our website will be the perfect opportunity to make our content not just more discoverable and more understandable, but also more accessible.\nClearly there is even more to be done, so watch this space for more updates on our accessibility roadmap and improvements. And if you have first-hand experience of using Crossref services and interfaces with assistive technologies, or you have other input or feedback you\u0026rsquo;d like to share, leave a comment below or start a discussion in our community forum.\nReferences Vale, P. (2025). Enhancing DOI Accessibility for All Users. Crossref. https://doi.org/10.64000/pp4rw-mtv44 World Wide Web Consortium (2024). Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.2. Retrieved May 8, 2026, from https://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG22/ Montilla, L. \u0026amp; Mahomed, R. (2026). Voices from Crossref Metadata Sprint in São Paulo. Crossref. https://doi.org/10.64000/a5qzf-k1738 Stoll, L. \u0026amp; Korzec, K. (2025). Request for proposals: Crossref website information architecture review. Crossref. https://doi.org/10.64000/058mr-k3s56 ",
"headings": ["Why accessibility matters","Where we are today","Beyond WCAG","What we are working on next","References"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/categories/technology/",
"title": "Technology",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Categories",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/categories/user-interfaces/",
"title": "User Interfaces",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Categories",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/events/",
"title": "Events",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2026-05-18",
"lastmod_ts": 1779062400,
"section": "Events",
"tags": [],
"description": "\nCrossref-hosted events and community webinars about metadata, persistent identifiers, and open research. All Crossref-hosted events are free to attend and open to everyone.\nAdditional resources\rWatch tutorials and past webinars on our YouTube channel. Learn about our services at crossref.org/services. Featured collections\rRecurring webinar\nMetadata health check webinars Hands-on sessions on using Participation Reports to assess and improve your metadata. This series also includes Metadata Manager and the Crossref OJS-plugin.\n",
"content": "\nCrossref-hosted events and community webinars about metadata, persistent identifiers, and open research. All Crossref-hosted events are free to attend and open to everyone.\nAdditional resources\rWatch tutorials and past webinars on our YouTube channel. Learn about our services at crossref.org/services. Featured collections\rRecurring webinar\nMetadata health check webinars Hands-on sessions on using Participation Reports to assess and improve your metadata. This series also includes Metadata Manager and the Crossref OJS-plugin.\nLearn more → New members\nGetting started at Crossref Interactive webinars for new members covering DOI registration, metadata, membership, and Crossref essentials.\nLearn more → Flagship event\nCrossref Annual Meeting 2026 An event with community highlights, product updates, and the board election. Join us in October.\nLearn more → All upcoming events\rUse Filter, Sort, or Search at the top right to narrow by topic, location, or language. Switch between list and calendar views with the dropdown.\nPast events? Browse the archive →\nContact our community team if you\u0026rsquo;d like us to participate in an event or meet us at one of the above. If you have an idea for an event or webinar, you can suggest a topic.\nBack to Top\n",
"headings": ["Additional resources","Featured collections","Metadata health check webinars","Getting started at Crossref","Crossref Annual Meeting 2026","All upcoming events"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/from-1990-to-today-connecting-hfsps-grant-history-to-the-research-nexus/",
"title": "From 1990 to today: connecting HFSP’s grant history to the research nexus",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2026-05-14",
"lastmod_ts": 1778716800,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "For a funder with over thirty years of funding history, making all of their funding metadata openly available is no small undertaking. In this conversation, I chat with Guntram Bauer, Chief Scientific Officer at the Human Frontiers Science Program (HFSP), about how the organisation is working to register decades of grant data with Crossref, the challenges of linking historical awards to published research outputs, and what open, structured funding metadata means for accountability to member countries and the wider scientific community.\n",
"content": "For a funder with over thirty years of funding history, making all of their funding metadata openly available is no small undertaking. In this conversation, I chat with Guntram Bauer, Chief Scientific Officer at the Human Frontiers Science Program (HFSP), about how the organisation is working to register decades of grant data with Crossref, the challenges of linking historical awards to published research outputs, and what open, structured funding metadata means for accountability to member countries and the wider scientific community.\nRGP: Why did HFSP join Crossref and decide to share its funding metadata openly?\nGB: Accountability starts with openness and transparency. If we are not open as a global funding organisation, we can\u0026rsquo;t convey that message to our constituents, our grantees, and our community. Before we could share our metadata openly through Crossref, we would share our funding activities through annual reports with a simple list of awardees and projects. In the digital era there are new possibilities to do this better and demonstrate to our member countries what we do with the funds. For us, it is a very helpful way to fulfil our obligations and the due diligence that is expected of us.\nWe started registering decade-old grant metadata, something we had always wanted to do but that before the current waiver would have meant a big financial undertaking.\n\u0026ndash; Guntram Bauer, Chief Scientific Officer, Human Frontiers Science Program\nRGP: How did you find integrating the Grant Linking System (GLS) within your existing workflows?\nGB: It was very straightforward. We work with Proposal Central, through Altum, which also acts as our Crossref sponsor, to help HFSP handle grant operations and related metadata, which makes it all very easy. One thing we did think carefully about was what the grant landing page would look like: what information people would see when they clicked on a grant DOI. Before Altum, we couldn\u0026rsquo;t even add an ORCID to our workflows, let alone a Crossref grant DOI! Having structured metadata to support transparent reporting to our own supporting member countries has been very valuable.\nThis step was independent from our funding policies. Registering funding metadata and assigning Crossref grant DOIs was paralleled with informative campaigns and direct information to our awardees to inform them about the new way of acknowledging funding.\nRGP: Can you tell us about HFSP\u0026rsquo;s experience registering historical grant data?\nGB: When HFSP started working with Crossref to benefit from the Grant Linking System (GLS) and make our funding metadata openly available, we began by registering data about our fellowships. More recently, in the context of the newly introduced waiver for historical grant data, we started registering decade-old grant metadata, something we had always wanted to do but that before the current waiver would have meant a big financial undertaking.\nRGP: Why are you so interested in registering historical grants?\nGB: HFSP has been registering funding with Crossref for a while, and the recent announcement of the two-year waiver made us decide to make all our historical data available. That’s going back all the way to 1990! We have been doing it little by little. We are keen to introduce as much funding metadata as possible into the system, to improve our transparency, but also to add to the research nexus and be able to link our funding to outputs, even the decades-old ones.\nRGP: Are there any challenges specific to registering historical grants?\nGB: There are a couple. When registering a historical grant, from 2005 for example, the publications that came out of that funding couldn’t be linked to the Crossref grant DOI since it didn’t exist when it was published, so the connection is missing. This is one of the key added values to the GLS, which in our view is the ability to track the impact of funding. Additionally, grantees who were awarded their funding many years ago and are only now receiving a Crossref grant DOI may not be as primed as current grantees to use that DOI when acknowledging their outputs.\nEncouraging recent grantees of their new Crossref grant DOI so they can start acknowledging their outputs is one thing. However, persuading earlier grantees to go back and inform publishers of a new grant DOI involves a lot of actors and many potential points of failure. How can those connections between grant DOIs and related outputs be established, beyond direct communication with grantees?\nRGP: That is indeed a challenge that we are well aware of! What excites us going forward is matching those records back to historical outputs with automated strategies. These will increasingly allow us to match, connect, and insert relationships between published outputs and Crossref grant DOIs. This is only possible when both the output and the grant are registered with Crossref and there is enough funding metadata in the output record to make the match. The more metadata available about an award (such as award number and funder name) in the output’s metadata, the more matches we can make, and the more confident the community can be in them.\nRGP: Is the GLS changing how you approach reporting or shifting the culture within the organisation?\nGB: For us, it\u0026rsquo;s an evolving situation. There is definitely a demand from our member countries to be more open and transparent, for the accountability reasons we mentioned. As the only truly globally operating funder supporting basic rather than applied research, demonstrating our impact across such a diverse membership is not always straightforward. If anything, the GLS and Crossref grant DOIs can help us in making our reporting evidence-based and follow the impact of the funding.\nWe are very grateful to Guntram Bauer for his perspectives and insights.\n",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/categories/grant-linking-system/",
"title": "Grant Linking System",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Categories",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/authors/guntram-bauer/",
"title": "Guntram Bauer",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Authors",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/categories/research-funders/",
"title": "Research Funders",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Categories",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/authors/roc%C3%ADo-gaudioso-pedraza/",
"title": "Rocío Gaudioso Pedraza",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Authors",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/categories/board-summary/",
"title": "Board Summary",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Categories",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/march-2026-board-meeting-summary/",
"title": "March 2026 board meeting summary",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2026-05-06",
"lastmod_ts": 1778025600,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "We\u0026rsquo;re providing a summary of the board\u0026rsquo;s March 2026 meeting. At the meeting, the board reviewed progress in our key programs and initiatives, the strategic outlook for 2026, filled a vacancy on the Board, considered an additional legal entity for Crossref, and reviewed our governance structures. The resolutions are available on the dedicated section of our website, which also lists the members of the Board and offers further information about our governance.\n",
"content": "We\u0026rsquo;re providing a summary of the board\u0026rsquo;s March 2026 meeting. At the meeting, the board reviewed progress in our key programs and initiatives, the strategic outlook for 2026, filled a vacancy on the Board, considered an additional legal entity for Crossref, and reviewed our governance structures. The resolutions are available on the dedicated section of our website, which also lists the members of the Board and offers further information about our governance.\nBoard business January board minutes The board voted unanimously to approve the minutes of the January 2026 board meeting.\nMarch board meeting agenda The board voted unanimously to approve the agenda for the March 2026 meeting. The board then voted to approve the consent agenda, which includes a package of routine board business items.\nVote to appoint a director to a vacated seat Lisa Schiff of California Digital Library (CDL) stepped down from the board at the end of February, and CDL decided not to name a replacement. The board voted unanimously to take the most recent member election results and appoint Oscar Donde of Pan Africa Science Journal to fill the seat. Oscar will serve out the remaining years on CDL’s term, which is to the end of 2027.\n2025 year in review \u0026amp; framing the strategy for 2026 Ed Pentz and Lucy Ofiesh presented a review of 2025, including our financial performance, member participation, and growth of metadata records, connections, and usage. Crossref ended 2025 in a healthy financial position, exceeding revenue by 6% and saving 3% on expenses as compared to the budget. Member participation and statistics on the metadata records are captured in our State of Research Nexus report.\nWe then turned the discussion to the strategic issues in focus for 2026. Ed discussed the projects in focus for each of the three program groups: Co-creation and Community Trends, Contributing to the Research Nexus, and Open and Sustainable Operations. Details of these programs can be found on the strategic agenda page and public roadmap.\nThe board discussed the ongoing work of the project known as Resourcing Crossref for Future Sustainability (RCFS). This multi-year effort, which began in 2023, aims to make our fees more accessible, equitable, and simpler to understand and operate. In January 2026, we rolled out a new, lower membership fee, removed little-used discounts that contributed to fee complexity, extended our GEM program to include zero-fee membership and content registration for 18 additional countries, and introduced a two-year fee waiver on back-year grants. In 2026, we are monitoring the effects of these changes and initiating the review of content registration fees.\nWe provided an update on community investments we’ve made in line with the use-of-surplus funds framework that the board adopted in November 2025. To date, Crossref has committed USD $447,000 to several organisations and initiatives that share our mission.\nEstablishing an additional legal entity in Europe The board discussed the decision to broaden our operations by setting up an entity in Europe, specifically an AISBL (International Non-Profit Association) in Belgium. This entity will sit alongside our existing organization and share the same name, mission, and services. They will be connected through a managed agreement. This will help build organisational resiliency, create the capacity for future operations if needed, and reflect the global nature of our membership.\nThe board discussed the structure of the entities. The entity will be organized so that it may conduct business in the future in a way that maintains equal governance with the primary entity. Concurrently, the team is reviewing storing a back up of the system in the EU for redundancy purposes. A board discussion ensued, followed by a vote.\nThe board voted unanimously to approve proceeding with establishing a Crossref AISBL to sit alongside the primary entity and serve the goals described above.\nGovernance review Periodically, the board conducts a review of the organization\u0026rsquo;s stakeholder governance. The board discussed the strengths and areas for improvement in the current board structure and options to adjust it in the future. Discussions were preliminary to scope the review and will continue in more detail at the July board meeting.\nThere being no other business, the meeting was adjourned.\n",
"headings": ["Board business","January board minutes","March board meeting agenda","Vote to appoint a director to a vacated seat","2025 year in review \u0026amp; framing the strategy for 2026","Establishing an additional legal entity in Europe","Governance review"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/categories/meetings/",
"title": "Meetings",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Categories",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/categories/funders/",
"title": "Funders",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Categories",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/matching-funders-in-scholarly-metadata-linking-names-to-ror-ids/",
"title": "Matching funders in scholarly metadata: linking names to ROR IDs",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2026-04-27",
"lastmod_ts": 1777248000,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "In April 2025, we launched the metadata matching project, in order to add missing relationships to the scholarly metadata. We will do this by consolidating all existing and planned matching workflows, which enrich member-deposited metadata in Crossref. This unified service will result in a more complete research nexus. In this blog post, we share our latest milestone: developing and evaluating a strategy for matching funder metadata to Research Organization Registry (ROR) identifiers.\n",
"content": "In April 2025, we launched the metadata matching project, in order to add missing relationships to the scholarly metadata. We will do this by consolidating all existing and planned matching workflows, which enrich member-deposited metadata in Crossref. This unified service will result in a more complete research nexus. In this blog post, we share our latest milestone: developing and evaluating a strategy for matching funder metadata to Research Organization Registry (ROR) identifiers.\nKey takeaways Funder matching links funding organisation names to persistent identifiers, helping us understand how research outputs are funded and supported. We built a new strategy to automatically match funder names in Crossref metadata to ROR identifiers. Evaluated on a manually labeled dataset of 3,505 funder names, the strategy achieves 99% precision and 81% recall. This is the first production deployment of Crossref\u0026rsquo;s new metadata matching framework, paving the way for future matching tasks across affiliations, references, grants, and more. We did a brief demonstration of the funder matching process at our Community Update Call on 13th May 2026. You can watch a recording thereof on Youtube.\nIntroduction In our recent blog post on metadata enrichment, we described the different ways that Crossref metadata can be enriched after its initial deposit, leading to a more complete research nexus. In this model, we can think of the metadata records served through the Crossref API as a result of several layers of enrichment applied on top of the initial deposit from a Crossref member. These layers may include member updates, community feedback, automated matching, and third-party datasets.\nMetadata matching (layer 3) is when we use automated strategies to find missing relationships between entities within the scholarly record, such as relationships between research outputs, funding organisations, and grants, based on the unstructured information already present in the metadata. Our matching project aims to create a dedicated, consolidated metadata matching workflow that will eventually replace all existing production matching processes, with results made available through the REST API. We have identified the first six matching tasks that we’d like to tackle: funder name matching, bibliographic reference matching, preprint matching, affiliation matching, grant matching, and title matching.\nFunder matching is a task of automatically finding an identifier of a funding organisation based on its name. Funder matching, when done well, improves the coverage and reliability of funding metadata, and the relationships between funding organisations and research outputs in particular. These relationships are critical for understanding how research is supported, tracking compliance with funder mandates, and enabling analyses of research investment.\nFunder matching, as any type of matching, is not trivial because data can be noisy: the same organisation may appear under many variants, abbreviations, or translations, and some names are genuinely ambiguous. Our goal was to develop a matching strategy that results in a lot of additional identifiers while maintaining high quality of the results.\nAs part of this project, we will be switching the target identifier set for funder matching from the Funder Registry to the ROR registry, in line with our long-term plan to replace the Funder Registry with ROR. ROR provides an open, community-governed identifier system that is already used for affiliations and research institutions. It has become a well curated and widely-trusted catalog of organisations around the world involved in research, and it is very well suited to be the primary identifier for funders in Crossref. We are taking this opportunity to make a major move toward using ROR IDs.\nThis blog post describes the funder matching strategy we’ve developed and presents an evaluation of its performance, along with a new evaluation data set.\nOverview of the funder matching strategy At a high level, the funder matching strategy takes a funder name string from Crossref metadata as input and returns zero or one ROR IDs. While funder strings can occasionally map to more than one ROR ID, this strategy can only return at most one match per input string. Future versions of the strategy will allow for multiple matches.\nThe new matching strategy is based on the “single search” strategy previously developed at Crossref to match affiliation strings to ROR IDs, which is currently implemented in ROR’s API and which we plan to use to enrich affiliation metadata for works in Crossref. Funder matching and affiliation matching are similar tasks—they share the same target identifier set (ROR IDs), and they both use free-form text strings as their primary inputs. Most of these text strings are in English, so the strategy is optimized for English text; but the matching still works well on text in other languages, thanks in large part to ROR’s comprehensive catalog of multilingual alternate names.\nHowever, there are also some differences in the way that these input strings tend to look across the two different tasks, so the strategy was adapted and refined specifically for funder matching. For example, affiliation strings are often much longer and contain information such as academic department and city/country in addition to the name of the institution; funder strings are usually more concise, which can often make it easy to identify an exact match in ROR, but requires more extensive exclusion criteria to prevent incorrect matches for generic names.\nThe flow chart diagram shows the basic steps that each funder name goes through when a match is attempted:\nFlow chart diagram of the matching strategy’s steps to evaluate a funder name against potential ROR matches\nAfter normalization, the name is compared to a list of country names and identifiers to identify if there is any country information. The name is then passed to a search engine—an indexed text-based search system such as Elasticsearch or OpenSearch—to retrieve a set of 15-20 possible candidates of ROR organisations with similar names. At this point, we use a set of filters to discard any name matches that are unlikely to be correct (i.e., they tend to produce false positives). Some examples include matches for very short names, or names that are very generic (think “Department of Education,” without any other indication of which larger entity it may be a department of).\nAt this point, we have a set of candidate ROR IDs, with a corresponding set of organization names that may match our funder name. We score these names by their similarity to the input name (using a fuzzy matching algorithm), then select the best candidate based on this score and a few other heuristic measures. As a final step, we ensure that, if we identified any country information in the early stages of the matching, the ROR ID that we matched is consistent—while developing the strategy, we learned that failure to do this would be a significant source of false positives.\nA core principle of the matching strategy is that it is relatively conservative: at several points in the pipeline, the strategy can explicitly abstain and return no match. This prioritizes precision over recall; we consider incorrect matches to be more harmful than missing ones. Nevertheless, this strategy will be able to fill in large gaps in the funder data, and we can be confident that we will not be making widespread mistakes. To verify this, we use an evaluation dataset, which is described in the next section.\nEvaluation dataset for funder matching To evaluate the funder matching strategy, we manually labeled an evaluation dataset that maps funder name strings from Crossref metadata to zero, one, or multiple ROR IDs. The funder names were extracted from a July 2025 snapshot of Crossref works metadata, which contains 25.7 million funder entries across 12.4 million works, representing just over 3 million unique funder name strings.\nThe distribution of funder names is highly skewed: a small number of names appear very frequently, while most appear only a handful of times. Because correct handling of common funders has a disproportionate impact on overall metadata quality, the evaluation dataset is a weighted sample, where each name is weighted by how often it appears without an asserted funder ID.\nThe final evaluation dataset contains 3,505 funder names, with a total weight of just over 2.1 million funder entries. Each name was manually labeled against the ROR registry, resulting in at least one ROR match for 1,895 names. In addition, for some cases, alternate matches were recorded to support “relaxed” evaluation in ambiguous scenarios.\nEvaluation methodology Evaluation is done by running the matching strategy on all names in the dataset and comparing the results to the manual annotations. The primary metrics are precision, recall, and the F0.5 score, which combines precision and recall while weighting precision more heavily. This reflects the project’s preference to avoid incorrect metadata assertions, even at the cost of lower recall.\nIn addition to standard (strict) evaluation, the framework supports relaxed evaluation using alternate matches. This is meant to address cases where funder strings might be ambiguous even for a human evaluator, or a matching strategy might identify a parent organisation of a target, which is not an entirely incorrect match.\nEvaluation is performed along two independent dimensions. First, results can be calculated in an unweighted mode, where each funder name is treated as equally important, or in a weighted mode, where names are weighted by how frequently they appear without an asserted identifier in Crossref metadata. Second, evaluation can be strict or relaxed, depending on whether only the primary annotated ROR ID is considered correct or whether alternate, manually annotated matches are also accepted. Together, these dimensions produce four possible evaluation modes.\nResults Under relaxed, weighted evaluation, the funder matching strategy achieves a precision of 0.99, recall of 0.81, and an F0.5 score of 0.95.\nThe table below compares the performance of the matching strategy across four evaluation modes. The Relaxed Weighted mode represents the headline performance (Precision: 0.9897) as it accounts for both the frequency of names in the metadata (weighting) and valid metadata ambiguity (alternates). In practical terms, the results mean that when the strategy produces a match, it is correct (or acceptably close, in cases of genuine ambiguity) roughly 99% of the time.\nEvaluation Mode Precision Recall F0.5 Score False Positives False Negatives Unweighted 0.9365 0.6024 0.8430 81 788 Weighted 0.9776 0.7948 0.9346 81 788 Relaxed Unweighted 0.9707 0.6445 0.8815 37 675 Relaxed Weighted 0.9897 0.8094 0.9475 37 675 While precision and recall are essential for understanding matching performance, there are other important considerations that also matter in practice. This strategy also scores high marks in some of these other criteria that we’ve identified:\nOpenness — The strategy is open source—source code here—and built on open source methods, in accordance with our commitment to POSI. Explainability/Flexibility — This is not a black box machine-learning model; the steps, detailed in the overview I’ve given earlier, are fairly easy to understand, update, and apply to new data. Resources/Speed — The strategy is very quick (averaging a matter of milliseconds per match), and does not require large amounts of intense computation or data storage. From evaluation to production This work represents more than an isolated matching experiment: it is intended to be the first production deployment of the new metadata matching framework. Bringing funder matching into production will involve not only implementing the strategy described here, but also standing up shared infrastructure for monitoring, iteration, and reuse across future matching tasks. Applying this new matching system across all of Crossref’s current and future funder data will be our next milestone in the project. Beyond that, we will move on to grants, affiliations, references, and more. The work we’re doing now of setting up infrastructure, refining evaluation methods, and working out any kinks as they arise, will all contribute to the momentum of the project. We’re very excited about all the enrichment of the research nexus that lies ahead!\n",
"headings": ["Key takeaways","Introduction","Overview of the funder matching strategy","Evaluation dataset for funder matching","Evaluation methodology","Results","From evaluation to production"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/categories/metadata-matching/",
"title": "Metadata Matching",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Categories",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/authors/kelly-stathis/",
"title": "Kelly Stathis",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Authors",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/authors/madhura-amdekar/",
"title": "Madhura Amdekar",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Authors",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/categories/research-integrity/",
"title": "Research Integrity",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Categories",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/why-metadata-matters-for-research-integrity-a-new-joint-guide-from-crossref-and-datacite/",
"title": "Why metadata matters for research integrity: a new joint guide from Crossref and DataCite",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2026-04-23",
"lastmod_ts": 1776902400,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "Preserving the integrity of the scholarly record is an important component of the overall endeavour to protect research integrity. Open scholarly infrastructure enables persistent recording of research objects and associated metadata, which provides an evidence trail for these objects for all in the research community. Crossref and DataCite – as providers of essential infrastructure for preservation of the scholarly record – we share our joint expertise in the new guide on “Why metadata matters for research integrity and how to contribute”.\n",
"content": "Preserving the integrity of the scholarly record is an important component of the overall endeavour to protect research integrity. Open scholarly infrastructure enables persistent recording of research objects and associated metadata, which provides an evidence trail for these objects for all in the research community. Crossref and DataCite – as providers of essential infrastructure for preservation of the scholarly record – we share our joint expertise in the new guide on “Why metadata matters for research integrity and how to contribute”.\nBoth our organisations enable our members to share metadata about the research outputs, resources, and activities that they produce and steward. That metadata about scholarly outputs provides important information about them, which can help evidence integrity. To highlight how and which elements in the Crossref and DataCite metadata schemas support this endeavour, we are excited to make our new guide, available at https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo19695957.\nThis joint guide offers practical information for all stakeholders in the scholarly ecosystem about the different metadata elements supported by Crossref and DataCite that can help in assessing the integrity of the scholarly record. With growth in the type and complexity of research outputs over the years, there is also a growing need to be able to ascertain the trustworthiness of research outputs. Metadata directly supports this function. Creators and stewards of research outputs can provide metadata about the content that they produce, including information on who authored the work, who funded it, which other works it cites, whether it was updated after publication, how it relates to other items in the research ecosystem, and more. This guide lists the metadata elements that capture this information in the Crossref and DataCite metadata schemas and the important role played by each of them in assessing integrity and rigour. We hope that by knowing more about the applications of metadata for preserving the integrity of the scholarly record, prospective authors, researchers, publishers, repositories, integrators, and funders will be encouraged to contribute rich and accurate metadata when registering DOI records.\nThis information can also be leveraged by researchers and users of metadata who are looking to incorporate open metadata into their tools and analyses. All of the metadata in Crossref and DataCite can be accessed via open APIs and public data files. This guide contains details of what each of the metadata elements can be used for, helping you to identify the right data that you need for your analyses of interest, such as looking at citation patterns, network analysis, and other research integrity trends.\nAs you read through this guide, please share your feedback and any questions that you may have via the Crossref community forum.\n",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/about/",
"title": "About us",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2026-04-22",
"lastmod_ts": 1776816000,
"section": "About us",
"tags": [],
"description": "About Crossref — non-profit open infrastructure supporting 25,000+ members across 167 countries, underpinning the global scholarly record.",
"content": " We envision a rich and reusable open network of relationships connecting research organisations, people, things, and actions; a scholarly record that the global community can build on forever, for the benefit of society.\nTake a look at our strategic agenda to see the planned work that aims to achieve the vision. The sustainability area aims to make transparent all the processes and procedures we follow to run the operation for the long term, including our financials and our ongoing committment to the Principles of Open Scholarly Infrastructure POSI. The governance area describes our board and its role in community oversight.\nIt also takes a strong team. We are a globally distributed group of dedicated people who take our work seriously, but don\u0026rsquo;t take ourselves too seriously. We like to play quizzes, measure coffee intake, compare snacks of the world, and create 100s of custom slack emojis.\nTake a look at our organisation chart.\nOur mission Crossref makes research objects easy to find, cite, link, assess, and reuse.\nWe’re a not-for-profit membership organisation that exists to make scholarly communications better. We rally the community; tag and share metadata; run an open infrastructure; play with technology; and make tools and services—all to help put research in context.\nIt’s as simple—and as complicated—as that.\nRally\nGetting the community working together to make scholarly communications better\nTag\nStructuring, processing, and sharing metadata to reveal relationships between research outputs\nRun\nOperating a shared, open infrastructure that is community-governed and evolves with changing needs\nPlay\nEngaging in debate and experimenting with technology to solve our members’ problems\nMake\nCreating tools and services to enable connections and give context\nHow do we work? These are the Crossref \u0026rsquo;truths\u0026rsquo;, the principles that guide everything we do. Read our truths page, with full descriptions for each.\nCome one, come all Smart alone, brilliant together One member, one vote Love metadata, love technology What you see, what you get Here today, here tomorrow How we started We started in January 2000 with a handful of founding members and one employee, Ed Pentz, as Executive Director. Read about our history in Ed\u0026rsquo;s words. Since then we\u0026rsquo;ve grown to (as of 2026) sixty staff and over 25,000 members coming from 167 countries.\nRead our background story, with an overview of our current services, in this document:\nRead or download this background story as a PDF in English, Spanish or Brazilian Portuguese.\nPlease contact our community team with any questions.\n",
"headings": ["Our mission","How do we work?","How we started"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/people/",
"title": "Our people",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2026-04-22",
"lastmod_ts": 1776816000,
"section": "Our people",
"tags": [],
"description": "We are a globally distributed group of dedicated people who take our work seriously, but don\u0026rsquo;t take ourselves too seriously. We like to play quizzes, measure coffee intake, compare snacks of the world, and create 100s of custom slack emojis.\nClick through to read more about each of us, and take a look at our organisation chart.\n",
"content": "We are a globally distributed group of dedicated people who take our work seriously, but don\u0026rsquo;t take ourselves too seriously. We like to play quizzes, measure coffee intake, compare snacks of the world, and create 100s of custom slack emojis.\nClick through to read more about each of us, and take a look at our organisation chart.\n",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/",
"title": "You are Crossref",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2026-04-14",
"lastmod_ts": 1776124800,
"section": "",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link the world's research outputs. 25,000+ members, 167 countries, 2.1 billion monthly API queries.",
"content": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions\u0026mdash;creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science.\nTogether with our \u0026gt;25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support 2.1 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.\n",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/authors/leandro-contreras/",
"title": "Leandro Contreras",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Authors",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/categories/membership/",
"title": "Membership",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Categories",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/community/service-providers/",
"title": "Service providers",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2026-04-13",
"lastmod_ts": 1776038400,
"section": "Get involved",
"tags": [],
"description": " We are currently planning the launch of a new Crossref Service Providers program in 2026. Any organisations interested in participating are welcome to get in touch for more information on when and how to apply. Crossref Service Providers are organisations that work collaboratively with us to help support member obligations and best practices, such as providing best practice metadata represented in Participation Reports on behalf of members. Some Service Providers are also Sponsors.\n",
"content": " We are currently planning the launch of a new Crossref Service Providers program in 2026. Any organisations interested in participating are welcome to get in touch for more information on when and how to apply. Crossref Service Providers are organisations that work collaboratively with us to help support member obligations and best practices, such as providing best practice metadata represented in Participation Reports on behalf of members. Some Service Providers are also Sponsors.\nMembers looking for advice on how to evaluate Service providers can consult guidance on working with a service provider in our documentation.\n",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/community/sponsors/",
"title": "Sponsors program",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2026-04-13",
"lastmod_ts": 1776038400,
"section": "Get involved",
"tags": [],
"description": "Some small organisations who want to register metadata for their research and participate in Crossref but are not able to join directly due to financial, administrative, or technical barriers. Our Sponsors program has grown over the last decade and has now become the primary route to membership for emerging markets and small or academic-adjacent publishing operations.\nMore members now join Crossref via a Sponsor than directly. So Sponsors are important partner organisations in helping to scale to meet the growing demand of new members.\n",
"content": "Some small organisations who want to register metadata for their research and participate in Crossref but are not able to join directly due to financial, administrative, or technical barriers. Our Sponsors program has grown over the last decade and has now become the primary route to membership for emerging markets and small or academic-adjacent publishing operations.\nMore members now join Crossref via a Sponsor than directly. So Sponsors are important partner organisations in helping to scale to meet the growing demand of new members.\nSponsors work closely with us in order to provide administrative, billing, technical, and\u0026mdash;if applicable\u0026mdash;language support, to the members they work with. Some Sponsors are also Service Providers. Each Sponsor has an agreement with us as well as with every member they represent, and they submit an annual report to us detailing their outreach and training activities. Sponsors are not members themselves\u0026mdash;and therefore cannot participate in our community governance\u0026mdash;but the organisations that work with them are full members and may vote in (or stand as a candidate for) our board elections.\nIn turn, we’re keen to support our Sponsors too, by running events and other outreach activities with them and listening to their feedback on what they need from us. You can find a list of our current Sponsors on this page.\nPlease note, we are pausing the acceptance of new Sponsors from regions where Sponsor numbers are already very high or not based in a GEM program country. Additionally, we are focusing on regions where growth is high and no Sponsor is present. By doing so we can focus on growing the program in areas where there is the greatest need.\nSponsor criteria Sponsors are key partners in making Crossref membership benefits available to all and keeping them to their membership obligations. There is quite a high bar to meet to be a Sponsor as we need to be sure you would represent Crossref accurately and successfully, and add value in the community.\nPlease make sure that your organisation would be able to meet the criteria below.\nAbout you as a Sponsor You are a recognized organisation in good standing with the scholarly community with a clear online presence describing your services. Your services are a good fit with Crossref services. You exhibit a clear knowledge of Crossref and our services, and of what is achieved by registering content with Crossref. You work with a particular segment or region of the research community who wouldn’t otherwise be able to work with Crossref due to barriers such as: Lack of resources either technically, financially, or operationally (or all) Need for support in languages other than English You have the technical know-how and resources to facilitate Content Registration with Crossref on behalf of members and you understand the importance of complete and accurate metadata, not solely registering a DOI. You are aware of the criteria that need to be met on an ongoing basis to participate in optional Crossref services e.g. Similarity Check, Cited-by. You understand that services such as these can only be offered to the Crossref members you work with, and is based on their eligibility for these services. You are aware that Crossref membership is not open to organisations or individuals who are subject to sanctions in the US, UK or EU - more information here. You have a financial/funding model and are capable of covering the membership fees for the members you represent and the content registration fees they incur. You can handle billing on behalf of members and will pay invoices within agreed payment terms. You can demonstrate the above in a documented plan that you would share with us and update and report on annually. You have the ability to work at scale and support a large number of members Your role as a Sponsor You work with organisations to enable them to be members of Crossref. This includes: Managing the membership set-up and joining process in collaboration with the members and our staff. Ensuring that organisations are clear about what they are agreeing to when becoming a Crossref member and joining Crossref through you as their Sponsor. Ensuring relevant contracts are completed by the member, that accurate information about members is sent to Crossref and kept up-to-date, Sharing and explaining member-specific communications and changes, and helping members adapt to new processes or obligations related to Crossref services. You perform checks to make sure the members you are working with are not prohibited from joining Crossref due to OFAC sanctions. You provide support for and promotion of Crossref activities and services. This includes being the first line of technical support for the members you work with, potentially providing training. You communicate with our staff in a timely manner. You positively contribute to the reputation of Crossref and its inclusive mission, adhering to the code of conduct and best practice guidelines that protect and enhance other members of the Crossref community collectively. When Sponsors stop being Sponsors Sometimes, things don\u0026rsquo;t work out, or plans change. We try to make sure that every Sponsor we accept will be able to commit to helping our members long-term. But if they change paths or stop being able to fulfill the role described above, we sometimes need to give notice of termination and to work with the members to find an alternative Sponsor. It is rare, but in such cases we will endeavour to follow these steps:\nLetter sent to Sponsor setting out concerns and asking for a plan to improve within a reasonable time period. We offer to help with this improvement plan, if relevant. Review performance and if no improvement, we inform the Sponsor that they will no longer be able to sign up new members for a short period. Assess progress and if no improvements we formally notify the Sponsor that we\u0026rsquo;re terminating our agreement, which includes 30 days\u0026rsquo; notice. We contact the relevant members to inform them of their options and the timeline. Depending on how many members the Sponsor represents, we may work with them for longer than 30 days to transition the members to new Sponsors or to direct membership. Members who don\u0026rsquo;t move to a new Sponsor will be moved to direct membership and will be responsible for content registration, fees, and administration going forward. Apply to become a Sponsor If you are located in one of the regions where we are seeking new Sponsors and if you are able to fulfil the above criteria, and are ready to apply to become a Sponsor, please contact us with your organisation name and website, plus your plans for how you could support Crossref members as a sponsor. After that, we\u0026rsquo;ll ask you to provide additional information so that we can find out more about your motivations, who you would help, your planned activities, and how you would fulfill the role. We normally make a decision about your application within a month after this review.\nWe look forward to hearing from you and working together to lower barriers to participation around the world.\nLooking for a Sponsor? If you have content you want to register with us but are not able to join directly, find a Sponsor to contact about representation, rather than applying to join Crossref directly.\nFor more information, please contact our membership team.\n",
"headings": ["Sponsor criteria","About you as a Sponsor","Your role as a Sponsor","When Sponsors stop being Sponsors","Apply to become a Sponsor","Looking for a Sponsor?"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/strengthening-community-connections-in-s%C3%A3o-paulo/",
"title": "Strengthening community connections in São Paulo",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2026-04-13",
"lastmod_ts": 1776038400,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "Versão em português\nAs our global community continues to grow, it is important for us to build and maintain our connections within it. In March this year, we had the opportunity to visit São Paulo for a community event at the Fundação Getúlio Vargas. The content of our presentations is available online. Events such as this provide an opportunity for us to update our members on Crossref fundamentals and developments, and help us better tune in to the varied needs of our communities and learn how we can work together more effectively. This was our third visit to Brazil, with previous events held in Campinas and São Paulo in 2016, and Goiânia and Fortaleza in 2018. ",
"content": "Versão em português\nAs our global community continues to grow, it is important for us to build and maintain our connections within it. In March this year, we had the opportunity to visit São Paulo for a community event at the Fundação Getúlio Vargas. The content of our presentations is available online. Events such as this provide an opportunity for us to update our members on Crossref fundamentals and developments, and help us better tune in to the varied needs of our communities and learn how we can work together more effectively. This was our third visit to Brazil, with previous events held in Campinas and São Paulo in 2016, and Goiânia and Fortaleza in 2018. Our membership in Latin America has grown steadily in the meantime. We currently work with more than 3,300 members across the region; and the largest number is based in Brazil, with over 1,900 members. The majority of these represent universities, societies, and government organisations, followed by libraries and foundations that also register their works with us. In total, our members in Brazil have contributed over 2 million open metadata records to the Research Nexus. On March 3, we welcomed 60 attendees, which included members, sponsors, service providers, and researchers. Each of these groups contribute unique perspectives and experiences, and use our services in a variety of ways. We were also joined by four Crossref ambassadors - Pedro López Casique from Mexico, Juan Felipe Vargas, Nicolás Mejía Torres from Colombia, Edilson Damasio from Brazil, as well as colleagues from SciELO Brazil.\nPhoto: Crossref staff and ambassadors: Leandro Contreras, Pablo López Casique, Nicolás Mejía Torres, Luis Montilla, Susan Collins, Juan Felipe Vargas, Jason Portenoy, and Isaac Farley\nWe started the day with an emphasis on metadata quality, the role of Crossref DOIs, and content registration best practices. We offered an overview of our helper tools: the updated Metadata Manager for record registration and Participation Reports for reviewing metadata completeness. Pedro, who is also a Publication Support Specialist with Public Knowledge Project (PKP), gave an overview of working with the Open Journals Systems (OJS) platform, which is widely used by our members throughout Brazil. Photo: PKP’s Pedro López Casique highlighting Brazil as the second highest user of OJS-hosted journals globally.\nLater in the day we shifted to more technical topics including metadata retrieval, the use of metadata for discoverability and research integrity, and common metadata errors in the registration process. Roberta Takenaka, systems developer at SciELO, discussed an overview and challenges of the adoption of DOIs in the SciELO network.\nThis was a tri-lingual event with presentations delivered in English, Portuguese, and Spanish, with live interpretation available for participants and presenters. Photo: Isaac Farley discussing metadata updates\nDuring the session, we asked attendees to share their feedback on both the value of Crossref to their organisation and the challenges they face when working with us. Participants noted persistence, the commitment to scientific development, metadata standardisation, interoperability, and increasing content visibility as important benefits. The most common challenge reported was language - the majority of our documentation is in English, which makes it difficult for many to fully utilise the available resources. Several mentioned that costs can be a challenge for some organisations, and others noted that more training opportunities, held in Brazilian Portuguese, would be appreciated.\nPhoto: Participants chatting during the morning coffee break\nThe question and answer sessions covered a wide range of technical topics, including OJS integrations, interpreting monthly resolution reports, updating metadata in bulk, and implementing Crossmark. During the coffee breaks, discussions continued as participants shared their thoughts, additional questions, and feedback with us. Following the presentations, we held small group sessions with participants to gather feedback on two ongoing projects. Leandro Contreras, our new UX researcher, met with a group to gather information on how users interact with our website, as part of our website architecture improvement project. Luis Montilla, Technical Community Manager, led a group discussion with editors to learn more about editorial workflows and how they interact with scholarly metadata.\nMany of the participants also joined us for our Metadata Sprint, which took place in the days following, exploring the uses of open scholarly metadata in creating new tools and solutions. These events were an opportunity to reconnect with the community, gather feedback to create additional training and support materials, share developments and resources, and strengthen our connections with members and key collaborators. Ana Marlene Freitas de Morais, former vice-president of the Associacao Brasileira de Editores Cientificos do Brasil (ABEC Brasil), our largest Sponsor in Brazil, stressed the importance of face-to-face collaborations, such as this event, for engagement in Brazil. Through our Ambassadors, Sponsors, and other partners, we aim to continue building lasting relationships and supporting our growing community in Brazil.\nWith special thanks to our hosts at Fundação Getúlio Vargas for the generous use of their venue and support personnel.\nPortuguês version À medida que nossa comunidade global continua a crescer, é importante para nós construir e manter nossos laços dentro dela. Em março deste ano, tivemos a oportunidade de visitar a nossa comunidade em São Paulo num evento na Fundação Getúlio Vargas. O conteúdo das apresentações está disponível online. Eventos como este nos proporcionam uma oportunidade de atualizar nossos membros sobre os fundamentos e desenvolvimentos da Crossref, além de nos ajudar a nos sintonizar melhor com as diversas necessidades de nossas comunidades, e aprender como podemos trabalhar juntos eficazmente. Esta foi a nossa terceira visita ao Brasil, com eventos anteriores realizados em Campinas e São Paulo em 2016, e em Goiânia e Fortaleza em 2018.\nNosso conjunto de membros na América Latina tem crescido de forma constante ao longo do tempo. Atualmente, trabalhamos com mais de 3.300 membros em toda a região; e o maior número está concentrado no Brasil, com mais de 1.900 membros. A maioria deles representa universidades, sociedades e organizações governamentais, seguidas por bibliotecas e fundações que também registram seus trabalhos conosco. No total, nossos membros no Brasil já contribuíram com mais de 2 milhões de registros de metadados abertos para o Research Nexus.\nNo dia 3 de março, recebemos 60 participantes, entre os quais membros, patrocinadores, prestadores de serviços e pesquisadores. Cada um desses grupos traz perspectivas e experiências únicas, e utilizam nossos serviços de diversas maneiras. Também contamos com a presença de quatro embaixadores da Crossref: Pedro López Casique, do México; Juan Felipe Vargas e Nicolás Mejía Torres, da Colômbia; e Edilson Damasio, do Brasil, e também colegas da SciELO Brasil.\nFoto: Equipe e embaixadores da Crossref: Leandro Contreras, Pablo López Casique, Nicolás Mejía Torres, Luis Montilla, Susan Collins, Juan Felipe Vargas, Jason Portenoy e Isaac Farley\nComeçamos o dia com ênfase na qualidade dos metadados, no papel dos DOIs da Crossref e nas boas práticas de registro de conteúdo. Apresentamos uma visão geral das nossas ferramentas: Metadata Manager, atualizado para registro de registros e os Participation Reports para verificar a integridade dos metadados. Pedro, que também é especialista em suporte a publicações no Public Knowledge Project (PKP), apresentou uma visão geral do trabalho com a plataforma Open Journals Systems (OJS), amplamente utilizada por nossos membros em todo o Brasil.\nFoto: Pedro López Casique, da PKP, destacando o Brasil como o segundo maior usuário de revistas hospedadas no OJS em todo o mundo.\nNo decorrer do dia, passamos a abordar temas mais técnicos, incluindo a recuperação de metadados, o uso de metadados para a visibilidade e a integridade da pesquisa, e erros comuns de metadados no processo de registro. Roberta Takenaka, desenvolvedora de sistemas da SciELO, apresentou uma visão geral e discutiu os desafios da adoção de DOIs na rede SciELO.\nEste foi um evento trilíngue, com apresentações em inglês, português e espanhol, com interpretação simultânea disponível para participantes e palestrantes.\nPhoto: Isaac Farley discussing metadata updates.\nDurante a sessão, pedimos aos participantes que compartilhassem comentários sobre o valor da Crossref para suas organizações, e sobre os desafios que enfrentam ao trabalhar conosco. Os participantes destacaram a persistência, o compromisso com o desenvolvimento científico, a padronização de metadados, a interoperabilidade e o aumento da visibilidade do conteúdo como benefícios importantes. O desafio mais comum relatado foi o idioma - a maior parte da nossa documentação está em inglês, o que dificulta para muitos a utilização plena dos recursos disponíveis. Vários mencionaram que os custos podem ser um desafio para algumas organizações, e outros observaram que mais oportunidades de treino, ministradas em português do Brasil, seriam bem-vindas.\nFoto: Participantes conversando durante o intervalo da manhã.\nAs sessões de perguntas e respostas abordaram uma ampla variedade de tópicos técnicos, incluindo integrações com o OJS, interpretação de relatórios mensais de resolução, atualização em massa de metadados e implementação do Crossmark. Durante os intervalos para o café, as discussões continuaram enquanto os participantes compartilhavam suas ideias, perguntas adicionais e comentários conosco. Após as apresentações, realizamos sessões em pequenos grupos com os participantes para coletar feedback sobre dois projetos em andamento. Leandro Contreras, nosso novo pesquisador de experiência do usuário (UX), reuniu-se com um grupo para coletar informações sobre como os usuários interagem com nosso site, como parte do nosso projeto de melhoria da arquitetura do site. Luis Montilla, gerente da comunidade técnica, conduziu uma discussão em grupo com editores para aprender mais sobre os fluxos de trabalho editoriais e como eles interagem com metadados acadêmicos. Muitos dos participantes também se juntaram a nós no nosso Metadata Sprint, realizado nos dias seguintes, para explorar os usos de metadados acadêmicos abertos na criação de novas ferramentas e soluções.\nEsses eventos foram uma oportunidade para nos reconectarmos com a comunidade, coletar feedback para criar materiais adicionais de treinamento e apoio, compartilhar desenvolvimentos e recursos, e fortalecer nossos laços com os membros e principais colaboradores. Ana Marlene Freitas de Morais, ex-vice-presidente da Associação Brasileira de Editores Científicos (ABEC Brasil), nosso maior patrocinador no Brasil, destacou a importância das colaborações presenciais, como este evento, para o engajamento no Brasil. Por meio de nossos Embaixadores, Patrocinadores e outros parceiros, nosso objetivo é continuar construindo relacionamentos duradouros e apoiando nossa crescente comunidade no Brasil.\nAgradecemos especialmente aos nossos anfitriões da Fundação Getúlio Vargas pelo generoso uso de suas instalações e pela equipe de apoio.\n",
"headings": ["Português version"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/authors/susan-collins/",
"title": "Susan Collins",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Authors",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/authors/amanda-bartell/",
"title": "Amanda Bartell",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Authors",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/reflections-from-bangkok/",
"title": "Reflections from Bangkok",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2026-04-01",
"lastmod_ts": 1775001600,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "Each organization in the global community of Crossref members (that’s currently over 25k organizations in 166 different countries) plays a key role in building the Research Nexus. Any opportunity we have to meet with our members in person is a highlight and a way for us to learn more from each other. The month of January saw three of us travel to Bangkok to attend the first-ever Charleston Conference organised in Asia and to meet with our growing community in Thailand.\n",
"content": "Each organization in the global community of Crossref members (that’s currently over 25k organizations in 166 different countries) plays a key role in building the Research Nexus. Any opportunity we have to meet with our members in person is a highlight and a way for us to learn more from each other. The month of January saw three of us travel to Bangkok to attend the first-ever Charleston Conference organised in Asia and to meet with our growing community in Thailand.\nThe Charleston Conference is a meeting for librarians and publishers that is held annually in the USA. This year, the conference was held for the first time in Asia, and attending the event allowed us to connect with the library publishing community from the region and others, who had travelled from around the world to meet in picturesque Bangkok. Half of Crossref members are now based in Asia, so visiting Thailand gave us a great opportunity to meet members and colleagues from the continent in person.\nAt the conference, Robbykha moderated a panel discussion on “the importance of metadata for Asian scholarship”, capturing voices from across Asia on how open metadata is being used for discoverability, integrity, and assessment by different scholarly communities in the region.\nOur visit to Bangkok culminated with a one-day Crossref Bangkok event that we had organised to meet with Crossref members in Thailand. We were also able to visit The Thailand National Library, who are the Thai ISSN Centre and stewards of so much of Thailand’s cultural heritage.\nWe were very grateful to our colleagues in Thailand for their warm welcome, particularly during the official mourning period for Her Majesty Queen Sirikit The Queen Mother.\nLeft hand photo: Madhura Amdekar (Crossref), Guo Xiaofeng (Crossref Ambassador and Crossref sponsors Sin-Chn Scientific Press Pte. Ltd (Singapore)), Robbykha Rosalien (Crossref), Mochammad Tanzil Multazam (Crossref sponsors Relawan Jurnal Indonesia), Prof. Dr. Namtip Wipawin (Sukhothai Thammathirat Open University and Crossref sponsors National Research Council of Thailand), Amanda Bartell (Crossref). Right hand photo: Members discussing challenges and opportunities for Thai scholarship.\nCharleston Asia conference - a reminder of the importance of infrastructure The three-day Charleston Asia conference gave us a great opportunity to meet with members and colleagues based in Asia, and hear about areas of focus and concern. It was refreshing to hear about the global challenges of access to knowledge, AI, and preserving research integrity, within the context of Asia’s institutional, linguistic, and economic environment. And it was wonderful to hear about so many projects (many at national level) integrating Crossref data to lead their strategies and even shape policy decisions.\nThree inspiring keynotes covered many of the challenges of scholarship in Asia, covering local, national, and regional approaches.\nDistinguished Professor Joyashree Roy (Asian Institute of Technology) presented her work on the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change at the United Nations. She highlighted how those in Asia are the most likely to be impacted by climate change, but underrepresented in the research due to structural, linguistic, and financial barriers. She explained how publishers and librarians can remove some of these barriers.\nProfessor Devika Madalli (Director of INFLIBNET Centre) talked about the various services that her team has created at a national level in India to reduce country and institution-wide inequalities. INFLIBNET subscribes to Crossref’s Metadata Plus service, and it’s great to see our community’s metadata being part of such useful services.\nProfessor Bin Zhang (Library Director, Renmin University of China) talked about the challenges of access to scholarship across different regions in China, and how investment in infrastructure is making a difference here.\nThere were many other fascinating sessions during the three days, including our panel discussion, moderated by Robbykha Rosalien.\nThe importance of metadata for Asian scholarship - our panel at Charleston Asia Metadata isn’t just a technical detail—it’s the backbone of discoverability, credibility, trust, and impact in scholarly communication. In our panel session, we explored metadata trends across Asia and discussed how open metadata is shaping research visibility, integrity, and assessment in the region. Our panel brought together diverse voices: Mochammad Tanzil Multazam from Relawan Jurnal Indonesia, Ms. Guo Xiaofeng, Crossref Ambassador in Asia and Director at Sin-Chn Scientific Press (Singapore), and Prof. Dr. Namtip Wipawin from the Department of Information Science, School of Liberal Arts, Sukhothai Thammathirat Open University in Thailand. Each shared experiences of challenges and solutions in adopting open metadata practices and leveraging metadata effectively.\nPhoto: panel session - Ms. Guo Xiaofeng, Prof. Dr. Namtip Wipawin, Mochammad Tanzil Multazam\nThe session opened with Robbykha presenting a striking graph: Crossref now has more than 14,000 members from Asia, representing over half of its global membership. As of January 19th, 2026, there are 13.8 million registered DOI records from Asia. Indonesia leads with 3.02 million registered DOIs, followed by Japan with 2.73 million, India with 2.52 million, South Korea with 1.28 million, and Türkiye rounding out the top five with 793,198. These numbers highlight Asia’s growing role in global scholarly communication.\nPhoto: Robbykha presenting the Asian metadata coverage from Crossref data\nMochammad Tanzil Multazam shared how government support for persistent identifiers and metadata in Indonesia has fueled one of the largest and fastest‑growing open‑access journal ecosystems worldwide. Of 27,807 national journals, nearly half already register DOIs and metadata records (SINTA, 13 January 2026). Prof. Dr. Namtip Wipawin provided an overview of the metadata landscape in Thai academia, highlighting both progress and ongoing challenges. Meanwhile, Ms. Guo Xiaofeng presented a case study on open metadata utilization across Asia, showing practical examples of how metadata strengthens discoverability and trust.\nParticipants emphasized the importance of metadata for Asian scholarship: enhancing discoverability, accessibility, and providing rich, accurate data. Yet challenges remain. One of the most pressing issues is multilingual content, and the best way to reflect this in the metadata. For our current advice on multilingual metadata, take a look at our documentation and this interesting discussion on our forum. Our Metadata Advisory Group currently has a working group of members and metadata users discussing this further, to help ensure our future schema updates help to accurately reflect multilingual metadata.\nPoll results from the panel audience on key challenges to the adoption of rich metadata\nCrossref Bangkok - a reminder of the importance of visibility The day after the Charleston Asia conference, around 75 attendees joined us for our Crossref Bangkok event. The event reinforced how valuable opportunities to interact directly with our members are for learning about the challenges that they face in scholarly publishing and to explore together how those can be overcome. We were supported during the event by our ambassadors Guo Xiaofeng, Amber Osman and Prof. MI Subhani, and by Prof. Dr. Namtip Wipawin and her team, who lead the sponsor organization from National Research Council of Thailand. We were also grateful to Mark Husskison from PKP for attending and helping attendees with some of their knottier OJS questions.\nMost of the event attendees were from universities, which are our existing members in Thailand, and we were also joined by a team from the National Library of Thailand.\nPhoto: Participants from across Thailand’s research and publishing landscape\nWe started the day by hearing more about who was in attendance, where they had travelled from, and what they hoped to get out of the day. We moved on to an introduction to Crossref and DOI metadata records, which provided a refresher on the benefits and obligations of Crossref membership and highlighted the importance of rich metadata for discoverability and research integrity. Next up, we split up into small groups to discuss and share the challenges and opportunities in scholarly publishing in Thailand. From across the discussion groups, there was one word that kept coming up again and again: visibility. Attendees shared how visibility is both a challenge and an opportunity. They appreciate that registering rich metadata records with Crossref - which are then shared with the global scholarly ecosystem - provides them with a way to make their content more visible, but agreed that this isn’t without challenges. Attendees welcomed the in-person meeting, and asked for more training and support from Crossref, particularly in registering content. (We shared details of our regular “Getting Started at Crossref” webinars for new members, and our regular “Metadata Health Checks” for longer term members, and we’ll be thinking about how to support members in Asia with more training).\nDuring the afternoon, we heard more from Prof. Dr. Namtip Wipawin on the importance of metadata for raising the visibility of Thai research. We then ran a practical session, explaining how to add (and update) metadata records for those using our new Metadata Manager, and those using the OJS platform. These were followed by a practical session, with participants exploring their own Participation Reports, and discussing how to fill in any gaps in their metadata. The new CSV download for metadata gaps was particularly useful. It was great to support members in adding in their missing references through the OJS platform live, by properly activating the OJS references plugin.\nAttending the Crossref Bangkok Workshop made it clear that being a part of Crossref goes far beyond simply assigning DOIs, it is about contributing to a global research community. The sessions highlighted how rich metadata, such as references, abstracts, ORCID iDs, and funding information, play a vital role in making Thai research more visible and accessible worldwide. There was also a strong emphasis on the importance of English metadata and standard identifiers in overcoming language and name-related challenges. Overall, the workshop showed how high-quality metadata can help bring Thai research onto the global stage and strengthen its international recognition.\n\u0026ndash; Prof. Dr. Namtip Wipawin on behalf of the National Research Council of Thailand.\nVisiting the National Library of Thailand - a reminder of the importance of stewardship The warm welcome from National Library of Thailand team: Ms. Thanachcha Suwannavach (Librarian, Practitioner Level), Ms. Thitima Kumkhun (Librarian, Professional Level), Ms. Linda Puechsee (Librarian, Professional Level), Madhura Amdekar (Crossref), Robbykha Rosalien (Crossref), Amanda Bartell (Crossref), Ms. Bubphar Chuchat (Director of the National Library of Thailand), Dr. Prasittichai Lertratanakehakarn (Director of Information Resources Service Group), Ms. Rawiwan Putsorn (Director of Library Research and Development Group), Mrs. Atchara Jaruwan (Director of Information Resources Development Group), Mr. Jung Dippracone (Director of Manuscripts and Inscriptions Group), and Ms. Samachaya Dadrung (Librarian, Professional Level)\nOn our final day in Bangkok, we were lucky enough to visit with the team at the National Library of Thailand. They have a key role to play in scholarly publishing in Thailand as they run the National ISSN Centre. They are also stewards of much of Thailand’s cultural heritage, and we were honoured to view some of the artifacts that they look after.\nStaff showcasing the digitization efforts at the National Library of Thailand — preserving knowledge and making it accessible for the future.\nThe role of DOI metadata in enhancing the visibility and accessibility of digital resources is vital. This experience has provided the National Library with a clearer strategic roadmap for establishing a DOI Center dedicated to rare materials and digital ancient manuscripts. This initiative aims to broaden the reach of these invaluable heritage resources, ensuring they are easily discoverable and accessible to a global audience.\n\u0026ndash; Ms. Bubphar Chuchat, Director of the National Library of Thailand\nWrapping up our visit, we left the National Library of Thailand feeling inspired. The team’s passion for preserving rare manuscripts while embracing digital tools shows how heritage and innovation can go hand in hand. It was a reminder that stewardship isn’t only about looking after the past; it’s about making sure knowledge and culture continue to thrive for the future.\n",
"headings": ["Charleston Asia conference - a reminder of the importance of infrastructure","The importance of metadata for Asian scholarship - our panel at Charleston Asia","Crossref Bangkok - a reminder of the importance of visibility","Visiting the National Library of Thailand - a reminder of the importance of stewardship"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/authors/robbykha-rosalien/",
"title": "Robbykha Rosalien",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Authors",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/authors/luis-montilla/",
"title": "Luis Montilla",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Authors",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/authors/reyhana-mahomed/",
"title": "Reyhana Mahomed",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Authors",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/voices-from-crossref-metadata-sprint-in-s%C3%A3o-paulo/",
"title": "Voices from Crossref Metadata Sprint in São Paulo",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2026-03-31",
"lastmod_ts": 1774915200,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "This year, we placed a spotlight on the Latin American community, hosting the second Crossref Metadata Sprint in São Paulo, Brazil from 4 - 6 March 2026. In our first tri-lingual event, we brought together 31 participants from Argentina, Brazil, Colombia, Ecuador, and Mexico. Our goal was to foster community co-creation using the open scholarly metadata. The Sprint was an opportunity to pose questions, share ideas, collaborate on research, and propose innovative solutions that enhance the use of metadata in scholarly communication and beyond.\nRead on for more details about the content of the Sprint, and the resulting projects. You can also register to join our Sprint Showcase call on 22nd April to hear directly from the team about their creations.\n",
"content": "This year, we placed a spotlight on the Latin American community, hosting the second Crossref Metadata Sprint in São Paulo, Brazil from 4 - 6 March 2026. In our first tri-lingual event, we brought together 31 participants from Argentina, Brazil, Colombia, Ecuador, and Mexico. Our goal was to foster community co-creation using the open scholarly metadata. The Sprint was an opportunity to pose questions, share ideas, collaborate on research, and propose innovative solutions that enhance the use of metadata in scholarly communication and beyond.\nRead on for more details about the content of the Sprint, and the resulting projects. You can also register to join our Sprint Showcase call on 22nd April to hear directly from the team about their creations.\nWe were excited to receive more than 100 expressions of interest for this sprint. We\u0026rsquo;re excited to see the growing enthusiasm in this space and will find new ways to channel it (watch the space!). We sought to balance that interest with ensuring a productive size of the group for the sprint. Our participants included librarians, researchers, grad students, developers, journal editors, and scholarly communications professionals. They engaged in rich, multilingual conversations about the different editorial practices across the region - dynamically jumping between Spanish, Portuguese, and English.\nWe coordinated our activities and ideas with the SciELO Brazil team, who also participated in the Sprint. SciELO is one of the most recognized scholarly organizations in the region and an important source of open scholarly content and metadata; articles, books, preprints, and datasets published in different languages.\nSome of the participants of the 2nd Crossref Metadata Sprint, and Crossref Staff\nSusan Collins, Luis Montilla, Isaac Farley, Jason Portenoy, and Leandro Contreras from Crossref acted as facilitators, providing general support, answering questions, and clarifying the ins and outs of Crossref tools and interfaces.\nUsing the key learning from our first Metadata Sprint, we created opportunities for the group to interact and get acquainted remotely, before the event, to help them hit the ground running and maximise the value of the time we spent together. It really paid off in terms of quality and progress of the sprint projects.\nProjects summary The projects developed also have their own mini stories. When we opened the call for expressions of interest, we invited individual pitches for projects that make creative use of Crossref metadata to answer questions and support solutions to problems faced by our communities locally. During the preparations to the event, participants refined their proposals and coalesced into project teams. This is the list of the projects they progressed during our Sprint:\nCrossref Metadata Refiner: A tool that queries the Crossref API for any publisher prefix or ISSN and computes a Crossref Health Score for each DOI, crossing citation count with metadata completeness. The result is a prioritized action list for the member: fix the most-cited papers with the worst metadata first.\nImproving Error Messages in Crossref Submission Details: A proposal for the redesign of the presentation of error messages in the Crossref Submission Details interface. Instead of showing only raw XML diagnostics, display structured and human-readable messages.\nScholarly Retractions and Corrections Tool: The development of a user-friendly form for Crossref members to fill in correction and retraction metadata.\nBest practices for metadata journals in OJS, according Crossref schema: A guide that shows the correct completion of metadata fields in order to avoid errors already seen in everyday work, and facilitate the correct registration of metadata with the necessary quality to avoid errors in XML export.\nMetrics for publishers using the Crossref API: A Power BI dashboard that summarises members’ metrics and indicators based on metadata retrieved from the REST API.\nMetadata Integrity Check: A proposal for the implementation of a second stage of XML integrity verification after using the XML parser. This additional step would allow preliminary verification of the presence of mandatory metadata elements and encourage the inclusion of recommended metadata, such as institutional affiliations and references.\nIntegration OJS / OPS - Crossmark: This project advanced the development of a plugin for the current versions of OJS (3.4 and 3.5), so that when an article receives a correction, update, or new version after publication, each published version of the same work receives its own DOI, while maintaining structured relationships between these versions.\nAutomated Detection of Reference Rot in Scholarly Web Citations: An automated evaluation pipeline to retrieve citations containing URLs, then traces redirect behavior, and records HTTP status codes and final page locations. It also extracts evidence from both the citation data and the webpage itself, including titles, creators, identifiers, and other metadata.\nWe will hold a community call where the teams will showcase their projects. If anything here caught your eye and you would like to learn more – join us on 22nd of April (or register to receive the recording). In the spirit of the São Paulo Sprint, we will hold the call in three languages again! Register now to join our Sprint Showcase call.\nI am still in awe at what our community achieved in such a short time in the Sprint: dashboards, clever API integrations, best practices manuals… all of these projects are sure to make a mark. The Metadata Sprint in São Paulo is a testament to my belief that great ideas are everywhere, and I’m happy to have taken part in amplifying them!\nSaid Leandro Contreras, User Experience Researcher\nLike many in attendance, this was my first Crossref Metadata Sprint. I went into the event hoping to make connections, help where I could, and learn from those in attendance. Thanks to Susan and Luis for all their planning and thoughtful leadership and the collaborative spirit of everyone participating in São Paulo, the sprint was three days full of rich co-creating, thoughtful shared problem solving, and lots of fun. It exceeded my expectations! I learned a lot and am eager for the next steps with the projects completed there. I hope to be able to participate in another Crossref sprint again very soon (and, encourage everyone reading to get to one in the future)!\nSaid Isaac Farley, Head of Support\nVoices from the Sprint During and after the Sprint, participants were actively sharing their experiences online. Here are a few highlights from across the community:\nBeing in this collaborative space allows us to deepen knowledge, exchange experiences with professionals from different countries and, above all, improve the quality of the metadata of our articles. This technical work, often invisible to the reader, is essential to ensure greater visibility, traceability and scientific impact to RBC\u0026rsquo;s publications.\nCarina Munhoz de Lima - Librarian at Revista Brasileira de Cancerologia, on Linkedin, 5 March 2026.\nThe session was a valuable opportunity to exchange knowledge, strengthen professional ties and reflect on the current challenges around metadata management and scholarly communication.\nSandra Gisela Martín - Library System Director at the Catholic University of Córdoba, on Linkedin, 10 March 2026.\nThe best experience of the Sprint was recognizing the potential of combining open infrastructure, reusable data and collaboration, with the accompaniment of Crossref experts.\nSofia E. Calle Pesántez - Research Impact and Scholarly Publishing Consultant, On Linkedin, 10 March 2026.\nI am grateful to see Crossref\u0026rsquo;s concern in personally listening to the demands of the Latin American scientific community!\nAlex Mendonça - Client Solutions Manager at ScholarOne, on Linkedin, 5 March 2026.\nIts been an absolute privilege representing Galoá at the Crossref metadata Sprint in Brazil… our specific focus during this Sprint has been clear: rolling up our sleeves to elevate the quality of metadata for Brazilian and Latin American scientific publications.\nFabiano Sant\u0026rsquo;Ana - Founder at Galoá, on Linkedin, 6 March 2026\nIt was wonderful to connect with so many people working to strengthen scholarly communication in the region, and to meet the Crossref staff who organised such a thoughtful and engaging program.\nZach Coble - Graduate Research Assistant, University of Missouri-Columbia, on Linkedin, 7 March 2026\nWe developed a free tool for registering retractions in the Crossref metadata Sprint… the motivation for the project was to develop a solution that would make the Crossmark registration process easier and more user-friendly.\nEugênio Telles, Genius Design blog, also on Crossref’s community forum. Browse Eugênio’s gallery of photos on Instagram, 8 March 2026\nParticipants None of this would’ve been possible without our enthusiastic participants. Huge thanks to everyone! Here is the full list of those who attended our second Metadata Sprint:\nName Affiliation Julia Bottesini Data-PASS Journal Editors Discussion Interface Pedro Cacique Public Knowledge Project Sofia Calle Red Iberoamericana de estudios científicos de la edición, evaluación y circulación del libro Zach Coble University of Missouri Edilson Damasio Universidade Estadual de Maringá Ana Claudia Ribeiro Editora E-papers Eugênio Fernandes Telles GeniusDesign Jhonathan de Seixas Miranda Lepidus Tecnologia Juan Felipe Vargas Martinez Journals \u0026amp; Authors Mariana Garroux Montezuma Sabesp Nicolas Mejia Torres Universidad de La Sabana Juliana Aaparecida Bolzan Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina Deise Katiuscia Xavier Kaisa Oliveira Centro Universitário de Mineiros Glicélia Pereira Silva Centro Universitário de Mineiros Carolina Tanigushi SciELO Amanda de Souza Ramalho SciELO Karolayne Costa Rodrigues de Lima Universidade Federal do Paraná Sara Jaqueline Santos da Silva Universidade Federal de Uberlândia Diego Abadan M. Melgarejo Lepidus Tecnologia Natalino Perovano Filho Universidade Estadual do Sudoeste da Bahia Sandra Gisela Martin Universidad Católica de Córdoba Roberta Takenaka SciELO Amélia Galdino Monteiro Amâncio Instituto de Física Gleb Wataghin Quele Pinheiro Valença Universidade Estadual de Santa Cruz Rafael Dias Da Silva Campos Universidade Federal do Triângulo Mineiro Igor Moura Danieleviz e Silva Lepidus Tecnologia Heytor Diniz Teixeira Universidade de São Paulo María Eduarda Dos Santos Puga Universidade Federal de São Paulo Fabiano Sant\u0026rsquo;Ana Galoá Science Flaviane Cristina Rocha Cesar Centro Universitário de Mineiros David Antonio Da Costa Universidade Federal de São Paulo The second Crossref Metadata Sprint in a nutshell\n",
"headings": ["Projects summary","Voices from the Sprint","Participants"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/categories/content-registration/",
"title": "Content Registration",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Categories",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/doi-resolution-and-deposit-outage-on-17-march-2026/",
"title": "DOI resolution and deposit outage on 17 March 2026",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2026-03-30",
"lastmod_ts": 1774828800,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "On 17 March 2026, we experienced an outage that affected DOI resolution for Crossref DOIs and the deposit of metadata records by Crossref members. In this summary, we outline what happened, the impact on our community, and the steps we are taking to strengthen our systems and processes as a result.\n",
"content": "On 17 March 2026, we experienced an outage that affected DOI resolution for Crossref DOIs and the deposit of metadata records by Crossref members. In this summary, we outline what happened, the impact on our community, and the steps we are taking to strengthen our systems and processes as a result.\nStarting around 06:30 UTC, a surge of traffic to the Handle System, governed by the DOI Foundation and operated by CNRI, caused instability across several handle servers. As a result, users couldn\u0026rsquo;t resolve Crossref DOIs. Because the Crossref system relies on the Handle System to register new DOIs and update resolution information for existing ones, metadata deposits by Crossref members were also failing.\nAlthough the handle service was restored by 09:30 UTC, the Crossref system held onto stale authentication sessions and did not automatically recover. Once we restarted the affected servers, deposit processing returned to normal around 10:18 UTC. We later reprocessed the failed submissions to ensure that members did not need to take any action.\nWhile incidents like this are disruptive for our community, several aspects of our response worked well. Our support and technology teams reacted quickly, and we were able to restore the deposit workflow promptly. We were also able to reach CNRI through established communication channels, and they responded out of hours to begin mitigation.\nThe incident also highlighted areas where we can improve our processes and resilience. In addition to the changes made by CNRI (more backend handle servers and tighter rate limiting), Crossref is taking the following actions:\nKnowledge sharing and documentation: Crossref, like all Registration Agencies, relies on the Handle System. We are reviewing the technical documentation describing how the Crossref system integrates with the Handle System, and we will continue working with CNRI to stay informed as the handle infrastructure evolves.\nImproving handle session management: We are reviewing how our system manages handle sessions to explore how recovery could occur automatically after connection disruptions.\nSubmission rerun process improvements: We will review, clarify, and document the workflow for identifying and rerunning affected member submissions after disruptions to deposit processing.\nReliable DOI resolution and deposit processing are central to the research ecosystem. We\u0026rsquo;re committed to continuously improving the resilience of our systems and we will continue to learn from incidents like this one to strengthen them further.\nIf you have any questions, we are always happy to hear from you.\nYou can stay informed about the status of our services by subscribing to updates at status.crossref.org\n",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/categories/handle/",
"title": "Handle",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Categories",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/categories/apis/",
"title": "APIs",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Categories",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/categories/data/",
"title": "Data",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Categories",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/categories/datacite/",
"title": "DataCite",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Categories",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/categories/event-data/",
"title": "Event Data",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Categories",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/authors/helena-cousijn/",
"title": "Helena Cousijn",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Authors",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/authors/martyn-rittman/",
"title": "Martyn Rittman",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Authors",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/strengthening-support-for-data-citations-and-saying-goodbye-to-event-data/",
"title": "Strengthening support for data citations and saying goodbye to Event Data",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2026-03-24",
"lastmod_ts": 1774310400,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "We’re excited to announce a new data citation API endpoint and are seeking your feedback. The new service makes existing data citation relationships in our metadata available, thereby surfacing this part of the research nexus. At the same time, we’ve decided that it’s time to move on from Event Data.\n",
"content": "We’re excited to announce a new data citation API endpoint and are seeking your feedback. The new service makes existing data citation relationships in our metadata available, thereby surfacing this part of the research nexus. At the same time, we’ve decided that it’s time to move on from Event Data.\nTime to say goodbye Metadata about published scholarly research has evolved, and continues to evolve in exciting ways. A published article, book, or conference paper is only a single piece of the puzzle. A host of digital identifiers and items can be put together to form a more complete picture of a research project. This is what forms the basis of the research nexus—a rich and reusable open network of relationships connecting research organisations, people, things, and actions; a scholarly record that the global community can build on forever, for the benefit of society.\nTen years ago, we launched Event Data to surface mentions of research around the Internet. What were people saying about published research? Could this discourse contribute to post-publication review and validation? We set up Event Data to capture use of Crossref DOIs in the online world from a variety of sources, including blog posts, social media, websites, and annotations. The idea was that diverse mentions (or “events”) could supplement traditional citation counts as a way to capture the value of research.\nToday, the focus is increasingly on transparency, research integrity, and the completeness of outputs. Trust in research is shaped by knowing who the funder was, being able to reanalyse the original data, or checking for bugs in the analysis code. There are also more identifiers for objects within the research space and they are used more widely. This shift is evident in the relatively low usage of Event Data. We can no longer justify the resources and cost that goes into maintaining it as a service. Instead, we will focus on enabling and surfacing relationships between different types of research outputs, starting with links to datasets.\nFor these reasons, we have decided to sunset the Event Data API and from 23 April 2026 it will no longer be available (although historical data will still be available). In its place, we’re making available an API endpoint for data citations.\nVisibility for data citations The new API endpoint focuses solely on data citations and uses references and relationships deposited by Crossref members, including Crossref articles referencing datasets with either Crossref or DataCite DOIs. While our metadata contains many data citations, and some of them are labelled as data citations, it is often difficult to find them because they are swamped in number by other citations. If you are trying to get data citations directly from our REST API, it’s like looking for a needle in a haystack. This new endpoint makes connections easier to find, enabling organisations to track when research is reused, cited, and built upon. By putting this metadata into a dedicated service, we are making it easier for interested organisations to track and find data citations. Our goal is to make existing sets of connections easier to access, giving clarity to how scholarly works link to the data that supports them.\nThis beta version will allow us the opportunity to incorporate feedback from the community and make changes to improve delivery. We received early positive feedback from a number of interested organisations. Later this year we will assess whether it is ready for production, needs more work, or if insufficient interest from the community suggests we should pursue a different solution.\nAnyone interested in data citations is invited to try the new endpoint. Please let us know your feedback via the community forum. You can find supporting documentation on our website and Swagger documentation, including the opportunity to try out features.\nEdited 15 June 2026: link to historical Event Data added.\n",
"headings": ["Time to say goodbye","Visibility for data citations"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/categories/linked-data/",
"title": "Linked Data",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Categories",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/categories/linking/",
"title": "Linking",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Categories",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/on-metadata-enrichment/",
"title": "On metadata enrichment",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2026-03-19",
"lastmod_ts": 1773878400,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "Metadata is communication; it can tell a story about research and paint a picture for others to respond to and learn from, across the world and throughout the forthcoming generations. Metadata can feel technical with words like ‘infrastructure’ and ‘schema’, and sometimes, like tech in general, it comes with hyperbole. But metadata really is part art (storytelling and pictures) and part science (structured models and standards) with both aspects being equally important, and requiring people as well as systems. That necessary combination of human and machine involvement also makes metadata challenging.\n",
"content": "Metadata is communication; it can tell a story about research and paint a picture for others to respond to and learn from, across the world and throughout the forthcoming generations. Metadata can feel technical with words like ‘infrastructure’ and ‘schema’, and sometimes, like tech in general, it comes with hyperbole. But metadata really is part art (storytelling and pictures) and part science (structured models and standards) with both aspects being equally important, and requiring people as well as systems. That necessary combination of human and machine involvement also makes metadata challenging.\nCrossref, as the earliest adopter of DOIs specialising in scholarly research, became synonymous with DOIs in this community. However, not everyone realises that DOIs can be registered with any one of nine different agencies, which are all separate organisations with entirely separate systems that do not at present integrate or connect. And what’s more – there isn’t a central or shared “DOI schema” – each agency develops the metadata for the purposes of their organisation or community. In Crossref’s case, with our vision to create the research nexus as a complete and robust network of relationships between objects, people, and institutions of scholarship – that community encompasses the whole of the research enterprise.\nThe immense 180 million records of research outputs in Crossref are maintained in a system that 24,000 member organisations have already invested in. Those records benefit from rich and format-appropriate metadata schema, developed in close collaboration with the community, which makes it possible for our members to offer contextual information about each object they register. We have a long history of working with our members on recording that context, creating tools, and providing support to adopt standard metadata, enriching the context for the benefit of the scholarly community, and society at large.\nOf course, those metadata records are not perfect, both in terms of quality and completeness, and the frustration around gaps in metadata is particularly strong. We are working to improve the quality and completeness of the metadata from many angles: by working with the community to understand their needs and obstacles, by identifying and analysing potential sources for additional metadata, by maintaining and adopting the existing system to changing environment, and by planning a new flexible system that will allow third-party assertions and automated enrichment workflows.\nIn 2020, we published a paper for the inaugural issue of Quantitative Science Studies on Crossref: The Sustainable Source of Community-Owned Scholarly Metadata and blogged an introduction to it under Crossref Metadata for Bibliometrics. One of the things our analyses in 2019 showed was that over 80% of records between 2013-2016 had been updated. Reviewing the numbers recently, we continue to see this stewardship and maintenance of metadata, amounting to almost 70% of records from the past decade being updated at least once. On the dawn of reaching 2 billion citation links, we’d like to share our experience, plans, and views on this ubiquitous activity of updating and connecting metadata – by our members and by automations built into the system by us. Altogether, these constitute the enrichment process to improve the usability of the information for the community.\nMetadata available through Crossref Crossref collects, processes, stores, and shares metadata records for a wide range of research outputs. While each record describes an individual research output, it also mentions other entities and their attributes - and, most importantly, the relationships between them. Two works identified by DOIs, for example, may be linked by a citation relationship. A person identified by an ORCID may be connected to an institution identified by a ROR ID through an affiliation relationship. A preprint and its corresponding journal article, each with its own DOI, can be linked by an “is preprint of” relationship. A research output may be associated with a grant through a “financed by” relationship. Together, these entities and relationships form the foundational building blocks of the research nexus.\nAs of March 14, 2026, the Crossref database contains 180,034,490 metadata records describing research outputs. You can download all the records and examine them yourself in the latest public data file. The plot below illustrates how the number of works has changed over time, showing that the rate of growth is accelerating.\nThe metadata records describe research outputs of various types, including:\njournal articles books and book chapters conference proceedings peer reviews reports datasets preprints dissertations grants and more The majority of works in the Crossref database (67%) are journal articles. However, the distribution of record types has changed considerably over time. Newer types, such as components, datasets, and posted content, are growing more quickly than more traditional ways of communicating research:\nResearch outputs in the Crossref database are represented by rich metadata records, which may include:\nbasic bibliographic metadata (title, publication dates, contributors, journal title, conference name, volume and issue numbers) authors’ affiliations and ORCID identifiers abstracts and links to full text funding metadata, including funders and grant details license metadata bibliographic reference lists clinical trial numbers updates such as corrections or retractions relationships between works and other entities, such as “is translation of”, “is review of”, “is preprint of”, or “is version of” components associated with the work, such as figures, tables, and supplemental materials All metadata is freely available through the Crossref REST API, and additional services, such as Crossref Search, are also provided.\nA natural question is: where does all this metadata come from? This is important for two main reasons. First, it helps address the question of trust, as understanding the origin of the metadata allows users to better assess its reliability. Second, it points us to the right place when investigating or addressing issues or gaps in the data.\nAt first glance, the answer might seem straightforward: from Crossref members. Crossref members, such as publishers, research institutions, universities, funders, museums, libraries, data and subject repositories, and conference providers, register metadata for the outputs they publish. Crossref stores this metadata and makes it available to the community.\nIn reality, however, the story is more complicated.\nMetadata enrichment layers The initial metadata deposit is only the beginning of what can become a long and rather fascinating journey. What users can see in our REST API is often the result of a series of updates and additions that occur over time, sometimes coming from multiple sources and happening in different ways. We can think of these ways as enrichment layers.\nEach enrichment layer offers opportunities to improve the metadata while also introducing its own considerations and challenges. Rather than forming a sequence of clearly separated stages, these layers intertwine, overlap, and affect one another, collectively shaping how a research output is represented within the research nexus.\nEnrichment layers are essential for completeness of the research nexus. If we relied solely on the original, one-off deposits from members, the metadata would be full of gaps, limiting the usefulness of any analysis or assessment based on it. While the scholarly metadata will never be perfectly complete, applying these enrichment layers is how we gradually and collectively build a fuller, more accurate picture of the research nexus.\nOne important caveat is that more metadata doesn’t magically equal better metadata. In fact, there’s often a delicate tradeoff between completeness and quality: the harder one pushes to fill every gap, the greater the chance of introducing errors. At Crossref, we believe quality comes first. We recognise that no dataset will ever be perfect, but we’re equally unwilling to apply enrichment processes without quality control. Any enrichment we introduce must meet a high bar for accuracy — no exceptions, no shortcuts.\nThe order of the enrichment layers discussed here loosely reflects how established they are within the scholarly ecosystem. There also might be a correlation, or at least a perceived one, between this ordering and the reliability of the underlying processes. That said, one must tread carefully when making such interpretations: perceived reliability is not the same as actual reliability.\nLayer 1: Member updates Crossref members not only deposit metadata, but also update it over time. This is an essential part of the system for several reasons. There may be errors in the originally deposited metadata that need to be corrected. Also, the initial record may contain gaps that can be filled later as more information becomes available. In addition, many changes naturally occur: landing page URLs may change, works may be archived in new locations, or identifiers for affiliated organisations may become available. Those situations also ideally result in an update.\nThis update process is well established. Over 24,000 Crossref members form a large global community that operates under shared membership terms. As part of these terms, members are responsible for maintaining and updating their metadata records. In this governance framework it is clearly defined who owns and stewards the metadata associated with each record, and who is responsible for the quality level and issues.\nMember updates are very common. As an example, over 80% of works deposited between 2013 and 2020 were updated at least once. This demonstrates the community\u0026rsquo;s commitment to improving completeness and quality of the scholarly record. The plot below shows the percentage of works created in a given month that were updated at least once.\nHowever, this layer also comes with challenges. It relies on members actively meeting their obligations to maintain and improve their metadata. As a result, gaps and inconsistencies can remain, and overall metadata quality is never perfect.\nOur plans for the future in this area largely build on what is already happening. This includes developing and maintaining effective user interfaces for updating metadata, evolving the input metadata schema to keep pace with changes in the scholarly landscape, offering regular workshops on metadata improvements, and collaboratively establishing best practices while educating members on how to apply them.\nLayer 2: Community feedback loop Crossref metadata is widely used and examined by a large community of consumers. As a result, issues with metadata are sometimes identified by community members and reported back to us. When this happens, Crossref does not directly correct the metadata records. Instead, we contact the relevant member responsible for the record and able to deposit an update.\nIn this layer, the stewardship of metadata remains with the member, while responsibility for metadata quality broadens to include other actors in the community. This creates significant potential for scaling by involving a large community in identifying and reporting metadata issues.\nAt present, however, this process is not automated. Crossref staff effectively act as intermediaries between those reporting issues and the responsible member. As a result, the process has limited scalability. It also depends on the willingness of members to act on the reports they receive, as they are not obligated to respond to such reports.\nIn the future, we may explore automating portions of this workflow to handle community feedback more efficiently and lighten the load on everyone involved.\nLayer 3: Metadata matching Metadata matching is the task of finding an identifier for an item based on a structured or unstructured description of it. Matching strategies run as fully automated processes that analyse information deposited and updated by members and add identifiers, filling gaps in the metadata.\nThere are many instances of metadata matching problems, for example:\nbibliographic reference matching: finding a DOI for a cited paper based on a bibliographic reference, funder matching: finding the ROR ID for a funder based on its name, affiliation matching: finding the ROR ID for an organisation based on an affiliation string, preprint matching: finding the DOI for a preprint that precedes a given journal article, grant matching: finding the grant DOI based on an award number and a funder name. This layer is unique, as it focuses on a crucial type of gap in the scholarly record: the missing relationships between entities. Indeed, adding an identifier for an entity mentioned within a metadata record of a research output is typically an equivalent of asserting a relationship between that output and the matched entity. For example, bibliographic reference matching inserts citation relationships, and funder name matching - funding relationships between a research output and a funding organisation. These relationships form the foundation of the research nexus.\nCurrently, at Crossref, we perform two types of matching. We match bibliographic references to the DOIs of cited outputs, and funder names to Funder IDs. Both processes rely on fuzzy comparisons and other heuristic approaches to identify likely matches.\nIn the case of bibliographic reference matching, as it turns out, more than half of the cited DOIs (1 billion) available in the Crossref database originate from automated metadata matching:\nIn the case of funder name matching, the distribution is very different, but the matching strategy was still able to fill in some of the gap:\nMetadata matching is a particularly valuable form of enrichment for several reasons. Matching strategies can often achieve high levels of accuracy while working in a fully automated way. This makes them highly scalable and drastically reduces the need for human oversight. Their focus on relationships also strengthens the foundations of the research nexus.\nAt the same time, this enrichment layer presents a number of challenges.\nIts most fundamental limitation to remember is that metadata matching can only fill gaps when there is at least some useful information to work with. For example, it can identify a cited document only using structured or unstructured citation data, and the funding organisation can only be identified if some funding information is available. But if citation information, or funding information, is completely absent, as is the case for 101M (56%) records and 166M (92%) records respectively, then matching simply isn’t possible.\nMatching strategies can also be complex and time-consuming to research, develop, and maintain. They require additional considerations of issues such as openness, explainability, complexity, flexibility, and cost.\nPerhaps most importantly, in the case of matching, it becomes less clear who is responsible for the information introduced through the matching process. This is particularly important because matching results are never perfect, meaning there is always a risk of introducing errors. The risk is further amplified by the fact that matching strategies typically operate in a fully automated, unsupervised manner. As a result, careful evaluation of matching performance, as well as maintaining accurate provenance records, becomes increasingly important.\nAt Crossref, we have ambitious plans in this area. We intend to rebuild Crossref’s metadata matching workflows using modern software development and data science practices. The goal is to create a dedicated, consolidated matching service that will eventually replace all existing production matching processes, with results made available through the REST API. This project will cover six matching tasks: bibliographic reference matching, funder name matching, preprint matching, affiliation matching, grant matching, and title matching. You can learn more about metadata matching at Crossref at a dedicated project page.\nLayer 4: Third-party datasets There are many databases containing scholarly data, and one way to fill gaps in Crossref member-provided metadata is to incorporate additional metadata from those external sources.\nWe already have one example of this. Crossref ingests data from the Retraction Watch database to supplement information about retractions and other updates to records:\nThis layer has several advantages. It draws on subject-specific and metadata-specific expertise, avoids reinventing work that has already been done elsewhere, and reflects a collaborative community-driven approach to improving the scholarly record.\nHowever, there are also important challenges to consider. Integrating external data often involves multiple data licenses or acquisition arrangements, and there may be less control over data quality compared to metadata that comes directly from members. There is also a risk that relying too heavily on external sources could shift responsibility away from the member stewards of the metadata. Finally, it can be difficult to determine which external datasets provide sufficient value and longevity to justify long-term integration.\nLooking ahead, we plan to explore further opportunities to incorporate third-party datasets, carefully considering the value they bring, as well as issues of licensing, sustainability, and data quality.\nLayer 5: Unstructured content scraping A significant amount of scholarly information still exists in fully unstructured forms, such as full-text PDF documents and web pages. In principle, extracting information from these sources could help fill many gaps in existing metadata.\nIn a lighter-touch approach, analysing full-text documents can also help verify existing metadata elements. If such a check fails, the unverified element may be removed from the record — which, perhaps counterintuitively, can also count as enrichment, since improving accuracy is every bit as important as adding new information.\nThere are also important challenges to consider. Extracting metadata directly from unstructured sources could substantially shift responsibility away from the original data stewards or owners, weakening the current stewardship model. The results of automated extraction may also be inconsistent or of relatively low quality. In addition, there are potential legal and rights-related concerns, particularly when processing full-text materials. Finally, developing reliable extraction methods would require substantial research and engineering effort.\nFor all these reasons, the practical usefulness of this approach remains uncertain, and Crossref currently has no plans to run such processes in production. We will, however, keep a close eye on emerging extraction technologies and may consider adopting them in some form if future evaluations show clear value.\nSummary Metadata is far more than a technical afterthought of the publishing process. It is the connective tissue of the scholarly ecosystem, linking research objects, people, and institutions into a coherent, navigable network. At Crossref, this takes the form of a vast and continually evolving corpus of more than 180 million metadata records, all contributing to the emerging research nexus, being built through collective community effort to help the global research community discover, interpret, and reuse knowledge effectively.\nThe initial metadata record deposited by members is only the beginning. Its quality and completeness can improve over time through multiple enrichment layers: member-driven updates, community feedback, automated metadata matching, and the incorporation of third-party datasets. These processes help fill gaps and strengthen the reliability of the scholarly record, all while upholding a firm commitment to accuracy and stewardship.\nTaken together, these layers reflect a long-term, collaborative effort across technology developments, community participation, and responsible automation, to ensure that scholarly metadata becomes richer, more interconnected, and more useful for everyone who relies on it.\n",
"headings": ["Metadata available through Crossref","Metadata enrichment layers","Layer 1: Member updates","Layer 2: Community feedback loop","Layer 3: Metadata matching","Layer 4: Third-party datasets","Layer 5: Unstructured content scraping","Summary"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/2026-public-data-file-now-available/",
"title": "2026 public data file now available",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2026-03-17",
"lastmod_ts": 1773705600,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "Once a year we release all metadata records for content registered with Crossref in a public data file. This year’s version, containing nearly 180 million records, is now available. It includes metadata associated with all Crossref-registered DOIs in JSON-lines format.\n",
"content": "Once a year we release all metadata records for content registered with Crossref in a public data file. This year’s version, containing nearly 180 million records, is now available. It includes metadata associated with all Crossref-registered DOIs in JSON-lines format.\nAll our metadata is openly available via our REST API at all time and this file provides the same information all in one place for those who find that format useful for their tools and analysis. You can access the file via Academic Torrents at https://doi.org/10.13003/nggf-vt1j or directly from AWS. For further guidance and tips, see our documentation. The complete, compressed files are 208 GB.\nOur metadata has several sources:\nPrimarily, it comes from records deposited by over 24,000 members spread across over 160 countries. This year, we are pleased to have added a number of new countries by expanding our GEM program, which supports participation in the Crossref community from those in the most economically disadvantaged regions. Second, we enrich the data by adding automated matches, for example by adding DOIs to deposited references, and organisation identifiers to funders. We are undertaking a renewal of our matching processes, starting later this year with matching funders to ROR identifiers. Finally, we use selected third party sources to enrich the metadata. Currently we include retractions from the Retraction Watch database. Most of the data can be freely reused and is not subject to copyright. Some limitations are applied to abstracts. See our documentation for more details about licensing.\nWhy do we do this? The community is key to everything we do. Without the thousands of members depositing metadata, we would have nothing to share. And without countless organisations and individuals making use of the metadata, it would have no impact or value. Our mission is to serve our community, and making metadata publicly and openly available is one of our key values. The public data file is just one of a number of ways in which we enable metadata retrieval.\nOver the last year, there have been over 600 downloads of the public data file. In addition, we see around 2 billion hits to our public APIs each month. We are always excited to hear about the diverse and interesting ways in which metadata can be used.\nWhat’s different this year? Thanks to the rich metadata, the records deposited with Crossref are interconnected with many types of relationships between works, people, and organisations, that tell the story of the research endeavor. The latest public data file reflects the current status of the research nexus as we know it and we’re delighted to share it with the community.\nThis year’s dataset contains 12.7 million new records (a 7.6% increase since last year). Across the board, we’re also seeing richer metadata records, with more abstracts (up 15%), ORCID identifiers for authors (up 20%), ROR identifiers for organisations (up 250%), and links to grant identifiers for funding (reaching 50,000 records).\nResearch integrity is a current theme in our community. We can see that members increasingly look to leverage metadata in service of asserting trust in their works. An additional 27% more records have Crossmark enabled, meaning that the member responsible is open about research integrity practices, and committed to communicating corrections, retractions, and other post-publication changes. In addition, this year’s snapshot contains retractions from the Retraction Watch database. If you have any questions or feedback about the public data file, or would like to discuss how you can use it, head over to our community forum and join the conversation.\n",
"headings": ["Why do we do this?","What’s different this year?"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/authors/carlos-del-ojo-el%C3%ADas/",
"title": "Carlos Del Ojo Elías",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Authors",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/categories/metadata-retrieval/",
"title": "Metadata Retrieval",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Categories",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/authors/johanssen-obanda/",
"title": "Johanssen Obanda",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Authors",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/reflections-from-the-crossref-ambassador-community/",
"title": "Reflections from the Crossref Ambassador Community",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2026-03-16",
"lastmod_ts": 1773619200,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref Ambassadors act as local points of contact, meeting editors, librarians, researchers, and institutions to help them navigate Crossref services and understand how strong metadata supports visibility, integrity, and trust in research. They explain how to participate in our rich network of connections between works, people, and institutions, in ways that make sense in their own contexts. And last year, being our 25th anniversary, Ambassadors also massively contributed to our celebrations!\n",
"content": "Crossref Ambassadors act as local points of contact, meeting editors, librarians, researchers, and institutions to help them navigate Crossref services and understand how strong metadata supports visibility, integrity, and trust in research. They explain how to participate in our rich network of connections between works, people, and institutions, in ways that make sense in their own contexts. And last year, being our 25th anniversary, Ambassadors also massively contributed to our celebrations!\nIn 2025, the Crossref Ambassador Programme continued to grow globally with 51 volunteers from 41 countries. We were delighted to welcome five new Ambassadors: Ahmet Anıl Müngen (Turkey), Mokheseng Richard Buti (South Africa), Richard Risasi (Democratic Republic of the Congo), Pedro López Casique (Mexico), and Nadia Boutaleb (Morocco).\nDuring the year, Ambassadors promoted the value of robust metadata through webinars, including Metadata Health Check sessions in Arabic, Bahasa, French and Turkish, alongside conference participation and institutional visits across their regions. While others were more active in the Crossref Community Forum, bringing questions from their communities and contributing to discussions that helped others learn and problem-solve together.\nABEC Conference 2025 in Brazil and the 5th Latin American Scientific Journal Editors and Researchers Congress in Colombia, with Crossref Ambassadors engaging editors and researchers.\nHighlights We endeavour to stay in touch with our communities locally, and Ambassadors play a critical role in these efforts. Ambassadors joined the first Metadata Sprint in Spain, supported engagement at the Beijing International Book Fair, and co-organised local Crossref events, such as Crossref Quito and Crossref Accra. Others played active roles in the Global Equitable Membership (GEM) program, engaging communities in Sri Lanka, Tanzania, Ghana, and Senegal.\nAmbassadors connecting with the scholarly community at the Beijing International Book Fair (China)(upper left), Crossref Quito (Ecuador)(upper right), and Crossref Accra (Ghana).\nDr. Lasith Gunawardena leading a GEM programme workshop at the University of Colombo, Sri Lanka.\nSome Ambassadors delivered metadata health check sessions in French, Turkish, Bahasa, and Spanish. Several institutions supported by Ambassadors went on to become new Crossref members, while others began conversations about improving their metadata completeness.\nCrossref Ambassador Ahmet Anıl Müngen hosting a Metadata Health Check webinar in Turkish.\nAmbassadors contribute their understanding of the industry and local contexts, and their communities’ feedback into Crossref, too. Nicolás Mejía Torres, Juan Felipe Vargas, Ahmed Moustafa, Sandra Gisela Martín and Guo Xiaofeng have recently joined our new Metadata Advisory Group, where they support us to craft our metadata for the future in tune with the community’s needs, and in particular, helping us shape how we reflect global scholarship through multilingual metadata.\nTo mark Crossref\u0026rsquo;s 25th anniversary, a celebratory series of Ambassador-led satellite events was hosted to coincide with the Annual Meeting. These events, held in Nairobi (Kenya), Bogotá (Colombia), and Medan (Indonesia), featured workshops, presentations, and a watch party, allowing attendees to synchronously join the main live annual meeting program.\nCrossref satellite events bringing local communities together in Bogotá (top), Medan (center), and Nairobi (bottom).\nMany of our Ambassadors routinely organise virtual meetings and webinars. Recognising the growing need for effective online engagement, we partnered with the Centre for Scientific Collaboration and Community Engagement (CSCCE) to deliver a targeted training program focused on the advanced skills of convening and facilitating highly engaging and interactive online events. This intensive training was designed to provide our Ambassadors with practical techniques and resources for maximising participant involvement, fostering dynamic discussions, and ensuring that their online gatherings are both productive and stimulating. Equipping Ambassadors in this way ultimately strengthens the overall effectiveness of their outreach and community-building efforts.\nChallenges \u0026amp; lessons learned Alongside successes in their roles as Crossref Ambassadors, many balanced the role alongside demanding professional responsibilities, while others encountered language gaps or uneven awareness of Crossref across their regions. In some contexts, limited institutional readiness or infrastructure meant that engagement required more foundational work and patience.\nThese experiences offered valuable lessons, including the importance of demonstrations, translated reference and training materials, and more regionally tailored support.\nThe impact of the programme was also reflected through Ambassador feedback. In the annual survey, most reported feeling that their work had significantly increased their community’s capacity to understand and use Crossref services. Similarly, Ambassadors reported that their role helped Crossref reach new people and institutions that were previously unaware of Crossref.\nSurvey results showing how Ambassadors increased community capacity around Crossref services and helped reach new institutions (40 of 51 responses).\nIn 2025, Ambassadors delivered 43 activities, including training sessions, webinars, events, translations, and feedback on tools and services both individually and collaboratively, reaching more than 1,200 people worldwide.\nIn 2026, the priority for the program includes strengthening regional and multilingual outreach, increasing visibility of the Ambassador role, expanding access to up-to-date resources and tools, and creating more opportunities to connect with Crossref staff.\n",
"headings": ["Highlights","Challenges \u0026amp; lessons learned"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/categories/doaj/",
"title": "DOAJ",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Categories",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/authors/katrine-sundsb%C3%B8/",
"title": "Katrine Sundsbø",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Authors",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/renewed-partnership-doaj-and-crossref-focus-on-equitable-scholarly-metadata-and-global-support/",
"title": "Renewed partnership: DOAJ and Crossref focus on equitable scholarly metadata and global support",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2026-03-12",
"lastmod_ts": 1773273600,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "We have renewed our partnership with DOAJ to focus on a new set of objectives that reflect both organisations\u0026rsquo; commitment to improving sustainable and equitable services and infrastructure. This renewed collaboration focuses on improving the quality of scholarly metadata while expanding support for journals in low- and middle income- countries.\nWe have worked together since 2021, primarily to encourage the dissemination and use of scholarly research using online technologies, and regional and international networks, partners and communities. This partnership has helped to build local institutional capacity and sustainability within the global scholarly communication ecosystem. A continued partnership also reflects that we have a shared community; currently almost 90% of DOAJ journals are represented in Crossref.\n",
"content": "We have renewed our partnership with DOAJ to focus on a new set of objectives that reflect both organisations\u0026rsquo; commitment to improving sustainable and equitable services and infrastructure. This renewed collaboration focuses on improving the quality of scholarly metadata while expanding support for journals in low- and middle income- countries.\nWe have worked together since 2021, primarily to encourage the dissemination and use of scholarly research using online technologies, and regional and international networks, partners and communities. This partnership has helped to build local institutional capacity and sustainability within the global scholarly communication ecosystem. A continued partnership also reflects that we have a shared community; currently almost 90% of DOAJ journals are represented in Crossref.\nOur renewed collaboration will support:\nArticle Metadata Enhancements: DOAJ will improve the ingestion, processing, storage, and display of article-level metadata. Improvements include:\nAuthor affiliations and persistent identifiers Open references Expanded metadata harvesting These enhancements are expected to benefit both direct users of DOAJ and downstream discovery, aggregation, and research analytics services that rely on DOAJ metadata.\nAmbassador Programme: Our collaboration with DOAJ will support the continued development of DOAJ’s Ambassador programme. This global network of ambassadors primarily based in low- and middle-income countries:\nSupport journal editors in understanding and applying good practices in open access publishing Organise and deliver workshops, webinars, and local events Collaborate with regional partners and policymakers Raise awareness of DOAJ and publishing standards within local scholarly communities Crossref’s contribution will support ambassador travel and the organisation of workshops and events.\nWe value our longstanding collaboration with Crossref. As fellow open scholarly infrastructures, we share a commitment to strengthening the systems that support trusted, global research discovery. This new partnership enables DOAJ to move forward with important work around interoperability. Improving how infrastructures connect and exchange information is a priority for us, and this support helps ensure we can continue to serve the community in line with the Principles of Open Scholarly Infrastructure—with openness, collaboration, and long-term sustainability at the centre.\n\u0026ndash; Joanna Ball, Managing Director of DOAJ\nThe collaborations with DOAJ so far only reaffirmed our shared goal to help make the global scholarly communications system more equitable wherever we can. Our joint projects aim to seek out and devise support for resource-constrained journals in multiple ways. DOAJ’s work is essential in helping journals to adopt good practice, while Crossref offers an open infrastructure to ensure all journals can be included and discoverable in the global scholarly record.\n\u0026ndash; Ginny Hendricks, Chief Program Officer at Crossref\nAbout DOAJ DOAJ is a community-curated online directory that indexes and provides access to high quality, open access, peer reviewed journals. DOAJ deploys around one hundred carefully selected volunteers from the community of library and other academic disciplines to assist in curating open access journals. This independent database contains over 20,400 peer-reviewed open access journals covering all areas of science, technology, medicine, social sciences, arts and humanities. DOAJ is financially supported worldwide by libraries, publishers and other like-minded organizations. DOAJ services (including the evaluation of journals) are free for all, and all data provided by DOAJ are harvestable via OAI/PMH and the API. See https://doaj.org/ for more information.\nContact: DOAJ - Joanna Ball, Managing Director - joanna@doaj.org.\nAbout Crossref Crossref is a non-profit organisation that runs an open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with their 24,000 members in 166 countries, Crossref drives metadata exchange and supports nearly 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.\nContact: Crossref - Kora Korzec, Director of Community – kkorzec@crossref.org.\n",
"headings": ["About DOAJ","About Crossref"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/hit-refresh-redesigning-our-technical-infrastructure/",
"title": "Hit refresh: redesigning our technical infrastructure",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2026-03-11",
"lastmod_ts": 1773187200,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "With key milestones achieved in 2025, including the appointment of new Directors of Technology and Programs, a move to the cloud, and some key schema updates, we now have a firm foundation for our next challenge: a redesign of our core technical systems to make them more modern, robust, and easier to maintain and scale.\n",
"content": "With key milestones achieved in 2025, including the appointment of new Directors of Technology and Programs, a move to the cloud, and some key schema updates, we now have a firm foundation for our next challenge: a redesign of our core technical systems to make them more modern, robust, and easier to maintain and scale.\nAt a high level, our systems serve our community well. The deposit system handles over 107,000 DOI deposits and updates per day, and the REST API responds to 2 billion requests per month, serving up nearly 180 million open metadata records. These systems are reliable: since December 2025, the REST API pools exceeded 99.94% uptime, and the submission queue, since January 2024, has had an uptime of 99.90%.\nUptime for REST API pools and the submission queue, with minimal service interruption since January 2024.\nIt’s this reliability, we think, that has kept us from tackling this redesign earlier. But the reality is that when these systems were first built, some as long ago as 2005, Crossref and our community looked very different. In 2005, we had 318 members, and were creating DOIs and depositing metadata exclusively for journal articles, all supported by 5 Crossref staff. Today, we have 24,000+ members, representing publishers, societies, funders, universities, service providers, sponsors, and sponsored members; and we are assigning DOIs to \u0026gt;17 content types, from journal articles to book chapters, grants, conference proceedings, dissertations, and more. All supported by 50+ Crossref staff.\nLike a stone monolith, a tightly coupled system can be solid, but hard to adapt. Over the years, we’ve accumulated quite a bit of technical debt building support for new features and functions into one monolithic codebase.\nWe haven\u0026rsquo;t always been great at paying down that technical debt (because, as some say, if it ain’t broke don’t fix it), but we have made big strides in the last 18 months. Our main database moved to Postgres from Oracle and we migrated from a physical data centre to the cloud.\nBut still, the codebase has become hard to maintain; it\u0026rsquo;s not always clear that fixing something in one place won\u0026rsquo;t break something else. A more modern approach, breaking apart the monolith into separate, smaller services, will enable us to seamlessly maintain services, identify and debug issues efficiently, and build new features to support the ever-changing needs of our growing community.\nPaul has recently started a new role at Crossref as the Product Manager for the Open and Sustainable Operations Program and will play a big role in this cross-functional effort. Having moved over from the technical support team, he brings a wealth of experience with all of our systems, how they work in detail, and where the pain points exist for internal users as well as members. We will rely on this experience to bring a better suited system to our members and colleagues.\nOh, the things he’s seen (and heard!). Here’s what rises to the top of his pain points list:\nOur authentication service is difficult to administer with manual processes still in place for change requests Title management causes headaches for our members and staff: members can’t modify or transfer titles between each other in our system themselves and rely on manual intervention from the Support team. Members don’t have access to all of the details about their own records that we have in our system. This creates unnecessary barriers to stewarding their metadata. Members can’t currently programmatically check the status of their submission in the system to learn in real-time whether it has been deposited or remains in the queue, which would be really useful. How are we going to do this? This won’t be one big bang – the scale is way too big, and it’s far too risky. We will instead break the work into a series of (many!) smaller projects, chipping away at the large monolith of Crossref code and building smaller, free-standing components which will be easier to maintain. We also don’t see this work as a separate project with a cleanly defined beginning and end - rather, gradually replacing parts of the system with more modern, better-designed components is simply part of ongoing maintenance.\nWe’ve already taken a hard look at what our system does (and it’s a lot!) and developed a list of ~14 core “functions” it serves, things like authentication and authorization, metadata deposit and validation, metadata distribution, and so on. We\u0026rsquo;ll work on replacing those functions with free-standing services, then pull out the (then-unnecessary!) code from the codebase. At each step, the monolith gets smaller and less complex.\nWe’ve already started doing this, and it feels great! Most recently, we rebuilt a component we lovingly call the ‘Pusher.’ Its function is to push the XML our members deposit to the REST API, where it can be distributed to users, and to keep citation counts updated. We deployed the new Pusher in two phases, in October 2025 and February 2026. It uses modern code libraries, is open source, and runs independently rather than being tangled up with the rest of the core system.\nAnother project that is currently underway is rebuilding of our metadata matching workflows using modern software development and data science practices. The goal is to create a dedicated, consolidated matching service that will eventually replace all existing matching processes, with results made available through the REST API. This project will start with matching funder names to ROR IDs, and eventually cover also bibliographic reference matching, preprint matching, affiliation matching, grant matching, and title matching.\nWe have yet to decide on the exact order of things, but that will likely be determined by the complex dependencies we touched on earlier. We’ll also consider urgency and risk - is something falling over too often and causing too much work to maintain it and keep it stable? That’s the reason we bumped up the priority on the Pusher work and rewrote it when we did. We’ll also consider benefits: quicker upgrades which will help both ourselves and our members will naturally have a higher priority than less impactful projects.\nWe do know that the top priority is the authentication service. The current one was not meant to be permanent, but rather a bridge until we build a permanent solution. It’s now beyond its useful life: it’s quite confusing, it doesn’t scale (and we are scaling), and it’s painful for sponsors, members, and Crossref staff. Tackling this piece of work first unblocks a lot of other important things we want to get done. It’s a big undertaking that we are excited to get started on to improve the user experience for everyone. Importantly, we will be consulting with the community along the way so that we get this right.\nDominika Tkaczyk, Crossref Director of Technology, emphasized the importance of maintaining open scholarly infrastructure at the Crossref annual meeting in October 2025. She said that, just as we maintain roads and bridges to make sure they’re safe, we must maintain scholarly infrastructure so it continues to serve the community far into the future.\nThis is a long road, but it’s one we’re excited to be on. We’ll have periodic updates on our progress as this work goes forward: what we’re getting done, where we need input, and what we’re tackling next. We’ll need a lot of feedback from you, our community, about what’s working well and where we might make improvements.\n",
"headings": ["How are we going to do this?"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/gem/",
"title": "Global Equitable Membership (GEM) program",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 3,
"lastmod": "2026-03-05",
"lastmod_ts": 1772668800,
"section": "Global Equitable Membership (GEM) program",
"tags": [],
"description": "In order to meet our mission of a truly global and connected research ecosystem, it is important to ensure that participation in Crossref and all our services and metadata is accessible to everyone involved in documenting scholarly progress.\nCrossref membership is open to all organisations that produce scholarly and professional materials and content. But cost and technical capabilities can be barriers to joining, and where that\u0026rsquo;s the case, we aim to reduce these in a number of ways. These include: partnering with organisations such as the Public Knowledge Project to support plugins for OJS users; by developing our Sponsor program where members are supported by an organisation that aggregates our fees and provides local language technical support.\n",
"content": "In order to meet our mission of a truly global and connected research ecosystem, it is important to ensure that participation in Crossref and all our services and metadata is accessible to everyone involved in documenting scholarly progress.\nCrossref membership is open to all organisations that produce scholarly and professional materials and content. But cost and technical capabilities can be barriers to joining, and where that\u0026rsquo;s the case, we aim to reduce these in a number of ways. These include: partnering with organisations such as the Public Knowledge Project to support plugins for OJS users; by developing our Sponsor program where members are supported by an organisation that aggregates our fees and provides local language technical support.\nThe GEM Program: improving membership equitability and accessibility For many years we have also waived content registration fees via specific Sponsor agreements for members in some countries and accounted for that as \u0026ldquo;donated deposits\u0026rdquo; under a \u0026ldquo;fee assistance\u0026rdquo; program. Starting in January 2023, this was expanded to be consistent across the world and to encompass the annual membership fee.\nThe Global Equitable Membership (GEM) program offers relief from membership and content registration fees for members in the least economically-advantaged countries in the world. Members in GEM-eligible countries do not pay Crossref membership or content registration fees. As we move toward realizing the vision of a connected Research Nexus, building a network for the global community must include input from the global community.\nList of eligible countries (as of 2026) The countries currently eligible under the Global Equitable Membership (GEM) program are:\nAfghanistan Eswatini Maldives Solomon Islands Angola Ethiopia Mali Somalia Bangladesh Fiji Marshall Islands South Sudan Belize Gambia Mauritania Sri Lanka Benin Ghana Micronesia (Federated States of) Sudan Bhutan Grenada Mozambique Suriname Burkina Faso Guinea Myanmar Syria Burundi Guinea-Bissau Nepal Tajikistan Cabo Verde Guyana Nicaragua Tanzania Cambodia Haiti Niger Timor Leste Cameroon Honduras Nigeria Togo Central African Republic Kenya Pakistan Tonga Chad Kiribati Papua New Guinea Tuvalu Comoros Kosovo Rwanda Uganda Congo, Rep Kyrgyz Republic Saint Lucia Uzbekistan Côte d'Ivoire Lao PDR Saint Vincent and the Grenadines Vanuatu Democratic Republic of the Congo Lesotho Samoa Yemen Djibouti Liberia São Tomé and Principe Zambia Dominica Madagascar Senegal Eritrea Malawi Sierra Leone Eligibility Eligibility for the program is based on a member’s country. In creating our list of countries, we refer to existing sources, including the World Bank’s International Development Association (IDA full and blend) and the UN Least Developed Countries (UNLDC).\nReviewing the eligibility criteria We will review these lists and the eligibility criteria annually and note any changes here. We will notify members whose country moves on or off the GEM Program of any upcoming fees (or the removal of fees) so they can plan and budget.\nWe ask for both mailing and billing addresses on our membership application form and both of these need to be in an eligible country (not necessarily the same one) in order to qualify.\nGEM program specifics Here are the details of what is waived and what is not, along with some answers to some frequently answered questions.\nQ: Which fees are waived and which are not? The annual membership fee is waived (irrespective of the member’s organisational size or revenue; it’s the country that determines the eligibility). All content registration fees are also waived for all record types. Participation in other paid services, such as Similarity Check and Metadata Plus, will be charged at the usual fees. Check out our standard fees to learn how much eligible members are saving. You can find out more about invoicing for GEM-eligible members on our Billing FAQs page\nQ: Can GEM program members also work with a Sponsor? The GEM program is open to independent members as well as members joining via a Sponsor. However, note that sponsors may only work with members who would normally be categorized in the lowest membership fee tier. Please also note that Sponsors may charge for their services (which include local language, technical, and other support), so it is important to discuss the terms with the Sponsor. Crossref will be actively seeking organisations to become Sponsors in GEM countries to build out support in these countries.\nJoin as a member Find out more about your benefits and obligations as a member and apply today. If your mailing and billing adresses are in a GEM country you will automatically be exempt from membership and content registration fees.\nJoin today Contact our member experience team with any questions.\n",
"headings": ["The GEM Program: improving membership equitability and accessibility","List of eligible countries (as of 2026)","Eligibility","Reviewing the eligibility criteria","GEM program specifics","Q: Which fees are waived and which are not?","Q: Can GEM program members also work with a Sponsor?","Join as a member","Join today"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/working-groups/isr/",
"title": "Integrity of the scholarly record (ISR) advisory group",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2026-03-05",
"lastmod_ts": 1772668800,
"section": "Working groups",
"tags": [],
"description": "In 2021 we coined the term \u0026ldquo;Integrity of the scholarly record (ISR)\u0026rdquo; to help position Crossref’s role as a part of the broader field of Research Integrity. We’ve had multiple community conversations where metadata, tools such as Crossmark, and our membership processes have been discussed widely. Acquiring the Retraction Watch data in 2023 and then engaging with the group of sleuths has also helped us to move these conversations forward. Given the increasing focus on research integrity challenges within our community, Crossref is exploring whether we may want to offer additional tools that would help publishers and other members address current research integrity issues. To involve the community in these conversations in a more structured way, we set up an ISR advisory group that will be involved in relevant conversations about ISR tools and practices longer term.\n",
"content": "In 2021 we coined the term \u0026ldquo;Integrity of the scholarly record (ISR)\u0026rdquo; to help position Crossref’s role as a part of the broader field of Research Integrity. We’ve had multiple community conversations where metadata, tools such as Crossmark, and our membership processes have been discussed widely. Acquiring the Retraction Watch data in 2023 and then engaging with the group of sleuths has also helped us to move these conversations forward. Given the increasing focus on research integrity challenges within our community, Crossref is exploring whether we may want to offer additional tools that would help publishers and other members address current research integrity issues. To involve the community in these conversations in a more structured way, we set up an ISR advisory group that will be involved in relevant conversations about ISR tools and practices longer term.\nThe Crossref ISR advisory group will focus on the following tasks:\nInform Crossref of community developments and help establish collaboration where relevant Discuss external ISR-related services and their relevance to the Crossref community Advise on ongoing Crossref pilots in the research integrity space Evaluate the continued value of Crossref’s ISR service offerings over time Group members Chair: Helena Cousijn, Crossref\nFacilitators: Madhura Amdekar, Crossref; Lena Stoll, Crossref\nAmy Asimah, Regional Maritime University Rene Aquarius, Radboud University Nijmegen Guntram Bauer, Human Frontier Science Program Helen Beynon, BMJ Guillaume Cabanac, University of Toulouse Michael Evans, F1000 Lauren Flintoft, IOP Publishing Audrey Kenni, Pan-African Medical Journal Hylke Koers, STM Bianca Kramer, Sesame Open Science Carly Robinson, SPARC Bert Seghers, ENRIO Mercury Shitindo, Africa Bioethics Network Shelly Shochat, Karger Daniel Ucko, American Physical Society Laura Wilson, Taylor \u0026amp; Francis Jennifer Wright, Cambridge University Press Jiayi Xu, Bon View Publishing Maria Zalm, PLOS How the group works With the exception of Crossref staff, the group will be limited to one representative from each participating organization, unless particular agenda items or topics call for additional expertise from additional colleagues or departments from within a single organisation. Members are, however, free to discuss the information shared during meetings with colleagues. Members can choose to leave the Advisory Group at any time but are asked to send their resignation in writing to the Chair and/or Facilitator.\nAdvisory Group members commit to attend all meetings by conference call, and may choose to send a named proxy if they are not available. The schedule of meetings is at the discretion of the Chair/Facilitator and may vary depending on whether there are relevant topics for discussion but are usually held four times per year. Notes are circulated by the Chair/Facilitator after each call, and any members who were unable to attend a call are asked to ensure they read these and take note of any action items. AI bots will not be allowed on advisory group calls. Members are asked not to invite colleagues or any external party to join Advisory Group meetings unless they have discussed this with the Chair/Facilitator prior to the call. This ensures a consistency in development approach and a level of fluency during meetings.\nPlease contact Helena Cousijn with any questions or to apply to join the advisory group.\n",
"headings": ["Group members","How the group works"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/operations-and-sustainability/working-at-crossref/",
"title": "Working at Crossref",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2026-03-04",
"lastmod_ts": 1772582400,
"section": "Operations & sustainability",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref is powered by a team of about 60 people who are based all over the world. We aim to provide a consistent employment experience, while also complying with the labour practices of the countries where our staff live.\nOur employee handbook details the benefits we offer the team. This document, along with our organisational policies \u0026amp; procedures, Code of conduct, and respective employment contracts govern how we work together.\nTo the extent possible, we make these policies publicly available for inspection or reuse by others.\n",
"content": "Crossref is powered by a team of about 60 people who are based all over the world. We aim to provide a consistent employment experience, while also complying with the labour practices of the countries where our staff live.\nOur employee handbook details the benefits we offer the team. This document, along with our organisational policies \u0026amp; procedures, Code of conduct, and respective employment contracts govern how we work together.\nTo the extent possible, we make these policies publicly available for inspection or reuse by others.\n",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/introducing-board-meeting-summaries-starting-with-the-january-2026-meeting/",
"title": "Introducing board meeting summaries, starting with the January 2026 meeting",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2026-03-03",
"lastmod_ts": 1772496000,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "Introducing board meeting summaries In an ongoing effort to make more of our operations transparent, we have decided to start sharing summaries of our board meetings on the blog. We already post our board resolutions, but the summaries will give a bit more information on what the board discusses that may or may not show up on the list of resolutions.\n",
"content": "Introducing board meeting summaries In an ongoing effort to make more of our operations transparent, we have decided to start sharing summaries of our board meetings on the blog. We already post our board resolutions, but the summaries will give a bit more information on what the board discusses that may or may not show up on the list of resolutions.\nWe do observe the Chatham House Rule for our board discussions, so we won\u0026rsquo;t disclose who says what, and there will still be executive sessions that discuss confidential matters that we can\u0026rsquo;t share. But those discussions constitute a minority of the time we spend together, so the summaries will cover much of what the board discusses.\nLet\u0026rsquo;s start with our recent meeting in January, which is online and lasts one hour.\nCrossref Board of Directors Meeting Executive Summary, January 22nd, 2026 The January meeting is held primarily to conduct board business at the start of the board term.\nBoard business The board conducted elections for this year’s board leadership, and approved each of the following positions:\nBoard Chair: Marin Dacos Board Treasurer: James Phillpotts Executive Committee members (3 seats): Rose L’Huillier; Rebecca Wambua; and Aaron Wood Board Secretary and Assistant Secretary: Lucy Ofiesh, Ed Pentz Audit Committee Chair: Ashley Towne Nominating Committee Chair: Nick Lindsay The board then turned to review and adopt the minutes from the November board meeting, December board meeting, and October executive committee meeting.\nThe board discussed a proposal to update the financial authorization approval levels, a set of guidelines established by the board to define the limits on the approval of expenses that are part of Crossref’s Financial and Accounting Operating Policies. The board adopted changes to the policy that would bring it in line with the scale of Crossref’s business operations.\nLooking ahead to 2026 Ed Pentz gave a brief overview of what the board can expect at the 2026 board meetings and reviewed topics that will be discussed at each meeting.\nThe board next meets in early March.\n",
"headings": ["Introducing board meeting summaries","Crossref Board of Directors Meeting Executive Summary, January 22nd, 2026","Board business","Looking ahead to 2026"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/working-groups/",
"title": "Working groups",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2026-02-20",
"lastmod_ts": 1771545600,
"section": "Working groups",
"tags": [],
"description": "Advisory groups and working groups help us to stay focused and inclusive. We also have more formal committees that have a role specified in the by-laws or have been set up by the board with a particular remit. We\u0026rsquo;ve also listed a few \u0026lsquo;interest groups\u0026rsquo; and these are the least formal, like community calls, where participants can be involved ad hoc and participate sporadically.\nThese groups are a good way for people across the community to get involved in Crossref\u0026rsquo;s work to support and improve our scholarly infrastructure. They are slightly different as described below but both are open to non-members and members alike.\n",
"content": "Advisory groups and working groups help us to stay focused and inclusive. We also have more formal committees that have a role specified in the by-laws or have been set up by the board with a particular remit. We\u0026rsquo;ve also listed a few \u0026lsquo;interest groups\u0026rsquo; and these are the least formal, like community calls, where participants can be involved ad hoc and participate sporadically.\nThese groups are a good way for people across the community to get involved in Crossref\u0026rsquo;s work to support and improve our scholarly infrastructure. They are slightly different as described below but both are open to non-members and members alike.\nAdvisory groups We have advisory groups for established services or ongoing themes to get input and advice from our members and other stakeholders. Each advisory group has a statement of purpose and should represent our broad membership. Each group has a chair and staff facilitator who together set agendas, organize calls, and ensure that the group fulfills its purpose. Each group has an email list and meets regularly via conference call, although the frequency varies by group. These groups tend to be permanent and long-term.\nAdvisory group Facilitator Chair Status Similarity Check Lena Stoll, Madhura Amdekar Lauren Flintoft, IOP Publishing Active Integrity of the Scholarly Record (ISR) Helena Cousijn n/a Active Crossmark Martyn Rittman TBC Inactive Funder Community Kora Korzec TBC Active Preprints community Martyn Rittman Oya Rieger, Ithaka Active Metadata Patricia Feeney n/a Active Event Data Martyn Rittman John Chodacki, California Digital Library Retired Working groups Working groups are more short-term than advisory groups and are set up for a specific task or ad-hoc purpose. They are usually set up to discuss and scope a specific idea, or oversee prototypes and pilots that could develop into new features. Working groups can also be set up jointly with other organisations to enable us to collaborate on projects.\nWorking groups don\u0026rsquo;t always have a Chair but they bring stakeholders together. A working group either disbands when finished its work or can become an advisory group if and when the board approves the idea or prototype as a production service, feature, or record type.\nWorking group Facilitator Chair Status Member Practices Amanda Bartell TBC Active Conferences and projects Patricia Feeney Aliaksandr Birukou, Springer Nature Inactive Distributed usage logging Martyn Rittman Esther Heuver, Elsevier Retired Linked clinical trials N/A Daniel Shanahan, BioMed Central Inactive Standards Patricia Feeney Retired Taxonomies Rachael Lammey Retired Interest groups Interest groups are more like community discussion forums with fairly low commitment needed from participants, where a large group of people meet to discuss a range of issues and can bring any topic under the theme to Crossref. They are the least formal of all our groups and vary in call frequency and scope.\nInterest group Facilitator Chair Status Books Kora Korzec David Woodworth, OCLC Active Metadata Practitioners Patricia Feeney n/a Retired ",
"headings": ["Advisory groups","Working groups","Interest groups"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/authors/andr%C3%A9-brasil/",
"title": "André Brasil",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Authors",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/innovation-in-scientific-publishing-and-its-implications-for-crossref-doi-registration-practices-metarors-approach/",
"title": "Innovation in scientific publishing and its implications for Crossref DOI registration practices - MetaROR’s approach",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2026-02-03",
"lastmod_ts": 1770076800,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "A couple of months ago, Ludo Waltman and André Brasil raised some questions about good practices for Crossref DOI registration, asking for input from the scholarly communication community. In this post, Ludo and André reflect on the input received and discuss the approach to DOI registration that the MetaROR publish-review-curate platform is going to take.\n",
"content": "A couple of months ago, Ludo Waltman and André Brasil raised some questions about good practices for Crossref DOI registration, asking for input from the scholarly communication community. In this post, Ludo and André reflect on the input received and discuss the approach to DOI registration that the MetaROR publish-review-curate platform is going to take.\nPractices for assigning DOIs and structuring the associated metadata are not merely technical details. They shape how scholarly outputs are discovered, cited, evaluated, indexed, and preserved over time. As new models of publishing emerge, especially those that decouple dissemination from evaluation, these infrastructural choices increasingly influence what counts as a scholarly object, as well as how credit and accountability mechanisms are organized.\nAs editors of MetaROR (MetaResearch Open Review), a platform launched in 2024 and operating under the publish-review-curate model, we are interested in good practices for Crossref DOI registration in the context of innovative new approaches to scientific publishing. In the earlier blog post, we invited members of the broader scholarly communication community to share their perspective on the following two questions:\nFor each article on the MetaROR platform, there is a corresponding article on a preprint server. Is it acceptable to have two Crossref DOIs, one registered by the preprint server and one registered by the MetaROR platform, for essentially the same article? If Crossref DOIs are registered for articles on the MetaROR platform, should the articles be assigned the type ‘journal-article’ or the type ‘preprint’ in their Crossref metadata, or something else entirely? We were pleasantly surprised by the level of interest in these two questions. We received about 15 responses from colleagues in the scholarly communication community. Some colleagues posted a reply at the bottom of our blog post. Others responded on social media (Bluesky, LinkedIn) or shared their perspective by email.\nBelow we reflect on the responses received and we outline the approach to Crossref DOI registration that MetaROR is going to take.\nDOI registration for articles on the MetaROR platform Colleagues offered mixed opinions on the question of whether articles on the MetaROR platform should have their own DOI, in addition to the DOI these articles have on the preprint server on which they were originally published. Some colleagues argued there is no good reason for registering DOIs for articles on the MetaROR platform and suggested this may cause confusion. One colleague reasoned that “if we want peer review to be something more ongoing and evolve beyond a single point in time judgment”, our approach should be to “better map the connections between events” rather than registering a new DOI each time an article has been peer-reviewed.\nHowever, other colleagues expressed support for registering DOIs for articles on the MetaROR platform. One colleague pointed out that this “allows the user to reference the exact artefact they have consulted”. This colleague also reminded us that in the past “people were worried about having a different DOI for a preprint and another for a VoR (version of record)”, while nowadays this is a generally accepted practice. Another colleague emphasized the value of decentralization and suggested to “let a thousand DOIs bloom”. Authors of an article peer-reviewed by MetaROR argued in favor of “an overarching DOI for the full package (preprint, reviews, author response and link to updated preprint)”, which in their view would make MetaROR’s “process more coherent”.\nHaving considered the various arguments in favor of or against registering DOIs for articles on the MetaROR platform, we feel the arguments in favor are more compelling. Our perspective is that an article on the MetaROR platform differs in a meaningful way from the corresponding article on a preprint server, since the article on the MetaROR platform has been enriched with an evaluation by peer reviewers and editors. MetaROR provides a carefully curated package that includes not only the article itself, but also review reports and an editorial assessment. In our view, this justifies registering DOIs for articles on the MetaROR platform. We also see DOI registration for articles on the MetaROR platform as a way to promote appropriate recognition for authors of articles peer-reviewed by MetaROR, similar to the way authors get recognition for articles published in traditional peer-reviewed journals.\nOf course, when an article has multiple versions, each with their own DOI, it is important to establish a link between the different DOIs, indicating that the DOIs are associated with the same work. This is important for articles published first on a preprint server and then on a platform such as MetaROR just like it is important for articles published first on a preprint server and then in a peer-reviewed journal. In practice, we establish these links by registering relationships between DOIs in the associated metadata. In this way, we ensure that indexing services, discovery systems, and research analytics tools are able to recognize that the DOIs refer to different manifestations of the same work rather than independent outputs.\nRecord type for articles on the MetaROR platform Our second question is about the record type to be used when registering a Crossref DOI for an article on the MetaROR platform. Many colleagues who provided input on this question argued there is a need for a new Crossref record type for ‘reviewed preprints’.\nWe feel the idea of such a new record type is interesting and its pros and cons deserve further consideration. However, any solution that requires changes in Crossref’s metadata schema will take time to realize, while for MetaROR we need a solution in the short term. At the moment, the most obvious options for MetaROR therefore seem to be to use either the record type ‘journal-article’ or the record type ‘preprint’ (which is in fact a subtype of the record type ‘posted-content’).\nThe use of the record type ‘preprint’ seems somewhat problematic to us, because preprints are typically understood to be articles that have not yet been formally peer-reviewed. In a way, articles on the MetaROR platform are the opposite of this, since these articles have undergone formal peer review. An article on the MetaROR platform is part of a package that also includes review reports and an editorial assessment. Such a package provides readers with a more informed understanding of an article than what they get from reading only the article itself. For this reason, we do not consider the record type ‘preprint’ to be suitable for articles on the MetaROR platform.\nInstead of the record type ‘preprint’, we have decided to use the record type ‘journal-article’ for articles on the MetaROR platform. The record type ‘journal-article’ is intended for articles published in journals. To be clear, MetaROR considers itself a ‘platform’, not a ‘journal’. However, the distinction between ‘platforms’ and ‘journals’ is not very well defined and the choice of terminology therefore involves a certain degree of arbitrariness. Moreover, articles on the MetaROR platform have been formally evaluated, and in that sense they resemble articles in traditional peer-reviewed journals. Although the nature of the evaluation is different (i.e., MetaROR provides a narrative assessment, while traditional journals provide a ‘stamp of approval’), we feel the resemblance justifies the use of the record type ‘journal-article’. We also hope that the use of this record type will help to ensure that articles evaluated by publish-review-curate (PRC) platforms are treated similarly to articles evaluated by traditional journals, advancing beyond more conservative ways of dealing with articles on PRC platforms.\nThere is a precedent for using the Crossref record type ‘journal-article’ for articles evaluated by PRC platforms. For over a decade, this approach has been used by platforms operated by F1000, such as F1000Research, Gates Open Research, Open Research Europe, and Wellcome Open Research. The approach we are taking at MetaROR is similar to the approach taken by these platforms. At the same time, our approach is different from the approach of eLife, another prominent PRC platform. eLife uses the record type ‘preprint’ for all versions of an article on its platform except for the version that the authors consider to be final and that they choose to designate as the ‘version of record’. This version has the record type ‘journal-article’.\nSummary of MetaROR’s approach to Crossref DOI registration Figure 1 summarizes MetaROR’s approach to Crossref DOI registration. The figure considers the situation in which an article went through two rounds of peer review by MetaROR. Both rounds of peer review involved two reviewers. After two rounds of peer review by MetaROR, the article was published in a journal. We emphasize that journal publication is optional in MetaROR’s PRC approach. It is included in Figure 1 for the sake of completeness.\nFigure 1: MetaROR’s approach to Crossref DOI registration\nEach element in Figure 1 represents an item that has its own Crossref DOI. The shape of an element indicates the Crossref record type of an item (‘preprint’, ‘journal-article’, ‘peer-review’). MetaROR is responsible for the blue elements in the figure. The gray elements are the responsibility of other actors, either a preprint server or a journal. Arrows represent relationships between items. These relationships are captured in the Crossref metadata of the various items.\nFigure 1 shows how MetaROR treats articles, review reports, editorial assessments, and author responses as first-class research objects. Each object has its own DOI, while the objects are linked through structured metadata. Assigning DOIs to review reports, editorial assessments, and author responses is central to our commitment to transparency, recognition, and reuse of evaluative contributions.\nWe note that Figure 1 assumes each version of an article on a preprint server has its own DOI. This is indeed how DOI registration is handled by many preprint servers, such as the OSF servers (e.g., MetaArXiv, PsyArXiv, SocArXiv), ChemRxiv, Research Square, and Preprints.org. However, some preprint servers use a single DOI for all versions of an article. This is the case for bioRxiv and medRxiv and also for arXiv, which registers DOIs with DataCite rather than Crossref. In the future, we hope these preprint servers will also adopt versioned DOIs.\nOutlook Over the past 25 years, practices for registering DOIs and associated metadata have evolved along with broader developments in the scholarly communication landscape. Inevitably, DOI registration practices will always be lagging behind the most recent developments in scholarly communication. From this point of view, the lack of agreement on good practices for DOI registration in the context of PRC platforms is not surprising. This lack of agreement can in fact be seen as part of a larger discussion about the pros and cons of different infrastructural approaches for handling ‘preprint review metadata’, including for instance the COAR Notify approach and the DocMaps approach.\nMetaROR’s approach to DOI registration demonstrates both the power and richness of Crossref’s metadata schema and its limitations. As discussed above, several colleagues who responded to our earlier blog post consider the lack of a record type for ‘reviewed preprints’ to be a significant limitation. With the growing interest in PRC models for scientific publishing, there appears to be a need to systematically evaluate possible improvements that can be made to Crossref’s metadata schema to offer better support for new approaches to scientific publishing.\nWe see this not only as a technical challenge but also as an issue of infrastructure governance. We therefore invite further dialogue between DOI registration agencies, other metadata infrastructures, preprint servers, PRC platforms, and indexing services to explore pathways for improving metadata standards, whether through new record types, extended relationship vocabularies, or shared best practices. We hope our experiences with MetaROR will contribute to the collective effort needed to ensure that emerging models of scholarly communication are represented accurately, transparently, and responsibly in the scholarly record.\nCrossref note: This discussion chimes with related plans for extending our schemas: more granular vocabulary for items within journal articles, preprints, reviews, and others; clearer relationship types; and support for the forthcoming NISO JAV recommendations. Our Preprint Advisory Group will discuss the topic this year, and our Metadata Advisory Group has both \u0026lsquo;journal article type vocab\u0026rsquo; and \u0026lsquo;relationships\u0026rsquo; on its radar for 2026. We look forward to engaging further on this topic as we work towards more flexible schemas in support of the Research Nexus. ",
"headings": ["DOI registration for articles on the MetaROR platform","Record type for articles on the MetaROR platform","Summary of MetaROR’s approach to Crossref DOI registration","Outlook"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/authors/ludo-waltman/",
"title": "Ludo Waltman",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Authors",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/categories/preprints/",
"title": "Preprints",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Categories",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/a-spotlight-on-our-community-in-indonesia/",
"title": "A spotlight on our community in Indonesia",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2026-01-28",
"lastmod_ts": 1769558400,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "Click here for the translation in Bahasa Indonesia\nAs Crossref celebrated its 25th anniversary last year, we are highlighting some of the most active and engaged regions in our global community.\nOver the past 25 years, the makeup of Crossref membership has evolved significantly; founded by a handful of large publishers, we now have more than 24,000 members representing 165 countries. Nearly two-thirds of them self-identify as universities, libraries, government agencies, foundations, scholar publishers, and research institutions.\n",
"content": "Click here for the translation in Bahasa Indonesia\nAs Crossref celebrated its 25th anniversary last year, we are highlighting some of the most active and engaged regions in our global community.\nOver the past 25 years, the makeup of Crossref membership has evolved significantly; founded by a handful of large publishers, we now have more than 24,000 members representing 165 countries. Nearly two-thirds of them self-identify as universities, libraries, government agencies, foundations, scholar publishers, and research institutions.\nThe Crossref community in Indonesia is by far the most dynamically growing region. Each year since 2017, we’ve seen the highest number of new members joining from the country. There are now over 4,400 members based in Indonesia who have registered the metadata for more than 2.6 million works, connecting their research to the global community.\nIndonesia also happens to be the largest user of OJS globally, with close to 20,000 journals publishing on the platform. Most journals are published by universities, research institutions, and government agencies.\nThere is a strong emphasis on publishing as part of completing a university degree. The Ministry of National Education policy requires all students to publish their research before graduation. To provide opportunities and accessible platforms for publication, Indonesian universities and faculties have established journals to help their students meet these requirements for graduation.\nMost journals in Indonesia are indexed in SINTA (Science and Technology Index), which is managed by the Ministry of Higher Education, Science, and Technology (MoHEST). The aim of SINTA is to improve journal quality, facilitate assessment, and increase the competitiveness of Indonesian journals. The use of DOIs is a requirement for indexing on the platform.\nMembers know the value of persistent identifiers for their content, but many also realise the value of Crossref’s commitment to open metadata and the open scholarly record. Being a member of Crossref means being part of a larger community. While DOIs may be required for national indexing, organisations have various reasons for becoming Crossref members. One of the most important factors is to increase the global visibility of their content and, therefore, increase the impact of their publications.\n“We feel like we\u0026rsquo;re part of the Crossref community because we don\u0026rsquo;t just use your service; we contribute to it. By providing DOIs and metadata, we\u0026rsquo;re helping to build the open scholarly record that benefits everyone. Being a part of the Crossref network is more than just being a member—it\u0026rsquo;s about a shared vision. We see ourselves as active contributors. Every time we register a DOI and provide metadata, we add a new link to the global chain of knowledge. This helps ensure our research can be easily found, cited, and connected to other works, which benefits everyone.” — Nita Nurdiana, Universitas PGRI Palembang\nWe have very dedicated ambassadors based in Indonesia who advocate for Crossref’s mission, Fauji Nurdin ST. Mudo and Zulidyana Rusnalasari. Each has been instrumental in organising in-person events and webinars for members, as well as in representing Crossref at events throughout the region.\nIn October, as part of our 25th Anniversary celebration, the ambassadors, with the support of our Sponsor Relawan Jurnal Indonesia (RJI), held a satellite event in Medan, which brought together participants from universities, publishers, government agencies, research institutes, non-governmental organisations, libraries, and museums. It provided a forum for dialogue around key topics in scholarly publishing.\nCrossref 25th Anniversary Satellite Event, Medan, October 2025\nThe majority of members in Indonesia work through one of our regional sponsors. Sponsors provide support to smaller organisations that often face financial, technical, and language barriers, making membership challenging. Their knowledge of the unique needs of their local publishing community and extensive networks help organisations learn more about Crossref in a more accessible way.\nOur first sponsor in Indonesia, Relawan Jurnal Indonesia (RJI), joined in 2017; we now have eight sponsors that together support over 3,900 members in Indonesia.\nOur sponsors are also key partners in helping us engage with the community, facilitating webinars and supporting our in-person meetings. In August 2024, in collaboration with RJI, we held a two-day in-person event in Jakarta, attended by over 100 members, and joined by our sponsors and ambassadors. Along with discussions on the fundamentals of Crossref and the role of quality metadata, we\u0026rsquo;ve heard from Ahmad Saefudin Surapermana, a sub-coordinator from ISSN Indonesia. Because so many members in Indonesia use the OJS publishing platform, colleagues from the Public Knowledge Project (PKP) joined us for a session on OJS plugins and an upgrade workshop for OJS system administrators. We continue to receive feedback from members that more regular in-person and online events should be held to facilitate connections and share developments.\nCrossref Jakarta, August 2024\nWhile interest in Crossref among this community is ever-growing, there are still painpoints for Indonesian members. Though many join through a Sponsor, some report challenges with metadata deposits, errors, and submission failures, and others struggle to navigate the documentation when technical issues arise. Some members have noted that our metadata requirements can be complex and that they struggle to achieve metadata completeness in their records. These concerns can be particularly challenging for institutions with limited resources.\nTo provide additional support, we developed a series of webinars in Bahasa Indonesia, covering topics such as using our Participation Reports to assess metadata completeness and workshops on best practices for using OJS. These webinars have been some of the most attended by our members. The strong interest reflects the value these sessions bring to our community, and we continue to receive requests for additional training opportunities. In total, we welcomed 1,044 registrants and 501 attendees across our webinars last year. This level of participation highlights the importance of ongoing training and the enthusiasm of our members to engage, learn, and grow together.\nDespite some challenges, many members feel there is significant value in being a Crossref member. Including their metadata in Crossref enhances the visibility and accessibility of their journals globally. Because Crossref provides the infrastructure of persistent identifiers and open metadata, this ensures scholarly outputs are discoverable, connected, and part of a global research record.\n“Crossref\u0026rsquo;s vision of creating open, connected scholarly infrastructure directly supports our university\u0026rsquo;s core mission of advancing knowledge and research impact. As an academic institution, we rely on Crossref\u0026rsquo;s DOI system to ensure our faculty publications and institutional repository content remain permanently accessible and properly cited. This infrastructure is essential for maximizing the visibility and impact of our research output, which directly contributes to our university\u0026rsquo;s reputation and ranking. Additionally, Crossref\u0026rsquo;s commitment to open scholarly communication aligns with our values of making knowledge freely accessible, supporting our open access initiatives and helping us demonstrate research impact to funding bodies and stakeholders. The persistent linking system also supports our students and researchers in conducting reliable literature reviews and building upon existing scholarship with confidence that their citations will remain valid over time.” — Anggota dari STIS Darul Falah, Indonesia\nRatna Galuh Manika Trisista, from Universitas Islam Jakarta, has also illustrated how joining Crossref and stewardship of rich metadata supports the development of Indonesian journals in her presentation, Our Metadata Story: Improving Citation Visibility through Reference Linking during the Crossref2025 Annual Meeting.\nAs membership growth in Indonesia continues, we look forward to building relationships within the community, supported by our ambassadors, sponsors, and members\u0026rsquo; contributions.\nMuch of the information in this report comes from a survey sent to our members, sponsors, and ambassadors in Indonesia. We appreciate all the feedback, comments, and suggestions we received, and we look forward to continuing our collaborations and increasing our engagement with the community.\nTranslation in Bahasa Indonesia Tahun lalu Crossref merayakan usia ke-25, dan momen ini menjadi kesempatan istimewa untuk menyoroti wilayah-wilayah yang paling aktif dan berperan penting dalam komunitas global Crossref. Salah satunya adalah Indonesia.\nDalam perjalanan 25 tahun tersebut, keanggotaan Crossref telah berkembang pesat. Yang awalnya hanya digagas oleh beberapa penerbit besar, kini Crossref menaungi lebih dari 24.000 anggota dari 165 negara. Menariknya, hampir dua pertiga anggota Crossref saat ini berasal dari perguruan tinggi, perpustakaan, lembaga pemerintah, yayasan, penerbit ilmiah, serta institusi riset, menunjukkan semakin kuatnya peran komunitas akademik dalam ekosistem publikasi global.\nIndonesia menjadi wilayah dengan pertumbuhan komunitas paling dinamis di Crossref. Sejak tahun 2017, Indonesia secara konsisten mencatat jumlah anggota baru terbanyak setiap tahunnya. Saat ini, lebih dari 4.400 anggota Crossref berbasis di Indonesia telah mendaftarkan metadata untuk lebih dari 2,6 juta karya ilmiah. Kontribusi ini tidak hanya memperkuat visibilitas riset nasional, tetapi juga menghubungkan pengetahuan yang dihasilkan di Indonesia dengan komunitas ilmiah global.\nPertumbuhan ini tentu tidak terjadi begitu saja. Ia lahir dari kerja kolektif para pengelola jurnal, penerbit perguruan tinggi, editor, dan komunitas akademik di Indonesia yang terus belajar, beradaptasi, dan saling berbagi praktik baik dalam tata kelola publikasi ilmiah. Semakin banyak institusi yang menyadari pentingnya metadata yang berkualitas, transparansi dalam publikasi, serta keterhubungan riset melalui DOI sebagai fondasi visibilitas dan keberlanjutan ilmu pengetahuan.\nDi berbagai forum, pelatihan, dan pendampingan komunitas, semangat kolaborasi ini terus tumbuh. Komunitas Crossref di Indonesia tidak hanya berkembang secara kuantitas, tetapi juga menunjukkan peningkatan kualitas dalam pengelolaan metadata, kepatuhan terhadap standar internasional, serta komitmen terhadap praktik publikasi ilmiah yang etis dan terbuka. Inilah yang menjadikan Indonesia bukan sekadar pengguna, melainkan kontributor aktif dalam ekosistem pengetahuan global.\nIndonesia juga dikenal sebagai pengguna Open Journal Systems (OJS) terbesar di dunia, dengan hampir 20.000 jurnal yang dikelola dan diterbitkan melalui platform ini. Sebagian besar jurnal tersebut diterbitkan oleh perguruan tinggi, lembaga riset, dan instansi pemerintah, yang menunjukkan kuatnya peran institusi akademik dan publik dalam ekosistem publikasi ilmiah nasional.\nBudaya publikasi ilmiah di Indonesia sangat erat kaitannya dengan dunia pendidikan tinggi. Kebijakan Kementerian Pendidikan Tinggi, Sains, dan Teknologi mewajibkan mahasiswa untuk mempublikasikan hasil penelitiannya sebagai salah satu syarat kelulusan. Untuk menjawab kebutuhan tersebut sekaligus menyediakan ruang publikasi yang inklusif dan mudah diakses, banyak universitas dan fakultas di Indonesia membentuk serta mengelola jurnal ilmiah mereka sendiri sebagai wadah bagi karya mahasiswa.\nSebagian besar jurnal di Indonesia terindeks dalam SINTA (Science and Technology Index) yang dikelola oleh Kementerian Pendidikan Tinggi, Sains, dan Teknologi (MoHEST). SINTA bertujuan untuk meningkatkan kualitas jurnal, memfasilitasi proses penilaian, serta mendorong daya saing jurnal ilmiah Indonesia. Dalam konteks ini, penggunaan DOI menjadi salah satu persyaratan penting agar jurnal dapat terindeks di platform tersebut.\nPara anggota Crossref di Indonesia memahami pentingnya persistent identifiers untuk memastikan keberlanjutan dan keterlacakan karya ilmiah mereka. Namun, semakin banyak pula yang menyadari nilai lebih dari komitmen Crossref terhadap metadata terbuka dan rekam jejak ilmiah yang terbuka. Menjadi anggota Crossref bukan sekadar memenuhi kewajiban teknis, melainkan juga menjadi bagian dari komunitas global yang lebih besar. Meski DOI dibutuhkan untuk kepentingan pengindeksan nasional, banyak organisasi memilih bergabung dengan Crossref demi meningkatkan visibilitas global konten mereka—dan pada akhirnya, memperluas dampak dari publikasi yang dihasilkan.\n“Kami merasa menjadi bagian dari komunitas Crossref karena kami tidak hanya menggunakan layanannya, tetapi juga berkontribusi di dalamnya. Melalui pendaftaran DOI dan penyediaan metadata, kami ikut membangun rekam jejak keilmuan terbuka yang bermanfaat bagi semua. Menjadi bagian dari jejaring Crossref bukan sekadar status keanggotaan—ini adalah tentang visi bersama. Kami melihat diri kami sebagai kontributor aktif. Setiap kali mendaftarkan DOI dan metadata, kami menambahkan satu mata rantai baru dalam jejaring pengetahuan global. Hal ini memastikan riset kami dapat ditemukan, disitasi, dan terhubung dengan karya lain, sehingga memberi manfaat bagi semua pihak.” — Nita Nurdiana, Universitas PGRI Palembang\nSemangat kontribusi ini juga diperkuat oleh peran para ambassador Crossref di Indonesia yang dengan penuh dedikasi mengadvokasi misi Crossref. Fauji Nurdin ST. Mudo dan Zulidyana Rusnalasari telah menjadi penggerak penting dalam penyelenggaraan berbagai kegiatan, mulai dari acara luring hingga webinar untuk para anggota, sekaligus mewakili Crossref dalam beragam forum di berbagai wilayah Indonesia.\nPada bulan Oktober lalu, sebagai bagian dari perayaan ulang tahun ke-25 Crossref, para ambassador ini—dengan dukungan sponsor dari Relawan Jurnal Indonesia (RJI)—menyelenggarakan sebuah acara satelit di Medan. Kegiatan ini mempertemukan peserta dari perguruan tinggi, penerbit, instansi pemerintah, lembaga riset, organisasi non-pemerintah, perpustakaan, hingga museum. Acara tersebut menjadi ruang dialog yang hidup untuk membahas isu-isu kunci dalam dunia publikasi ilmiah dan memperkuat jejaring kolaborasi lintas sektor.\nCrossref 25th Anniversary Satellite Event, Medan, October 2025\nSebagian besar anggota Crossref di Indonesia bergabung dan beraktivitas melalui sponsor regional. Para sponsor ini berperan penting dalam mendampingi organisasi-organisasi kecil yang kerap menghadapi berbagai tantangan—mulai dari keterbatasan finansial, kendala teknis, hingga hambatan bahasa—yang membuat proses keanggotaan menjadi tidak selalu mudah. Dengan pemahaman yang kuat terhadap kebutuhan khas komunitas penerbitan lokal serta jejaring yang luas, para sponsor membantu organisasi mengenal dan memanfaatkan Crossref dengan cara yang lebih ramah dan mudah diakses.\nSponsor pertama Crossref di Indonesia, Relawan Jurnal Indonesia (RJI), bergabung pada tahun 2017. Hingga kini, Indonesia telah memiliki delapan sponsor yang secara kolektif mendukung lebih dari 3.900 anggota di seluruh Indonesia. Peran ini menjadikan para sponsor sebagai tulang punggung pertumbuhan dan keberlanjutan komunitas Crossref di tanah air.\nLebih dari sekadar pendamping teknis, para sponsor juga menjadi mitra strategis dalam membangun keterlibatan komunitas—mulai dari memfasilitasi webinar hingga mendukung pertemuan luring. Pada Agustus 2024, misalnya, Crossref bekerja sama dengan RJI menyelenggarakan acara luring selama dua hari di Jakarta, yang dihadiri oleh lebih dari 100 anggota. Selain diskusi mengenai dasar-dasar Crossref dan pentingnya metadata berkualitas, kegiatan ini juga menghadirkan Ahmad Saefudin Surapermana dari ISSN Indonesia, serta para sponsor dan ambassador Crossref. Mengingat banyaknya anggota di Indonesia yang menggunakan platform OJS, rekan-rekan dari Public Knowledge Project (PKP) turut bergabung untuk memberikan sesi khusus tentang plugin OJS serta lokakarya peningkatan versi bagi para administrator sistem OJS. Hingga kini, Crossref terus menerima masukan dari para anggota bahwa kegiatan luring dan daring yang lebih rutin sangat dibutuhkan—tidak hanya untuk memperkuat jejaring, tetapi juga untuk berbagi perkembangan terbaru dalam dunia publikasi ilmiah.\nCrossref Jakarta, August 2024\nSeiring dengan meningkatnya minat komunitas ini terhadap Crossref, masih terdapat sejumlah tantangan (pain points) yang dirasakan oleh anggota di Indonesia. Meskipun banyak yang bergabung melalui sponsor, sebagian anggota melaporkan kendala dalam proses deposit metadata, munculnya error, hingga kegagalan pengiriman data. Ada pula yang merasa kesulitan menavigasi dokumentasi teknis ketika menghadapi permasalahan sistem. Beberapa anggota juga menilai bahwa persyaratan metadata Crossref cukup kompleks, sehingga mereka mengalami tantangan dalam mencapai kelengkapan metadata pada rekaman mereka. Kondisi ini tentu menjadi lebih berat bagi institusi dengan sumber daya yang terbatas.\nUntuk memberikan dukungan tambahan, Crossref kemudian mengembangkan rangkaian webinar dalam Bahasa Indonesia, yang membahas topik-topik praktis seperti pemanfaatan Participation Reports untuk menilai kelengkapan metadata, serta lokakarya praktik terbaik dalam penggunaan OJS. Webinar-webinar ini menjadi salah satu kegiatan dengan tingkat kehadiran tertinggi. Minat yang kuat mencerminkan nilai yang dibawa sesi ini bagi komunitas kami, dan Crossref terus menerima permintaan untuk pelatihan tambahan. Secara keseluruhan, kami menyambut 1.044 pendaftar dan 501 peserta dalam webinar sepanjang tahun 2025. Tingkat partisipasi ini menegaskan pentingnya pelatihan berkelanjutan serta antusiasme anggota kami untuk terlibat, belajar, dan berkembang bersama.\nDi balik berbagai tantangan tersebut, banyak anggota tetap merasakan nilai strategis dari keanggotaan Crossref. Penyertaan metadata jurnal ke dalam Crossref secara signifikan meningkatkan visibilitas dan aksesibilitas jurnal Indonesia di tingkat global. Melalui infrastruktur persistent identifiers dan metadata terbuka yang disediakan Crossref, keluaran ilmiah menjadi lebih mudah ditemukan, saling terhubung, dan tercatat sebagai bagian dari rekam jejak riset global.\n“Visi Crossref dalam membangun infrastruktur keilmuan yang terbuka dan saling terhubung sangat mendukung misi utama universitas kami dalam memajukan pengetahuan dan dampak riset. Sebagai institusi akademik, kami mengandalkan sistem DOI Crossref untuk memastikan publikasi dosen dan konten repositori institusi kami tetap dapat diakses secara permanen dan disitasi dengan tepat. Infrastruktur ini sangat penting untuk memaksimalkan visibilitas dan dampak luaran riset kami, yang secara langsung berkontribusi pada reputasi dan peringkat universitas. Selain itu, komitmen Crossref terhadap komunikasi ilmiah terbuka sejalan dengan nilai-nilai kami dalam membuka akses pengetahuan seluas-luasnya, mendukung inisiatif open access, serta membantu kami menunjukkan dampak riset kepada lembaga pendanaan dan para pemangku kepentingan. Sistem keterhubungan yang berkelanjutan ini juga mendukung mahasiswa dan peneliti kami dalam melakukan tinjauan pustaka yang andal, dengan keyakinan bahwa sitasi yang digunakan akan tetap valid dalam jangka panjang.”\n— Anggota dari STIS Darul Falah, Indonesia\nPengalaman serupa juga disampaikan oleh Ratna Galuh Manika Trisista dari Universitas Islam Jakarta, yang memaparkan bagaimana keikutsertaan di Crossref dan pengelolaan metadata yang kaya dapat mendukung pengembangan jurnal Indonesia. Hal ini ia sampaikan dalam presentasinya berjudul “Our Metadata Story: Improving Citation Visibility through Reference Linking” pada Crossref Annual Meeting 2025. Seiring pertumbuhan keanggotaan Crossref di Indonesia yang terus berlanjut, kami menantikan penguatan relasi dengan komunitas—dengan dukungan para ambassador, sponsor, serta kontribusi aktif dari para anggota itu sendiri.\nSebagian besar informasi dalam laporan ini bersumber dari survei yang dikirimkan kepada anggota, sponsor, dan ambassador Crossref di Indonesia. Kami sangat menghargai seluruh umpan balik, komentar, dan saran yang telah diberikan, dan berharap dapat terus melanjutkan kolaborasi serta meningkatkan keterlibatan bersama komunitas di masa mendatang.\n",
"headings": ["Translation in Bahasa Indonesia"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/authors/zulidyana-d-rusnalasari/",
"title": "Zulidyana D Rusnalasari",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Authors",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/community/",
"title": "Get involved",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2026-01-27",
"lastmod_ts": 1769472000,
"section": "Get involved",
"tags": [],
"description": "Get involved with Crossref — a global community of 25,000+ organisations across 167 countries collaborating for open, connected scholarly infrastructure.",
"content": "It takes a village. Crossref only works as long as the scholarly research community wants to work together globally, across all disciplines, for integrity and openness of the scientific record. Our community includes tens of thousands of organisations and systems in 167 countries. More than 25,000 organisations create identifiers for metadata records that describe and locate their research. They share them through Crossref so that they don\u0026rsquo;t have to duplicate the information for the many thousands who consume and use it downstream throughout the research ecosystem.\nCrossref was founded in 2000 by some established scientific societies and publishers. Now, our membership comprises just 35% publishers or societies, with the largest membership group (40%) self-identifying as research institutions and universities. The other 25% is made up of funders (who started joining to record grants, use of facilities, and other support) alongside hundreds of museums, government organisations, libraries, data and subject repositories, conference providers, standards bodies, individual scholars, and news outlets. Our members register any research object that might be part of the scholarly evidence trail - from grants, articles, books, preprints, and reports to data, software, video, and physical objects.\nCrossref is the world\u0026rsquo;s largest registry of Digital Object Identifiers (DOIs) and metadata for the scholarly research community. Unlike other DOI agencies, we encompass all research stakeholders and all geographies. We facilitate an average of 1.4 billion DOI resolutions (clicks of a DOI link) every month, which is 93% of all DOI activity. And our APIs see over 2 billion queries of our metadata every month.\nThis global network effect means your work is more likely to be found, if it\u0026rsquo;s in Crossref.\nEveryone is welcome, and there are lots of opportunities to participate and help prioritise our strategic agenda and roadmap, to get together, to learn or advise, or to more formally contribute to open science communication through co-creating and using our Research \u0026lsquo;Nexus\u0026rsquo; of metadata and relationships, backed by our strong commitment to the POSI principles for broad governance, transparent and forkable operations, and financial sustainability.\nSo get involved with Crossref to\u0026hellip;\nIdentify and describe any research object You can maintain and enrich the scholarly record in perpetuity to contribute evidence and make your work discoverable globally. If you publish scholarly or professional materials, content, or any kind of research object, you are eligible to become a member of Crossref. Membership allows you to create DOI records that persistently identify and describe your work.\nAlways use the DOI links wherever you communicate about your work, following the display guidelines available at https://doi.org/10.13003/5jchdy, so that the community can refer to and build upon your work. You agree to certain obligations that help safeguard the system for everyone, including future generations.\nThere are fees attached as part of our not-for-profit sustainability model, and we also have a number of ways to reduce barriers, such as the Global Equitable Membership (GEM) program, or joining via a Sponsor organisation. If you\u0026rsquo;re just starting out in your journey, visit the Publishers Learning And Community Exchange (The PLACE) for more general orientation including information about ethical publishing and open access, which is broader than just Crossref.\nAdd more metadata to make a difference You can curate and steward the record and include metadata and assert relationships between other objects so your work can be found, cited, linked, assessed, and reused by the whole community. You can add context and match research to funding, affiliations, translations, references, contributors, and more.\nCrucially, you can also put updates, corrections, and retractions on the record so these notices accompany the work to better inform users and readers in the future.\nAll of this added context helps co-create the \u0026lsquo;Research Nexus\u0026rsquo;, which is the vision of a rich and reusable open network of relationships connecting research organisations, people, things, and actions; a scholarly record that the global community can build on forever, for the benefit of society\nAnalyse metadata to inform and understand research Crossref is the sustainable source of community-owned scholarly metadata and is relied upon by thousands of systems across the research ecosystem and the globe.\nTake a look at our metadata and search for anything at search.crossref.org and specifically by funder at search.crossref.org/funding. Or explore how to use our API with these sample queries.\nPeople using Crossref metadata need it for all sorts of reasons including metaresearch (researchers studying research itself such as through bibliometric analyses), publishing trends (such as finding works from an individual author or reviewer), or incorporation into specific databases (such as for discovery and search or in subject-specific repositories), and many more detailed use cases.\nAnyone can retrieve and use over 150 million records without restriction. So there are no fees to use the metadata but if you really rely on it then you might like to sign up for Metadata Plus which offers greater predictability and higher rate limits.\nAdditionally, we facilitate screening of text-based research for originality through collective licensing terms with leading software tools such as iThenticate from Turnitin.\nCo-create solutions to shared problems Crossref co-developed the initial system for what is now known as ORCID, we co-founded and help operate the ROR Registry.\nWe are active on dozens of boards and working groups, such as JATS, Open Research Funders Group, African Journals Online (AJOL), software citation, and OA Switchboard - to list just a few. We collaborate with others on several community initiatives, such as co-founding Metadata 20/20 and we support other campaigns for richer open metadata, such as I4OC and I4OA.\nWe have especially close integrations and partnerships with other POSI adopters, such as DOAJ, the Public Knowledge Project, Europe PMC, and DataCite.\nWe’re keen for volunteers to join our advisory and working groups which help to support and give input on our different programs and initiatives. If you want to help test new metadata schema, suggest or join a working group, or have thoughts about what Crossref should prioritise, please get in touch to make a suggestion. We have a large agenda and roadmap but we\u0026rsquo;re always open to ideas.\nJoin the discussions We host webinars and in-person events which are all open and free to attend. Through these we aim to inform and update people with what we’re working on, but we also want your feedback - what’s happening with you and what do you need from us? What shall we collaborate on next? Who in the community would you like to hear more from, and what about?\nWith an eye towards the future of our planet with a promise to reduce travel, we\u0026rsquo;re doing more events online than in-person so please come and chat with us over on Mastodon, interact with the whole community and ask for support on our forum, and read and comment on our blog (or volunteer a guest post).\nIf you\u0026rsquo;re passionate about open research infrastructure and your community doesn\u0026rsquo;t feel represented in Crossref, please tell us. Consider applying to become an Ambassador. You\u0026rsquo;d be joining many others around the world in becoming a Crossref expert and helping us understand how to support your community better.\nYou can browse and contribute to our open code on GitLab and in fact you can even update this website by opening issues or merge requests in the public repository.\nOur team is looking forward to hearing from you; thanks for getting involved.\n",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/authors/amanda-french/",
"title": "Amanda French",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Authors",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/insights-from-a-roundtable-on-author-affiliation-metadata/",
"title": "Insights from a roundtable on author affiliation metadata",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2026-01-22",
"lastmod_ts": 1769040000,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "It’s been said that Americans are unusual in tending to ask “Where do you work?” as an initial question upon introduction to a new acquaintance, indicating a perhaps unhealthy preoccupation with work as identity. But in the context of published research, “What is this author\u0026rsquo;s affiliation?” is a question of global importance that goes beyond just wanting to know the name \u0026ndash; and perhaps prestige level \u0026ndash; of the place a researcher works.\n",
"content": "It’s been said that Americans are unusual in tending to ask “Where do you work?” as an initial question upon introduction to a new acquaintance, indicating a perhaps unhealthy preoccupation with work as identity. But in the context of published research, “What is this author\u0026rsquo;s affiliation?” is a question of global importance that goes beyond just wanting to know the name \u0026ndash; and perhaps prestige level \u0026ndash; of the place a researcher works.\nWhen collected, used, and analyzed at scale, data about author affiliations can provide intriguing insights about international collaboration trends, signal trust and lack of trust in particular research institutions, generate business intelligence for publishers, help universities track the work their researchers do, help funders demonstrate the impact of their funding, and much more.\nIn November we partnered with OA Switchboard to organize a roundtable on author affiliation metadata for the Crossref community, service and infrastructure providers, production vendors, data scientists, researchers, and librarians. We aimed to bring together scholarly information professionals with many diverse perspectives; ultimately, participants from more than 40 organizations joined the roundtable to share their experiences and their thoughts.\nIn focusing on a single type of metadata, we hoped to focus our discussions, as well. Similarly, in October the Barcelona Declaration on Open Research Information organized a roundtable on \u0026ldquo;Moving Funding Metadata Forward\u0026rdquo; in which it became clear that “improving the quality and coverage of funding metadata was on the agenda of many organisations and there was a strong interest in collaborating on practical next steps.”\nWhile many of the issues and solutions discussed at both roundtables are similar, in the course of the author affiliation metadata roundtable we identified some unique challenges as well as benefits related to this particular flavor of information. In this blog post, I’ll share these insights.\nInsights from presenters I opened the roundtable with a brief introduction and a working definition of affiliation metadata: names and/or identifiers such as Research Organization Registry (ROR) IDs for organizations where research was conducted or with which authors and contributors are associated, usually officially, as in their place of employment.\nNext, to create a shared context for discussion, we heard four presentations on the current state of author affiliation metadata, its importance, and Crossref’s ongoing initiative to enhance it automatically.\nNees Jan van Eck of Leiden University’s Center for Science and Technology Studies (CWTS) shared observations on the state of author affiliations from a preprint titled “Crossref as a source of open bibliographic metadata” that presents the findings of an analysis performed annually since 2021. Nees’s key points:\nCrossref is a foundational data source for bibliographic metadata. Affiliation metadata is available for only 1 out of 3 journal articles in Crossref for the period 2023-2024. There is considerable variation in the extent to which Crossref members deposit affiliation metadata. Downstream sources try to fill gaps using suboptimal approaches, leading to missing, inaccurate, and inconsistent linking of publications to institutions. Publications lacking affiliation metadata in Crossref are less visible in bibliometric applications, analyses, studies, and tools (such as the open edition of the Leiden Ranking of over 2800 universities). Next, Yvonne Campfens of OA Switchboard reiterated the desirability of the Crossref community providing complete and accurate author affiliation metadata at the source. Yvonne called upon publishers to “Integrate metadata creation in your systems and workflows before publication and relay it throughout the editorial, production, and publication processes.”\nYvonne pointed out that in the context of managing Open Access agreements, publishers ought to keep in mind that providing good affiliation metadata improves customer satisfaction, since institutions and consortia need to have that information in order to connect research to the correct organization. In closing, Yvonne featured best practices from OA Switchboard’s Data Quality Challenge:\neLife captures affiliations at submissions with “author select,” ensuring that ROR IDs are introduced early and verified before publication, coupled with a quality assurance process during proofing. (See also our piece on Metadata Excellence Award winner eLife.) EMS Press captures metadata via manuscript extraction as early as at submission, building on globally valid identifiers whenever possible (ROR IDs, DOIs, ORCIDs). Pensoft Publishers uses AI-assisted metadata extraction with human review and in-house metadata validation. Beilstein-Institut performs post-acceptance metadata quality assurance through automation and expert review. The Royal Society embeds metadata in OA payment and agreement workflows. American Chemical Society (ACS) has a multi-method persistent identifier matching strategy with near-complete coverage. The American Society for Microbiology (ASM) combines AI-powered submission tools with editorial oversight via expert manual checks. (See also our piece on Metadata Excellence Award winner ASM.) Rockefeller University Press (RUP) maintains ROR IDs across the full publishing workflow with “author select” at submission through metadata deposits upon publication. (See also the ROR case study on RUP.) Adam Day of Clear Skies Ltd began his talk by wryly framing the first and second rules of data science as contradictory: “Never fix data: always use sources that produce high-quality data in the first place,” but also “Get good at fixing data, because you will have to.” Adam went on to demonstrate the central role author affiliation metadata plays in research integrity investigations, displaying anonymized data for institutions with a high number of alerts. In conclusion, Adam reiterated the importance of author affiliation metadata to research integrity efforts:\nData analysis is critical to research integrity. Quality data helps enormously by giving oversight, saving time, and assisting investigations. Lastly, our own Director of Technology Dominika Tkaczyk gave an account of our plans to enrich author affiliation metadata by matching organization name text strings to ROR IDs as part of our metadata matching initiative. A strategy for performing such matching has already been developed and tested and an open dataset of results made available. Tests on a set of 3,000 affiliations sampled from our metadata show that the strategy can be expected to match 95 million ROR IDs to organization names with 97.35% precision, an astronomical increase over the less than 1 million ROR IDs deposited in Crossref records to date.\nDominika concluded the presentation portion of the session by reiterating that our planned enrichment of author affiliation metadata\nWill use flexible and transparent matching strategies (and open code), Will welcome community participation in developing new strategies, and Will be available in the REST API. Automatic matching of organization names to ROR IDs in author affiliations cannot solve the problem of missing organization names, of course, but it represents a huge leap forward in addressing metadata quality issues.\nAll of our speakers\u0026rsquo; presentations are available on Zenodo at https://doi.org/10.13003/661591chqlyw.\nInsights into challenges In the next stage of the event, participants broke into six breakout groups to identify factors contributing to incomplete or inaccurate affiliation metadata. Participants were pre-assigned to groups randomly by role to ensure a variety of perspectives in every discussion.\nAt least two participants, it should be noted, pointed out that it would be helpful to agree on a definition of “complete” and “accurate” affiliation metadata, which in itself is a challenge, and one we did not address in this roundtable. For instance, practices most recently have trended away from defining a complete author affiliation in open metadata as including an institutional address, although many internal databases might include such information separately.\nEven without such definitions, however, all six groups were able to identify several general areas for attention, and one participant provided a particularly helpful categorization of these areas that is largely reused here.\nInherent data complexity Research organizations have names in different languages, abbreviations, and many other name variants. Research organizations have frequent name changes, mergers, and rebranding. Research organizations have different degrees, levels, and complexity of hierarchical granularity, and authors, publishers, and software systems are often misaligned as to which level in an organization\u0026rsquo;s structure is appropriate to use in a particular instance. Research organizations often lack official policies on how affiliations should be written, leading to hundreds of variations for a single institution. Author-related issues Corresponding authors often submit information for all co-authors, which can lead to inaccuracies. Many authors have multiple profiles across multiple submission systems, which can introduce errors. Authors may have “octopus affiliations,” claiming affiliations with many institutions that are difficult to verify. Authors may fail to update affiliations when changing institutions between manuscript acceptance and publication. Authors may demonstrate \u0026ldquo;apathy\u0026rdquo; when repeatedly filling out submission forms, sometimes providing incomplete, inconsistent, or incorrect information. On occasion, authors might even provide false or purchased affiliations, which of course is a significant research integrity concern. Technical barriers Many manuscript tracking and peer review systems, especially legacy systems, lack structured fields for affiliations or don\u0026rsquo;t support open organization identifiers like ROR. Some systems limit authors to a single affiliation, despite many researchers having multiple institutional connections. Some systems only collect affiliation information for the corresponding author. Some systems link affiliations to user accounts instead of to publications. Different systems use competing identifier registries, including proprietary identifier registries, creating interoperability challenges. Publisher practices Even when publishers improve current metadata collection practices, historical data correction is resource-intensive and often not prioritized. Publishers collect affiliation information at submission but don’t ensure that it is maintained throughout all stages of the publication process and deposited in metadata. Some publishers are unaware of the importance of author affiliation metadata or do not prioritize its improvement. Some publishers deliberately choose not to deposit affiliation metadata to Crossref, viewing it as value-added information they\u0026rsquo;ve invested in curating. Insights into solutions Naturally, we didn’t rest at identifying challenges: after a break, we gathered in the same groups to brainstorm approaches to improving author affiliation metadata.\nAdopt collective approaches Collective action, where corrections and improvements made by various stakeholders flow back into shared systems, has historically worked for proprietary systems and could be even more powerful with open infrastructure. Since those who do not provide metadata “upstream” will inevitably have it provided for them “downstream” by multiple separate entities using multifarious methods, provenance metadata indicating who asserted author affiliations and how (whether automatically or with the author’s or editor’s input) would help metadata users assess trust levels. Engage authors and institutions Reach out to authors and institutions to educate them on the need for more consistent affiliation reporting, especially in terms of language, name format, and degree of hierarchical granularity. Demonstrate the benefit to institutions of maintaining accurate records in registries like ROR, including abbreviations and name variants. Publishers and/or software systems should allow authors to review (though not necessarily edit) affiliation information during the proofing process to verify accuracy. Authors should not, however, need to know, see, or use ROR IDs. Improve the tech Publishers would welcome submission systems that incorporate structured fields for author affiliations with well-designed auto-suggestions linked to ROR or other organization identifiers. Making affiliation data mandatory at submission could significantly improve capture rates, although it would be important to ensure that independent researchers can use these systems as well. Enable collection of affiliations for all authors, not just the corresponding author. Pull in verified affiliation information from ORCID. Increasingly, intelligent matching systems can be implemented to reduce author burden and perhaps also increase accuracy and completeness of metadata. Better crosswalks between different organization identifier systems would make it vastly easier for publishers to maintain better metadata. Since open registries cannot include proprietary information, proprietary registries should provide their customers with crosswalks to all standard open identifiers. Encourage publisher best practices Publishers can use already-available tools to help assess and improve the quality of both new and legacy author affiliation metadata. Crossref’s Participation Reports OpenAIRE\u0026rsquo;s affiliation matching methods and validation systems ROR API affiliation matching service Share the benefits of improved author affiliation metadata for internal and external analytics, customer satisfaction, and research integrity. Identify best practices in collecting and structuring author affiliation metadata. Understand that the entire research ecosystem would benefit from publishers sharing collected affiliation data with Crossref. It’s worth mentioning that these solutions are heterogeneous: not all strategies can be implemented by any one actor nor even by any one sector of our profession. Clearly, collaborative action is necessary for substantive change.\nMoving forward The affiliations metadata roundtable represented an important step in addressing affiliation metadata challenges in a productive and collaborative way. If there was a consensus, it was that while perfect completeness and accuracy of author affiliation metadata may not be achievable (or even definable), incremental improvements can substantially enhance the quality and availability of affiliation metadata for the entire scholarly information community.\nHere at Crossref, we intend to use the insights from this roundtable to inform our support of the Crossref community, including publishers, service providers, and metadata users. We welcome your comments, questions, and suggestions on this issue! Share your thoughts with Amanda French at alfrench@crossref.org.\nReferences van Eck, N. J., \u0026amp; Waltman, L. (2025). Crossref as a source of open bibliographic metadata (No. smxe5_v2). MetaArXiv. https://doi.org/10.31222/osf.io/smxe5_v2 Tkaczyk, D. (2025). Crossref relationships involving research organisations [Dataset]. Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.15254993 French, A., van Eck, N. J., Campfens, Y., Day, A., \u0026amp; Tkaczyk, D. (2026, January 19). Affiliations Metadata Roundtable 2025—All Presentations. https://doi.org/10.13003/661591chqlyw Participating organizations Africa PID Alliance / TCC Africa Frontiers Media SA American Association of Cancer Research (AACR) Iowa State American Chemical Society (ACS) Kriyadocs / Exeter Premedia Services American Physical Society (APS) MDPI American Society for Microbiology (ASM) Noyam Publishers Aptara OpenAIRE / OpenOrgs Australian Research Data Commons (ARDC) Optica Publishing Group Atypon ORCID Beilstein-Institut Oxford University Press California Digital Library (CDL) Public Knowledge Project (PKP) Cambridge University Press Public Library of Science (PLOS) Carnegie Mellon University River Valley Technologies CHORUS Rockefeller University Press Clarivate / Web of Science SAGE Publications Copernicus GmBH Barcelona Declaration on Open Research Information Curtin University / Curtin Open Knowledge Initiative (COKI) Silverchair / ScholarOne De Gruyter Brill Springer Science \u0026amp; Business Digital Science / Figshare TNQTech Digital Science / Symplectic Elements University of Laval eLife University of Chicago Press Elsevier BV University of Split Enago ",
"headings": ["Insights from presenters","Insights into challenges","Inherent data complexity","Author-related issues","Technical barriers","Publisher practices","Insights into solutions","Adopt collective approaches","Engage authors and institutions","Improve the tech","Encourage publisher best practices","Moving forward","References","Participating organizations"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/categories/ror/",
"title": "ROR",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Categories",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/categories/equity/",
"title": "Equity",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Categories",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/categories/gem/",
"title": "GEM",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Categories",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/people/org-chart/",
"title": "Organisation chart",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2026-01-14",
"lastmod_ts": 1768348800,
"section": "Our people",
"tags": [],
"description": "Our team is shown in this interactive organisational chart. Also take a look at our people directory and click through to read about each of our roles and areas of responsibility, and check out our jobs page to see opportunities to join our growing team.\n",
"content": "Our team is shown in this interactive organisational chart. Also take a look at our people directory and click through to read about each of our roles and areas of responsibility, and check out our jobs page to see opportunities to join our growing team.\n",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/the-gem-program-year-three-and-program-expansion-for-2026/",
"title": "The GEM program - Year Three and program expansion for 2026",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2026-01-14",
"lastmod_ts": 1768348800,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "As Crossref membership continues to grow, finding ways to help organisations participate is an important part of our mission. Although Crossref membership is open to all organisations that produce scholarly and professional materials, cost and technical challenges can be barriers to joining for many.\n",
"content": "As Crossref membership continues to grow, finding ways to help organisations participate is an important part of our mission. Although Crossref membership is open to all organisations that produce scholarly and professional materials, cost and technical challenges can be barriers to joining for many.\nOur Global Equitable Membership (GEM) Program aims to provide greater membership equity and accessibility to organisations in the world\u0026rsquo;s least economically advantaged countries. Eligible members pay no membership or record registration fees. Eligibility for the program is based on a member\u0026rsquo;s country. Seeing its effectiveness in increasing participation in the research nexus from previously underrepresented regions, this year we are expanding the GEM program to include 18 new countries.\nOverview of the first 3 years of GEM The program began in January 2023 with 214 existing members. By the end of 2025, we had 628 organisations under the GEM program. Of these, 535 are independent members, and 89 members work through one of our sponsors. To date, GEM program members have contributed approximately 334,000 works to the Research Nexus.\nGlobal equitable membership 2023 2024 2025 New members joining 129 127 151 Total member count 327 458 628 Total number of Crossref GEM members by country until the end of 2025:\nGEM country – alphabetically Total no. of members GEM country – alphabetically Total no. of members Afghanistan 29 Malawi 2 Bangladesh 167 Maldives 4 Benin 6 Mali 4 Bhutan 6 Marshall Islands 0 Burkina Faso 7 Mauritania 1 Burundi 3 Micronesia 0 Cambodia 14 Mozambique 2 Central African Republic 1 Myanmar 3 Chad 0 Nepal 60 Comoros 1 Nicaragua 2 Congo, Democratic Republic 24 Niger 0 Côte d\u0026rsquo;Ivoire 3 Rwanda 9 Djibouti 0 Samoa 0 Eritrea 0 São Tomé and Principe 0 Ethiopia 17 Senegal 7 Gambia 0 Sierra Leone 2 Ghana 38 Solomon Islands 0 Guinea 0 Somalia 10 Guinea-Bissau 0 South Sudan 0 Guyana 3 Sri Lanka 31 Haiti 2 Sudan 14 Honduras 3 Tajikistan 8 Kiribati 0 Tanzania, United Republic of 28 Kosovo 9 Togo 1 Kyrgyz Republic 27 Tonga 0 Lao, People\u0026rsquo;s Democratic Rep. 5 Tuvalu 0 Lesotho 0 Uganda 23 Liberia 1 Vanuatu 0 Madagascar 5 Yemen 37 Zambia 8 Membership Density in GEM Program Countries until the end of 2025\nProgram expansion in 2026 Starting on 1st of January 2026, we’re excited to invite organisations from Angola, Belize, Cabo Verde, Cameroon, Republic of Congo, Dominica, Eswatini, Fiji, Grenada, Kenya, Nigeria, Pakistan, Papua New Guinea, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Suriname, Timor Leste, and Uzbekistan to join Crossref and register their content and metadata with us without membership or record registration fees. There are 711 existing Crossref members based in these countries who are now eligible for the program, bringing the overall number of GEM members to 1339 across 77 countries (that’s close to 5% of all Crossref members).\nIn creating our eligibility list, we refer to existing sources. For the first three years of the program, our list was predominantly based on the World Bank’s International Development Association (IDA) classification. In 2026, we leveraged additional sources to curate our list, resulting in the inclusion of 18 new countries in the program. Following community feedback, we now refer to the IDA, the IDA Blend List, and the United Nations Least Developed Countries list. In our choices, we also keep abreast of the global situation and conversations about supporting equitability in scholarly publishing and in the future, we may consider other factors too.\nWe will review our lists and the eligibility criteria annually and note any changes on our website. Members whose country moves on or off the GEM Program will be notified of any upcoming fees (or the removal of fees) with adequate time to plan and budget accordingly. Although the GEM program reduces financial barriers, many small organisations may still need administrative, technical, and language support provided by our Sponsors, and we will continue working with suitable organisations to make participation in Crossref easier.\n",
"headings": ["Overview of the first 3 years of GEM","Program expansion in 2026"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/categories/fees/",
"title": "Fees",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Categories",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/reduction-of-grant-doi-registration-fees-a-boost-for-the-research-nexus/",
"title": "Reduction of Grant DOI registration fees: a boost for the Research Nexus",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2026-01-08",
"lastmod_ts": 1767830400,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "We are pleased to announce that\u0026mdash;effective 1st January 2026\u0026mdash;we have made two changes to grant record registration fees that aim to accelerate adoption of Crossref\u0026rsquo;s Grant Linking System (GLS) and provide a two-year window of opportunity to increase the number and availability of open persistent grant identifiers and boost the matching of relationships with research objects.\n",
"content": "We are pleased to announce that\u0026mdash;effective 1st January 2026\u0026mdash;we have made two changes to grant record registration fees that aim to accelerate adoption of Crossref\u0026rsquo;s Grant Linking System (GLS) and provide a two-year window of opportunity to increase the number and availability of open persistent grant identifiers and boost the matching of relationships with research objects.\nLaunched in 2019 with close input from several funders and other infrastructure organisations, the GLS primarily offers the ability to create and steward Crossref Grant DOIs, along with several benefits such as dedicated grant/award metadata like funding type, value, contributors, and projects, as well as hosted landing pages, tools to create and update metadata, and of course both member-asserted and Crossref-automatic matching of relationships within the global corpus of 180 million other research objects. Essentially, we need to identify what research objects are produced as a result of the award, and these objects could be articles, preprints, data, code, blogs, posters, and more. This connected network is what we call the Research Nexus, essential for exploring research activity in general, as well as evaluating reach and return on funding and other support like use of facilities/equipment.\nA fee reduction and a two-year fee waiver pilot Following a review by our Membership \u0026amp; Fees Committee, the Board met in December and passed two related motions:\nCurrent-Year (CY) grant registration fee has been cut in half to match other record types: The board approved the adjustment of the Current-Year (CY) grant registration fee down from $2.00 to $1.00 USD, effective 1st January 2026. Back-Year (BY) grant registration fee is waived through 2027: The board approved a time-limited fee waiver as a pilot for Back-Year (BY) grant registration fees, bringing that per-record fee down from $0.30 to $0.00 for 2026 and 2027. We aim to boost registration of Back-Year (BY) records and accelerate the growth of the Research Nexus with millions more grant\u0026lt;-\u0026gt;output matches. During the course of the two-year pilot, the Membership \u0026amp; Fees Committee and our fee project work that started in 2023 and also brought in other fee reductions, will consider more adjustments across BY registration fees for the benefit of members beyond just funders and beyond just grants.\nAll Board motions are publicly available and we encourage questions from the community about our governance processes and the decisions on our members\u0026rsquo; behalf; email us via feedback@crossref.org anytime, or post on the forum.\nSupercharging the Grant Linking System Leading up to the GLS launch in 2019, we worked with a group of funders and metadata experts to inform the design and implementation of the new service, including a funder governance and fees working group. That was seven years ago, and our Funder Advisory Group now includes nearly 100 funding community representatives the GLS has grown to almost 50 funder members that have registered more than 185,000 open grant metadata records. But they are mostly research councils and agencies or charities from Europe and North America, and we know that for a truly comprehensive and interconnected Research Nexus, more needs to be done to include organisations from all parts of the world. The other key driver is simply to boost more metadata connections; the more grant metadata we gather, the better we can match it to all kinds of research outputs, and this metadata directly feeds thousands of services available in our community, from Dimensions and Scopus, to OA.Report and OpenAlex, as well as funders\u0026rsquo; own analytics tools. See our recent report about the latest dataset and of course use api.crossref.org directly.\nRelatedly, we just added a new Grant DOI field to our schema for all record types, to give our members a precise and accurate way of capturing funding metadata for all research outputs. With the new lower CY registration fee and a pilot waiver of BY fees for grant records, we hope to boost the creation of more Grant DOIs by more funders from more parts of the world\u0026mdash;so that others also see and can build on the momentum and reuse the data in their own tools and services. All actors need to play their role, and Crossref’s part is in running the global linking infrastructure at scale, connecting research objects and making them openly available while ensuring that the barriers for the registration, use and reuse of metadata remain as low as possible.\nWe feel we\u0026rsquo;re at a tipping point that only needs a small nudge to truly scale the Grant Linking System.\nBy waiving BY fees entirely for two years, we\u0026rsquo;re hoping to see members fill in historical data and create more comprehensive grant\u0026lt;-\u0026gt;outcome connections. There is often a long period of time between funding being awarded, and the resulting research objects being generated and communicated. That is why historical grant metadata is so important; we think that there will be many funding outcome relationships and insights just waiting to be uncovered!\nWhy give funders a fee break and not others? We\u0026rsquo;re not ruling out this kind of fee incentive in future for other members and other object types, but that needs more analysis (which we plan to do) and right now, the relatively small number of grant records, combined with a growing need for this kind of metadata, means the changes are small enough to have almost no impact on Crossref\u0026rsquo;s healthy financial position.\nThis decision is consistent with the goals of our Resourcing Crossref for Future Sustainability (RCFS) to review our fees to make sure they are equitable and clear, while ensuring Crossref retains a sustainable business model. Our fees can encourage or discourage the community to participate in Crossref. The RCFS project has also resulted in the creation of a lower membership fee tier for the very lowest-resourced members, and the tidying up of things like outlier volume discounts.\nThe BY fee waiver is positioned as a pilot to allow us to measure its impact over the next two years and feed into the Membership \u0026amp; Fees Committee and RCFS project. We will evaluate the pilot results (i.e. does it indeed supercharge funding metadata connections and adoption?) and consider additional adjustments to other BY registration fees and whether such fee incentives might be extended to other members.\nWe encourage all funders to take advantage of these reduced rates to contribute to the Research Nexus and help us build a more complete picture of the relationship between research funding and outcomes.\nTake a look at the recent case studies from early GLS adopters FWF (Austria), NWO (The Netherlands), FCCN|FCT (Portugal), and Wellcome/EuropePMC, reach out to them or us with any questions, or peruse the GLS community forum!\n",
"headings": ["A fee reduction and a two-year fee waiver pilot","Supercharging the Grant Linking System","Why give funders a fee break and not others?"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/categories/best-practice/",
"title": "Best Practice",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Categories",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/authors/patricia-feeney/",
"title": "Patricia Feeney",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Authors",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/the-best-way-of-acknowledging-research-funding-in-the-metadata-crossref-grant-id/",
"title": "The best way of acknowledging research funding in the metadata: Crossref Grant ID",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2026-01-06",
"lastmod_ts": 1767657600,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "We are very pleased to kick off the New Year with another important schema update and the news that a Grant DOI field is now supported for all record types. This means that Crossref members can explicitly include the Crossref Grant IDs as part of their DOI metadata records for publications and any other output type, accurately linking research outputs to the funding that made it possible, all through metadata. We hope that our members will leverage this to respond to recent calls for stronger funding transparency and best practices for reporting funding sources in research outputs. ",
"content": "We are very pleased to kick off the New Year with another important schema update and the news that a Grant DOI field is now supported for all record types. This means that Crossref members can explicitly include the Crossref Grant IDs as part of their DOI metadata records for publications and any other output type, accurately linking research outputs to the funding that made it possible, all through metadata. We hope that our members will leverage this to respond to recent calls for stronger funding transparency and best practices for reporting funding sources in research outputs. Funding information is very important for the research community. As explored by some key European funder representatives, providing mechanisms to clearly link funding with its outputs is essential for the community to have a full picture of the research endeavour.\nWhen funders systematically register grants with persistent identifiers and make this information openly available, they create a foundation that publishers and infrastructure providers such as repositories can reliably build upon when depositing output metadata.”\n\u0026ndash; Hans de Jonge, Katharina Rieck and Zoé Ancion\nUp until now, if a Crossref member wanted to include a Crossref Grant ID to unambiguously identify the output funding source, they would need to use other available fields, such as for an award number. While it was an important step towards increasing transparency and is heavily used for reporting and impact assessment, being an unstructured field, it was prone to errors, and of course, funders’ internal award identifiers are not unique, persistent, or necessarily open. This limited our ability to create unambiguous relationships with the Crossref Grant DOIs registered by our now ~50 funder members. As the new field becomes increasingly populated by our members, this rich metadata will pave the way for capturing and representing the funding relationships in a more accurate and complete way and fulfilling one of our commitments at the recent funding metadata workshop with the Barcelona Declaration. The Crossref Grant ID field in the schema is a clear signal of the growing demand for these persistent Grant IDs (Crossref DOIs), and the relationships these help us create. Those connections can in turn enable streamlined reporting for the grantees, as well as compliance tracking and programme evaluation for funders. As part of our work to enable the research nexus, Crossref has been proactively identifying funding information and prototyping metadata enrichment processes through matching projects, ensuring that as many relationships as possible are established and made discoverable. With this schema update, we aim to lower barriers and encourage more members to register output-funding relationships at source. This will facilitate the links that make the research nexus a connected, interoperable, and an important source of information that ensures a transparent and trustworthy research process. We encourage all Crossref members to start incorporating Grant DOIs when available into your metadata submissions. By taking advantage of this new field, you\u0026rsquo;ll help build a more complete and transparent record of research funding, making it easier for the community to understand and trace the impact of funded research. When collecting funding information for your publication, please consider asking the authors for the Grant DOI (Crossref Grant ID) as well as the funder’s details (such as their name and identifier). Here’s how the U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Scientific and Technical Information\u0026rsquo;s (OSTI-DOE) grant https://doi.org/10.46936/aps-182101/60010611 can be included in the metadata for related works, from datasets, to preprints, conference proceedings, journal articles, and more:\n\u0026lt;assertion name=\u0026#34;fundgroup\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;assertion name=\u0026#34;ror\u0026#34;\u0026gt;https://ror.org/04qxsr837\u0026lt;/assertion\u0026gt; \u0026lt;assertion name=\u0026#34;grant_doi\u0026#34;\u0026gt;10.46936/aps-182101/60010611\u0026lt;/assertion\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/assertion\u0026gt; Similarly, a grant https://doi.org/10.3030/732489 from European Union H2020-EU.2.1.1. - INDUSTRIAL LEADERSHIP, would be represented in related work’s metadata as follows:\n\u0026lt;assertion name=\u0026#34;fundgroup\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;assertion name=\u0026#34;funder_name”\u0026gt;H2020 LEIT Information and Communication Technologies \u0026lt;assertion name=\u0026#34;funder_identifier”\u0026gt;10.13039/100010669\u0026lt;/assertion\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/assertion\u0026gt; \u0026lt;assertion name=\u0026#34;grant_doi\u0026#34;\u0026gt;10.3030/732489\u0026lt;/assertion\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/assertion\u0026gt; For more technical documentation and implementation guidance, please visit our funding data documentation. If you have questions or need support integrating Grant IDs into your workflow, our support team is here to help!\n",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/fees/",
"title": "Fees",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2025-12-23",
"lastmod_ts": 1766448000,
"section": "Fees",
"tags": [],
"description": "We have different fees for different kinds of community participation. These include annual membership fees and content registration fees for members, optional member fees for Similarity Check, and annual subscription fees for Metadata Plus.\nOur Membership and Fees Committee regularly reviews our fees and makes recommendations to our Board. In July 2019 our board voted to approve our fee principles. We haven\u0026rsquo;t increased the regular annual membership or content registration fees since 2004 years but please note that fees may be changed soon as part of the Resourcing Crossref for Future Sustainability (RCFS) Program that started in 2024.\n",
"content": "We have different fees for different kinds of community participation. These include annual membership fees and content registration fees for members, optional member fees for Similarity Check, and annual subscription fees for Metadata Plus.\nOur Membership and Fees Committee regularly reviews our fees and makes recommendations to our Board. In July 2019 our board voted to approve our fee principles. We haven\u0026rsquo;t increased the regular annual membership or content registration fees since 2004 years but please note that fees may be changed soon as part of the Resourcing Crossref for Future Sustainability (RCFS) Program that started in 2024.\nMember fees If you want to get a Crossref DOI prefix for your organisation so you can create unique and persistent links and distribute metadata through us, you’ll need to become a member. Most members pay an annual fee at the beginning of each calendar year plus a one-time fee for each content item registered. There are also fees for the optional Similarity Check service.\nAnnual membership fees If you are a member through a sponsor, your sponsor will pay membership fees on your behalf (but they may also charge you for their services - more here).\nIf you are eligible for the GEM programme, you will not pay annual membership fees - more here.\nAll other members pay an annual membership fee to Crossref. There are different membership fee tiers depending on whether you will be registering published content with us, or whether you are a funder and will be registering grants. These fees are tiered, depending on your publishing revenues or expenses (whichever is higher), or the value of the grants that you award.\n(IMPORTANT: your membership fee gives you access to our services, but DOES NOT include content registration. There are separate content registration fees payable.)\nAnnual membership fee tiers (for organisations registering published content) Our membership fees for organisations who will be registering published research outputs are tiered depending on the publishing revenue or expenses of your organisation, whichever is higher. Please select your tier from the table below, and use the higher number of either:\nTotal annual publishing revenue from all the divisions of your organisation (the member is considered to be the largest legal entity) for all types of activities (advertising, sales, subscriptions, databases, article charges, membership dues, etc). Total annual publishing operations expenses including (but not limited to) staff costs, hosting, outsourcing, consulting, typesetting, etc. Total publishing revenue or expenses Annual membership fee \u0026lt; 1000 USD 200 USD 1000 - 1 million USD 275 USD 1 million USD - 5 million USD 550 USD 5 million USD - 10 million USD 1,650 USD 10 million USD - 25 million USD 3,900 USD 25 million USD - 50 million USD 8,300 USD 50 million USD - 100 million USD 14,000 USD 100 million USD - 200 million USD 22,000 USD 200 million USD - 500 million USD 33,000 USD \u0026gt; 500 million USD 50,000 USD Annual membership fees (for funders who will be registering grants) Since 2019, funders are able to register DOIs for the research grants they have awarded. Their annual membership fees are lower than for all other members, but their grant registration fees are higher. Funder fees are tiered depending on your annual award value.\nTotal annual award value (USD) Annual membership fee \u0026lt; 500k USD 200 USD 0.5-2 million USD 400 USD 2.1-10 million USD 600 USD 10.1-500 million USD 800 USD 500.1 million - 1 billion USD 1,000 USD \u0026gt; 1 billion USD 1,200 USD Content Registration fees Content Registration (metadata deposit) fees are one-time fees for the initial registration of DOI metadata records with us, and they are usually billed quarterly in arrears. If you are a member through a sponsor, your sponsor will pay registration fees on your behalf (but they may also charge you for their services - more here). If you are eligible for the GEM program, you will not pay registration fees - more here.\nThere are different fees for different record types, and some record types have discounts for older content - newer items are charged at the \u0026ldquo;current record\u0026rdquo; price, and older items are charged at the \u0026ldquo;back-year record\u0026rdquo; price.\nAfter the initial registration fee, there are no further fees for updating the metadata associated with existing records.\nContent registration fees by record type Record type Registration fee per current record Registration fee per back-year record Journal articles, book titles, conference proceedings and conference papers, technical reports and working papers, theses and dissertations 1.00 USD 0.15 USD Peer Reviews 0.25 USD 0.25 USD Grants 1.00 USD 0.00 USD in 2026 and 2027 Preprints 0.25 USD 0.15 USD Book Chapters 0.25 USD 0.15 USD Standards 0.15 USD 0.15 USD Databases and datasets 0.06 USD 0.06 USD Components 0.06 USD 0.06 USD *Note: \u0026ldquo;Current record\u0026rdquo; prices are for content that was published (or awarded, in the case of grants) in the current calendar year + the previous two calendar years, and \u0026ldquo;Back-year record\u0026rdquo; prices are for content that is older than that. So for records registered with Crossref in 2026, current records are anything registered with publication/award dates of 2026, 2025, or 2024. Back-year is anything registered with publication/award dates of 2023 or before.\nAdditional note: Volume discounts were previously offered on some content types, but these discounts were removed on 1st January 2026. See our blog for more information.\nPricing for peer reviews If you register more than one peer review for the same article, then you pay a cheaper price than the first peer review.\nTotal number of registered DOIs per article Registration fee per record (current and back-year) First peer review against single article 0.25 USD Second and all further peer reviews against same article 0.00 USD Similarity Check fees Members are able to participate in Similarity Check. As a participant, you pay an annual service fee to use Similarity Check plus a per document charge each time you check a document. Even members who are part of the GEM Program will pay these fees.\nSimilarity Check annual service fee Members of Crossref can participate in Similarity Check. The service fee is 20% of your annual membership fee and is included in your annual membership fee invoice.\nTotal annual revenue/expenses Crossref annual membership fee Similarity Check annual subscription fee \u0026lt; 1000 USD 200 USD 40 USD 1000 USD - 1 million USD 275 USD 55 USD 1 million - 5 million USD 550 USD 110 USD 5 million - 10 million USD 1,650 USD 330 USD 10 million - 25 million USD 3,900 USD 780 USD 25 million - 50 million USD 8,300 USD 1,660 USD 50 million - 100 million USD 14,000 USD 2,800 USD 100 million - 200 million USD 22,000 USD 4,400 USD 200 million - 500 million USD 33,000 USD 6,600 USD \u0026gt; 500 million USD 50,000 USD 10,000 USD Similarity Check per-document fees Each document run through Similarity Check is charged at a per-document-checking fee, and there are volume discounts. There is a separate invoice for Similarity Check document checking fees. This invoice is sent annually in January for the previous years\u0026rsquo; usage.\nNumber of documents checked per year Price per document up to 25,000 words 1 - 100 0.00 USD 101 - 2,000 0.75 USD 2,001 - 25,000 0.65 USD 25,001 - 50,000 0.55 USD 50,001 - 100,000 0.45 USD 100,001 - 200,000 0.30 USD \u0026gt;200,001 0.25 USD Metadata Plus subscriber fees If you want to get and use our metadata, you don’t need to be a member and you don\u0026rsquo;t have to pay a fee. We have a free public REST API that you can use without contacting us.\nHowever, if you want a more predictable service level than we can support with the free API, then our optional paid-for service Metadata Plus could work for you. The service has a dedicated pool of servers and comes with monthly snapshot data dumps of XML or JSON for you to do more flexible and customised analyses. There is an annual subscription fee which pro-rated in your first year, and then renews each January. This annual fee is tiered, based on whichever is the higher between the subscriber organisation\u0026rsquo;s:\ntotal annual revenue (including earned and fundraised, e.g. grants); or annual operating expenses (including staff and non-staff, e.g. occupancy, equipment, licenses etc.). The subscriber is always considered to be the largest legal entity, unless:\nyou are a university, then the subscriber is considered to be the university department(s), school(s), or faculty(ies) that is using the service e.g. Department of Earth Sciences, School of Law, or Faculty of Medicine. you are a government body, then the subscriber is considered to be the agency(ies), department(s), or ministry(ies) that is using the service, e.g. Agence de l\u0026rsquo;Innovation Industrielle, Department of Energy, or Ministry of Consumer Affairs. Total annual revenue/funding or operating expenses Annual fee \u0026lt; 500,000 USD 550 USD 500,001-999,999 USD 2,200 USD 1 - 5 million USD 3,300 USD 5,000,001-9,999,999 USD 11,000 USD 10 million-25 million USD 16,500 USD \u0026gt; 25 million USD 44,000 USD Sponsor fees Some organizations work with us as a Sponsor to facilitate Crossref membership for groups of smaller organisations.\nSponsors provide administrative, technical and\u0026mdash;if applicable\u0026mdash;language support to the communities they work with. Sponsors pay one membership fee to Crossref for all the members that they work with, and sponsors also pay the content registration fees for any content registered by their members. Many sponsors then pass on these fees to members and/or charge the members for their services.\nSponsors may only work with member organizations whose annual publishing revenue or expenses (whichever is higher) is under 1 million USD.\nSponsor annual membership fees The annual membership fee you pay as a Sponsor is based on the total combined annual publication revenue or expenses (whichever is higher) of all the members you sponsor.\nTotal combined publishing revenue or expenses Annual fee \u0026lt; 1000 USD 200 USD 1000 USD - 1 million USD 275 USD 1 million - 5 million USD 550 USD 5 million - 10 million USD 1,650 USD 10 million - 25 million USD 3,900 USD 25 million - 50 million USD 8,300 USD 50 million - 100 million USD 14,000 USD 100 million - 200 million USD 22,000 USD 200 million - 500 million USD 33,000 USD \u0026gt; 500 million USD 50,000 USD We\u0026rsquo;ll ask you to re-categorise your annual membership fee at the end of every year, as the number of members that you support grows, and the combined publishing revenue or expenses of these members also grows.\nIf you sponsor grant-awarding funders, there are a different set of membership fees.\nSponsor content registration fees At the end of each quarter you\u0026rsquo;ll be sent an invoice for any content items that have been registered by the members that you sponsor during that quarter. The charges are listed by each member\u0026rsquo;s prefix on the invoice. There are different fees for different record types and the fees are also different depending on the publication date of the content.\nSimilarity Check fees If you decide to offer the optional Similarity Check service to the members you sponsor, you will pay an annual Similarity Check service fee on behalf of the members that you sponsor (which is 20% of your annual membership fee), and you will also pay the per document checking fees for your members who make use of the service. This will be itemised by member iThenticate account number on your invoice.\nHow to pay us and other FAQs There\u0026rsquo;s more information about how to pay us, when you\u0026rsquo;ll be billed and other billing FAQs here.\nDo contact our member support team if you have any further questions.\n",
"headings": ["Member fees","Annual membership fees","Annual membership fee tiers (for organisations registering published content)","Annual membership fees (for funders who will be registering grants)","Content Registration fees","Content registration fees by record type","Pricing for peer reviews","Similarity Check fees","Similarity Check annual service fee","Similarity Check per-document fees","Metadata Plus subscriber fees","Sponsor fees","Sponsor annual membership fees","Sponsor content registration fees","Similarity Check fees","How to pay us and other FAQs"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/working-groups/member-practices/",
"title": "Member Practices Working Group",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 2,
"lastmod": "2025-12-22",
"lastmod_ts": 1766361600,
"section": "Working groups",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref has always aimed to keep membership barriers low. We believe the best way to support a healthy scholarly ecosystem is to make metadata about published work as open and transparent as possible, enabling members to demonstrate their practices through clear “trust signals.” And when practices fall short, the metadata itself provides a way to surface those issues. You can read more about our approach to supporting the Integrity of the Scholarly Record here.\n",
"content": "Crossref has always aimed to keep membership barriers low. We believe the best way to support a healthy scholarly ecosystem is to make metadata about published work as open and transparent as possible, enabling members to demonstrate their practices through clear “trust signals.” And when practices fall short, the metadata itself provides a way to surface those issues. You can read more about our approach to supporting the Integrity of the Scholarly Record here.\nFor years, our membership terms have allowed us to revoke membership in cases of fraudulent use of metadata or identifiers—but we’ve had less clarity around how to respond when a member’s broader practices raise concerns. After consultation with our Board, we’ve now updated our member terms to include an obligation to follow published “member practices.” These practices will offer clearer guidance to members and give us the flexibility to act decisively in the rare situations where that becomes necessary.\nTo shape these practices, we’re convening a working group of Research Integrity experts from January to November 2026.\nGoals Create a draft of our new member practices for community consultation, and ultimately for board approval. Ensure these member practices provide clear guidelines for members around behaviour and practices. Ensure these practices are achievable for all types of Crossref members. It\u0026rsquo;s particularly important that we don\u0026rsquo;t create barriers to entry or continued membership for less experienced or less well-resourced publishers. Participants The group is a mix of research integrity experts and scholarly sleuths at publishers, institutions, funders and other community organizations.\nRene Aquarius, Radboud University Guntram Bauer, Human Frontiers Science Program Dorothy Bishop, University of Oxford Gaelle Bequet, ISSN International Oscar Donde, Pan Africa Science Journal Jason Hu, Taylor \u0026amp; Francis and United2Act Kihong Kim, Korean Council for Science Editors Leslie McIntosh, Digital Science Adya Misra, Sage Publishing Katharina Reick, Austrian Research Council (FWF) Leena Shah, DOAJ Émilie Lavallée-Funston, University of Bristol and Co-chair of NISO\u0026rsquo;s Transfer Standing Committee Jennifer Wright, Cambridge University Press and COPE Council Member Jiayi Xu, Bon View Publishing and COPE Council Member ",
"headings": ["Goals","Participants"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/operations-and-sustainability/annual-report/",
"title": "Annual report",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2025-12-19",
"lastmod_ts": 1766102400,
"section": "Operations & sustainability",
"tags": [],
"description": "2025 Our 2025 annual report is posted on our blog.\nCite the 2054 annual report \u0026ldquo;Crossref Annual Report 2025\u0026rdquo;, retrieved [date], https://doi.org/10.13003/y8ygwm5\nNote that we also do bi-annual audits of our POSI commitments.\n2019 The 2019 report is an expanded version we\u0026rsquo;ve called a \u0026ldquo;fact file\u0026rdquo;.\nCite as: \u0026ldquo;Crossref Annual Report \u0026amp; Fact File 2018-19\u0026rdquo;, retrieved [date], https://doi.org/10.13003/y8ygwm5\nDownload the PDF.\n2018 Download the PDF.\n2017 Download the PDF.\n2016 Download the PDF.\nPrevious annual reports 2014-15 annual report: PDF or Digital 2013-14 annual report: PDF or Digital 2012-13 annual report: PDF or Digital 2011-12 annual report: PDF or Digital 2010-11 annual report: PDF or Digital 2009-10 annual report: PDF or Digital 2008-09 annual report: PDF or Digital 2007-08 annual report: PDF or Digital Please contact our outreach team if you have any questions.\n",
"content": "2025 Our 2025 annual report is posted on our blog.\nCite the 2054 annual report \u0026ldquo;Crossref Annual Report 2025\u0026rdquo;, retrieved [date], https://doi.org/10.13003/y8ygwm5\nNote that we also do bi-annual audits of our POSI commitments.\n2019 The 2019 report is an expanded version we\u0026rsquo;ve called a \u0026ldquo;fact file\u0026rdquo;.\nCite as: \u0026ldquo;Crossref Annual Report \u0026amp; Fact File 2018-19\u0026rdquo;, retrieved [date], https://doi.org/10.13003/y8ygwm5\nDownload the PDF.\n2018 Download the PDF.\n2017 Download the PDF.\n2016 Download the PDF.\nPrevious annual reports 2014-15 annual report: PDF or Digital 2013-14 annual report: PDF or Digital 2012-13 annual report: PDF or Digital 2011-12 annual report: PDF or Digital 2010-11 annual report: PDF or Digital 2009-10 annual report: PDF or Digital 2008-09 annual report: PDF or Digital 2007-08 annual report: PDF or Digital Please contact our outreach team if you have any questions.\n",
"headings": ["2025","2019","Cite as:","2018","2017","2016","Previous annual reports"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/archives/2025/",
"title": "2025",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Archives",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/categories/annual-report/",
"title": "Annual Report",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Categories",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/authors/ed-pentz/",
"title": "Ed Pentz",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Authors",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/categories/finance/",
"title": "Finance",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Categories",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/highlights-of-a-very-busy-year-our-2025-annual-report/",
"title": "Highlights of a very busy year: our 2025 annual report",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2025-12-18",
"lastmod_ts": 1766016000,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "As we finish celebrating our 25th anniversary, we can look back on a truly transformational year, defined by the successful delivery of several long-planned, foundational projects\u0026mdash;as well as updates to our teams, services, and fees\u0026mdash;that position Crossref for success over the next quarter century as essential open scholarly infrastructure. In our update at the end of 2024, we highlighted that we had restructured our leadership team and paused some projects. The changes made in 2024 positioned us for a year of getting things done in 2025. We launched cross-functional programs, modernised our systems, strengthened connections with our growing global community, and streamlined a bunch of technical and business operations while continuing to grow our staff, members, content, relationships, and community connections.\n",
"content": "As we finish celebrating our 25th anniversary, we can look back on a truly transformational year, defined by the successful delivery of several long-planned, foundational projects\u0026mdash;as well as updates to our teams, services, and fees\u0026mdash;that position Crossref for success over the next quarter century as essential open scholarly infrastructure. In our update at the end of 2024, we highlighted that we had restructured our leadership team and paused some projects. The changes made in 2024 positioned us for a year of getting things done in 2025. We launched cross-functional programs, modernised our systems, strengthened connections with our growing global community, and streamlined a bunch of technical and business operations while continuing to grow our staff, members, content, relationships, and community connections.\nRead on for the highlights of a very busy year, grouped around our four strategic themes.\nStrategic theme 1: Contribute to an environment where the community identifies and co-creates solutions for broad benefit Enhanced tools and services In October, we released an enhanced Participation Reports dashboard that shows metadata coverage across all 180 million records and provides individual member organisations with actionable gap reports to guide them to improve metadata completeness. The new tool provides more complete coverage of all members and resource types, now including funders and grants, with up to 11 best-practice metadata elements publicly tracked.\nWe launched support for journal articles in the New Metadata Manager record registration form (initially only for grants), which includes built-in reference and relationships deposit capabilities. In the New Metadata Manager, it’s now also possible to search for previously registered DOIs to edit your metadata records. In the coming years, we are planning to expand the new Metadata Manager to support all the many different content types that you can register with Crossref DOIs.\nAfter a long break between regular updates, we have fixed our process for and just released v.1.63 of the Open Funder registry. With the updated process, we\u0026rsquo;re now able to resume more frequent updates to the registry (while of course still working towards the transition to ROR for funders).\nThroughout 2025, we conducted a website information architecture review to improve the information we provide to our members and the wider community. Based on the recommendations from this review, we will be renewing our website and documentation in 2026.\nDeprecations and modernisation ‘Old’ Metadata Manager is to be retired at the end of 2025, with users transitioning to the \u0026lsquo;New\u0026rsquo; version or to our other helper tools for registering and updating DOIs. All users have been contacted during 2025 and received training on how to use the New Metadata Manager.\nWe also announced the deprecation of Co-access, which will end in 2026, bringing an end to the service that allowed duplicate DOIs for book content. Users of co-access have been informed and are in the process of transitioning to multiple resolution.\nTogether with Turnitin and our members, we are working to transition all subscribers to our Similarity Check service to a new version of iThenticate 2.0. We are happy to report that all platforms with integrations with us transitioned to 2.0 during 2025, and we will continue working with our members to get everyone transitioned during 2026.\nEating our own DOI dogfood In June this year, we were particularly pleased to finally support the registration of DOIs for our own content, this very blog, through partnering with Rogue Scholar. Blogs are a growing format for scholarly discourse and our own blog is no different as it’s the main way that we share guidelines and best practices, as well as news and stories from the scholarly community. With a Crossref DOI for all blogs going back to 2006, we’re setting ourselves up to ensure better future preservation of the discussion and information about Crossref.\nCommunity connections We delivered 29 metadata health-check webinars over the course of the year, in French, Indonesian, Spanish, and English, reaching 2,166 participants with practical advice on identifying gaps in journal metadata using Participation Reports.\nCrossref Accra took place in March as our first in-person event in a GEM country. We also held similar events in Ecuador and Türkiye with Crossref Quito in September and Crossref Ankara in November. At these three events, we welcomed key figures from each country\u0026rsquo;s library, government, publishing, and academic communities and we learned so much about the thriving communities there, and also that even more dedicated workshops on the specifics of metadata quality improvements would be appreciated.\nOur metadata sprint in Madrid in April brought together community members to tackle specific problems collaboratively, with teams exploring coding, documentation, translation, and research using our open metadata. We\u0026rsquo;re already planning our next sprint in São Paulo for March 2026, and it will be held in three languages: Portuguese, Spanish, and English.\nA strategic goal for Crossref is to grow research funders’ adoption of the Grant Linking System, and we produced the first in a series of interviews with funder members this year to highlight how and why Crossref DOIs are fulfilling goals to assess the reach and return of their research support for FWF (Austria), NWO (Netherlands), FCCN|FCT (Portugal), and Wellcome. This year, we welcomed more funders including Fonds de recherche du Québec (Canada) and Independent Research Fund Denmark as part of their national research platform NORA; we look forward to reporting on their experiences and outcomes next year and others as they work towards Crossref Grant DOI adoption.\nWe continued working closely with PKP and renewed our partnership to help drive better experience for OJS users registering metadata with Crossref. We also delivered a proportion of the metadata health-checks together to maximise the learning opportunities for our members using OJS; and we joined PKP\u0026rsquo;s Sprint in Oslo to help make improvements to OJS and OMP.\nCrossref staff members serve on almost 50 committees, boards, and other community bodies alongside our own direct work. These include in the areas of research integrity, metascience, metadata and PID standards, open science policy or monitoring, development of new models (such as Diamond OA), editorial production, library and institutional publishing, and citation and other metadata analyses. We also work with other DOI Registration Agencies and support the sustainability of the DOI Foundation with an additional annual subsidy. Many DOI RAs are also Crossref Sponsors so that their members can access our unique reference matching service. While we often might advise, we also learn a huge amount from collaborating with the numerous systems and initiatives that make up the wider research community.\nOur involvement with developing the Barcelona Declaration on Open Research Information led us to become the fiscal host and to participate in most of the working groups on open metadata. Of particular note this year was the Funding Metadata Working Group round table about moving forward the state of funding metadata, which we co-hosted with Barcelona Declaration colleagues, and three funding bodies, NWO (Netherlands), FWF (Austria), and ANR (France) as we heard from publishers and their vendors about challenges and how to overcome them to increase the quantity and quality of available open funding metadata.\nAll our community engagement activities have been enthusiastically supported and enriched by our indispensable Ambassadors and our group of now 130 Sponsors, organisations that help thousands of Crossref members with local language and technical support and lower cost access to our membership.\nStrategic theme 2: A sustainable source of complete, open, and global scholarly metadata and relationships Schema developments The grant schema version 0.2.0 was released in January, adding support for ROR identifiers to identify funders and new funding types for in our taxonomy, including APC, BPC, and infrastructure. All of these funding types can be specified in the metadata of our grant-giving members alongside the existing types such as use of facilities or salary/training awards, etc.\nVersion 5.4 of our publications schema was released in March, marking our first update in many years and a great opportunity to learn how to do this and make the process more efficient. This release introduced typed references to denote the type of object referenced (dataset, blog, software, etc.), preprint status indicators, and version numbering.\nJust last week, we also added a dedicated field for grant DOIs to our publications schema. This means it’s now possible to indicate in an article\u0026rsquo;s metadata which grant(s) funded the research using the persistent identifier. This is an essential step toward better alignment between grant funding and research, enriching the Research Nexus.\nWe also launched our new Metadata Advisory Group and they have already devised sub-working groups in three focus topic areas:\nMultilingual metadata Subjects and keywords Relationships Public data file We released the 2025 public data file in March, containing metadata for (at the time) over 165 million research outputs from more than 22,000 organisations.\nInaugural Metadata Awards In May, we launched the first-ever Metadata Awards to recognise members demonstrating excellence in metadata completeness and enrichment. Winners included Noyam Publishers (Ghana), GigaScience Press (Hong Kong), eLife (UK), American Society for Microbiology (USA), Universidad La Salle Arequipa (Peru), and Instituto Geologico y Minero de España (Spain). The awards will be held biennially going forward.\nMetadata Matching project In April, we launched the metadata matching project with the aim of building a more complete picture of the research nexus over time by automatically identifying missing relationships between entities across the scholarly record. The project’s goal is to modernise Crossref’s enrichment workflows by rebuilding them using modern software development and data science practices.\nWe are in the throws of developing a consolidated matching workflow that will eventually replace all existing production matching processes, with results exposed through the REST API. All new matching strategies will be rigorously evaluated, and the resulting data will be accompanied by clear provenance information. This project covers six matching tasks:\nbibliographic reference matching funder name matching preprint matching affiliation matching grant matching title matching In the meantime, while work continues on integrating matching results into the REST API, we’ve been releasing standalone matching datasets for separate download and analysis. These include relationships between preprints and journal articles, relationships involving research organisations, and relationships between grants and research outputs.\nData infrastructure and Research Nexus participation dashboard Staying on the data science front, we’ve established an internal data environment that combines all relevant data sources (scholarly metadata, logs and usage data, and external datasets) in their raw forms into a single place. This environment is supported by a suite of modern tools and data processing techniques, enabling data science experiments and analytics pipelines to run effectively at scale.\nBuilding on this foundation, we plan to develop a series of dashboards to monitor the state of the scholarly record over time. These dashboards will feature both work-level and member-level statistics (for example, how many works of a given type have been registered, or how many members are registering grant IDs) as well as more detailed insights at the relationship level (for example, how many bibliographic references have been automatically matched, or how many times ROR IDs are included in funder assertions). Some of these statistics are already available in a public spreadsheet for now, pending the dashboard.\nRetraction Watch integration In 2023, Crossref acquired the Retraction Watch database to make it open data. Initially, this was done through sharing simple CSV files, but this year we have set up a pipeline to feed this information into our REST API, which means that Retraction Watch data is now fully available through the REST API, integrated with Crossref member-supplied retraction and correction metadata. This is the first example of Crossref integrating third-party metadata, and we\u0026rsquo;re learning a lot about how to best incorporate other datasets in future.\nMetadata API and services improvements From 1 December 2025, we revised rate limits for the REST API to ensure system stability whilst maintaining free access to metadata for everyone. Changes were made to the rate limits for our ‘public’ and ‘polite’ APIs, while the limits for our Metadata Plus users stayed the same. We continue to make all metadata openly available to the whole community.\nWe also improved how information from our content system feeds into the REST API. A tool we call ‘pusher’\u0026mdash;because it pushes information from the content system to the REST API\u0026mdash;was rebuilt so that we now have a more reliable transfer of information between our two systems.\nWhile adding to technical improvements, we’ve also worked to better understand the use of and streamline the service offering for paid options. We’ll share more about this year’s Metadata Plus consultation soon. And based on feedback, we have already retired the ‘Query Affiliate’ service, where a handful of organisations still paid us a fee to access our XML API, whereas no credentials have been required for some time.\nStrategic theme 3: Manage Crossref openly and sustainably, modernising and making transparent all operations so that we are accountable to the communities that govern us Infrastructure modernisation One of our biggest projects of 2025\u0026mdash;if not the biggest\u0026mdash;was the move from our data centre into the cloud (AWS). For 25 years, Crossref had been running a physical data centre in Massachusetts, USA, but as part of modernising our systems, it was high time to move everything into the cloud. The move to AWS took several months, but we successfully completed this move to the cloud in July this year. We’re spending these last weeks of 2025 fully decommissioning our data centre, which means that we are removing all the equipment we had there and locking the door for the last time.\nA part of the move to AWS included moving onto an open-source database solution, PostgreSQL. This reduced our reliance on closed, costly licensed solutions, while also aligning with our POSI commitment to open-source. Running our entire system in AWS provides a more stable, modern approach to our infrastructure, but it also is expensive. We expect to spend about 2 million USD on AWS fees next year, with the majority of this cost coming from REST API usage. Some of the improvements described above will help us manage those costs and better observe traffic patterns.\nOur new cloud infrastructure is a bittersweet milestone: while we are happy to not have to rely on a physical presence to support a 24/7 global infrastructure, we also say a sad farewell to our much-loved and long-suffering Sys Admin, Tim Pickard, who has been with Crossref since 2002, and has contributed significantly and unwaveringly to keeping our system up and running in the data centre. Tim will be leaving Crossref at the end of the year; we’re grateful to Tim for all his years of dedication, and we will greatly miss his impressive Hawaiian shirt game on our all-staff calls.\nAfter 25 years, it was also time to get serious about modernising our core content system, because even though it serves our community well, an older system with legacy code is a constant risk and frustration. We’ve therefore embarked on a multi-year modernisation project where we are replacing our old code piece by piece. We no longer want to have one big content system (a monolith), but are planning to identify different pieces of functionality and rebuild these as separate services (a modular, flexible, and robust approach). This year, we already managed to reconstruct some smaller pieces (for example, the ‘pusher’ mentioned above), and next year we will tackle larger projects, such as Metadata Matching and Authentication.\nWe continue to prioritise open, timely communication for planned or unplanned service interruptions and encourage everyone to monitor our status page at status.crossref.org. We’ll further hone our incident response processes in 2026, including openly posting incident reviews, and we’ll also centre system maintenance and documentation clarity in everything we do.\nRCFS Projects The Resourcing Crossref for Future Sustainability projects (RCFS) and the work of our Membership \u0026amp; Fees Committee resulted in deciding not to change some things (such as the basis for annual membership fees), but to change three things about our fees, as reported in July:\nA new lower membership fee tier of 200 USD for members with annual revenues/expenses of under 1000 USD - so far, this includes around 3000 members. See below for more info. A removal of volume discounts to reduce complexity in our billing code; they were little used, and those who did use these were fine with the loss of the discount. A removal of the rule that only publishers of a title could register peer review reports (including comments and annotations) at the lower 0.25 USD fee for the first review; this lower fee is now available to any member to register any reviews of any other members’ works. A new late-breaking addition to these fee decisions is the reduction of fees for members registering grants. As of January 1st 2026, there will be no fee for back-year (BY) grant registration, to encourage the faster adoption of older grants, which are more likely to have research outputs to be matched. This will be a two-year pilot to trial how a reduced fee incentivises adoption and boosts metadata connections, and could be extended to other record types as we monitor its success and sustainability. In addition, the 2 USD fee per current-year (CY) grant record is being reduced to 1 USD in line with the next-nearest fee, this is a permanent change for the foreseeable future.\nMembership growth, efficiencies, and accessibility In March, the board voted to update membership terms and bylaws to clarify processes for suspending and revoking membership, and to be more explicit about member practices that preserve the integrity of the scholarly record. A short-term Member Practices Working Group will be meeting in the first half of 2026 to draft these.\nCrossref now serves 23,600 members across 164 countries, with continued growth particularly in Asia and Latin America. We\u0026rsquo;ve continued our ongoing member onboarding activities to support new members joining the community. We see around 230 new members join each month, and have welcomed 2,700 this year so far. We recently reported on how the shape of membership has evolved over our 25 years of operation.\nFrom January 2026, we\u0026rsquo;re introducing a new lower membership fee tier of 200 USD for organisations with annual revenue or expenses of 1,000 USD or less, making membership more accessible to low-resourced organisations. Already, over 3000 members have been eligible to move into or join under that fee, and the idea is to monitor how this affects Crossref’s financial sustainability and potentially adjust the 200 USD annual fee down again in future years.\nFrom 1 January 2026, the GEM program, which offers fee-free membership and content registration for all members from certain countries, will expand to include 18 additional countries, further reducing financial barriers to participation in the scholarly record, so we expect several hundred further members to join the existing 600 organisations in this category. More information about the GEM program expansion here.\nAs our membership base continues to grow, the Membership and Finance teams are constantly exploring ways to make shared processes more efficient. A key component in this work has been the efforts to automate several tasks within both teams to help us manage the additional work caused by our growth and allow our teams to focus more on providing the best quality service we can.\nOur membership team continues to support our members, sponsors, service providers, metadata users and the wider community by email and through our community forum. The membership team includes staff members who focus on member support, and staff members who focus on technical support. During 2025 so far, we’ve received 36.8k member enquiries through our support system, a 17% increase from last year. This includes 22.6k inquiries related to general membership and 13k technical support enquiries. We’ve received 3.8k membership applications, and welcomed 2.7k new members.\nGrowth by the numbers Crossref continues its steady revenue growth in 2025 due to the expansion of our membership base. With the addition of new members and the general growth of Crossref, comes an increase in the transaction-based tasks our Finance team handles.\nSo far in 2025 we have issued 14,833 invoices, which is a 9% increase since last year. We’ve seen an 11% increase in the number of payments received and applied, and a 12% increase in the amount of credit and debit memos applied over the same time last year. We have also seen a 42% increase in the number of billing-related tickets, totalling 20,723. A large segment of these tickets are related to fee updates associated with the new $200 membership tier.\nNot all transactional work in Finance has increased as steadily, with increased revenue of 8% we have also seen a 14% increase in operating expenses. Through the strategic consolidation of vendors and use of financial tools, we have only seen a 1% increase in Accounts Payable invoices processed.\nOrganisational sustainability Finance-wise, we’re doing well. We’re projecting to finish this year with revenue of 14,200,000 USD and expect revenue next year of 14,500,000 USD. We’re budgeting 2% growth in overall revenue, accounting for some of the changes to fees that will reduce our earnings on membership dues, but anticipating continued growth of content registration revenue.\nRevenue and expenses trends\nAbout 67% of our expenses come from personnel costs, and the other 33% include non-personnel costs like AWS, travel, legal fees, etc. As we continue to build out the team, we have ten new positions planned for the next year (recruitment for many of these is already underway or done). With additional staff roles and AWS expenses, we’re expecting expense growth of 16%. We post our financial statements and Form 990 filings on the financials page on our website.\nRevenue per member size (by tier)\nAs the chart above shows, we still see \u0026rsquo;the long tail\u0026rsquo; of smaller members in the lowest fee category (275 USD) contributing more revenue than those in the largest category (50,000 USD) at 5.8 million USD versus 5 million USD.\nAnother aspect of sustainability is our impact on the world around us. And this year we were able to publish a second report on Crossref’s carbon footprint, having monitored and controlled for several carbon-heavy activities, primarily staff travel. Our reported emissions went up 40% from 2023 to 2024, due to more travel given our growth in staff and members, better recording our emissions (for example, with hotel stays), and including travel that we support for our partners, ambassadors and board members. In terms of travel spending, we are still well below 2019 when we were smaller, demonstrating that we are following through on not going back to the pre-pandemic norm.\nWe were one of the first open infrastructure organisations to adopt the POSI Principles and now have a few years’ experience in trying to meet them. Together with other adopters, we proposed updates and additions to the principles, based on real-world practice, and gathered a lot of community comment, resulting in the group publishing POSI v2 in October. We conduct a self-assessment every other year and we’ll be involving all our staff in the next self-assessment, due later in 2026.\nOpen governance through board election and annual meeting We continued our commitment to being member-led and community-driven. This year’s anniversary Annual Meeting in October brought together members to discuss strategy, metadata developments, and hear the results of their voting in our board election. It comprised two half-days of online conferencing and several in-person satellite meetings spread across five continents, gathering close to 500 members of our community. It was a platform to reflect together on the past quarter of the century of building community infrastructure and connections underpinning the progress of scholarship, and to share plans for the future.\nEach member has one vote, and together they elected the following organisations to serve a three-year term alongside the rest of the board:\nTier 1 candidates (electing one seat):\nRebecca Wambua, Distance, Open and e-Learning Practitioners\u0026rsquo; Association of Kenya Tier 2 candidates (electing four seats):\nDamian Bird, CABI Rose L\u0026rsquo;Huillier, Elsevier* Anjalie Nawaratne, Springer Nature* Nick Lindsay, The MIT Press* *returning board member\nCongratulations to the remaining and incoming board members as we start their new term in January 2026. Have a look at all the outputs from our Annual Meeting.\nStrategic theme 4: Foster a strong team—because reliable infrastructure needs committed people who contribute to and realise the vision, and thrive doing it Team structure We reorganised the team heading into 2025 because we had ambitious goals that required a more structured, collaborative approach. We reorganised the work around three strategic, mission-driven areas of focus described above. This was our first full year with the cross-functional program groups in place, and the activities reported here make it evident that our team members, both existing and new, are firing on all cylinders.\nNew staff and new roles We welcomed eight new team members in 2025. In February, we welcomed our new Director of Programs \u0026amp; Services, Helena Cousijn, and a new member of the Technical Support team, Arley Soto. In March, we welcomed our new Community Manager for funders, Rocío Gaudioso Pedraza. In April, we launched our new Data Science team by welcoming Jason Portenoy and Alex Bédard-Vallée. In November, we welcomed our new DevOps Engineer, Thelma Laryea, and our new Program Technical Lead for the OSO program, Bharath Govindarajan. In December, we welcomed another member of the Technical Support team, Natali Giorgobiani.\nWe also had team members step up into new roles. Dominika Tkaczyk completed the new leadership team by taking on the Director of Technology role, Paul Davis has started his new role as Product Manager, and Michelle Cancel has taken on the Head of Human Resources role. And there’s more to come! As next year begins, two team members will step into Program Technical Lead roles: Carlos del Ojo Elias for the CRN program and Patrick Vale for the CCT program. Together with the Program Technical Lead for the OSO program and the Head of Infrastructure Services, these roles will complete the new structure of the technology team. This structure is more closely aligned with how our work is organised and will enable stronger coordination both within and across cross-functional programs.\nSupporting a thriving global culture As our team grows in different aspects within our new org structure to meet the needs of the community, we remain committed to supporting a thriving culture through training, conducting regular temperature checks, and organising our annual staff retreat. This year, we continued our work on psychological safety and introduced workshops on giving and receiving feedback and on consensus building. We were able to put some of this training into practice at our in-person all-staff event in Split, Croatia, where we all came together to build our roadmap.\nWe are ending the year with 51 staff in 14 countries and look forward to diversifying and evolving even further as a team in 2026\u0026mdash;we’re currently hiring in UX, Communications, and Membership\u0026mdash;and keep an eye on our jobs page for forthcoming opportunities in Software, DevOps, Metadata, and Operations!\nThank you to our community of members, partners, board, ambassadors, sponsors, metadata users, service providers, integrators—and of course our team—for making 2025 such a productive year. Together, we\u0026rsquo;re building a richer, more connected research ecosystem for the benefit of society. We can’t wait to continue the work together in 2026.\n",
"headings": ["Strategic theme 1: Contribute to an environment where the community identifies and co-creates solutions for broad benefit","Enhanced tools and services","Deprecations and modernisation","Eating our own DOI dogfood","Community connections","Strategic theme 2: A sustainable source of complete, open, and global scholarly metadata and relationships","Schema developments","Public data file","Inaugural Metadata Awards","Metadata Matching project","Data infrastructure and Research Nexus participation dashboard","Retraction Watch integration","Metadata API and services improvements","Strategic theme 3: Manage Crossref openly and sustainably, modernising and making transparent all operations so that we are accountable to the communities that govern us","Infrastructure modernisation","RCFS Projects","Membership growth, efficiencies, and accessibility","Growth by the numbers","Organisational sustainability","Open governance through board election and annual meeting","Strategic theme 4: Foster a strong team—because reliable infrastructure needs committed people who contribute to and realise the vision, and thrive doing it","Team structure","New staff and new roles","Supporting a thriving global culture"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/authors/ryan-mcfall/",
"title": "Ryan McFall",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Authors",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/categories/staff/",
"title": "Staff",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Categories",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/categories/strategy/",
"title": "Strategy",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Categories",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/categories/sustainability/",
"title": "Sustainability",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Categories",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/operations-and-sustainability/financials/",
"title": "Financials",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2025-12-17",
"lastmod_ts": 1765929600,
"section": "Operations & sustainability",
"tags": [],
"description": "We operate on a budget of around $14 million (USD). About one-third of our revenue comes from annual dues (e.g., membership fees, subscriptions) and two-thirds from services (e.g., Content Registration, Similarly Check document checking). Our fees are set and reviewed by the Membership \u0026amp; Fees committee, which includes our staff, board, and community members. This group also created a set of fee principles which were approved by the board in 2019.\nAbout 70% of our expenses are related to people - staff, benefits, and contracted support. 30% of our costs are everything else - hosting costs, licensing fees, events, and costs to do business like banking fees and insurance.\n",
"content": "We operate on a budget of around $14 million (USD). About one-third of our revenue comes from annual dues (e.g., membership fees, subscriptions) and two-thirds from services (e.g., Content Registration, Similarly Check document checking). Our fees are set and reviewed by the Membership \u0026amp; Fees committee, which includes our staff, board, and community members. This group also created a set of fee principles which were approved by the board in 2019.\nAbout 70% of our expenses are related to people - staff, benefits, and contracted support. 30% of our costs are everything else - hosting costs, licensing fees, events, and costs to do business like banking fees and insurance.\nEach year we strive to generate a small operating net and have been able to do so nearly every year.\nWe also maintain a reserve fund to support long-term sustainability. We periodically report on our progress towards fulfilling the Principles of Open Scholarly Infrastructure: 2020, 2022, 2024\nBelow is a look at how our operations have changed over time.\nThe majority of our revenue comes from members in smallest and largest tiers. We have seen the most growth in revenue from the smallest fee tier.F Annual financial reporting As a not-for-profit, we are tax-exempt, and to maintain that status, we undergo a financial audit each year by an independent accounting firm. Our auditors prepare our Form 990, which the US IRS requires and is made publicly available. It gives an overview of what we do, how we are governed, and detailed financial information.\nBelow are our recent Form 990s and audited financial statements.\n2017 Form 990 and Audited Financial Statements 2018 Form 990 and Audited Financial Statements 2019 Form 990 and Audited Financial Statements 2020 Form 990 and Audited Financial Statements 2021 Form 990 and Audited Financial Statements 2022 Form 990 and Audited Financial Statements 2023 Form 990 and Audited Financial Statements 2024 Form 990 and Audited Financial Statements\n",
"headings": ["Annual financial reporting"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/authors/rosa-morais-clark/",
"title": "Rosa Morais Clark",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Authors",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/twenty-five-years-of-crossref-reflections-from-the-2025-annual-meeting-and-board-election/",
"title": "Twenty-five years of Crossref: reflections from the 2025 annual meeting and board election",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2025-12-17",
"lastmod_ts": 1765929600,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref turned twenty-five this year, and our 2025 Annual Meeting became more than a celebration—it was a shared moment to reflect on how far open scholarly infrastructure has come and where we, as a community, are heading next.\n",
"content": "Crossref turned twenty-five this year, and our 2025 Annual Meeting became more than a celebration—it was a shared moment to reflect on how far open scholarly infrastructure has come and where we, as a community, are heading next.\nOver two days in October, hundreds of participants joined online and in local satellite meetings in Madrid, Nairobi, Medan, Bogotá, Washington D.C., and London––a reminder that our community spans the globe. The meetings offered updates, community highlights, and a look at what’s ahead for our shared metadata network––including plans to connect funders, platforms, and AI tools across the global research ecosystem.\nEd Pentz opened with thanks and perspective. He reflected on how it all began: twelve members, one shared goal — to make research easier to find and verify. 25 years later, the same goal underpins 174 million open metadata records, 1.9 billion citation links, and roughly 1.3 billion DOI resolutions each month. What started as reference linking is now a global network of relationships among people, institutions, and research outputs. Ed also reaffirmed the Principles of Open Scholarly Infrastructure (POSI) as the foundation of our operations and our collaborations with other community-governed infrastructures.\n“Each number represents shared effort, trust, and long-term commitment,” Ed reminded us. “Open infrastructure works because people keep showing up.”\nCrossref\u0026rsquo;s purpose as per the Certificate of Incorporation.\nFollowing up Ed’s talk, we showed a video timeline, ‘25 years of Crossref’, tracing milestones from the first DOIs to today’s connected Research Nexus.\nCrossref 25th anniversary timeline Shared perspectives from the community We featured perspectives from organizations that have built key scholarly infrastructure alongside Crossref over the years. A shared message ran through their talks: open infrastructure only works when it’s interoperable, community-led, and practical for the people who use it.\nUrooj Nizami (PKP) described PKP and Crossref as “independent and interdependent,” using the archipelago metaphor to show how open software and shared metadata services connect local publishing to a global network.\nTodd Carpenter (NISO) emphasized standards being a social, and technical contract, noting how persistent identifiers and reliable metadata underpin a broader knowledge graph—and why provenance and linking matter even more as AI systems remix content.\nAbel Packer (SciELO) highlighted Latin America’s strong DOI coverage while pointing out where multilingual versions and preprint–article–data links still break visibility—arguing for metadata that connects versions, not splits them. [data point]\nSoichi Kubota (J-STAGE/JST) showed how Crossref services (from citation linking, Cited-by, metadata, to Similarity Check) anchor Japan’s national platform and how deeper cooperation (e.g., Crossmark) will support richer, more reliable metadata.\nLeena Shah (DOAJ) outlined DOAJ’s open index, renewed POSI commitment, and hands-on collaboration with Crossref—from the MoU and PLACE to help-desk coordination, gap analyses, and plans to boost DOAJ records via Crossref’s API and open references.\nSusan Murray (AJOL) spoke of capacity building: with 900+ journals across 40 countries, benefiting from AJOL’s support in registering identifiers and metadata , and of their long-standing partnership with Crossref making it possible for journals with limited resources to take part.\nThese voices echoed a common call: Build bridges, not silos.\nGovernance and election results Leading off the formal annual meeting, Lisa Schiff, Chair of the Crossref Board, looked back on our 25th anniversary as one marked by progress and problem-solving. She talked about moving all our systems to the cloud—a big step that makes the organization’s work faster and more reliable. She also spoke about ongoing efforts to maintain the research record\u0026rsquo;s trustworthiness, including adding Retraction Watch data and updating member terms. Lisa noted new ways we are making membership more accessible, like the lower $200 tier and the expansion of the GEM program.\nLucy Ofiesh brought it back to the role of the members themselves, reminding everyone that success still rests with its members. The annual meeting is when members directly influence Crossref’s direction––when each vote helps shape how we move forward together.\nWe extend our thanks to the Board members whose terms have concluded, and we congratulate the newly elected members who will carry the work forward.\nFive directors were elected: Rebecca Wambua (Distance, Open and e-Learning Practitioners’ Association of Kenya), Damian Bird (CABI), Rose L’Huillier (Elsevier), Anjalie Nawaratne (Springer Nature), and Nick Lindsay (MIT Press).\nWe also thank the 2025 Nominating Committee for their thoughtful work guiding this year\u0026rsquo;s process and slate selection.\nThe Board plays an important role in making sure our governance remains community-led, transparent, and accountable. The volunteer members bring experience from research funders, publishers, and libraries, giving a balance of perspectives that help steer our long-term strategy and sustainability.\nTools in practice Then our attention turned to the tools that many members use every day. Patrick Vale walked participants through updates to Participation Reports and the Record Registration Form— designed to make working with metadata simpler.\nUpdated Participation Report for Universidad La Salle Arequipa (Peru), showing metadata element coverage percentages.\nParticipation Reports, first launched in 2018, have now been completely rebuilt as version 1.2. The refreshed interface runs on a new technology stack and supports morecontent types, and offers a new “download gap report” feature that generates a CSV list of records missing key fields—so members can identify and fix gaps directly.\nPatrick then demonstrated improvements to the Record Registration Form, now streamlined for creating as well as editing records. The form includes real-time validation, auto-fill options for journals previously used, and the ability to edit existing records directly. Members can now easily add abstracts, funding data, licenses, and affiliations linked to ORCID and ROR—all within one place.\nIn the final demonstration, Luis Montilla, shared a “short research story”. He showed how anyone can explore Crossref metadata to uncover global participation patterns—turning what might seem like a mass of disconnected records into something meaningful once you start asking questions. He also shared a workflow that automatically retrieves and enriches data with country and regional information, then visualises member contributions and metadata coverage.\nLuis also demonstrated an interactive notebook that lets users explore participation trends through radar charts and other visuals—illustrating how open data can help the community understand and improve the completeness of the scholarly record.\nCrossref then \u0026amp; now Amanda Bartell walked through how the community has changed over 25 years.\nThe membership has broadened dramatically: universities and scholar-led groups now form the largest share, and more organizations in Asia and Latin America have joined (with big growth in Indonesia and Brazil). Most members are small: 98% qualify for the lowest fee tier, and 57% participate via a Sponsor. In support of including members from smaller economies, Crossref launched a GEM programme, which will be expanding to 19 new countries in 2026.\nShe expanded her presentation later with a blog post to share insights about the changes in the Crossref global community.\nWith our growing membership, the needs of the community are evolving too, including expectations about Crossref’s role in preserving the integrity of the scholarly record.\n“Our role in preserving the integrity of the scholarly record is focused on enriching the metadata to provide fuller and better trust signals while keeping barriers to participation low.” —Amanda Bartell, Crossref\nIn response to the growing membership across the globe, we launched our Ambassadors program in 2018. Johanssen Obanda highlighted the activities of what is now 50 volunteers across 38 countries. Ambassadors act as local contacts—running training sessions, organizing events, translating materials, and providing feedback from their regions. Over the past year, they’ve led 41 activities reaching around 1,200 people. Many also contribute to GEM outreach, metadata health checks, and regional events—often in local languages.\nRoadmap highlights Helena Cousijn outlined progress across three programs—Co-creation and Community Trends, Contributing to the Research Nexus, and Open and Sustainable Operations. Along with already showcased progress with Participation Reports and the new Record Registration Form, the Community Trends program involves working in partnership with others on DSpace integration and OJS plug-ins consolidation. In the near future there\u0026rsquo;s also a consideration for piloting AI detection tools. The Contributing to Research Nexus program carried out a consultation with Metadata Plus subscribers, and develops a new data citations endpoint for the Crossref REST API. This team is also developing further matching services, in the first instance looking to match funder metadata to ROR IDs.\nFinally, Helena discussed the recent accomplishment of the Open and Sustainable Operations program, the migration of our database from the data centre to the cloud with Amazon Web Services. Other projects in this program involve ravamping resolution reports, rebuilding the Crossref authentication system, and launching new metadata schema.\nResourcing Crossref for Future Sustainability (RCFS) RCFS program is focused on equity, simplicity, and revenue balance. Kora shared recent developments and next steps: : A new $200 membership tier (for organizations with ≤$1,000 in publishing revenue/expenses) takes effect on January 1, 2026; more than 3,000 members have already moved into it. We will keep “publishing revenue/expenses” as the sizing basis for publishers while funder sizing is still under review. Volume discounts for content registration end on January 1, 2026. Backfile discounts for theses/dissertations and conference proceedings are under review. Peer-review fees are normalized at $0.25 for the first review of a work, with subsequent reviews (same member, same work) for free\nBehind the scenes: metadata, data science Patricia Feeney reviewed recent and upcoming changes to our metadata schemas. Earlier this year, we began accepting ROR IDs as funder identifiers and released schema 5.4, which added versioning across all record types, a new status field for preprints, and a way to label citation types (like data sets, software, or blog posts).\nComing soon, Crossref will add grant DOIs to funding metadata and release schema 5.5, which supports the CRediT contributor vocabulary and allows multiple contributor roles. A new grant schema will follow, including support for beneficiaries, project identifiers (like RAiD), and repeatable roles. Looking ahead to 2026, our plans to overhaul how names and organizations are modeled, add richer funding and data-availability statements, and expand abstract and multilingual metadata support. A new Metadata Advisory Group has also been formed to guide work on multilingual fields, subjects, keywords, and relationship modeling.\nFinally, Patricia announced plans to deprecate older schemas—a gradual, multi-year process—to simplify and modernize our metadata structure. She highlighted the importance of stronger relationships, richer records, and practical improvements that make metadata more useful across the community. That focus on connection carried directly into the next session about building through data science.\nData science at Crossref Dominika Tkaczyk introduced the new data science team, formed a few months ago as part of the technology group. The team was created because of the growing scale and complexity of the data Crossref manages, driven by the expanding scholarly community. Their role is to use data science to assess, improve, and enrich scholarly metadata.\nTheir work falls into two areas: data analysis and insights—to help Crossref understand the scholarly record and guide decisions—and data services and workflows—to apply data science in building and maintaining production systems. Examples include studying overlap between scholarly databases and improving metadata quality. The session then focused on two projects: creating an internal data processing environment and developing metadata matching services.\nAlex Bédard-Vallée described the team’s first project: building a data lake to bring together fragmented data from different systems. Previously, data were split across silos like the REST API, internal logs, and production databases. It enables tracking of reference deposits, closing 718M citation gaps. The system already enables analyses that were previously impractical, such as tracking how many members include reference metadata in deposits. It will also power new dashboards, monitoring tools, and other data-driven initiatives that support the integrity of the scholarly record.\nJason Portenoy then outlined the metadata matching project, which links pieces of information (like citations, funder names, or affiliations) to their identifiers such as DOIs or ROR IDs. He gave examples including reference-to-DOI, funder-to-ROR ID, affiliation-to-ROR ID, grant-to-DOI, and preprint-to-published-article matching.\nHe explained that much metadata is already deposited by members but large gaps remain. For example, among more than a billion citation links, about 843 million already include DOIs, while another 718 million references can’t yet be matched. The goal is to close these gaps to build a more complete and connected scholarly record—the “research nexus.”\nCommunity highlights Martyn Rittman, Program Lead, and Kora each opened the community highlights over the two days by noting that everyone presenting is sharing how they use metadata and contribute to the broader ecosystem.\nCrossref does not exist without our members and the broader community—people who provide metadata and people who use the metadata. That’s why we’re here.” ~ Martyn Rittman\nAntoine Drouin (Fonds de Recherche du Québec) shared that FRQ joined Crossref earlier this year and created 22,000+ grant and scholarship DOIs, linking grants to outputs and improving interoperability with ORCID, ROR, and Crossref grant IDs.\nAgon Memeti (University of Tetova) shared findings of his analysis of abstract metadata coverage across 2024 articles from 13 university journals.\nCharlie Rapple (Kudos) presented a Crossref-supported study on how researchers engage with the UN SDGs and described Kudos’ work explaining research for wider audiences. A survey of ~4,500 researchers showed strong awareness, regional differences in SDG priorities, and some targeted budgets for promotion, alongside challenges in publishing SDG-focused local research in prestige venues.\nPia Kretschmar (SCOAP3) outlined integrating Crossref metadata into new SCOAP³ open science elements in Phase 4; SCOAP³ funds OA publishing in high-energy physics and has covered 78,000+ articles. Publishers are scored on elements such as metadata provision to Crossref, identifiers, and links to datasets/software; completeness was checked via the Crossref API, results varied, and evaluation continues next year.\nBarbara Rivera (Barcelona Declaration) introduced the Declaration, its four commitments, and its community of 125 signatories and 52 supporters, including Crossref. Working groups are executing a joint roadmap, with recent actions such as a funding-metadata roundtable and upcoming surveys on metadata frameworks and repository workflows.\nHans de Jonge (Dutch Research Council, NWO) presented his and Bianca Kramer’s recent study (as of 10/23/25 Preprint, not yet reviewed) of metadata completeness in Crossref among publishers using different manuscript submission systems. They compared six metadata types across major publishers and found that differences had more to do with workflow choices, customization, and policy than with the system itself.\nAudrey Kenni (Pan African Medical Journal) shared PAMJ’s journey with Crossref to increased visibility.\nNurul Ain Mohd Noor (UMT Press, Malaysia) described UMT Press’s evolution since 2003, rebranding in 2007 and joining Crossref in 2020. Nurul explained how registering their metadata with Crossref increased citation visibility and indexing across databases.\nAchal Agrawal (PostPub) introduced PostPub’s dashboard providing retraction statistics by country and institution, supported by a Catalyst Grant from Digital Science, and shared their journey through disambiguation challenges.\nRatna Galuh Manika Trisista (Universitas Islam Jakarta) presented how enabling reference linking transformed her law journal’s citation visibility.\nClosing reflections We closed the meeting with a panel discussion on the Research Nexus in the real world: What is the impact and potential of open scholarly metadata. Ginny Hendricks, Crossref; Dominika Tkaczyk, Crossref; Bianca Kramer, Barcelona Declaration on Open Research Information; David Oliva Uribe, UNESCO; Amber Osman, XploreOpen; Mariángela Nápoli, CONICET-IICE UBA-FFYL; Crossref; Kazuhiro Hayashi, National Institute of Science and Technology Policy; Science Council of Japan, shared a diversity of perspectives, which we’ll share in an upcoming blog.\nYou can also learn more about the in-person satellite events across the world from their organisers on our Community Forum.\nYou will find outputs from #Crossref2025 on our website, which you can cite as `#Crossref2025 Annual Meeting and Board Election, 22-23 October 2025 retrieved [date], https://doi.org/10.13003/431937misogo \u0026lsquo;.\n",
"headings": ["Shared perspectives from the community","Governance and election results","Tools in practice","Crossref then \u0026amp; now","Roadmap highlights","Resourcing Crossref for Future Sustainability (RCFS)","Behind the scenes: metadata, data science","Data science at Crossref","Community highlights","Closing reflections"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/authors/hannah-hope/",
"title": "Hannah Hope",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Authors",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/authors/melissa-harrison/",
"title": "Melissa Harrison",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Authors",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/working-groups/metadata-advisory/",
"title": "Metadata Advisory Group",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 2,
"lastmod": "2025-12-15",
"lastmod_ts": 1765756800,
"section": "Working groups",
"tags": [],
"description": "The purpose of the Crossref Metadata Advisory Group is to provide Crossref with advice and insight to help shape our metadata development as we broaden the metadata we collect and outputs we support to better align with the Research Nexus vision. Group participants will help shape metadata development at Crossref, and will discuss potential new metadata to adopt, best practices, and the overall needs of metadata providers and users.\nSubgroups or working groups may be formed to address specific topics raised in advisory group meetings.\n",
"content": "The purpose of the Crossref Metadata Advisory Group is to provide Crossref with advice and insight to help shape our metadata development as we broaden the metadata we collect and outputs we support to better align with the Research Nexus vision. Group participants will help shape metadata development at Crossref, and will discuss potential new metadata to adopt, best practices, and the overall needs of metadata providers and users.\nSubgroups or working groups may be formed to address specific topics raised in advisory group meetings.\nWhat we are working on The Metadata Advisory Group reviews items on our Metadata Development roadmap and has formed working groups concentrating on:\nMultilingual metadata Subjects and keywords Relationships If you have suggestions for new metadata to add or would like more information about the advisory group, participate in our Community Forum or contact Patricia Feeney\nHow the group works The group is comprised of Crossref members, users, and other interested parties with expertise in Crossref and related metadata. The group will be led by Crossref facilitators. Advisory group members commit to attend quarterly meetings via conference call, and may choose to send a named proxy if they are not available. Meeting notes will be circulated to all by the facilitator. With the exception of Crossref staff, the group will be limited to one representative from each participating organisation, unless particular agenda items or topics call for domain expertise from specific colleagues or departments. Members are, however, free to discuss the information shared during meetings with colleagues or any external party.\nThe schedule of meetings is at the discretion of the facilitators and may vary depending on whether there are relevant topics for discussion but are usually held three - four times per year. Notes are circulated by the facilitator after each call, and any members who were unable to attend a call are asked to ensure they read these and take note of any action items.\nMembers are asked not to invite colleagues or any external party to join Advisory Group meetings unless they have discussed this with the facilitators prior to the call. This ensures a consistency in development approach and a level of fluency during meetings.\n",
"headings": ["What we are working on","How the group works"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/working-groups/metadata/",
"title": "Metadata Practitioner Interest Group",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 2,
"lastmod": "2025-12-15",
"lastmod_ts": 1765756800,
"section": "Working groups",
"tags": [],
"description": "The Metadata Practitioners Interest Group advised Crossref on publishing needs and trends as they impact Crossref metadata, and was retired in 2020. The Metadata Advisory Group is comprised of Crossref members, metadata users, and other interested parties with expertise in Crossref and related metadata and currently advises Crossref on metadata.\nPast participants Midori Baer, National Academy of Sciences Debra Borrelli, West Virginia University Iwan Joe Dewanto, Pengurus Besar Persatuan Dokter Gigi Indonesia Angela Herrera, Universidad Nacional de Educacion Enrique Guzman y Valle Cyrenes Moncawe, National Fisheries Research and Development Institute Melissa Harrison, eLife Johannes Gottschalt, Bohlau Verlag James Phillpotts, OUP Asbjørn Dahl, National Library of Denmark Iwan Joe Dewanto, Pengurus Besar Persatuan Dokter Gigi Indonesia Uli Fechner, Beilstein Institut Favio Andres Florez, Editorial Pontificia Universidad Javeriana April Gilbert, San Jose State University Mark Gillespie, Reactome Johannes Gottschalt, Bohlau Verlag Xiaofeng Guo, Wanfang Data Melissa Harrison, eLife Angela Herrera, Universidad Nacional de Educacion Enrique Guzman y Valle Helen King, BMJ Cyrenes Moncawe, National Fisheries Research and Development Institute Mike Nason, PKP/UNB Jaime de la Ossa, Universidad de Sucre James Phillpotts, OUP Carly Robinson, OSTI ",
"content": "The Metadata Practitioners Interest Group advised Crossref on publishing needs and trends as they impact Crossref metadata, and was retired in 2020. The Metadata Advisory Group is comprised of Crossref members, metadata users, and other interested parties with expertise in Crossref and related metadata and currently advises Crossref on metadata.\nPast participants Midori Baer, National Academy of Sciences Debra Borrelli, West Virginia University Iwan Joe Dewanto, Pengurus Besar Persatuan Dokter Gigi Indonesia Angela Herrera, Universidad Nacional de Educacion Enrique Guzman y Valle Cyrenes Moncawe, National Fisheries Research and Development Institute Melissa Harrison, eLife Johannes Gottschalt, Bohlau Verlag James Phillpotts, OUP Asbjørn Dahl, National Library of Denmark Iwan Joe Dewanto, Pengurus Besar Persatuan Dokter Gigi Indonesia Uli Fechner, Beilstein Institut Favio Andres Florez, Editorial Pontificia Universidad Javeriana April Gilbert, San Jose State University Mark Gillespie, Reactome Johannes Gottschalt, Bohlau Verlag Xiaofeng Guo, Wanfang Data Melissa Harrison, eLife Angela Herrera, Universidad Nacional de Educacion Enrique Guzman y Valle Helen King, BMJ Cyrenes Moncawe, National Fisheries Research and Development Institute Mike Nason, PKP/UNB Jaime de la Ossa, Universidad de Sucre James Phillpotts, OUP Carly Robinson, OSTI ",
"headings": ["Past participants"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/working-groups/metadata-user/",
"title": "Metadata User Working Group",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 2,
"lastmod": "2025-12-15",
"lastmod_ts": 1765756800,
"section": "Working groups",
"tags": [],
"description": "Overview Despite a large, international and growing community of users, the particulars of metadata user workflows are still too often unclear or undocumented. Questions of efficiencies, thresholds, how records and elements were evaluated for usefulness, through a series of calls and asynchronous work.\nThe Metadata User Working Group ended in 2023 - results are summarized in In the know on workflows: The metadata user working group.\nGoals Document workflows Highlight the efforts of metadata users in enabling discovery/discoverability Determine directions for improved engagement Inform approaches to product planning Participants The group is a mix of service subscribers using different interfaces:\n",
"content": "Overview Despite a large, international and growing community of users, the particulars of metadata user workflows are still too often unclear or undocumented. Questions of efficiencies, thresholds, how records and elements were evaluated for usefulness, through a series of calls and asynchronous work.\nThe Metadata User Working Group ended in 2023 - results are summarized in In the know on workflows: The metadata user working group.\nGoals Document workflows Highlight the efforts of metadata users in enabling discovery/discoverability Determine directions for improved engagement Inform approaches to product planning Participants The group is a mix of service subscribers using different interfaces:\nAchraf Azhar, Centre pour la Communication Scientifique Directe (CCSD) Satam Choudhury, HighWire Press Nees van Eck, CWTS-Leiden University Bethany Harris, Jisc Ajay Kumar, Nova Techset David Levy, Pubmill Bruno Ohana, biologit Michael Parkin, European Bioinformatics Institute (EMBL-EBI) Axton Pitt, Litmaps Dave Schott, Copyright Clearance Center (CCC) Stephan Stahlschmidt, German Centre for Higher Education Research and Science Studies (DZHW) ",
"headings": ["Overview","Goals","Participants"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/wellcome-and-europe-pmc-supporting-open-research-through-open-metadata/",
"title": "Wellcome and Europe PMC: supporting Open Research through open metadata",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2025-12-15",
"lastmod_ts": 1765756800,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "In my latest conversations with research funders, I talked with Hannah Hope, Open Research Lead at Wellcome, and Melissa Harrison, Team Leader of Literature Services at Europe PMC. Wellcome and Europe PMC are working together to realise the potential of funding metadata and the Crossref Grant Linking System for, among other things, programmatic grantee reporting. In this blog, we explore how this partnership works and how the Crossref Grant Linking System is supporting Wellcome in realising their Open Science vision.\n",
"content": "In my latest conversations with research funders, I talked with Hannah Hope, Open Research Lead at Wellcome, and Melissa Harrison, Team Leader of Literature Services at Europe PMC. Wellcome and Europe PMC are working together to realise the potential of funding metadata and the Crossref Grant Linking System for, among other things, programmatic grantee reporting. In this blog, we explore how this partnership works and how the Crossref Grant Linking System is supporting Wellcome in realising their Open Science vision.\nWhat motivated you to join Crossref? Hannah: The motivation for Crossref Grant IDs is to be able to disaggregate research outputs between funders. Funders’ grant identifiers come in a range of formats, funders might change them over time, and there are also similarities between funders’ names, which is a challenge. Permanent identifiers, in this case, Crossref Grant IDs, are an opportunity to avoid some of the confusion if we were able to implement them throughout the research ecosystem.\nThis is also being discussed in different contexts, for example, within the Barcelona Declaration working groups, funders and other stakeholders are exploring the diverse motivations that exist to implement changes into our workflows, as well as the challenges that funding metadata and persistent grant IDs can help solve.\nThe way Wellcome implemented the Grant Linking System is a bit unique, given that it partnered with Europe PMC for the technical implementation and metadata registration with Crossref. Can you tell us more about how it works? Hannah: The collaboration between Wellcome and Europe PMC in the implementation of Crossref’s Grant Linking System started because they already had the grants landing page feature ready and available to us.\nThere was an initial hope that other funders of Europe PMC, which also have these grant landing pages, could then leverage that same system to make Crossref grant IDs more broadly available to the research community, but I am not sure if that has materialised yet.\nMelissa: Currently we are supporting Wellcome’s implementation of Crossref grant IDs, but the infrastructure remains available to other Europe PMC funders should they decide to take advantage of it. We already have funding metadata for Europe PMC funders because it is a requirement for grantees to select their grant identifier when submitting their accepted manuscripts for indexing and archiving. As we already have that metadata, naturally we can pull it together and send it to Crossref, along with the link to the Europe PMC grant landing pages!\nAn additional benefit of partnering with Europe PMC is the comprehensive metadata we deliver to Crossref with the grant IDs. For example, we have invested in supplementing affiliation data with ROR iDs and we deliver to Crossref all the data we have that matches their schema for grant data.\nHow is Wellcome leveraging the funding metadata and Crossref grants IDs that are being shared and registered with Crossref? Hannah: We are discussing internally how we can better socialise the Crossref grant DOIs among the grantees, either via our grant management system or through Europe PMC. One place where the Crossref grant DOIs are being used and shared is through our publishing platform, Wellcome Open Research. The Crossref grant DOI is included in the publication metadata, ensuring that the research output is linked to the funding via the open metadata registered.\nHowever, as we use Europe PMC as our repository for funded written research outputs, these outputs are aggregated alongside the grant records which includes the Crossref grant DOI, facilitated by Europe PMC APIs. So we have the means to link the two things together.\nMelissa: There are some UX and technical blockers to fully integrate Crossref grant IDs within the Europe PMC grant system currently that are detrimental to the utility of these IDs, for example, you can’t search for a specific grant in Europe PMC grant finder using a Crossref grant ID. We are partnering with Crossref to solve these challenges and offer users more functionality in this space next year.\nHannah: Beyond eLife and Wellcome Open Research, I am not sure which publishers use Crossref grants DOIs in their workflows.\nRocio: That’s an interesting question, as we aren’t seeing a massive flow of Crossref grant IDs in the works metadata records just yet. We are exploring with publishers and their service providers how to make this business-as-usual, and in the meantime, we are running a series of matching projects to ensure that, when possible, we make those connections ourselves to enrich the metadata with funding information. We already insert reciprocal relationships where one record asserts a link with another (in this case, where either a grant Finances a work or a work isFinancedBy a grant record, Crossref adds in the reverse). Improving and enriching these relationships directly in the metadata makes sure that metadata provided by funders can make their way to the research outputs that originate from the grant.\nWellcome is streamlining the way of asking grantees to report on their publications, facilitated by Europe PMC. Can you tell us a bit more about how this will work and what role metadata will play? Hannah: We will stop asking researchers to report their publications directly to us as part of progress and end-of-grant reporting. We believe there is sufficient open metadata with high-quality tagging in the ecosystem for us to collect written research outputs programmatically from this public data. Under our new system, we will be directing researchers to look at their grant record within Europe PMC and make sure that their written research outputs are properly linked there; otherwise, we won’t see them. We are trying to leverage open data, existing infrastructure, and a route that enables us to improve the completeness of open metadata.\nThere aren’t many mechanisms that enable our researchers to add assertions to funding and research output records retrospectively, and Europe PMC offers us that opportunity, and that is really critical for us. Rather than collecting information in our own system, we can contribute to enhancing the global corpus of knowledge and the quality of open metadata more broadly. Since correcting metadata at source isn’t easy, Europe PMC presents us with an opportunity to contribute to that system.\nMelissa: We are thinking broadly about this problem; many institutions curate their research information in spreadsheets or closed CRIS systems and struggle to make it publicly available. We are thinking about how Europe PMC can be leveraged to be a public home for that data. EMBL-EBI hosts Europe PMC and utilises it as the institutional repository, so we have started a pilot project to add ROR IDs for affiliations to EMBL-authored publications within Europe PMC. This is manually curated, high-quality metadata that would otherwise be lost from the public ecosystem.\nIf you look into the future, what would your hopes be for the GLS and greater transparency in funding metadata in general? What do you think that we could achieve collectively as a community? Melissa: It would be amazing (!) if everybody, from funders to publishers, to institutions and authors, would coalesce around the Crossref Grant Linking System, and add to metadata exchange workflows – you would potentially have a very clean and clear picture of where the money is going, what the outputs are, and how they relate.\nCurrently, even with the Open Funder Registry, there is ambiguity around funder names - for example, different geographical national funders sharing the same exact name as their counterpart in another country - so even with the best will in the world, funder institutions could be misidentified in systems and assigned the wrong identifier. The Crossref Grant Linking System facilitates complete disambiguation because grants are associated with the issuing funder’s correct identifier, ensuring traceability of outputs and funding and enabling more precise, cleaner metadata.\nHannah: I think that is a bit of the Holy Grail and in reality, its a bit messy, there isn’t just one system! We need to be able to move past the chicken and egg discussion, where we talk about the use of different identifiers, with sometimes competing priorities. For me, the real challenge for the metadata community is how do we enrich metadata, correct errors, and develop greater interoperability between PID systems. So that multiple parties can contribute towards the creation of a greater whole record, rather than relying on a single owner of the record to provide all the information. If we could all, funders included, connect information from individual partners to create a unified record at the end of it, we could have better records and probably save time by distributing the workload.\nWhat would you say to colleagues in other funders about investing in open metadata? We all need information from other partners in the ecosystem and investing in our own internal system will not give us the same return as collectively investing in opening up that information wherever possible.\n—\u0026mdash;-\nWe are very grateful to Hannah Hope and Melissa Harrison for their perspectives on open funding metadata and the role of the community in ensuring a complete and comprehensive Research Nexus.\n",
"headings": ["What motivated you to join Crossref?","The way Wellcome implemented the Grant Linking System is a bit unique, given that it partnered with Europe PMC for the technical implementation and metadata registration with Crossref. Can you tell us more about how it works?","How is Wellcome leveraging the funding metadata and Crossref grants IDs that are being shared and registered with Crossref?","Wellcome is streamlining the way of asking grantees to report on their publications, facilitated by Europe PMC. Can you tell us a bit more about how this will work and what role metadata will play?","If you look into the future, what would your hopes be for the GLS and greater transparency in funding metadata in general? What do you think that we could achieve collectively as a community?","What would you say to colleagues in other funders about investing in open metadata?"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/some-things-are-big-because-they-are-small-the-new-fee-tier-for-crossref-members-takes-effect/",
"title": "Some things are big because they are small – the new fee tier for Crossref members takes effect",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2025-12-11",
"lastmod_ts": 1765411200,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "Haz clic aquí para ver la versión en español\nIn January 2026, our new annual membership fee tier takes effect. The new tier is US$200 for member organisations that operate on publishing revenue or expenses (whichever is higher) of up to US$1,000 annually. We announced the Board’s decision, making it possible in July, and––as you can infer from Amanda’s latest blog––this is the first such change to the annual membership fee tiers in close to 20 years!\n",
"content": "Haz clic aquí para ver la versión en español\nIn January 2026, our new annual membership fee tier takes effect. The new tier is US$200 for member organisations that operate on publishing revenue or expenses (whichever is higher) of up to US$1,000 annually. We announced the Board’s decision, making it possible in July, and––as you can infer from Amanda’s latest blog––this is the first such change to the annual membership fee tiers in close to 20 years!\nThe new fee tier resulted from the consultation process and fees review undertaken as part of the Resourcing Crossref for Future Sustainability program, carried out with the help of our Membership and Fees Committee (made up of representatives from member organisations and community partners). The program is ongoing, and the new fee tier, intended to make Crossref membership more accessible, is one of the first changes it helped us determine.\nWhen our membership renewal invoices are sent out in January 2026, the new fee tier will apply to 3,194 of our existing members, who will receive annual membership invoices 27% lower than previously. Surveys preceding the introduction of the new fee tier have shown that it might be applicable to between 30-60% of the organisations in what used to be our lowest fee tier (US$275 fee for organisations with publishing revenue or expenses of up to US$1 million).\nWe received positive feedback from members affected by the change.\nWe are very grateful for the new lowest membership fee tier. The Crossref fee is indeed a significant expense for our organisation, but we accept it given its importance. This new fee structure will make it easier for us to cover the cost.” – said Marina Pérez, Análisis Filosófico.\nThis initiative by Crossref to reduce membership fees is a welcome step toward achieving a truly global and connected research ecosystem. This will undoubtedly help our journal\u0026rsquo;s mission in fostering inclusive, open, and accessible publishing.” – said Dev Roychowdhury, Journal of Psychological Experience.\nFollowing the feedback provided in the consultations and a number of prompts over the months after the original announcement, our Membership Team gathered information necessary to transition 3,194 members into the new fee tier. That’s 14.5% of all Crossref members (please note that in the graph below the number of members in $200 tier is higher due to recent influx of new members who didn\u0026rsquo;t need to transition, further – \u0026ldquo;$0\u0026rdquo; denotes all our sponsored members, who don’t pay membership fees to us, and those included in the GEM program).\nAny members out there who think their organisation should be moved to the new lowest membership fee tier and haven’t already informed us – please contact us as soon as possible, before the end of the year, so we can make the change before invoices are raised in January.\nWe know – from speaking with our community (and thank you SO MUCH, for everyone’s feedback in surveys and discussions!) that this change makes participation in Crossref more accessible to smaller organisations communicating research. This will result in a continued flow of new records and associated metadata into the research nexus, helping us to make it easier to find and assess research, achieve greater transparency in the scientific process, and continue building trust in its outputs.\nWe’re not done reviewing our fees, and we don’t think the new fee tier addresses all the needs of the growing and evolving scholarly community. We continue working with Sponsors and Ambassadors, and we have upcoming changes to the Global Equitable Membership program to facilitate participation by all types and sizes of organisations sharing research.\nVersion in Español Algunas cosas son grandes porque son pequeñas: la nueva tarifa para los miembros de Crossref entra en vigencia En enero de 2026 entrará en vigencia nuestra nueva tarifa anual. Será de 200 dólares americanos (US$) para las organizaciones miembro que operen con ingresos o gastos editoriales de hasta 1000 US$ al año. Tras anunciar esta decisión de la Junta Directiva, se hizo realidad en julio y, como se puede inferir del último blog de Amanda, este es el primer cambio en las tarifas anuales de membresía en casi 20 años.\nEsta nueva tarifa fue resultado de consultas y revisiones de tarifas que hicimos y que hacen parte del programa de financiación para la sostenibilidad a futuro de Crossref y que fue elaborada con la ayuda del comité de membresía y tarifas (compuesto por miembros representantes y aliados de la comunidad). El programa sigue en curso y la nueva tarifa, pensada para hacer más accesible la membresía de Crossref, es uno de los primeros cambios que nos ayudó a definir.\nCuando se envíen las facturas de renovación de membresía en enero de 2026, la nueva tarifa se aplicará a 3.194 de nuestros miembros actuales, quienes notarán que esta será un 27 % más económica que en otros años. Por otro lado, queremos que tengan en cuenta que las encuestas realizadas antes de la introducción de la nueva tarifa demostraron que esta podría ser aplicable a entre el 30 y el 60 % de las organizaciones que anteriormente se encontraban en nuestro nivel de tarifa más bajo (275 US$ para organizaciones con ingresos o gastos de publicación de hasta 1 millón de US$). Ya hemos recibido retroalimentación positiva de miembros que han sido beneficiados con el cambio:\nEstamos agradecidos por la nueva tarifa más baja. El costo de Crossref es, sin duda, un gasto significativo para nuestra organización, pero lo aceptamos dada su importancia. Esta nueva estructura de tarifa hará que cubrir el costo sea más fácil.”, dijo Mariana Pérez, de Análisis Filosófico.\nLa iniciativa de Crossref de reducir las tarifas de membresía es la bienvenida a lograr un verdadero ecosistema de investigación global y conectado. Sin duda, esto va a ayudar en la misión de nuestra revista de fomentar una publicación inclusiva, abierta y accesible.”, dijo Dev Roychowdhury, del Journal of Psychological Experience.\nSiguiendo los comentarios proporcionados en las consultas y una serie de indicaciones a lo largo de los meses posteriores al anuncio original, nuestro equipo de membresías recopiló la información necesaria para trasladar a 3.194 miembros al nuevo nivel de tarifas, lo que representa el 14,5 % de todos los miembros de Crossref (el gráfico a continuación muestra que el número de miembros en el nivel de $200 es mayor debido a la reciente afluencia de nuevos miembros que no necesitaron hacer la transición; además, “$0” denota a todos nuestros miembros patrocinados, que no pagan cuotas de membresía, y a aquellos incluidos en el programa Global Equitable Membership (GEM)).\nNota: los miembros que consideren que su organización debería pasar a esta nueva tarifa de cuota de membresía y que aún no nos lo hayan comunicado, por favor, contáctenos antes de que termine el año para que podamos hacer el cambio antes de que se emitan las facturas en enero.\nDicho lo anterior, por medio de las conversaciones que tenemos con nuestra comunidad (y GRACIAS por todos sus comentarios en encuestas y debates), sabemos que este cambio hace que la participación en Crossref sea más accesible para organizaciones pequeñas que comunican investigación. Estamos seguros de que esto promoverá un flujo continuo de nuevos registros y metadatos asociados que sumarán al nexo de la investigación, lo que nos ayudará a facilitar la búsqueda y evaluación de la investigación, lograr una mayor transparencia en el proceso científico y seguir construyendo confianza en sus resultados.\nAún no terminamos de revisar nuestras tarifas y no creemos que este nuevo nivel de tarifas considere todas las necesidades de la comunidad académica, que está en crecimiento y evolución. Seguimos trabajando con nuestros patrocinadores y embajadores y tenemos próximos cambios en el programa GEM para facilitar la participación de organizaciones, de todo tipo y tamaño, que comparten investigación.\nTraducido por: Nicolás Mejía Torres\n",
"headings": ["Version in Español","Algunas cosas son grandes porque son pequeñas: la nueva tarifa para los miembros de Crossref entra en vigencia"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/its-time-planning-for-metadata-schema-deprecation/",
"title": "It’s Time: Planning for Metadata Schema Deprecation",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2025-12-10",
"lastmod_ts": 1765324800,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "It has been 18 (!) years since Crossref last deprecated a metadata schema. In that time, we\u0026rsquo;ve released numerous schema versions, some major updates, and some interim releases that never saw wide adoption. Now, with 27 different schemas to support, we believe it\u0026rsquo;s time to streamline and move forward.\nStarting next year, we plan to begin the process of deprecating lightly-used schemas, with the understanding that this will be a multi-year effort involving careful planning and plenty of communication.\n",
"content": "It has been 18 (!) years since Crossref last deprecated a metadata schema. In that time, we\u0026rsquo;ve released numerous schema versions, some major updates, and some interim releases that never saw wide adoption. Now, with 27 different schemas to support, we believe it\u0026rsquo;s time to streamline and move forward.\nStarting next year, we plan to begin the process of deprecating lightly-used schemas, with the understanding that this will be a multi-year effort involving careful planning and plenty of communication.\nWhich schema will be deprecated? There are two types of schema used to register content metadata records: a full metadata input schema, which follows the pattern crossrefX.X.X.xsd, and resource schema, which follows the pattern doi_resourcesX.X.X.xsd. The resource schema are used to append metadata, such as references or funding data, to an existing metadata record.\nI\u0026rsquo;ve categorized our schemas by usage levels to help prioritize the deprecation process:\nLight usage (planned for initial deprecation):\ncrossref4.3.1.xsd crossref4.3.2.xsd crossref4.8.1.xsd doi_resources4.3.2.xsd doi_resources4.3.4.xsd doi_resources4.3.5.xsd doi_resources4.4.2.xsd Moderate usage:\ncrossref4.3.3.xsd crossref4.3.4.xsd crossref4.3.5.xsd High usage:\ncrossref4.3.0.xsd crossref4.3.6.xsd crossref4.3.7.xsd crossref4.4.0.xsd crossref4.4.1.xsd crossref4.4.2.xsd doi_resources4.3.0.xsd doi_resources4.3.6.xsd We currently support 5 versions of our grants-specific schema and will be working with our funder members to move to new versions of that schema over time - this will follow a different timeline and process as there are fewer schemas to navigate.\nIf you don\u0026rsquo;t know which version you\u0026rsquo;re currently using, now would be a good time to check. Many of our members are still using 4.3.0, the earliest supported version.\nWhy deprecate now? Supporting 27 schema is unsustainable: Each schema version we maintain adds complexity to our systems and makes it harder to implement improvements that benefit everyone. Existing schema need modernization. Some fundamental elements, like names and titles, need to be modeled differently to fully capture variations in language and usage patterns across different cultures and contexts. We also have too many bespoke record types. Consolidating these will create a simpler, more coherent structure. We may retain certain specialized structures for journal articles and books, but overall, simplification will benefit everyone. Most importantly:\nOur current requirements are too minimal. For most record types, we only require a title and publication year. While this low barrier has made registration accessible, it hasn\u0026rsquo;t served metadata quality well. We know you can do better, and we\u0026rsquo;d like to ask for more to improve the richness and utility of Crossref metadata. What happens next? This won\u0026rsquo;t be an abrupt change. We would like to deprecate the schema flagged ‘light usage’ by the end of 2026 and will be reaching out to impacted members early next year. For other schema, we\u0026rsquo;re planning a multi-year effort with clear communication at every stage. We\u0026rsquo;ll provide ample notice before any schema is deprecated, along with migration guidance and support.\nWith the exception of recent changes to affiliation metadata, we\u0026rsquo;ve primarily been building on existing schema structures. This means upgrading should be straightforward for most users. As mentioned, we\u0026rsquo;ll judiciously making some breaking changes to names, titles, and requirements, and would like to consolidate schema as we move forward.\nOur goal is to create a more robust, modern metadata framework that better serves the scholarly community while reducing the maintenance burden that comes with supporting decades of schema versions. Stay tuned for more details on timelines and migration paths. In the meantime, if you\u0026rsquo;re unsure which schema version you\u0026rsquo;re using, we encourage you to check your current implementation.\n",
"headings": ["Which schema will be deprecated?","Why deprecate now?","What happens next?"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/community/special-programs/register-references/",
"title": "Register your references",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2025-12-10",
"lastmod_ts": 1765324800,
"section": "Get involved",
"tags": [],
"description": "Make your references count: register today Improving the discoverability and impact of research across the globe is central to the future of open research. We understand that your time is limited. That’s why we have a clear process for registering your references with Crossref using our Simple Text Query, built with you in mind.\nGive your content the recognition it deserves We know how hard it is to find time. Once your content is registered through the web deposit form, use our Simple Text Query to add your references. Learn more about how to use our Simple Text Query using either of our handy guides:\n",
"content": "Make your references count: register today Improving the discoverability and impact of research across the globe is central to the future of open research. We understand that your time is limited. That’s why we have a clear process for registering your references with Crossref using our Simple Text Query, built with you in mind.\nGive your content the recognition it deserves We know how hard it is to find time. Once your content is registered through the web deposit form, use our Simple Text Query to add your references. Learn more about how to use our Simple Text Query using either of our handy guides:\nStep-by-step instructions Instructional video +- Video transcript\rTranscript for the video \u0026ldquo;How to use the Crossref Simple Text Query form to register your references with Crossref”\nHi there. This is a tutorial on how to use Crossref\u0026rsquo;s simple text query form. This is a form that allows you to discover the DOIs for your references and add them to the metadata for a content item that has already been registered with CrossRef and already has a DOI registered for it.\nWhat this does is create a relationship between the citing item and each of the various items that it cites. Be aware that this method will overwrite any references that have already been deposited for that content item. So we recommend that you deposit all of an item\u0026rsquo;s references at once when you use the simple text query.\nTo start, let\u0026rsquo;s head on over to Crossref\u0026rsquo;s website, crossref.org. Here in the search box, start typing \u0026ldquo;simple text query.\u0026rdquo; You\u0026rsquo;ll want the second entry here: documentation, simple text query. This page has a whole lot of useful background and information about the simple text query form. For our purposes, we just want to access it right now. So we\u0026rsquo;ll head down here to number one and click this link. Voilà, the simple text query form. It is indeed pretty simple.\nYou\u0026rsquo;ll want to paste your list of references here in the text field. A couple of things to note about this:\nIt doesn\u0026rsquo;t matter which citation style you\u0026rsquo;re using. What\u0026rsquo;s important is that you\u0026rsquo;re using a consistent citation style for all of your references. Each reference should be on its own line, ideally in a numbered list form, although you won\u0026rsquo;t break anything by not having the numbers. You want to avoid line breaks within individual references as this can result in poorer citation matching from the form. So watch out for that if you\u0026rsquo;re copying the references over from a .doc or a PDF file. When all your references are in here, click Submit, and the simple text query will match them in a couple of seconds to a minute or two, depending on how many references you have, and it can handle up to 1000 at a time.\nAnd there you have it. It looks like it\u0026rsquo;s found DOIs for seven of the eight references that we included here. Of course, not every cited item has a DOI, but the great feature of the simple text query is that even if something doesn\u0026rsquo;t have a DOI, the form will save it and periodically run checks to see if a DOI has been added for this item.\nEvery so often, it\u0026rsquo;s a good practice to spot check a few of the DOIs that the simple text query finds to make sure they correspond to the article. When you\u0026rsquo;re happy with the results, click Deposit down here at the bottom. In the Email Address field, you\u0026rsquo;ll enter your email address because you\u0026rsquo;ll be receiving a report after you finish the deposit.\nThe parent DOI is the DOI for the content item whose references you\u0026rsquo;re registering here—a reminder that you need to have registered a DOI for the content item first before using the simple text query. So if you haven\u0026rsquo;t yet done that, go back and register the DOI and then come back to the simple text query to deposit its references.\nThe username is either going to be your organisation\u0026rsquo;s shared role credential, which will be a four, five, or six alphanumeric character string, or your individual user credential, which will be an email address followed by the role. And your password is your password. Click Deposit. Great. The simple text query has sent your references to CrossRef.\nYou\u0026rsquo;ll now receive two emails: one with the XML of the references you just deposited, and the second, which will confirm if the deposit was a success or a failure. That\u0026rsquo;s it. That\u0026rsquo;s the simple text query. We hope that you\u0026rsquo;ll find that it\u0026rsquo;s easier than ever to deposit references with CrossRef and that you\u0026rsquo;ll start doing it today if you haven\u0026rsquo;t already. Thanks so much.\nMake your research more visible, evaluated, and likely to be cited. By registering your references you improve the discoverability of your work, facilitate evaluation, and assist with citation counts and accuracy.\nReferences matter:\nUsed by thousands of organisations Guide researchers to your content Contribute to the evaluation of research Progress your metadata strategy Start registering references today.\nAlready submitted your article metadata? Now register your article references to improve discoverability of your article: https://apps.crossref.org/SimpleTextQuery/ Ready to submit your article metadata? Add your metadata using our Web Deposit form and then register your references with our Simple Text Query. Or go to our new Metadata Manager tool where you can include reference metadata in your submission and do it all in one go. Need more help? Explore our step by step instructions.\nWhy is registering references important? By registering your references, you provide context and help readers understand the methodology and sources in your content, supporting the scholars to build upon it. Make your content more accessible and discoverable to a wider audience and increase the chances of it being cited.\nHelp with research assessment. Your authors will benefit from accurate citations as it contributes to the impact of their research. Many citation-counting services use references as a way of tracking citations.\nThanks to the recent changes to our Citedby service, which is now open for all members to use, your references not only support your readers in their research, but now more than ever before – they can help guide others to your content as well.\nTop tips for submitting your references: Work with authors to make sure that your references are complete and accurate. This includes each source\u0026rsquo;s author, title, publisher, publication date, and –– if available –– the DOIs. Use a consistent citation style. This will make it easier for readers to find your references and understand how to cite them in their own work. Submit your references at the same time or straight after you register your content DOIs so they are included in citation databases, and citations are counted accurately. Looking for support? Use our community forum or email support@crossref.org.\nHelpful resources: Our blogs about references Amendments to membership terms to open reference distribution and include UK jurisdiction Linking references is different from depositing references ",
"headings": ["Make your references count: register today","Give your content the recognition it deserves","Step-by-step instructions","Instructional video","Why is registering references important?","Top tips for submitting your references:","Helpful resources:","Our blogs about references","Amendments to membership terms to open reference distribution and include UK jurisdiction","Linking references is different from depositing references"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/member-setup/",
"title": "Setting up as a member",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2025-12-10",
"lastmod_ts": 1765324800,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "You need to be a member of Crossref in order to get your Crossref prefix and register your content with us. Membership of Crossref is about more than just registering DOIs - find out more on our membership page. You can apply to join there too.\nAfter you’ve applied for membership and paid your pro-rated membership fee for the remainder of the current year, we set you up with your own Crossref DOI prefix. We also help you set up the Crossref account credentials that you’ll use to access our systems and register your content.\n",
"content": "You need to be a member of Crossref in order to get your Crossref prefix and register your content with us. Membership of Crossref is about more than just registering DOIs - find out more on our membership page. You can apply to join there too.\nAfter you’ve applied for membership and paid your pro-rated membership fee for the remainder of the current year, we set you up with your own Crossref DOI prefix. We also help you set up the Crossref account credentials that you’ll use to access our systems and register your content.\nThere are three key steps to getting started, and you can even start step one before you’ve received your new prefix and credentials.\nPrepare to register your content Register and verify Display your DOIs Step 1: Prepare to register your content a) Choose your content registration method In order to get working DOIs for your content and share your metadata with the scholarly ecosystem, you need to register your content with Crossref.\nYour metadata is stored with us as XML. Some members send us XML files directly, but if you’re not familiar with writing XML files, you can use a helper tool instead. There are three helper tools available - these are online forms with different fields for you to complete, and this information is converted to XML and deposited with Crossref for you. A big decision to make as a new member is which of our content registration methods to use.\nFind the best option for you.\nb) Decide how you’ll construct your DOI suffixes A DOI has several sections, including a prefix and a suffix. A DOI will always follow this structure:\nhttps://doi.org/[your prefix]/[a suffix of your choice]\nWe provide you with your prefix, but you decide what’s in the suffix for each of your DOIs when you register them with us. Your DOIs will look something like this:\nShow image\r×\rIf you use the Crossref XML plugin for OJS, they can provide suffixes for you by default, but otherwise you’ll need to decide on your own suffix pattern. It’s important to keep this opaque.\nAs a DOI is a persistent identifier, the DOI string can\u0026rsquo;t be changed after it\u0026rsquo;s been registered. It\u0026rsquo;s therefore important that your DOI string is opaque and doesn\u0026rsquo;t include any human-readable information. This means that the suffix should just be a random collection of characters. It should not include any information about the work that could be changed in the future, to avoid a difference between the information in the DOI string, and the information in the metadata.\nFor example, 10.5555/njevzkkwu4i7g is opaque (and correct), but 10.5555/ogs.2016.59.1.1 is not opaque (and not correct); it encodes information about the publication name and date which may change in the future and become confusing or misleading. So don’t include information such as publication name initials, date, ISSN, issue, or page numbers in your suffix string.\nLearn more about constructing your DOIs.\nc) Ensure your landing pages meet the guidelines You’ll need a live, unique landing page on your website for each item you register and this landing page will need to contain specific information\nLearn more about landing pages.\nStep 2: Register and verify a) Set the password on your Crossref account credentials You’ll need a set of Crossref account credentials to access our content registration tools. We\u0026rsquo;ll send you an email so you can set your password.\nb) Register your content You should assign Crossref DOIs to anything that’s likely to be cited in the scholarly literature - journals and journal articles, books and book chapters, conference proceedings and papers, reports, working papers, standards, dissertations, datasets, and preprints.\nBecause DOIs are designed to be persistent, a DOI string can’t be changed once registered, and DOIs can’t be fully deleted. You can always update the metadata associated with a DOI, but the DOI string itself can’t change, and once it’s been registered, it will be included in your next content registration invoice. It’s important that you only register a DOI that you definitely want to use.\nWorking with Crossref is about more than just DOIs. When you register content with us, you do register the DOI and the resolution URL, but you also register a comprehensive set of metadata - rich information about the content. This metadata is then distributed widely and used by many different services throughout the scholarly community, helping with discoverability of your content.\nIf you are registering DOI records for journal articles, you will include metadata about the journal title that this article was published in. When you register your first article for a journal, be really careful about the journal title you enter - this will create a journal title record and any future submissions will have to match this. Your journal title doesn’t have to match the title in the ISSN portal, but if you do want it to match, make sure to check what this is before you register your first item.\nContent registration instructions for helper tools:\nCrossref XML plugin for OJS Web deposit form New Metadata Manager (previously known as the record registration form) Content registration instructions for direct deposit of XML:\nUpload XML files using our admin tool XML deposit using HTTPS POST Upload JATS XML using the web deposit form c) Verify your registration When you register your content, you’ll receive a message telling you whether your submission has been successful, or whether there are any problems. If there are problems, your DOI may not be live so do check this message carefully.\nLearn more about how to verify your registration.\nStep 3: Display your DOIs Don’t forget to display your DOI on the landing page of each item you register - this is an obligation of membership. You’ll need to display your DOI as a link like this:\nhttps://doi.org/10.xxxx/xxxxx\nLearn more about Crossref DOI display guidelines.\nHow to get help and support Our support team is available to help if you have any problems, and you may find help from others in our community on our Crossref Forum. We also run regular \u0026ldquo;Ask Me Anything\u0026rdquo; webinars for new members - learn more about our webinars and register to attend.\nWhat happens next? Once you’ve started registering your content with Crossref and displaying your DOIs on your landing pages, it doesn’t stop there. After you first join, we send you a series of onboarding emails to help you through the next stages. If you want to get started straight away, take a look at how to get started constructing your DOIs.\n",
"headings": ["Step 1: Prepare to register your content ","a) Choose your content registration method ","b) Decide how you’ll construct your DOI suffixes ","c) Ensure your landing pages meet the guidelines ","Step 2: Register and verify ","a) Set the password on your Crossref account credentials ","b) Register your content ","c) Verify your registration ","Step 3: Display your DOIs ","How to get help and support ","What happens next? "]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/authors/christine-ferguson/",
"title": "Christine Ferguson",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Authors",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/metadata-in-editorial-workflows/",
"title": "Metadata in editorial workflows",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2025-12-03",
"lastmod_ts": 1764720000,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "Background Scholarly metadata, deposited by thousands of our members and made openly available can act as “trust signals” for the publications. It provides information that helps others in the community to verify and assess the integrity of the work. Despite having a central responsibility in ensuring the integrity of the work that they publish, editorial teams tend not be fully aware of the value of metadata for integrity of the scholarly record. How can we change that?\n",
"content": "Background Scholarly metadata, deposited by thousands of our members and made openly available can act as “trust signals” for the publications. It provides information that helps others in the community to verify and assess the integrity of the work. Despite having a central responsibility in ensuring the integrity of the work that they publish, editorial teams tend not be fully aware of the value of metadata for integrity of the scholarly record. How can we change that?\nThousands of publishers and institutions from all over the world, big and small, are Crossref members, providing us rich metadata for their publications. During our discussion with the community on this topic, it has surfaced that it is usually the technical or production teams, which interact closely with Crossref, where the appreciation of benefits and value of metadata remain confined.\nAlthough editors may interact with some aspects of metadata when they screen manuscripts that come their way, it is not evident whether they see metadata as useful for signalling trust. In the last couple of years, we have been specifically engaging with editors, meeting them, speaking to them, and writing for them on this topic. As next steps in this effort, we are now keen to engage with the diverse editorial community to understand where metadata fits in their workflows, and to identify opportunities for providing visibility to the importance of rich metadata.\nTo get a better grasp on this subject, I reached out to Christine Ferguson, to share her rich experience across many editorial roles with me, and to try and paint a better picture of the mutual gaps in understanding when it comes to publication metadata. Here’s what we discovered about the different editorial roles and some ideas for how Crossref might better engage with editors.\nWe know that Our members come in all shapes and sizes, and that is also reflected in the diversity of editorial functions that may exist within their organisations. Some of our publishing members have editorial staff whose role is to screen submissions, which includes checking them to make sure that the manuscripts are formatted correctly, and have all the required information e.g. on ethics approvals, or ORCIDs (Open Researcher and Contributor ID) of authors. They then pass these manuscripts on to an external or an academic editor, who is usually a subject matter expert and is responsible for the editorial oversight of the content, to manage the rest of the peer review process, such as assessing the novelty and scope of the work, inviting and securing reviewers, and making a final decision on the manuscript. The academic editors make up a vast majority of the editorial community, variously serving as the editor-in-chief, section editors, and members of the editorial board. They usually volunteer their time as an editor, while having another primary job function.\nOther publishers may have in-house editors who are subject matter experts themselves and manage the peer review process. Manuscripts can come to these editors after initial checks have been performed on them or the editors may also perform these checks, following which selected manuscripts undergo the peer review process.\nProduction editors assume responsibility for the manuscripts that are accepted. Their role is to make the manuscript production and publication ready, often liaising with the authors to finalise the formatting, and finally assigning it to an issue.\nThen there are editorial roles that may be a combination of one or more of the above. The size and operational structure of an organisation may determine how editorial and other responsibilities are delegated within the organisation. For some of our medium or smaller members, it may be that the same individual or team is responsible for one or more tasks related to assessing the scientific content of the manuscript, managing the peer review process, as well as being in charge of the post-production workflows such as registering metadata with Crossref.\nThere are also emerging publishing workflows involving solicited peer-reviews of preprints or other types of works, which sometimes retain a form of editorial oversight.\nIn summary, editorial roles and responsibilities may vary quite a lot within our member organisations and we have less clarity about editorial roles and responsibilities within member organisations.\nAll of these different flavors of editors also interact with metadata at various stages in their workflows. For example, the title of the manuscripts, names of authors, whether they have ORCIDs and what is reflected in their ORCID records, and the abstracts may be used to assess the novelty and integrity of the work under consideration. The names of authors, especially if they are not known personally to the editor, can be verified in part by an ORCID check, ensuring the individuals exist, are affiliated to the organisations as claimed, that they have the relevant expertise to write or contribute to the manuscript, and to be able to find what they have written previously on the subject. Making sure that whether all or some of the authors (e.g. the corresponding author) have provided their ORCIDs, or if the link to where the dataset has been deposited in a repository resolves correctly, is usually a part of the pre-screening or post-acceptance checklists. As our recent metadata awardee, ASM has highlighted that having this metadata can be hugely beneficial during the peer-review management process, such as for identifying conflicts of interest, to ensure data policy compliance, and even for carrying out systematic analyses.\nWe’d like to know more about… whether all editors interact with metadata in their workflows, and whether they are sufficiently informed about the power of rich metadata. It is evident that there is a lot of diversity in editorial roles and functions. Editors, whether they are mostly concerned with scientific content or with the manuscript peer-review process, are closely connected to the researcher community and the latest research topics and trends. By virtue of this, they are in an excellent position to ascertain the important metadata elements most relevant in their scholarly community. If we have a better understanding of how editors are using metadata in their workflows, we’d be able to identify specific opportunities for engaging with this key community to create greater recognition of the role of metadata in preserving the integrity of the scholarly record.\nWhat we have in mind is to engage systematically with editorial community members and understand from them how, where, and which metadata are they using in their workflows. We’d like to do so by talking to editors who represent different Crossref members, perhaps in small groups, where participants will be able to share which metadata elements they interact with. We’d also like to share with them information about the use of metadata for research integrity. We’d like to understand whether they have been leveraging metadata in this context and the relevance of this information for them. Via this exercise, we hope to pick out some commonalities about the use of metadata in editorial workflows. Ultimately, we’d like to use this information to create resources that can be used for educating editors (and ultimately the researchers who submit their work for publication) about the importance of metadata, especially in signalling trust and preserving the integrity of the scholarly record.\n",
"headings": ["Background","We know that","We’d like to know more about…"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/crossref-members-over-the-years-a-journey-through-space-and-time/",
"title": "Crossref members over the years: a journey through space and time",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2025-11-26",
"lastmod_ts": 1764115200,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref was created back in 2000 by 12 forward-thinking scholarly publishers from North America and Europe, and by 2002, these members had registered 4 million DOI records. At the time of writing, we have over 23,600 members in 164 different countries. Half of our members are based in Asia, and 35% are universities or scholar-led. These members have registered over 176 million open metadata records with DOIs (as of today). What a difference 25 years makes!\nIn our 25th anniversary year, I thought it would be time to take a look at how we got here. And so—hold tight—we’re going to go on an adventure through space and time1, stopping every 5 years through Crossref history to check in on our members. And we’re going to see some really interesting changes over the years.\n",
"content": "Crossref was created back in 2000 by 12 forward-thinking scholarly publishers from North America and Europe, and by 2002, these members had registered 4 million DOI records. At the time of writing, we have over 23,600 members in 164 different countries. Half of our members are based in Asia, and 35% are universities or scholar-led. These members have registered over 176 million open metadata records with DOIs (as of today). What a difference 25 years makes!\nIn our 25th anniversary year, I thought it would be time to take a look at how we got here. And so—hold tight—we’re going to go on an adventure through space and time1, stopping every 5 years through Crossref history to check in on our members. And we’re going to see some really interesting changes over the years.\n2005 Let’s go back twenty years to 2005. Crossref has been running for five years, and at this point, we have just 318 members from 31 countries, with 18 million DOI records already registered. These members and the Crossref infrastructure are supported by five Crossref employees based in just two countries—the US and the UK.\nIn 2005, the majority of our members are based in North America, Northern Europe and Western Europe, and they are mostly publishers or societies. Our sponsor program doesn’t yet exist, so all members pay a membership fee directly to Crossref. Our membership fee structure is the same as it is today—we have tiered membership fees so our members can contribute to our infrastructure based on their capacity to pay. At this point, half of our members are eligible for our lowest fee tier.\n2005 at a glance 318 members from 31 countries. 18 million DOI records registered. Supported by five Crossref employees based in two countries - the US and the UK. The majority (89%) are based in North America or Northern \u0026amp; Western Europe. Half are eligible for our lowest fee tier. Mostly societies (40%) and publishers (33%). 2010 Let’s move on by five years to 2010. By this stage, Crossref membership had grown to 1101 members from 69 countries, and these members have now registered 44 million DOI records. They are now supported by 14 Crossref employees, still all located in either the US or the UK.\nWe’re starting to see some changes in where our members are based. You’ll remember that back in 2005, 89% of Crossref members were based in North America, Northern Europe or Western Europe. By 2010, that percentage has dropped to 63%, and we\u0026rsquo;re seeing the number of members based in Asia starting to grow. In 2005, only 4% of our members were based in Asia, but by 2010, 18% of our members are based there, with 93 members in the Republic of Korea alone.\nBy 2010, the percentage of members who are eligible for our lowest fee tier has grown to 78%, so we are seeing smaller and less well-funded organisations starting to join. The types of organisations joining hasn\u0026rsquo;t changed significantly—members are still mostly societies and publishers. However, we are starting to see universities and scholar-led organisations beginning to join.\n2010 at a glance 1,101 members from 69 countries. 44 million DOI records registered. Supported by 14 Crossref employees based in two countries - the US and the UK. Growth of members based in Asia (18%). Smaller, less well-funded organisations starting to join - 78% eligible for our lowest fee tier. Still mostly societies (37%) and publishers (28%), but universities and scholar-led members starting to emerge (23%). 2015 Jumping ahead another five years to 2015, we see Crossref membership has grown to over 3,000 members from 93 countries, with registered DOI records exceeding 77 million. These members and the Crossref infrastructure are supported by 28 employees, still all based in the US and UK.\nMembership in Asia has now really taken off, and Asian organisations now account for 38% of all Crossref members. We also see membership in Latin America emerging, representing 12% of our membership. We have members from 12 different countries in Latin America in 2015, but the most significant number are from Brazil, with 274 members.\nOur formal Sponsor program started to emerge from 2012 onwards. Our Sponsor program supports members who are otherwise eligible for our lowest fee tier and provides financial, technical and language support to organisations that would otherwise face barriers to membership. By 2015, we have 26 sponsors in 14 countries, and 20% of all members are working with us through a Sponsor. This is one of the drivers behind smaller, less well-funded members joining Crossref. We really see a leap here in 2015 with over 90% of members now eligible for our lowest fee tier.\nAround 2015, we also begin to see an interesting shift in the types of organisations that are becoming members. Increasingly, our new members are university-based, and that type of member organisation has overtaken the publisher group in number for the first time. However, societies still make up the largest number of members.\n2015 at a glance 3,134 members from 93 countries. 77 million DOI records. Supported by 28 Crossref employees based in two countries - US and UK. Growth in Asia (38%) and members in Latin America (12%) starting to emerge. Leap in smaller, less well-funded members - 92% eligible for the lowest fee tier. Sponsor program emerges - 26 sponsors in 14 countries. Rise of university and scholar-led members (29%) - overtaking publishers (21%). Societies (31%) are still the largest group. 2020 Can you believe we’re already in 2020? Crossref now has almost 12,000 members in 133 countries, with registered DOI records totalling over 120 million! These members and the Crossref infrastructure are now supported by 43 employees across five countries, with Ireland, Germany, and France added to our staff locations.\nAlmost half of our members are based in Asia at this time, driven by growth from Indonesia, where we have 1681 members in 2020. Our sponsor program now contains 77 sponsors across 32 countries, including our first sponsor in North Africa.\nWe can now really see how membership is weighted towards smaller, less well-funded organisations: 97% of members are eligible for the lowest fee tier, and 57% choose to work with a sponsor.\nBy 2020, we also see a fundamental change in the types of organisations that are Crossref members. Societies no longer account for the largest share of our members, with both universities and publishers overtaking them. In 2016, we updated our schema to enable members to register records for preprints (and connect them to an article where relevant). By 2020, 65 members are registering preprints, and many preprint repositories have already become members.\n2020 at a glance 11,976 members from 133 countries. 120 million DOI records. Supported by 43 Crossref employees in five countries - France, Germany, Ireland, the UK, and the US. 46% of members based in Asia. 77 sponsors in 32 countries, first sponsor in N Africa. Membership heavily weighted to smaller, less well-funded organisations - 97% eligible for the lowest fee tier and 57% working through a sponsor. Universities and scholar-led are now the largest group (37%), followed by publishers (29%) and societies (24%). 2025 And so we find ourselves back in the present day.\nWith such steady growth, it’s pretty easy to predict almost exactly how many members we will have by 31st December 2025. By year-end, we would expect to have 23,800 members in 164 countries, with registered DOI records totalling around 177 million. With recent hiring, these members and our infrastructure will be supported by 52 Crossref employees in 14 different countries.\nMember organisations are now a real mix, with museums, hospitals, botanic gardens, banks, and many more joining. The largest proportion remains those at a university or scholar-led (35%), but interestingly, we see the percentage who consider themselves to be societies starting to fall (19%) and publishers starting to grow again (29%).\nAnd we see the arrival of a new type of member - since the launch of the Grant Linking System in 2019, we now see Research Funders joining Crossref in order to register identifiers for individual grants. These grant identifiers can then be included in the metadata for published content to uniquely identify the funding source, providing context and trust signals for the content, and fleshing out the Research Nexus. We currently have 45 funders who have registered over 175,000 grant records.\nBy 2025 we have 129 sponsors in 51 countries - including our first sponsors in East and West Africa who joined in 2024 and 2025 respectively. Half of all members are now based in Asia. 98% of members are now eligible for our lowest fee tier and 57% are working with us through a sponsor.\nIn 2023, we launched our Global Equitable Membership (GEM) program, which offers relief from any membership and content registration fees for organisations in the least economically advantaged countries in the world. We use the World Bank’s International Development Association (IDA) list as our data source for countries to include in the program. When we launched the program, 187 existing members moved under the program. Since the program’s focus is to enable participation for those who would otherwise find Crossref unaffordable, we are happy that we now have 583 organisational members in the GEM Program, showing the growth in participation from lower-income nations. Most members in the GEM Program are based in Southern Asia (48%) and Sub-Saharan Africa (33%).\nNovember 2025 at a glance 23,622 members in 164 countries. 175 million DOI records. Supported by 52 Crossref employees from 14 countries - Armenia, Austria, Canada, Ecuador, Germany, Ghana, Hong Kong, Ireland, Kenya, the Netherlands, Nigeria, Spain, the UK, and the US. 51% of members are based in Asia. 129 sponsors in 51 countries - first sponsors in East and West Africa. 98% of members are eligible for the lowest fee tier, and 57% working through a sponsor. Real mix of organisation types - universities and scholar-led (35%), publishers (29%), societies (19%), but also research funders, museums, pharmaceutical companies, news agencies, and more! Changes over the years Here are some of that data over time, depicted in charts.\n2026 and beyond As you can see from our adventure through space and time, the types of organisations that work with Crossref have changed significantly over the years as the scholarly communications world has evolved. Our members now tend to be university-based research-performing organisations or scholar-led journals, based in Asia, and with low or zero publishing revenues (and volumes).\nTo meet our mission of a truly global and connected research ecosystem, it is essential to ensure that participation in Crossref and all our services and metadata is accessible to everyone involved in documenting scholarly progress.\nWe want to ensure that access to the Crossref infrastructure is equitable, so we are making two key changes in 2026: we’re extending eligibility for the GEM Program (more to follow), and we are introducing a new, lower-fee tier as an outcome of the RCFS projects more here.\nWe’re excited to see how our members will change as we head into our next 25 years—we hope you’ll continue with us on our journey and welcome all kinds of new members to the expansive and vibrant Crossref community.\nTechnically, this is only an adventure through time. At the time of writing, we have no members based in space. Unless you count the European Space Agency, NASA, et al.\u0026#160;\u0026#x21a9;\u0026#xfe0e;\n",
"headings": ["2005","2005 at a glance","2010","2010 at a glance","2015","2015 at a glance","2020","2020 at a glance","2025","November 2025 at a glance","Changes over the years","2026 and beyond"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/crossref-at-the-frankfurt-book-fair-2025/",
"title": "Crossref at the Frankfurt Book Fair 2025",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2025-11-19",
"lastmod_ts": 1763510400,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "The Frankfurt Book Fair is the largest book fair in the world, and therefore a key event on our calendar. Held annually in Frankfurt, Germany, the 77th Frankfurt Book Fair (October 15–19, 2025) saw 118,000 trade visitors and 120,000 private visitors from 131 countries. The Crossref booth was located, as usual, in Hall 4.0 where all the stands with information about academic publishing can be found. Four Crossref colleagues attended the Book Fair this year, and in this blog post, you can read more about their meetings, experiences, and plans. ",
"content": "The Frankfurt Book Fair is the largest book fair in the world, and therefore a key event on our calendar. Held annually in Frankfurt, Germany, the 77th Frankfurt Book Fair (October 15–19, 2025) saw 118,000 trade visitors and 120,000 private visitors from 131 countries. The Crossref booth was located, as usual, in Hall 4.0 where all the stands with information about academic publishing can be found. Four Crossref colleagues attended the Book Fair this year, and in this blog post, you can read more about their meetings, experiences, and plans. First timer fun at the Frankfurt Fair - Helena Even though I’ve been working in scholarly comms for over 10 years, I’d never had a chance to visit the Frankfurt Book Fair. I was therefore really excited to have an opportunity to attend this year, and it didn’t disappoint! I arrived on Monday, October 13, in time for the STM dinner, which proved a great opportunity to meet with Crossref members and collaborators. On Tuesday, I attended the STM conference with the exciting theme of ‘The role of publishers in science diplomacy’. I think my favorite part of the day was the last panel, where the panelists realised that even though they represent different groups, in the end, they all have the same goals and are all working towards better science and dissemination. On Wednesday, it was time to head over to our booth, where we prepared for the interesting conversations ahead. My meetings were mainly focused on collaborations in the area of research integrity, as Crossref plans to run pilots with potential partners next year. In-person meetings at the fair were a good opportunity to discuss in more detail which kinds of integrity checks could be useful to our members. I also had several meetings with organizations functioning as Service Providers –– depositing content on behalf of members –– who are eagerly awaiting the launch of our renewed Service Providers program next year. In these conversations, we shared our thinking about requirements for Crossref Service Providers and got input from organizations with experience serving our member community. Overall, it was a great opportunity to see members and collaborators in person, and I’ve already put the 2026 Frankfurt Book Fair in my calendar!\nAn exciting comeback - Maryna If last year, I was a debutante at the Frankfurt Book Fair, 2025 marked an exciting comeback. It\u0026rsquo;s always a pleasure to spend time chatting with people you usually only meet through email or Zoom. Working remotely as part of a global team is something I truly value about Crossref, but it also makes those in-person moments even more special. You get to solve issues that have been sitting on your to-do list over lunch, brainstorm ideas while walking to the venue, get immediate advice in a meeting—and, of course, talk about dogs over dinner.\nFrankfurt was busy but well organised. Our booth was lively with a mix of planned and spontaneous meetings. It was nice to reconnect with members and sponsors I\u0026rsquo;ve worked with over the years. We even gave an early look at the new Participation Reports before the official release (what a thrill!). There were good conversations about deprecating co-access, the importance of title transfers, and how we can keep improving the member experience. One highlight: I spoke with a prospective member about our membership model and fee structure, and they joined the following week! Their account is already active, with a prefix assigned, which was great to see.\nAnother key topic was the importance of ROR IDs. I talked with several publishers about how they could be implemented across other systems. At one point, I spotted an issue with unregistered DOIs and was able to fix it on the spot by finalising a title transfer—we\u0026rsquo;d had permission but never received the formal request—so it was satisfying to close that loop in real time.\nBeing a relatively small team serving a global membership of more than 23,000 and growing, it\u0026rsquo;s not possible to meet with every member face-to-face to respond to every question. Our team works hard to respond to all queries by email, but it\u0026rsquo;s undeniably faster and more productive in person. That\u0026rsquo;s why we keep returning to the Frankfurt Book Fair year after year—you can definitely count on seeing us again next year! Third time at bat - Luis The Frankfurt Book Fair is always an incredible opportunity to connect with our community. We come prepared with highlights of the year, plans for developments and upcoming releases, and remind the members we meet to participate and vote in the annual elections. But most of what we learn happens during the informal moments––meetings, drop-ins, and chats over coffee and tea––where people discuss what they’re working on, trends, and interests of the scholarly and publishing community. This year, some of those conversations included meeting someone working with groups from Egypt and the UAE who are developing tools around our metadata. They wanted to talk through REST API use, recent Crossref updates, and how retraction metadata could fit into their systems. Another person opened their participation report with us and were surprised to see their metadata showing 0% despite the team believing they were sending complete metadata, which led to a discussion about getting their internal workflows running again. Booth days always fly by, but they’re deeply informative and insightful for teams that participate in person, as we can “cross-check” (pun intended) how our different support mechanisms help the community and how well we\u0026rsquo;re delivering our communications. There is a good mix of problem-solving and catching-up; often, we see members who prepare a list of questions because they find it easier to sit and navigate through them with our support or membership colleagues. Sometimes it’s about refreshing their understanding of what Crossref is and what we do, especially during team changes. We also spoke with a publisher preparing to adopt Crossmark. They wanted to check they were handling updates and relationships correctly, and mentioned that increasing transparency is becoming a priority for them. Someone else, working closely with a repository, asked about using the REST API or Metadata Plus to enrich their records. A few visitors simply needed clarity––one was pleased to learn they could register reports and datasets after being told otherwise. Another visitor who registers a small number of book DOIs each year asked whether the Web Deposit Form was still the best fit. We walked through the Record Registration Form together, and its new editing features helped them plan for upcoming changes.\nPersonally, I enjoy seeing the cultural and organisational diversity of existing and potential Crossref members, ambassadors, sponsors, allies and colleagues from all over the world at our booth. If you have the opportunity to attend the Book Fair next year, please visit our booth and say hello!\nThis year’s Frankfurt Veteran - Paul I think this is my 5th (?) Frankfurt book fair, and each year I come away thinking how much I appreciate the opportunity to speak with our members face to face, and I get to see and hear the impact that Crossref has, which is always such a pleasure.\nThis year, there were only four of us in attendance, and it felt busier than ever. We had a lot of pre-booked meetings at our wonderfully designed booth again (thanks to the amazing work of our colleague Rosa) but we also had lots of ad-hoc meetings, where members came up to say “hello”, “thank you” or ask about that really knotty, niche problem that they have, which they are not sure how to explain over email. From a technical support perspective, this is great, as we can go through these issues and get a resolution––or a solid background––without the delay and confusion of long email threads. I also worked with a member who got their IT department to send over a file there and then for us to work through and try to navigate a difficult question regarding reference matching and whether the simple text query form worked using an API, which others could use. These were just two examples of many in which it was much easier to sit down and work through issues directly at the fair.\nSo I would always say that if you are at the Frankfurt book fair, and you have one of these issues then it is a great opportunity to come by, say hello and work through it with us. We will send out a reminder before the fair in 2026 to get any meetings booked, or just come find us at the fair.\nA highlight for me this year was also showing some of our members our new Participation Report. It’s had a visual update as well as some new functionality: you can download a gap report that lists DOI numbers of records that are missing the metadata element you choose, making it easier to identify and update missing metadata. I always like attending the Frankfurt Book Fair and so might be there next year. It\u0026rsquo;s an important opportunity for all Crossref colleagues to engage and meet our members––many for the first time. Next year Feeling inspired after all the great meetings and conversations we had this year, we immediately started planning for next year! We’ll definitely be in Frankfurt in 2026, where you can find our team at the Crossref booth. We’re also planning to organize another roundtable on the Monday before the fair, so put October 5-9, 2026, in your calendars and stay tuned for more details.\n",
"headings": ["First timer fun at the Frankfurt Fair - Helena","An exciting comeback - Maryna","Third time at bat - Luis","This year’s Frankfurt Veteran - Paul","Next year"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/authors/maryna-kovalyova/",
"title": "Maryna Kovalyova",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Authors",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/the-sunset-is-on-the-horizon-for-metadata-manager.-whats-next/",
"title": "The sunset is on the horizon for Metadata Manager. What’s next?",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2025-11-06",
"lastmod_ts": 1762387200,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "TL;DR. Metadata Manager will be retired at the end of 2025. Over the past four years, we have been developing a new helper tool to replace it, and that tool has now reached a stage of maturity that means we will be able to switch off Metadata Manager by the end of the year.\n",
"content": "TL;DR. Metadata Manager will be retired at the end of 2025. Over the past four years, we have been developing a new helper tool to replace it, and that tool has now reached a stage of maturity that means we will be able to switch off Metadata Manager by the end of the year.\nHow did we get here? In 2021, we said that we would be retiring the deprecated Metadata Manager as soon as we can offer members a suitable replacement for registering their journal content. So this news has been a long time coming - Metadata Manager has been very challenging for us to support, and we have found it impossible to develop additional features. However, we did not want to take the final step of switching off the interface until we were able to offer a suitable replacement for members who rely on manual helper tools to register their journal content.\nThat replacement, our new record registration form, has now been used by many members for over a year to register their journal content. The feedback so far has been positive, and we have been able to add functionality to the tool at a pace that we are happy with.\nIn July 2025, we contacted those members who are still using Metadata Manager to let them know that the tool will no longer be available after December 2025. So if you are affected by this news, you were probably already aware of it. But we wanted to go into a little more detail on the sunsetting of Metadata Manager, why we are doing it, and what’s next for Crossref’s content registration helper tools.\nWhat has happened since 2021? We have been developing the record registration form ever since that announcement in 2021. It began its life as a helper tool for registering grant records, but we knew we wanted to expand it to cover journal articles and other record types as soon as we could.\nTo see whether the concept behind the grants form could be applied to journal content, we first built an initial prototype and tested it with a number of Crossref ambassadors and volunteers. We wanted to ensure that the tool was intuitive to use, and to understand what functionality it would need to support for it to be truly useful to our members. Following some iteration on the invaluable feedback we received from our testers, we finally released the tool to production in September 2024 and began encouraging members to use it for their real-life article deposits.\nWe have been continuously adding new functionality since then, from additional fields for registering richer metadata to a feature that allows members to edit their articles’ metadata without having to re-enter everything into the form.\nNow, about two months from the target date for retiring Metadata Manager, the record registration form is used by members to register about 200 articles per day, while Metadata Manager still sees about double that volume of submissions. So we have some way left to go.\nWhy is now the right time to retire Metadata Manager? 2025 has been a year of addressing technical debt for Crossref. My colleague Sara wrote about this co-ordinated push towards modernising our system in her post about our cloud migration in the summer.\nHaving the long-awaited replacement for Metadata Manager in place will allow us to free up the resources that have been tied up for years by troubleshooting Metadata Manager, in terms of both technology and user support, so that we can focus on projects and initiatives that align with our longer-term strategy.\nHow will we avoid the new tool developing the same problems as Metadata Manager? As stated above, Metadata Manager has caused us many issues and headaches in different ways - but we have also learned a lot from dealing with these problems. As Bryan Vickery wrote in 2020, Metadata Manager is “not flexible enough to easily add other record types, like books/book chapters, or to include any changes we may make to our input schema.” To address this, we built the record registration form in a schema-driven way, which makes it adaptable to any future schema changes. It also means that we can spin up prototypes of new forms for additional record types quite quickly.\nSo while Metadata Manager was custom-built in a way that could only ever work for journal content, the record registration form already supports two record types and will support more in future. This is key for our goal of building a complete research nexus, which extends far beyond journal content, and even beyond “content” as such (did someone say grants?).\nWhat happens next? Metadata Manager will no longer be available from January 2026. Starting next year, if you attempt to access Metadata Manager at https://www.crossref.org/metadatamanager/, you will be redirected to a deprecation note on https://www.crossref.org/deprecated/ which will link out to the new tool. What options do I have for registering my journal content going forward? If your organisation still uses Metadata Manager to register metadata for your journal articles, now is a good time to begin familiarising yourself with the alternatives available to you from 2026 forward - these include, but are not limited to, the new record registration form.\nIf your journal has an ISSN We recommend you begin using the record registration form as soon as possible. Simply go to https://manage.crossref.org/records and sign in with your Crossref account credentials to register a journal article. You can also see a list of all the journal article records you have previously registered using our manual helper tools at https://manage.crossref.org/records/edit and edit their metadata using the form.\nTo help you make the switch from Metadata Manager, we will be hosting an interactive webinar on 13 November about how to transition to the new tool. Register here or look out for the recording, which will be shared in our events archive.\nIf your journal does not have an ISSN The record registration form currently only supports ISSNs as journal identifiers. Title-level and volume/issue-level DOIs, which are at the core of how Metadata Manager handles journal metadata, have been the cause for some of the problems we have had over the years with that particular tool. Also, Crossref DOIs have always been intended primarily as citation identifiers, and entire journals/volumes/issues are very rarely cited. For that reason, we built the Record Registration Form such that it doesn\u0026rsquo;t support registering or using journal-level DOIs.\nWith that being said, if you do not (yet) have an ISSN for your journal for whatever reason, you can use our web deposit form to register your articles with journal DOI. If you do obtain an ISSN for your title later on, you can then simply begin using the record registration form from that point onward.\nHow will the new tool continue to be developed? We will continue to work with our members and community to develop additional functionalities for the journal article form. Currently we are working on allowing relationships metadata to be registered using the form.\nUltimately, the goal is for the record registration form to become the one-stop shop for members who manually register and update their metadata. To this end, we are working on expanding the tool to cover additional record types - we have recently developed a prototype for registering books and chapters, and we will be looking to test this in the coming months with volunteers who are currently registering their book metadata via other avenues such as the web deposit form.\nIf you would like to support these efforts, or you have begun using the new tool and would like to share your feedback, come join the discussion in our community forum.\nReferences Bowman, S. (2021). Next steps for Content Registration. Crossref. https://doi.org/10.64000/30vzx-r5x16 Bowman, S. (2025). We’ve migrated to the cloud; we hope you didn’t notice (but maybe you did). Crossref. https://doi.org/10.64000/wd6rx-vpq73 Vale, P. (2022). Forming new relationships: Contributing to Open source. Crossref. https://doi.org/10.64000/cvq2e-q8t24 ",
"headings": ["How did we get here?","What has happened since 2021?","Why is now the right time to retire Metadata Manager?","How will we avoid the new tool developing the same problems as Metadata Manager?","What happens next?","What options do I have for registering my journal content going forward?","If your journal has an ISSN","If your journal does not have an ISSN","How will the new tool continue to be developed?","References"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/announcing-changes-to-rest-api-rate-limits/",
"title": "Announcing changes to REST API rate limits",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2025-11-05",
"lastmod_ts": 1762300800,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "Our REST API makes all of the metadata we hold publicly available. It receives the majority of our API traffic, with around 1 billion hits per month. It’s one of the key ways that we fulfil our mission to make research objects easy to find, cite, link, assess, and reuse. From 1 December 2025, we will be revising the rate limits for the public and polite pools of the REST API to ensure that we can maintain a stable and reliable system, and that metadata is freely available to everyone.\n",
"content": "Our REST API makes all of the metadata we hold publicly available. It receives the majority of our API traffic, with around 1 billion hits per month. It’s one of the key ways that we fulfil our mission to make research objects easy to find, cite, link, assess, and reuse. From 1 December 2025, we will be revising the rate limits for the public and polite pools of the REST API to ensure that we can maintain a stable and reliable system, and that metadata is freely available to everyone.\nWe haven’t changed the rate limits since the REST API was launched in 2013. In the past five years, the number of requests to the REST API has tripled and the number of metadata records has increased by a third, from 120 million to around 180 million. This means an increase in the resources needed to run it, and we’ve seen periods of instability where we haven’t been able to keep the API available for all users. We have decided that it is the right time to revisit rate limits to check that they’re in line with what our technology can provide and what our community needs. As a result, we will apply the following for the public and polite pools:\nPublic pool:\nRequest type Rate limit Concurrency limit Single record 5 1 List of records (queries, filters, etc.) 1 1 Polite pool:\nRequest type Rate limit Concurrency limit Single DOI record 10 3 List of records (queries, filters, etc.) 3 3 The rate limit is the number of total requests that can be made per second. The concurrency limit is how many requests can be running at the same time. This means that for longer-running requests you may need to wait for previous requests to finish before you can make a new one.\nHere are some examples of single records requests:\nhttps://api.crossref.org/v1/works/10.1002/cphy.cp010129 https://api.crossref.org/v1/journals/0266-612X\u0026mailto=my@email.com The second case here will be directed to the polite pool because an email is included using the ‘mailto’ parameter. And here are examples of requests that return lists of records:\nhttps://api.crossref.org/v1/works?filter=from-created-date:2025-10-21T16:20,until-created-date:2025-10-21T17:00 https://api.crossref.org/v1/members/13/works\u0026mailto=my@email.com https://api.crossref.org/v1/works?query.bibliographic=linear+dichroism\u0026mailto=my@email.com The second and third examples here will use the polite pool.\nOur guiding principle in making these changes is to keep all of the metadata available to everyone, all of the time. These changes to rate limits won’t restrict current users from accessing the metadata they want to retrieve, but it will make it easier for us to maintain the system now and in the future.\nWhich use cases do we support? Our metadata has a broad range of applications. If you’re someone who uses the REST API, we’re glad that you are part of our community! Our mission includes making it easier to find, reuse, and assess scholarly research outputs. By using metadata, you’re helping us to fulfil that goal.\nThe main uses of the REST API fit into several categories. The new rate limits will continue to support these, among many others:\nI have some metadata, what is the DOI? I have a DOI, what is its metadata? I want all of the metadata, just give me everything. Research on a specific topic or subset of metadata, often refreshing the results every few weeks or months. Rate limits can encourage responsible usage. The majority of API users make requests at a low rate and will not need to make any changes, however a few send spikes of large numbers of requests in a short space of time, sometimes making it difficult for others to access the service. These can be smoothed out by lower rate limits. Complex requests that search across large numbers of items put more pressure on our systems than requests for a single content item, so we have decided to set different rate limits for different types of request.\nWho will be affected? We estimate that the changes might affect around 40 users per week across the public and polite pools, and this is only for some of their requests. In all of the cases we’ve seen, the rate of requests could be slowed down and users would still be able to get the same results. In other words, the aim of these changes is to make the load on the API more predictable, not to reduce the total number of requests or amount of metadata transferred. No changes are being made to the Metadata Plus service or other APIs, such as the XML API and OAI-PMH endpoint.\nDo I need to change how I use the API? If you’re reading this, thank you! It’s clear that you want to be a considerate user of our services. Almost all users can continue to use the REST API in exactly the same way, you won’t need to change anything. Here is some general advice that will help you make the most of the service and ensure that you won’t encounter issues.\nUse a mailto parameter. This gives you access to the polite pool meaning higher rate limits and meaning we can get in touch with you if needed. We’ll only use your address to contact you about your API requests. Check the HTTP response status for your requests. This is always good practice and can help you identify malformed requests and where you reach rate limits. Cache results to avoid repeatedly making the same requests. Most records don’t change on a regular basis. How often you update the cache will depend on what you are interested in, but most metadata fields rarely change. If you are making a very high volume of requests or have very complex analysis to carry out, consider downloading the public data file which is made available once a year and contains all of our metadata. You can update it with recent additions using the REST API. If you are relying on our metadata in a production service, Metadata Plus can provide more stability, support, and access to monthly snapshots of our entire database. We have more tips and tricks for the REST API in our documentation. If you have questions, please join the conversation on our Community Forum.\n",
"headings": ["Which use cases do we support?","Who will be affected?","Do I need to change how I use the API?"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/categories/standards/",
"title": "Standards",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Categories",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/celebrating-noyam-journals-metadata-award/",
"title": "Celebrating Noyam Journals’ Metadata Award",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2025-11-04",
"lastmod_ts": 1762214400,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "Noyam Journals, based in Accra, Ghana, was recently recognised for the completeness of its metadata through the Crossref Metadata Award, part of our 25th anniversary celebrations. Noyam was one of six publishers worldwide to receive the award and stood out as a leader among members of our Global Equitable Membership (GEM) Program.\n",
"content": "Noyam Journals, based in Accra, Ghana, was recently recognised for the completeness of its metadata through the Crossref Metadata Award, part of our 25th anniversary celebrations. Noyam was one of six publishers worldwide to receive the award and stood out as a leader among members of our Global Equitable Membership (GEM) Program.\nThe GEM Program supports publishers and organisations in low- and middle-income countries to participate in the global scholarly community by reducing barriers to membership and services.\nEarlier this year, at our Crossref Accra event, representatives from Noyam spoke about how registering metadata with Crossref has expanded their readership worldwide. They also encouraged other publishers and institutions in Africa to utilise Crossref’s infrastructure to enhance the visibility and impact of their work.\nFollowing their award, we spoke with Naa Kai Amanor-Mfoafo from Noyam Journals about their approach to metadata quality. She shares her reflections in the Q\u0026amp;A below.\nWhat motivates your team to work towards high-quality metadata? Our commitment towards high-quality metadata stems from our organisational goal to promote the dissemination of usable knowledge by publishing innovative and high-quality research content. Over the last five years, registering our metadata with Crossref has strengtheed authors\u0026rsquo; trust as their institutions can verify quality through tools like Crossmark. For instance, many institutions use the Crossmark feature on our published articles to access the latest information about a scholarly article, including updates, corrections, or retractions.\nDo you have a strategy for complete metadata? We prioritise inclusion of ORCID IDs, Abstracts, and References as these increase visibility of our articles. We also include Affiliations, Licenses, and Crossmark, and we use Similarity Check to help ensure research integrity.\nAs part of our team structure, we have a dedicated staff member responsible for ensuring that every article is assigned a Crossref DOI on the same day it is published online. Our in-house system supports this process, allowing us to capture and register all the key metadata efficiently.\nWhat impact of good metadata can you see on your organisation? Good metadata has made a real difference for our organisation. It has helped increase the visibility and discoverability of our journal articles, making it easier for researchers and readers around the world to find and cite our work. We’ve noticed more engagement with our publications since improving our metadata, which encourages us to keep strengthening the quality of the information we register.\nHave you encountered any challenges in curating or improving your metadata, and how did you address those? One major challenge we’ve faced is discovering errors in previously uploaded metadata, and we haven’t yet established a systematic process for correcting them. We’re currently working to improve our workflow to help ensure the correctness of our metadata to follow Crossref’s recommended best practices.\nHave your efforts around metadata led to real benefits for your community? Our authors appreciate the fact that their ORCID profiles are automatically updated with their published articles once they are assigned DOIs from Crossref. They are, of course, also enjoying increased visibility of our published articles globally.\nLooking ahead, how are you planning to build on your metadata quality? We need to stay informed about developments at Crossref. Once in a while, we visit the Crossref website or participate in a webinar to stay informed. For example, a few months ago, we got to know that a new record registration form had been initiated for metadata uploads through the documentation section on the Crossref website.\nWe advise others who are new to Crossref to focus on consistency. Ensure your organisational system includes staff dedicated to keeping your metadata up to date. Secondly, feel free to seek technical support from the Crossref team when the need arises.\n",
"headings": ["What motivates your team to work towards high-quality metadata?","Do you have a strategy for complete metadata?","What impact of good metadata can you see on your organisation?","Have you encountered any challenges in curating or improving your metadata, and how did you address those?","Have your efforts around metadata led to real benefits for your community?","Looking ahead, how are you planning to build on your metadata quality?"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/categories/metadata-awards/",
"title": "Metadata Awards",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Categories",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/authors/naa-kai-amanor-mfoafo/",
"title": "Naa Kai Amanor-Mfoafo",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Authors",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/crossref-annual-meeting/",
"title": "Crossref Annual Meeting",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2025-10-22",
"lastmod_ts": 1761091200,
"section": "Crossref Annual Meeting",
"tags": [],
"description": "#Crossref2025 online, 22-23 October 2025 Our annual meeting, #Crossref2025, was held online, two 1/2 day sessions, 22-23 October 2025 starting. We invited all our members from 160+ countries—and everyone in our community—to join us for the announcement of the board election results, updates from the Crossref team, flash talks from members of our community and more.\nPlease see information from #Crossref2025 below, and cite the outputs as `#Crossref2025 Annual Meeting and Board Election, 22-23 October 2025 retrieved [date], https://doi.org/10.13003/431937misogo.\n",
"content": "#Crossref2025 online, 22-23 October 2025 Our annual meeting, #Crossref2025, was held online, two 1/2 day sessions, 22-23 October 2025 starting. We invited all our members from 160+ countries—and everyone in our community—to join us for the announcement of the board election results, updates from the Crossref team, flash talks from members of our community and more.\nPlease see information from #Crossref2025 below, and cite the outputs as `#Crossref2025 Annual Meeting and Board Election, 22-23 October 2025 retrieved [date], https://doi.org/10.13003/431937misogo.\nIf you attended any portion of the meeting, please take our survey to help inform furture events: Day 1, Day 2\nPosts on BlueSky #Crossref2025 Posts on LinkedIn #Crossref2025 Agenda Day 1 🦩 Time (UTC) Topic 12:00 Celebrating 25th Anniversary of Crossref Hello to Crossref Satellite Event Nairobi, Kenya Welcome and agenda – Ed Pentz Timeline: 25 Years of Crossref Speakers - Urooj Nizami (PKP, Simon Fraser University) – Stronger Together: How PKP and Crossref support a shared scholarly community - Todd Carpenter (NISO) - Abel Packer (SciELO) – Crossref and the evolution of Latin America scholarly communication metadata - Lisa Schiff (California Digital Library, Pre-elections Board Chair) 13:00 Annual meeting \u0026amp; business – 2025 Board election 13:40 Crossref then and now - Membership – Presentation - Roadmap update – Presentation - RCFS – Presentation 14:10 Community highlights - Agon Memeti (University of Tetova) – Analyzing Abstract Coverage and Authorship Patterns in Crossref-Registered University of Tetova Journal Articles (2024) - Charlie Rapple (Kudos) – Scholarly publishing and the Sustainable Development Goals: What you need to know - Antoine Drouin (Fonds de Recherche du Québec) – Diving into Crossref as a Funder: A Tale of Swift Adoption - Pia Kretschmar (SCOAP3) – SCOAP3 Open Science elements - Barbara Rivera (Barcelona Declaration) – Open Research Information 15:15 Metadata updates – Patricia Feeney, Head of Metadata 15:30 Data Science - Dominika Tkaczyk (Director of Technology) – Introduction to Data Science team - Alex Bédard-Vallée (Data Scientist) – Internal environment for efficient data processing - Jason Portenoy (Data Scientist) – Metadata matching service and strategies 16:00 Closing remarks Day 2 🦩 Time (UTC) Topic 07:00 Celebrating 25th Anniversary of Crossref Welcome and agenda – Ed Pentz Timeline: 25 years of Crossref - Soichi Kubota (J-STAGE, JST) – Presentation - Leena Shah (DOAJ) – Presentation - Susan Murray (AJOL) – Presentation 08:00 Tools and services demonstrations New Participation Reports demo – Patrick Vale Record Registration Form demo – Lena Stoll Data storytelling with Crossref REST API – Luis Montilla 08:45 Project and programs updates - Johannsen Obanda – Ambassador Program update - Amanda Bartell – Integrity of the Scholarly Record (ISR) - Dominika Tkaczyk – A few words about technology 09:10 Community highlights - Hans de Jonge (NWO) – Manuscript submission systems and metadata completeness - Audrey Kenni (Pan African Medical Journal) – PAMJ’s Journey to Visibility with Crossref - Nurul Ain Mohd Noor (Universiti Malaysia Terengganu) – My Crossref Journey - Achal Agrawal (PostPub) – The Unreasonable Effectiveness of Author-Affiliation Co-Occurrence - Ratna Galuh Manika Trisista (Universitas Islam Jakarta) – Our Better Metadata Story 10:00 Panel discussion: Research Nexus in the real world Ginny Hendricks (Crossref, Facilitator), Dominika Tkaczyk (Crossref), Bianca Kramer (Barcelona Declaration on Open Research Information), David Oliva Uribe (UNESCO), Amber Osman (Cofounder XploreOpen), Mariángela Nápoli (CONICET-IICE UBA-FFYL; Crossref Ambassador in Pakistan), Kazuhiro Hayashi (National Institute of Science and Technology Policy, Science Council of Japan) 04:00 Closing remarks: Ed Pentz The annual meeting archive Browse our archive of annual meetings with agendas and links to previous presentations from 2001 through 2015. Its a real trip down memory lane!\nPlease contact us with any questions.\n",
"headings": ["#Crossref2025 online, 22-23 October 2025","Agenda","Day 1 🦩","Day 2 🦩","The annual meeting archive"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/new-tool-to-report-on-completeness-of-open-research-information-globally/",
"title": "New tool to report on completeness of open research information globally",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2025-10-21",
"lastmod_ts": 1761004800,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "Wednesday 22nd October 2025\u0026mdash;Crossref, the open scholarly infrastructure nonprofit, today releases an enhanced dashboard showing metadata coverage and individual organisations’ contributions to documenting the process and outputs of scientific research in the open. The tool helps research-performing, funding, and publishing organisations identify gaps in open research information, and provides supporting evidence for movements like the Barcelona Declaration for Open Research Information, which encourages more substantial commitment to stewarding and enriching the scholarly record through open metadata.\n",
"content": "Wednesday 22nd October 2025\u0026mdash;Crossref, the open scholarly infrastructure nonprofit, today releases an enhanced dashboard showing metadata coverage and individual organisations’ contributions to documenting the process and outputs of scientific research in the open. The tool helps research-performing, funding, and publishing organisations identify gaps in open research information, and provides supporting evidence for movements like the Barcelona Declaration for Open Research Information, which encourages more substantial commitment to stewarding and enriching the scholarly record through open metadata.\nCrossref’s Participation Reports now offer expanded features and provide full coverage of all members and all resource types registered with Crossref DOIs (Digital Object Identifiers)—over 175 million records representing a significant share of global research production from organisations in 164 countries. Each of Crossref’s 23,000 members has a dashboard to visualise their metadata contributions, display coverage of key information for scholarly works, and get actionable feedback via a gap report that specifies records that need enrichment, all helping to make more transparent the work that goes into creating and curating the scholarly record.\nFor any Crossref member—whether journal publisher, research funder, university, or museum—coverage of up to 11 key elements is public and visible to everyone, including: references, abstracts, ORCID iDs, affiliation strings, ROR IDs, Open Funder Registry IDs, funding award numbers, text-mining URLs, licence URLs, Similarity Check URLs (for text-based plagiarism checking) and the presence of a Crossmark policy, indicating the organisation’s commitment to declare corrections and retractions. These metadata elements provide greater context and visibility for research objects such as journal articles and preprints, grants and awards, books and book chapters, standards, datasets, conference papers and various ‘other’ content such as scholarly blogs, images, and even physical museum artefacts.\nMochammad Tanzil Multazam, Library Director of Universitas Muhammadiyah Sidoarjo, and Secretary of the Supervisory Board of Relawan Jurnals, says, “As a sponsoring organisation for several thousand small publishers across Indonesia, we support Crossref members to register complete metadata for their works. Despite time and resource constraints, this new actionable open report on key metadata elements will help drive improvements in the information they share for their publications. This has wide-reaching implications for the visibility of that research and trust among the community, and therefore has the potential to support Indonesian scholarship in the global context.”\nLena Stoll, Program Lead at Crossref, explains, “We are happy to have extended participation reports to cover more diverse record types, including grants, datasets, dissertations, and more, and to make it easier for our members to act on their ongoing improvements to enrich their records and build towards the vision of an open and more complete Research Nexus.”\nLudo Waltman, Scientific Director and Professor of Quantitative Science Studies at the Centre for Science and Technology Studies (CWTS) at Leiden University, comments, “As a representative of the researcher and metascience communities, this data is of great importance for us to analyse the trends and effects of global research activity. Crossref is one of the main driving forces in open infrastructure, and its commitment to supporting metadata completeness through this open reporting dashboard is a significant step for the open research information movement.”\nAccess Crossref Participation Reports and search for any Crossref member organisation.\nParticipation report for a typical Crossref member, Universidad La Salle Arequipa in Peru\nAbout Crossref Crossref runs an open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with their 23,000 members in 164 countries, Crossref drives metadata exchange and supports nearly 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.\n",
"headings": ["About Crossref"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/authors/patrick-vale/",
"title": "Patrick Vale",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Authors",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/retrieve-metadata/",
"title": "Metadata Retrieval",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2025-10-16",
"lastmod_ts": 1760572800,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": " Crossref metadata is freely available for the community.\nWe provide open, comprehensive metadata on scholarly works. By collecting metadata from a wide number of organisations, we significantly simplify the downstream use and analysis of scholarly research outputs. For each content item, we collect rich metadata that can be put to a variety of uses.\nThe metadata can be freely accessed through:\nUser interfaces for people to access metadata in human-readable formats. APIs for computers to access metadata in structured formats. Bulk downloads to get all metadata. Member services to check deposited content. This page provides a general overview, with a brief summary of services. Use the navigation on the left to access full documentation for each service and examples to get started. You can also visit our learning hub. If you have any questions, suggestions or feedback, join the conversation at our community forum.\n",
"content": " Crossref metadata is freely available for the community.\nWe provide open, comprehensive metadata on scholarly works. By collecting metadata from a wide number of organisations, we significantly simplify the downstream use and analysis of scholarly research outputs. For each content item, we collect rich metadata that can be put to a variety of uses.\nThe metadata can be freely accessed through:\nUser interfaces for people to access metadata in human-readable formats. APIs for computers to access metadata in structured formats. Bulk downloads to get all metadata. Member services to check deposited content. This page provides a general overview, with a brief summary of services. Use the navigation on the left to access full documentation for each service and examples to get started. You can also visit our learning hub. If you have any questions, suggestions or feedback, join the conversation at our community forum.\nOn this page Access and authentication Sources of metadata Licensing Summary of services Access and authentication We make our metadata open and accessible. You don\u0026rsquo;t need to register to use any of our interfaces.\nAll of our APIs provide public options and almost all requests can be made anonymously. We recommend that you identify yourself by providing an email address. This helps us in the unlikely event that your use of the API causes a problem. We don\u0026rsquo;t use this information for marketing or any other purpose and logs are deleted after three months. Note that if you use our metadata anonymously, your IP address and the content of your request is still logged.\nOur APIs offer various options identification and authentication. Not all are available for all APIs, refer to the documentation for each API for details.\nOption How to authenticate Public No authentication or identification. Polite Email address in a request parameter or agent header. Member Email address, role, and password in request parameters. Metadata Plus API key in the Crossref-Plus-API-Token header. Sources of metadata Our metadata contains information about scholarly outputs, their properties, and relationships. We rely primarily on deposits by members and don\u0026rsquo;t scrape websites or full text documents. Our metadata comes from the following sources:\nMetadata from members We are a DOI registration agency with over 20,000 members. We collect metadata with each registered DOI, including information about where it was published and how it should be cited. Members also tell us about relationships to other research outputs, people, and organisations, such as authors, references, data sets, and clinical trials. License information and links to the full text are also deposited, including how to access and use content for text and data mining.\nEnrichments by Crossref We hold information that is useful to the community, and by comparing metadata we can create links between content items and add useful additional information. We current add the following additional metadata to content items:\nMember metadata to identify the organisation currently responsible for curating the metadata record.\nReference matching: For references deposited without a DOI, we attempt to match the reference metadata to a Crossref DOI. Reference matches are included in the XML and REST APIs, including forwardLinks and getResolvedRefs (for members). We match using either an unstructured reference string or structured bibliographic metadata, depending on what is available.\nPreprint matching: We notify members who deposit preprints when we find an article that matches their preprint. They can add this to the metadata record. Matching is based on the article title and authors.\nExternal sources We use a small number of trusted, external organisations to supplement member-deposited metadata. This is useful in cases where members do not provide certain types of metadata, either because they don\u0026rsquo;t have the full information or their systems aren\u0026rsquo;t able to process and send it to us.\nWe currently have the following sources:\nRetraction Watch, a non-profit organisation that collects and curates retractions. Their database of retractions has been acquired by Crossref and made publicly available. Retractions from Retraction Watch are included in REST API works and the full database is available as a download in csv format. Licensing Almost all of the metadata we hold is reusable without restriction, with the exception of abstracts which are subject to publisher or author copyright. The majority of metadata is considered to be \u0026lsquo;facts\u0026rsquo; which are not copyrightable and are thus in the public domain (CC0). The agreement we have with our members permits us to distribute abstracts, but they retain the license under which they were published. We release any Crossref-generated data, including aggregations, as public domain material. In summary:\nData Licence Bibliographic metadata, including references Facts, not subject to copyright Crossref-generated data CC0 Open Funder Registry, Retraction Watch database CC0 Abstracts Copyright held by publisher or author Summary of services The following sections give an overview of our services. Use the links or navigation on the left for further details, examples, and full documentation.\nUser interfaces User interfaces are designed for real people to retrieve metadata in human-readable formats.\nService Description Participation reports See metadata completeness for a member. Metadata search A search bar for metadata. Simple text query Add DOIs to a set of references. APIs Interfaces for computers to retrieve metadata in a structured format. We provide APIs that return JSON and XML formats. We recommend the REST API for most users: it offers the most flexibility and features, and uses JSON format which is simpler to interpret than XML.\nService Format Description REST API JSON DOI lookup, filter, and query for metadata. XML API XML DOI lookup and query for metadata. Content negotiation Various DOI lookup across multiple DOI registrations agencies and various formats. OAI-PMH XML A widely used query format. Returns lists of DOIs or metadata records. OpenURL XML Resolve a DOI or retrieve its metadata in XML format using the OpenURL NISO standard. Bulk downloads We offer access to all of our metadata as bulk downloads for free. These are useful for high volume, complex research and analysis tasks that can\u0026rsquo;t be completed easily via an API.\nService Description Annual public data file Metadata for all Crossref content items in JSON format. Monthly snapshot Metadata for all Crossref content items in JSON and XML formats, available to Metadata Plus subscribers. Retraction Watch csv formatted metadata from Retraction Watch. Updated daily. Open funder registry DOI identifiers for funders. For members Some services are specifically to support members checking their deposited metadata.\nService Description Participation reports A visual summary of metadata completeness. Cited-by Access matches made to your content items. Deposit harvester Retrieve the details of recent deposits in XML format using an OAI-PMH request. GetResolvedRefs Retrieve reference matches made by Crossref in JSON format. ",
"headings": ["On this page","Access and authentication","Sources of metadata ","Metadata from members ","Enrichments by Crossref ","External sources ","Licensing ","Summary of services ","User interfaces ","APIs ","Bulk downloads ","For members "]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/authors/c%C3%A1tia-laranjeira/",
"title": "Cátia Laranjeira",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Authors",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/categories/identifiers/",
"title": "Identifiers",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Categories",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/integrating-grant-metadata-for-seamless-research-interconnectivity-at-fccnfct/",
"title": "Integrating grant metadata for seamless research interconnectivity at FCCN|FCT",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2025-10-15",
"lastmod_ts": 1760486400,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "Click here for the version in Portuguese\nWelcome back to our series of case studies of research funders using the Grant Linking System. In this interview, I talk with Cátia Laranjeira, PTCRIS Program Manager at FCCN|FCT, Portugal’s main public funding agency, about the agency’s approach to metadata, persistent identifiers, Open Science and Open Infrastructure. With a holistic approach to the management, production and access to information on science, FCCN|FCT\u0026rsquo;s decision to implement the Grant Linking System within their processes was not simply a technical upgrade, but a coordinated effort to continue building a strong culture of openness. With the mantra “register once, reuse always”, FCCN|FCT efforts to embrace open funding metadata was only logical.\n",
"content": "Click here for the version in Portuguese\nWelcome back to our series of case studies of research funders using the Grant Linking System. In this interview, I talk with Cátia Laranjeira, PTCRIS Program Manager at FCCN|FCT, Portugal’s main public funding agency, about the agency’s approach to metadata, persistent identifiers, Open Science and Open Infrastructure. With a holistic approach to the management, production and access to information on science, FCCN|FCT\u0026rsquo;s decision to implement the Grant Linking System within their processes was not simply a technical upgrade, but a coordinated effort to continue building a strong culture of openness. With the mantra “register once, reuse always”, FCCN|FCT efforts to embrace open funding metadata was only logical.\nCould you introduce your organisation? We are FCCN, the digital services of the FCT, the Foundation for Science and Technology, which is the main public funding agency in Portugal. FCT supports research and innovation in Portugal through multiple funding instruments targeting researchers, projects, institutions and international partnerships. FCCN is focused on providing digital services to the scientific and academic community in Portugal.\nI am the manager of a program called PTCRIS, part of the FCCN, within the ‘Scientific Knowledge’ pillar of the unit. PTCRIS is a broad program, whose main goal is to fulfill the mantra ‘register once, reuse always’. We aim to develop an integrated ecosystem of scientific information, so all the projects we run have this main goal and that’s what we work towards. We develop infrastructure and added-value services, such as the scientific curriculum vitae management platform and an indicator system that exposes information of all the funding that supports research and innovation in Portugal.\nWhat motivated you to join Crossref? We had already adopted ORCID and we also developed a national PID, connected to the citizen card additional to ORCIDs. In 2015 we adopted the ISNI and we also had DOIs for research outputs. So we were clearly missing one piece, which was metadata for funding. At the same time we started developing a national infrastructure on science and technology funding, to have an aggregated and holistic view of the funding that is distributed in Portugal.\nBefore that the information was scattered across different databases and websites from many different funders, so we organised and aggregated this information into a platform called SciPROJ, which brings together all the information on scientific funding in one place, with quick and flexible access. But we didn’t have persistent identifiers for grants, and this was at the same time that Crossref started to build the Grant Linking System, so we were actually one of the first organisations to join, and in 2023 we had a pilot, where we registered 6000 grants, and we have been registering funding metadata ever since.\nCan you tell us about your experience using the Grant Linking System? The beginning of the pilot was the most critical stage of the process; some effort was needed to map our data models to the Crossref grant metadata schema. FCCN wasn’t in a bad position to do this since we already had all that information in a registry and it was well organised, we just had to map them to make sure that the information we had could be shared following the Crossref metadata schema and best practices. It has been two years since the pilot, which puts us in phase 2 of the implementation of the system. During the pilot we concentrated on registering both historical and current grants\u0026rsquo; metadata, in the current phase, we are focusing on current grants’ metadata.\nWhat do you find useful about registering grant metadata with Crossref? Although this is the very beginning of this journey, we envision a world where we have the ability to link grants to any other object and entity that comprises the ecosystem: people that execute that funding, projects, institutions, outputs. Outputs are something particularly important to us, like for many other funders, because we want to be able to monitor the impact of our funding and that is something that is always at the back of our mind.\nWe are actually developing more and more services that aim to show how these links can be very useful to retrieve information from the system. For example, we are developing an indicator system that is focusing on the funding but also on the outputs and the links between the two. We are also monitoring OA trends, to see how FCT funding is contributing to Open Science initiatives.\nAdditionally, our OA policy was recently launched but we currently don’t have any system that allows us to track policy compliance. We are working towards that, but to achieve this it is absolutely fundamental that grants are linked to the outputs through metadata.\nWhat are your hopes for the GLS and greater transparency in funding metadata in general? The interconnectivity and interoperability of entities and objects, which is something that the field of scientific information management has always wanted to do, but that it’s very difficult to do. There have been attempts in the past to achieve this using information from the acknowledgement sections of publications, but this is fairly inefficient and there needs to be more structure to it. A critical piece of this puzzle would be to influence publishers, manuscript submission platforms to facilitate the systematic sharing of grant IDs and grant metadata by design. I think this is something that is still missing and that I would like to see happening soon.\nHas anything surprised you while implementing the Grant Linking System? Something that we have seen that was surprising was that researchers, who in general are not that concerned about PIDs, when it came to grant IDs, they would ask us proactively what the Crossref grant ID for their award was! It was very refreshing to see that we didn’t need to do any advertising to socialize Crossref grant IDs among our grant holders. I think that tells you about the high level of awareness there is within our community of the importance of the Crossref grant ID, using it and putting it in the acknowledgment section of their publications.\nBased on your experience, what would be your advice for colleagues from other research funders? I would say go for it! The more the merrier! This is like any other similar information system – it only works if there are enough people using it, registering grants metadata that facilitate the links between objects.\nIt is a very easy process to get into. Once you map the metadata schema to your own data it’s not a technically difficult thing to do. For us it’s an automated process that runs very smoothly, from grant registration to communicating this information to grant holders. We can see this in action in this example: the grantee published an article that acknowledges their funding through Crossref’s grants IDs or funding received being acknowledged in the website of a Research Center.\nIf you could change something about the GLS or how the grant metadata you register is used, what would it be? I would love to have access to a visualization of grants’ metadata, how many outputs are linked to, and how they relate to other objects and entities. That would really give us a clearer understanding of the impact that our funding is having. We’d also love to see better integration between Crossref and ORCID for grants—just like it works for publications. Ideally, when a grant is registered and linked to a researcher, they’d be notified and could easily add it to their ORCID record. This would allow the information to flow seamlessly into their national CV via PTCRISsync, ensuring consistency and reducing manual work.\nWe are grateful to Cátia Laranjeira and FCT|FCCN for sharing their perspective and long-standing experience in this space. Their experience highlights the role that funding metadata plays in an interconnected and complete research and funding ecosystem.\nVersion in Portuguese Translation by Edilson Damasio\nIntegração de metadados de financiamento pela FCCN|FCT para reforçar a interoperabilidade da informação sobre a atividade científica Bem-vindo(a) de volta à nossa série de estudos de caso sobre instituições financiadoras de investigação que utilizam o Grant Linking System. Nesta entrevista, conversamos com Cátia Laranjeira, gestora do programa PTCRIS na FCCN|FCT, a principal agência pública de financiamento à ciência em Portugal, sobre a abordagem da instituição aos metadados, identificadores persistentes, Ciência Aberta e Infraestruturas Abertas.\nCom uma abordagem holística à gestão, produção e acesso à informação científica, a decisão da FCCN|FCT de integrar o Grant Linking System nos seus processos não representou apenas uma evolução técnica, mas sim um esforço coordenado para consolidar uma forte cultura de abertura. Sob o lema “registar uma vez, reutilizar sempre”, a adoção de metadados abertos de financiamento pela FCCN|FCT foi um passo natural e coerente com essa visão.\nPoderia apresentar a sua organização? A FCCN é a unidade de serviços digitais da FCT — Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia, a principal agência pública de financiamento à ciência em Portugal. A FCT apoia a investigação e a inovação através de diversos instrumentos de financiamento dirigidos a investigadores, projetos, instituições e parcerias internacionais. A FCCN dedica-se a disponibilizar serviços digitais à comunidade científica e académica portuguesa.\nNa FCCN|FCT, sou gestora do PTCRIS, um programa integrado no pilar do Conhecimento Científico. O PTCRIS é um programa abrangente que tem como objetivo central concretizar o princípio “registar uma vez, reutilizar sempre”. Trabalhamos para desenvolver um ecossistema integrado de informação científica, e todos os projetos que conduzimos convergem nesse propósito. Desenvolvemos infraestruturas e serviços de valor acrescentado, como a plataforma de gestão do currículo científico CIÊNCIAVITAE e um sistema de indicadores que disponibiliza informação sobre todos os financiamentos que apoiam a investigação e a inovação em Portugal.\nO que motivou a adesão à Crossref? A FCCN tinha já adotado o ORCID e desenvolvido um identificador nacional persistente (PID), ligado ao cartão de cidadão, como complemento aos ORCIDs. Em 2015, adotámos o ISNI e também tínhamos DOIs para a produção científica. Ficava claramente em falta um elemento: os metadados de financiamento.\nAo mesmo tempo, iniciámos o desenvolvimento de uma infraestrutura nacional de financiamentos de ciência e tecnologia, com o objetivo de ter uma visão agregada e holística do financiamento que suporta a investigação e inovação em Portugal.\nAntes disso, a informação estava dispersa por diferentes bases de dados e websites de múltiplos financiadores. Organizámos e agregámos esta informação numa plataforma chamada SciPROJ, que reúne toda a informação sobre financiamentos científicos num único local, com acesso rápido e flexível. No entanto, ainda não existiam identificadores persistentes para os financiamentos, coincidindo com o momento em que a Crossref começou a desenvolver o Grant Linking System. Fomos, assim, uma das primeiras organizações a aderir. Em 2023, realizámos um piloto com 6.000 financiamentos registados, e desde então temos vindo a registar continuamente os metadados de financiamento.\nPode falar-nos sobre a sua experiência com o Grant Linking System? A FCCN iniciou a utilização do Grant Linking System com um piloto, que constituiu a fase mais crítica do processo. Foi necessário algum esforço para mapear os nossos modelos de dados para o esquema de metadados de financiamentos da Crossref. A FCCN estava, no entanto, bem posicionada para isso, uma vez que já dispunha de toda a informação num registo organizado; o passo necessário foi apenas assegurar que esta informação pudesse ser partilhada de acordo com o esquema de metadados da Crossref e as melhores práticas.\nJá passaram dois anos desde o piloto, o que nos coloca na fase 2 de implementação do sistema. Durante o piloto, focámo-nos no registo de metadados de financiamentos históricos e atuais; na fase atual, estamos focados no registo de metadados de financiamentos atuais.\nO que considera útil no registo de metadados de financiamento na Crossref? Embora este seja ainda o início deste percurso, a FCCN idealiza um ecossistema em que seja possível ligar financiamentos a qualquer outro objeto ou entidade do sistema científico — projetos, pessoas que executam esses financiamentos, instituições onde são executados e produções científicas que dele resultam. Estes últimos são particularmente importantes para nós, como para muitos outros financiadores, pois queremos monitorizar o impacto do financiamento — uma preocupação que está sempre presente no nosso trabalho.\nEstamos, de facto, a desenvolver serviços que demonstram o valor dessas ligações para a recuperação de informação no sistema. Um exemplo é o sistema de indicadores em desenvolvimento, que se centra nos financiamentos, nas produções científicas e nas relações entre ambos. Estamos também a acompanhar as tendências de Ciência Aberta, para perceber de que forma o financiamento da FCT está a contribuir para as iniciativas de Open Science.\nAlém disso, a política de Acesso Aberto da FCT foi recentemente lançada, mas ainda não dispomos de um sistema que permita monitorizar a conformidade com essa política. Estamos a trabalhar nesse sentido, mas para o concretizar é absolutamente essencial que consigamos associar inequivocamente os financiamentos às produções científicas através de metadados.\nQuais são as suas expectativas para o GLS e para uma maior transparência dos metadados de financiamento em geral? A interconectividade e interoperabilidade entre entidades e objetos é algo que a área da gestão de informação científica sempre procurou alcançar — embora seja um objetivo difícil de concretizar. No passado, houve várias tentativas nesse sentido, recorrendo à informação presente nas secções de agradecimentos das publicações, mas esse método revelou-se pouco eficiente e carece de uma estrutura mais sistemática.\nUma peça essencial deste puzzle seria influenciar as editoras e as plataformas de submissão de manuscritos a facilitarem a partilha sistemática de identificadores e metadados de financiamento. Este é um elemento que ainda falta concretizar, mas que gostaríamos de ver implementado em breve.\nAlgo o surpreendeu durante a implementação do Grant Linking System? Algo que nos surpreendeu durante a implementação do Grant Linking System foi a reação dos investigadores. Normalmente, os investigadores não demonstram grande preocupação com identificadores persistentes (PIDs), mas, neste caso, começaram a procurar ativamente o identificador Crossref do seu financiamento! Foi muito positivo perceber que não foi necessário fazer qualquer esforço de divulgação para promover o uso dos Grant IDs da Crossref entre os beneficiários dos financiamentos. Isso mostra o nível de consciência existente na comunidade científica sobre a importância destes identificadores — usá-los e incluí-los na secção de agradecimentos das publicações.\nCom base na sua experiência, qual seria o seu conselho para colegas de outros financiadores de investigação? Com base na nossa experiência, o conselho para outros financiadores seria simples: avancem! Quanto mais, melhor! Este tipo de sistema de informação só é verdadeiramente eficaz quando há muitas entidades a utilizá-lo, a registar metadados de financiamento e a criar ligações entre objetos.\nÉ também um processo simples de implementar. Uma vez feito o mapeamento entre o esquema de metadados e os dados internos da instituição, não há grandes desafios técnicos. No nosso caso, o processo é totalmente automatizado e flui de forma eficiente, desde o registo do financiamento até à comunicação dessa informação aos beneficiários. É possível ver isso em prática em vários exemplos — desde artigos que reconhecem o financiamento através dos Grant IDs da Crossref até ao reconhecimento do apoio financeiro nos sites dos centros de investigação.\n​​Se pudesse alterar algo no GLS ou na forma como os metadados dos subsídios que regista são utilizados, o que seria? Se pudéssemos mudar algo no Grant Linking System ou na forma como os metadados de financiamento são utilizados, gostaríamos de ter acesso a uma visualização interativa que mostrasse quantas produções científicas estão ligadas a cada financiamento e como esses se relacionam com outras entidades e objetos. Isso permitiria compreender de forma muito mais clara o impacto real dos financiamentos.\nGostaríamos também de ver uma melhor integração entre a Crossref e o ORCID no que respeita aos financiamentos — tal como já acontece com as publicações. Idealmente, quando um financiamento fosse registado e associado a um investigador, este seria notificado e poderia adicioná-lo facilmente ao seu registo ORCID. Assim, a informação fluiria automaticamente para o currículo nacional via PTCRISsync, garantindo consistência e reduzindo o trabalho manual.\nAgradecemos à Cátia Laranjeira e à FCT|FCCN por partilharem a sua perspetiva e longa experiência neste domínio. A sua experiência destaca o papel que os metadados de financiamento desempenham num ecossistema de investigação e financiamento interligado e completo.\n",
"headings": ["Could you introduce your organisation?","What motivated you to join Crossref?","Can you tell us about your experience using the Grant Linking System?","What do you find useful about registering grant metadata with Crossref?","What are your hopes for the GLS and greater transparency in funding metadata in general?","Has anything surprised you while implementing the Grant Linking System?","Based on your experience, what would be your advice for colleagues from other research funders?","If you could change something about the GLS or how the grant metadata you register is used, what would it be?","Version in Portuguese","Integração de metadados de financiamento pela FCCN|FCT para reforçar a interoperabilidade da informação sobre a atividade científica","Poderia apresentar a sua organização?","O que motivou a adesão à Crossref?","Pode falar-nos sobre a sua experiência com o Grant Linking System?","O que considera útil no registo de metadados de financiamento na Crossref?","Quais são as suas expectativas para o GLS e para uma maior transparência dos metadados de financiamento em geral?","Algo o surpreendeu durante a implementação do Grant Linking System?","Com base na sua experiência, qual seria o seu conselho para colegas de outros financiadores de investigação?","​​Se pudesse alterar algo no GLS ou na forma como os metadados dos subsídios que regista são utilizados, o que seria?"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/enhancing-repository-integration-with-crossref/",
"title": "Enhancing repository integration with Crossref",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2025-10-13",
"lastmod_ts": 1760313600,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "Repositories are home to a wide range of scholarly content; they often archive theses, dissertations, preprints, datasets, and other valuable outputs. These records are an important part of the research ecosystem and should be connected to the broader scholarly record. But to truly serve their purpose, repository records need to be connected to each other, to the broader research ecosystem, and to the people behind the research. Metadata is what makes that possible. Enhancing metadata is a way to tell a fuller, more accurate story of research. It helps surface relationships between works, people, funders, and institutions, and allows us as a community to build and use a more connected, more useful network of knowledge - what Crossref calls the ‘Research Nexus’.\n",
"content": "Repositories are home to a wide range of scholarly content; they often archive theses, dissertations, preprints, datasets, and other valuable outputs. These records are an important part of the research ecosystem and should be connected to the broader scholarly record. But to truly serve their purpose, repository records need to be connected to each other, to the broader research ecosystem, and to the people behind the research. Metadata is what makes that possible. Enhancing metadata is a way to tell a fuller, more accurate story of research. It helps surface relationships between works, people, funders, and institutions, and allows us as a community to build and use a more connected, more useful network of knowledge - what Crossref calls the ‘Research Nexus’.\nThe challenge many repositories face is that metadata can be incomplete, inconsistent, or disconnected. Think of references without DOIs, authors without ORCID iDs, or research outputs that aren\u0026rsquo;t linked to funding. To address this, Crossref provides a range of services that repositories can use to improve the quality and interoperability of their metadata. Our REST API, which is openly and publicly accessible, allows repositories to retrieve structured metadata, such as DOIs, references, abstracts, contributors, ORCID iDs, and funder information, that can be used to enrich and update their local records. For repository members, with the Cited-by service and reference linking, repositories can also show how works are being cited and interconnect related content. The Grant Linking System (GLS) enables the clear indication of which research outputs are linked to specific grants, and funding bodies themselves are connected using Open Funder Registry and ROR, adding another layer of context. With Crossmark, repositories can flag updates, corrections, or retractions to ensure transparency and trust in the scholarly content they host.\nEnriching repository metadata using Crossref is a practical and empowering step toward making your records more discoverable, complete, and connected. The process is simple, and you don’t need to be a developer to get started. Repositories can query the Crossref REST API using a DOI or basic metadata like a title or author name, and receive structured, reliable information. This can include full author lists, ORCID iDs, reference lists, funding data, and licensing terms. You can then match and merge this data into your repository records. Adding Crossref DOIs to your metadata enables persistent linking, helping users trace research outputs back to their stewards. It also helps create rich relationships between articles, datasets, software, grants, and other research objects. All of this supports the FAIR principles and contributes to a more connected and reusable scholarly record. And because Crossref’s infrastructure is open, any repository can access and use this metadata to improve the quality, visibility, and long-term value of their collections.\nSteps to enrich repository metadata with Crossref: Query the REST API using DOIs or basic metadata (visit our API learning hub to learn how to use the Crossref API) Retrieve structured metadata like authors, ORCID iDs, funders, affiliations, ROR IDs, licenses, grants, and references Map and merge with your local records Display persistent links to all kinds of research objects using Crossref DOIs Support FAIR by including open, structured, and complete metadata Across the repository community, several institutions are already integrating Crossref metadata in meaningful ways to enrich their records and improve discoverability. DSpace users can enrich their deposits by using the platform’s “Live Import” feature, which allows them to pull in Crossref metadata, such as titles, authors, and DOIs, directly into items during the submission process. A deeper integration between DSpace and Crossref is currently in development. HAL in France uses the Crossref API to complete and standardise references, making its content more consistent and connected (hal.archives-ouvertes.fr). SciELO, a key open access platform in Latin America, leverages Crossref DOI links and citation metadata to strengthen the visibility of its journals (scielo.org). In Canada, the University of Saskatchewan’s eCommons repository queries the Crossref API to enhance metadata accuracy and link records to the broader scholarly graph (ecommons.usask.ca). The Apollo repository at the University of Cambridge uses Crossref to connect theses and articles to their published versions, creating a clearer picture of research outcomes (repository.cam.ac.uk). Zenodo, hosted by CERN, draws on Crossref metadata to link deposited datasets and software with related publications, supporting transparency and reuse (zenodo.org).\nThese examples show how even modest integrations with Crossref can lead to substantial gains in metadata quality, interoperability, and global discoverability. Altogether, these activities and organisations are enhancing the Research Nexus, enriching a scholarly graph for the benefit of all.\nWant to learn more? You can explore the presentation slides (PDF) from Open Repositories 2025, which cover the Crossref API and its capabilities, how repositories can use it to query and enrich metadata, the benefits for repository managers, researchers, and funders, as well as recent updates to our metadata schema.\n",
"headings": ["Steps to enrich repository metadata with Crossref:"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/categories/interoperability/",
"title": "Interoperability",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Categories",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/categories/funding/",
"title": "Funding",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Categories",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/piecing-together-the-research-nexus-uncovering-relationships-with-open-funding-metadata/",
"title": "Piecing together the Research Nexus: uncovering relationships with open funding metadata",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2025-10-01",
"lastmod_ts": 1759276800,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "The Crossref Grant Linking System (GLS) has been facilitating the registration, sharing and re-use of open funding metadata for six years now, and we have reached some important milestones recently! What started as an interest in identifying funders through the Open Funder Registry evolved to a more nuanced and comprehensive way to share and re-use open funding data systematically. That’s how, in collaboration with the funding community, the Crossref Grant Linking System was developed. Open funding metadata is fundamental for the transparency and integrity of the research endeavour, so we are happy to see them included in the Research Nexus.\n",
"content": "The Crossref Grant Linking System (GLS) has been facilitating the registration, sharing and re-use of open funding metadata for six years now, and we have reached some important milestones recently! What started as an interest in identifying funders through the Open Funder Registry evolved to a more nuanced and comprehensive way to share and re-use open funding data systematically. That’s how, in collaboration with the funding community, the Crossref Grant Linking System was developed. Open funding metadata is fundamental for the transparency and integrity of the research endeavour, so we are happy to see them included in the Research Nexus.\nAs emphasised recently by Hans de Jonge from NWO, funding metadata’s value is in the transparency of the relationships it enables. The system is powered by the collective action of the research community– including research funders – that registers open metadata with Crossref, making these relationships possible. With close to 180,000 grant records in our corpus we wanted to know how far they reach and what story they tell.\nIn March 2022, we developed an approach for linking grants to research outputs and analysed how many such relationships could be established. Now we’re able to present the latest dataset that contains relationships between grants and research outputs, both those deposited by Crossref members and discovered by an automated matching strategy. It includes data deposited up to the end of July 2025.\nThis work is part of our ongoing Metadata Matching project.\nWhat exactly is in this new open dataset of grant\u0026lt;\u0026gt;output relationships? The dataset contains 250,163 total funding relationships between grants and research outputs. We welcomed a number of funders, such as the Dutch Research Council and Fonds de Recherche du Quebec, which together registered almost 27,000 grants in the past year. It’s clear that the more grant metadata is registered the more funding relationships we can uncover. The percentage of relationships that are registered explicitly by Crossref members providing grants IDs in funding information has grown from less than 0.1% in 2023 to 1% (modest numbers but amazing growth!). The methodology We created a dataset of relationships between grants and research outputs by analysing their metadata in several ways. A relationship is included in the dataset if at least one of the following conditions is met:\nA relationship was explicitly deposited by a Crossref member through a finances or isFinancedBy relationship: 488 (0.2%) relationships The research output contains the grant DOI within the award number in the funding metadata: 2,003 (0.8%) relationships The award numbers in the grant and the research output are similar, and the associated funding organisations are either the same, or one is the sub-organisation of the other: 247,672 (99%) relationships The dataset includes data deposited until the end of July 2025 and contains 250,163 total relationships.\nThe code used to generate the dataset is available in our GitLab repository.\nThe results As you can see in the graph below, the number of relationships grant-research output continues to grow as the number of grants records Crossref members register with us increases.\nFigure 1: Cumulative totals of grants, linked grants, research outputs, and grant–research output relationships from 2019 to 2025. Stepwise increases correspond to the addition of major funder datasets, including Wellcome (2020), OSTI (2021), JST (2022), the European Union (2022), the Austrian Science Fund (2023), and the Fonds de recherche du Québec (2025).\nLooking at the numbers broken down by grant registrants we can see that the more grants registered the more relationships can be uncovered. The table below shows funders who have at least 1,000 total grants registered and for whom at least 10% of their registered grants are linked to research outputs, showing the number of relationships, grants, linked grants and linked research outputs (sorted by the percentage of linked grants), and compared with the data from the 2023 analysis (where available) to see how the uptake of open funding metadata is evolving.\nFunder Relationships Linked research outputs Grants Number of linked grants Percentage of linked grants 2023 2025 2023 2025 2023 2025 2023 2025 2023 2025 European Union 86,979 128,572 78,576 114,491 39,703 53,473 14,860 21,402 37.4% 40% Japan Science and Technology Agency 19,549 30,728 16,265 25,003 9,923 11,866 2,609 3,900 26.3% 32.9% Wellcome 34,254 45,596 25,720 33,783 17,547 19,929 5,238 6,206 29.9% 31.1% American Cancer Society 50 604 49 586 380 1,162 34 277 8.9% 23.8% American Heart Association (AHA) 40 1,040 38 935 598 2,764 30 621 5% 22.5% Fundacao para a Ciencia e a Tecnologia 0 27,915 0 15,681 5 17,422 0 3,793 – 21.8% Austrian Science Fund (FWF) – 10,387 – 7,459 – 19,576 – 2,712 – 13.9% Table 1: Comparison between data from 2023-07-31 and 2025-07-31 of a number of Crossref members registering grants. It shows the number of relationships, grants, linked grants and linked research outputs, sorted by the percentage of linked grants.\nWe encourage funders to join as members once they have determined the means of effective implementation of the GLS within their processes. By further analysing metadata of matched outputs, funders have the opportunity to monitor compliance with their policies and learn more about the impact of their programs.\nFollowing through funders’ Open Science commitments The relationships showcased above and in the recent analysis are powered by open funding metadata. Open funding metadata plays a central role in building a transparent, accountable and high integrity research environment by making visible the connections between the funding, grantees, research outputs, and their impact. Funders’ openness mandates and Open Science commitments emphasize the importance of traceability in the research process, so ensuring that the support given-whether financial or otherwise-can be systematically recorded and shared is instrumental. Openness is also part of the strategic plans of institutions such as the International Science Council, who has explicitly called for greater transparency in funding as a way to strengthen trust in science and counter misinformation. At the same time, initiatives such as the Barcelona Declaration on Open Research Information underscores the benefits of open, reusable funding metadata for monitoring, evaluation and assessment of research and researchers.\nCrossref’s Grant Linking System offers funders’ a way to demonstrate a commitment to openness, modeling the standards they expect of the research community they support, while creating a more robust, trustworthy and collaborative research ecosystem.\nEconomy of scale: unlocking relationships with Crossref Crossref houses millions of records, from the ubiquitous research articles and preprints, to books, peer review records, technical reports, datasets – you name it. Our members not only register, but also regularly update their metadata as new or corrected information becomes available. Our matching workflows allow us to make visible the hidden relationships and complete and improve the metadata records by adding new and reciprocal assertions.\nThis analysis shows the unique value of registering funding metadata with Crossref and adding an essential piece to the Research Nexus puzzle. The relationship metadata allows the funding that underpins the research process to be connected, and contextualise scattered data points, acting as an anchor that links publications, people, and other research outputs. This is made possible by the impressive number of records continuously being registered by more than 23,000 member organisations, and by the increasing availability of funding information in the system with more research funders joining in and registering their grant metadata with us.\nNext steps As we welcome more and more funders to the GLS, we, collectively, continue to complete the Research Nexus, record by record, field by field. The more awards we have in our corpus the more relationships we’ll uncover, so we’ll keep making these analyses periodically to make sure we don’t miss them.\nBut it is not all on us. We are working towards a vision where Crossref Grant IDs are business as usual – where funders register their awards, grantees are aware of them and share them with publishers, and those publishers share them back with us when registering their content – closing the loop organically. We continue working on making this easier. In the upcoming works schema update a specific Crossref Grant ID field will be added in the funding information, alongside Award ID (for an internal identifier).\nCrucially, as the momentum of adoption among funders increases, and thousands of Crossref Grant IDs are available in the system, we are working with all members to raise their attention to the importance and desirability of funding metadata, so inclusion of that information in metadata of all works increases and consequently, the percentage of relationships asserted by Crossref members can grow.\nThis matching analysis is just one example of what we do to enrich metadata to highlight relationships among works, individuals, institutions, and actions. Earlier this year, we launched the Metadata Matching project, which is a major effort to rebuild our matching workflows using modern software development and data science practices. As part of the project, we plan to expose additional matched relationships between grants and research outputs in our REST API, alongside those deposited by our members. We’ll keep you updated as we go along!\nRead more about metadata matching in the blog series:\nMetadata matching 101: what is it and why do we need it? The anatomy of metadata matching The myth of perfect metadata matching How good is your matching? Metadata matching: beyond correctness ",
"headings": ["What exactly is in this new open dataset of grant\u0026lt;\u0026gt;output relationships?","The methodology ","The results","Following through funders’ Open Science commitments","Economy of scale: unlocking relationships with Crossref","Next steps"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/innovation-in-scientific-publishing-and-its-implications-for-crossref-doi-registration-practices-request-for-input/",
"title": "Innovation in scientific publishing and its implications for Crossref DOI registration practices - Request for input",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2025-09-25",
"lastmod_ts": 1758758400,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "Lots of exciting innovations are being made in scientific publishing, often raising fundamental questions about established publishing practices. In this guest post, Ludo Waltman and André Brasil discuss the recently launched MetaROR publish-review-curate platform and the questions it raises about good practices for Crossref DOI registration in this emerging landscape.\n",
"content": "Lots of exciting innovations are being made in scientific publishing, often raising fundamental questions about established publishing practices. In this guest post, Ludo Waltman and André Brasil discuss the recently launched MetaROR publish-review-curate platform and the questions it raises about good practices for Crossref DOI registration in this emerging landscape.\nDigital Object Identifiers (DOIs) are unique identifiers commonly assigned to research outputs such as journal articles, preprints, peer review reports, and datasets. The DOI of a research output allows the output to be identified online in a persistent way, even when the underlying publishing infrastructure changes (e.g., a journal moving from one publisher to another).\nThere are several DOI registration agencies. Most of the larger scientific publishers work with Crossref, and so do many preprint servers, and therefore our focus in this post is on Crossref. Crossref also keeps track of metadata associated with research outputs, such as the title, authors, and publication date of an output, and it makes this metadata openly available via APIs for all kinds of services to ingest and reuse. Because indexing, discovery, and evaluation tools rely heavily on this metadata, content registration practices and metadata design choices can have major effects on the visibility and findability of research outputs and on analytics used to monitor and assess research outputs and their contributors.\nFor the most common types of research outputs, such as journal articles and preprints, a broad consensus has emerged over the past decades on good practices for DOI registration. Such consensus means that articles are assigned the record type ‘article’ in their Crossref metadata. Likewise, many preprint servers register DOIs for preprints at Crossref, with the record type ‘preprint’ in the metadata. (The arXiv preprint server is an exception; it registers DOIs for preprints with DataCite rather than Crossref.)\nFor innovative new publication platforms, however, good practices for DOI registration are less clear. The approaches to scientific publishing offered by these platforms often do not fit neatly into established ways of working. For instance, for some of these platforms, the traditional distinction between peer-reviewed articles published in scientific journals and non-peer-reviewed articles posted on preprint servers is no longer applicable. This raises fundamental questions about suitable DOI registration practices for new approaches to scientific publishing.\nMetaROR The MetaROR (MetaResearch Open Review) platform, launched in November 2024 by the Research on Research Institute (RoRI) and the Association for Interdisciplinary Meta-Research and Open Science (AIMOS), offers an example of the challenge of developing appropriate DOI registration practices for new publishing models.\nInspired by similar initiatives such as eLife and others, MetaROR adopts the so-called publish-review-curate model. Authors first publish their article on a preprint server and then submit it to MetaROR. MetaROR then organizes an open peer review process for the article. Review reports are published on the MetaROR platform, along with a copy of the preprinted article and an editorial assessment. Rather than a simple binary decision (accept vs. reject), an editorial assessment is a short one-paragraph statement summarizing the strengths and weaknesses of an article. Each review report and each editorial assessment has its own DOI registered at Crossref. In this way, review reports are treated as first-class research outputs that can, for instance, be indexed in scientific literature databases and can be cited in other research outputs.\nFor an article submitted to MetaROR, the publication of the review reports, the editorial assessment, and a copy of the article itself concludes MetaROR’s publish-review-curate process. The authors of the article may revise their work in light of the feedback received, and MetaROR may review the revised article. However, there is no requirement that revisions must be made. The primary aim of the review reports and the editorial assessment published on the MetaROR platform is to offer context for readers of the article, helping readers understand the strengths and weaknesses of the article.\nCrossref DOI registration Registration of DOIs for open peer review reports is increasingly common. By registering Crossref DOIs for review reports and editorial assessments, MetaROR enables reviewers and editors to be recognized for their contributions. But what about recognition for authors?\nA crucial element in MetaROR’s philosophy is that authors of articles peer-reviewed by MetaROR deserve to be recognized in a similar way as authors of articles published in traditional peer-reviewed journals. One way to promote appropriate recognition for authors of articles peer-reviewed by MetaROR is to ensure that articles on the MetaROR platform, just like articles in peer-reviewed journals, have their own DOI. While this may seem straightforward to arrange, it actually raises two non-trivial questions about good practices for Crossref DOI registration:\nFor each article on the MetaROR platform, there is a corresponding article on a preprint server. Is it acceptable to have two Crossref DOIs, one registered by the preprint server and one registered by the MetaROR platform, for essentially the same article? If Crossref DOIs are registered for articles on the MetaROR platform, should the articles be assigned the type ‘article’ or the type ‘preprint’ in their Crossref metadata, or something else entirely? On the first question, it could be argued that having two Crossref DOIs for the same article is problematic and that MetaROR, therefore, should not register DOIs for articles on its platform. Alternatively, one could argue that an article on the MetaROR platform differs in a meaningful way from the corresponding article on a preprint server, since the article on the MetaROR platform has been enriched with peer review reports and an editorial assessment, similar to the way an article in a peer-reviewed journal may be seen as an enriched version of the corresponding article on a preprint server. This line of reasoning would justify registering DOIs for articles on the MetaROR platform.\nOn the second question, the argument could be made that articles on the MetaROR platform should be assigned the type ‘preprint’ in their Crossref metadata, since the type ‘article’ is intended for articles in journals and MetaROR does not consider itself to be a journal (in fact, MetaROR works with partner journals to enable articles peer-reviewed by MetaROR to be published in journals) and does not certify articles in the way journals do (i.e., MetaROR does not make accept/reject decisions). On the other hand, one could argue that articles on the MetaROR platform should be assigned the type ‘article’, since the peer-reviewed nature of articles in journals is typically seen as the key factor distinguishing these articles from articles on preprint servers. Articles on the MetaROR platform have been peer-reviewed, and in that sense, they resemble articles in journals. A third line of reasoning could be that neither the ‘preprint’ nor the ‘article’ type is fully appropriate for articles on the MetaROR platform and, consequently, that there is a need for a new Crossref record type.\nWhat is your take? The MetaROR team, in consultation with Crossref, will need to decide how to deal with the two questions discussed in this blog post. After some preliminary conversations between the MetaROR team and Crossref, we decided to share these questions more widely to solicit input from the broader community. We invite you to share your thoughts on the two questions, either by posting a comment on this blog post or by reaching out to us on social media or by email. Community perspectives will help shape good practices not only for MetaROR but also for other publish-review-curate initiatives facing similar questions. We look forward to hearing from you!\nLudo Waltman and André Brasil are members of the editorial team of MetaROR. Ludo and André are grateful to Ginny Hendricks at Crossref for valuable discussions about the issues raised in this blog post.\n",
"headings": ["MetaROR","Crossref DOI registration","What is your take?"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/crossref-and-pkp-enter-new-partnership-phase-to-support-richer-and-more-inclusive-metadata/",
"title": "Crossref and PKP enter new partnership phase to support richer and more inclusive metadata",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2025-09-22",
"lastmod_ts": 1758499200,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref and the Public Knowledge Project (PKP) have been working closely together for many years, sharing resources and supporting our overlapping communities of organisations involved in communicating research. Now we’re delighted to share that we have agreed on a new set of objectives for our partnership, centred on further development of the tools that our shared community relies upon, as well as building capacity to enable richer metadata registration for organisations using the Open Journal Systems (OJS).\n",
"content": "Crossref and the Public Knowledge Project (PKP) have been working closely together for many years, sharing resources and supporting our overlapping communities of organisations involved in communicating research. Now we’re delighted to share that we have agreed on a new set of objectives for our partnership, centred on further development of the tools that our shared community relies upon, as well as building capacity to enable richer metadata registration for organisations using the Open Journal Systems (OJS).\nCrossref is working towards the vision of a rich and open network underpinning global scholarship, making relationships between works, people, institutions, and actions visible, thanks to the thread of metadata – the research nexus. This vision depends upon participation of research communication organisations coming from all parts of the world, disciplines, and languages. Working with PKP towards making tools for metadata registration more comprehensive, accessible, and easier to use is a big step towards supporting our community to participate in the research nexus.\nThe renewed partnership has three main goals:\nDevelopments to improve experience and support metadata registration workflows in OJS, bringing relevant functionalities together under the Crossref plug-in, and developing an OMP Crossref plug-in. Joint community engagement in support of transitioning OJS users to the future Long-Term Support (LTS) version of OJS, which will enable richer metadata registration. Creation of a PKP School self-paced training course for system administrators. Crossref and PKP have a rich history of collaboration, including previous investment in tools development in 2020, which resulted in some vital improvements to Crossref metadata management in OJS and a more streamlined experience for Crossref members on the platform, as well as many collaborative community events and training.\nWe know that thousands of Crossref members use OJS to register their metadata. Many are based in resource-constrained institutions, so the training provided by Crossref and PKP will be key to building their capacity to participate in the research nexus. With OJS 3.5 empowering organisations to register richer metadata, we look forward to opening up more opportunities for members to enhance their participation.\nAt PKP, we’re excited to deepen our longstanding collaboration with Crossref, supporting our global community in amplifying the visibility and impact of their research through streamlined integration for robust metadata management. By working together on both technological innovation and capacity-building initiatives, we anticipate even greater outcomes that will strengthen open scholarship throughout the duration of this partnership and well into the future.” – said Kevin Stranack, PKP Director of Operations.\n\u0026ndash; Kevin Stranack, PKP Director of Operations\nAbout Crossref Crossref runs an open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with their 23,000 members in 164 countries, Crossref drives metadata exchange and supports nearly 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.\nAbout PKP Public Knowledge Project (PKP) seeks to improve the scholarly and public quality, reach, and diversity of academic research through the research, development, implementation, and support of innovative open source software to support scholarly publishing and communication.\n",
"headings": ["About Crossref","About PKP"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/categories/pkp/",
"title": "PKP",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Categories",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/raising-the-standard-gigascience-press-on-metadata-and-discoverability/",
"title": "Raising the standard: GigaScience Press on metadata and discoverability",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2025-09-17",
"lastmod_ts": 1758067200,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "To mark Crossref’s 25th anniversary, we launched our first Metadata Awards to highlight members with the best metadata practices. GigaScience Press, based in Hong Kong, was the leader among small publishers, defined as organisations with less than USD 1 million in publishing revenue or expenses. We spoke with Scott Edmunds, Ph.D., Editor-in-Chief at GigaScience Press, about how discoverability drives their high metadata standards.\nWhat motivates your organisation/team to work towards high-quality metadata? What objectives does it support for your organisation? Our objective is to communicate science openly and collaboratively, without barriers, to solve problems in a data- and evidence-driven manner through Open Science publishing. High-quality metadata helps us address these objectives by improving the discoverability, transparency, and provenance of the work we publish. It is an integral part of the FAIR principles and UNESCO Open Science Recommendation, playing a role in increasing the accessibility of research for both humans and machines. As one of the authors of the FAIR principles paper and an advisor of the Make Data Count project, I’ve also personally been very conscious to practice what I preach.\n",
"content": "To mark Crossref’s 25th anniversary, we launched our first Metadata Awards to highlight members with the best metadata practices. GigaScience Press, based in Hong Kong, was the leader among small publishers, defined as organisations with less than USD 1 million in publishing revenue or expenses. We spoke with Scott Edmunds, Ph.D., Editor-in-Chief at GigaScience Press, about how discoverability drives their high metadata standards.\nWhat motivates your organisation/team to work towards high-quality metadata? What objectives does it support for your organisation? Our objective is to communicate science openly and collaboratively, without barriers, to solve problems in a data- and evidence-driven manner through Open Science publishing. High-quality metadata helps us address these objectives by improving the discoverability, transparency, and provenance of the work we publish. It is an integral part of the FAIR principles and UNESCO Open Science Recommendation, playing a role in increasing the accessibility of research for both humans and machines. As one of the authors of the FAIR principles paper and an advisor of the Make Data Count project, I’ve also personally been very conscious to practice what I preach.\nDo you have a strategy for complete metadata? Which elements did you prioritise? What workflows, tools, or collaborations helped you get there? We’ve been privileged to work with our technical partners at River Valley Technologies, and the novel XML-first publishing platform they have developed has made it particularly easy to integrate and collect persistent identifiers and other metadata, embedding it into the resulting rich-XML. As Open Access advocates, licensing and machine readability were early focuses when launching our journals. We ensured that we provided a text and data mining portal, allowing bulk downloads of our content to encourage reuse. Many specific metadata elements highlighted by the FAIR principles and UNESCO Open Science recommendations, and so these have also helped guide what should be prioritised. If there’s one specific tool to mention, we’ve been big fans of the Crossref participation reports, as this has helped highlight what is missing and what we need to improve upon.\nHow have you integrated these into your metadata processes? The participation reports, in particular, have been useful for this, and by regularly checking them, we’ve managed to spot when processes have broken, for example. When you’ve added new fields to the reports like ROR IDs (Research Organization Registry), this has also motivated us to prioritise integrating these, so having a curated list of metadata fields like this definitively helps users focus on what should be the most important. River Valley Technologies has been very responsive to this type of feedback, and being able to see the participation report data in real-time has helped drive them to fix and update our metadata. So I thank them for being so patient and quick to respond to our very demanding standards.\nWhat impact of good metadata can you see for your organisation? From an Editorial side, our technical partners at River Valley Technologies have found having this metadata information available very useful in the Research Integrity tools they have developed and integrated into our publication platform. Things like ORCID IDs, RORs, and other identifiers are very useful for tracking provenance and increasing trust.\nFrom a business side, putting the effort into collecting rich metadata has paid off in the long run by making it easier to integrate our publishing data into new platforms. Making it easier and quicker to integrate and track our data via OA Switchboard, for example. It also helps us more easily mirror and list our content in indexes like PMC, Scopus, Web of Science, and others.\nHave you encountered any challenges in curating or improving your metadata? One of the main metadata areas that has currently let us down, funding and registries, is because our publishing model is so affordable. The automated production processes from RVT\u0026rsquo;s novel publishing platform have allowed us to publish very cost-effectively (the APC of GigaByte is $535). We’ve also received sponsorship from the WHO to publish a series of public health papers, particularly supporting authors from the Global South who may not have sources of funding listed in these registries. Because of this, we’ve published numerous papers from independent researchers, students, and self-financed projects that may not have funding IDs or grant numbers. We’d like to push to get “unfunded” counted as a metadata field to address this.\nHave your efforts regarding metadata yielded tangible benefits for your community? Is this something your editors, authors, or readers are aware of and appreciate? If so, why? We’d like to think our authors find this useful, but we’ve not had any specific feedback on this. Our readers, both human and machine, should hopefully appreciate finding our work more easily, and from a purely selfish perspective, should get us higher access and citations. This is difficult to measure, but as evidence nerds, we have attempted to conduct RCTs examining this for Data Citations. One anecdote I can give is about the author who told us they pasted their paper into ChatGPT and asked it which was the best journal for their work, and it suggested our journal. I’d like to think that putting in this effort in making our papers more machine-readable and comprehensible pays off at times like this to make the discoverability and visibility of our journals greater.\nLooking ahead, how are you planning to build on your metadata quality? Are there new elements or practices you’re exploring? And what advice would you give to others just starting to strengthen their metadata? We still need to update older content with RORs, and improve it for the datasets linked to our papers. To do this, we’ve had interns working to improve our DataCite metadata.\nWe encourage others to think about metadata issues when setting up their workflows. While it may seem like additional work, it will be increasingly important to future-proof and get journals ready for our increasingly AI-centric age. And as we show here, we can more easily carry out important tasks like getting your content more quickly and widely indexed and disseminated.\nStrong metadata ties open science, integrity, and discoverability together. GigaScience Press shows how consistent identifiers, machine-readable formats, and continuous checks deliver real benefits. As discovery becomes more AI-assisted, the priority is clear: keep metadata complete, open, and usable.\nWhile it may seem like additional work, it will be increasingly important to future-proof and get journals ready for our increasingly AI-centric age.\n\u0026ndash; Scott Edmunds, GigaScience\nNow, a few words from Scott.\nMetadata Awards video - Gigascience ",
"headings": ["What motivates your organisation/team to work towards high-quality metadata? What objectives does it support for your organisation?","Do you have a strategy for complete metadata? Which elements did you prioritise? What workflows, tools, or collaborations helped you get there?","How have you integrated these into your metadata processes?","What impact of good metadata can you see for your organisation?","Have you encountered any challenges in curating or improving your metadata?","Have your efforts regarding metadata yielded tangible benefits for your community? Is this something your editors, authors, or readers are aware of and appreciate? If so, why?","Looking ahead, how are you planning to build on your metadata quality? Are there new elements or practices you’re exploring? And what advice would you give to others just starting to strengthen their metadata?"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/authors/scott-edmunds/",
"title": "Scott Edmunds",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Authors",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/2025-board-election/",
"title": "Meet the candidates and cast your vote in our 2025 Board elections",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2025-09-16",
"lastmod_ts": 1757980800,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "On behalf of the Nominating Committee, I’m pleased to share the slate of candidates for the 2025 board election.\nEach year we do an open call for board interest. This year, the Nominating Committee received 51 submissions from members worldwide to fill five open board seats.\nWe have four large member seats and one small member seat open for election in 2025. We maintain a balanced board of 8 large member seats and 8 small member seats. Size is determined based on the organization\u0026rsquo;s membership tier (small members fall in the $0-$1,650 tiers and large members in the $3,900 - $50,000 tiers).\n",
"content": "On behalf of the Nominating Committee, I’m pleased to share the slate of candidates for the 2025 board election.\nEach year we do an open call for board interest. This year, the Nominating Committee received 51 submissions from members worldwide to fill five open board seats.\nWe have four large member seats and one small member seat open for election in 2025. We maintain a balanced board of 8 large member seats and 8 small member seats. Size is determined based on the organization\u0026rsquo;s membership tier (small members fall in the $0-$1,650 tiers and large members in the $3,900 - $50,000 tiers).\nWe were pleased to see the diversity in candidates, with applicants from 19 countries. The committee was keen to prepare a diverse slate of organization types, individual skills and perspectives, and global representation.\nTier 1, Small member seats (electing one candidate) Rebecca Wambua, Distance, Open and e-Learning Practitioners\u0026rsquo; Association of Kenya Oscar Donde, Pan Africa Science Journal Nwachukwu Egbunike, Pan-Atlantic University Press Tier 2, Large member seats (electing four candidates) Damian Bird, CABI Rose L\u0026rsquo;Huillier, Elsevier John Sivo, IEEE Nick Lindsay, The MIT Press Anjalie Nawaratne, Springer Nature Please read the candidates\u0026rsquo; statements Every member has a vote If your organisation is a voting member in good standing as of September 5th, 2025, you are eligible to vote.\nThe voting contact for your organisation will receive a ballot from eBallot, a third party election platform. You should receive your ballot by Wednesday, September 17th, and you will have until 12:00 UTC on October 22nd to submit your ballot.\nThe election results will be announced at Crossref2025, our annual online meeting on October 22nd, 2025.\nSpecial thanks to the committee: James Phillpotts of Oxford University Press, Wendy Patterson of Beilstein Institut, Abiodun Falodun of University of Benin, Amanda Ward of Taylor \u0026amp; Francis, and Chaerul Umam of the National Library of Indonesia for the time they dedicated to reviewing the expressions of interest and participating in committee meetings.\nIf you have any questions about our election process, please contact me\nHappy voting!\n",
"headings": ["Tier 1, Small member seats (electing one candidate)","Tier 2, Large member seats (electing four candidates)","Please read the candidates\u0026rsquo; statements","Every member has a vote"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/a-second-look-at-crossrefs-carbon-footprint-the-2024-report/",
"title": "A second look at Crossref’s carbon footprint - the 2024 report",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2025-09-15",
"lastmod_ts": 1757894400,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "In 2022, we wrote a blog post “Rethinking staff travel, meetings, and events” outlining our new approach to staff travel, meetings, and events with the goal of not going back to ‘normal’ after the pandemic and said that in the future we would report on our efforts to balance online and virtual events, work life balance for staff, and track our carbon emissions. In December 2024, we wrote a blog post, “Summary of the environmental impact of Crossref,” that gave an overview of 2023 and provided the first report on our carbon emissions. Our report on 2023 only just made it into 2024, so we are happy to report on 2024 a little sooner in the year.\n",
"content": "In 2022, we wrote a blog post “Rethinking staff travel, meetings, and events” outlining our new approach to staff travel, meetings, and events with the goal of not going back to ‘normal’ after the pandemic and said that in the future we would report on our efforts to balance online and virtual events, work life balance for staff, and track our carbon emissions. In December 2024, we wrote a blog post, “Summary of the environmental impact of Crossref,” that gave an overview of 2023 and provided the first report on our carbon emissions. Our report on 2023 only just made it into 2024, so we are happy to report on 2024 a little sooner in the year.\nOn the positive side, there are a few things:\nOur spending on travel and meetings (a proxy for emissions) in 2024 was 56% of what it was in 2019, keeping below the target of not more than 60% of our 2019 spend We were better at tracking hotel nights in 2024 compared to 2023 We managed to balance in-person, regional, and online meetings to engage with our global community while still not having returned to the pre-pandemic “normal” In practice, our approach means thinking carefully about how to make the most of each trip. For example, when organising our Crossref Jakarta event, we travelled via Singapore and used the opportunity to meet with members there. Once in Jakarta, we combined our two-day event with an OJS workshop with colleagues from PKP, and another event with Universitas Indonesia. Similarly, when our colleague travelled by train to a conference in Amsterdam, they combined it with a day of visits to members in the area. These kinds of combinations reduce the need for separate trips and maximise the value of in-person travel.\nSome of the less positive things were:\nAs our membership continues to grow globally and we expand our staff, (which are both great things in themselves), our emissions have also increased. Not only do we have more staff, but some staff travelled more in 2024 than in 2023. We’ll keep a close eye on this to avoid ever-increasing travel. Taking a train instead of flying can take longer, and clashes with our desire for staff needing to be away from home as little time as possible. It is difficult to find reliable data for some calculations - for example, we have decided not to try to calculate the impact of our Zoom use because there is no reliable way to do this. We don’t have good options for offsetting our emissions, and it’s unclear whether we would want to do this even if they were available. There is also the issue of whether it is worth it, or possible, to collect certain data, or whether it would change what we do. An example is Zoom. The estimate for the emissions from Zoom meetings in 2024 was 100 kg (that’s kilograms, not tonnes), but the calculations were made using a tool from 2020 that made many assumptions and estimates. We have no way of verifying whether the tool we used is accurate, so we decided not to update our previous calculation. In any case, we aren’t going to ration or reduce our teleconferencing, since it’s an essential tool, and especially if we want to fly less, have fewer in-person meetings, and operate effectively as a distributed organisation in multiple countries with no offices.\nIn summary, our total reported carbon emissions increased 40% from 105 tCO2e in 2023 to 147 tCO2e in 2024 (see below for the details). The positive aspect of this is that the increase is partly due to our improved ability to track our travel and hotel stays. The more concerning side of this is that we are travelling more. This enables us to engage with our growing community. We are still thinking strategically about our travel and meetings, following the approach outlined in our 2022 blog post. However, we need to carefully consider air travel in 2026, as it is our largest source of emissions (93%).\nTotal travel and carbon spending Year Amount Percentage of 2019 Total carbon spent Total hotel nights covered 2019 actuals $585,482 100% did not record did not record 2020 actuals $91,700 16% did not record did not record 2021 actuals $19,066 3% did not record did not record 2022 actuals $74,416 13% did not record did not record 2023 actuals $305,737 52% 105 tCO2e did not record 2024 actuals $327,939 56% 147 tCO2e 415 2025 budget $417,767 (reforecast) 71% 68 tCO2e (YTD) 256 (YTD) 2026 budget $439,817 75% TBD TBD In 2024, we met the target of keeping our travel expenses below 60% of our 2019 level. In 2025, we will exceed this. There are a number of reasons for this. We have more staff, more members, inflation has been high, and we are subsidising a lot more travel for others, such as our ambassadors, speakers, and collaborators at local events, and some board members (since 2019, we reduced from three to one in-person board meeting per year). This aligns with our goals of inclusivity for Crossref meetings, but we have to recognise there is a trade-off. The cost of travel, particularly airfare, has increased since 2019. Using US Bureau of Labor Statistics data from 2019 to 2025 the inflation multiplier for a dollar is 1.26 so adjusted for inflation the comparison figure for 2025 spending is $737,000 and forecasted 2025 spending is 60% of this. While we use cost as a proxy for travel volume, now that we’re better at tracking actual carbon emissions, we can try to set targets of keeping under a certain carbon tonne equivalent total instead of (only) a financial target.\nTotal Carbon Emissions for 2024 Our total reported carbon emissions increased 40% from 105 tCO2e in 2023 to 147 tCO2e in 2024. In 2023, we didn’t report on the estimated emissions from hotel stays, but for 2024, we have. We recorded 415 hotel nights in 2024 for 4 tCO2e using an average of Europe/US hotel per night emissions estimates (Circular Ecology). The most carbon-intensive activity was flying. There were about 215 flights in 2024, accounting for emissions of 138 tCO2e - 93% of our total. Crossref staff and community members we covered took 88 train journeys with carbon emissions of .47 tCO2e - so the more travel by train, the better, but this isn’t always possible or feasible. We haven’t included estimates of the impact of home working (Crossref is fully distributed), but we have an initial estimate below and will look to improve this analysis for the 2025 analysis and going forward.\nEstimate of carbon footprint for distributed staff Crossref is fully distributed with staff in 11 countries. We used Claude from Anthropic to calculate the emissions from home working for our staff in 2024 and asked for sources to be cited. It provided some approaches for how to go about the calculations but the results were not reliable - for our 46 staff in 10 countries (this is for 2024 - we now have 49 staff in 11 countries) estimates ranged from 5 tCO2e to 28 tCO2e depending on various assumptions such as whether to account for the grid intensity of the countries where staff are based (Our World in Data has grid intensity figures) and what estimate is used for the amount of energy an employee working from home uses each day. Circular Ecology uses UK DEFRA figures to come up with 2.67 kgCO2e/day for home working. So a simple calculation of 46 staff working 230 days per year arrives at the 28 tCO2e amount. This is much less than the equivalent figure for office-based work, which is 70 tCO2e. A number of things aren’t factored into these calculations: staff with green energy tariffs, staff with solar panels and home batteries, or other renewable energy sources, and the different needs for heating and air conditioning in different countries.\nWe decided not to include these figures in our overall emissions for 2024, but we are looking at a more reliable way to estimate this for 2025. However, we need to consider what we would do with the information and whether we would, or could, do anything to reduce this.\nHosting services We use AWS for hosting our REST APIs, Metadata Search, and the website. In 2024, our main metadata registry was in a data centre in Massachusetts, which is not included in our calculations. In July 2025, we transitioned fully to AWS, so from 2025 onwards, our emissions from AWS will be higher and will encompass our entire system.\nIn 2023, Amazon reports Crossref’s carbon emissions were 0.216 tCO2e compared with 0.266 tCO2e in 2022. In 2024, emissions were 0.132 tCO2e.\nCompared to travel, the footprint from AWS is minimal.\nOnline meetings As a distributed, remote-first organisation, Crossref is a heavy Zoom user––it’s essential for staff and for engaging with our community. However, Zoom doesn’t provide tools or estimates of the carbon impact of Zoom meetings. We used a tool last year to provide an estimate, but we aren’t confident it’s accurate or meaningful. The tool was built in 2020 and made a lot of assumptions and guestimates.\nTools we used To calculate emissions for flights and train journeys, we chose to use Carbon Calculator. For hotel stays and home working estimates, we used Circular Ecology. For AWS, we used the Customer Carbon Footprint Tool (CCFT) provided by AWS.\nOffsetting We don’t offset our emissions from travel or other operations and don’t have plans to do this. Offsetting emissions is problematic in a number of different ways, so we don’t feel confident in doing it.\nIn conclusion In general, it feels good to have had a few years of tracking this, learning more, finding the right tools, and trying to stick to a target to limit our increases. While of course there are always reasons for the target to increase—as we grow and are able to subsidise others beyond our staff more—we remain committed to not just monitoring our carbon spend but also maintaining it at a reasonable level and finding ways to limit and mitigate our impact on the environment. This kind of sustainability isn’t included in the POSI Principles for open scholarly infrastructures, but we’d love to see other similar organisations share their tips and measurements so that, as a community, we can learn how to do even better.\n",
"headings": ["Total travel and carbon spending","Total Carbon Emissions for 2024","Estimate of carbon footprint for distributed staff","Hosting services","Online meetings","Tools we used","Offsetting","In conclusion"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/categories/environment/",
"title": "Environment",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Categories",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/categories/books/",
"title": "Books",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Categories",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/deprecating-co-access-crossref-plans-and-timelines/",
"title": "Deprecating co-access: Crossref plans and timelines",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2025-09-11",
"lastmod_ts": 1757548800,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "To date, there are about 100 Crossref members who have made use of our co-access service for one or more of their books. The service was designed to be a last-resort measure when multiple parties - book publishers, aggregators, and other members - had rights to register book content. Unfortunately, the service allowed members to register multiple DOIs for shared books and book chapters, thereby violating our own core tenet of one DOI per content item. We should not have created a service that violated that tenet, resulting in duplicate DOIs. As we are able to offer an alternative in the form of the multiple resolution service, it is time to switch co-access off. Among other benefits – for the publisher and the authors, creation of a single DOI for each item, regardless of where it might be hosted, will result in more accurate citation counts and usage statistics. We’re retiring co-access at the end of 2026.\n",
"content": "To date, there are about 100 Crossref members who have made use of our co-access service for one or more of their books. The service was designed to be a last-resort measure when multiple parties - book publishers, aggregators, and other members - had rights to register book content. Unfortunately, the service allowed members to register multiple DOIs for shared books and book chapters, thereby violating our own core tenet of one DOI per content item. We should not have created a service that violated that tenet, resulting in duplicate DOIs. As we are able to offer an alternative in the form of the multiple resolution service, it is time to switch co-access off. Among other benefits – for the publisher and the authors, creation of a single DOI for each item, regardless of where it might be hosted, will result in more accurate citation counts and usage statistics. We’re retiring co-access at the end of 2026.\nAn idiom to start There\u0026rsquo;s an idiom used in technology circles called \u0026lsquo;eating your own dog food.\u0026rsquo; It\u0026rsquo;s used to describe an organization that tests or uses its own products in the real world. I\u0026rsquo;m no developer and only have a handful of years of exposure to this phrase, but I\u0026rsquo;ve always wanted to work it into one of my blog posts. The visceral reactions I have observed when it\u0026rsquo;s been used on internal calls are just too tempting. That, and I think it applies to our own rollout of and missteps with a service we call co-access. The decision to enable co-access reflected the priorities of that period, but we can now improve on it with an upgraded multiple resolution service. That rickety footing for co-access doomed it from the start. Now\u0026rsquo;s the time to face the music and swallow our own kibble.\nAlways meant as a last-resort measure, co-access allows multiple Crossref members to register metadata for shared book and book chapter content. Thus, use of co-access results in multiple, duplicate DOIs registered for the same book content. There are well over 500,000 DOIs in co-access within our corpus today. At least half of those are duplicates (more on this below).\nThis is far from ideal and has adverse consequences for the integrity of the scholarly record and the community. As we are able to offer an alternative in the form of the multiple resolution service, it is time to switch co-access off.\nAmong other benefits \u0026ndash; for the publisher and the authors, creation of a single DOI for each item, regardless of where it might be hosted, will result in more accurate citation counts and usage statistics.\nDuplicate DOIs We frequently receive questions from members, metadata users, and others in the community, like this one, asking us what we are doing to combat the very real problem of registration and propagation of duplicate DOIs. We do take measures to prevent the registration of duplicate DOIs, including flagging registration of potential duplicate records to our members using what we call conflicts and conflict reports. As you might expect, this has been a sensitive topic for us, because we have one glaring service, yes, co-access, that has been actively exacerbating the issue of duplicate DOIs.\nSo, while we have been actively trying to counter the rise of duplicate DOIs, co-access enabled duplicate registrations of book DOIs. For every prefix that we configured for the service, we knew we were contributing to the problem (our members noticed too. As I said above, co-access allows multiple members to register their own DOI for shared book content. That means that book content in co-access has at least two DOIs registered. In some cases, there is book content with five or more registered DOIs for a single book. That\u0026rsquo;s a great many duplicates that this service is responsible for.\nReplacing co-access We plan to replace co-access with an existing tool, multiple resolution, which allows for more than one resolution URL to be registered to a single DOI. A user resolving the DOI is presented with an interim page, allowing them to choose from the various content sources registered with this DOI. We\u0026rsquo;ve made some progress toward making multiple resolution simpler for members to implement, but we still have more to do.\nWe\u0026rsquo;re aware that the technical steps involved in adopting multiple resolution might present a barrier to implementation for some of our members. To help with the transition, we are working on a basic tool (currently in beta) that simplifies the process. We will make it available to members between now and the middle of 2026.\nOur timeline We are not going to make these changes tomorrow. We\u0026rsquo;re going to give members who have been using co-access time to adjust. Right now, we trigger co-access when a secondary DOI is registered by a secondary registrant (member) that: 1) is already in a co-access group within our system with the DOI prefix that registered the original DOI, 2) has at least one shared ISBN with the metadata of that original DOI, and 3) has a title (in the title element of the book or chapter XML) that exactly matches the title of the original DOI. We\u0026rsquo;re going to stop triggering co-access for book and book chapter registrations starting 2026 July 1. No new DOIs will be placed in co-access starting then.\nFrom there, there will be six months to clean up records already in co-access. One definitive DOI should be selected by the parties in a co-access group; the DOIs that will no longer be maintained for those books and book chapters should be aliased to the primary (definitive) DOI that will be maintained going forward. The primary DOI should be the DOI used on all landing pages for that book (or, book chapter).\nIn January 2027, if co-access DOIs have not been aliased to one another, we will force alias the DOIs in the record to the DOI registered by the organization identified as the publisher in the metadata records already in our system. At any point in this timeline, our team will be happy to help with the registration of secondary URLs in order to move books from co-access to multiple resolution. As a result, we will encourage members, end users, and the broader community to move back to using a single, definitive source of truth for these books and book chapters.\nWhat will registration of books and book chapters look like post-co-access? Coordinated. We expect that our members and their publishing partners will define the single DOI for each book and book chapter well upstream of Crossref, so all entities and their systems will use that one definitive DOI.\nAs for the registration process and our system, the first member to register the book (and its ISBNs) will establish the DOI for that book and its chapters. Following attempts to register the same content, with a duplicate book-level DOI(s), will fail the registration. Multiple DOIs for the same book or book chapter should be avoided starting 2026 July 01, as we will no longer be able to place books and book chapters into co-access.\nWe believe this will result in increased cited-by and usage metrics for that single DOI, and a cleaner, more accurate scholarly record.\nWe\u0026rsquo;d love to hear your reaction to this news in our Community Forum.\n",
"headings": ["An idiom to start","Duplicate DOIs","Replacing co-access ","Our timeline","What will registration of books and book chapters look like post-co-access?"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/board-and-governance/elections/",
"title": "Election process and results",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2025-09-10",
"lastmod_ts": 1757462400,
"section": "Board & governance",
"tags": [],
"description": "About board elections Our board terms are three years, and roughly one third of the board is eligible for election every year. There is a Nominating Committee consisting of three board members not up for re-election, and two Crossref members that are not on the board. The purpose of this committee is to review and create the slate each year for nominations to the board, ensuring a fair representation of membership.\n",
"content": "About board elections Our board terms are three years, and roughly one third of the board is eligible for election every year. There is a Nominating Committee consisting of three board members not up for re-election, and two Crossref members that are not on the board. The purpose of this committee is to review and create the slate each year for nominations to the board, ensuring a fair representation of membership.\nThe Nominating Committee meets to discuss the charge, process, criteria, and potential candidates, and puts forward a slate which is at least equal to the number of board seats up for election. Each year members are notified of the election schedule but generally the election opens online in late September and election results are announced at our annual meeting in November.\nIn 2017 the Nominating Committee introduced two things for the first time: to issue an open call for expressions of interest; and to propose a slate with more candidates than seats available.\nIn 2018, the board voted to balance the board with equal numbers of small and large revenue category members starting from the 2019 election.\nPlease see the full current board list.\nThe election takes place in October or November each year during the Annual Meeting. Each member organisation designates a voting contact when they join, and that member receives a unique link each September to place their vote on behalf of their organisation.\nPast elections 2025 election The following organisations were elected to the board for three-year terms commencing January 2026:\nRebecca Wambua, Distance, Open and e-Learning Practitioners\u0026rsquo; Association of Kenya Damian Bird, CABI Rose L\u0026rsquo;Huillier, Elsevier Anjalie Nawaratne, Springer Nature Nick Lindsay, The MIT Press 2024 election The following organisations were elected to the board for three-year terms commencing January 2025:\nKatharina Rieck, Austrian Science Fund (FWF) Lisa Schiff, California Digital Library Aaron Wood, American Psychological Association Amanda Ward, Taylor and Francis 2023 election The following organisations were elected to the board for three-year terms commencing March 2024:\nBeilstein-Institut, Wendy Patterson Korean Council of Science Editors, Kihong Kim OpenEdition, Marin Dacos Vilnius University, Vincas Grigas Universidad Autónoma de Chile, Dr. Ivan Suazo Oxford University Press, James Phillpotts University of Chicago Press, Ashley Towne Candidate statements | Election procedures | Proxy\n2022 election The following organisations were elected to the board for three-year terms commencing March 2023:\nPan Africa Science Journal, Oscar Donde Clarivate, Christine Stohn Elsevier, Rose L’Huillier The MIT Press, Nick Lindsay Springer Nature, Anjalie Nawaratne Candidate statements | Election procedures | Proxy: in English, em Português, en Español, 한국어, en Français\n2021 election The following organisations were elected to the board for three-year terms commencing March 2022:\nCalifornia Digital Library, University of California, Lisa Schiff Center for Open Science, Nici Pfeiffer Melanoma Research Alliance, Kristen Mueller AIP Publishing (AIP), Penelope Lewis American Psychological Association (APA), Jasper Simons Candidate statements | Election procedures | Proxy: in English, em Português, en Español, 한국어, en Français\n2020 election The following organisations were elected to the board for three-year terms commencing March 2021:\nOpenEdition, Marin Dacos (France) Korean Council of Science Editors, Kihong Kim (South Korea) Scientific Electronic Library Online (SciELO), Abel Packer (Brazil) Beilstein-Institut, Wendy Patterson (Germany) Taylor \u0026amp; Francis/F1000, Liz Allen (United Kingdom) Oxford University Press, James Phillpotts (United Kingdom) Candidate statements | Election procedures\n2019 elections The following organisations were elected to the board for three-year terms:\nClarivate Analytics, Nandita Quaderi eLife, Melissa Harrison Elsevier, Chris Shillum Springer Nature, Reshma Shaikh Wiley, Todd Toler Candidate statements | Election procedures\n2018 election The following organisations were elected to the board for three-year terms:\nAfrican Journals OnLine, Susan Murray California Digital Library, Catherine Mitchell Association for Computing Machinery, Scott Delman Hindawi, Paul Peters American Psychological Association, Jasper Simons Proxy | Candidate statements | Election procedures\n2017 election The following organisations were elected to the board for three-year terms:\nAIP Publishing Inc., Jason Wilde F1000, Liz Allen MIT Press, Amy Brand SciELO, Abel Packer Vilnius Gediminas Technical University Press, Eleonora Dagiene Proxy | Candidate Statements | Election Procedures\n2016 election The following organisations were elected to the board for three-year terms:\nBMJ, Helen King eLife, Mark Patterson Elsevier, Chris Shillum IOP, James Walker Springer Nature, Wim van der Stelt Proxy | Notice | Candidates | Candidate Statements | Election Procedures\n2015 election The following organisations were elected to the board for three-year terms:\nIan Bannerman, Informa UK Paul Peters, Hindawi Bernie Rous, ACM Peter Marney, Wiley John Shaw, Sage Publications 2014 election The following organisations were elected to the board for three-year terms:\nJason Wilde, AIP Publishing Inc. Gary VandenBos, American Psychological Association Gerry Grenier, IEEE Eleonora Dagiene, Vilnius Gediminas Technical University Press Carsten Buhr, Walter de Gryuter Y. H. (Helen) Zhang, Zhejiang University Press 2013 election The following organisations were elected to the board for three-year terms:\nChris Shillum, Elsevier James Walker, IOP Publishing Kathleen Keane, Johns Hopkins University Press Kristen Fisher Ratan, PLOS Wim van der Stelt, Springer 2012 election The following organisations were elected to the board for three-year terms:\nIan Bannerman, Informa UK (Chair) Bernard Rous, ACM (Treasurer) Ahmed Hindawi, Hindawi Robert Campbell, John Wiley \u0026amp; Sons, Inc. Carol Richman, Sage Publications Sven Fund, Walter de Gruyter has replaced Rebecca Simon, University of California Press and will serve out their term expiring in 2014. 2011 election The following organisations were elected to the board for three-year terms:\nTerry Hulbert, American Institute of Physics Linda Beebe, American Psychological Association Gerry Grenier, IEEE Patricia Shaffer, INFORMS Rebecca Simon, University of California Press Chi Wai Lee, World Scientific Publishing 2010 election The following organisations were elected to the board for three-year terms:\nKaren Hunter, Elsevier Steven Hall, IOP Publishing Howard Ratner, Nature Publishing Group Stuart Taylor, The Royal Society Wim van der Stelt, Springer Science + Business Media 2009 election The following organisations were elected to the board for three-year terms:\nBernard Rous, ACM Ian Bannerman, Informa UK Robert Campbell, John Wiley \u0026amp; Sons Inc. Carol Richman, Sage Publications Ahmed Hindawi, Hindawi 2008 election The following organisations were elected to the board for three-year terms:\nTim Ingoldsby, American Institute of Physics Linda Beebe, American Psychological Association Paul Reekie, CSIRO Publishing Anthony Durniak, IEEE Patricia Shaffer, INFORMS Rebecca Simon, University of California Press 2007 election The following organisations were elected to the board for three-year terms:\nBeth Rosner, AAAS (Science) Karen Hunter, Elsevier Howard Ratner, Nature Publishing Group Thomas Connertz, Thieme Publishing Group Wim van der Stelt, Springer Science + Business Media Jerry Cowhig, IOP, who was appointed by the board to fill the Blackwell vacancy, was elected to serve out the term expiring in 2008. 2006 election The following organisations were elected to the board for three-year terms:\nJohn R. White, Association for Computing Machinery Nawin Gupta, University of Chicago Press Carol Richman, Sage Publications Ian Bannerman, Informa UK Limited (Taylor \u0026amp; Francis) Eric A. Swanson, John Wiley \u0026amp; Sons, Inc. 2005 election The following organisations were elected to the board for three-year terms:\nMarc Brodsky, American Institute of Physics Linda Beebe, American Psychological Association Robert Campbell, Blackwell Publishing Anthony Durniak, IEEE Rebecca Simon, University of California Press Paul Weislogel, Wolters Kluwer 2004 election The following organisations were elected to the board for three-year terms:\nBeth Rosner, AAAS (Science) Karen Hunter, Elsevier Science Annette Thomas, Nature Publishing Group Thomas Connertz, Thieme Publishing Group Ruediger Gebauer, Springer Science + Business Media Please contact Lucy Ofiesh with any questions.\n",
"headings": ["About board elections","Past elections","2025 election","2024 election","2023 election","2022 election","2021 election","2020 election","2019 elections","2018 election","2017 election","2016 election","2015 election","2014 election","2013 election","2012 election","2011 election","2010 election","2009 election","2008 election","2007 election","2006 election","2005 election","2004 election"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/schema-library/",
"title": "Schema library",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2025-09-10",
"lastmod_ts": 1757462400,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "The metadata that our members register with us is stored as XML, and our XML schema provides a structure and set of rules to keep everything consistent and interoperable.\nIf you\u0026rsquo;re using one of our helper tools, you don\u0026rsquo;t need to worry too much about the schema, as the tool you use will transform your information into XML for you. This means that if you are using one of our helper tools, you don\u0026rsquo;t need to read this section of the documentation.\n",
"content": "The metadata that our members register with us is stored as XML, and our XML schema provides a structure and set of rules to keep everything consistent and interoperable.\nIf you\u0026rsquo;re using one of our helper tools, you don\u0026rsquo;t need to worry too much about the schema, as the tool you use will transform your information into XML for you. This means that if you are using one of our helper tools, you don\u0026rsquo;t need to read this section of the documentation.\nHowever, if you\u0026rsquo;re sending us XML directly, it\u0026rsquo;s important that you understand the schema, so this section of the documentation is for you.\nAs a registration agency of the International DOI Foundation, we follow the ISO/IEC 11179 Metadata Registry (MDR) standard, which specifies a schema for recording both the meaning and technical structure of the data for unambiguous usage by humans and computers.\nWe have a single deposit schema, which supports a range of different record types (see full list of record types).\nWe support several versions of our schema but we recommend using the latest version (v5.4.0). For certain types of updates, we also offer the resource-only section of the schema. (Here\u0026rsquo;s more information on what you can update with a resource-only deposit).\n",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/celebrating-one-year-of-crossref-grant-ids-at-nwo/",
"title": "Celebrating one year of Crossref Grant IDs at NWO",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2025-09-09",
"lastmod_ts": 1757376000,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "This month marks one year since the Dutch Research Council (NWO) introduced grant IDs—an important milestone in our journey toward more transparent and trackable research funding. We created over 1,600 Crossref Grant IDs with associated metadata. We are beginning to see them appear in publications. These early examples show the enormous potential Grant IDs have. They also highlight that publishers could extend their efforts to improve the quality of funding metadata of publications.\n",
"content": "This month marks one year since the Dutch Research Council (NWO) introduced grant IDs—an important milestone in our journey toward more transparent and trackable research funding. We created over 1,600 Crossref Grant IDs with associated metadata. We are beginning to see them appear in publications. These early examples show the enormous potential Grant IDs have. They also highlight that publishers could extend their efforts to improve the quality of funding metadata of publications.\nThe promise of grant linking For decades, funders have struggled with a seemingly simple challenge: tracking the research outputs that arise from their funding. The traditional approach—requiring grantees to cite their grants in acknowledgement sections of their papers—has all kinds of problems. Authors make many errors in providing this information, and even when funding organizations and schemes are cited correctly, there is no guarantee that a grant number is globally unique and not already in use by another funding council in the world.\nTo address these issues, and in collaboration with the research funding community, Crossref introduced the Grant Linking System (GLS) six years ago. The system allows funding organizations to assign globally unique and persistent identifiers to their grants, but - more importantly - the system allows connecting these grants with the outputs arising from them. The vision is straightforward: authors include Grant IDs (which are Crossref DOIs) in the funding acknowledgements of their research articles. Publishers either take these IDs from the acknowledgement or proactively ask authors for these IDs in their submission system. Next, when a publisher registers their publication with Crossref, it includes the grant identifier in the metadata of that publication, creating an unambiguous link between the publication and the grants from which the research was funded.\nThis last step—including the Grant ID in the metadata of the article when registering the publication with Crossref—is a crucial part of the system as it enables anyone to automatically retrieve all publications arising from a given grant over time via the Crossref API. Funding organizations interested in tracking the impact of their funding could then stop asking their grantees to manually report on the outputs of their funding, as most still do today. Instead, this information would become open data that funding organizations harvest directly themselves, reducing administrative burden on researchers while enhancing the ability to track the impact of their funding.\nAs Robert Kiley, former head of Open Research at the Wellcome Trust, which piloted the GLS in 2018, put it: \u0026ldquo;\u0026hellip;if every funder were to adopt such a system and expose their grant metadata in a consistent, machine-readable way, it would facilitate the development of applications to help funders get a greatly enhanced picture of the global funding landscape, which in turn would inform strategic planning and resource allocation.\u0026rdquo;\nNWO\u0026rsquo;s implementation journey NWO joined Crossref\u0026rsquo;s Grant Linking System in 2024. It reflects our broader commitment to open science and aligns with our Persistent Identifier Strategy published in 2021, and our support for the Barcelona Declaration on Open Research Information. Since August 2024, all new grants awarded from July 2024 onward receive a Crossref Grant ID that persistently resolves to the information about the grant on our website, displaying all basic award information including project titles, summaries, grantee names, and affiliations. NWO is one of the 44 funding organizations worldwide that have introduced Crossref Grant IDs for their collective 111 funding programs. Other organizations include the European Commission, OSTI-DOE, the Wellcome Trust, Moore Foundation, Fonds de Recherche du Québec, CSIRO, Japan Science and Technology Agency, and the Austrian Science Fund.\nAlthough it took time, implementation at NWO in general proceeded smoothly. Over the course of a year, we\u0026rsquo;ve registered over 1,500 grant records without experiencing difficulties or complaints from researchers. On the contrary, after we announced the introduction of Grant IDs, some researchers expressed disappointment on our decision—for practical reasons—to only register DOIs for new grants instead of the entire historical record. This shows that researchers understand the importance of persistent identifiers. Already, a year after its introduction, we are seeing the first NWO Grant IDs appearing in publications— showing that researchers are taking the extra step to look up their Crossref Grant ID and include it in their articles, as we are asking them to do. However, publishers don’t always manage to handle these identifiers in the way we expect them to.\nLinking grants to publications in real life One of the first publications to include an NWO Grant ID is a paper by Weile et al., published by the American Physical Society (APS) in the journal Physical Review X. On the left, we see the funding information provided by the authors, as included in the acknowledgement section of the published article. Funding by NWO from its Talent Scheme VIDI is identified with a Grant ID https://doi.org/10.61686/YDRHT18202.\nOn the right, we see how APS has included this information in the metadata of the publication: NWO is identified with its Funder ID and the grant with the Grant ID - forging an unambiguous link between funding and publication, initially between this particular grant and this particular publication, but potentially in the future between this grant and all other outputs arising from it. This works so long as all publishers include this information in the metadata of their publications; we need to encourage more publishers and other Crossref members (e.g., preprint services, repositories, blog platforms) to follow the APS example and do the same.\nWhere publishers fall short There are big differences among publishers in their ability to include funding metadata. Many have been including funder IDs in the metadata for more than a decade, but some are still struggling to do that. Most are yet to catch up to start including Crossref Grant IDs, too.\nLet’s demonstrate that in an example. On the left, we see the acknowledgements section of a paper by Van Zundert et al. in the journal Small, published by Wiley. The authors acknowledge a host of funding organizations and grants, including NWO with Grant ID https://doi.org/10.61686/LVZRW92421. On the right, we see that the publisher has correctly included NWO in the metadata as the funder with our Funder ID, but there’s no reference to our Grant ID, instead mentioning an award number, which seems to refer to a Marie Sklodowska-Curie grant for the same research with their internal award identifier.\nLikewise, a publication by Criscuolo et al in Physics of Life Reviews (a journal published by Elsevier) correctly identified NWO using our Funder ID, but omitted our Grant ID in the metadata, despite its clear inclusion by the author in the acknowledgements (left). Apparently, this persistent link and open metadata is being thrown out of the infrastructure at a crucial time, when the article record could be connecting up with the grant record and making it easy and open for us all to track and report on the connection.\nSeveral publishers do not seem to register funding data at all, despite the opportunity existing for almost 15 years, and sometimes even when comprehensive funding information is provided by authors.\nThe broader implications It has been known for some time that publishers struggle with registering complete, high-quality funding metadata for their publications. They sometimes blame authors for not providing the required information or making errors in reporting their funding. Or they call on funders to identify their funding more precisely by introducing persistent Grant IDs for their grants. While these are legitimate issues, and it’s true that more funders could also do this, the examples presented here suggest this narrative is incomplete—when authors provide clear, standardized funding information using persistent identifiers, many publishers still fail to capture it accurately.\nThe Grant Linking System is still relatively new in terms of open infrastructure and open metadata development, and adoption from funders is still in the tens rather than the tens of thousands, with publishers being more accustomed to creating and providing millions of open metadata records for their publications. Most participating funders, like us, have only started registering grants in the past couple of years. Now that Crossref Grant IDs are becoming more widespread, and with publishers’ experience in creating open metadata, we would love to see publishers prioritise collecting and including Grant IDs in their Crossref metadata. By updating their production practices, they would be supporting the community at large in reaping the benefits of open grant metadata.\nTo address these challenges, we are organizing a roundtable session under the Barcelona Declaration in October to discuss concrete solutions for these issues. We invite publishers who are interested in participating to contact us. This follows a 2023 workshop where many publishers were very open in discussing the challenges and working towards improving the process together with funders.\nLooking ahead The introduction of Crossref Grant IDs represents just the first step in a longer journey toward more open research information for NWO. We are happy to see how quickly researchers are adopting the system by including Crossref Grant IDs in their work. For Grant IDs to truly become a Grant Linking System and fulfil its promise, however, publishers must act on the need to collect and process funding information in their publishing workflows, just as they do for other joint efforts, such as for ORCID iDs for contributors. The information is there—authors are providing it in the acknowledgement sections of their articles (and probably would too if asked directly in a submission form). The question now is: can we encourage more publishers to take up the request to capture and transmit this information accurately and register it with Crossref?\nWe’re hopeful. This first year has demonstrated the enormous potential of Crossref Grant IDs in action for NWO. We call on publishers to do their bit in ensuring this vital infrastructure reaches its full potential for the research community.\n",
"headings": ["The promise of grant linking","NWO\u0026rsquo;s implementation journey","Linking grants to publications in real life","Where publishers fall short","The broader implications","Looking ahead"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/authors/hans-de-jonge/",
"title": "Hans De Jonge",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Authors",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/an-elife-filled-with-possibility-thanks-to-great-metadata/",
"title": "An eLife filled with possibility thanks to great metadata",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2025-08-28",
"lastmod_ts": 1756339200,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "eLife recently won a Crossref Metadata Award for the completeness of its metadata, showing itself as the clear leader among our medium-sized members. In this post, the eLife team answers our questions about how and why they produce such high-quality open metadata. For eLife, the work of creating and sharing excellent metadata aligns with their mission to foster open science and supports their preprint-centred publication model, but it also lays the groundwork for all kinds of exciting potential uses.\n",
"content": "eLife recently won a Crossref Metadata Award for the completeness of its metadata, showing itself as the clear leader among our medium-sized members. In this post, the eLife team answers our questions about how and why they produce such high-quality open metadata. For eLife, the work of creating and sharing excellent metadata aligns with their mission to foster open science and supports their preprint-centred publication model, but it also lays the groundwork for all kinds of exciting potential uses.\nHaving complete and rich metadata puts you in the best position to fulfil future, as-yet-undetermined requirements.\n\u0026ndash; Fred Atherden, eLife\nWhat motivates your organisation/team to work towards high-quality metadata? What objectives does it support for your organisation? eLife is a mission-driven organisation tasked by its founders to help scientists accelerate discovery and encourage responsible behaviours in science. As such, we’re passionate about open science and metadata, and we\u0026rsquo;re vocal advocates of the benefits these provide to academic communities and beyond.\nGiven Crossref’s position as a hub at the centre of scholarly communication, providing Crossref with complete metadata furthers our mission. It facilitates the discovery and reuse of research and enables linkage to key but often overlooked outputs such as datasets and software. As signatories of DORA and supporters of the Barcelona Declaration, we are keenly aware of the wider context - that these efforts enable research assessment and policy decisions to be derived from open and transparent information, moving beyond closed systems that have proliferated the damaging use of anachronistic metrics.\nDo you have a strategy for complete metadata? Which elements did you prioritise? What workflows, tools, or collaborations helped you get there? There are plenty of existing guidelines that provide a great skeleton to follow. For example, we follow FAIR data and FORCE11 software citation principles, which ensure the capture of metadata for supporting datasets and software packages. There’s not any one particular element that we’ve prioritised, although we’re keen to ensure we follow best practices while also exploring the bleeding edge.\nWe’ve collaborated with and relied on the advice of many organisations over the years, including (but not limited to) Crossref, Research Organization Registry (ROR), JATS4R, FORCE11, Software Heritage, openRxiv, and our production vendors Exeter Premedia.\nWe’ve developed our own open source Crossref metadata generation library. Keeping this process in-house has proven really fruitful. It allows us to quickly and continuously improve upon the metadata we provide.\nAnd we have a data team that has created a centralised data hub, serving as a really useful authoritative resource that can be queried, instead of always making use of disparate systems.\nHow have you integrated these into your metadata processes? At submission, we collect ROR IDs for (a subset of) affiliations, and structured data for funding, datasets, and other information. Our publication model is centred around preprints, so it’s necessary to capture related information such as the preprint DOI, preprint posted date, the version that pertains to each specific revision (and so on). Without this information, we could not post public reviews to the correct preprint version on the preprint server, or indeed ensure the article we publish is the correct iteration of that work.\nThe systems that enable the publication of eLife Reviewed preprints are dependent on DocMaps, a framework for a machine-readable representation of the processes involved in the creation of a document. These are provided by our Data Hub and enable us to capture structured information about the peer review process and accompanying metadata for each article.\nOur proofing system for journal articles only permits login via ORCID authentication, and we don’t capture unauthenticated ORCID IDs that have been copied or keyed (see ‘What’s So Special About Signing In?’). It also makes use of both the Crossref API and the PubMed Central API to ensure we have persistent identifiers where possible for references. We have an in-house content validator, which uses ROR’s API to ensure we have ROR IDs for affiliations and funders where possible. We use Software Heritage to archive author-generated code, and include their persistent ID (SWHID) in software references.\nAll our published content is captured as JATS XML (the industry standard format for journal articles), which our metadata generation library uses as its input.\nWhat impact of good metadata can you see for your organisation? Is it supporting the business and/or editorial side of your work? Persistent identifiers are very useful for reporting. Creating a report that, for example, includes publication volumes from a particular institution is trivial when content is enriched with persistent identifiers. It’s more complex when all you have are messy author-supplied strings of text. They’re also useful for content validation. For example, when we have a persistent ID and a method to retrieve the related metadata, we can confirm that the information we’ve been provided is complete and correct.\nThere are, of course, many other benefits, some of which are \u0026ldquo;unknown unknowns.\u0026rdquo; Having complete and rich metadata puts you in the best position to fulfil future, as-yet-undetermined requirements.\nHave you encountered any challenges in curating or improving your metadata? If so, what were they, and how did you address those? In 2024, we started introducing persistent grant IDs for our content. While we updated our submission system to collect these from authors, it’s apparent that many authors aren’t aware when/if these have been registered by funders, and they still provide us with the (internal) grant numbers instead.\nOur workaround was to pull grant data from Crossref and then replace the grant numbers with the persistent IDs when we’re confident of a match. Since the grant number registered at Crossref might not exactly match the grant number the authors have given us, potential matches are confirmed by a team member or our production vendors. Since many organisations do a great job of creating informative landing pages (for example, EuropePMC for Wellcome funding), this is feasible, but we’re investigating ways we can make this less manual while remaining careful that we don’t introduce false positives.\nHave your efforts around metadata led to real benefits for your community? Is this something your editors, authors, or readers are aware of and appreciate? If so, why? Yes, I think this is something that is becoming increasingly visible. Authors are very mindful of the benefits that good metadata can bring for discoverability and promotion. And much is lost without the increased interoperability it brings, both for publishers themselves but also the wider ecosystem. For example, we’ve had some great feedback from numerous organisations that appreciate that the outputs we publish directly link to the preprints they are based on.\nIn recent years, there’s been an increased focus on research integrity, and this is likely to remain the case. Metadata has an obvious and key role in providing trust and transparency, whether that’s through the presence of trust markers like ORCID IDs or through the inclusion of complete post-publication metadata such as correction, retraction, or withdrawal information.\nLooking ahead, how are you planning to build on your metadata quality? Are there new elements or practices you’re exploring? And what advice would you give to others just starting to strengthen their metadata? Several years ago, we introduced a \u0026ldquo;publish, review, curate\u0026rdquo; model of publishing, where we publish ‘Reviewed preprints’ following each stage of review. We don’t collect the same level of structured information from authors at submission for these as we do for Versions of Record. This presents a challenge for retrieving and disseminating complete metadata for Reviewed preprints. We aim to start moving this forward so that comprehensive metadata is available at earlier stages of the publication process. For example, we recently started depositing (some) funding metadata for these.\nWe’re also keen to explore the ways in which we can make our eLife Assessments more discoverable. Our Editors use a common vocabulary to describe the significance of the findings and strength of evidence in a paper. Other publishers moving beyond accept/reject publication models use different rubrics and taxonomies, so having one restrictive field in a schema for the entire corpus of research won’t cut it. But nevertheless making these terms more discoverable and interoperable would be preferential.\nWe’ve found that the integration of public APIs/data within systems (such as ROR’s, Crossref’s, PubMed’s, and OpenAlex’s) to be really helpful in validating the correctness and completeness of content/metadata. The effort in adding these integrations will pay dividends in the future.\nTime to enjoy Fred’s acceptance video.\nMetadata Awards video - eLife ",
"headings": ["What motivates your organisation/team to work towards high-quality metadata? What objectives does it support for your organisation?","Do you have a strategy for complete metadata? Which elements did you prioritise? What workflows, tools, or collaborations helped you get there?","How have you integrated these into your metadata processes?","What impact of good metadata can you see for your organisation? Is it supporting the business and/or editorial side of your work?","Have you encountered any challenges in curating or improving your metadata? If so, what were they, and how did you address those?","Have your efforts around metadata led to real benefits for your community? Is this something your editors, authors, or readers are aware of and appreciate? If so, why?","Looking ahead, how are you planning to build on your metadata quality? Are there new elements or practices you’re exploring? And what advice would you give to others just starting to strengthen their metadata?"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/authors/frederick-atherden/",
"title": "Frederick Atherden",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Authors",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/community/our-ambassadors/",
"title": "Meet our ambassadors",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2025-08-18",
"lastmod_ts": 1755475200,
"section": "Get involved",
"tags": [],
"description": "The Crossref Ambassador Program is an exciting and important program initiated in early 2018, and one which fully embraces a key strategic focus\u0026mdash;to adapt to expanding constituencies.\nOur Ambassadors are enthusiastic volunteers who work within the global academic community in a variety of ways\u0026mdash;as librarians, researchers, publishers, and societies,\u0026mdash;and all of whom share a strong belief in the mission-driven work we do to improve scholarly research communication. They support us by using their industry expertise, local knowledge, and translation skills to represent Crossref at regional events\u0026mdash;providing training to our members in different languages, locations and time zones.\n",
"content": "The Crossref Ambassador Program is an exciting and important program initiated in early 2018, and one which fully embraces a key strategic focus\u0026mdash;to adapt to expanding constituencies.\nOur Ambassadors are enthusiastic volunteers who work within the global academic community in a variety of ways\u0026mdash;as librarians, researchers, publishers, and societies,\u0026mdash;and all of whom share a strong belief in the mission-driven work we do to improve scholarly research communication. They support us by using their industry expertise, local knowledge, and translation skills to represent Crossref at regional events\u0026mdash;providing training to our members in different languages, locations and time zones.\nSee who is based in your region:\nAfrica Asia Americas Europe Oceania Country groupings are based on the geographic regions defined under the Standard Country or Area Codes for Statistical Use (known as M49) of the United Nations Statistics Division. The assignment of countries or areas to specific groupings does not imply any assumption regarding political or any other affiliation of countries or territories.\nExplore our interactive map to discover Crossref Ambassadors around the world:\nApply to become an ambassador If you are interested in finding out more about the Ambassador Program and working with us please fill out the application form to give us a little information about yourself. We\u0026rsquo;ll then get back to you to follow-up and discuss your plans and ideas.\nBack to top\nPlease contact our community team with any questions.\n",
"headings": ["Africa","Asia","Americas","Europe","Oceania","Apply to become an ambassador"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/services/reference-linking/",
"title": "Support for Reference Linking",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 5,
"lastmod": "2025-08-15",
"lastmod_ts": 1755216000,
"section": "Find a service",
"tags": [],
"description": " Reference linking enables researchers to follow a link from the reference list to other full-text documents, helping them to make connections and discover new things. Reference Linking means including Crossref DOIs (displayed as URLs) in the reference lists that you provide in your own published work. This enables researchers to follow a link from a reference list to the current landing page for that referenced work. And because it’s a DOI rather than just a link, it will remain persistent.\n",
"content": " Reference linking enables researchers to follow a link from the reference list to other full-text documents, helping them to make connections and discover new things. Reference Linking means including Crossref DOIs (displayed as URLs) in the reference lists that you provide in your own published work. This enables researchers to follow a link from a reference list to the current landing page for that referenced work. And because it’s a DOI rather than just a link, it will remain persistent.\nSo, instead of just including the reference in your reference list\u0026hellip;\nSoleimani N, Mohabati Mobarez A, Farhangi B. Cloning, expression and purification flagellar sheath adhesion of Helicobacter pylori in Escherichia coli host as a vaccination target. Clin Exp Vaccine Res. 2016 Jan;5(1):19-25.\n\u0026hellip;you should also display the DOI link:\nSoleimani N, Mohabati Mobarez A, Farhangi B. Cloning, expression and purification flagellar sheath adhesion of Helicobacter pylori in Escherichia coli host as a vaccination target. Clin Exp Vaccine Res. 2016 Jan;5(1):19-25. https://doi.org/10.7774/cevr.2016.5.1.19\nBecause Crossref is all about rallying the scholarly community to work together, reference linking is an obligation for all Crossref members. But you don\u0026rsquo;t have to be a Crossref member to link your references - we provide free tools that anyone can use to match their reference lists to existing DOIs so they can link their references.\nWatch the introductory reference linking animation in your language:\nFrançais Español Português do Brasil Chinese 简体中文 Japanese 日本語 Korean 한국어 Arabic العربية Bahasa Indonesia English How Reference Linking works Show image × Download the reference linking factsheet, and explore factsheets for other Crossref services and in different languages.\nBenefits of reference linking Persistent links enhance scholarly communications. Reference linking offers important benefits:\nReciprocity: members’ records are linked together and more discoverable because all members link their references. As a member organisation, we can obligate all our members to link their references, so that individual members can avoid the inconvenience of signing bilateral agreements to link to persistent resources on other platforms. The result is a scholarly communications infrastructure that enables the exchange of ideas and knowledge. Discoverability: research travels further when everyone links their references. Because DOIs don’t break if implemented correctly, they will always lead readers to the resource they’re looking for, including yours. When the DOIs are displayed, anyone can copy and share them. This will also enable better tracking of where and when people are talking about and sharing scholarly objects, including in social media. Obligations and fees for reference linking Reference Linking is an obligation of membership for all Crossref members. But anyone can use our support tools for Reference Linking - you don\u0026rsquo;t have to be a member. And there\u0026rsquo;s no charge to use our support tools for Reference Linking.\nGetting started with reference linking There are various different ways to look up other member\u0026rsquo;s DOIs to add to your reference lists. Read more here.\nImportant note: Reference Linking is not the same as including your reference lists in your metadata record. Here\u0026rsquo;s more information about how to add your reference lists to your metadata records.\nBest practice for reference linking Start reference linking within 18 months of joining Crossref Link references for back-year as well as current resources Link references in all relevant resource types such as preprints, books, data, conference proceedings, etc. Make sure the links in your references and other platforms conform to our DOI display guidelines ",
"headings": ["Reference linking enables researchers to follow a link from the reference list to other full-text documents, helping them to make connections and discover new things.","How Reference Linking works","Benefits of reference linking ","Obligations and fees for reference linking ","Getting started with reference linking ","Best practice for reference linking "]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/mejorando-la-visibilidad-a-trav%C3%A9s-de-los-metadatos-una-mirada-desde-editorial-csic/",
"title": "Mejorando la visibilidad a través de los metadatos: una mirada desde Editorial CSIC",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2025-08-14",
"lastmod_ts": 1755129600,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "Click here for the version in English\nHablamos con Nacho Pérez Alcalde, Vicedirector Técnico de Editorial CSIC, la editorial al mando de ´Boletín Geológico y Minero’, ganadora del Crossref Metadata Award en la categoría de Metadata Enrichment. Miembro de Crossref desde 2008, Editorial CSIC publica 41 revistas en acceso abierto Diamante, y juega un papel esencial en la diseminación del conocimiento científico a nivel internacional. Exploramos lo que este premio ha significado para Editorial CSIC y qué planes para el futuro tienen para seguir mejorando la calidad y uso de sus metadatos.\n",
"content": "Click here for the version in English\nHablamos con Nacho Pérez Alcalde, Vicedirector Técnico de Editorial CSIC, la editorial al mando de ´Boletín Geológico y Minero’, ganadora del Crossref Metadata Award en la categoría de Metadata Enrichment. Miembro de Crossref desde 2008, Editorial CSIC publica 41 revistas en acceso abierto Diamante, y juega un papel esencial en la diseminación del conocimiento científico a nivel internacional. Exploramos lo que este premio ha significado para Editorial CSIC y qué planes para el futuro tienen para seguir mejorando la calidad y uso de sus metadatos.\nEl ‘Boletín Geológico y Minero’ ha recibido el primer premio de Crossref al enriquecimiento de vuestros metadatos ya que en tan solo dos años, ha visto la cobertura de los metadatos pasar del 1 al 40%. ¿Cuáles han sido las motivaciones que han llevado a esta revista a ver una mejora tan grande en sus metadatos? Editorial CSIC publica 41 revistas científicas, todas ellas presentes en los principales indexadores. Son revistas de prestigio que ofrecen, desde hace muchos años, contenidos revisados de alta calidad. Sin embargo, hoy en día, no es ya suficiente para una revista científica ofrecer contenidos de calidad, hoy en día es necesario ofrecer también una alta calidad en los metadatos generados por esas publicaciones. Algo que hace no muchos años veíamos como un servicio de valor añadido se ha convertido en algo imprescindible.\nEn un entorno de trabajo electrónico y en Internet, los metadatos son claves para la difusión de los contenidos, la identificación de revistas, autores/as, instituciones editoras, entidades financiadoras… Para un editor es fundamental poder transmitir esa información según unos procedimientos técnicos y unos protocolos estandarizados para garantizar su compatibilidad con las máquinas que cosechan, almacenan y distribuyen datos favoreciendo la visibilidad y la descubribilidad de nuestras revistas.\n¿Seguis alguna estrategia? ¿Cómo decidís qué elementos priorizar? Llevamos años trabajando con metadatos y, de forma periódica, vamos revisando y ampliando el número de elementos que convertimos en metadatos. Damos prioridad siempre a lo que es ya un estándar claramente identificado (por ejemplo el ORCID) y también a aquellos metadatos alineados con las políticas editoriales que consideramos prioritarias (por ejemplo la licencia CC by que aplicamos).\nEl flujo de trabajo requiere como primer paso la identificación, por parte del editor, de los datos que se quieren obtener y de cómo se van a pedir. Una vez se integran todos ellos en la política de envío de originales a la revista, es imprescindible la colaboración de los autores que son los que aportan los datos que, en una fase posterior son revisados por un editor técnico especializado en metadatos (diferente al revisor de texto). Por último, es imprescindible contar con una herramienta que permita automatizar la transferencia de metadatos y aquí es muy importante contar con personal técnico especializado. Nosotros trabajamos con la plataforma OJS, yo he pasado años depositando metadatos en Crossref con los archivos XML que generábamos, uno a uno. Con 1.000 artículos publicados de media al año, la creación del Módulo de exportación CrossRef XML de OJS para el depósito automatizado desde la plataforma fue de gran ayuda para nosotros porque aligera bastante el trabajo, asegura una mayor fiabilidad y nos permite dedicar nuestro tiempo a mejorar otras cosas.\nTambién nos da una mayor flexibilidad a la hora de revisar nuestras políticas de datos, por ejemplo, nos ha permitido abordar un depósito masivo para actualizar todas nuestras referencias para corregir errores recurrentes.\n¿Cómo habéis integrado esto en vuestra estrategia de metadatos? El Crossref Metadata Enrichment Award ha sido concedido en concreto a la revista Boletín Geológico y Minero por haber experimentado una gran mejora en sus metadatos en los últimos años. Esta revista era editada por otra institución y cuando Editorial CSIC se hizo cargo de ella le aplicamos los mismos estándares que venimos utilizando en el resto de nuestras revistas desde hace años. Nos sentimos por ello especialmente orgullosos, porque entendemos este premio como el aval a una política de metadatos que llevamos años desarrollando y que ha permitido una mejora importante para esta revista en un tiempo relativamente corto.\nPara ello fue clave la colaboración de la dirección científica de la revista, nosotros explicamos primero qué datos deben ser solicitados a los autores, por qué y para qué, y luego nos ocupamos de confirmar que se han ido integrando en los artículos y de implementarlos en la plataforma OJS para proceder después a su depósito en Crossref pero también a su integración en otras vías de difusión de metadatos.\nA nivel de impacto, ¿cómo veis que una buena cobertura de los metadatos afecta a vuestra organización? ¿Beneficia de alguna manera vuestro trabajo editorial? O cualquier otro aspecto de vuestra actividad? Más allá de sus beneficios obvios como potenciar la visibilidad de nuestras publicaciones y contribuir a manejar una información controlada y de calidad, en última instancia deberían ayudarnos a posicionarnos como grupo profesional. Nuestra función esencial es publicar contenido científico revisado y de calidad y transmitirlo a la comunidad científica y, cada vez más, a toda la sociedad. Sin embargo, hoy en día, deberíamos aspirar a ser identificados también como proveedores de datos. Y eso, en “la era del dato”, es mucho decir. Debemos ser capaces de extraer los metadatos de nuestras publicaciones aportados por los autores (palabras claves, filiación, bibliografías\u0026hellip;) pero también debemos ser capaces de generar nosotros otros metadatos y de transmitirlos y difundirlos.\nLas revistas científicas deben seguir contando con un editor que haga una revisión ortotipografía y de pruebas, pero también deben contar con un editor de metadatos, alguien que sepa qué es FundRef y sepa dónde y cómo hay que introducir los datos en la plataforma para garantizar que se conservan y transfieren de manera correcta y eficiente.\nPor ello, quiero aprovechar esta ocasión para reivindicar el papel del editor como generador y proveedor de datos. Los editores somos la fuente de datos, hay agentes como las bibliotecas e indexadores que los cosechan, archivan, transmiten y procesan para, por ejemplo, generar nuevos contenidos o servicios, pero solo nosotros tenemos la capacidad de generarlos.\n¿Habéis encontrado dificultades a la hora de mejorar y manejar vuestros metadatos? En ocasiones los autores se quejan de que se les piden muchos datos, por ejemplo, el uso de ORCID es obligatorio en nuestras publicaciones y muchos autores, sobre todo de ámbitos no europeos, se han quejado porque no saben qué es y para qué sirve o, por motivos personales, no quieren registrar ese identificador personal. Son motivos respetables, por supuesto, pero para nosotros prima la necesidad de identificar correctamente a cada autor y creemos que el ORCID ayuda a ello.\nOtro problema habitual es que muchos autores, al citar una fuente de financiación, utilizan el nombre de la entidad financiadora pero a veces no lo ponen completo, o no incluyen el acrónimo o lo que es peor, ponen el nombre pero no el código de la institución o del proyecto. Los autores están acostumbrados a escribir pensando en los lectores “humanos” y no en las máquinas que van a procesar después toda esa información. Nuestro papel, como editores de metadatos, pasa por informarles, de forma didáctica, de la importancia de aportar esos códigos y pedírselos si vemos que no los han incluido en su manuscrito.\nY con respecto a vuestra comunidad, ¿se ha visto beneficiada de vuestro esfuerzo para tener unos metadatos completos y de alta calidad? ¿Están los autores, editores o lectores al tanto de estos esfuerzos o lo valoran? Para el editor técnico es más sencillo valorarlo, nosotros sabemos cómo funciona el entorno, lo importante que es la interoperabilidad de las plataformas, la rapidez y amplitud de transmisión que puede alcanzar un dato y lo importante que es que esté correcto desde su origen porque luego puede ser muy, muy difícil corregirlo y controlarlo. Somos conscientes también de su posible impacto porque sabemos cómo los sistemas de información se alimentan unos de otros y comparten información, una información que generamos nosotros.\nLos editores científicos, autores y lectores suelen valorarlo menos y no siempre son conscientes de su relevancia, aunque no se puede generalizar. Y de hecho, aunque creo que todos deberían tener al menos unas nociones básicas de cómo funciona, creo que los autores ya están bastante saturados con todos los requerimientos que les pedimos para entregar sus manuscritos como para que les pidamos, además, formación específica en metadatos. Para eso (entre otras cosas) estamos los editores, para indicarles qué datos y cómo los deben aportar.\nNo obstante, hoy en día todo el mundo está familiarizado con lo que son y lo que se puede hacer con los datos, todos consumimos productos muy diversos a través de internet y tenemos al menos nociones de lo que son los metadatos, los datos personales, los algoritmos… Hace años era mucho más complejo hacer didáctica de esto, pero hoy en día cualquiera lo entiende fácilmente y más en un ámbito científico y tecnológico como el de nuestras publicaciones.\nCon la vista puesta en el futuro, tenéis algún plan para seguir construyendo sobre lo ya creado? ¿Algún elemento que queráis seguir implementando o prácticas que queráis incorporar en vuestra manera de trabajar? En editorial CSIC, desde que comenzamos a publicar en formato electrónico y a distribuir nuestras revistas electrónicas en línea, hace ya casi 20 años, siempre estamos tratando de innovar en diseños, plataformas de gestión, formatos de archivo… Hablando de cosas concretas, hemos ampliado el uso obligatorio de ORCID y DOI a las contribuciones que no son puramente artículos científicos (hasta ahora nuestras reseñas, obituarios y textos similares no los tenían) y estamos valorando la implementación de identificadores ROR para organizaciones de investigación.\n¿Qué consejos darías a aquellas organizaciones que están comenzando a mejorar la calidad de sus metadatos? Para aquellos editores que están empezando a reforzar sus metadatos me atrevería a indicar algo aparentemente lógico y sencillo pero que creo que no siempre se hace: que planifiquen con calma y en detalle una política editorial de datos basada en identificar y seleccionar los datos que consideren prioritarios e implementar, después, protocolos para solicitarlos a sus autores e integrarlos en las plataformas editoriales y, por último, configurar correctamente dichas plataformas para asegurar una correcta exportación.\nEl metadato requiere de una cadena en la que trabajan diversas personas con distintos perfiles, hay que tener recursos para afianzar esa cadena y hay que tener en cuenta que no basta con pedir los datos a los autores, hay que seguir el recorrido de los datos desde su origen hasta donde podamos y eso no termina cuando los depositamos en Crossref: podemos depositarlos de manera adicional en otros sitios, podemos darles otras salidas y, además, debemos volver sobre ellos si detectamos algún error sistemático que podamos corregir.\nLos Metadata Excellence Awards fueron entregados en mayo de 2025, en el contexto del encuentro anual de Crossref con su comunidad. Os dejamos el vídeo de aceptación del premio por parte de la revista Boletín Geológico y Minero, editada por Editorial CSIC.\nY ahora disfruta de este vídeo de aceptación.\nVersion in English Improving visibility through metadata: a look from CSIC Editorial We spoke with Nacho Pérez Alcalde, Technical Deputy Director of Editorial CSIC, the publisher behind ‘Boletín Geológico y Minero’, recipient of the Crossref Metadata Award in the Metadata Enrichment category. A Crossref member since 2008, Editorial CSIC publishes 41 Diamond Open Access journals and plays a key role in scholarly communication at the international level. We explore what this award has meant for Editorial CSIC and what plans they have for the future to continue improving the quality and use of their metadata.\nWhat motivates your team to work towards high-quality metadata? What objectives does it support for your organisation? Editorial CSIC publishes 41 scientific journals, all of which are included in major indexing databases. These are prestigious journals that have offered high-quality, peer-reviewed content for many years. However, today, it is no longer enough for a scientific journal to provide quality content alone; it is now also essential to deliver high-quality metadata associated with those publications. What just a few years ago was considered a value-added service has now become indispensable.\nIn an electronic and internet-based working environment, metadata is key to content dissemination and to the identification of journals, authors, publishing institutions, and funding organizations. For a publisher, it is crucial to be able to transmit this information through technical procedures and standardised protocols to ensure compatibility with the systems that harvest, store, and distribute data, enhancing the visibility and discoverability of our journals.\nDo you have a strategy for complete metadata? We’ve been working with metadata for years and, periodically, we review and expand the number of elements we convert into metadata. We always prioritise what is already a clearly established standard (for example, ORCID), as well as metadata aligned with editorial policies we consider a priority (such as the CC BY license we apply).\nThe workflow begins with the editor identifying the data to be collected and how it will be requested. Once this is integrated into the journal\u0026rsquo;s submission guidelines, the collaboration of authors becomes essential, as they are the ones who provide the data. In a later phase, the data is reviewed by a technical editor specialising in metadata (different from the content reviewer). Finally, it\u0026rsquo;s crucial to have a tool that enables the automated transfer of metadata, and here, having specialised technical staff is very important.\nWe work with the OJS platform; I spent years depositing metadata in Crossref using XML files that we generated manually, one by one. With an average of 1,000 articles published per year, the creation of the Crossref XML export module in OJS for automated deposit from the platform was a huge help for us – it significantly lightened the workload, ensured greater reliability, and allowed us to focus our time on improving other aspects.\nIt also gives us more flexibility when reviewing our data policies. For example, it allowed us to carry out a bulk deposit to update all our references in order to correct a recurring error.\nHow have you integrated these into your metadata processes? The Crossref Metadata Enrichment Award was specifically granted to the journal Boletín Geológico y Minero for having shown significant improvement in its metadata in recent years. This journal was previously published by another institution, and when Editorial CSIC took over, we applied the same standards we have been using for our other journals for many years. We are especially proud of this because we see the award as recognition of a metadata policy we’ve been developing over the years, one that has led to significant improvements for this journal in a relatively short time.\nThe collaboration of the journal’s scientific leadership was key to achieving this. We first explained which data should be requested from authors, why, and for what purpose. Then we ensured that the data was being properly integrated into the articles and implemented it within the OJS platform. From there, we proceeded with depositing the metadata in Crossref and also integrating it into other metadata dissemination channels.\nWhat impact of good metadata can you see for your organisation? Is it supporting the business and/or editorial side of your work? Beyond their obvious benefits, such as increasing the visibility of our publications and contributing to the management of controlled, high-quality information, they should ultimately help us position ourselves as a professional group. Our essential role is to publish peer-reviewed, high-quality scientific content and deliver it to the scientific community and, increasingly, to society at large. However, today, we should also aim to be recognised as data providers. And that, in the “age of data,” is a significant shift. We must be able to extract metadata from our publications-supplied by authors (keywords, affiliations, bibliographies\u0026hellip;). We also need to generate other metadata ourselves, and transmit and disseminate those effectively. Scientific journals must still have editors who perform copy editing and proofreading, but they must also have metadata editors, people who understand what FundRef is, and know where and how to input data into the platform to ensure it is preserved and transferred correctly and efficiently.\nThat’s why I want to take this opportunity to highlight the role of the editor as a generator and provider of data. Editors are the source of data. There are other actors-like libraries and indexers-who harvest, archive, transmit, and process that data to, for example, create new content or services. But only we have the capacity to generate it.\nHave you encountered any challenges in curating or improving your metadata? Sometimes authors complain about being asked for too much information. For example, the use of ORCID is mandatory in our publications, and many authors, especially those from non-European regions, have complained because they don’t know what it is or what it’s for, or – for personal reasons – they don’t want to register for a personal identifier. These reasons are, of course, valid and understandable, but for us, the priority is to correctly identify each author, and we believe ORCID helps achieve that. Another common issue is that when authors cite a funding source, they often include the name of the funding body, but sometimes don’t write it in full, or they omit the acronym, or worse – they include the name but not the institution or project code. Authors are used to writing with “human” readers in mind, not the machines that will later process all that information. Our role, as metadata editors, involves educating them about the importance of providing these codes and requesting them when we see they’ve been left out of the manuscript.\nHave your efforts around metadata led to real benefits for your community? Is this something your editors, authors, or readers are aware of and appreciate? If so, why? For the technical editor, it\u0026rsquo;s easier to assess the value of metadata. We understand how the ecosystem works, how important platform interoperability is, how quickly and widely data can be transmitted, and how crucial it is for data to be correct from the very beginning. Once it\u0026rsquo;s out there, it can be very, very difficult to correct or control. We’re also aware of its potential impact because we know how information systems feed off each other and share information – information that we generate.\nScientific editors, authors, and readers tend to value it less and aren’t always aware of its importance, though of course there are exceptions. While I believe everyone should at least have a basic understanding of how it works, I also think authors are already overwhelmed with all the requirements we ask of them when submitting manuscripts. Editors are here to guide them on what data to provide and how to provide it.\nThat said, today, everyone is at least somewhat familiar with what data is and what can be done with it. We all consume a wide variety of digital content online and have at least a basic idea of what metadata, personal data, and algorithms are. A few years ago, explaining all this was much more difficult, but nowadays, it’s much easier for people to grasp, especially within the scientific and technological environment in which we publish.\nLooking ahead, how are you planning to build on your metadata quality? Are there new elements or practices you’re exploring? And what advice would you give to others just starting to strengthen their metadata? At Editorial CSIC, ever since we began publishing in electronic format and distributing our journals online, almost 20 years ago, we have consistently sought to innovate in design, management platforms, and file formats. Speaking of specific actions, we have extended the mandatory use of ORCID and DOI to contributions that are not strictly scientific articles (until now, our book reviews, obituaries, and similar texts didn’t have them), and we are currently considering the implementation of ROR identifiers for research organizations.\nDo you have any advice for organisations that are making an effort to improve the quality of their metadata? For editors who are just beginning to strengthen their metadata, I would suggest something that seems logical and simple, but is not always put into practice: take the time to calmly and thoroughly plan a data policy. This should be based on identifying and selecting which data elements are most important, then implementing protocols to request them from authors and integrate them into editorial platforms, and finally, configuring those platforms correctly to ensure proper export.\nMetadata involves a chain of tasks carried out by people with different profiles. You need to have resources to strengthen that chain. It’s good to remember that it’s not enough to simply ask authors for data – you have to follow the data along its entire path from the source as far as possible. That journey doesn’t end when we deposit it in Crossref: we can also deposit it in other repositories, find additional ways to disseminate it, and we must revisit it if we detect any recurring errors that can be corrected.\nAnd now enjoy this acceptance video.\n",
"headings": ["El ‘Boletín Geológico y Minero’ ha recibido el primer premio de Crossref al enriquecimiento de vuestros metadatos ya que en tan solo dos años, ha visto la cobertura de los metadatos pasar del 1 al 40%. ¿Cuáles han sido las motivaciones que han llevado a esta revista a ver una mejora tan grande en sus metadatos?","¿Seguis alguna estrategia? ¿Cómo decidís qué elementos priorizar?","¿Cómo habéis integrado esto en vuestra estrategia de metadatos?","A nivel de impacto, ¿cómo veis que una buena cobertura de los metadatos afecta a vuestra organización? ¿Beneficia de alguna manera vuestro trabajo editorial? O cualquier otro aspecto de vuestra actividad?","Y con respecto a vuestra comunidad, ¿se ha visto beneficiada de vuestro esfuerzo para tener unos metadatos completos y de alta calidad? ¿Están los autores, editores o lectores al tanto de estos esfuerzos o lo valoran?","Con la vista puesta en el futuro, tenéis algún plan para seguir construyendo sobre lo ya creado? ¿Algún elemento que queráis seguir implementando o prácticas que queráis incorporar en vuestra manera de trabajar?","¿Qué consejos darías a aquellas organizaciones que están comenzando a mejorar la calidad de sus metadatos?","Version in English","Improving visibility through metadata: a look from CSIC Editorial","What motivates your team to work towards high-quality metadata? What objectives does it support for your organisation?","Do you have a strategy for complete metadata?","How have you integrated these into your metadata processes?","What impact of good metadata can you see for your organisation? Is it supporting the business and/or editorial side of your work?","Have you encountered any challenges in curating or improving your metadata?","Have your efforts around metadata led to real benefits for your community? Is this something your editors, authors, or readers are aware of and appreciate? If so, why?","Looking ahead, how are you planning to build on your metadata quality? Are there new elements or practices you’re exploring? And what advice would you give to others just starting to strengthen their metadata?","Do you have any advice for organisations that are making an effort to improve the quality of their metadata?"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/authors/nacho-p%C3%A9rez-alcalde/",
"title": "Nacho Pérez Alcalde",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Authors",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/categories/cloud/",
"title": "Cloud",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Categories",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/categories/data-centre/",
"title": "Data Centre",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Categories",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/weve-migrated-to-the-cloud-we-hope-you-didnt-notice-but-maybe-you-did/",
"title": "We’ve migrated to the cloud; we hope you didn’t notice (but maybe you did)",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2025-08-12",
"lastmod_ts": 1754956800,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "TLDR: We\u0026rsquo;ve successfully moved the main Crossref systems to the cloud! We’ve more to do, with several bugs identified and fixed, and a few still ongoing. However, it’s a step in the right direction and a significant milestone, as, whilst it is a much larger financial investment, it addresses several risks and limitations and shores up the Crossref infrastructure for the future.\n",
"content": "TLDR: We\u0026rsquo;ve successfully moved the main Crossref systems to the cloud! We’ve more to do, with several bugs identified and fixed, and a few still ongoing. However, it’s a step in the right direction and a significant milestone, as, whilst it is a much larger financial investment, it addresses several risks and limitations and shores up the Crossref infrastructure for the future.\nSome background We have been doing a lot of thinking, planning, and working on paying down our technical debt and modernising our systems. It’s not fun and flashy work, but it is vital for sustaining our infrastructure, meeting the demand on existing services, and developing new services.\nJust about a year ago, we completed phase one, migrating our main database from Oracle to PostgreSQL, an open-source database. This move brought us more in line with our commitment to the POSI principles, reduced our dependencies on costly private licenses, and opened up the possibility to use and offer additional and more contemporary features. With the transition to PostgreSQL we made upgrades to the operating system, the database software, and the underlying hardware, resulting in significant improvements to the overall throughput and capacity of the deposit system. Previously, we typically maintained a queue of more than 10,000 deposits waiting to be processed; now, the queue holds fewer than 100 deposits on average. Consequently, the average latency – the elapsed time from submission to deposit – has reduced from hours to seconds.\nDuring phase one, a total of 35 new servers were created, and for the first time, the entire system configuration was defined through infrastructure-as-code, enabling the infrastructure to be recreated as necessary. This effort not only enabled the migration but also established a solid foundation for our cloud migration strategy, as the code was leveraged to configure our infrastructure on AWS. Additionally, it serves as a critical component of our disaster recovery planning.\nMost importantly, phase one set us up for phase two and our next migration: moving the system into the cloud.\nWhy we moved to the cloud We had been running most of our services in a physical data centre near Boston, MA, USA (there are a few exceptions: the REST API and our test system (test.crossref.org) were already in the cloud, as was the Crossref website). We’ve been planning to move to the cloud for ahem quite some time, but as always, competing priorities and limited resources have thwarted us, and the data centre was mainly serving us well.\nBut… with staff across 12 countries, and increased global use of our system, operating our own hardware in a physical data centre was becoming increasingly challenging and risky, not to mention, frustrating.\nMoving to the cloud has solved several pain points for us:\nPhysical access to the data centre was required for various tasks (e.g., hardware upgrades, troubleshooting, general maintenance), but as Crossref grew as an organisation and became more distributed, we had fewer staff in the area. Hosting services in the cloud means staff around the world can access our servers remotely from anywhere (and we can leave the hardware upgrades to our vendor). Scalability in the data centre required installing new hardware or upgrading connections, which also meant a good amount of time. In the cloud, we can scale up almost instantly. We can maintain copies of our databases and services in distributed places, providing insurance against natural or other disasters. Upgrades now don’t involve buying physical hardware and installing it; it’s a much quicker and more straightforward process. Moving from a physical data centre to the cloud also has some trade-offs; for instance, the cost will be approximately five times higher than running the system in the data centre; with initial data, it’s not unlikely the annual cost may be up to 2,000,000 USD. We aim to optimise and control this cost going forward.\nWhat we did The size of the undertaking was partly due to leaving it so long; technical debt has accumulated over many years of running the system in the data centre.\nThe whole plan was hugely detailed, but we can distil it to a few bullets:\nWe conducted an analysis of components, considered risks and sequencing, and created a test plan and timeline, including comms. While most of the drive and work was on the shoulders of two infrastructure services colleagues, our software engineers were heavily involved too, and we had weekly check-ins with a cross-team group to review progress, reassess risks, and adjust timelines as we got closer to the migration date (or decided to move it once or twice). We first created the deposit system in the cloud. We then created other parts of our services that aren’t in the deposit system code base, but run alongside it, such as reports, querying, and other tools. We replicated our databases (of which there are several, in a few different flavours - PostgreSQL, MySQL). We gave 14 days’ notice to our members, via email, and kept this maintenance notice up to date. We commenced the migration on 8th July, which involved taking the whole system down and rejecting deposits for up to 24 hours. In the process, we scripted the process to create CS and the other services using Terraform and Ansible, so that going forward, bringing up a whole new instance of CS (should we need to) won’t be a manual process. We moved the DNS to point at our new system in the cloud, rather than the data centre. We brought the system back up on 9th July, after 14 hours of downtime, and watched the first few deposits come in, while testing thoroughly. Alongside the technical team, the membership and support team was at the ready to work through the testing in the new live production environment. The message we sent to members, Metadata Plus subscribers, and key integrators like PKP and Turnitin, listed which services would be down and described what changes they might see, such as:\nThe system timezone shifted from EST to UTC (universal coordinated time), which would be noticeable in the timestamps reported back to members after metadata deposits Our IP address became dynamic and is no longer static. If members had hardcoded our previous IP static address to connect to our services, that would no longer work. We previously allowed connections using the HTTP/1.0 protocol, but now require HTTP/1.1. Likewise, we previously allowed TLS version 1.1, but now require at least version 1.2. Older ciphers will not work. A list of accepted ciphers can be found on this page for “ELBSecurityPolicy-TLS13-1-2-2021-06”. How it went and what’s next We still have more to do, with both expected and unexpected issues arising from the migration. There are a couple of functions that still route through the data centre, configuration changes to wrangle, and processes to iron out, so we’ll be keeping that open for another couple of months.\nThose were the known issues…\n…we also uncovered a few bugs along the way, and we’ve been reporting those (and our progress toward fixing them) on our status page. See history.\nA few diligent members also alerted us to problems they were having. In some cases, we could tell why, and in many cases, their systems needed to be upgraded to work with ours. Thanks go to mEDRA, Spandidos Publications, and Stichting SciPost who helped us identify gaps that resulted in configuration improvements and lessons learned (that we then shared with other members).\nThere were three issues that we were contacted about more than others:\nDelayed delivery of notification emails which is partly due to the volume of backlogged notification emails in the system. Mostly solved: We have repaired delivery of notification emails for all metadata deposits and are working on a fix for the delivery of messages associated with very large queries. A small percentage of registered records not being indexed in the REST API - this can cause downstream issues for a number of other services (e.g., Crossref metadata search - search.crossref.org, Participation Reports, ORCID auto-update, and for external services that make use of the metadata from our REST API). Mostly solved: All records in July are now indexed in the REST API, albeit we have new reports of a few records missing in the last week, which we are actively investigating. Delayed delivery of July’s resolution reports. Solved - not only has July’s resolution report run completed, but we also completed August’s ahead of schedule. This migration was a significant effort, and 2025’s top priority project for the Open and Sustainable Operations (OSO) program team. Overall, we’re happy with our progress toward making Crossref infrastructure more robust, reliable, and future-proof. And judging by the messages of support we received, you are too! Onwards to the next infrastructure project… check out our roadmap to see what’s up next.\nReferences \u0026lsquo;Infrastructure as code\u0026rsquo; (2025) Wikipedia, 12 August. Available at: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infrastructure_as_code (Accessed: 12 August 2025). \u0026lsquo;The programs approach: our experiences during the first quarter of 2025\u0026rsquo; (2025) Crossref. Available at: https://doi.org/10.64000/4s2ee-wkr84 (Accessed: 12 August 2025). ",
"headings": ["Some background","Why we moved to the cloud","What we did","How it went and what’s next","References"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/community/special-programs/",
"title": "Special programs",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2025-08-11",
"lastmod_ts": 1754870400,
"section": "Get involved",
"tags": [],
"description": "\rAt Crossref, our mission is not only about making research easier to find, cite, link, assess, and reuse. We are constantly widening our horizon to create special programs that focuses on different elements of the Research Nexus vision – a vision that aspires to create a rich, reusable open network of relationships connecting research elements for the benefit of society.\nThese programs focus on making connections between all kinds of research information, including journal articles, book chapters, grants, and preprints. We want to connect these different elements to make it easier for everyone involved in research to find and understand the information they need. We aim to involve everyone - like researchers, funding organisations, and governments - in building a better, more open network for sharing research.\n",
"content": "\rAt Crossref, our mission is not only about making research easier to find, cite, link, assess, and reuse. We are constantly widening our horizon to create special programs that focuses on different elements of the Research Nexus vision – a vision that aspires to create a rich, reusable open network of relationships connecting research elements for the benefit of society.\nThese programs focus on making connections between all kinds of research information, including journal articles, book chapters, grants, and preprints. We want to connect these different elements to make it easier for everyone involved in research to find and understand the information they need. We aim to involve everyone - like researchers, funding organisations, and governments - in building a better, more open network for sharing research.\nExplore our programs designed to uphold our Research Nexus vision.\nSpecial programs Resourcing Crossref for Future Sustainability (RCFS) A multi-year effort to make participation more accessible through our fees becoming more equitable, less complex, and rebalanced to ensure they match our mission and future growth.\nIntegrity of the scholarly record (ISR) Our efforts ensuring that research is accurately documented and trustworthy by improving the quality and context of metadata, without directly judging the content itself. It supports the research community by providing reliable signals to assess the integrity of scholarly work.\nMetadata matching Metadata matching gives us a more complete picture of the research nexus by automatically discovering missing relationships between various entities within and throughout the scholarly record, from grants to affiliations to funders to titles.\nRegister your references Registering your references with Crossref helps citation linking, creates a more interconnected scholarly network, and improves the discoverability and impact of your research. This is a campaign to encourage more members to take up adding references to their Crossref records.\nCrossref turns 25 For one year only (!) Crossref celebrates it\u0026rsquo;s 25th anniversary with stories and well wishes that highlight all aspects of our community. We also launch the inaugural Metadata Awards showing the efforts our members make in enriching their metadata records to collectively enhance the Research Nexus.\n",
"headings": ["Special programs","Resourcing Crossref for Future Sustainability (RCFS)","Integrity of the scholarly record (ISR)","Metadata matching","Register your references","Crossref turns 25"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/board-and-governance/",
"title": "Board & governance",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2025-08-08",
"lastmod_ts": 1754611200,
"section": "Board & governance",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref is registered as Publishers International Linking Association, Inc. (PILA) in New York, USA. You can view our certificate of incorporation and by laws. We have tax exempt status in the US as a 501(c)6 organisation. Here is our antitrust policy (pdf) and our conflict of interest policy (pdf).\nThe board of directors governs Crossref. They meet four times a year and oversee the organisation, set its strategic direction and make sure that Crossref fulfills its mission. A list of motions from every board meeting is available.\n",
"content": "Crossref is registered as Publishers International Linking Association, Inc. (PILA) in New York, USA. You can view our certificate of incorporation and by laws. We have tax exempt status in the US as a 501(c)6 organisation. Here is our antitrust policy (pdf) and our conflict of interest policy (pdf).\nThe board of directors governs Crossref. They meet four times a year and oversee the organisation, set its strategic direction and make sure that Crossref fulfills its mission. A list of motions from every board meeting is available.\nOur members elect the board. Voting take place online and election results are announced at the annual business meeting during the Crossref Annual Meeting each October/November. There is a nominating committee made up of three board members not up for election, and two non-board members. This committee puts forward a slate in September of each year for the entire membership to vote on. Please contact us if you would like to know more.\nTo ensure effective governance and get input from a wide range of members and other stakeholders in the scholarly communications community, we have committees.\nOfficers Chair: Marin Dacos Treasurer: James Phillpotts Secretary: Lucy Ofiesh, Crossref Chief Operating Officer Assistant Secretary: Ed Pentz, Crossref Executive Director Board members Board member Representative Alternate Location Org Type Term APA Aaron Wood Jasper Simons USA Society 2025-2027 Austrian Science Fund (FWF) Katharina Rieck Falk Reckling Austria Research Funder 2025-2027 Beilstein-Institut Wendy Patterson Carsten Kettner Germany Nonprofit 2024-2026 CABI Damian Bird UK Publisher 2026-2028 Distance, Open and e-Learning Practitioners’ Association of Kenya Rebecca Wambua Suleiman Mwangi Kenya Society 2026-2028 Elsevier BV Rose L\u0026rsquo;Huillier Louise Curtis Netherlands Publisher 2026-2028 Korean Council of Science Editors Kihong Kim Sue Kim South Korea Nonprofit 2024-2026 MIT Press Nick Lindsay Amy Brand US University Press 2026-2028 Open Edition Marin Dacos Marie Pellen France Nonprofit 2024-2026 Oxford University Press James Phillpotts John Campbell UK University press 2024-2026 Pan Africa Science Journal Oscar Donde Kenya Publisher 2026-2027 Springer Nature Anjalie Nawaratne Nick Campbell UK Publisher 2026-2028 Taylor and Francis Amanda Ward Stewart Gardiner UK Publisher 2025-2027 Universidad Autónoma de Chile Ivan Suazo Chile University 2024-2026 University of Chicago Press Ashley Towne US University 2024-2026 Vilnius University Vincas Grigas Arūnas Gudinavičius Lithuania University 2024-2026 2026 Motions passed March 2026 Board meeting To approve the agenda for the March 10-11, 2026, meeting of the Board of Directors. To appoint Oscar Donde of Pan Africa Science Journal to fill the seat vacated by the resignation of Lisa Schiff of CDL, to serve out the remainder of CDL’s term through 2027 or until his respective successor is duly appointed and qualified. To approve the Consent Agenda as set forth in the meeting materials. To approve proceeding with establishing Crossref EU, a legal entity in Belgium, in order to build organizational resiliency and create the opportunity and capacity for future operations to exist in the EU if needed. The entity would sit alongside the existing organization with a managed agreement between them. January 2026 Board meeting To appoint Marin Dacos as Chair of the Board. (Open Edition abstaining.) To appoint James Phillpotts as Treasurer. (Oxford University Press abstaining.) To appoint each of Rose L’Huillier, Rebecca Wambua, and Aaron Wood to the Executive Committee. (Elsevier, Distance, Open and e-Learning Practitioners’ Association of Kenya, and APA abstaining) To appoint Lucy Ofiesh as Secretary and Ed Pentz as Assistant Secretary. To appoint Ashley Towne as Chair of the Audit Committee. (University of Chicago Press abstaining) To appoint Nick Lindsay as Chair of the Nominating Committee. (MIT Press abstaining) To approve the Minutes of the November 2025 meeting of the Board of Directors as presented. To approve the Minutes of the December 2025 special meeting of the Board of Directors as presented. To adopt the Minutes of the October 2025 meeting of the Executive Committee as presented. To approve the updated Crossref Authorization Approval procedures as presented. 2025 Motions passed December 2025 special meeting of the Board To approve the adjustment of the Current-Year (CY) grant registration fee down from $2.00 to $1.00 USD, effective January 1st, 2026. To approve a time-limited fee waiver as a pilot for Back-Year (BY) grant registration fees, bringing that per-record fee down from $0.30 to $0.00 for 2026 and 2027 to boost the registration of Back-Year (BY) records and accelerate the contribution to the Research Nexus of more grant\u0026lt;-\u0026gt;output matches. When the pilot concludes, the M\u0026amp;F Committee and RCFS work will consider other adjustments across other BY registration fees for the benefit of all members. November 2025 Board meeting To approve the agenda for the November 11-12, 2025 meeting of the Board of Directors. To approve the Consent Agenda as set forth in the meeting materials. To approve Crossref’s FY 2026 budget as presented. To adopt the revised Investment Policy #6 for Capital Reserve Fund and Investment Policy #6a for Capital Investment Fund, each as set forth in the meeting materials. To provide the following guidance to the Nominating Committee: The Nominating Committee should develop a slate to elect five Tier 1 (small/mid-size), and two Tier 2 (large seats). To achieve balance between Revenue Tiers by proposing a 2026 slate consisting of Revenue Tier 1 seats and Revenue Tier 2 seats; thereby resulting in, as nearly as practicable, an equal balance between Board members representing Revenue Tier 1 and Revenue Tier 2 (as those terms are defined in Crossref’s Bylaws); and To provide the following further guidance to the Nominating Committee with respect to the choice of the slate of candidates for election to the Board at the 2026 annual meeting: Construct a slate of nominees that is at least equal to, and exceeds by no more than two, the number of available seats in each of the Revenue Tier categories (as defined in Crossref’s Bylaws); Prioritize maintaining representation of members including business models (commercial and non-commercial), geography, and sector (such as research institutions, libraries, funders, etc.) in addition to continuing to seek balance of personal characteristics of the individual representative, such as gender, language, and racial and ethnic background; and Work with staff to develop a call for interest that reflects those areas of skill that are functional priorities for the Board, and clearly describes requirements with non-native English speakers in mind. To approve the approach, processes, and monitoring for strategically reinvesting previous years’ accumulated surplus funds as described in the meeting materials, in order to advance Crossref’s mission and strengthen the scholarly communications ecosystem. July 2025 Board meeting To approve the agenda for the July 8-9, 2025 meeting of the Board of Directors. To approve the Consent Agenda as set forth in the meeting materials. To adopt the FY2024 audited financial statements. To create a new tier for members whose publishing revenue/expense is equal to or lower than 1,000 USD per year, effective as of January 1, 2026, and to set membership fees for this tier at 200 USD in 2026, with the intention to revisit in subsequent years, once Crossref confirms data on how many members will be eligible for this tier. To remove all volume discounts (book chapters and reference entries, preprints/posted content, databases/datasets, components) due to underuse, starting January 1, 2026. To consolidate all peer review pricing, regardless of who registers it, to 0.25 USD for the first review for an article, and 0 USD for any subsequent reviews, starting January 1, 2026. March 2025 Board meeting To approve the agenda for the March 5-6, 2025 meeting of the Board of Directors. To approve the Consent Agenda as set forth in the meeting materials. To amend and restate the Crossref Bylaws as presented. To amend the Crossref Member Terms as presented. January 2025 Board meeting Lisa Schiff as Chair of the Board. (CDL abstaining.) Rose L’Huillier as Treasurer. (Elsevier abstaining.) To appoint Lucy Ofiesh as Secretary and Ed Pentz as Assistant Secretary. To appoint each of Oscar Donde, Nick Lindsay, and James Phillpotts to the Executive Committee. (Pan Africa Science Journal, MIT Press, and Oxford University Press abstaining) To appoint Ashley Towne as Chair of the Audit Committee. (University of Chicago Press abstaining) To appoint James Phillpotts as Chair of the Nominating Committee. (Oxford University Press abstaining) To approve the Minutes of the November 2024 meeting of the Board of Directors. 2024 Motions passed November 2024 Board meeting To approve the agenda for the November 12-13, 2024 meeting of the Board of Directors. To approve the Consent Agenda as set forth in the meeting materials. To approve Crossref’s FY 2025 budget as presented. To provide the following guidance to the Nominating Committee: To achieve balance between Revenue Tiers by proposing a 2025 slate consisting of Revenue Tier 1 seats and Revenue Tier 2 seats; thereby resulting in, as nearly as practicable, an equal balance between Board members representing Revenue Tier 1 and Revenue Tier 2 (as those terms are defined in Crossref’s Bylaws); and To provide the following further guidance to the Nominating Committee with respect to the choice of the slate of candidates for election to the Board at the 2025 annual meeting: Construct a slate of nominees that is at least equal to, and exceeds by no more than two, the number of available seats in each of the Revenue Tier categories (as defined in Crossref’s Bylaws); Prioritize maintaining representation of members including business models (commercial and non-commercial), geography, and sector (such as research institutions, libraries, funders, etc.) in addition to continuing to seek balance of personal characteristics of the individual representative, such as gender, language, and racial and ethnic background; Work with staff to develop a call for interest that reflects those areas of skill that are functional priorities for the Board, and clearly describes requirements with non-native English speakers in mind; and Encourage and recruit Crossref members who are research funders to apply to the board. July 2024 Board meeting To approve the agenda for the July 9-10, 2024 meeting of the Board of Directors. To approve the Consent Agenda as set forth in the meeting materials. To approve the FY2023 audited financial statements. To create a non-voting class of Crossref membership, open only to otherwise-eligible organisations for whom, as determined by Crossref’s legal counsel, international sanctions law prohibits voting membership but permits non-voting membership; and further To agree to waive the 10 days notice requirement for bylaws changes in exchange for seven days’ notice of the proposed changes; and further To adopt the necessary changes to Crossref’s Bylaws, as set forth in the meeting materials. (APA, Oxford University Press, and Springer Nature abstaining.) To restrict $500,000 to the capital reserve fund. (AIP, Center for Open Science, Elsevier, and Oxford University Press against; Clarivate abstaining.) March 2024 Board meeting To approve the agenda for the March 12-13, 2024 meeting of the Board of Directors. To approve the Consent Agenda as set forth in the meeting materials. To appoint Lucy Ofiesh as Secretary and Ed Pentz as Assistant Secretary. January 2024 Board meeting Lisa Schiff as Chair of the Board. (CDL abstaining.) Rose L’Huillier as Treasurer. (Elsevier abstaining.) To appoint each of Wendy Patterson, James Phillpotts, and Christine Stohn to the Executive Committee. (Beilstein Institut, Oxford University Press, and Clarivate abstaining) To appoint Nick Lindsay as Chair of the Audit Committee. (MIT Press abstaining) To appoint Vincas Grigas as Chair of the Membership \u0026amp; Fees Committee. (Vilnius University abstaining) To appoint James Phillpotts as Chair of the Nominating Committee. (Oxford University Press abstaining) To approve the Minutes of the November 2023 meeting of the Board of Directors. 2023 Motions passed November 2023 Board meeting To approve the agenda for the November 14-15, 2023 meeting of the Board of Directors. To approve the Consent Agenda as set forth in the meeting materials. To approve Crossref’s FY 2023 budget as presented. To provide the following guidance to the Nominating Committee: To achieve balance between Revenue Tiers by proposing a 2024 slate consisting of Revenue Tier 1 seats and Revenue Tier 2 seats; thereby resulting in, as nearly as practicable, an equal balance between Board members representing Revenue Tier 1 and Revenue Tier 2 (as those terms are defined in Crossref’s Bylaws); and To provide the following further guidance to the Nominating Committee with respect to the choice of the slate of candidates for election to the Board at the 2024 annual meeting: Construct a slate of nominees that is at least equal to, and exceeds by no more than two, the number of available seats in each of the Revenue Tier categories (as defined in Crossref’s Bylaws); Prioritize maintaining representation of members including business models (commercial and non-commercial), geography, and sector (such as research institutions, libraries, funders, etc.) in addition to continuing to seek balance of personal characteristics of the individual representative, such as gender, language, and racial and ethnic background; Work with staff to develop a call for interest that reflects those areas of skill that are functional priorities for the Board, and clearly describes requirements with non-native English speakers in mind; and Encourage and recruit Crossref members who are research funders to apply to the Board. To amend Art. V. of Sec. 9 of the Crossref Bylaws to replace the words “until the next annual meeting” with the words “until the end of the term which the director was elected or appointed to fill, or for a term to be determined by the Board which ends at an annual meeting (but in no event longer than three (3) years).” To adopt the following remit for the Membership and Fees Committee: The Membership and Fees Committee (M\u0026amp;F Committee) is charged with working with staff to regularly review the policies and fees for all our services and making recommendations to the board about any changes. The M\u0026amp;F Committee will review the proposed policies and fees (if any) for new services while they are being developed and make recommendations to the board. The Committee ensures that all policies and fees are consistent with Crossref’s mission, fee principles, and the Principles of Open Scholarly Infrastructure (POSI). In addition, the board can also ask the committee to address specific issues about policies and services. 2024 committee scope: Recruit committee members as needed to represent Crossref stakeholders Work with the leadership team on the project approved at the November 2023 board meeting to assess Crossref’s long-term resourcing model Review and provide feedback on project outputs, including SWOT analysis, modelling of new fees, and impact/effort assessments of fee changes. Support staff in getting feedback from the community on fee models and possible changes to current fees. Committee work might also include advising on how we engage the community in the process, such as reviewing RFPs for a project consultant, refining the questions we ask, and reviewing the input. Make recommendations to the board for any proposed fee changes Share findings publicly with the community July 2023 Board meeting To approve the agenda for the July 11-12, 2023 meeting of the Board of Directors. To approve the Consent Agenda as set forth in the meeting materials. To ratify the election of Mike Schramm to fill the seat vacated by the resignation of Marc Hurlbert, to serve out the remainder of the current term of the vacated seat or until his respective successor is duly appointed and qualified. (NISC abstaining.) To approve the FY2022 audited financial statements. To restrict $2,700,000 of surplus funds to Crossref’s capital reserve fund. To amend Article I, Section 5 of the Bylaws to add the words “or required by applicable international sanctions compliance” after the words “non-payment of dues and fees,” and to delegate to the Executive Director the authority to carry out such suspensions or expulsions. To approve the revocation of membership of those Crossref members listed in the meeting materials as having been identified as being located in jurisdictions or industry areas subject to applicable sanctions regimes, effective as of December 31, 2023 unless sooner lifted. To ratify the membership revocations previously approved by the ExCo of the Crossref members listed in the meeting materials. To authorize Crossref personnel, further to the July 2019 resolution of the Board authorizing the for-cause termination of OMICS Publishing Group and several related entities, to terminate the membership of any additional Crossref member that is identified by Crossref staff as a likely affiliate of OMICS or controlled by its founder, where the member is unable to provide evidence of independent ownership. March 2023 Board meeting Lisa Schiff as Chair of the Board. (CDL abstaining.) Rose L’Huillier as Treasurer. (Elsevier abstaining.) To appoint each of Wendy Patterson and Christine Stohn to the Executive Committee. (Beilstein Institut and Clarivate abstaining) To appoint James Phillpotts to the Executive Committee. (Oxford University Press abstaining) To appoint Lucy Ofiesh as Secretary and Ed Pentz as Assistant Secretary. To appoint Aaron Wood as Chair of the Nominating Committee. (APA abstaining) To appoint Penelope Lewis as Chair of the Audit Committee. (AIP abstaining) To approve the agenda for the March 8-9, 2023 meeting of the Board of Directors. To approve the Consent Agenda as set forth in the meeting materials. To limit the 2023 Board slate to a number of nominees that is at least equal to, and exceeds by no more than two, the number of available seats in each of the Revenue Tier categories. To provide the following guidance to the Nominating Committee: To achieve balance between Revenue Tiers by proposing a 2023 slate consisting of Revenue Tier 1 seats and Revenue Tier 2 seats; thereby resulting in, as nearly as practicable, an equal balance between Board members representing Revenue Tier 1 and Revenue Tier 2 (as those terms are defined in Crossref’s Bylaws); and To provide the following further guidance to the Nominating Committee with respect to the choice of the slate of candidates for election to the Board at the 2023 annual meeting: Construct a slate of nominees that is at least equal to, and exceeds by no more than one, the number of available seats in each of the Revenue Tier categories (as defined in Crossref’s Bylaws); Prioritize maintaining representation of members including business models (commercial and non-commercial), geography, and sector (such as research institutions, libraries, funders, etc.) in addition to continuing to seek balance of personal characteristics of the individual representative, such as gender, language, and racial and ethnic background; Work with staff to develop a call for interest that reflects those areas of skill that are functional priorities for the Board, and clearly describes requirements with non-native English speakers in mind; and Prepare strategic issues for discussion at the July board meeting about nominating and governance goals and practices. 2022 Motions passed November 2022 Board meeting To approve the agenda for the November 8-9, 2022 meeting of the Board of Directors. (APA, Open Edition abstaining.) To approve the Consent Agenda as set forth in the meeting materials. (APA, Open Edition abstaining.) To approve Crossref’s FY 2023 budget as presented. (APA abstaining.) To approve the proposal to evolve the fee assistance program into a more expansive Global Equitable Membership (GEM) Program involving: waiving annual membership fees as well as content registration fees; and offering this by default to all eligible countries irrespective of joining through any specific Sponsor, or independently, subject to annual review. July 2022 Board meeting All motions passed unanimously except as otherwise noted.\nTo approve the agenda for the July 12-13, 2022 meeting of the Board of Directors. To approve the Consent Agenda as set forth in the meeting materials. (APA abstaining.) To ratify the appointment of Aaron Wood to fill the American Psychological Association seat vacated by Jasper Simons, to serve out the remainder of the current term or until his respective successor is duly appointed and qualified. (APA abstaining.) To approve the FY2021 audited financial statements, and to accept the recommendations from the Audit Committee. Crossref commits to support, along with the California Digital Library and DataCite, the long term sustainability of ROR by funding a share of ROR operating costs through its normal expense budget on an ongoing basis, along with joint governance and sustainability oversight. Crossref will include support for ROR in the normal budget proposal presented to the board in November. (CDL abstaining.) March 2022 Board meeting All motions passed unanimously except as otherwise noted.\nTo elect Reshma Shaikh as Chair of the Board. (Springer Nature abstaining) To elect Damian Pattison as Treasurer. (eLife abstaining) To appoint each of Rose L’Huillier and Wendy Patterson to the Executive Committee. (Elsevier and Beilstein Institut abstaining) To appoint Lucy Ofiesh as Secretary and Ed Pentz as Assistant Secretary of the Corporation. To appoint Jasper Simons as Chair of the Audit Committee. (APA abstaining) To appoint Abel Packer as Chair of the Membership \u0026amp; Fees Committee. (SciELO abstaining) To appoint Todd Toler as Chair of the Membership \u0026amp; Fees Committee. To ratify the appointment of Marc Hurlbert to fill the Melanoma Research Alliance seat vacated by Kristin Mueller, and of Damian Pattison to fill the eLife seat vacated by Melissa Harrison, in each case to serve out the remainder of the current term or until their respective successor is duly appointed and qualified. (eLife abstaining) To approve the agenda for the March 9-10, 2022 meeting of the Board of Directors. To approve the Consent Agenda as set forth in the meeting materials. That, based on a technical assessment, Crossref will change its reference distribution policy so that all references registered with Crossref are treated the same as other metadata, following a planned transition. To limit the 2022 Board slate to a number of nominees that is at least equal to, and exceeds by no more than one, the number of available seats in each of the Revenue Tier categories. (6 in favor; 5 opposed; Clarivate abstaining) To provide the following guidance to the Nominating Committee: To achieve balance between Revenue Tiers by proposing a 2022 slate consisting of Revenue Tier 1 seats and Revenue Tier 2 seats; thereby resulting in, as nearly as practicable, an equal balance between Board members representing Revenue Tier 1 and Revenue Tier 2 (as those terms are defined in Crossref’s Bylaws); and To provide the following further guidance to the Nominating Committee with respect to the choice of the slate of candidates for election to the Board at the 2022 annual meeting: Construct a slate of nominees that is at least equal to, and exceeds by no more than one, the number of available seats in each of the Revenue Tier categories (as defined in Crossref’s Bylaws); Prioritize maintaining representation of members having both commercial and non-commercial business models, in addition to continuing to seek balance across factors such as gender, ethnic and racial background, geography, and sector; Work with staff to develop a call for interest that reflects those areas of skill that are functional priorities for the Board; and Take into account any recommendations from the previous year’s Nominating Committee. To appoint Liz Allen to the Executive Committee. (Taylor \u0026amp; Francis abstaining) 2021 Motions passed November 2021 Board meeting All motions passed unanimously except as otherwise noted.\nTo approve the agenda for the November 9-10, 2021 meeting of the Board of Directors. To approve the Consent Agenda as set forth in the meeting materials. To adopt the proposed funds framework and investment policy changes as set forth in the meeting materials; and To authorize (1) the Investment Committee to establish a set of high-level guidelines for ethical and sustainable investment practices, and (2) the Leadership Team and the Investment Committee to implement Crossref’s capital investments consistent with those guidelines. To adopt Crossref’s proposed travel and events commitments, including budget levels, set forth in the meeting materials. To authorize the Leadership Team, supported by counsel, to proceed with negotiations with Turnitin, LLC based on the recommendations set forth in the Board meeting materials, as well as to (1) further investigate options for image detection and (2) continue to promote and cultivate longer-term alternative solutions within the plagiarism detection market. To approve Crossref’s FY 2022 budget as presented. July 2021 Board meeting All motions passed unanimously except as otherwise noted.\nTo approve the agenda for the July 13-14, 2021 meeting of the Board of Directors. To approve the consent agenda as set forth in the meeting minutes. To approve the FY2020 audited financial statements, and to accept the recommendations from the Audit Committee. To ratify the Executive Committee’s termination of Graduate School of Economics and Management membership. To terminate the subsequent membership of University of Economic and Management. To disallow membership for any applications that the Leadership Team determines are the same entity or organisation trying to regain membership. 7.To approve starting the recruitment and hiring for an additional infrastructure position as soon as possible. March 2021 Board meeting: All motions passed unanimously except as otherwise noted.\nTo elect Scott Delman as Chairman of the Board. (ACM abstaining) To elect Catherine Mitchell as Treasurer. (CDL abstaining) To appoint each of Melissa Harrison, Rose L’Huillier, and Reshma Shaikh to the Executive Committee. (eLife, Springer Nature, and Elsevier abstaining) To appoint Lucy Ofiesh as Secretary and Ed Pentz as Assistant Secretary of the Corporation. To appoint Jasper Simons as Chair of the Audit Committee. (APA abstaining) To appoint Todd Toler as Chair of the Membership \u0026amp; Fees Committee. (Wiley abstaining) To ratify the appointment of Dean Sanderson to fill the AIP seat vacated by Jason Wilde for the remainder of AIP’s term until March 2021. (AIP abstaining) To approve the agenda for the March 9-10, 2021 meeting of the Board of Directors. To approve the consent agenda as set forth in the meeting minutes. To appoint Liz Allen as Chair of the Nominating Committee. (Taylor \u0026amp; Francis abstaining) To instruct the Nominating Committee to (1) put forward a slate to fill three Tier 1 seats and two Tier 2 seats with one additional candidate per tier, for a total of four Tier 1 candidates and three Tier 2 candidates; and (2) to propose at least one name from a funder member for the current round of elections, with the Crossref Board to review this approach following the 2021 Board election. (APA and AJOL abstaining.) 2020 Motions passed November 2020 Board meeting: All motions passed unanimously except as otherwise noted.\nTo approve the agenda for the November 10-11, 2020 meeting of the Board of Directors.\nTo approve the Minutes of the July 2020 meeting of the Board of Directors.\nTo approve the Minutes of the October 2020 strategy session of the Board of Directors.\nTo hold the March 2021 Crossref Board meeting, in virtual format, on March 9-10, 2021.\nTo adopt the Audit Committee’s report as presented.\nTo endorse the Principles of Open Scholarly Infrastructure, as set forth in the meeting materials. (APA voting against; Elsevier abstaining.)\nTo approve the 2020 budget as presented.\nThat the Crossref Board supports another organisation’s taking ownership of the Distributed Usage Logging (“DUL”) initiative. Crossref will support the DUL proof of concept, as is, until the March 2021 Crossref Board meeting or until ownership has been transitioned, whichever is sooner. Crossref will provide adequate transition support when the service migrates, and continue to support the registration of article-level DUL endpoint metadata if another organisation takes over and maintains the service.\nJuly 2020 Board meeting: All motions passed unanimously except as otherwise noted.\nTo approve the agenda for the July 8-9, 2020 meeting of the Board of Directors.\nTo approve the Minutes of the March 2020 meeting and May and June 2020 strategy sessions of the Board of Directors, with the revisions proposed by participants.\nTo adopt the Minutes of the Crossref Executive Committee meetings of April 3, April 17, May 1, May 15, May 29, and June 12, 2020.\nTo adopt the auditors’ recommendations with respect to further updating and documenting Crossref’s internal controls.\nTo direct the Crossref leadership team to analyze the options with respect to type and frequency of regular audits of Crossref’s internal controls, and to present a proposal to the Board at its November 2020 meeting.\nTo adopt the 2019 audited financial statements of the Company.\nTo direct the organisation to create a standing Investment Committee to provide guidance to the board and leadership team on managing Crossref’s financial assets, which committee shall (1) seek Board approval for any change in investment strategy and (2) work closely with the leadership team with respect to communications regarding Crossref’s asset management policies and related matters.\nTo revise the Day 2 Board meeting agenda as proposed.\nThat Crossref should proactively lead an effort to explore, with other infrastructure organisations and initiatives, how we can improve the scholarly research ecosystem. Crossref is committed to the collaborative development of open scholarly infrastructure for the benefit of our members and the wider research community. Abstaining: Open Edition, SciELO\nThat the exploration referenced in the foregoing resolution should consider a range of options looking at operational, governance, technical, and product and service issues and how the organisations could take advantage of synergies, efficiencies, and opportunities for the benefit of the wider research community by working more closely together.\nTo establish an ad hoc Exploratory Committee to determine, within six weeks, concrete next steps in exploring broader scholarly infrastructure partnerships under the auspices of Crossref; said committee to include the Crossref leadership team and board members at large with relevant experience and no conflicts of interest.\nTo constitute the ad hoc Exploratory Committee to consist of five members of the Crossref leadership team and four members of the Crossref Board. Abstaining: ACM, SciELO\nThat the Executive Committee’s May 29, 2020 termination of two sponsoring members, as more particularly set forth in the meeting materials, is hereby ratified, and staff directed to work with counsel to explore alternative modes of Crossref participation for similarly-situated members consistent with US and other applicable legal constraints.\nThat the Executive Committee’s May 29, 2020 termination of certain Crossref members linked with former Crossref member OMICS is hereby ratified.\nTo accept with pleasure, subject to appropriate legal review and documentation, the rescission of Ed Pentz’s resignation as Executive Director of Crossref.\nMarch 2020 Board meeting: All motions passed unanimously except as otherwise noted.\nTo approve the agenda for the March 11-12, 2020 meeting of the Board of Directors.\nTo ratify the appointment of Rose L’Huillier to fill the Elsevier seat vacated by Chris Shillum, and of Andrew Smeall to fill the Hindawi seat vacated by Paul Peters, in each case to serve out the remainder of the current term or until his/her successor is duly appointed and qualified.\nTo appoint Lucy Ofiesh as Secretary of the Corporation.\nTo appoint each of Amy Brand, Catherine Mitchell, and Reshma Shaikh to the Executive Committee. (MIT Press, CDL, and Springer Nature abstaining.)\nTo appoint Andrew Smeall as Chair of the Audit Committee. (Hindawi and Springer Nature abstaining.)\nTo adopt the recommendation of the Executive Committee with respect to acquisitions of Crossref members to provide that (1) any consolidated enterprise cannot occupy more than one Board seat, but can permit a subsidiary organisation to occupy its Board seat; (2) wholly-owned subsidiaries should not be treated as separate Crossref members, but should be part of a single member whose fees are based on enterprise-level revenues; and (3) pursuant to the foregoing principles, Taylor \u0026amp; Francis and F1000 Research will be treated as a single member following the acquisition of F1000 Research by Taylor \u0026amp; Francis. (AJOL, SciELO, and Taylor \u0026amp; Francis abstaining.)\nTo approve the Minutes of the November 2019 meeting of the Board of Directors. (AJOL, Springer Nature, Clarivate Analytics, Elsevier, Wiley, and Hindawi abstaining.)\nTo provide the following guidance to the Nominating Committee: To achieve balance between Revenue Tiers by proposing a 2020 slate consisting of four Revenue Tier 1 seats and two Revenue Tier 2 seats; thereby resulting in, as nearly as practicable, an equal balance between Board members representing Revenue Tier 1 and Revenue Tier 2 (as those terms are defined in Crossref’s Bylaws).\nTo provide the following further guidance to the Nominating Committee with respect to the choice of the slate of candidates for election to the Board at the 2020 annual meeting:\nConstruct a slate of nominees that is at least equal to, and exceeds by no more than two, the number of available seats in each of the Revenue Tier categories (as defined in Crossref’s Bylaws); Prioritize maintaining representation of members having both commercial and non-commercial business models, in addition to continuing to seek balance across factors such as gender, ethnic and racial background, geography, and sector; and Work with staff to develop a call for interest that reflects those areas of technical skill that are functional priorities for the Board. To adopt the proposed 2020 scope of work for the Membership \u0026amp; Fees Committee as set forth in the meeting materials. (AJOL abstaining.)\nTo retire Crossref’s Text and Data Mining Click Through Service due to lack of uptake, working in consultation with those Crossref members currently utilizing the service to accommodate their reasonable timing needs.\nThat, with respect to the search process for Crossref’s next Executive Director, (1) Crossref’s Executive Committee, in consultation with Crossref’s staff directors, will conduct the search; (2) the Executive Committee will propose one candidate to the Board for ratification; and (3) in the event that the Executive Committee cannot agree on a single candidate to propose to the Board, it will seek broader assistance from the Board and senior staff, at the discretion of the Executive Committee, in order to arrive at a single candidate to propose for Board ratification.\n2019 Motions passed November 2019 Board meeting: All motions passed unanimously except as otherwise noted.\nTo approve the agenda for the November 12-13, 2019 meeting of the Board of Directors. To approve the Minutes of the July 2019 meeting of the Board of Directors. To adopt the amended Whistleblower Policy. That staff, working with the ad hoc Strategic Working Group, will develop the framework for a discussion of key strategic questions, including alternatives to evaluate, to be held at the March 2020 Board meeting, with facilitation if appropriate. That any resource request associated with the Distributed Use Logging Initiative will be submitted to Crossref’s Executive Committee for review and approval. That the Membership \u0026amp; Fees Committee will prepare a revised M\u0026amp;F Committee Charter, to include elements addressing committee membership criteria and expectations for committee membership. To finalize the Board’s previous provisional decision to eliminate the Crossmark fee, in light of the presentation of Crossref’s proposed 2020 budget. To approve the 2020 budget as presented. July 2019 Board meeting: All motions passed unanimously except as otherwise noted.\nTo approve the agenda for the July 10-11, 2019 meeting of the Board of Directors. To approve the minutes of the March 2019 meeting of the Board of Directors, as revised to reflect participant feedback. To ratify the appointment of Melissa Harrison to fill the eLife seat vacated by Mark Patterson, to serve out the remainder of the current term until November 2019 or her successor is duly appointed and qualified. (eLife abstaining.) To institute a membership fee of $5 per Sponsored Member. (AJOL abstaining.) To keep Event Data in maintenance mode and defer sustainability model work until July 2020, and require staff to present a plan to the Board in July 2020 for Event Data Plus. To take the following actions: (1) to implement a practice whereby, when a member registers a content item for which it pays the standard Content Registration fee, then no additional content fee will be assessed for a subsequent registration by the same member of a version of the original content, provided that the appropriate isVersionof designator is used in the metadata; (2) to treat the isTranslationOf relationship type in the same fashion; (3) to treat corrections and retractions in the same fashion when and to the extent technically feasible; and (4) to direct the Membership \u0026amp; Fees Committee to examine Crossref’s other relationship types to determine which others, if any, should be treated in the same fashion. To approve the following Crossref Fee Principles: Crossref’s fees should: (1) Enable us to fulfill our mission to make research outputs easy to find, cite, link, assess, and reuse. (2) Encourage best practice and discourage bad practice, as Crossref policies and obligations advise. (3) Be non-discriminatory, encouraging broad participation from organisations of all sizes and types. (4) Support the long-term persistence of our services and infrastructure, so long as relevant and valuable to the community. (5) Deliver value to our members. (6) Be transparent and openly available, recommended by the Membership \u0026amp; Fees Committee and approved by the Board. (7) Be the same for all, not discounted or negotiated individually, to ensure fairness. (8) Be independent of our members’ own business models. (9) Not always be necessary, e.g., new record types are not usually separate services. (10) Be based on services not metadata. To approve the elimination of the Crossmark fee, subject to the 2020 budgeting process. To adopt the 2018 audited financial statements of the Company. To ratify the account termination, for cause, of OMICS Publishing Group (Member ID 2674); Ashdin Publishing (Member ID 2853); Scitechnol Biosoft Pvt. Ltd. (Member ID 9225); and Herbert Publications PVT LTD (Member ID 4912). To amend Art. I Sec. 5 of Crossref’s Bylaws by replacing the second sentence thereto in its entirety with the following text: “Suspension or expulsion shall be by a vote of the Board (or by action of the Executive Committee, to take effect at the time specified in such Executive Committee action and to be reviewed and ratified by a vote of the Board at the next subsequent Board meeting), except where the suspension or expulsion is the result of the non-payment of dues and fees, in which event the Board may delegate such authority to the Executive Director.” To approve a policy of causing the DOIs of permanently terminated member accounts to resolve first to an interstitial page with a message indicating the DOI has resolved to content of a party that is no longer a member, and then to the original version of the content (or, if no original, an archived version). (AIP, eLife abstaining.) To form a temporary ad hoc Strategic Review Working Group to examine (1) the feedback on strategic matters provided by the Board breakout groups at the July 2019 Board meeting; and (2) results of Crossref’s value research project once available. March 2019 Board meeting: All motions passed unanimously except as otherwise noted.\nTo approve the agenda for the March 6-7, 2019 meeting of the Board of Directors. To elect Paul Peters as Chairman of the Board. (Hindawi abstaining.) To elect Scott Delman as Treasurer. (ACM abstaining.) To appoint each of Amy Brand, Wim van der Stelt, and Jason Wilde to the Executive Committee. (MIT Press, Springer Nature, and AIP abstaining.) To appoint Chris Shillum as Chair of the Audit Committee. (Elsevier abstaining.) To appoint Jasper Simons as Chair of the Nominating Committee. (APA abstaining.) To appoint each of Graham McCann and Mark Patterson to the Audit Committee. (IOP and eLife abstaining.) To appoint each of Scott Delman and Catherine Mitchell to the Nominating Committee. (ACM and CDL abstaining.) To appoint Lisa Hart as Secretary of the Corporation. To approve the minutes of the November 2018 meeting of the Board of Directors. To amend Art. VII, Sec. 2 of Crossref’s Bylaws by inserting the following language after the second sentence thereof: Each such slate will be comprised such that, as nearly as practicable, one-half of the resulting Board shall be composed of Directors designated by Members then representing Revenue Tier 1; and one-half of the resulting Board shall be composed of Directors designated by Members then representing Revenue Tier 2. “Revenue Tier 1” means all consecutive membership dues categories, starting with the lowest dues category, that, when taken together, aggregate, as nearly as possible, to fifty percent (50%) of Crossref’s annual revenue. “Revenue Tier 2” means all membership dues categories above Revenue Tier 1. To adopt the Crossref Board Election Campaign Policy as proposed in the Board materials. To provide the following guidance to the Nominating Committee: To achieve balance between Revenue Tiers by proposing a 2019 slate consisting of one Revenue Tier 1 seat and four Revenue Tier 2 seats, and a 2020 slate consisting of four Revenue Tier 1 seats and two Revenue Tier 2 seats; thereby resulting in, as nearly as practicable, an equal balance between board members representing Revenue Tier 1 and Revenue Tier 2 (as those terms are defined in Crossref’s Bylaws). To provide the following further guidance to the Nominating Committee with respect to the choice of the slate of candidates for election to the Board at the 2019 annual meeting: Construct a slate of nominees that is at least equal to, and exceeds by no more than two, the number of available seats in each of the Revenue Tier categories(as defined in Crossref’s Bylaws); Prioritize maintaining representation of members having both commercial and non-commercial business models, in addition to continuing to seek balance across factors such as gender, ethnic and racial background, geography, and sector; and Work with staff to develop a call for interest that reflects those areas of technical skill that are functional priorities for the Board. To authorize the Treasurer, Executive Director, and Secretary to open a new account at a mutually agreed-upon bank, and formally close Crossref’s Citizen’s Bank account. To ratify the appointment of Ingrida Kasperaitienė to fill the VGTU seat vacated by Eleonora Dagiene, to serve out the remainder of their current term. 2018 Motions passed November 2018 Board meeting: All motions passed unanimously except as otherwise noted.\nTo approve the agenda for the November 15, 2018 meeting of the Board of Directors. To approve the minutes of the July 2018 meeting of the Board of Directors. To approve the recommendation of the Membership \u0026amp; Fees Committee that Crossref begins admitting funders as members and register grant identifiers and to approve the fee structure proposed. To approve the proposed Definitive Agreement with Turnitin, LLC, subject to (1) revisions to address Board member comments summarized in the Minutes and (2) further discussions to accommodate the content licensing concern expressed by Board meeting participants. To approve the adoption of a governance structure pursuant to which Board seats will be, as nearly as practicable, designated by revenue tier, with two categories (large and small), defined so as to roughly reflect half of Crossref’s revenue and registered content items in each category. (PASSED with one abstention (MIT Press). To approve the promulgation of a policy on campaigning in Board elections, with policy language to be developed by staff to reflect, at a minimum, a prohibition on negative campaigning and member expenditure of funds on campaigns and a distinction between passive versus active campaigning. To approve the process proposed by the Governance Committee for nominations to each of the following positions: Chair, Treasurer, Executive Committee members, the Nominating Committee Chair, and the Audit Committee Chair. To amend Art. VII of the Bylaws to remove Section 3 (Independent Nominations). To amend Art. I Sections 2 and 3 of the Bylaws to reflect the current means and sequence of member acceptance, as more particularly set forth in the Board meeting materials under “Proposed Amendments to the Crossref Bylaws.” To approve the 2019 budget as proposed, with the addition of up to $50,000 for the Distributed Usage Logging initiative. July 2018 Board meeting: All motions passed unanimously except as otherwise noted.\nTo approve the agenda for the July 11-12, 2018 meeting of the Board of Directors. To approve the minutes of the March 2018 meeting of the Board of Directors. To adopt the 2017 audited financial statements of the Company. To approve, with recommended revisions, the revised form of Crossref Membership Terms. There was general consensus to make three revisions to the draft terms: using the term “Crossref Infrastructure and Services” throughout the document; qualifying a member’s obligation to comply with the Crossref Display Guidelines; and clarifying the GDPR compliance language. To approve the proposed Term Sheet with Turnitin, LLC, subject to revisions: (1) to expressly retain the parties’ existing terms with respect to full text use and reuse by Turnitin; and (2) to provide that the final agreement will include required milestones and deliverables coupled with express remedies, including termination of exclusivity, for certain milestone/deliverable failures. To amend Art. I Sec. 1 of Crossref’s Bylaws by replacing the text of Art. I Sec. 1 in its entirety with the following text: “Membership in Crossref shall be open to any organisation that publishes professional and scholarly materials and content and otherwise meets the terms and conditions of membership established from time to time by the Board of Directors, and to such other entities as the Board of Directors shall determine from time to time.” To amend Art. V Sec. 4 to replace the phrase “on the day after” with the phrase “during the next calendar quarter immediately following”. To promulgate a policy on board alternate participation, pursuant to which (1) alternates are encouraged and welcomed to attend each meeting of Crossref’s Board of Directors that is held concurrently with Crossref’s annual meeting; (2) only a director or their alternate, but not both, may attend any other meeting of the Crossref Board of Directors; and (3) Crossref’s need-based reimbursement policy will explicitly cover the participation of alternates. March 2018 Board meeting: All motions passed unanimously except as otherwise noted.\nTo approve the agenda for the March 7-8, 2018 meeting of the Board of Directors. To appreciate the contributions of Lois Wasoff to the Company. To approve the minutes of the November 2017 Board meeting. Board authorizes Crossref to make a proposal to DataCite and ORCID to proceed with an Org ID initiative on the following principles: OrgID activities would be conducted through a new legal entity (or whatever structural approach is optimal from a legal standpoint), with a governing body consisting of Crossref, Date Cite, and ORCID, and potentially other nonprofit representative bodies. Other interested parties who wish to contribute financially to the entity would be welcome to participate in a non-governance role. Crossref is willing to commit $300,000 as follows: $30,000 in 2018; and $270,000 in additional startup funding, contingent on raising an additional $400,000 from other stakeholders by mid-October (so that results are available by Crossref’s November 2018 meeting). Further funding beyond Year 1 will be contingent on a full business plan being developed and approved by the Crossref Board at its November 2018 meeting. To give the Nominating Committee the following guidance with respect to the choice of the slate of candidates for election to the Board at the 2018 annual meeting: Create a slate of nominees that encourages engagement in the election of directors through a contested election; maintain stability by constructing a slate that exceeds the number of available seats by no more than two. Construct slate based on the quality of the expressions of interest from candidates and to maintain balance across organisational size, gender, and geography. To create an ad hoc Finance Committee of the Board to project the financial profile of the Company on a two- to three-year prospective basis; and analyze and respond to the financial and revenue implications of the Company’s various strategic initiatives. 2017 Motions passed November 2017 Board meeting: All motions passed unanimously except as otherwise noted.\nTo approve the agenda for the meeting. To approve the minutes of the July 2017 Board Meeting. To accept the minutes of the Executive Committee telephone meetings on October 6, October 27 and November 7, 2017. To elect Paul Peters as Chair of the Board of Directors, after a Board vote done through written ballots in which Paul Peters and Chris Shillum were each nominated as Chair and a majority of the votes were cast for Paul. To elect Scott Delman as Treasurer, Lisa Hart as Secretary, and Ed Pentz as Executive Director and Assistant Secretary. To elect Jason Wilde, Chris Shillum and John Shaw to the Executive Committee. To elect Wim van der Stelt as Chair of the Audit Committee, and Duncan Campbell and Helen King as members of the Audit Committee. To elect Mark Patterson as the Chair of the Nominating Committee, and to defer the appointment of other Nominating Committee members until the March Board meeting. To elect Graham McCann as the Chair of the Membership \u0026amp; Fees Committee. To authorize Crossref staff to reply to the organisation Identifier Working Group’s request for information (RFI) in accordance with the recommendations from the staff report, with specific guidance that the response should state Crossref’s willingness to take a leading role in the development of an independent organisation identifier registry, that there is a strong preference that a new joint venture collaboration be formed and not a new non‐profit organisation and that Crossref can make resources available to support the joint venture collaboration along with grants and funding from other organisations. To approve the 2018 budget as proposed. To create an ad hoc Governance Committee, to comprise Paul Peters, Mark Patterson, Chris Shillum, Ian Bannerman, Wim van der Stelt and Lisa Hart Martin with Lois Wasoff as counsel, which will make specific recommendations to the Board at the March meeting. To create an ad hoc Technical Committee to look at infrastructure issues, the membership of which will be determined by seeking expressions of interest from the members of the Board. July 2017 Board meeting: All motions passed unanimously except as otherwise noted.\nTo approve the agenda for the meeting. To approve the minutes of the March 2017 Board Meeting, as corrected. To accept the minutes of the Executive Committee telephone meetings on April 21 and June 23, 2017. To approve the creation of an ad hoc Finance Committee, the members of which will be appointed at the November Board meeting. To formally recognize Bernie Rous’s contributions to Crossref and to scholarly publishing over his 40-year career. To approve the recommendations of the Membership \u0026amp; Fees Committee with respect to volume discounts for current deposits of posted content. (PASSED with AIP, IEEE, Elsevier opposed; and ACM abstaining.) To approve the recommendations of the Membership \u0026amp; Fees Committee with respect to the creation of “peer review” as a new record type, with specific metadata schema and a bundled fee of $1.25 to be charged, with the clarifications that (i) the original, unaccepted author manuscript is to be excluded; and (ii) although the number of peer reviews that can be registered at the bundled fee will be unlimited now, Crossref may make changes in future based on actual experience with the new record type. To approve the recommendations of the Membership \u0026amp; Fees Committee with respect to updating the metadata delivery offering to have a single agreement that covers all metadata APIs/delivery routes, to adopt a single (updated) fee structure, and to remove case-by-case opt-outs for metadata. To approve the audited financials. March 2017 Board meeting: All motions passed unanimously except as otherwise noted.\nTo approve the agenda for the meeting. To approve the minutes of the November 2016 Board Meeting, as corrected. To accept the minutes of the Executive Committee telephone meetings on January 24 and February 9, 2017. To appoint Eric Merkel-Sobotta to fill the vacancy on the Audit Committee. To approve the proposed charge to the Audit Committee, with the addition of language giving the Audit Committee the responsibility of overseeing technical and security audits of the company’s systems. 2016 Motions passed November 2016 Board meeting: All motions passed unanimously except as otherwise noted.\nTo approve the agenda for the meeting. To approve the minutes of the July 2016 Board Meeting. To accept the minutes of the Executive Committee telephone meetings on September 30 and October 21, 2016. To elect Bernard Rous as Chairman and President, Gerry Grenier as Treasurer and Vice Chairman, Ed Pentz as Executive Director and Assistant Secretary, and Lisa Hart as Secretary. To elect Ian Bannerman, Chris Shillum and Jason Wilde to serve on the Executive Committee along with Bernard Rous and Gerry Grenier. To appoint John Shaw as Chair, and Paul Peters, Reny Guida (IEEE) and Mark Patterson as members, of the Nominating Committee with authority to appoint two additional members who represent companies that are not on the Board. To appoint James Walker as Chair, and Wim van der Stelt and Jasper Wilde as members of the Audit Committee. To appoint Scott Delman as Chair of the Membership \u0026amp; Fees Committee. To approve the recommendation of the Membership \u0026amp; Fees Committee with respect to pricing for the registration of DOIs for preprints, with volume discounts to be applied only to back-year deposits. To approve ongoing participation in the working group being formed to look at organisation Identifiers and the expenditure of up to US$30,000 from capital reserves to support that participation. To approve the 2017 budget as proposed. July 2016 Board meeting: All motions passed unanimously except as otherwise noted.\nTo approve the agenda for the meeting. To approve the minutes of the March 2016 Board meeting. To accept the minutes of the Executive Committee telephone meetings on April 26 and June 24, 2016. To amend Section 2, Article VII of the bylaws to add the words “at least” before the words “equal in number” in the second sentence, so that the sentence will read “The Nominating Committee shall designate a slate of candidates for each election that is at least equal in number to the number of Directors to be elected at such election.” (PASSED, with four opposing: Springer, Elsevier, IEEE and Sage; ACM abstaining.) To adopt the revised financial policy. To accept the report from the auditors. To approve the business model for Event Data recommended by the Membership and Fees Committee subject to the clarification of the definition of “reseller” and to delegate approval of that clarification to the Executive Committee. March 2016 Board meeting: All motions passed unanimously except as otherwise noted.\nTo approve the agenda for the meeting. To approve the minutes of the November 2015 Board meeting. To accept the minutes of the Executive Committee telephone meeting on January 27, 2016, as corrected. To appoint Jasper Simons as the Chair of the Nominating Committee, to appoint Jason Wilde and Paul Peters as committee members, and to authorize the Nominating Committee to identify two additional committee members representing companies that are not on the Board. To delete the first sentence of Section 4a of PILA’s financial policy # 3 (Approval Authority), to eliminate the requirement that salaries and other compensation of all non-officer persons who report directly to the Executive Director must be jointly approved by the Executive Director, Treasurer and President, and to delegate the authority to set such compensation to the Executive Director. (PASSED with one abstention (IOP). To apportion 10% of the capital reserve fund to be invested in accordance with a different investment policy from the rest of the capital reserve fund, in a professionally managed portfolio consisting of dividend paying stocks and other instruments. To remove from the current investment policy the requirement that maturity of securities be targeted at January 31 of each year. To disband the Taxonomies Interest Group. 2015 Motions passed November 2015 Board meeting: All motions passed unanimously except as otherwise noted.\nTo approve the agenda for the meeting. To approve the minutes of the July 2015 Board Meeting as corrected. To accept the minutes of the Executive Committee telephone meetings on September 25,2015. To elect Bernard Rous as Chairman and President, Gerry Grenier as Treasurer and Vice Chairman, Ed Pentz as Executive Director and Assistant Secretary, and Lisa Hart as Secretary. To elect Ian Bannerman, Kathleen Keane and Chris Shillum to serve on the Executive Committee along with Bernard Rous and Gerry Grenier. To appoint Jasper Simons as Chair of the Nominating Committee. To appoint James Walker as Chair of the Audit Committee and Carsten Buhr and Renny Guida as members of the Audit Committee. To appoint Scott Delman as Chair of the Membership \u0026amp; Fees Committee. To approve the recommendation of the Membership \u0026amp; Fees Committee with respect to pricing for registration of DOIs for standards (PASSED with Elsevier abstaining). To approve the language changes to the membership rules to cover registration of preprints as proposed by staff. To approve the 2016 budget as proposed. July 2015 Board meeting: All motions passed unanimously except as otherwise noted.\nTo approve the agenda for the meeting. To approve the minutes of the March 2015 Board Meeting. To accept the minutes of the Executive Committee telephone meetings on April 13 and June 12, 2015. To accept the recommendation of the Membership \u0026amp; Fees Committee that the member fees be unchanged for 2016. To approve the audited financials. To approve the recommendation to create a new Director of Product Management position. To designate the interest generated by the Capital Reserve Fund as part of the fund. To change the minimum cash balance from 3 months operating expenses to 4 months operating expenses. With respect to the proposed DOI Event Tracking (DET) service: To support the launch of the DET service and to authorize staff to move forward with the development of a plan; To ask the M\u0026amp;F Committee to review and refine the proposed sustainable revenue model; and To establish a Crossref DET Committee to oversee and guide the ongoing development of the DET service and report back to the board. To change current membership rules 12 and 13 to eliminate inconsistencies and reflect current member practice and allow assignment of DOIs to preprints in accordance with the procedures described in the duplicative works report submitted to the board. (PASSED with PLOS, VGTU Press, Hindawi Limited, IOP, de Gruyter, Johns Hopkins, Springer, and IEEE voting in favor; ACM, AIP, Sage and APA voting against; and Elsevier abstaining). March 2015 Board meeting: All motions passed unanimously except as otherwise noted.\nTo approve the agenda for the meeting with the addition of the discussion of a possible acquisition to the second day’s agenda. To approve the minutes of the November 2014 Board Meeting, as amended at the meeting. To accept the minutes of the Executive Committee telephone meeting on February 13, 2015. To give the Nominating Committee the following guidance with respect to the choice of the slate of candidates for election to the Board at the 2015 annual meeting: In designating the slate of candidates, take into account issues of Board composition and balance, with the goal that the board fairly represent the membership; Look at the balance between large, medium and small members, the balance between non-profit and commercial organisations and the geographic location of Board members; Look at issues such as board meeting attendance, committee participation and serving as an officer when considering candidates for the slate; Complete its work sufficiently in advance of the annual meeting to permit independent nominations. To appoint Chris Shillum as a member of the Executive Committee to fill the vacancy created by Carol Richman’s retirement. To adopt the whistle blower policy as presented to the board. Earlier motions Here are the the motions passed by the board from 2010 to 2014.\nMotions 2014 PDF Motions 2013 PDF Motions 2012 PDF Motions 2011 PDF Motions 2010 PDF Policy on term limits The board adopted the following policy in November 2009:\nNon-officer members of the Executive Committee (that is, members of the Executive Committee other than the Chairman and the Treasurer) may serve no more than three (3) consecutive one-year terms on the Executive Committee. After a break in service of at least one (1) year, the term-limited director shall again be eligible to serve on the Executive Committee. Years of service on the Executive Committee as an officer shall not be included in calculating the number of consecutive terms served. A director may serve no more that three (3) consecutive one-year terms as Chair. After a break in service of at least one (1) year, the term-limited director shall again be eligible to serve as Chair. A director may serve no more that three (3) consecutive one-year terms as Treasurer. After a break in service of at least one (1) year, the term-limited director shall again be eligible to serve as Treasurer. The limitations set forth in this Board Policy apply to the directors as representatives of their member companies, and not as individuals. For avoidance of doubt, this means that if a member company designates a successor representative to serve on the Board, as set forth in the By-Laws, the years of service of that member company’s prior representative on the Executive Committee, as Chair or as Treasurer (as applicable) will be included in determining whether the newly appointed representative is term-limited under this policy. This Board Policy is being implemented pursuant to resolutions adopted at the July 2009 meeting of the PILA Board of Directors and is in effect as of the date of that meeting. For purposes of determining whether a director is term-limited under this policy, each director will be deemed to have commenced service in the relevant capacity as of November, 2008. Please contact our operations director with any questions about our governance.\n",
"headings": ["Officers","Board members","2026 Motions passed","March 2026 Board meeting","January 2026 Board meeting","2025 Motions passed","December 2025 special meeting of the Board","November 2025 Board meeting","July 2025 Board meeting","March 2025 Board meeting","January 2025 Board meeting","2024 Motions passed","November 2024 Board meeting","July 2024 Board meeting","March 2024 Board meeting","January 2024 Board meeting","2023 Motions passed","November 2023 Board meeting","July 2023 Board meeting","March 2023 Board meeting","2022 Motions passed","November 2022 Board meeting","July 2022 Board meeting","March 2022 Board meeting","2021 Motions passed","November 2021 Board meeting","July 2021 Board meeting","March 2021 Board meeting:","2020 Motions passed","November 2020 Board meeting:","July 2020 Board meeting:","March 2020 Board meeting:","2019 Motions passed","November 2019 Board meeting:","July 2019 Board meeting:","March 2019 Board meeting:","2018 Motions passed","November 2018 Board meeting:","July 2018 Board meeting:","March 2018 Board meeting:","2017 Motions passed","November 2017 Board meeting:","July 2017 Board meeting:","March 2017 Board meeting:","2016 Motions passed","November 2016 Board meeting:","July 2016 Board meeting:","March 2016 Board meeting:","2015 Motions passed","November 2015 Board meeting:","July 2015 Board meeting:","March 2015 Board meeting:","Earlier motions","Policy on term limits"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/authors/david-haber/",
"title": "David Haber",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Authors",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/from-storage-closet-to-metadata-champions-asms-journey-toward-a-smarter-scholarly-infrastructure/",
"title": "From storage closet to metadata champions: ASM’s journey toward a smarter scholarly infrastructure",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2025-08-04",
"lastmod_ts": 1754265600,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "The American Society for Microbiology (ASM) has earned recognition in Crossref\u0026rsquo;s Participation Reports for its exceptional metadata coverage among large publishing members––an achievement built on intentional change, technical investment, and collaborative work. In this Q\u0026amp;A, the ASM team shares what that journey looked like, the challenges they\u0026rsquo;ve tackled, and how centering metadata has helped them better connect research with the global scientific community.\n",
"content": "The American Society for Microbiology (ASM) has earned recognition in Crossref\u0026rsquo;s Participation Reports for its exceptional metadata coverage among large publishing members––an achievement built on intentional change, technical investment, and collaborative work. In this Q\u0026amp;A, the ASM team shares what that journey looked like, the challenges they\u0026rsquo;ve tackled, and how centering metadata has helped them better connect research with the global scientific community.\nA key lesson we learned is that meaningful progress doesn\u0026rsquo;t require perfection from day one. Start small, find manageable wins, refine as you go, and build a shared understanding across all your teams.\n\u0026ndash; David Haber, ASM\nSince we first featured your metadata efforts in 2022, what developments or improvements have you made—and how does this new recognition reflect the journey so far? Once we completed our initial metadata cleanup of our backfile and made sure that we were producing good, clean, and consistent Crossref metadata (no small feat), we realized that each new policy, process, or even style change should be viewed through a metadata capture lens. By looking at our publishing goals through that lens, we are better able to see the right time and method to help enrich and \u0026ldquo;grow\u0026rdquo; both our article metadata breadth and depth. Much of the metadata work is invisible or an afterthought. But the recognition of ASM\u0026rsquo;s coverage in the participation reports has affirmed that our change in perspective — shifting from viewing Crossref metadata as something produced as an afterthought to centering our processes around the creation of that metadata — has put us on the right path.\nHave any of your goals around metadata changed or grown since then? What feels different about your work now compared to when you were first featured? When we first started on our various metadata cleanup projects, it felt like there were just a few of us, arguing, agreeing, and arguing some more about obscure tagging structures and proper XML modeling in a closet––literally\u0026hellip; My office actually was an old storage closet, and my pre-pandemic whiteboard still has that ghostly blue haze of angle brackets scribbled with dry-erase markers.\nSince then, our goals have shifted significantly. Early on, we just wanted all our content mapped to DOIs; then we thought, \u0026ldquo;Oh wait. Let\u0026rsquo;s include as many abstracts as possible. And references. If we have the data, let\u0026rsquo;s send it.\u0026rdquo; Now that we have a strong metadata foundation, we can think proactively about what to capture and transmit, how we want to prioritize our efforts, and how to make research we publish more discoverable to those who need it.\nLooking back, were there any changes in internal collaboration or external partnerships that influenced your progress? Over the past three to four years, we have made some significant changes to our partnerships. We migrated to a new online platform (Atypon), a new production partner (Kriyadocs), a new submission platform (Chronoshub), and a new billing system (RLSC). Each of these partnerships allowed us to evaluate how we were capturing metadata, when that capture occurred, and how best to improve the QC process to ensure accuracy and quality. These partnerships accelerated all our efforts to improve hidden metadata and finally brought them out of the storage closet into the light.\nHave you adopted any new tools, standards, or technologies since your last blog? Our production software (Kriyadocs) has centered metadata capture as a core function. We have processes and procedures that match all affiliations to Ringgold and ROR IDs. We have invested heavily in partnerships with organizations like Chronoshub to utilize natural language processing, automating the identification of authors and affiliations, so that users no longer have to fill out tedious forms. We embraced ORCID and strongly encourage all authors to register for one if they don\u0026rsquo;t already have it. We have also adopted the CRediT taxonomy as a contributor framework and have built processes to make it easy for authors to stay within that taxonomy.\nHave you encountered any challenges in curating or improving your metadata? If so – what were they and how did you address those? The core problem (from our perspective) has always been the difference between author profile information and what is actually submitted in manuscripts. Auto-extraction of manuscript data into submission forms is one small step toward unifying author identity with manuscript data. One of our biggest pain points now is reconciling the chaotic data on author affiliations in manuscripts with institutional identifiers. Over the next year, this will be one of our main initiatives.\nCan you share any examples where high-quality metadata clearly benefited your organization, community, or publishing processes? The capture of ORCID IDs has improved our ability to match papers to editors and identify hidden conflicts of interest. ORCID IDs have also helped us expand our reviewer pool, as they enable us to better disambiguate individuals with similar names.\nBecause we now capture CRediT roles in a controlled manner (rather than as loose text in the acknowledgments section), we are better able to identify when authors are contributing equally and how authors determine author order in the byline when this occurs. This analysis was undertaken by one of our Editors-in-Chief to study gender bias when authors contributed equally to a work. Now that we capture CRediT roles as structured data, we can build on his research.\nIn the last two years, we have also begun capturing Data Availability Statements and Ethics Statements in unique metadata fields (rather than as unstructured text in the body of an article or in the acknowledgments sections) because some of our editors are curious about open data policy compliance and whether there is higher uptake of open science initiatives in certain microbiology fields.\nRC: These are very interesting and quite profound results, especially for integrity and equality in the publishing process! Good to see how useful you find this information as we’re approaching our schema updates to include contributor roles, among other things. I see that editors are already on board and taking advantage of high quality metadata. Are authors more engaged with metadata now than before?\nOur authors likely are engaged too––though we have tried to build author metadata QC into our proofing and typesetting process in such a way that they wouldn\u0026rsquo;t even notice.\nWhat challenges have you encountered while sustaining or scaling your metadata work? In the realm of metadata, there are two standard solutions: 1) hire vendors to clean data at the end (the throw-people-at-the-problem philosophy); or 2) trust a black-box technical solution. The problem with the first method is that it is inefficient and can become expensive. The issue with the second is that, in my experience, most technical solutions have an 80% success rate. That may be acceptable for certain types of data, but it can fail spectacularly at the worst possible moment.\nFor example, let\u0026rsquo;s say you find a technical solution that parses affiliation data in such a way as to assign a PID. Great, wonderful. Let\u0026rsquo;s say your parser is the best natural language processor in the world and makes matches 90% of the time (if you have one that does this, I\u0026rsquo;m all ears). You announce that you are including these IDs. Everyone cheers. It is great, right? Now, imagine you want to use those IDs to identify subscribing institutions to offer discounts or fee-less publishing for authors. You also want to use those IDs to send alerts to institutional admins of publishing activity. In both situations, achieving 90% accuracy simply won\u0026rsquo;t work. What we\u0026rsquo;ve learned is that black-box technology and \u0026rsquo;throw people at it\u0026rsquo; philosophies cannot work alone. Metadata curation must be a collaborative effort among authors, publishers, funders, and institutions, where the information grows throughout the research process.\nWhat\u0026rsquo;s next? Are you exploring any new metadata elements or areas (e.g., funding data, peer review metadata, preprints)? Over the next year, we will focus on CRediT identifiers and pass them to Crossref, along with institutional PIDs (ROR, Ringgold, and ISNI). We are also exploring various ways to capture peer reviewer activity and contributions, which will inevitably lead us down new and interesting paths.\nAnything else you want to share? Here\u0026rsquo;s the thing about metadata that I wish I\u0026rsquo;d known when I started: it\u0026rsquo;s not a project with a finish line. It\u0026rsquo;s more like tending a garden that keeps growing in unexpected directions. Every time you think you\u0026rsquo;ve got it figured out, someone invents a new identifier, or your authors start doing something creative with their affiliations, or a funder changes their requirements, and suddenly you\u0026rsquo;re back to the drawing board.\nBut what I\u0026rsquo;ve also learned from our journey out of that metaphorical (and literal) storage closet: the best metadata work happens when you start thinking of it as infrastructure. Good metadata is like good plumbing; when it\u0026rsquo;s working, nobody notices it, but when it\u0026rsquo;s not, everything backs up and gets messy fast.\nIf you\u0026rsquo;re just starting this journey, my advice is this: don\u0026rsquo;t try to boil the ocean (gosh, I still need to remember that one). Pick one thing. Perhaps it could be ORCID IDs or institutional identifiers. Do it really, really well. Then build on that success. And please, for the love of all that is holy, invest in good partnerships. We couldn\u0026rsquo;t have done any of this without partners who understood that metadata isn\u0026rsquo;t just data entry; it\u0026rsquo;s the connective tissue of scholarly communication.\nOf course, even with the best partners and aligned teams, there will still be moments when you\u0026rsquo;ll sit dumbfounded in front of a screen where an author\u0026rsquo;s affiliation that was listed as \u0026ldquo;Bloomberg School of Public Health\u0026rdquo; matched to the identifier linked to the \u0026ldquo;Escuela Nacional de Sanidad.\u0026rdquo; On those days, just remember: at least you\u0026rsquo;re not still working in a storage closet with a haunted whiteboard.\nGood metadata is more than just a technical specification, and it\u0026rsquo;s not just for those XML wonks and nerds. It\u0026rsquo;s a service to science, and its core mission is to help us understand the world around us.\n\u0026ndash; David Haber, ASM\nASM\u0026rsquo;s story is a reminder that building a strong metadata infrastructure isn\u0026rsquo;t just about meeting technical requirements—it\u0026rsquo;s about aligning people, tools, and values around the idea that clean, connected, and consistent metadata is foundational to open and discoverable research. Whether you\u0026rsquo;re starting small or overhauling major systems, their experience shows what\u0026rsquo;s possible when you treat metadata not as a checkbox, but as a core part of scholarly publishing.\nThank you, David, for taking the time to share your insights. Again, congratulations!\n",
"headings": ["Since we first featured your metadata efforts in 2022, what developments or improvements have you made—and how does this new recognition reflect the journey so far?","Have any of your goals around metadata changed or grown since then? What feels different about your work now compared to when you were first featured?","Looking back, were there any changes in internal collaboration or external partnerships that influenced your progress?","Have you adopted any new tools, standards, or technologies since your last blog?","Have you encountered any challenges in curating or improving your metadata? If so – what were they and how did you address those?","Can you share any examples where high-quality metadata clearly benefited your organization, community, or publishing processes?","What challenges have you encountered while sustaining or scaling your metadata work?","What\u0026rsquo;s next? Are you exploring any new metadata elements or areas (e.g., funding data, peer review metadata, preprints)?","Anything else you want to share?"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/jobs/",
"title": "Jobs",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 2,
"lastmod": "2025-08-01",
"lastmod_ts": 1754006400,
"section": "Jobs",
"tags": [],
"description": "Help us achieve our mission to make research outputs easier to find, cite, link, assess, and reuse. We are ~57 fully remote people spanning 16+ countries from East to West (e.g. Hong Kong to Oakland) and we all like to interact with and co-create with our engaged community.\nWe take our work seriously but usually not ourselves\u0026hellip; so come and work with us - where else can you do something a bit geeky and important that is also sometimes fun?!\n",
"content": "Help us achieve our mission to make research outputs easier to find, cite, link, assess, and reuse. We are ~57 fully remote people spanning 16+ countries from East to West (e.g. Hong Kong to Oakland) and we all like to interact with and co-create with our engaged community.\nWe take our work seriously but usually not ourselves\u0026hellip; so come and work with us - where else can you do something a bit geeky and important that is also sometimes fun?!\nWe have no openings at this time but please keep us in mind for future career opportunities! You can also follow us on Linkedin for job updates. Take a look at our current team and check out the org chart to see where our vacancies fit in. We especially encourage applications from people with backgrounds historically under-represented in research and scholarly communications.\nEqual opportunities commitment Crossref is committed to a policy of non-discrimination and equal opportunity for all employees and qualified applicants for employment without regard to race, colour, religion, sex, pregnancy or a condition related to pregnancy, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, national origin, ancestry, age, physical or mental disability, genetic information, veteran status, uniform service member status, or any other protected class under applicable law. Crossref will make reasonable accommodations for qualified individuals with known disabilities in accordance with applicable law. We regularly review and revise our code of conduct.\nPlease contact our Head of HR, Michelle Cancel, with any questions.\n",
"headings": ["Equal opportunities commitment"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/committees/",
"title": "Committees",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2025-07-29",
"lastmod_ts": 1753747200,
"section": "Committees",
"tags": [],
"description": "We have a number of committees that provide oversight of different aspects of our activities. They ensure that Crossref is governed and run efficiently and fulfills its mission. Committees are established in our by-laws or they can be established by our board for a specific purpose.\nOur board appoints the Chair of each committee each year at its November meeting. The Crossref guiding principles highlight that effective and representative governance is important to persistence and enabling us to achieve our mission.\n",
"content": "We have a number of committees that provide oversight of different aspects of our activities. They ensure that Crossref is governed and run efficiently and fulfills its mission. Committees are established in our by-laws or they can be established by our board for a specific purpose.\nOur board appoints the Chair of each committee each year at its November meeting. The Crossref guiding principles highlight that effective and representative governance is important to persistence and enabling us to achieve our mission.\nCommittees Committee Staff facilitator Chair Audit committee Lucy Ofiesh Ashley Towne, University of Chicago Press Executive committee Ed Pentz Marin Dacos Membership and Fees committee Amanda Bartell Vincas Grigas, Vilnius University Nominating committee Lucy Ofiesh Nick Lindsay, MIT Press ",
"headings": ["Committees"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/changing-fees-to-increase-equity-and-reduce-complexity/",
"title": "Changing fees to increase equity and reduce complexity",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2025-07-28",
"lastmod_ts": 1753660800,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "The Crossref Board recently approved three recommendations for changes to our fees: introduction of a new lowest membership fee tier, removal of volume discounts for record registration, and normalisation of registration fees for peer reviews. The changes will be applied from January 2026.\nThis is the first outcome of the Resourcing Crossref for Future Sustainability (RCFS) program, launched in 2023, as a comprehensive effort to review all aspects of Crossref revenue and how we\u0026rsquo;re adapting to growth and the diversification of our membership. The program aims to make fees more equitable, simplify our complex fee schedule, and rebalance revenue sources.\n",
"content": "The Crossref Board recently approved three recommendations for changes to our fees: introduction of a new lowest membership fee tier, removal of volume discounts for record registration, and normalisation of registration fees for peer reviews. The changes will be applied from January 2026.\nThis is the first outcome of the Resourcing Crossref for Future Sustainability (RCFS) program, launched in 2023, as a comprehensive effort to review all aspects of Crossref revenue and how we\u0026rsquo;re adapting to growth and the diversification of our membership. The program aims to make fees more equitable, simplify our complex fee schedule, and rebalance revenue sources.\nFollowing two rounds of member surveys, feedback gathered from the community in polls, open discussions, and emails, the Membership and Fees (M\u0026amp;F) Committee (made up of 30+ representatives from members, service providers, sponsors, and community partners) discussed evidence and made the first round of recommendations to the Board this month. We\u0026rsquo;re very thankful for their time spent reviewing data and sharing their experiences to get to this point.\nGOAL 1: More equitable fees Our membership has changed over the years - members now tend to be less well-resourced, more likely to be based in Asia or Latin America, and more likely to be much smaller operations, some of which may not even be organisations but volunteer groups. We are seeing more universities join as members, and fewer members now consider themselves publishers first and foremost. With our mission of creating a complete global research nexus, this growing diversity is excellent news.\nWhile new member growth is steady (2.3k members per year), over half join via a Sponsor (that makes membership more accessible both financially and technically), and close to 300 members have their membership revoked due to unpaid invoices each year, indicating that the current fee may be a barrier to participation for some.\nArea of focus: Define a new basis for sizing and tiering members for their capacity to pay Our annual membership fees are currently tiered according to the publishing revenue or expenses (whichever is higher) of each member. This enables each member to contribute to the community infrastructure according to their capacity to pay.\nOne of the first areas under consideration throughout 2024 was an option to change the basis of our membership fees from the publishing revenue (or expenses) of each organization to their overall organisational revenue (or expenses) instead.\nThrough surveys, discussions with the M\u0026amp;F committee, and at the Crossref 2024 Annual Meeting, we received strong feedback, particularly from those based at institutions and/or following a diamond open-access model, that making this change would put Crossref beyond their reach.\nIt became clear therefore that we should NOT change the basis for sizing and tiering members.\nInstead, we will maintain the current basis for sizing and tiering members by considering their publishing revenue or expenses, whichever is higher. For non-publisher members, we advise taking \u0026lsquo;publishing\u0026rsquo; to mean \u0026lsquo;producing\u0026rsquo;, so taking their cost of producing the works being registered with us, whether that is data, software, imagery, physical objects, etc.\nArea of focus: Evaluate the USD 275 annual membership fee tier and propose a more equitable pricing structure, which might entail breaking this down into two or more different tiers. We also looked into making our fees more equitable. It\u0026rsquo;s been long recognised that our lowest fee tier (an annual fee payment of USD 275 for all members with publishing revenue up to USD 1 million) represents a huge diversity of organisations operating within a range of financial contexts - over 95% of our non-sponsored members are in this category, and this is the category almost all new members join in. Throughout the project, we ran various surveys with our members to learn more about the makeup and factors affecting the capacity to pay for this group.\nFrom January 2026, we will create a new annual membership tier for members whose publishing revenue/expenses (whichever is higher) is equal to or lower than USD 1,000 per year.\nBased on survey data, we expect 30-60% of our current members in the current USD 275 tier to move to this new category. This new membership fee tier will be set at USD 200 in 2026, which is 27% lower than the current 275 membership fee. We will monitor the uptake in this category, with a view to identify necessary adjustments in future years. As a result, we expect a decrease in revenue of between USD 174k (if 30% of current lowest tier members move into the new tier) and USD 348k (if 60% of those members move into the new tier).\nOur Membership team will reach out to help qualifying members change to the new tier well before January 2026. If your publishing revenue or expenses are equal to or lower than USD 1,000 per year, look out for our email in the next couple of weeks to help you transition to the lower USD 200 tier.\nGOAL 2: Simplify complex fees Area of focus: Address and adjust volume discounts for Content Registration We currently offer volume discounts for several of our record types. These are calculated at the end of each quarter.\nIn order to reduce the complexity of our pricing, we will eliminate all volume discounts.\nThey are underused, accessible only to a small percentage of members, and the financial impact of making the change is small. These discounts contribute to complexity in our billing process and block our ability to offer members a running total or provide leaving members with a timely final invoice.\nHaving consulted with affected organisations, we\u0026rsquo;re reassured that the change will not adversely affect their ability to register their works with us. We appreciate their understanding of the overall positive impact of this change for Crossref and their support for our sustainability.\nArea of focus: Reduce complexity in peer review fees Finally, prompted by feedback from our members, we looked into normalising fees for peer review registration. We currently have two sets of fees for peer reviews based on whether the review is registered by the owner of the item being reviewed. There is a charge for the first review for a specific article, and a different charge for subsequent reviews for the same article by the same member. This charge for the subsequent reviews also varies depending on who registered the review. Very few members register peer reviews for records that they do not own, so having a separate, higher set of fees just adds complexity to the fee schedule with no financial or strategic benefit.\nStarting from January 2026, we will consolidate all peer review fees, regardless of who registers it, to USD 0.25 for the first review for an article, and free registration for any subsequent reviews of that same record by the same member.\nArea of focus: Address and adjust back-year discounts for record registration Another recommendation, related to the removal of back-year discounts for select record types (conference proceedings, technical reports and working papers, theses and dissertations, and posted content/preprints) due to under use, hasn\u0026rsquo;t been approved yet. Based on feedback from the board, more research will be conducted on trends related to specific record types, such as theses and dissertations, so we can better understand potential unintended consequences of such changes.\nWe\u0026rsquo;re looking to retain back-year discounts for record types where they continue to be well-used, including those for journal articles and book titles. We\u0026rsquo;re also looking to retain back-year discounts for grants, as these are at an early stage of adoption, and new funders coming on board naturally start with a backlog of grants to register in the Grant Linking System.\nWhat happens next? The Resourcing Crossref for Future Sustainability (RCFS) initiative is very broad, and in the coming months and years you can expect progress with other aspects of our fees and resourcing. There is more work to come, including the rebalancing of revenue from the use of our metadata, the future of fees for our funder members, and further changes to record registration fees.\nWe\u0026rsquo;re glad to see the first changes progressing to implementation, and would like to thank our Membership and Fees Committee and all members who took part in the consultations so far for your continued support.\n",
"headings": ["GOAL 1: More equitable fees","Area of focus: Define a new basis for sizing and tiering members for their capacity to pay","Area of focus: Evaluate the USD 275 annual membership fee tier and propose a more equitable pricing structure, which might entail breaking this down into two or more different tiers.","GOAL 2: Simplify complex fees","Area of focus: Address and adjust volume discounts for Content Registration","Area of focus: Reduce complexity in peer review fees","Area of focus: Address and adjust back-year discounts for record registration","What happens next?"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/metadata-excellence-among-new-members-la-salle-university-per%C3%BA/",
"title": "Metadata excellence among new members: La Salle University, Perú",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2025-07-25",
"lastmod_ts": 1753401600,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "Click here for the version in English\nEn 2025, lanzamos los Premios Crossref a los Metadatos, con el objetivo de destacar el rol de nuestra comunidad en la gestión y el enriquecimiento del registro académico. En esta publicación, destacamos a la Universidad La Salle, Perú, ganadora del premio a la excelencia entre los nuevos miembros, y contamos con la participación de Yasiel Pérez, Responsable Técnico y Editor de la Revista, quien comparte sus ideas:\n",
"content": "Click here for the version in English\nEn 2025, lanzamos los Premios Crossref a los Metadatos, con el objetivo de destacar el rol de nuestra comunidad en la gestión y el enriquecimiento del registro académico. En esta publicación, destacamos a la Universidad La Salle, Perú, ganadora del premio a la excelencia entre los nuevos miembros, y contamos con la participación de Yasiel Pérez, Responsable Técnico y Editor de la Revista, quien comparte sus ideas:\nPor qué los metadatos importan para nosotros La Universidad La Salle se convirtió en miembro de Crossref hace relativamente poco tiempo, en 2023. Gestionamos nuestras revistas usando Open Journal Systems (OJS), y una vez que nos unimos a esta comunidad, los diferentes Consejos Editoriales compartimos la motivación de lograr una mayor visibilidad global, y vimos una oportunidad de mejora al proporcionar más metadatos y más completos.\nEl lado técnico de subsanar las deficiencias Nuestras revistas, que llevan activas entre dos y cuatro años, han comenzado a enriquecer sus metadatos faltantes a niveles aceptables (¡creemos que aún podemos mejorar a niveles excelentes!). Gracias a mi formación como ingeniero de software, adaptamos el plugin de OJS para que admita campos de metadatos adicionales que no están disponibles en las versiones anteriores. El plugin requiere actualizaciones, por lo que realizamos modificaciones personalizadas para que sea compatible con los esquemas Crossref más recientes. Debido a limitaciones de tiempo, recursos humanos y financieros, consideramos más eficiente adaptar el plugin en lugar de adaptar nuestras instalaciones de OJS a las últimas versiones. Con estas modificaciones, depositamos los ROR ID, las licencias, las páginas de políticas y las actualizaciones de las revistas en Crossmark.\nPor otro lado, hemos probado la versión con Soporte a Largo Plazo actual y la versión 3.5 de OJS, y recomiendo encarecidamente a cualquier usuario que actualice a cualquiera de estas versiones más recientes. Incluyen importantes parches de seguridad y, además, los plugins de Crossref son compatibles con los esquemas más recientes. Desafortunadamente, para nosotros, actualizar los sistemas desde una versión anterior a la 3.3 requiere tiempo adicional y soporte técnico, dada la importancia de los cambios de la v3.2 a la v3.3.\nHaciendo las políticas sobre metadatos una prioridad Tenemos un compromiso institucional con la provisión de metadatos enriquecidos. Contamos con políticas que exigen metadatos lo más completos posible como parte de nuestros flujos de trabajo, y lo convertimos en un requisito estricto. Naturalmente, existen algunos desafíos. Los metadatos abiertos y transparentes aún están relativamente poco valorados. A veces, los editores no comprenden completamente las implicaciones de proporcionar metadatos enriquecidos; mostrar su nombre en el sitio web no es lo mismo que tenerlo en los metadatos, por lo que la conexión entre la versión de registro y su visibilidad no siempre es evidente para autores y editores. Los apoyamos proporcionando directrices y capacitación a los consejos editoriales y equipos de las revistas. Por ejemplo, si una afiliación no está disponible en ROR, animamos a los autores a solicitar su inclusión en el registro.\nPor otro lado, esto también nos motiva. Nos estamos preparando para empezar a incluir metadatos de subvenciones y financiación en nuestros flujos de trabajo. También apuntamos a utilizar estos datos para estudiar el impacto de nuestras políticas editoriales en la visibilidad, el uso, las citas, la indexación y otras métricas institucionales. La Universidad La Salle es una organización interesante porque formamos una red de universidades de todo el mundo, lo que provoca errores en la identificación adecuada.\nCreemos que ciertamente otras organizaciones pueden lograr altos niveles de enriquecimiento de metadatos. Esto tiene dos aspectos fundamentales: uno técnico y otro organizativo. Desde nuestra perspectiva, el primer paso es obtener el apoyo de la organización y establecer políticas a nivel de toda la organización. Las soluciones técnicas pueden seguir después y no son fundamentalmente difíciles en comparación con conseguir que la comunidad proporcione metadatos buenos y completos.\nUna vez que se consigue la asignación de recursos, se planifica la hoja de ruta para recopilar más metadatos. Es mejor tenerlos y no usarlos que necesitarlos y no tenerlos. Por ejemplo, ya estamos recopilando los roles de autor utilizando la taxonomía CRediT, por lo que una vez que sea totalmente compatible con el esquema de Crossref, queremos estar preparados para enviarlos. Idealmente, nos gustaría ver compatibilidad con identificadores alternativos y más tipos de fechas. Recopilamos las fechas de envío y aceptación a través de Crossmark y asignamos simultáneamente DOI, PURL y ARK. Con el tiempo suficiente, también planeamos implementar la revisión por pares abierta en nuestras revistas.\nLo que el reconocimiento nos ayudó a lograr Recibir este premio ha tenido un profundo impacto en nuestra organización; nos ayuda a reforzar el mensaje que intentamos transmitir a nuestra comunidad. Abrió los ojos de las autoridades y los gestores de presupuesto, y también está aumentando la visibilidad de la organización en la región. Queremos ser vistos como un ejemplo en la comunidad local y regional: «Si una institución provincial puede hacerlo, otras también». Hemos comenzado a recibir llamadas solicitando capacitación para otras organizaciones. Por lo tanto, este premio ha sido sin duda fundamental para nosotros.\nVersion in English In 2025, we launched the Crossref Metadata Awards, aiming to highlight our community’s role in stewarding and enriching the scholarly record. In this post, we put the spotlight on La Salle University, Perú, winner of the award for excellence among new members, and have Yasiel Pérez, Technical Head and Journal Editor, sharing his insights:\nWhy metadata matters to us La Salle University became a Crossref member relatively recently, in 2023. We manage our journals using Open Journal Systems (OJS), and once we became part of this community, the different Editorial Boards had as a common motivation achieving more global visibility, and we saw an opportunity for improvement by providing more and richer metadata.\nTechnical side of filling the gaps Our journals that have been active for two to four years started enriching their missing metadata to acceptable levels (we still think we can improve to excellent levels!). Because of my background as a software engineer, we adapted the OJS plugin to support additional metadata fields not yet available in the older versions. The plugin requires updates, so we made custom modifications to support the latest Crossref schemas. Because of time, human, and financial constraints, we found it most efficient to adapt the plugin rather than to adapt our OJS installations to the latest versions. With these modifications, we deposit ROR IDs, licences, and the journals\u0026rsquo; policy pages and updates to Crossmark.\nOn the other hand, we have tested the current Long-term support and the 3.5 versions of OJS and I fully recommend to any user to upgrade to any of these more recent versions, there are important security patches and also the Crossref plugins are compatible with the latest schemas. Unfortunately, for us, upgrading the systems from a version older than 3.3 requires additional time and technical support, given the importance of changes from v3.2 to v3.3.\nMaking metadata a policy priority We have an institutional commitment to the provision of rich metadata. We have policies in place to require metadata as complete as possible as part of our workflows and we make this a strict requirement. Naturally, there are some challenges. Open and transparent metadata is still relatively underappreciated. Sometimes editors don’t fully understand the implications of providing rich metadata; displaying your name in the website is not the same as having it on the metadata so the connection between the version of record and its visibility is not always evident for authors and editors. We support them by providing guidelines and training to the editorial boards and journal teams. E.g. if an affiliation is not available in ROR we encourage authors to request their inclusion in the registry.\nOn the other hand, this is also a motivational push for us. We are preparing to start including grant and funding metadata in our workflows. We also aim to use this data to study the impact of our editorial policies on the visibility, use, citations, indexation, and other institutional metrics. La Salle University is an interesting organization because we are a network of universities across the world, leading to mistakes in proper identification.\nWe certainly think that other organizations can achieve high levels of metadata enrichment. There are two fundamental aspects to it: A technical aspect and an organizational aspect. From our point of view, the first step is gaining organizational support, establishing organization-wide policies. The technical solutions can follow and are not fundamentally difficult compared with having the community provide good and complete metadata.\nOnce you manage to secure the assignment of resources, then you plan the roadmap for collecting more metadata. It\u0026rsquo;s better to have it and not use it than to need it and not have it. For example, we already collect author roles using the CRediT taxonomy, so once it is fully supported by Crossref’s schema, we want to be prepared to submit them. Ideally, we would like to see support for alternative identifiers and more types of dates. We collect submission and acceptance dates via Crossmark and we simultaneously assign DOI, PURL, and ARK. Given enough time, we are also planning to implement open peer review in our journals.\nWhat the recognition helped us achieve Receiving this award has been profoundly impactful for our organization; it helps us reinforce the message that we are trying to deliver to our community. It opened the eyes of the authorities and budget managers, and it is also increasing the organization’s visibility in the region. We want to be seen as an example in the local and regional community—“if a provincial institution can do it, others can too.” We have started receiving calls requesting training for other organizations. So, this award has certainly become pivotal for us. ",
"headings": ["Por qué los metadatos importan para nosotros","El lado técnico de subsanar las deficiencias","Haciendo las políticas sobre metadatos una prioridad","Lo que el reconocimiento nos ayudó a lograr","Version in English","Why metadata matters to us","Technical side of filling the gaps","Making metadata a policy priority","What the recognition helped us achieve"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/community/special-programs/metadata-matching/",
"title": "Metadata matching",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2025-07-25",
"lastmod_ts": 1753401600,
"section": "Get involved",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref is focused on enriching metadata to highlight relationships among works, individuals, institutions, and actions. Metadata matching is the task of finding an identifier for an item based on a structured or unstructured “description” of it. It\u0026rsquo;s a key part to our enrichment process and one way to address gaps in the scholarly record, while keeping barriers to membership and participation as low as possible – to enable inclusivity of the research nexus.\n",
"content": "Crossref is focused on enriching metadata to highlight relationships among works, individuals, institutions, and actions. Metadata matching is the task of finding an identifier for an item based on a structured or unstructured “description” of it. It\u0026rsquo;s a key part to our enrichment process and one way to address gaps in the scholarly record, while keeping barriers to membership and participation as low as possible – to enable inclusivity of the research nexus.\nSome examples of matching tasks include:\nFinding a DOI for a cited article based on a citation string. Finding the ROR ID for an organisation based on an affiliation string. Finding the ORCID ID for a researcher based on the person\u0026rsquo;s name and affiliation. Finding the grant DOI based on an award number and a funder name. Metadata matching gives a more complete picture of the research nexus. It discovers missing relationships between entities throughout the scholarly record. In many cases, these relationships are already included in metadata records, but in others we can carry out automated matching to identify the related entity.\nRead more about metadata matching in the blog series:\nMetadata matching 101: what is it and why do we need it? The anatomy of metadata matching The myth of perfect metadata matching How good is your matching? Metadata matching: beyond correctness In April 2025, we launched the matching project, which is a major effort to rebuild Crossref\u0026rsquo;s metadata matching workflows using modern software development and data science practices. The goal is to create a dedicated, consolidated matching workflow that will eventually replace all existing and future production matching processes, with results made available through the REST API. This project covers six matching tasks: bibliographic reference matching, funder name matching, preprint matching, affiliation matching, grant matching, and title matching.\nproject phase matching task input target identifier status 1 funder matching funder organisation name ROR ID in production as part of the legacy CS system; matches available in the REST API 2 preprint matching journal article metadata preprint DOI in production as part of the legacy CS system; matches not available in the REST API 2 affiliation matching affiliation string ROR ID not in production 2 grant matching funding metadata grant DOI not in production 3 reference matching bibliographic reference DOI in production as part of the legacy CS system; matches available in the REST API 3 title matching journal title internal Crossref journal ID in production as part of the legacy CS system; matches not available in the REST API Additional reading and resources Funder name matching Funder name matching is used to map funder names to funder organisation identifiers. For example, \u0026ldquo;London Health Sciences Centre\u0026rdquo; can be mapped to https://ror.org/037tz0e16. Currently, we match against the Funder Registry. In the new matching service, matching will be done against the ROR Registry.\nPreprint matching Preprint matching is used to discover relationships between preprints and journal articles by matching journal metadata to preprint DOIs.\nBackground reading: Discovering relationships between preprints and journal articles\nRecommended strategy: code\nA ground truth evaluation dataset: dataset\nA dataset with relationships between preprints and journal articles discovered by matching within Crossref data: dataset\nAffiliation matching Affiliation matching is used to map affiliation strings to organisation identifiers. For example, \u0026ldquo;Department of Molecular Medicine, Sapporo Medical University, Sapporo 060-8556, Japan\u0026rdquo; can be mapped to https://ror.org/01h7cca57.\nRecommended strategy: code\nA ground truth evaluation dataset: dataset\nA dataset with relationships involving research organisations discovered by matching within Crossref data: dataset\nGrant matching Grant matching is used to discover funding relationships by matching funding information to grant DOIs.\nBackground reading:\nFollow the money, or how to link grants to research outputs The more the merrier, or how more registered grants means more relationships with outputs A dataset with relationships between grants and research outputs discovered by matching within Crossref data: dataset\nCitation matching Citation matching is used to map bibliographic reference strings or metadata to DOIs. For example, \u0026ldquo;1. Boucher RC (2004) New concepts of the pathogenesis of cystic fibrosis lung disease. Eur Resp J 23: 146–158.\u0026rdquo; can be mapped to https://doi.org/10.1183/09031936.03.00057003.\nBackground reading:\nMatchmaker, matchmaker, make me a match Reference matching: for real this time What if I told you that bibliographic references can be structured? Recommended startegy for unstructured citation matching: code\nTitle matching Title matching is used to map journal titles to Crossref\u0026rsquo;s internal journal records. We run title matching to map data in members\u0026rsquo; deposits.\n",
"headings": ["Additional reading and resources","Funder name matching","Preprint matching","Affiliation matching","Grant matching","Citation matching","Title matching"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/community/special-programs/resourcing-crossref/",
"title": "RCFS: Resourcing Crossref for Future Sustainability",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2025-07-25",
"lastmod_ts": 1753401600,
"section": "Get involved",
"tags": [],
"description": "Background Following discussions at our July 2023 board meeting, Crossref commenced a large-scale program, dubbed RCFS - ‘Resourcing Crossref for Future Sustainability’ with the following stated purpose:\nCore to any discussion of resourcing Crossref is understanding what makes us sustainable long term. Organisational sustainability aligns the impact Crossref makes with the financial position required to support it. We want to conduct a thoughtful, comprehensive review that centers on our long-term vision and plans, is guided by well-defined problems and principles, includes board, staff, and community input, and details an implementation plan.\n",
"content": "Background Following discussions at our July 2023 board meeting, Crossref commenced a large-scale program, dubbed RCFS - ‘Resourcing Crossref for Future Sustainability’ with the following stated purpose:\nCore to any discussion of resourcing Crossref is understanding what makes us sustainable long term. Organisational sustainability aligns the impact Crossref makes with the financial position required to support it. We want to conduct a thoughtful, comprehensive review that centers on our long-term vision and plans, is guided by well-defined problems and principles, includes board, staff, and community input, and details an implementation plan.\nCrossref is in a healthy financial position. We’ve experienced steady growth in our revenue and operating size over the past 20 years. We’re self-reliant on program revenue. Our growth has come from natural, broad adoption of membership, content registration, and the development of services like Metadata Plus and Similarity Check. Core revenue lines, like membership dues and content registration, have grown through volume rather than price increases. In fact, basic content registration and membership fees haven’t increased in over 20 years.\nBut our fee schedules have also strained under the evolution of our membership. They\u0026rsquo;ve grown complex over time with the addition of new fees, new record types, or new membership and user categories. The complexity in our fees is hard to manage programatically, and also means it is difficult for the community to reliably predict their costs.\nThe RCFS program is an umbrella for a few related goals:\nMaking fees more equitable Simplifying our complex fee schedule Rebalancing revenue sources Changes might result in fee increases for some, but only to the extent that fee increases are in service to those goals. The ideal outcome would be that all of these changes result in as close to an overall revenue-neutral position as possible while ensuring long term sustainability.\nThroughout all the project discussions and decisions, we are being mindful of Crossref’s fee principles, which the board adopted in 2019.\nScope of the RCFS Program 2024-2025 We engaged Research Consulting in late 2023 to help us identify 11 potential changes that would have the highest positive impact and be most feasible.\nSince then we have narrowed down the 11 projects to five that we will tackle in 2024-2025. In February 2024, we started working with our expanded Membership \u0026amp; Fees Committee to progress the discussions. Their remit is to give and assess community input and data in order to make recommendations to the Board.\nThis page sets out the work for each of the five projects under the three core program goals.\nGOAL: MORE EQUITABLE FEES Project 1: Evaluate the USD $275 annual membership fee tier and propose a more equitable pricing structure, which might entail breaking this down into two or more different tiers. Project 2: Define a new basis for sizing and tiering members for their capacity to pay GOAL: SIMPLIFY COMPLEX FEES Project 3: Address and adjust volume discounts for Content Registration Project 4: Address and adjust back-year discounts for Content Registration GOAL: REBALANCE REVENUE SOURCES Project 5: Reflect the increasing value of Crossref as a metadata source, likely increasing Metadata Plus fees Read on for more about the goals and the five projects and what\u0026rsquo;s happening with each.\nGOAL: MORE EQUITABLE FEES Membership characteristics have evolved over time, with revenue concentrated on the furthest ends of the membership tiers. The goal of reviewing the tiers is to align them with how membership participation has changed, reduce the number of tiers, and examine how we apply the sliding scale of pricing to an organisation’s capacity to pay.\nProject 1: Evaluate the lowest membership tier and propose a more equitable pricing structure, which might entail breaking this down into two or more different tiers. The first project in focus is an analysis of the USD $275 membership tier. The vast majority of Crossref’s revenues come from the top and bottom membership tiers. 65% of membership revenues come from organisations in the USD $275 tier, which is for organisations sized at \u0026lt; USD $1 million, and membership fees account for a much greater share of these organisations’ total payments to Crossref, at 44%. There are currently over 8000 members in that USD $275 tier, so we need to understand them better.\nWork to date In March 2024, we distributed a survey to all members in the USD $275 tier and received over 1000 responses. In May 2024, preliminary survey results were shared and discussed in our community call, and the final findings were considered by the Membership \u0026amp; Fees Committee, who highlighted a number of possible paths that need to be modelled, as well as the need for further research into barriers to Crossref membership. Modelling of future impacts of different approaches to fee changes. In August - October 2024, we invited feedback from organisations, who are not Crossref members to understand how our fees can be more accessible. In early 2025, we included additional questions on the application form to better understand the financial circumstances of newly joining members. In May 2025, we surveyed all our members to learn about their current publishing revenue and expenses. In June 2025, the M\u0026amp;F Committee made a recommendation to the Board to create a new lowest membership fee tier for organisations whose publishng revenue or expenses (whichever is higher) of up to US $1,000. In July 2025, the new membership fee tier of US $200 was approved by the Board for implementation from January 2026 What\u0026rsquo;s next Crossref Memebership and Billing teams will work through August to October 2025 to help qualifying members to change from $275 to $200 membership fee tier before the launch of the new tier in January 2026. Project 2: Define a new basis for sizing and tiering members for their capacity to pay We will review the basis for determining annual membership fee. Currently, tier is based on the higher of:\nTotal annual publishing revenue from all the divisions of your organisation (the member is considered to be the largest legal entity) for all types of activities (advertising, sales, subscriptions, databases, article charges, membership dues, etc). Or, if no publishing revenue then: Total annual publishing operations expenses including (but not limited to) staff costs, hosting, outsourcing, consulting, typesetting, etc. This criterion has become limiting as it is based on the original premise that all Crossref members are publishers. However, we have government bodies and NGOs, funders, news agencies, museums, pharmaceutical companies, and more - who don’t measure publishing revenue or expenses. It should simply be a way to determine size or capacity to pay.\nAdditionally, even within traditional publishing, so many journals are volunteer-led, that it\u0026rsquo;s been tricky for them to size themselves based on either revenue or expenses, since the volunteer group may be very broad but largely involve just a few snatched hours from many different researchers and editors.\nWork to date Between April and November 2024, we gathered feedback about an option to change the basis of our membership fees from the publishing revenue (or expenses) to overall organisational revenue (or expenses). Through surveys, discussions with the M\u0026amp;F committee, and at the Crossref 2024 Annual Meeting, we learned that, particularly for those based at institutions and/or following a diamond open-access model, making this change, whilst more inclusive of non-publishers, would put Crossref beyond their reach. It became clear that we should not change the basis for sizing and tiering members; instead, we will maintain the current basis (publishing revenue/expenses, whichever is higher). For non-publisher members, we advise taking ‘publishing’ to mean ‘producing’, so taking their cost of producing the works being registered with us, whether that is data, software, imagery, physical objects, etc.\nWhat\u0026rsquo;s next Consultation about a suitable fee basis with funder members will take place between August and December 2025 GOAL: SIMPLIFY COMPLEX FEES Content registration fees can be broken down into 14 different record types, which can be further split into 42 different content fees, when accounting for current year (CY), back year (BY) discounts, and volume discounts.\nContent registration fees have not changed substantially in 20 years. Fees have been added over time as new record types have been introduced for new communities such as preprint servers and funders.\nThe number of fee variants creates complexity in our code and billing processes; makes it difficult for members to predict their fees because of computation that can currently only be done at the close of the quarter; and inhibits our ability in the future to change our approach to billing or provide accurate running costs of content registration for members.\nA lot of the complexity in our billing can be attributed to underused content type provisions like volume and back-year discounts. Discounted prices, like discounts for registering back-year records, were introduced to encourage members to register as much content as they had, in order to better capture the scholarly record.\nMany of these discount categories have very little to no activity in them, but a few are still in use and some conceptually encourage best practice in line with fee principles.\nRemoving or reducing discount types would have a significant impact on simplifying our fees without risking significant financial impact. Although encouraging previous archival content to be registered is an important incentive, in this review, we\u0026rsquo;re considering to what extent the discounted price encourages registration of high volumes of content and/or back year records.\nSummary of a recent Membership \u0026amp; Fees committee discussion of the usefulness of discounts:\nProject 3: Address and adjust volume discounts for content registration We currently offer volume discounts for several of our record types. These are calculated at the end of each quarter. In order to reduce the complexity of our pricing, we will eliminate all volume discounts. They are underused, accessible only to a small percentage of members, and the financial impact of making the change is small. These discounts contribute to complexity in our billing process and block our ability to offer members a running total or provide leaving members with a timely final invoice.\nWork to date In May and June 2025 we invited feedback by email from organisations affected by this proposed change to understand the likely impact of removing volume discounts. Having consulted with affected organisations, we’re reassured that the change will not adversely affect their ability to register their works with us. We appreciate their understanding of the overall positive impact of this change for Crossref and their support for our sustainability. Prompted by members\u0026rsquo; feedback, we reviewed fees for peer review registration and found an opportunity to simply fees further by normalising peer review regisrtation fees. Board apporved both of these recommendations to be implemented from Janauary 2026. What\u0026rsquo;s next Volume discounts will be discontinued from January 2026. Starting from January 2026, we will also consolidate all peer review pricing, regardless of who registers it, to US $0.25 for the first review for an article, and free registration for any subsequent reviews of that same record. Project 4: Address and adjust back-year discounts for record registration Work to date In May and June 2025 we invited feedback by email from organisations affected by this proposed change to understand the likely impact of removing volume discounts. We learnt that the change will not adversely affect their ability to register their works with us. The Board requested further research into rising content types such as conference proceedings and theses and dissertations. What\u0026rsquo;s next Further research into our members\u0026rsquo; plans related to registering back-year conference proceedings and theses and dissertations in the coming years. GOAL: REBALANCE REVENUE SOURCES Project 5: Reflect the increasing value of Crossref as a metadata source, likely increasing Metadata Plus fees Increasing Metadata Plus fees would help reflect the change in the value of Crossref to the community. Initially, Crossref was primarily an end-point role for members; we are (and will remain) custodians of the scholarly record through metadata. Over the last decade—with the growth of search and APIs and the vision of the Research Nexus—Crossref’s role has expanded to be a hub-point for all scholarly stakeholders, we are also now distributors of metadata between and among all parties in scholarly communications who curate or consume metadata.\nIn five years, Crossref has seen the following growth:\nData point 2018 2023 Total annual DOI resolutions 6 billion 13.8 billion Total annual API/Search calls 7.6 billion 14.8 billion Rebalancing revenue between metadata registration and metadata distribution will more accurately reflect Crossref’s purpose as perceived by the wider community we now serve.\nWork to date We have been in touch with a few Query Affiliate subscribers to understand why they use this service We have started analysing the costs to Crossref of supporting the Plus API We have started gathering usage data in case that is a fee model we could move to What\u0026rsquo;s next Present the data to the Plus subscribers and discuss Present the data and subscriber feedback to the Membership \u0026amp; Fees Committee We invite everyone to comment or ask questions about this program in the dedicated RCFS Program category on our community forum.\n",
"headings": ["Background","Scope of the RCFS Program 2024-2025","GOAL: MORE EQUITABLE FEES","GOAL: SIMPLIFY COMPLEX FEES","GOAL: REBALANCE REVENUE SOURCES","GOAL: MORE EQUITABLE FEES","Project 1: Evaluate the lowest membership tier and propose a more equitable pricing structure, which might entail breaking this down into two or more different tiers.","Work to date","What\u0026rsquo;s next","Project 2: Define a new basis for sizing and tiering members for their capacity to pay","Work to date","What\u0026rsquo;s next","GOAL: SIMPLIFY COMPLEX FEES","Project 3: Address and adjust volume discounts for content registration","Work to date","What\u0026rsquo;s next","Project 4: Address and adjust back-year discounts for record registration","Work to date","What\u0026rsquo;s next","GOAL: REBALANCE REVENUE SOURCES","Project 5: Reflect the increasing value of Crossref as a metadata source, likely increasing Metadata Plus fees","Work to date","What\u0026rsquo;s next"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/authors/yasiel-p%C3%A9rez-vera/",
"title": "Yasiel Pérez Vera",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Authors",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/authors/alicia-wang/",
"title": "Alicia Wang",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Authors",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/crossref-at-beijing-international-book-fair-2025/",
"title": "Crossref at Beijing International Book Fair 2025",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2025-07-24",
"lastmod_ts": 1753315200,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "This June, we presented at the Beijing International Book Fair (BIBF) and connected directly with our growing community in China. With a surge of interest from Chinese publishers and partners, it was clear: there’s a strong and rising curiosity around how metadata plays a vital role in maintaining the integrity of the scholarly record.\n",
"content": "This June, we presented at the Beijing International Book Fair (BIBF) and connected directly with our growing community in China. With a surge of interest from Chinese publishers and partners, it was clear: there’s a strong and rising curiosity around how metadata plays a vital role in maintaining the integrity of the scholarly record.\nAnd we were not alone: our incredible Crossref Ambassadors based in the region joined us at the booth, and together we hosted visitors and answered questions. Throughout the fair, we engaged in passionate conversations, provided metadata guidance, and shared our knowledge as part of a panel session focused on how metadata supports scholarship. Ms. Ran Dang, Editorial Director at Atlantis Press (Springer Nature), supports Crossref outreach and advocates for Open Access and Open Science. Ms. Xiaofeng Guo, Director at Sin-Chn Scientific Press, leads DOI infrastructure efforts in China and supports Crossref members across the region. Mr. Gantulga Lkhagva, Founder and CEO of Mongolian Digital Knowledge Solutions and MongoliaJOL, works to strengthen local scholarly publishing and promote metadata best practices.\nPhoto: Crossref Ambassadors and Staff\nThis was the first time some of us had met in person after years of online collaboration, and the sense of connection and shared purpose was energising. Our Ambassadors also contributed to this post, sharing their favourite moments, key takeaways, and stories from the fair.\nA snapshot from the panel discussion During BIBF, we hosted a panel session focused on the role of metadata in supporting scholarship. Ms. Alicia Wang, Vice President - CNPIEC Kexin Technology Co., Ltd, Robbykha Rosalien, Membership Support Specialist - Crossref, Johanssen Obanda - Community Engagement Manager - Crossref, and our Ambassadors joined the panel, and we were glad to have a mix of Crossref members, Metadata Plus users, and curious participants join the discussion.\nPhoto: Panel session - Ms. Alicia Wang, Mr. Gantulga Lkhagva, Ms. Robbykha Rosalien, Mr. Johanssen Obanda, Ms. Xiaofeng Guo, Ms. Ran Dang.\nMs Xiaofeng Guo making a presentation about how metadata supports scholarship\nKey questions from the session included the status of open abstracts in Crossref, how retracted articles affect citation tracking and research integrity, and what happens when DOIs no longer resolve due to unmaintained landing pages.\nRobbykha explained our DOI resolution and archival systems, clarifying that DOIs are designed to always resolve, even when the original content moves or becomes unavailable. We also touched on the work Crossref is doing to support transparency around retractions, and the goals of The Initiative for Open Abstracts, which aims to make research summaries more accessible.\nMetadata Plus use cases from China Two of our Metadata Plus users were present during the panel and generously shared how they are leveraging Crossref metadata in their work.\nJie He from ScienceRiver described how their team translates Crossref metadata from English into Chinese, making it possible for users in China to search for relevant academic literature originally published outside the mainland. Their efforts open up global research to local audiences, bridging language and accessibility gaps. This conversation also led to broader discussions about multilingual metadata and the work our Metadata Advisory Group hopes to support in this area.\nEurasia Academic Publishing Group, based in Hong Kong, talked about using Crossref metadata coupled with AI approaches to develop a tool for readers, editors, and institutions to help assess the integrity of research articles and detect paper mills.\nReflections from our Ambassadors and the community One common thread throughout our time at BIBF was the recognition that many of our resources, documentation, and support materials are still primarily in English. For Chinese-speaking community members who are new to Crossref or metadata concepts, this creates a pretty steep learning curve. We heard this clearly, and we know there’s work to do in making our services more accessible across languages.\nFrom personal highlights to fascinating conversations, here’s what some of our Ambassadors had to say:\nI am very happy to have met with colleagues from Crossref and several Ambassadors from Asia! We have met many times online, but this was the first time we met face-to-face and worked together to engage with our members and host events! I learned a great deal from our face-to-face exchanges, including updates on Crossref\u0026rsquo;s latest use cases, industry development trends, and even information about my colleagues\u0026rsquo; hometowns. We built friendships and successfully participated in the first BIBF event for Crossref, which was the biggest takeaway!\n我非常高兴，能够与Crossref的同事和亚洲的几位大使见面！我们曾经多次在网络会议中见面，但是这是第一次面对面，并且共同面对用户、举办活动！在我们面对面的交流中我也学到了很多，包括Crossref的最新应用案例，行业发展情况，甚至同事们自己家乡的情况！我们建立了友谊，成功举办了第一次BIBF活动，这是最大的收获！\nAt the BIBF exhibition and events, we had good conversations with our Chinese partners and some members, and learned about actual application needs and use cases, which was very helpful to me. Most of the people I met spoke Chinese, but their publishers or institutions may have come from countries and regions outside mainland China, such as Singapore, Hong Kong, and Taiwan.\n在此次BIBF展览和活动中，我们与中国的合作伙伴以及很多用户面对面交流，了解到实际的应用需求和应用案例，这对我帮助很大。我接触的客户多半讲华语，但是他们的出版社或机构可能来自新加坡、香港、台湾等中国大陆以外的国家和地区。\nI also participated in the BIBF Forum events held before the exhibition, including the PubTech Conference, the first STM Asia-Pacific Conference, and the networking dinner. These three events were jointly organised by China National Publications Import and Export (Group) Corporation (CNPIEC), STM, and the Chinese Society of China University Journals (SCUJ). During the events, I heard about the latest developments in the publishing industry and gained valuable insights into hot topics. I also met many new and old friends and partners, some from China and others from around the world. Interacting with them not only allowed me to reminisce about the past but also provided me with new perspectives and expanded my professional network.\n我这次也参加了在展览之前举办的BIBF论坛活动，包括的PubTech论坛，以及首界STM亚太会议和交流晚宴。这三个活动是由中国图书进出口公司（CNPIEC）、STM和中国高校科技期刊研究会（SCUJ）联合举办的。在活动中我听到了很多出版行业的最新发展以及针对热点问题的真知灼见，见到了很多新老朋友和伙伴，他们部分来自中国，部分来自世界各地。与他们交流不仅让我重温旧时光，也获得了新的见解、新的人脉。\nDiscussion with Ms. Bo Li from China Education Publication Import \u0026amp; Export Corporation (CEPIEC) on matching papers with their funding grants from China. This is an excellent use case for Crossref\u0026rsquo;s Grant Linking System (GLS) service and related metadata. We introduced the GLS service and Crossref metadata to Ms. Bo Li and will follow up with her and her colleagues to help them use Crossref\u0026rsquo;s metadata to complete this task more easily.\n与中国教育图书进出口公司的李博女士讨论为科研基金匹配项目资助的论文元数据。这是一个非常好的应用案例，可以利用Crossref的GLS服务以及相关元数据。我们向李博介绍了GLS服务以及元数据的相关情况，之后还将与她和她的同事进行深入讨论，帮助他们利用Crossref的元数据更快捷地完成此项工作。\nDiscussion with Dr. Zhu Xuefeng. Their team has developed an application that identifies research integrity issues in journals and articles. They primarily utilise Crossref metadata (including article metadata and retraction observation data), withdrarXiv, ORCID and Research Organization Registry (ROR) data, among others. By linking and integrating these data, they calculate the research integrity risk of relevant journals and articles, providing a reference for authors submitting manuscripts, editors reviewing manuscripts, and institutions monitoring research integrity issues.\n与朱学峰博士的讨论。他们的团队开发了一款应用程序，识别期刊/文章的科研诚信问题。他们主要利用了Crossref元数据（包括文章元数据和撤稿观察数据），arXiv的撤回数据集，以及ORCID和ROR数据等，通过关联、集成这些数据计算相关期刊/文章的科研诚信风险，为作者投稿、编辑审稿、机构监测科研诚信问题等提供参考。\nAt the Crossref BIBF event, Ms. Wang Xuan, Vice President of CNPIEC Kexin Technology Co., Ltd, a Crossref sponsor in China, discussed the strong demand for reliable data sources when applying AI in the field of scientific research, as well as how Crossref metadata can provide strong support. She proposed that all AI products focusing on scientific research should show the original DOIs for the academic resources they cite in the results they provide to users, to enhance the reliability and traceability of data sources. She committed that her company, Ke Xin, as a provider of research AI assistants, will implement this functionality in its products and hopes to promote this as a best practice to all research AI application developers and providers. This reflects that, as cutting-edge technology advances and requirements for research integrity and compliance continue to rise, Crossref metadata continues to play an important role in scholarship and will become increasingly extensive and indispensable.\n在Crossref BIBF活动上，中图科信公司（Crossref中国赞助机构）副总经理王轩女士在讨论中阐述了关于AI在科研领域应用时对于可信数据来源的强烈需求，以及Crossref元数据如何能提供有力支撑的想法。她倡议所有的科研AI产品在为用户提供结果时，应对引用的学术资源提供原始的DOI标识，以增强数据来源的可信度和可追踪性。她承诺中图科信公司作为科研AI助手的提供者将在其产品中实现这一功能，并希望能将此作为最佳实践向所有科研AI应用的开发者、提供者进行推广。这反映了随着前沿科技发展以及科研诚信与合规要求不断提升，Crossref元数据对于学术研究提供的支撑作用将越来越广泛、越来越重要。\n",
"headings": ["A snapshot from the panel discussion","Metadata Plus use cases from China","Reflections from our Ambassadors and the community"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/authors/gantulga-lkhagva/",
"title": "Gantulga Lkhagva",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Authors",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/authors/ran-dang/",
"title": "Ran Dang",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Authors",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/authors/xiaofeng-guo/",
"title": "Xiaofeng Guo",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Authors",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/connecting-the-dots-fwfs-transition-to-linked-grant-metadata-to-support-a-thriving-culture-of-openness/",
"title": "Connecting the dots: FWFs transition to linked grant metadata to support a thriving culture of openness",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2025-07-23",
"lastmod_ts": 1753228800,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "Click here for the version in German\nAs a new Community Engagement Manager at Crossref, dedicated to working with the funders community, I frequently hear requests for examples and case studies of adopting Crossref\u0026rsquo;s Grant Linking System (GLS) by \u0026lsquo;funders like us\u0026rsquo;. This has spurred me to start a series of blog posts presenting funders\u0026rsquo; perspectives on joining Crossref and using our system \u0026ndash; to demonstrate how it\u0026rsquo;s done. ",
"content": "Click here for the version in German\nAs a new Community Engagement Manager at Crossref, dedicated to working with the funders community, I frequently hear requests for examples and case studies of adopting Crossref\u0026rsquo;s Grant Linking System (GLS) by \u0026lsquo;funders like us\u0026rsquo;. This has spurred me to start a series of blog posts presenting funders\u0026rsquo; perspectives on joining Crossref and using our system \u0026ndash; to demonstrate how it\u0026rsquo;s done. In the first case study of a series, I speak with Katharina Rieck, Open Science Manager at the Austrian Science Fund (FWF), Austria\u0026rsquo;s national funding agency for basic research, about the agency\u0026rsquo;s approach to research metadata, transparency and openness, and the role that the Grant Linking System plays in it. With a strong track record in Open Access and Open Science, the FWF\u0026rsquo;s decision to implement grant IDs represents more than a mere technical upgrade. What began as an initiative to enhance the openness and interoperability of grant information illustrates that truly open research infrastructure is not solely a matter of systems, but about people, policies and collaboration.\nKatharina was also elected to the Crossref Board at our November 2024 Annual Meeting, and started her three-year term in January 2025.\nCould you introduce your organisation? And what is your role? The Austrian Science Fund (FWF) is Austria\u0026rsquo;s national funding agency for basic research. The FWF funds all disciplines, from Social Sciences and Humanities to Life Sciences and Natural Sciences and Technology. As Open Science Manager, I am responsible for developing the FWF\u0026rsquo;s Open Science strategy, including the development of the Open Access Policy for Peer-Reviewed Publications, the Open Access Policy for Research Data as well as the FWF Research Data Management Policy. I am also responsible for the development and implementation of funding instruments such as the FWF Open-Access Block Grant and support for Open Science infrastructures.\nWhat motivated you to join Crossref? For more than two decades, the FWF has actively promoted and supported various aspects of Open Science. In 2004, it published its first Open Access Policy, making it one of the first funding organizations worldwide to adopt an Open Access policy for publications. In line with the commitment to open research information as a core pillar of Open Science, the FWF has taken further steps to strengthen openness and transparency: it joined Crossref to register grant DOIs and became a signatory of the Barcelona Declaration on Open Research Information and joined Crossref to register grant DOIs.\nWhile funding metadata––information about projects funded by the FWF––has long been freely available on our website, the launch of the Research Radar in 2023 marked a significant step forward. Our goal was not only to maintain accessibility but to ensure that the data published in the Research Radar is interoperable and aligned with the FAIR principles. By implementing the Grant Linking System from Crossref, we assign each FWF funded project a unique, persistent identifier with associated metadata, helping to make FWF grant information open, interoperable and sustainable.\nCan you tell us about your experience using the Grant Linking System? We have been using the Grant Linking System since November 2023. With the launch of the FWF\u0026rsquo;s new website and the introduction of the Research Radar, we began registering Crossref grant IDs (DOIs) for all grants included in the Research Radar database. As a result, all FWF-funded projects dating back to 1995 are now uniquely identifiable. The process of registering grant metadata with Crossref is straightforward, and we have set up a smooth internal workflow that enables the registration of DOIs after the FWF\u0026rsquo;s funding decision.\nIt is important to note that implementing Crossref grant IDs involved more than just a technical setup––it required the development of new internal processes and coordination through a dedicated Crossref grant DOI implementation group. The implementation process also resulted in a revised structure for grant numbers (DOI suffixes) for FWF-funded projects, establishing a sustainable and future-proof system.\nHow was your journey to socialise the Grant Linking System within your research community? How did you communicate the importance of identifiers and grant metadata to your grant holders? The introduction of grant DOIs was supported by a comprehensive communication strategy, including dedicated online resources (e.g., New Identification Numbers for FWF Projects –– FWF), updates across multiple pages of the FWF website (such as Carrying out Your Project –– FWF), and presentations at various events. This communication strategy aimed to explain the purpose and value of the \u0026ldquo;new numbers\u0026rdquo; ensuring that researchers and stakeholders understood how this contributes to greater visibility, traceability, and openness of funded research.\nAs a funding organisation, we require grant recipients to acknowledge FWF support in all research outputs resulting from their projects. With the integration of grant DOIs into FWF\u0026rsquo;s metadata, the standardised acknowledgment text was updated to ensure that the DOIs are now included in outputs. The new required wording is: \u0026lsquo;This research was funded in whole or in part by the Austrian Science Fund (FWF) [grant DOI],\u0026rsquo; and is now a requirement in the FWF funding agreement. Including the grant DOI both in the output metadata and the acknowledgment text enhances traceability and supports more effective analysis of FWF-funded outputs.\nWhat do you find useful about registering grant metadata with Crossref? One of the key benefits of registering grant metadata is the enhanced interconnectivity and the unique identification of FWF\u0026rsquo;s grant information. By registering our grants with Crossref, funding information becomes more than just information on the FWF website––it becomes interoperable data that is accessible and reusable. This not only increases visibility but also enables us to better analyse the outcomes of funded projects and ensures that the data is accessible as well as (re)usable by the broader research community.\nIn addition to assigning Crossref Grant IDs and registering grant metadata, the FWF has required ORCID IDs for researchers since 2016 and mandates the use of ROR IDs for institutions. The consistent use of persistent identifiers in metadata ensures the interoperability of FWF grant information and facilitates seamless integration with external data sources.\nWhat are your hopes for the GLS and greater transparency in funding metadata in general? The FAIRness and openness of research information––including metadata on funding information, research outputs, researchers, and institutions––are fundamental to a well-functioning research ecosystem. I hope to see a broader adoption of persistent identifiers in metadata, particularly in grant information, as well as a broader commitment to openly sharing research information as expressed in the Barcelona Declaration. Moreover, a key objective should be to ensure the highest possible accuracy of metadata at the point of entry. This entails, for instance, that publication metadata accurately includes funding metadata.\nWhat were the key challenges you encountered when embracing the GLS, and how did you overcome them? One of the key challenges we encountered when adopting the GLS was ensuring seamless integration in our existing IT infrastructure and workflows. Integrating the new number across different systems required considerable coordination. We overcame this challenge by establishing a dedicated implementation team that included IT experts.\nAnother challenge involved communicating and disseminating information regarding the grant DOI, ensuring that researchers and other relevant stakeholders were adequately informed. This was successfully managed through targeted and comprehensive communication efforts.\nBased on your experience, what would be your advice for colleagues from other research funders? It is important to recognise that registering grant identifers and metadata goes beyond a mere technical implementation. This is an opportunity to engage with diverse stakeholders, rethink processes and highlight the value of open funding metadata for the entire research community.\nWe are grateful to Katharina Rieck and FWF for generously sharing their insights and know-how. Their experience highlights the importance of seeing metadata not just as information, but as a shared resource that connects and empowers the research community.\nVersion in German The title has been changed slightly from the original version. Translation by Lena Stoll.\nConnecting the Dots: Wie der FWF durch die Umstellung auf vernetzte Fördermetadaten eine Kultur der Offenheit fördert Als neue Community-Engagement-Managerin bei Crossref, die sich der Zusammenarbeit mit Fördergebern widmet, werde ich häufig gefragt, ob ich Beispiele und Fallstudien von „Förderern wie uns“ geben kann, die Crossrefs Grant Linking System (GLS) bereits eingeführt haben. Dies hat mich dazu veranlasst, eine Blogreihe zu starten, in der ich die Perspektiven von Fördergebern auf eine Crossref-Mitgliedschaft und die Nutzung unseres Systems vorstelle – um zu zeigen, wie es funktioniert.\nIn der ersten Fallstudie dieser Reihe spreche ich mit Katharina Rieck, Open-Science-Managerin beim Österreichischen Wissenschaftsfonds FWF, Österreichs nationaler Förderagentur für Grundlagenforschung, über den Ansatz des FWF zu Forschungsmetadaten, Transparenz und Offenheit sowie über die Rolle, die das Grant Linking System dabei spielt.\nMit seiner langjährigen Erfahrung im Bereich Open Access und Open Science stellt die Entscheidung des FWF, Grant-IDs (DOIs für Fördermittel) einzuführen, mehr als nur eine technische Verbesserung dar. Die Initiative begann mit dem Ziel, die Offenheit und Interoperabilität von Förderinformationen zu verbessern, aber schon bald wurde klar, dass eine wirklich offene Forschungsinfrastruktur nicht nur eine Frage der Systeme ist, sondern auch Menschen, Regelwerke, Abläufe und die Zusammenarbeit betrifft.\nKatharina Rieck wurde auf unserer Jahresversammlung im November 2024 außerdem in Crossrefs Board of Directors gewählt und ist im Januar 2025 ihre dreijährige Amtszeit angetreten.\nBitte stellen Sie den FWF kurz vor und erklären Sie unseren Leser:innen, was Ihre Rolle dort ist. Der Österreichische Wissenschaftsfonds FWF ist Österreichs nationale Förderorganisation für Grundlagenforschung. Der FWF fördert alle Disziplinen, von den Sozial- und Geisteswissenschaften über die Lebenswissenschaften bis hin zu Naturwissenschaften und Technik. Als Open-Science-Managerin bin ich für die Entwicklung der Open-Science-Strategie des FWF verantwortlich, einschließlich der Entwicklung der Open-Access-Policy für begutachtete Publikationen, der Open-Access-Policy für Forschungsdaten sowie der FWF-Richtlinie zum Forschungsdatenmanagement. Darüber hinaus bin ich verantwortlich für die Entwicklung und Umsetzung von Förderinstrumenten wie der Open-Access-Pauschale des FWF sowie die Unterstützung von Open-Science-Infrastrukturen.\nWas hat Sie dazu bewogen, Crossref beizutreten? Der FWF fördert und unterstützt seit mehr als zwei Jahrzehnten aktiv verschiedene Aspekte von Open Science. 2004 veröffentlichte er seine erste Open-Access-Policy und war damit eine der ersten Förderorganisationen weltweit, die eine Open-Access-Policy für Publikationen eingeführt haben. Im Einklang mit seinem Engagement für offene Forschungsinformationen als zentrale Säule von Open Science hat der FWF weitere Schritte unternommen, um Offenheit und Transparenz zu stärken: Der FWF ist Crossref beigetreten, um Grant-DOIs zu registrieren, und ist Unterzeichner der Barcelona Declaration on Open Research Information.\nZwar sind Metadaten zur Forschungsförderung – also Informationen über FWF-geförderte Projekte – schon seit Langem über unsere Website frei verfügbar. Doch die Einführung des Research Radar im Jahr 2023 war nochmal ein bedeutender Fortschritt. Unser Ziel war es nicht nur, den offenen Zugang zu den Metadaten aufrechtzuerhalten, sondern auch sicherzustellen, dass die im Forschungsradar veröffentlichten Daten interoperabel und mit den FAIR-Prinzipien vereinbar sind. Durch die Anwendung von Crossrefs Grant Linking System bekommt jetzt jedes vom FWF geförderte Projekt eine eindeutige, unveränderliche ID mit dazugehörigen Metadaten – und die Informationen zu FWF-Fördermitteln sind somit offen, interoperabel und nachhaltig verfügbar.\nKönnen Sie uns mehr über Ihre Erfahrungen mit dem Grant Linking System erzählen? Wir nutzen das Grant Linking System seit November 2023. Mit dem Launch der neuen FWF-Website und des Research Radar begannen wir damit, Crossref-Grant-IDs (DOIs) für alle in der Forschungsradar-Datenbank enthaltenen Förderungen zu registrieren. Dadurch sind nun alle FWF-geförderten Projekte seit 1995 eindeutig identifizierbar. Die Registrierung von Grant-Metadaten bei Crossref ist unkompliziert, und wir haben einen reibungslosen internen Workflow entwickelt, um DOIs nach der Förderentscheidung des FWF zu registrieren.\nEs ist wichtig zu erwähnen, dass es für die Einführung von Crossref-Grant-IDs mehr als nur den Aufbau technischer Prozesse brauchte – wir haben auch neue interne Abläufe entwickelt und eine eigene Arbeitsgruppe für die Koordination von Crossref-Grant-DOIs gebildet. Im Zuge dieses Prozesses haben wir auch die Struktur der Projektnummern für FWF-geförderte Projekte (also der DOI-Suffixe) überarbeitet und somit ein nachhaltiges und zukunftssicheres System aufgebaut.\nWelche Erfahrungen haben Sie damit gemacht, das Grant Linking System in Ihrer Forschungscommunity zu bewerben? Wie haben Sie Ihren Fördernehmer:innen die Wichtigkeit von Identifiern und Metadaten vermittelt? Wir haben die Einführung der Grant-DOIs mit einer umfassenden Kommunikationsstrategie unterstützt, inklusive spezieller Online-Ressourcen (z. B. Neue Identifikationsnummern für FWF-Projekte), der Aktualisierung mehrerer Seiten auf der FWF-Website (z. B. Projekt durchführen) sowie Vorträgen bei diversen Veranstaltungen. Ziel dieser Kommunikationsstrategie war es, Zweck und Nutzen der „neuen Nummern“ zu erläutern und sicherzustellen, dass Forschende und Stakeholder verstehen, wie diese zu mehr Sichtbarkeit, Nachvollziehbarkeit und Offenheit der geförderten Forschung beitragen.\nAls Förderorganisation verlangen wir von unseren Fördernehmer:innen, die Unterstützung durch den FWF in allen Forschungsergebnissen zu erwähnen, die aus dem Projekt resultieren. Mit der Integration der Grant-DOIs in die Metadaten des FWF haben wir den standardisierten Acknowledgement-Text aktualisiert, um sicherzustellen, dass die DOIs in den Ergebnissen erwähnt werden. Der neue erforderliche Wortlaut ist: „Diese Forschung wurde gänzlich oder teilweise durch den Wissenschaftsfonds FWF finanziert [Grant-DOI].“ und ist in jedem FWF-Fördervertrag festgeschrieben. Die Angabe von Grant-DOIs sowohl in den Metadaten als auch im Acknowledgement-Text von wissenschaftlichem Output verbessert die Rückverfolgbarkeit und ermöglicht eine genauere Analyse der vom FWF geförderten Ergebnisse.\nWas finden Sie an der Registrierung von Fördermetadaten bei Crossref am hilfreichsten? Einer der Hauptvorteile der Registrierung von Fördermetadaten ist die verbesserte Vernetzung und die eindeutige Identifizierung der Förderinformationen des FWF. Durch die Registrierung unserer Projekte bei Crossref werden Förderinformationen zu mehr als nur Informationen auf unserer Website – sie werden zu interoperablen Daten, die abrufbar und wiederverwendbar sind. Dies erhöht nicht nur die Sichtbarkeit, sondern ermöglicht uns auch eine bessere Analyse der Ergebnisse geförderter Projekte und stellt sicher, dass die Daten für die allgemeine Forschungsgemeinschaft zugänglich und (wieder-)verwendbar sind.\nNeben der Vergabe von Crossref-Grant-IDs und der Registrierung von Fördermetadaten schreibt der FWF seit 2016 ORCID für Forschende sowie die Verwendung von ROR IDs für Institutionen vor. Die konsequente Verwendung persistenter IDs in den Metadaten gewährleistet die Interoperabilität der FWF-Förderinformationen und erleichtert die nahtlose Integration mit externen Datenquellen.\nWas erhoffen Sie sich vom GLS und von mehr Transparenz bei Fördermetadaten im Allgemeinen? Die FAIRness und Offenheit von Forschungsinformationen – einschließlich der Metadaten zu Förderinformationen, Forschungsergebnissen, Forschenden und Institutionen – sind für ein gut funktionierendes Forschungsökosystem wesentlich. Ich hoffe auf eine weiterreichende Anwendung von persistenten IDs in Metadaten, insbesondere in Förderinformationen, und auf ein größeres Engagement für den offenen Austausch von Forschungsinformationen, wie es zum Beispiel in der Barcelona Declaration on Open Research Information gefordert wird. Darüber hinaus sollte sichergestellt werden, dass die Metadaten bereits bei der Eingabe und damit bei ihrer Generierung möglichst korrekt sind. Das bedeutet unter anderem, dass die Metadaten von Publikationen die korrekten Fördermetadaten enthalten sollten.\nWelche Herausforderungen sind bei der Einführung des GLS aufgetreten und wie haben Sie diese gemeistert? Eine der größten Herausforderungen bestand darin, das Grant Linking System nahtlos in unsere bestehende IT-Infrastruktur und Arbeitsabläufe zu integrieren. Die „neue Nummer“ in die unterschiedlichen Systeme zu integrieren, bedeutete einen hohen Koordinationsaufwand. Gemeistert haben wir diese Herausforderung durch die Bildung einer eigenen Arbeitsgruppe für die Anwendung von Crossref-Grant-DOIs, in der auch IT-Expert:innen vertreten waren.\nEine weitere Herausforderung bestand in der Kommunikation und Verbreitung von Informationen zu Grant-DOIs, um Forschende und andere Stakeholder angemessen zu informieren. Das haben wir durch gezielte und umfassende Kommunikationsmaßnahmen erreicht.\nBasierend auf Ihrer eigenen Erfahrung, welchen Ratschlag würden Sie Kolleg:innen bei anderen Fördergebern mitgeben? Es ist wichtig zu verstehen, dass die Registrierung von Grant-IDs und Metadaten über eine bloße technische Umsetzung hinausgeht. Der Prozess bietet die Gelegenheit, mit verschiedenen Stakeholdern in Kontakt zu treten, Abläufe zu überdenken und den Wert offener Fördermetadaten für die gesamte Forschungsgemeinschaft zu unterstreichen.\nWir danken Katharina Rieck und dem FWF für ihre Bereitschaft, ihre Erkenntnisse und ihr Know-how so großzügig zu teilen. Ihr Erfahrungsbericht hat uns gezeigt, wie wichtig es ist, Metadaten nicht nur als Informationen zu betrachten, sondern als eine gemeinsame Ressource, die die gesamte Forschungsgemeinschaft vernetzen und stärken kann.\n",
"headings": ["Could you introduce your organisation? And what is your role?","What motivated you to join Crossref?","Can you tell us about your experience using the Grant Linking System?","How was your journey to socialise the Grant Linking System within your research community? How did you communicate the importance of identifiers and grant metadata to your grant holders?","What do you find useful about registering grant metadata with Crossref?","What are your hopes for the GLS and greater transparency in funding metadata in general?","What were the key challenges you encountered when embracing the GLS, and how did you overcome them?","Based on your experience, what would be your advice for colleagues from other research funders?","Version in German","Connecting the Dots: Wie der FWF durch die Umstellung auf vernetzte Fördermetadaten eine Kultur der Offenheit fördert","Bitte stellen Sie den FWF kurz vor und erklären Sie unseren Leser:innen, was Ihre Rolle dort ist.","Was hat Sie dazu bewogen, Crossref beizutreten?","Können Sie uns mehr über Ihre Erfahrungen mit dem Grant Linking System erzählen?","Welche Erfahrungen haben Sie damit gemacht, das Grant Linking System in Ihrer Forschungscommunity zu bewerben? Wie haben Sie Ihren Fördernehmer:innen die Wichtigkeit von Identifiern und Metadaten vermittelt?","Was finden Sie an der Registrierung von Fördermetadaten bei Crossref am hilfreichsten?","Was erhoffen Sie sich vom GLS und von mehr Transparenz bei Fördermetadaten im Allgemeinen?","Welche Herausforderungen sind bei der Einführung des GLS aufgetreten und wie haben Sie diese gemeistert?","Basierend auf Ihrer eigenen Erfahrung, welchen Ratschlag würden Sie Kolleg:innen bei anderen Fördergebern mitgeben?"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/authors/katharina-rieck/",
"title": "Katharina Rieck",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Authors",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/operations-and-sustainability/",
"title": "Operations & sustainability",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2025-07-23",
"lastmod_ts": 1753228800,
"section": "Operations & sustainability",
"tags": [],
"description": "We are a not-for-profit organisation, registered in the United States of America as a 501(c)6 (a \u0026ldquo;trade association\u0026rdquo;). We are sustained by annual membership fees that are tiered according to organisational size. We also charge a Content Registration fee for each item of content whose metadata is registered with us. We also provide both free and paid-for metadata retrieval options for access to this metadata.\nMembers can and do participate in many ways and contribute to our global network of linked scholarly content. We are governed by sixteen of our members that form our board serving three-year terms.\n",
"content": "We are a not-for-profit organisation, registered in the United States of America as a 501(c)6 (a \u0026ldquo;trade association\u0026rdquo;). We are sustained by annual membership fees that are tiered according to organisational size. We also charge a Content Registration fee for each item of content whose metadata is registered with us. We also provide both free and paid-for metadata retrieval options for access to this metadata.\nMembers can and do participate in many ways and contribute to our global network of linked scholarly content. We are governed by sixteen of our members that form our board serving three-year terms.\nCrossref adopted the Principles of Open Scholarly Infrastructure and this section of our website is part of our commitment to transparent operations. From here you can find information about our financials, our membership operations, our policies, and our staff handbook and other formerly-internal documents.\nSustainability at Crossref Revenue from Crossref\u0026rsquo;s annual dues and services sustains operations. The relevant POSI goals we strive to meet are:\nTime-limited funds are used only for time-limited activities – day-to-day operations should be supported by day-to-day sustainable revenue sources. Goal to generate surplus – it is not enough to merely survive. Producing a small surplus allows us to respond nimbly to opportunities or weather economic downtimes. Goal to create a contingency fund to support operations for 12 months – generating an operating surplus also allows us to create a separate fund that could support operations for a year. Mission-consistent revenue generation – any revenue we generate must be mission-aligned and not run counter to the aims of the organisation. Revenue based on services, not data – data related to the running of the research enterprise should be community property. Appropriate revenue sources might include value-added services, consulting, API Service Level Agreements, or membership fees. Transparent operations – achieving trust in the selection of representatives to governance groups will be best achieved through transparent processes and operations in general (within the constraints of privacy laws). Fee principles In July 2019 our board voted to approve the following principles to inform all future fee modeling and decisions.\nCrossref’s fees should:\nEnable us to fulfil our mission to make research outputs easy to find, cite, link, assess, and reuse Encourage best practice and discourage bad practice, as our policies and obligations advise Be non-discriminatory, encouraging broad participation from organisations of all sizes and types Support the long-term persistence of our services and infrastructure, so long as relevant and valuable to the community Deliver value to our members Be transparent and openly available, recommended by the Membership \u0026amp; Fees Committee and approved by the board Be the same for all, not discounted or negotiated individually, to ensure fairness Be independent of our members’ own business models Not always be necessary (e.g., new record types are not usually separate services) Be based on providing services not metadata We are accredited in handling your data Crossref was awarded the SOC 2® accreditation most recently in 2025 after an independent assessment of our controls and procedures by the American Institute of CPA’s (AICPA).\nThe SOC 2® accreditation is awarded to service organisations that have passed standard trust services criteria relating to the security, availability, and processing integrity of systems used to process users’ data and the confidentiality and privacy of the information processed by these systems.\nThe AICPA’s assessment also reviewed our vendor management programs, internal corporate governance and risk management processes, and regulatory oversight.\nFind out more about the SOC accreditation structure\n",
"headings": ["Sustainability at Crossref","Fee principles","We are accredited in handling your data"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/membership/terms/",
"title": "Current membership terms",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 5,
"lastmod": "2025-07-11",
"lastmod_ts": 1752192000,
"section": "Become a member",
"tags": [],
"description": "Updated 11th July 2025\nThese Crossref Terms of Membership (these \u0026ldquo;Terms\u0026rdquo;) set forth the terms and conditions of membership in The Publishers International Linking Association, Inc. d/b/a Crossref (\u0026ldquo;Crossref\u0026rdquo;), a nonprofit corporation organized under the laws of New York, USA.\nBackground Crossref is a not-for-profit membership organization that exists to make scholarly communications better. Its mission is to \"make research outputs easy to find, cite, link, assess, and reuse.\" To that end, Crossref: manages and maintains a database of information (\"Metadata\") that describes and identifies professional and scholarly materials and content (collectively, \"Content\") and persistent identifiers such as Digital Object Identifiers (\"Identifiers\") that point to or give context to the Content online; facilitates the deposit and retrieval of Metadata and Identifiers; enables linking among Content online through embedded reference citations; and offers other online information management tools. All of the above functions and offerings, including associated systems, hardware, software, and know-how, are referred to in these Terms as the \"Crossref Infrastructure and Services.\" Membership in Crossref is open to organizations that produce Content and otherwise meet the terms and conditions of membership established from time to time by Crossref, and to such other entities as Crossref may determine from time to time. Together with Crossref's Articles of Incorporation and Bylaws (collectively, the \"Crossref Governing Documents\"), these Terms govern membership in Crossref. By submitting a membership application, the applicant agrees to be bound by these Terms and, upon Crossref's approval of that application, and receipt of the first annual membership fee, the applicant becomes a \"Member\" of Crossref. Terms Member's Rights. Subject to these Terms, the Crossref Governing Documents, and Crossref's policies and procedures made available on Crossref's website (the \"Website\"), the Member shall: be entitled to use the Crossref Infrastructure and Services as set forth in these Terms; and have the governance rights afforded to Members in the Crossref Governing Documents. Member's Obligations. As a condition of its membership, the Member shall comply with these Terms, including this Section 2. Member Practices Member agrees to comply with the member practices, including activities and conduct, described on the Website. Metadata Deposits. The Member is responsible for depositing accurate Metadata for each Content item: produced by the Member, and/or for which the Member otherwise has rights to cause such Content to be included in the Crossref Infrastructure and Services. All Content described in the two bullet points above is referred to in these Terms as the Member's Content. Timely Metadata Deposits. Prior to, or as soon as reasonably practicable after, online publication of the Member's Content, the Member shall deposit with Crossref the Metadata corresponding to such Content. All deposits of Metadata shall comply with Crossref's technical documentation and schemas, including fields, parameters and other metadata criteria, set forth from time to time in support and best practice documentation on the Website. Rights to Content Required. The Member will not deposit or register Metadata for any Content for which the Member does not have legal rights to do so. The Member acknowledges that the unauthorized deposit or use of Metadata causes harm to Crossref, the Crossref Intrastructure and Services, and other Members, and compromises the integrity of the scholarly record. Registering Identifiers. The Member shall assign an Identifier to each of its Content items, for registration within the Crossref Infrastructure and Services. Reference Linking. Promptly upon becoming a Member, and throughout the Term, the Member shall embed the appropriate Identifier(s) within each reference citation appearing in the Member's Content. Use identifiers for all Linking. Throughout the Term, the Member shall use best efforts to maximize linking through Identifiers to other Content within the Crossref Infrastructure and Services from all Member's platforms, services and communications. Display Identifiers. With respect to each Identifier assigned to the Member's Content, the Member shall (i) display each Identifier in a location and format that comply with the Crossref Display Guidelines, as updated on the Website from time to time (the \"Display Guidelines\"), and (ii) ensure each Identifier is hyperlinked so as to be citable. Maintaining and Updating Metadata. The Member shall ensure that each Identifier assigned to the Member's Content continuously resolves to a landing response page (a \"Landing Page\") containing, at a minimum, (i) complete bibliographic information about the corresponding Content (including the Identifier), visible on the initial page, with reasonably sufficient information detailing how the Content can be cited and accessed, and/or (ii) a hyperlink leading to the Content itself, in each case in accordance with the Display Guidelines. The Identifier shall serve as the permanent URL link to the Response Page. The Member shall register the Response Page URL with Crossref, keep it up-to-date and active, and promptly correct any errors or variances communicated to the Member by Crossref. The Member shall be exclusively responsible for maintaining the accuracy of data associated with each Identifier relating to the Member's Content, and the validity and operation of the corresponding URL(s) containing the Response Page, and related pages. Some examples of failures to maintain and update Metadata as required by this Section 2(i) include: 1) publishing or communicating Identifiers without registering them with Crossref; 2) withdrawing content without posting a notification and updating the record's URL/metadata with Crossref; or 3) registering new Identifiers with the Member's own prefix for content that already had Identifiers registered by a prior publisher. Archives. The Member shall use best efforts to contract with a third-party archive or other content host (an \"Archive\") (a list of which can be found here) for such Archive to preserve the Member's Content and, in the event that the Member ceases to host the Member's Content, to make such Content available for persistent linking. The Member hereby authorizes Crossref, solely in the event an Archive becomes the primary location of the Member's Content, to contract directly with such Archive for the purpose of ensuring the persistence of links to such Content. The Member agrees that, in the event that the Content permanently ceases to be maintained by the Member, Crossref is entitled to redirect Identifiers to an Archive or a \"Defunct DOI\" page hosted by Crossref. Content-Specific Obligations. Should the Member choose to register different types of Content and Metadata, such as journal articles, book chapters, datasets, conference proceedings, preprints, components, data, peer review reports, versions, or relations, the Member shall comply with all obligations applicable to each specific record type as set forth on the Website from time to time. Fees. The Member shall pay the Fees described in this Section 3. These Terms refer to Annual Fees, service fees, and usage fees (including Content Registration Fees) collectively as \"Fees.\" Annual Fee. The Member is responsible to pay an annual membership fee (the \"Annual Fee\"). The Annual Fee for a Member's first year of membership is invoiced as a prorated amount for the Member's initial calendar year of membership, to be paid in full for membership. Thereafter, the Annual Fee is invoiced at the beginning of each calendar year. Payment terms are 45 days from the date of invoice. Content Registration Fees. Crossref charges Members a Content Registration fee (collectively, \"Content Registration Fees\") to deposit content with Crossref, as more fully described on the Website from time to time. Content Registration Fees are invoiced on a quarterly basis. Payment terms are 45 days from the date of invoice. Other Fees. The Member is responsible for any fees they may incur to transact with Crossref as a result of their chosen payment method, such as fees from the Member's bank or foreign exchange fees. Fees for Optional Services. From time to time Crossref charges Members service fees for various optional services offered by Crossref and elected by the Member. These are set forth on the Website and updated from time to time. Intellectual Property Rights. General License. Subject to these Terms, the Member hereby grants to Crossref and its agents a fully-paid, non-exclusive, worldwide license for any and all rights necessary to use, reproduce, transmit, distribute, display and sublicense Metadata and Identifiers corresponding to the Member's Content, in the reasonable discretion of Crossref in connection with the Crossref Infrastructure and Services, including all aspects of Reference Linking and Crossref's various other service offerings. Metadata Rights and Limitations. Except as set forth herein and without limiting Section 4(a) above, Crossref shall not use, or acquire or retain any rights in the deposited Metadata of a Member. Nothing in these Terms gives a Member any rights (including copyrights, database compilation rights, trademarks, trade names, and other intellectual property rights, currently in existence or later developed) to any Metadata belonging to another Member. Crossref Intellectual Property. The Member acknowledges that, as between itself and Crossref, Crossref has all right, title and interest in and to the Crossref Infrastructure and Services, including all related copyrights, database compilation rights, trademarks, trade names, and other intellectual property rights, currently in existence or later developed, with the exception of rights in the deposited Metadata as set forth in Section 4(b) or expressly provided elsewhere in writing. The Member shall not delete or modify any of Crossref's logos or notices of intellectual property rights on documents, online text or interfaces made available by Crossref. Distribution of Metadata by Crossref. Without limiting the provisions of Section 4 above, the Member understands and agrees that all Metadata and Identifiers registered with Crossref are made available for reuse without restriction through public APIs and search interfaces, which enhances discoverability of Content. Metadata and Identifiers may also be licensed to third party subscribers along with an agreement for Crossref to provide third parties with certain higher levels of support and service. Use of Marks. Crossref may use the Member's name(s) and mark(s) to identify the Member's status as a member of Crossref. The Member may identify itself as a Crossref member by placing the Crossref mark or Crossref badges (without modification) on its Website, by referencing the code provided on the Website. The Member may also identify use of Crossref Identifiers and Metadata, for example within reference lists, using the label \"Crossref.\" Maintenance of the Crossref Infrastructure and Services. Crossref shall use commercially reasonable efforts to maintain the Crossref Infrastructure and Services and to make it continually available for use by Members. Term. These Terms shall remain in effect until and unless superseded by updated Crossref Terms of Membership amended as set forth in Section 18 below. Termination of Membership; Effect. Termination of Membership; Suspension. A Member's Crossref membership may be terminated: By the Member for convenience upon written notice to Crossref; By the Member for cause (1) in the event of Crossref's material breach of these Terms, which breach remains uncured following 45 days' notice from the Member to Crossref (or is by its nature incapable of cure) or (2) in the event Crossref provides notice of a material amendment to these Terms pursuant to the provisions of Section 18 hereof, and the Member provides notice to Crossref within 60 days of such notice of the Member's objection to such amendment and its intention to terminate; By Crossref upon written notice to the Member, in accordance with the Crossref Governing Documents, including for (1) a misrepresentation in the Member's membership application or ongoing practices; (2) legal sanctions or judgments against the Member or its home country; (3) fraudulent or misleading use or creation of Identifiers or Metadata; (4) failure to pay Fees due (5) violation of the Crossref Governing Documents or any Crossref rules or (6) any other basis set forth in the Crossref Governing Documents. At Crossref's discretion, the Member's membership may be temporarily suspended in lieu of, or in advance of, termination. The procedures for suspension and termination shall be set forth in the Crossref Governing Documents. If the Member's membership of Crossref is through a sponsor, and the sponsor cancels their agreement with the member and informs Crossref. Effect of Suspension or Termination of Membership. A suspended or terminated Member shall not be entitled to a refund of any Fees that have been paid or waiver of any Fees that have accrued, except that a Member will be entitled to a refund of any prepaid fees representing the remaining portion of the then-current term of such Member's membership in the event of a termination for cause pursuant to Section 9(a)(ii) above. Suspension or termination of Membership shall have no adverse effect on Crossref's intellectual property rights in any Metadata or upon any related licenses then in effect. During suspension and following termination of its membership, an outgoing Member shall have no further obligation to deposit Metadata with Crossref or to assign Identifiers to its Content, and Crossref shall have no further obligation to register such Identifiers. With respect to Metadata deposited and Identifiers registered prior to such suspension or termination: (i) Crossref shall have the right to keep, maintain and use such Metadata and Identifiers within the Crossref Infrastructure and Services; and (ii) the obligations of the Member set forth in Sections 2(h) (i), and (j) of these Terms will survive. Enforcement. Crossref shall take reasonable steps to enforce these Terms, provided that Crossref shall not be obligated to take any action with respect to any Metadata that is the subject of an intellectual property dispute, but reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to remove or suspend access from, to or through such Metadata and/or its associated Content or to take any other action it deems appropriate. Governing Law. These Terms shall be interpreted, governed and enforced under the laws of New York, USA, without regard to its conflict of law rules. All claims, disputes and actions of any kind arising out of or relating to these Terms shall be settled in Boston, Massachusetts, USA. Disputes. Alternative Dispute Resolution. The Member shall promptly notify Crossref of any claim, dispute or action, whether against other Members or Crossref, related to these Terms or any Identifiers or Metadata. Pursuant to the Commercial Arbitration Rules of the American Arbitration Association, a single arbitrator reasonably familiar with the publishing (including online publishing) and internet industries shall settle all claims, disputes or actions of any kind arising from or relating to the subject matter of these Terms between Crossref and the Member. The decision of the arbitrator shall be final and binding on the parties, and may be enforced in any court of competent jurisdiction. Injunctive Relief. Notwithstanding Section 12(a), no party shall be prevented from seeking injunctive or preliminary relief in anticipation, but not in any way in limitation, of arbitration. The Member acknowledges that the unauthorized deposit or use of Metadata would cause irreparable harm to Crossref, the Crossref Infrastructure and Services, and/or other Members, that could not be compensated by monetary damages. The Member therefore agrees that Crossref may seek injunctive relief to remedy any actual or threatened unauthorized deposit or use of Metadata. Indemnification. To the extent authorized by law, the Member agrees to indemnify and hold harmless Crossref, its representatives, and their respective directors, officers and employees, from and against any and all liability, damage, loss, cost or expense, including reasonable attorney fees, costs, and other expenses, to the extent arising from or resulting from such Member's or its agent's or representative's acts or omissions, breach of these Terms, or violation of any third-party intellectual property right. Limitations of Liability. NEITHER PARTY SHALL BE LIABLE TO THE OTHER FOR ANY INDIRECT, SPECIAL, INCIDENTAL, PUNITIVE, CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES OR LOST PROFITS ARISING FROM OR RELATING TO THESE TERMS OR THE CROSSREF INFRASTRUCTURE AND SERVICES, EVEN IF IT HAS BEEN INFORMED IN ADVANCE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES. NEITHER PARTY SHALL BE LIABLE TO THE OTHER FOR (I) ANY LOSS, CORRUPTION OR DELAY OF DATA OR (II) ANY LOSS, CORRUPTION OR DELAY OF COMMUNICATIONS WITH OR CONNECTION TO ANY CROSSREF SERVICE OR ANY CONTENT. Taxes. The Member is responsible for all sales and use taxes imposed, if any, with respect to the services rendered or products provided to the Member hereunder, other than taxes based upon or credited against Crossref's income. Other Terms. Independent Contractors. These Terms will not create or be deemed to create any agency, partnership, employment relationship, or joint venture between Crossref and any Member. The Member shall not have any right, power or authority to enter into any agreement for or on behalf of, or incur any obligation or liability of, or to otherwise bind, Crossref. No Third-Party Beneficiaries. Except to the extent expressly set forth herein, neither party intends that these Terms shall benefit, or create any right or cause of action in or on behalf of, any person or entity other than Crossref and the Member. No Assignment. A Member may not assign, subcontract or sublicense these Terms without the prior written consent of Crossref, and any attempted assignment in violation of the foregoing shall be void. Notices. Written notice under these Terms shall be given as follows: If to Crossref: by emailing member@crossref.org, Attention: Membership team. If to a Member: To the name and email address designated by the Member as the Primary Contact (previously \"Business Contact\") in such Member's membership application. This information may be changed by the Member by giving notice to Crossref by email at member@crossref.org. The Member shall also designate a technical, primary, voting (if relevant), billing, and metadata quality contact, and advise Crossref of any changes to such information. Survival. Sections (and the corresponding subsections, if any) 2(g), (h), and (i), 4, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, and 16, and any other provisions that by their express terms or nature survive, and any rights to payment, shall survive the expiration or termination of these Terms. Headings. The headings of the sections and subsections used in these Terms are included for convenience only and are not to be used in construing or interpreting these Terms. Severability. If any provision of these Terms (or any portion thereof) is determined to be invalid or unenforceable, the remaining provisions of these Terms will not be affected thereby and will be binding upon the parties and will be enforceable, as though said invalid or unenforceable provision (or portion thereof) were not contained in these Terms. Entire Agreement. These Terms, together with any Addenda of Terms executed between Crossref and a Member, constitute and contain the entire agreement between Crossref and such Member with respect to the subject matter hereof, and supersede any prior or contemporaneous oral or written agreements. The \"Background\" section at the beginning of these Terms forms a part of these Terms and is incorporated by reference herein. Amendment. These Terms may be amended by Crossref, via updated Terms posted on the Website and emailed to each Member no fewer than sixty (60) days prior to effectiveness. By using the Crossref Infrastructure and Services after the effective date of any such amendment hereto, the Member accepts the amended Terms. These Terms may also be amended by mutual agreement of a given Member and Crossref by execution of an Addendum of Terms. Data Privacy. By providing Crossref with personal data which was provided to the Member by a natural person(s), including Member staff (the \"origin party\"), the Member guarantees that: the Member collected and processed the data in accordance with applicable law, including the General Data Protection Regulation; the Member acquired the origin party's informed consent to share the data with Crossref; the Member acquired the origin party's consent for the data to be transferred to the United States for processing. The Member further agrees that it will maintain appropriate mechanisms to ensure that it will provide natural person(s) whose personal data it provides to Crossref with a means to have access to, to correct, and to delete such data and understands that the burden is on the Member to communicate such corrections or deletions to Crossref. Crossref's Privacy Policy is located here. Compliance. Each of the Member and Crossref shall perform under this Agreement in compliance with all laws, rules, and regulations of any jurisdiction which is or may be applicable to its business and activities, including anti-corruption, copyright, privacy, and data protection laws, rules, and regulations. The Member warrants that neither it nor any of its affiliates, officers, directors, employees, or members is (i) a person whose name appears on the list of Specially Designated Nationals and Blocked Persons published by the Office of Foreign Assets Control, U.S. Department of Treasury (\"OFAC\"), (ii) a department, agency or instrumentality of, or is otherwise controlled by or acting on behalf of, directly or indirectly, any such person; (iii) a department, agency, or instrumentality of the government of a country subject to comprehensive U.S. economic sanctions administered by OFAC; or (iv) is subject to sanctions by the United Nations, the United Kingdom, or the European Union. If you would like to apply to join please visit our membership page which describes the obligations and leads to an application form. Please contact our membership specialist with any questions.\n",
"content": "Updated 11th July 2025\nThese Crossref Terms of Membership (these \u0026ldquo;Terms\u0026rdquo;) set forth the terms and conditions of membership in The Publishers International Linking Association, Inc. d/b/a Crossref (\u0026ldquo;Crossref\u0026rdquo;), a nonprofit corporation organized under the laws of New York, USA.\nBackground Crossref is a not-for-profit membership organization that exists to make scholarly communications better. Its mission is to \"make research outputs easy to find, cite, link, assess, and reuse.\" To that end, Crossref: manages and maintains a database of information (\"Metadata\") that describes and identifies professional and scholarly materials and content (collectively, \"Content\") and persistent identifiers such as Digital Object Identifiers (\"Identifiers\") that point to or give context to the Content online; facilitates the deposit and retrieval of Metadata and Identifiers; enables linking among Content online through embedded reference citations; and offers other online information management tools. All of the above functions and offerings, including associated systems, hardware, software, and know-how, are referred to in these Terms as the \"Crossref Infrastructure and Services.\" Membership in Crossref is open to organizations that produce Content and otherwise meet the terms and conditions of membership established from time to time by Crossref, and to such other entities as Crossref may determine from time to time. Together with Crossref's Articles of Incorporation and Bylaws (collectively, the \"Crossref Governing Documents\"), these Terms govern membership in Crossref. By submitting a membership application, the applicant agrees to be bound by these Terms and, upon Crossref's approval of that application, and receipt of the first annual membership fee, the applicant becomes a \"Member\" of Crossref. Terms Member's Rights. Subject to these Terms, the Crossref Governing Documents, and Crossref's policies and procedures made available on Crossref's website (the \"Website\"), the Member shall: be entitled to use the Crossref Infrastructure and Services as set forth in these Terms; and have the governance rights afforded to Members in the Crossref Governing Documents. Member's Obligations. As a condition of its membership, the Member shall comply with these Terms, including this Section 2. Member Practices Member agrees to comply with the member practices, including activities and conduct, described on the Website. Metadata Deposits. The Member is responsible for depositing accurate Metadata for each Content item: produced by the Member, and/or for which the Member otherwise has rights to cause such Content to be included in the Crossref Infrastructure and Services. All Content described in the two bullet points above is referred to in these Terms as the Member's Content. Timely Metadata Deposits. Prior to, or as soon as reasonably practicable after, online publication of the Member's Content, the Member shall deposit with Crossref the Metadata corresponding to such Content. All deposits of Metadata shall comply with Crossref's technical documentation and schemas, including fields, parameters and other metadata criteria, set forth from time to time in support and best practice documentation on the Website. Rights to Content Required. The Member will not deposit or register Metadata for any Content for which the Member does not have legal rights to do so. The Member acknowledges that the unauthorized deposit or use of Metadata causes harm to Crossref, the Crossref Intrastructure and Services, and other Members, and compromises the integrity of the scholarly record. Registering Identifiers. The Member shall assign an Identifier to each of its Content items, for registration within the Crossref Infrastructure and Services. Reference Linking. Promptly upon becoming a Member, and throughout the Term, the Member shall embed the appropriate Identifier(s) within each reference citation appearing in the Member's Content. Use identifiers for all Linking. Throughout the Term, the Member shall use best efforts to maximize linking through Identifiers to other Content within the Crossref Infrastructure and Services from all Member's platforms, services and communications. Display Identifiers. With respect to each Identifier assigned to the Member's Content, the Member shall (i) display each Identifier in a location and format that comply with the Crossref Display Guidelines, as updated on the Website from time to time (the \"Display Guidelines\"), and (ii) ensure each Identifier is hyperlinked so as to be citable. Maintaining and Updating Metadata. The Member shall ensure that each Identifier assigned to the Member's Content continuously resolves to a landing response page (a \"Landing Page\") containing, at a minimum, (i) complete bibliographic information about the corresponding Content (including the Identifier), visible on the initial page, with reasonably sufficient information detailing how the Content can be cited and accessed, and/or (ii) a hyperlink leading to the Content itself, in each case in accordance with the Display Guidelines. The Identifier shall serve as the permanent URL link to the Response Page. The Member shall register the Response Page URL with Crossref, keep it up-to-date and active, and promptly correct any errors or variances communicated to the Member by Crossref. The Member shall be exclusively responsible for maintaining the accuracy of data associated with each Identifier relating to the Member's Content, and the validity and operation of the corresponding URL(s) containing the Response Page, and related pages. Some examples of failures to maintain and update Metadata as required by this Section 2(i) include: 1) publishing or communicating Identifiers without registering them with Crossref; 2) withdrawing content without posting a notification and updating the record's URL/metadata with Crossref; or 3) registering new Identifiers with the Member's own prefix for content that already had Identifiers registered by a prior publisher. Archives. The Member shall use best efforts to contract with a third-party archive or other content host (an \"Archive\") (a list of which can be found here) for such Archive to preserve the Member's Content and, in the event that the Member ceases to host the Member's Content, to make such Content available for persistent linking. The Member hereby authorizes Crossref, solely in the event an Archive becomes the primary location of the Member's Content, to contract directly with such Archive for the purpose of ensuring the persistence of links to such Content. The Member agrees that, in the event that the Content permanently ceases to be maintained by the Member, Crossref is entitled to redirect Identifiers to an Archive or a \"Defunct DOI\" page hosted by Crossref. Content-Specific Obligations. Should the Member choose to register different types of Content and Metadata, such as journal articles, book chapters, datasets, conference proceedings, preprints, components, data, peer review reports, versions, or relations, the Member shall comply with all obligations applicable to each specific record type as set forth on the Website from time to time. Fees. The Member shall pay the Fees described in this Section 3. These Terms refer to Annual Fees, service fees, and usage fees (including Content Registration Fees) collectively as \"Fees.\" Annual Fee. The Member is responsible to pay an annual membership fee (the \"Annual Fee\"). The Annual Fee for a Member's first year of membership is invoiced as a prorated amount for the Member's initial calendar year of membership, to be paid in full for membership. Thereafter, the Annual Fee is invoiced at the beginning of each calendar year. Payment terms are 45 days from the date of invoice. Content Registration Fees. Crossref charges Members a Content Registration fee (collectively, \"Content Registration Fees\") to deposit content with Crossref, as more fully described on the Website from time to time. Content Registration Fees are invoiced on a quarterly basis. Payment terms are 45 days from the date of invoice. Other Fees. The Member is responsible for any fees they may incur to transact with Crossref as a result of their chosen payment method, such as fees from the Member's bank or foreign exchange fees. Fees for Optional Services. From time to time Crossref charges Members service fees for various optional services offered by Crossref and elected by the Member. These are set forth on the Website and updated from time to time. Intellectual Property Rights. General License. Subject to these Terms, the Member hereby grants to Crossref and its agents a fully-paid, non-exclusive, worldwide license for any and all rights necessary to use, reproduce, transmit, distribute, display and sublicense Metadata and Identifiers corresponding to the Member's Content, in the reasonable discretion of Crossref in connection with the Crossref Infrastructure and Services, including all aspects of Reference Linking and Crossref's various other service offerings. Metadata Rights and Limitations. Except as set forth herein and without limiting Section 4(a) above, Crossref shall not use, or acquire or retain any rights in the deposited Metadata of a Member. Nothing in these Terms gives a Member any rights (including copyrights, database compilation rights, trademarks, trade names, and other intellectual property rights, currently in existence or later developed) to any Metadata belonging to another Member. Crossref Intellectual Property. The Member acknowledges that, as between itself and Crossref, Crossref has all right, title and interest in and to the Crossref Infrastructure and Services, including all related copyrights, database compilation rights, trademarks, trade names, and other intellectual property rights, currently in existence or later developed, with the exception of rights in the deposited Metadata as set forth in Section 4(b) or expressly provided elsewhere in writing. The Member shall not delete or modify any of Crossref's logos or notices of intellectual property rights on documents, online text or interfaces made available by Crossref. Distribution of Metadata by Crossref. Without limiting the provisions of Section 4 above, the Member understands and agrees that all Metadata and Identifiers registered with Crossref are made available for reuse without restriction through public APIs and search interfaces, which enhances discoverability of Content. Metadata and Identifiers may also be licensed to third party subscribers along with an agreement for Crossref to provide third parties with certain higher levels of support and service. Use of Marks. Crossref may use the Member's name(s) and mark(s) to identify the Member's status as a member of Crossref. The Member may identify itself as a Crossref member by placing the Crossref mark or Crossref badges (without modification) on its Website, by referencing the code provided on the Website. The Member may also identify use of Crossref Identifiers and Metadata, for example within reference lists, using the label \"Crossref.\" Maintenance of the Crossref Infrastructure and Services. Crossref shall use commercially reasonable efforts to maintain the Crossref Infrastructure and Services and to make it continually available for use by Members. Term. These Terms shall remain in effect until and unless superseded by updated Crossref Terms of Membership amended as set forth in Section 18 below. Termination of Membership; Effect. Termination of Membership; Suspension. A Member's Crossref membership may be terminated: By the Member for convenience upon written notice to Crossref; By the Member for cause (1) in the event of Crossref's material breach of these Terms, which breach remains uncured following 45 days' notice from the Member to Crossref (or is by its nature incapable of cure) or (2) in the event Crossref provides notice of a material amendment to these Terms pursuant to the provisions of Section 18 hereof, and the Member provides notice to Crossref within 60 days of such notice of the Member's objection to such amendment and its intention to terminate; By Crossref upon written notice to the Member, in accordance with the Crossref Governing Documents, including for (1) a misrepresentation in the Member's membership application or ongoing practices; (2) legal sanctions or judgments against the Member or its home country; (3) fraudulent or misleading use or creation of Identifiers or Metadata; (4) failure to pay Fees due (5) violation of the Crossref Governing Documents or any Crossref rules or (6) any other basis set forth in the Crossref Governing Documents. At Crossref's discretion, the Member's membership may be temporarily suspended in lieu of, or in advance of, termination. The procedures for suspension and termination shall be set forth in the Crossref Governing Documents. If the Member's membership of Crossref is through a sponsor, and the sponsor cancels their agreement with the member and informs Crossref. Effect of Suspension or Termination of Membership. A suspended or terminated Member shall not be entitled to a refund of any Fees that have been paid or waiver of any Fees that have accrued, except that a Member will be entitled to a refund of any prepaid fees representing the remaining portion of the then-current term of such Member's membership in the event of a termination for cause pursuant to Section 9(a)(ii) above. Suspension or termination of Membership shall have no adverse effect on Crossref's intellectual property rights in any Metadata or upon any related licenses then in effect. During suspension and following termination of its membership, an outgoing Member shall have no further obligation to deposit Metadata with Crossref or to assign Identifiers to its Content, and Crossref shall have no further obligation to register such Identifiers. With respect to Metadata deposited and Identifiers registered prior to such suspension or termination: (i) Crossref shall have the right to keep, maintain and use such Metadata and Identifiers within the Crossref Infrastructure and Services; and (ii) the obligations of the Member set forth in Sections 2(h) (i), and (j) of these Terms will survive. Enforcement. Crossref shall take reasonable steps to enforce these Terms, provided that Crossref shall not be obligated to take any action with respect to any Metadata that is the subject of an intellectual property dispute, but reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to remove or suspend access from, to or through such Metadata and/or its associated Content or to take any other action it deems appropriate. Governing Law. These Terms shall be interpreted, governed and enforced under the laws of New York, USA, without regard to its conflict of law rules. All claims, disputes and actions of any kind arising out of or relating to these Terms shall be settled in Boston, Massachusetts, USA. Disputes. Alternative Dispute Resolution. The Member shall promptly notify Crossref of any claim, dispute or action, whether against other Members or Crossref, related to these Terms or any Identifiers or Metadata. Pursuant to the Commercial Arbitration Rules of the American Arbitration Association, a single arbitrator reasonably familiar with the publishing (including online publishing) and internet industries shall settle all claims, disputes or actions of any kind arising from or relating to the subject matter of these Terms between Crossref and the Member. The decision of the arbitrator shall be final and binding on the parties, and may be enforced in any court of competent jurisdiction. Injunctive Relief. Notwithstanding Section 12(a), no party shall be prevented from seeking injunctive or preliminary relief in anticipation, but not in any way in limitation, of arbitration. The Member acknowledges that the unauthorized deposit or use of Metadata would cause irreparable harm to Crossref, the Crossref Infrastructure and Services, and/or other Members, that could not be compensated by monetary damages. The Member therefore agrees that Crossref may seek injunctive relief to remedy any actual or threatened unauthorized deposit or use of Metadata. Indemnification. To the extent authorized by law, the Member agrees to indemnify and hold harmless Crossref, its representatives, and their respective directors, officers and employees, from and against any and all liability, damage, loss, cost or expense, including reasonable attorney fees, costs, and other expenses, to the extent arising from or resulting from such Member's or its agent's or representative's acts or omissions, breach of these Terms, or violation of any third-party intellectual property right. Limitations of Liability. NEITHER PARTY SHALL BE LIABLE TO THE OTHER FOR ANY INDIRECT, SPECIAL, INCIDENTAL, PUNITIVE, CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES OR LOST PROFITS ARISING FROM OR RELATING TO THESE TERMS OR THE CROSSREF INFRASTRUCTURE AND SERVICES, EVEN IF IT HAS BEEN INFORMED IN ADVANCE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES. NEITHER PARTY SHALL BE LIABLE TO THE OTHER FOR (I) ANY LOSS, CORRUPTION OR DELAY OF DATA OR (II) ANY LOSS, CORRUPTION OR DELAY OF COMMUNICATIONS WITH OR CONNECTION TO ANY CROSSREF SERVICE OR ANY CONTENT. Taxes. The Member is responsible for all sales and use taxes imposed, if any, with respect to the services rendered or products provided to the Member hereunder, other than taxes based upon or credited against Crossref's income. Other Terms. Independent Contractors. These Terms will not create or be deemed to create any agency, partnership, employment relationship, or joint venture between Crossref and any Member. The Member shall not have any right, power or authority to enter into any agreement for or on behalf of, or incur any obligation or liability of, or to otherwise bind, Crossref. No Third-Party Beneficiaries. Except to the extent expressly set forth herein, neither party intends that these Terms shall benefit, or create any right or cause of action in or on behalf of, any person or entity other than Crossref and the Member. No Assignment. A Member may not assign, subcontract or sublicense these Terms without the prior written consent of Crossref, and any attempted assignment in violation of the foregoing shall be void. Notices. Written notice under these Terms shall be given as follows: If to Crossref: by emailing member@crossref.org, Attention: Membership team. If to a Member: To the name and email address designated by the Member as the Primary Contact (previously \"Business Contact\") in such Member's membership application. This information may be changed by the Member by giving notice to Crossref by email at member@crossref.org. The Member shall also designate a technical, primary, voting (if relevant), billing, and metadata quality contact, and advise Crossref of any changes to such information. Survival. Sections (and the corresponding subsections, if any) 2(g), (h), and (i), 4, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, and 16, and any other provisions that by their express terms or nature survive, and any rights to payment, shall survive the expiration or termination of these Terms. Headings. The headings of the sections and subsections used in these Terms are included for convenience only and are not to be used in construing or interpreting these Terms. Severability. If any provision of these Terms (or any portion thereof) is determined to be invalid or unenforceable, the remaining provisions of these Terms will not be affected thereby and will be binding upon the parties and will be enforceable, as though said invalid or unenforceable provision (or portion thereof) were not contained in these Terms. Entire Agreement. These Terms, together with any Addenda of Terms executed between Crossref and a Member, constitute and contain the entire agreement between Crossref and such Member with respect to the subject matter hereof, and supersede any prior or contemporaneous oral or written agreements. The \"Background\" section at the beginning of these Terms forms a part of these Terms and is incorporated by reference herein. Amendment. These Terms may be amended by Crossref, via updated Terms posted on the Website and emailed to each Member no fewer than sixty (60) days prior to effectiveness. By using the Crossref Infrastructure and Services after the effective date of any such amendment hereto, the Member accepts the amended Terms. These Terms may also be amended by mutual agreement of a given Member and Crossref by execution of an Addendum of Terms. Data Privacy. By providing Crossref with personal data which was provided to the Member by a natural person(s), including Member staff (the \"origin party\"), the Member guarantees that: the Member collected and processed the data in accordance with applicable law, including the General Data Protection Regulation; the Member acquired the origin party's informed consent to share the data with Crossref; the Member acquired the origin party's consent for the data to be transferred to the United States for processing. The Member further agrees that it will maintain appropriate mechanisms to ensure that it will provide natural person(s) whose personal data it provides to Crossref with a means to have access to, to correct, and to delete such data and understands that the burden is on the Member to communicate such corrections or deletions to Crossref. Crossref's Privacy Policy is located here. Compliance. Each of the Member and Crossref shall perform under this Agreement in compliance with all laws, rules, and regulations of any jurisdiction which is or may be applicable to its business and activities, including anti-corruption, copyright, privacy, and data protection laws, rules, and regulations. The Member warrants that neither it nor any of its affiliates, officers, directors, employees, or members is (i) a person whose name appears on the list of Specially Designated Nationals and Blocked Persons published by the Office of Foreign Assets Control, U.S. Department of Treasury (\"OFAC\"), (ii) a department, agency or instrumentality of, or is otherwise controlled by or acting on behalf of, directly or indirectly, any such person; (iii) a department, agency, or instrumentality of the government of a country subject to comprehensive U.S. economic sanctions administered by OFAC; or (iv) is subject to sanctions by the United Nations, the United Kingdom, or the European Union. If you would like to apply to join please visit our membership page which describes the obligations and leads to an application form. Please contact our membership specialist with any questions.\n",
"headings": ["Background","Terms"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/authors/alex-b%C3%A9dard-vall%C3%A9e/",
"title": "Alex Bédard-Vallée",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Authors",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/categories/data-science/",
"title": "Data Science",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Categories",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/data-science-@crossref/",
"title": "Data Science @Crossref",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2025-07-07",
"lastmod_ts": 1751846400,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "To address the growing scale and complexity of scholarly data, we\u0026rsquo;ve launched a new data science function at Crossref. In April, we were excited to welcome our first data scientists, Jason Portenoy and Alex Bédard-Vallée, to the team. With their arrival, the Data Science team is now fully up and running. In this blog post, we\u0026rsquo;re sharing our vision and what\u0026rsquo;s ahead for data science at Crossref.\n",
"content": "To address the growing scale and complexity of scholarly data, we\u0026rsquo;ve launched a new data science function at Crossref. In April, we were excited to welcome our first data scientists, Jason Portenoy and Alex Bédard-Vallée, to the team. With their arrival, the Data Science team is now fully up and running. In this blog post, we\u0026rsquo;re sharing our vision and what\u0026rsquo;s ahead for data science at Crossref.\nNew approach to achieve our mission Over the last few years, we have witnessed substantial growth of the scholarly community in general, and Crossref in particular. This has been reflected in the increase in the volume and variety of the data we collect, store and process, including scholarly metadata and Crossref operational data related to membership, DOI registrations, billing, usage measurement, and other activities.\nOn the one hand, this growth opens new possibilities for using the data to better understand the scholarly landscape, serve our community, develop services, and make informed decisions. On the other hand, it forces us to address a set of challenges related to the scale and complexity of the data.\nThe new Data Science team, created as part of last year\u0026rsquo;s broader organisational changes, will address these challenges and fulfil our data-related ambitions. As part of our strategic mission, we created the following vision for the Data Science team within Crossref and our community:\nThe Data Science team uses scientific research and data science to deliver, assess, improve, and enrich scholarly metadata.\nThe work of the Data Science team broadly entails two types of projects: 1) data analysis \u0026amp; insights; and 2) data services \u0026amp; workflows.\nData analysis \u0026amp; insights: The goal of these kinds of projects is to broaden our understanding of the scholarly record and our community and help Crossref make decisions in a data-driven way, without trying to create any specific application or product. They will help Crossref explore new strategic directions, make more informed decisions, monitor the trends and outcomes of certain decisions and policies, and discover and share new insights with the community. This category also involves large and small data assessments and analyses, measuring and monitoring certain metrics, verifying hypotheses, answering questions using data, monitoring trends in the metadata, forecasting, data visualisation, reporting, and interpreting results.\nData services \u0026amp; workflows: The goal of these kinds of projects is to apply scientific knowledge and data analysis to build and maintain Crossref services, tools, and workflows. The Data Science team collaborates with other Crossref teams on the research, design and implementation of the Crossref system and its various components. This will involve modelling across different data stores and APIs, as well as designing efficient and robust data workflows for various processes, including metadata deposit, validation, and dissemination. Furthermore, the team will investigate and implement modern tools and techniques for efficient data processing, storage and analysis, and strategies for data enrichment. Finally, the Data Science team is involved in planning and implementing comprehensive monitoring and reporting for various features and services.\nConnecting with the community Crossref exists as part of a diverse, global community of 22,000 members from 160 countries, plus countless systems that rely on our metadata. Launching the new Data Science function gives us a great opportunity to connect more deeply and in new ways with the wider scholarly community. We\u0026rsquo;re keen to engage with Crossref members, users of our services, and partner organisations to better understand trends and needs, and to contribute to others\u0026rsquo; community initiatives and awareness.\nOne area we\u0026rsquo;re particularly interested in is the growing range of initiatives in the metascience space. We\u0026rsquo;re looking to expand and solidify our understanding of how researchers use our data and services, and to learn more about their needs and perspectives. These insights will help inform the design and functionality of our data workflows and APIs over the long term.\nWe\u0026rsquo;re also committed to supporting the scholarly community\u0026rsquo;s efforts to preserve the integrity of the scholarly record (ISR). By applying modern, scalable data processing techniques, we aim to help detect and investigate potential issues affecting metadata quality, including both intentional manipulation and unintentional errors or inconsistencies.\nMore broadly, we\u0026rsquo;re looking forward to engaging with our community on scalable data processing approaches, as well as best practices and standards for processing and enriching scholarly metadata.\nIntroducing new members of the team We couldn\u0026rsquo;t pursue our ambitious goals without the dedication and passion of our team. In April, we were thrilled to welcome two data scientists, Jason Portenoy and Alex Bédard-Vallée, to the Crossref team.\nAlex Bédard-Vallée brings over six years of experience extracting meaningful insights from data within the research and scholarly publishing sector, applying it to large-scale bibliometric data, aiming to better serve the scholarly community. Prior to Crossref, during his tenure at Elsevier, he was instrumental in modernising data infrastructure, significantly enhancing the efficiency of massive research data pipelines. His contributions included developing automated data quality checks, creating reusable Python tools to streamline data access, and leveraging machine learning techniques to uncover research trends. Alex provided key insights for major reports, contributing to evaluations for the Canada Research Chairs Program and the NSF Science and Engineering Indicators between 2020 and 2024. Alex holds an M.Sc. in Quantum Physics (2018) and a B.Sc. in Physics (2016) from the Université de Sherbrooke.\nJason Portenoy is a New York-based data scientist with a background in bibliometric research and building applications using scholarly data. Through his work, he has become a passionate advocate for the maintenance and improvement of high-quality scholarly metadata. He holds a PhD in Information Science from the University of Washington where he studied how scholarly metadata can offer insights into scientific activity and help develop tools to address information overload. He brings experience working at OpenAlex, Semantic Scholar, and other organisations concerned with scholarly communication. Most recently, he was the Senior Data Engineer at OpenAlex, and he is now excited to continue his work using data science to support and strengthen crucial open scholarly infrastructure.\nWhat\u0026rsquo;s next for us? In the short term, we are focusing on two main projects: analysing how reliably DOIs resolve, and detecting discrepancies in bibliographic references at scale.\nDOI resolutions: DOIs are persistent identifiers and links that are meant to consistently resolve to landing pages that represent the object they identify and Crossref has certain obligations that members have to adhere to, one of which is that if the location of the landing page changes, it is the responsibility of the member to update the metadata so the DOI continues to resolve correctly. Some prior work has suggested this doesn\u0026rsquo;t always happen, so there are some gaps in the scholarly record. We\u0026rsquo;re now analysing metadata from a broad sample of members to better understand the scale of the issue, and to identify cases where members may need to update their metadata records.\nDetecting discrepancies in bibliographic references: Following last year\u0026rsquo;s reports of discrepancies between bibliographic references in metadata records and those found in full-text PDFs, we\u0026rsquo;ve explored ways to run broader, systematic checks across a larger set of members and metadata records. The goal was to understand how widespread these inconsistencies are and to identify cases where members may need support in correcting references in their metadata records. Ultimately, we aim to create a collaborative process that improves the accuracy and reliability of bibliographic references across the scholarly record, enhancing research discovery and reproducibility and ensuring impact assessments are reliable.\nLook out for forthcoming blog posts with more details on these projects!\nLooking further ahead, Crossref has two big projects for which the Data Science team will serve central roles: developing dashboards, and improving metadata matching.\nData dashboards: We are planning to develop a series of dashboards to monitor the state of the scholarly record over time. These will include both work-level statistics (e.g., how many works of a given type have been registered?) and more detailed insights at the relationship level (e.g., how many bibliographic references have been automatically matched? How often are ROR IDs included in funder assertions?). Upstream, this will require us to build an environment where all relevant data sources can be combined, as well as adopting a suite of scalable tools and data processing techniques.\nMetadata matching: In April, we commenced the matching project. It is a major effort to rebuild Crossref\u0026rsquo;s metadata matching workflows using modern software development and data science practices. The goal is to create a dedicated consolidated matching workflow that will eventually replace all existing production matching processes, with results made available through the REST API. This project covers six matching tasks: bibliographic reference matching, funder name matching, preprint matching, affiliation matching, grant matching, and title matching.\n(In the meantime, as we do not have a good mechanism to add matching results to the REST API yet, we separately released two datasets with relationships discovered by automated matching strategies: a dataset of relationships between preprints and journal articles, and a dataset of relationships involving research organisations.)\nAs you can tell, we are very excited about Crossref\u0026rsquo;s role in the modern, open, community-focused future of scholarly infrastructure. The new Data Science team is a crucial component of this vision. If you\u0026rsquo;re interested in collaborating or learning more about data science at Crossref, we\u0026rsquo;d love to hear from you!\n",
"headings": ["New approach to achieve our mission","Connecting with the community","Introducing new members of the team","What\u0026rsquo;s next for us?"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/categories/blogs/",
"title": "Blogs",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Categories",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/categories/persistence/",
"title": "Persistence",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Categories",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/categories/rss/",
"title": "RSS",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Categories",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/scholarly-blogs-and-their-place-in-the-research-nexus/",
"title": "Scholarly blogs and their place in the research nexus",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2025-06-24",
"lastmod_ts": 1750723200,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "If you are reading this blog on our website, you may have noticed that alongside each post we now list a Crossref DOI link, which was not the case a few months ago (though we have retroactively added DOIs to all older posts too). You can find the persistent link for this post right above this paragraph. Go on, click on it, we’ll wait.\n",
"content": "If you are reading this blog on our website, you may have noticed that alongside each post we now list a Crossref DOI link, which was not the case a few months ago (though we have retroactively added DOIs to all older posts too). You can find the persistent link for this post right above this paragraph. Go on, click on it, we’ll wait.\nAre you back here? Good. As you probably expected, the DOI link for this post resolves to the post itself, and you should use it anytime you want to cite this post. But the DOI does more than just point readers to this page––it is part of a rich metadata record that includes the authors’ ORCID iDs, the publication date, and more. In other words, the posts on this blog are part of what we call the research nexus: the open network of relationships connecting research outputs, people, organisations, and actions.\nCrossref research nexus vision\nWhy blogs deserve a place in the scholarly record A blog post may not be the first thing that comes to mind when you think of scholarly outputs. But scholarly blogs have been around since at least the early 2000s and have carved out a niche for themselves as a type of “grey literature” that allows researchers to write about research in a way that may not fit neatly into more traditional, peer-reviewed publishing venues, but also is too long-form for social media. Science blogs can give readers a window into ongoing work that isn’t ready to publish yet, serve as a self-publishing venue, or allow researchers to comment on others’ work and recent developments in science and science communication. These kinds of perspectives add crucial context to the scholarly record that should not be overlooked.\nHowever, as Martin Fenner explained at the #Crossref2023 annual meeting, blogs have largely not benefitted from the metadata and long-term archiving solutions that tend to be applied to more “traditional” forms of publishing. As a result, most blogs have been left out of the scholarly record. But in recent years, there have been some efforts in the community to change this. Earlier this year, ORCID added support for the work type blog post, among others, to align more closely with the Confederation of Open Access Repositories (COAR) vocabulary of resource types.\nAt our 2025 midyear community update, we asked our community what content types they saw as growing in importance. Blog posts were mentioned several times as a ‘trending’ record type, and as one that members would like to see support for in the Crossref system.\nEating our own dog food We had already been thinking for a while about how our own blog should be a part of the research nexus. We started out by manually uploading XML files through our Admin tool for each post. We did this for a few months and quickly found, like many of our members do, that this can be a laborious and error-prone process.\nIn the product management world, the process of using the products you usually spend your time building and maintaining is often referred to as dogfooding. The idea is that firsthand experience makes it easier to understand your end users’ needs and feel their pain - and we have certainly found that registering metadata for our blog posts has reinforced the importance of making manual registration easier for our members, but also of supporting and enabling machine-to-machine integrations.\nWhat did we do? The Crossref website, which includes this blog, uses an open-source static site generator named Hugo. Rather than using a content management system (CMS), we edit the website content in Markdown format using code editors. Whenever we start working on a post for this blog, we not only write the content of the post itself, but also include some front matter for the page, which contains some key metadata about the post.\nThe front matter of a recent post on this blog\nWe wanted this metadata to be part of the research nexus. But then there was also the question of archiving. Our membership terms state that:\nThe Member shall use best efforts to contract with a third-party archive or other content host (an \u0026ldquo;Archive\u0026rdquo;) (a list of which can be found here) for such Archive to preserve the Member’s Content and, in the event that the Member ceases to host the Member’s Content, to make such Content available for persistent linking.\nSo we knew that if this blog was to be part of the scholarly record, we would need to ensure that it would be available in perpetuity, even if www.crossref.org were to go offline one day.\nDoing this properly was starting to look like a sizeable project!\nFortunately, we knew that others had already done some great work in this field, so we would not have to start from scratch. After considering our options, we opted to integrate our blog with an established workflow for registering blog metadata: the Rogue Scholar service.\nThe Rogue Scholar was launched in 2023 by Martin Fenner as an archive for scholarly blog posts, hosted by Front Matter. Rogue Scholar improves science blogs in important ways, including full-text search, long-term archiving, and DOIs and metadata, such as versions and relationships along with identifiers such as ORCID iDs and ROR IDs. It provides the necessary tools to treat blog posts as research outputs through better attribution, preservation, and discoverability.\nHow did we do it? Rogue Scholar works on the basis of consuming RSS and ATOM feeds (you may remember them from the days of getting headlines direct to your browser or feed reader). We created a new feed, including the proposed DOI as each entry’s id: and taking full advantage of the ATOM format by listing the post’s authors and including their ORCID iDs. We also provide the entire post as the entry’s \u0026lt;content\u0026gt; to allow for full-text indexing and archiving.\nThe XML feed entry for a recent post on this blog\nFor each post, we generate and assign a unique DOI under the Crossref prefix 10.64000. The Rogue Scholar integration then registers the DOI along with the metadata of the post as posted content. If you are interested in getting a similar workflow set up for your blog, you can read more in the Rogue Scholar blog and documentation.\nWhat does the future hold for scholarly blogs? Researchers are increasingly sharing their early work, or commenting on others’ work, in less formal ways, and if you look at the growth in the number of blogs covered in the Rogue Scholar platform in just a couple of years, it seems like science blogging is here to stay and will only increase. We believe that this practice is an integral part of a healthy scholarly ecosystem, and it needs to be represented in the research nexus.\nThe Crossref input schema does not include a blog work type, but we are planning to add it as a subtype of posted content in our next schema update. We will discuss this and other plans and ideas in the metadata advisory group that we are currently forming.\nIf you have thoughts on the role of blogs in the public discourse around science and science communications, or you would like to share your experience of registering metadata for your blog, let us know by commenting below. Your comments will be threaded in our community forum for discussion.\n",
"headings": ["Why blogs deserve a place in the scholarly record","Eating our own dog food","What did we do?","How did we do it?","What does the future hold for scholarly blogs?"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/sprinting-to-progress-behind-the-scenes-of-our-first-metadata-sprint/",
"title": "Sprinting to Progress: Behind the scenes of our first metadata sprint",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2025-06-23",
"lastmod_ts": 1750636800,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "If you take a peek at our blog, you’ll notice that metadata and community are the most frequently used categories. This is not a coincidence – community is central to everything we do at Crossref. Our first-ever Metadata Sprint was a natural step in strengthening both. Cue fanfare!. And what better way of celebrating 25 years of Crossref?\nWe designed the Crossref Metadata Sprint as a relatively short event where people can form teams and tackle short problems. What kind of problems? While we expected many to involve coding, teams also explored documenting, translating, researching—anything that taps into our open, member-curated metadata. Our motivation behind this format was to create a space for networking, collaboration, and feedback, centered on co-creation using the scholarly metadata from our REST API, the Public Data File, and other sources.\n",
"content": "If you take a peek at our blog, you’ll notice that metadata and community are the most frequently used categories. This is not a coincidence – community is central to everything we do at Crossref. Our first-ever Metadata Sprint was a natural step in strengthening both. Cue fanfare!. And what better way of celebrating 25 years of Crossref?\nWe designed the Crossref Metadata Sprint as a relatively short event where people can form teams and tackle short problems. What kind of problems? While we expected many to involve coding, teams also explored documenting, translating, researching—anything that taps into our open, member-curated metadata. Our motivation behind this format was to create a space for networking, collaboration, and feedback, centered on co-creation using the scholarly metadata from our REST API, the Public Data File, and other sources.\nWhat have we learned in planning The journey towards the event was filled with valuable lessons and learnings from our community. Our initial call received submissions from 71 people, which was exciting but presented the first challenge: we felt our event would work better with a relatively smaller group. An additional challenge we faced was the enthusiasm from people from different regions of the world who were eager to join, but needed support to attend in person. It reminded us how global our community is, and how important it is to think about different ways of making participation possible, especially in future events.\nWe also wanted to make sure that participation wasn’t limited by technical background. The selection process included a preliminary review by several members of our team to bring in a mix of perspectives and reduce bias. The event welcomed participants from all kinds of expertise levels, including colleagues who had never worked with APIs before. We sought to provide common ground for all with several group calls, where we presented introductions to our tools and used the opportunity to collect requests about tools, specific data, and questions from the participants that could enhance their preparation during the sprint.\nAt the Crossref Metadata Sprint I’ve recently stumbled upon the following quote from a recognized data scientist:\nNumbers have an important story to tell. They rely on you to give them a clear and convincing voice. (Stephen Few) 1\nIt made me think that we can replace numbers for metadata and the idea still holds. Surrounded by the paleontological collections of the National Museum of Natural History, on 8th of April in Madrid, 21 participants and 5 Crossref staff came together to work on twelve different projects. These ranged from improvements to our Public Data file formats and exploring metadata completeness, to tackling multilingual metadata challenges, understanding citation impact for retracted works, and connecting Retraction Watch metadata with other knowledge graphs metadata. The different teams that participated in the first Crossref Metadata Sprint. The initial hours were the most energetic (but not chaotic!) as most of the participants had the chance to interact in person for the first time, ideas were exchanged, and pre-formed groups became more stable (however, one of the advantages of the format is that teams don't have to be rigid). Twelve coffee- and tea-powered projects started taking shape, a few of which are part of larger ideas under development. By the end of the second day, we saw: Author changes between preprints and published articles. Coverage of funding information by publisher. Enriching citations with Crossref metadata. Funding metadata completeness. Improvement to the Public Data File. Interoperability between Crossref DOIs and hash-based identifiers. University of Tetova’s metadata coverage. Retraction Watch data mash-up. Perspective about AI-driven multilingual metadata. Public Data File in Google Big Query. Visibility of retractions across citations. Visualising Crossref geographic member data. Our team worked as part of some of these projects, providing valuable insights and feedback to the participants. We ended the first session with a group dinner and re-energised for the second day, which started with everybody fully immersed in their tasks. As we approached the conclusion, the groups started preparing some quick slides for a short presentation (that you can find here).\nOur team and the participants left excited and looking forward to the next opportunity to collaborate. We certainly see the potential of recreating these spaces, and we\u0026rsquo;ll work on future editions in a different location. All of the project summaries and notes will remain stored in our metadata sprint Gitlab repo. Would you like to know more about any of these ideas? Let us know in the comments.\nThe first Crossref Metadata Sprint in a nutshell\nParticipants None of this would’ve been possible without our enthusiastic participants. Huge thanks to everyone! Here is the full list of those who attended our inaugural Sprint:\nName Blessing Abumere Ana Bermejo Robert Bianchi Adam Buttrick María de la Paz Nicoleta Roxana Dinu Jack Ekinsmyth Castedo Ellerman Álvaro Hontanar Bianca Kramer Anne L\u0026rsquo;Hôte Cyril Labbe Alexandra Malaga Agon Memeti Kaitlin Newson Yağmur Öztürk Dietrich Rordorf Mohamed Selim Sajad Sepehri Ramazan Turgut Iñaki Úcar https://www.forbes.com/sites/brentdykes/2016/03/31/data-storytelling-the-essential-data-science-skill-everyone-needs/\u0026#160;\u0026#x21a9;\u0026#xfe0e;\n",
"headings": ["What have we learned in planning","At the Crossref Metadata Sprint","Participants"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/categories/api-case-study/",
"title": "API Case Study",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Categories",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/evolving-the-preprint-evaluation-world-with-sciety/",
"title": "Evolving the preprint evaluation world with Sciety",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2025-06-17",
"lastmod_ts": 1750118400,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "This post is based on an interview with Sciety team at eLife.\n",
"content": "This post is based on an interview with Sciety team at eLife.\nWhat is Sciety? Sciety is a community-led initiative developed by a team within eLife, that brings together expert evaluations of papers in one place. It is focused on preprints, preprint review and curation.\nCan you tell us more about how Sciety works? Sciety aggregates preprints from different sources to facilitate the processes of discovery and evaluation. Groups can triage the content and offer preprint reviews and endorsements, and individual researchers can learn about and share preprints of interest and their evaluations. We see the value of increasing trust in preprints, and transparency around the process of peer review, and we are trying to highlight this value and encourage more people to take part.\nThere are two key angles to Sciety: first, as preprints proliferate, we’re helping to make people more productive in their research by only surfacing the content they might be interested in and that they know they can trust. Second, we are also trying to get more people involved in the public review and curation of preprints. Contributors on Sciety are part of ‘groups’, representing organisations and other communities that facilitate some form of preprint evaluation. We\u0026rsquo;re broadly talking about peer review, but we also see the highlighting and summarisation of research. eLife, Biophysics Colab, MetaROR and Gigabyte, for example, are all providing some kind of review summary which Sciety shows as a ‘curation statement’. There’s also this additional layer of individual curation on top of it: we have people creating their own highlights in lists which they curate by topic; for example, ‘preprints by authors in the Global South’ or ‘Papers we want to discuss in our lab’. There is also an update feed available to users to help them keep track of all the reviews and endorsements from the groups they follow. We post these assessments and reviews alongside the preprint, which others can then use as an indicator of trust: why should one care about this particular study? As a given group – let’s say GigaByte – and its reviewers highlight the specific strengths of a preprint or reference an updated version, this feedback offers essential context for readers.\nBy making this evaluation and curation activity visible, Sciety clarifies who has reviewed the work and which groups have added it to their lists. These signals are invaluable for readers seeking reliable, curated research. The activity feed, which at present shows you all the added value in the form of comments, reviews and curation we are bringing from diverse sources, could be expanded to show different forms of curation activity in the future. Furthermore, other providers ingest and surface this information on their own platforms, such as Europe PMC and bioRxiv.\nWhat is your main use of Crossref resources? We started using the Crossref API to pull in the front matter of articles. Originally, these were only bioRxiv preprints, and then we expanded to various other preprint servers. We would aggregate reviews and build on top of all the preprint servers that have put the authors\u0026rsquo; content out there.\nWe were mostly after a representation of the papers that we could link to: titles, authors, abstracts, publication dates, and, to have a way to go from the DOI of a paper, a classic Crossref entry point. Initially, we used the public API, but the performance wasn\u0026rsquo;t high enough for what we needed and we switched to Metadata Plus. This immediately increased the speed at which we got data to the point where we could compose pages on the fly and talk to Crossref simultaneously. Even if we needed to pull 10 or 20 different paper titles at the same time to show a list of articles, it stayed that way for a long time. Next, we implemented caching – that is, we started storing temporal local copies to improve performance further. Eventually, we expanded the set of preprint servers we were interested in. It\u0026rsquo;s always been quite a good experience to be able to put in a DOI and use the same code, essentially, to pull out titles, author information and so on. Crossref does this great job of aggregating the world of content so that we don\u0026rsquo;t have to. The metadata standardisation via Crossref’s API saves us the need to write special code for every new preprint server.\nBy the end of 2023, we were interested in multiple revisions and versions of a single preprint. Because the scholarly world is moving on, we can now see cases where the updates to a manuscript produce multiple versions in bioRxiv, and these might eventually evolve into an article in eLife, Nature, or another journal. The publication history complexity of papers has been increasing and we started relying a lot on Crossref to trace the relationships and the different versions of a paper across time. There is some good support on the relationship metadata on Crossref APIs, where you can see that a preprint has a new version with a different DOI, or conversely, that a preprint has an older version. Or you can see that a preprint has become a journal article, or the journal article was originally a preprint – along with all the dates that accompany these different versions. And we can establish the time it took for a preprint to become a journal article. In some cases it can take years, which is not great, right? We don\u0026rsquo;t want science to be stuck and not relied upon for years. So it helps us to make our case that preprints are the evolution of publishing, that authors publish them and then the preprints evolve rather than being stuck between gates kept by journals.\nWhat can you tell us about the use of preprints? We have noticed an increase in the interest in how a paper evolves over time and the cross-links between different preprint expressions or journal articles. We\u0026rsquo;re now seeing enthusiasm from those who are trying alternative publishing models to bring reviewed scientific preprints to people faster, and there is also interest in the transparency of a journal. And I think that\u0026rsquo;s part of what the Crossref relationship metadata gives us.\nFor example, we collaborated on a paper aimed at enhancing the culture of preprint peer review. One of the things we observed was that it was published on an OSF preprint server, and then went on to be published in PLOS Biology. As we\u0026rsquo;d started this project to show the relationships between something that had originally been a preprint, we noticed that the connection between PLOS and OSF for that specific preprint was not explicit. So, we asked a colleague if this was something that could be done. And our contact at PLOS said, “yes, we\u0026rsquo;ll do this”. At the time, we were aware of Crossref’s intention to either make this more manageable or to do it in bulk. This also prompted another group on Sciety to explore whether they could do the same. Consequently, GigaByte and GigaScience, two other reviewing communities on Sciety, inquired with their publishing platform, Riverview, if they could do the same. Eventually, they realised there was a way to connect the dots through Crossref, and they also started doing it. So, there seems to be a lot of enthusiasm around this idea of making the relationships more explicit: we should show if something has been a preprint, because it\u0026rsquo;s important to the authors, and it’s important to show the transparency in the journey. That was a real-world example of something that we\u0026rsquo;re able to service through Sciety by using the Crossref metadata, and the community is responding in a very positive manner to that.\nHow has your experience been using Crossref services? What are you looking forward to seeing in the future? The works endpoint is really the 99% of what we have been historically interested in. We generally experiment by putting DOIs in the public API or trying to discover content in the API itself. The amount of data is so big that there are always different examples of what we seek. And we don\u0026rsquo;t have many performance problems now because we have adopted some aggressive caching. So anything that comes from Crossref is typically cached for 24 hours.\nFor example, take a bioRxiv preprint that might have multiple versions available on bioRxiv itself, because it\u0026rsquo;s quite common for authors to update the preprint as they make new changes to it. With this context, an example of something we would like to see is supporting the preprint version number. So this is something that we could implement for bioRxiv over some specific preprint servers on Sciety. But in the end, as we expanded our set of preprint servers, we had to get rid of that, because there wasn\u0026rsquo;t a sustainable way to aggregate it across most servers, like we would do with Crossref. So there\u0026rsquo;s probably a space there for papers as living documents. And we certainly have an interest in preprint-specific metadata – that\u0026rsquo;s where we will place our bets.\nAlso, as part of the preprint review metadata group, which is something that formed out of the recent meeting with EMC Europe and ASAPbio, we\u0026rsquo;re trying to drive forward a recommendation and prototypes for more consistency in preprint review metadata. It\u0026rsquo;s quite exciting to be involved in this and, as you can see, Sciety is a place where we\u0026rsquo;re starting to pull all this stuff together. And like I say, it is a bit of a Wild West. There are so many things that are called a review, but in metadata, we know there are different terminologies. As people are saying, everyone should be commenting on preprints, everyone should be curating them, and we\u0026rsquo;re trying to make some sense of that.\nWorking on Sciety and exploring Crossref metadata to make preprint review more open and valuable has been a rewarding experience.\nWith thanks to Giorgio Sironi, former Tech Lead Manager, and Mark Williams, Product Manager, at eLife\n",
"headings": ["What is Sciety?","Can you tell us more about how Sciety works?","What is your main use of Crossref resources?","What can you tell us about the use of preprints?","How has your experience been using Crossref services? What are you looking forward to seeing in the future?"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/destacando-nuestra-comunidad-en-colombia/",
"title": "Destacando nuestra comunidad en Colombia",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2025-06-05",
"lastmod_ts": 1749081600,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "English version\nDado que Crossref celebra su 25º aniversario este año, nos gustaría destacar algunas de las regiones activas y comprometidas en nuestra comunidad global.\nDurante los primeros 25 años, la composición de los miembros de Crossref ha evolucionado significativamente. De un puñado de grandes editoriales fundadoras, ahora tenemos más de 22.000 miembros de 160 países. Casi dos tercios de ellos se identifican como universidades, bibliotecas, entidades gubernamentales, fundaciones, editoriales académicas, e institutos de investigación.\n",
"content": "English version\nDado que Crossref celebra su 25º aniversario este año, nos gustaría destacar algunas de las regiones activas y comprometidas en nuestra comunidad global.\nDurante los primeros 25 años, la composición de los miembros de Crossref ha evolucionado significativamente. De un puñado de grandes editoriales fundadoras, ahora tenemos más de 22.000 miembros de 160 países. Casi dos tercios de ellos se identifican como universidades, bibliotecas, entidades gubernamentales, fundaciones, editoriales académicas, e institutos de investigación.\nUna de las regiones de mayor crecimiento es Latinoamérica, con más de 3.200 miembros, la mitad de los cuales se unió en los pasados cinco años. Colombia fue uno de los primeros miembros de Crossref en Latinoamérica y continua siendo uno de los países más activos con 242 organizaciones.\n\u0026ldquo;Creo que las organizaciones en Colombia siempre están abiertas a nuevos cambios, y a implementar nuevas estrategias que permitan mejorar o generar vínculos entre diversos actores, el programa Nexo podría verse de gran utilidad puesto que Colombia está uno de los grandes generadores de investigación en la región, y el poder conectar de una manera ágil y rápida toda una red de investigación va a representar grandes ventajas en los procesos\u0026rdquo;, \u0026ndash; dice nuestro Embajador Juan Felipe Vargas Martínez, Cofundador y Director de Journals \u0026amp; Authors, en Medellín.\nUna de las razones del aumento en la participación en Colombia es nuestro programa de patrocinadores. Los patrocinadores proveen apoyo a organizaciones más pequeñas que a menudo enfrentan barreras financieras, técnicas, y linguísticas que les dificultan convertirse en miembros de Crossref. Uno de los primeros patrocinadores en Colombia, Journals \u0026amp; Authors, se unió en 2016, siendo de los primeros en Latinoamérica. Ahora tenemos cinco patrocinadores ubicados en Colombia, apoyando 114 miembros.\nNuestros patrocinadores también han sido aliados clave en ayudarnos a interactuar con la comunidad, facilitando numerosos webinars y apoyando nuestras reuniones presenciales en Colombia en 2019 y 2024. Su conocimiento de la comunidad editorial a lo largo del país y sus extensas redes ayudan a las organizaciones nuevas a aprender más sobre Crossref de manera accesible, y a crecer continuamente la participación con nosotros.\nTambién tenemos embajadores altamente dedicados ubicados en Colombia que son fuertes promotores de la misión de Crossref: Nicolás Mejía Torres y Juan Felipe Vargas Martínez. A lo largo de los años, ellos han sido instrumentales en ayudar a organizar eventos presenciales y webinarios para miembros, así como también en representar a Crossref en eventos a en Latinoamérica. Puedes aprender sobre nuestras discusiones en el resumen de los eventos más recientes en nuestro Foro Comunitario. Recientemente Juan Felipe y Nicolás participaron en la Feria Internacional del Libro en Bogotá donde presentaron una charla sobre los beneficios de los metadatos académicos abiertos.\nNuestra membresía en Colombia está conformada fundamentalmente por universidades, sociedades, e instituciones públicas. Casi todas las revistas dejan su contenido disponible abiertamente. La mayoría del contenido de revistas se publica usando la plataforma de publicación OJS de PKP - Colombia es el 8vo mayor usuario de OJS globalmente, y el segundo mayor en Latinoamérica.\n\u0026ldquo;Entendemos que hay todavía mucho margen de uso de editoriales colombianas de Crossref.\u0026rdquo; Jaime Iván Hurtado, CEO \u0026amp; Fundador de Hipertexto-Netizen, un patrocinador de Crossref, reporta que \u0026ldquo;algunas hacen uso del DOI pero centradas en revistas tímidamente en los libros y poco en los capítulos de libros,\u0026rdquo; Hipertexto ha estado contribuyendo al incremento en el uso de identificadores persistentes para libros y capítulos de libros a través de sus herramientas y manejo estadarizado de metadatos.\nLos miembros de Crossref a menudo conocen la importancia de los identificadores persistentes para su contenido, pero hay una necesidad de incrementar la conciencia sobre los beneficios y la importancia de incluír metadatos adicionales. Estamos concientes que muchos editores ofrecen su tiempo de manera voluntaria lo cual puede limitar su disponibilidad para entrenamiento adicional y participación en eventos relacionados con la edición y las buenas practicas para el manejo de metadatos. Queremos aumentar las oportunidades para el entrenamiento tanto presencial como remotamente, y nuestros patrocinadores y embajadores han sido aliados clave en la facilitación de estos eventos. En febrero de 2024 nos aliamos con nuestro patrocinador Biteca en un evento de dos días en Bogotá, en el que participaron más de 100 miembro. Hubo diuscusiones activas sobre los fundamentos de Crossref y el rol de los metadatos de calidad en la visibilidad de contenido, así como también presentaciones sobre la integridad y ética en la investigación y la publicación, con compañeros clave como COPE, PKP, Scielo, y DOAJ.\nEn Colombia no hay un requerimiento de usar identificadores persistentes (o no específicamente el DOI). Cada institución decide si usarlos de manera independiente, así que vemos con agrado tantos miembros de Crossref activos, registrando su contenido, y cada mes se unen más. Ellos reconocen el beneficio de los metadatos, así como también el ser parte de la comunidad de Crossref en general: \u0026ldquo;En Colombia, Crossref es un referente gracias al uso del DOI. Si bien en sus inicios este identificador se veía como otro requisito más que complicaba el trabajo de las editoriales, hoy es reconocido como una herramienta clave para mejorar la visibilidad y el impacto de las publicaciones. Asimismo, Crossref, a través de sus encuentros y recursos, brinda apoyo a los equipos editoriales al ofrecer pautas, herramientas e información valiosa que facilita la adopción de buenas prácticas y el cumplimiento de estándares de calidad\u0026rdquo; reporta Luz Ayda Becerra, Consultora de Innovación con nuestro patrocinador Biteca.\nLas organizaciones tienen varias razones para convertirse en miembros de Crossref - la principal motivación es incrementar la visbilidad global de su contenido y, por lo tanto, incrementar el impacto de sus publicaciones. Los metadatos de Crossref son accesibles de manera abierta para todos en la comunidad. Cada mes tenemos millones de búsquedas en nuestra base de datos por parte de investigadores, bibñiotecas, herramientas que perfilan autores, servicios de búsqueda, y muchos más. Otras partes usan estos metadatos para crear herramientas y servicios que incrementan la visibilidad y la recuperabilidad del contenido de los miembros.\nSin embargo, existen desafíos que los miembros aún enfrentan cuando trabajan con nosotros. El obstáculo más frecuentemente mencionado al trabajar con Crossref es el lenguaje. La mayoría de nuestros correos electrónicos, documentación y herramientas están en inglés, y a los miembros les gustaría tener la oportunidad de recibir soporte, recursos y correspondencia en español. Aquellos que trabajan con patrocinadores se benefician de soporte de esta manera. Estamos aumentando el número de oportunidades de entrenamiento remoto y webinarios en español, y nuestros embajadores han estado interactuando con la comunidad local para proveer recursos adicionales. A principios de este año, el primer miembro de nuestro equipo ubicado en un país de Latinoamérica se unió a nuestro equipo de soporte técnico, y ahora podemos proveer soporte en español (recursos como este aparecerán más frecuentemente ahora). Reconocemos que aun tenemos trabajo por hacer para que Crossref sea más accesible a las comunidades globalmente.\nNuestros miembros han sugerido que más eventos locales y presenciales serian beneficiosos. Y estamos de acuerdo que las interacciones cara a cara son una manera clave para nosotros construir relaciones e incrementar la representación y visibilidad en las comunidades, y aspiramos a crear oportunidades de interacturas con nuestros miembros en todos los rincones del mundo.\nMostrar como se utilizan los metadatos puede resaltar los beneficios y la importancia de incluir metadatos adicionales. Varios de nuestros miembros y Patrocinadores han solicitado entrenamiento adicional en español sobre el uso de nuestras APIs, lo cual les permitiría obtener y analizar elementos clave de los metadatos.\n\u0026ldquo;Al especializarse en este tipo de tecnologías, puedo analizar y estructurar la información de manera efectiva, generando informes útiles para los editores. Esto facilita la toma de decisiones informadas sobre sus publicaciones, optimizando la gestión editorial y asegurando una mejor visibilidad e impacto de los contenidos académicos.\u0026rdquo; (Luz Ayda Becerra)\nEn años anteriores Crossref ha sido invitado a participar en webinars y eventos presenciales en Colombia, dado el interés en crecimiento y la conciencia de la importancia de los metadatos para la comunidad de investigadores y la visibilidad de las publicaciones.\nGran parte de la información en este reporte proviene de encuestas enviadas a nuestros miembros, patrocinadores, y embajadores en Colombia. Apreciamos toda la retroalimentación, comentarios y sugerencias que hemos recibido, y queremos continuar la colaboración e incrementar la interacción con la comunidad.\nEnglish version A spotlight on our community in Colombia As Crossref celebrates its 25th anniversary this year, we would like to highlight some of the active and engaged regions in our global community.\nOver the past 25 years, the makeup of Crossref membership has evolved significantly; from a handful of founding large publishers, we now have more than 22,000 members from 160 countries. Nearly two-thirds of them self-identify as universities, libraries, government agencies, foundations, scholar publishers, and research institutions.\nOne of our fastest-growing regions is Latin America, with over 3,200 members, half of whom joined us in the past five years. Colombia was one of the early adopters of Crossref from Latin America and remains one of our most active countries with 242 organisations.\n\u0026ldquo;I believe that organisations in Colombia are always open to new changes and to implementing new strategies that allow for improvement or the creation of connections between diverse actors. The Research Nexus program could be very useful since Colombia is one of the largest producers of research in the region, and being able to connect an entire research network quickly and efficiently will represent significant advantages in the processes\u0026rdquo;, \u0026ndash; says our Ambassador Juan Felipe Vargas Martínez, Co-founder and Director, Journals \u0026amp; Authors, in Medellín.\nOne of the reasons for increased participation in Colombia is our sponsor program. Sponsors provide support for smaller organisations that often face financial, technical, and language barriers that make becoming a member difficult. Our first sponsor in Colombia, Journals \u0026amp; Authors, joined in 2016, one of our first in Latin America. We now have five sponsors based in Colombia, supporting 114 members.\nOur sponsors have also been key partners in helping us engage with the community, facilitating numerous webinars and supporting our in-person meetings in Colombia in 2019 and 2024. Their knowledge of the publishing community across the country and extensive networks help new organisations learn more about Crossref in an accessible way, and continuously grow participation with us.\nWe also have very dedicated ambassadors based in Colombia who are strong advocates for Crossref\u0026rsquo;s mission: Nicolás Mejía Torres and Juan Felipe Vargas Martínez. Over the years, they have been instrumental in helping to organise in-person events and webinars for members, as well as representing Crossref at events throughout Latin America. You can learn more about our discussions from the summary of the latest event on our Community Forum. Most recently, Juan Felipe and Nicolás attended the Bogotá International Book Fair, where they gave a presentation on the benefits of open academic metadata.\nOur membership in Colombia is made up primarily of universities, societies, and public institutions. Almost all journals make their content openly available. Most of the journal content is published using the OJS publishing platform from PKP. Colombia is the eighth-largest user of OJS globally and the second-largest in Latin America.\n\u0026ldquo;There is still considerable scope for Colombian publishers to utilise Crossref\u0026rdquo; Jaime Iván Hurtado, CEO \u0026amp; Founder of Hipertexto-Netizen, a Crossref sponsor, reports that \u0026ldquo;while organisations use DOIs most commonly for journals, there\u0026rsquo;s potential for greater use for books and chapters.\u0026rdquo; Hipertexto has been contributing to the increased use of persistent identifiers for books and book chapters through their tools and standardised metadata management.\nMembers often know the importance of persistent identifiers for their content, but there is a need to increase awareness of the benefits and importance of including additional metadata. We\u0026rsquo;re aware that many editors volunteer their time, which can limit their availability for additional training and participation in events related to publishing and metadata best practices. We aim to increase opportunities for training, both in-person and online, and our sponsors and ambassadors have been key partners in facilitating these events. In February 2024, we partnered with our Sponsor, Biteca, on a two-day event in Bogotá, attended by over 100 members. There were lively discussions on the fundamentals of Crossref and the role of quality metadata for content discovery, as well as additional presentations on research integrity and publication ethics, with key partners including COPE, PKP, Scielo, and DOAJ.\nThere is no requirement to use persistent identifiers (or specifically DOIs) in Colombia. Each institution decides whether to use them independently, so we\u0026rsquo;re delighted to see so many are active Crossref members, registering their content, and more are joining every month. They recognise the benefit of metadata, as well as being part of the Crossref community at large: \u0026ldquo;In Colombia, Crossref is a benchmark thanks to its use of the DOI. While initially viewed as yet another requirement that complicated the work of publishers, this identifier (and related metadata) is now recognised as a key tool for improving the visibility and impact of publications. Furthermore, through its meetings and resources, Crossref supports editorial teams by offering guidelines, tools, and valuable information that facilitate the adoption of best practices and compliance with quality standards,\u0026rdquo; reports Luz Ayda Becerra, Innovation Advisor with our sponsor, Biteca.\nOrganisations have various reasons for becoming members with Crossref \u0026ndash; the main motivation is to increase the global visibility of their content and, therefore, to increase the impact of their publications. Crossref\u0026rsquo;s metadata is openly accessible and free for everyone in the community. Each month, we have millions of queries to our database from researchers, libraries, author profiling tools, discovery services and many more. Third parties use this metadata to create tools and services that increase visibility and discoverability of members\u0026rsquo; content.\nThere are, however, challenges that members still face when working with us. The most frequently listed obstacle in working with Crossref is language. Most of our emails, documentation and tools are in English, and members would like the opportunity for support, resources, and correspondence in Spanish. Those working with sponsors benefit from their support in this way. For all, we are increasing the number of Spanish language online training opportunities and webinars, and our ambassadors have been engaging with the local community to provide additional resources. Earlier this year, the first staff member based in Latin America joined our technical support team, and we can now provide Spanish language support (resources like this will appear more frequently now). We recognise that we still have work to do to make Crossref more accessible to global communities.\nMembers have suggested that more local in-person events would be beneficial. And we agree - face-to-face interactions are a key way for us to build relationships and increase representation and visibility in communities, and we aspire to create opportunities to engage with members in all corners of the world.\nShowing how metadata is utilised can show the benefits and importance of including additional metadata. Several of our members and sponsors have requested additional Spanish language training on using our APIs, which would enable them to obtain and analyse key metadata elements.\n\u0026ldquo;By specialising in these technologies, I can effectively analyse and structure information, generating useful reports for editors. This facilitates informed decision-making regarding their publications, optimising editorial management, and ensuring greater visibility and impact of scholarly content.\u0026rdquo; (Luz Ayda Becerra)\nOver the past several years, Crossref has been invited to participate in webinars and in-person events in Colombia, as there is an increased interest and awareness of the importance of metadata for the research community and the visibility of publications.\nMuch of the information in this report is taken from a survey sent to our members, sponsors, and ambassadors in Colombia. We appreciate all the feedback, comments, and suggestions we received, and we look forward to continuing our collaborations and increasing our engagement with the community.\n",
"headings": ["English version","A spotlight on our community in Colombia"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/strategy/",
"title": "Strategic agenda and roadmap",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2025-05-24",
"lastmod_ts": 1748044800,
"section": "Strategic agenda and roadmap",
"tags": [],
"description": "This page presents all our high-level activities, from open governance and sustainability, collaborative projects with different parts of the ever-diversifying scholarly community, work to expand metadata, and delivery of tools and APIs to retrieve works, entities, and their relationships\u0026mdash;all while fostering a strong global team.\nView our live and detailed roadmap at the bottom of this page.\nRead on to learn more about where Crossref is heading and let us have your thoughts by starting or joining a discussion in the strategy section of our community forum. Review the archived strategic narratives for 2020-2022 and 2018-2020, and read background on our strategic planning approach on our blog.\n",
"content": "This page presents all our high-level activities, from open governance and sustainability, collaborative projects with different parts of the ever-diversifying scholarly community, work to expand metadata, and delivery of tools and APIs to retrieve works, entities, and their relationships\u0026mdash;all while fostering a strong global team.\nView our live and detailed roadmap at the bottom of this page.\nRead on to learn more about where Crossref is heading and let us have your thoughts by starting or joining a discussion in the strategy section of our community forum. Review the archived strategic narratives for 2020-2022 and 2018-2020, and read background on our strategic planning approach on our blog.\nCrossref\u0026rsquo;s role in the scholarly landscape We envision a rich and reusable open network of relationships connecting research organisations, people, things, and actions; a scholarly record that the global community can build on forever, for the benefit of society.\nCrossref makes research objects easy to find, cite, link, assess, and reuse. We’re a not-for-profit membership organisation that exists to make scholarly communications better. We rally the community; tag and share metadata; run an open infrastructure; play with technology; and make tools and services\u0026mdash;all to help put scholarly content in context.\nWe run open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.\nGovernments, funders, institutions, publishers, and researchers all have a role in shaping how research is recorded, shared, contextualised, and assessed. As the scholarly record evolves, Crossref is capturing provenance and relationships through metadata. We are scaling our systems, tools, and resources to collect, enrich, and deliver metadata in context, supporting our diverse global community and making it easy for members to participate and share and use as much metadata as possible.\nWith a more complete picture of the scholarly record available in the open, everyone is able to examine the integrity, impact, and outcomes of our collective efforts to progress science and society.\nContribute to an environment where the community identifies and co-creates solutions for broad benefit A sustainable source of complete, open, and global scholarly metadata and relationships Manage Crossref openly and sustainably, modernising and making transparent all operations so that we are accountable to the communities that govern us Foster a strong team\u0026mdash;because reliable infrastructure needs committed people who contribute to and realise the vision, and thrive doing it We want to contribute to an environment in which the scholarly research community identifies shared problems and co-creates solutions for broad benefit Our cross-functional program \u0026lsquo;Co-creation and community trends\u0026rsquo; enables us to build and foster relationships so that we can respond to and lead community trends. We co-create to tackle emerging challenges, develop best practices, and explore new ideas for meeting Crossref\u0026rsquo;s mission. Recently completed Launched Crossref-hosted interim pages for grants (see example) Announced plans for aligning the Open Funder Registry with ROR Community consultation about Crossmark Released Participation Reports v1.1 together with CWTS at Leiden University Extended the grant record registration form to accept journal articles Integrated with Rogue Scholar for archiving and metadata registration of all posts on the Crossref blog Determined the winners of, and announced, the inaugural Crossref metadata awards Conducted an audit of the accessibility of our interfaces Sunset legacy Metadata Manager In focus Surveying small members to better understand fee accessibility Hosting a series of webinars to support members’ metadata quality improvements with Participation Reports Extending engagement around our Integrity of the Scholarly Record (ISR) program with editors, institutions, and research integrity sleuths Forming a new ISR expert community group to help categorise member practices and for \u0026lsquo;for-cause\u0026rsquo; revocation reasons Developing Similarity Check to improve the user experience and add features Growing adoption of the Grant Linking System (GLS) with more funders becoming members Working with the Barcelona Declaration signatories to prioritise open metadata efforts Broad adoption of the GEM Program to include more of the world\u0026rsquo;s metadata Expand and relaunch our Service Provider program Review the information architecture of the Crossref website for better usability and navigation Conduct pilots with tool that monitor research integrity Make improvements to the accessiblity of our interfaces Up next Re-introduce faceted search to Crossref Metadata Search Extend the list of metadata elements that can be registered using our helper tools Rewrite the Participation Reports frontend to allow for future feature development Adoption campaign for publishers and their service providers to participate in the GLS i.e. include Crossref Grant IDs in their publication records Under consideration Exploring: Integrate with open repository software DSpace to allow seamless registration of metadata records Exploring: Improvements to the design and functionality of the Crossmark button following community consultation and design recommendations We want to be a sustainable source of complete, open, and global scholarly metadata and relationships Our cross-functional program \u0026lsquo;Contributing to the research nexus\u0026rsquo; helps us build flexible, clearer assertions of metadata provenance to improve the accuracy, transparency, and downstream usage of the metadata we collect and ingest from a range of sources. We work to expand metadata for all research objects from multiple sources and deliver tools and APIs so the whole community can discover works, entities, and their relationships. Recently completed Completed initial blog series and released software and methods used in metadata matching explorations, including open datasets of preprint and affiliation. Launched metadata ingest schema v5.4 to include citation types, versions, and contributor roles Incorporated Retraction Watch data into our API In focus Developing a new Metadata Advisory Group to hone and enact the roadmap Working on metadata ingest schema v.5.5 to include support for the CRediT taxonomy of contributor roles Co-creating interactive resources for using metadata, e.g. interviews, demos, and tutorials for working with our API Developing a new Matching service to improve and integrate matches for preprints/versions, affiliations, funding, grants, references, titles, and more Ongoing bug fixes and metadata completeness checks for our the API Running a series of API sprints to encourage the community to build tools with Crossref metadata Up next Incorporate new preprint matching approach in our API Under consideration Develop a training program and resources on metadata registration best practices Develop the next steps for transitioning the Open Funder Registry into ROR We want to manage Crossref openly and sustainably, modernising and making transparent all operations so that we are accountable to the communities that govern us. The cross-functional program \u0026lsquo;Open and sustainable operations\u0026rsquo; is centred on transparency and sustainability of our technical systems, our governance, and all our operations. We work to broaden board representation, manage finances responsibly and openly, and improve organisational resilience through modernising systems, processes, and policies, while controlling or reducing costs - whether to Crossref, our community, or the environment. Recently completed Released the 2025 public data file Published our employee manuals and policies publicly for transparency Released the 2024 self-assessment update on POSI compliance Updated our by-laws to create a new category of membership to broaden participation Published our patent non-assertion policy Migrated all databases to an open-source database management system (Postgres) Aligned bylaws and membership terms to clarify processes for membership revocation - see notification to members Worked with the other POSI-adopting infrastructure organisations to develop v2 of the Principles, also based on community input via a survey Conducted penetration tests and SOC 2 Type I audit Complete the move from data center to cloud Make billing code changes based on Membership \u0026amp; Fees Committee recommendations and board vote re fee changes stemming from the outcome of the RCFS research In focus Increasing transparency of more of our employment practices and general operations Improving the technical structure of our API to gain efficiencies Project, technology, and resource planning underway to decouple and open up all components of our primary system, starting with the Matching service (see above) and Authentication. Establish test environments in AWS Conduct another round of penetration testing in 2026 Up next Enact the plan to decouple and open up all components of our primary system Under consideration Exploring: Is our governance structure representative and are the processes efficient? (see: Governance) Continue opening up our technical support conversations and processes Following our SOC 2 audit with an ISO 27001 audit We want to foster a strong team\u0026mdash;because reliable infrastructure needs committed people who contribute to and realise the vision, and thrive doing it We do this through fair policies and working practices, a balanced approach to resourcing, and accountability to each other. By making our people operations more transparent and ethical, we can hold ourselves to account and ensure consistency and equity. Potential candidates can get a sense of how we work, and other organisations can adapt and reuse policies if needed. Recently completed Reviewed and revised our leadership structure to set up our teams to reflect and accommodate Crossref\u0026rsquo;s growth and expansion Set up cross-functional program teams to manage our work more collaboratively Hired two new Director positions: Technology; and Programs and Services. See org chart Established and recruited a new Data Science team whose focus is be to analyse and improve how we collect, match, and deliver scholarly metadata Reviewed recruitment and compensation practices In focus Pursuing a program to better understand how resourcing supports Crossref\u0026rsquo;s sustainability Continuously (re-)prioritising our product roadmap using a rubric of 12 prioritisation drivers to ensure we\u0026rsquo;re well-resourced and working on the right things at the right times Continuously (re-)assessing and mitigating for items on our risk register to ensure long-term sustainability, reduce technical debt, and organisational resilience Automating membership processes to support continued growth (such as new member-application processing, new-member invoicing, and DOI prefix allocation) Tracking staff carbon emissions and considering ways to reduce our environmental impact Recruiting for new positions; see our jobs page Plan 2026 in-person all-staff event Up next Close our last remaining physical office in Lynnfield, MA (USA) Under consideration Exploring: how do we adapt to working in a fully remote environment as a growing organisation? Completed activities Recently-completed activities are listed on our strategic roadmap above per theme. The following projects and initiatives have been completed since we last revisited our high-level strategy but are no longer considered recent:\nAcquired and opened Retraction Watch database; entered an agreement to grow the service together with Center for Scientific Integrity Brought operational management of ROR in-house, shared across DataCite, CDL, and Crossref Added metadata records with ROR IDs to our API Launched Global Equitable Membership (GEM) program Released new form for funders to register grant records Opened references by default New recommendations from the Preprints Working Group Discovery work on metadata matching and relationships Investigated patterns in and matching of article and preprint metadata Explored preservation coverage among Crossref membership Developed a framework to better track our carbon emissions Developed v2 of the experimental Labs participation reports Explored preservation coverage among Crossref membership and partnering with preservation services Celebrated five years of the Crossref Grant Linking System (GLS) Launched Crossref-hosted interim pages for grants (see example) Shared metadata development plans in response to community feedback Developed clear metadata development strategy, priorities, and roadmap Retired the inconsistent and unreliable subject codes and removed them from our API Investigated and shared strategies for matching affiliation strings to ROR IDs Agreed and published our new travel and events policy Reached our 12-month contingency goal (see: Sustainability) Worked with the other POSI-adopting infrastructures to release v1.1 of the Principles together Live roadmap See a timeline of completed, running, and planned projects embedded below or visit the full roadmap.\n",
"headings": ["Crossref\u0026rsquo;s role in the scholarly landscape","Contribute to an environment where the community identifies and co-creates solutions for broad benefit","A sustainable source of complete, open, and global scholarly metadata and relationships","Manage Crossref openly and sustainably, modernising and making transparent all operations so that we are accountable to the communities that govern us","Foster a strong team\u0026mdash;because reliable infrastructure needs committed people who contribute to and realise the vision, and thrive doing it","We want to contribute to an environment in which the scholarly research community identifies shared problems and co-creates solutions for broad benefit","Our cross-functional program \u0026lsquo;Co-creation and community trends\u0026rsquo; enables us to build and foster relationships so that we can respond to and lead community trends. We co-create to tackle emerging challenges, develop best practices, and explore new ideas for meeting Crossref\u0026rsquo;s mission.","Recently completed","In focus","Up next","Under consideration","We want to be a sustainable source of complete, open, and global scholarly metadata and relationships","Our cross-functional program \u0026lsquo;Contributing to the research nexus\u0026rsquo; helps us build flexible, clearer assertions of metadata provenance to improve the accuracy, transparency, and downstream usage of the metadata we collect and ingest from a range of sources. We work to expand metadata for all research objects from multiple sources and deliver tools and APIs so the whole community can discover works, entities, and their relationships.","Recently completed","In focus","Up next","Under consideration","We want to manage Crossref openly and sustainably, modernising and making transparent all operations so that we are accountable to the communities that govern us.","The cross-functional program \u0026lsquo;Open and sustainable operations\u0026rsquo; is centred on transparency and sustainability of our technical systems, our governance, and all our operations. We work to broaden board representation, manage finances responsibly and openly, and improve organisational resilience through modernising systems, processes, and policies, while controlling or reducing costs - whether to Crossref, our community, or the environment.","Recently completed","In focus","Up next","Under consideration","We want to foster a strong team\u0026mdash;because reliable infrastructure needs committed people who contribute to and realise the vision, and thrive doing it","We do this through fair policies and working practices, a balanced approach to resourcing, and accountability to each other. By making our people operations more transparent and ethical, we can hold ourselves to account and ensure consistency and equity. Potential candidates can get a sense of how we work, and other organisations can adapt and reuse policies if needed.","Recently completed","In focus","Up next","Under consideration","Completed activities","Live roadmap"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/our-annual-open-call-for-expressions-of-interest-to-join-our-board/",
"title": "Our annual open call for expressions of interest to join our board",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2025-05-14",
"lastmod_ts": 1747180800,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "The Crossref Nominating Committee invites expressions of interest to join the Board of Directors of Crossref for the term starting in January 2026. 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.\nExpressions of interest will be due Monday, June 9th, 2025\n",
"content": "The Crossref Nominating Committee invites expressions of interest to join the Board of Directors of Crossref for the term starting in January 2026. 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.\nExpressions of interest will be due Monday, June 9th, 2025\nThis is an exciting time to join the board, as we have a number of active projects underway. Our focus is on how our community and metadata can contribute to ensuring the integrity of the scholarly record. We are redesigning our content system to better serve the changing needs of our community. We’re broadening our metadata record to capture richer funding and institutional affiliations. New board members will be part of on-going discussions about how to make our fees simpler and more equitable. Additionally, we envision a future where the scholarly record prioritizes relationships between research outputs to build a holistic research nexus. The board helps guide this work.\nAbout our board elections The board is elected through the “one member, one vote” policy wherein every member organisation of Crossref has a single vote to elect representatives to the Crossref board. Board terms are for three years, and this year, there are five seats open for election.\nThe board maintains a balance of seats, with eight seats for smaller members and eight seats for larger members (based on total revenue to Crossref). This is an effort to ensure that the scholarly community\u0026rsquo;s diversity of experiences and perspectives is represented in decisions made at Crossref.\nThis year, we will elect four of the larger member seats (membership tiers $3,900 and above) and one of the smaller member seats (membership tiers $1,650 and below). You don’t need to specify which seat you are applying for; we will provide that information to the nominating committee.\nThe online election will open in September, with results announced at the annual meeting scheduled for October 22nd. New members will begin their term in January 2026.\nAbout the Nominating Committee The Nominating Committee reviews the expressions of interest and selects a slate of candidates for election. The slate put forward will exceed the total number of open seats. The committee considers the statements of interest, organisational size, geography, and experience.\nJames Phillpotts*, Oxford University Press, committee chair Abiodun Falodun, University of Benin Wendy Patterson*, Beilstein Institut Chaerul Umam, National Library of Indonesia Amanda Ward*, Taylor \u0026amp; Francis (*) indicates Crossref board member\nBoard roles and responsibilities Crossref’s services provide a central infrastructure for scholarly communications. Crossref’s board helps shape the future of our services and by extension, impacts the broader scholarly ecosystem. We are looking for board members to contribute their experience and perspective.\nThe role of the board at Crossref is to provide strategic and financial oversight of the organisation, as well as guidance to the Executive Director and the staff leadership team, with the key responsibilities being:\nSetting the strategic direction for the organisation; Providing financial oversight; and Approving new policies and services. The board represents of our membership base and guides the staff leadership team on trends affecting scholarly communications.\nThe work of the board takes place in board meetings and board committees. The board sets strategic directions for the organisation while also providing oversight into policy changes and implementation. Board members join four meetings each year that typically take place in January, March, July, and November. The July meeting is in-person and may take place in a variety of international locations; travel support is provided when needed. January, March, and November board meetings are held virtually, and all committee meetings take place virtually. Each board member should sit on at least one Crossref committee. Care is taken to accommodate the wide range of time zones in which our board members live.\nWhile the expressions of interest are specific to an individual, the seat that is elected to the board belongs to the member organisation. The primary board member also names an alternate who may attend meetings in the event that the primary board member is unable to. There is no personal financial obligation to sit on the board. The member organisation must remain in good standing.\nBoard members are expected to be comfortable assuming the responsibilities listed above and to prepare and participate in board meeting discussions.\nWho can apply to join the board? Any active member of Crossref can apply to join the board. Crossref membership is open to organisations that produce content, such as academic presses, commercial publishers, standards organisations, and research funders.\nWhat does the committee look for? The committee looks for skills and experience that will complement the rest of the board. Candidates from countries and regions not currently reflected on the board are strongly encouraged to apply. Successful candidates often have some or all of these characteristics:\nDemonstrate a commitment to or understanding of our strategic agenda or the Principles of Open Scholarly Infrastructure Have expertise that may be underrepresented on the board currently; Hold decision-making positions in their organisations; Have experience with governance or community involvement; Represent member organisations that are active in the scholarly communications ecosystem; Demonstrate metadata best practices as shown in the member’s participation report The board is also encouraging Crossref members who are research funders to apply.\nWhat does the application evaluation process look like? Open call for board interest, May 14 to June 9th: Any active member in good standing can apply for a seat on the board. This includes direct members, sponsored members, and GEM members. Sponsoring organisations, service providers, and Metadata Plus subscribers who are not also members are not eligible to sit on the board.\nApplication review, June through August: Applications will be reviewed by our Nominating Committee. We also gather internal information about the member organisation, such as metadata habits, history with Crossref, any previous experience in Crossref working groups or community initiatives.\nWe might also refer to external information to help the committee’s review including LinkedIn profiles or member organisation websites and publications.\nBrief interviews with final candidates, August: The committee will hold brief virtual interviews with the top candidates before finalising the slate of nominations.\nAnnouncement of the slate and election, September: The committee will announce the final slate of candidates in September and the online election will begin, culminating at the annual meeting at the end of October.\nHow to apply Please click here to submit your expression of interest by Monday, June 9th. We ask for a brief statement about how your organisation could enhance the Crossref board and a brief personal statement about your interest and experience with Crossref.\nPlease contact me with any questions at voting@crossref.org\n",
"headings": ["About our board elections","About the Nominating Committee","Board roles and responsibilities","Who can apply to join the board?","What does the committee look for?","What does the application evaluation process look like?","How to apply"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/notice-of-amendments-to-crossref-membership-terms-and-bylaws/",
"title": "Notice of amendments to Crossref membership terms and bylaws",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2025-05-11",
"lastmod_ts": 1746921600,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "In its March 2025 meeting, the Crossref board unanimously voted to update both the Crossref bylaws and the Crossref membership terms to:\nProvide more clarity and alignment between our bylaws and membership terms, where they had become out of sync over the years.\nReflect previous board motions and bring both documents up-to-date with current processes for suspending and revoking membership, and reviewing those decisions.\nWork towards being more explicit about what \u0026ldquo;Member Practices\u0026rdquo; should look like in terms of preserving the integrity of the scholarly record.\n",
"content": "In its March 2025 meeting, the Crossref board unanimously voted to update both the Crossref bylaws and the Crossref membership terms to:\nProvide more clarity and alignment between our bylaws and membership terms, where they had become out of sync over the years.\nReflect previous board motions and bring both documents up-to-date with current processes for suspending and revoking membership, and reviewing those decisions.\nWork towards being more explicit about what \u0026ldquo;Member Practices\u0026rdquo; should look like in terms of preserving the integrity of the scholarly record.\nLink to updated membership terms and link to updated bylaws The bylaw changes are effective immediately, and the updated version of the membership terms will come into effect on 11th July 2025.\nIn accordance with the 60-day notice period, we have emailed the Primary contact on all our active member accounts today. Note: Members do not need to do anything in response to these changes - by continuing to use our services after 11th July, they are accepting the latest version of the terms.\nChanges to the membership terms The membership terms will be updated on 11th July to be clearer on, among other things, the importance of accurate metadata, using DOI links everywhere, the all-important reference linking obligation, and the process for suspending and revoking/terminating membership. It also introduces the new concept of \u0026ldquo;Member Practices\u0026rdquo;, which a dedicated community committee will propose for board approval. More information about this will follow soon.\nYou can find the specific changes below, or take a look at this marked-up PDF showing the changes between the current (from June 2022) terms and the revised (July 2025) terms.\nTopic Section Summary of Change(s) Terminology Various sections (e.g., 1, 2(i), 2(k), 5) Streamlines some legal language to enhance clarity and readability. Member Practices 2(a) Establishes an obligation of Members to comply with Member Practices, to be established soon through a dedicated committee. Unauthorised use of metadata 2(d) Highlights the harmful impact of unauthorised use or deposit of metadata on Crossref, its Members, and the integrity of the scholarly record. Reference linking 2(f), (g) Updates the language referring to reference linking, and makes explicit Members’ obligation to maintain reference linking throughout membership, not only upon first joining Crossref. It also makes it clear that members should use DOI links wherever they communicate about any item with a DOI. Displaying identifiers 2(h) Strengthens Members’ obligation to display DOIs in accordance with Crossref’s Display Guidelines (by eliminating the “commercially reasonable efforts” qualifier). Fees 3 Expands the definition of “Fees” to include all usage fees and fees for optional services, in addition to annual fees and Content Registration fees. Crossref’s right to suspend or terminate a Member’s account for non-payment extends to any of these fees. Termination of Membership 9 Significantly revises the provision regarding termination of a Member’s membership by Crossref: Updates the bases for ‘for-cause’ termination, to include ongoing misrepresentations in a Member’s practices; misleading use or creation of DOIs; and failure to pay fees due (without the former 120-day minimum duration of nonpayment); Clarifies the distinction between suspension and termination (also referred to as revocation or expulsion) of a Member’s Crossref membership; Eliminates the existing procedures for automatic Board review of a termination or extended suspension. (Crossref’s bylaws have been amended to prescribe a new suspension/termination process and right to request Board review); Adds a termination trigger for cases where a Sponsor cancels its agreement with a Sponsored Member. (The member, of course, has the option to move to a new Sponsor, or re-join Crossref as an independent member). Notice contacts 8(d) Updates Crossref’s Notice contact; updates the list of required Member contacts. Changes to the bylaws Our bylaws have needed updating for a while, but since these seldom change, we\u0026rsquo;ve saved up a few changes, also to bring them in line with the revised membership terms.\nWe\u0026rsquo;ve now modernised the language, ensured that the bylaws match what\u0026rsquo;s in the membership terms, and we\u0026rsquo;ve added in motions that have been agreed by the board but not updated in the bylaws over the last few years. We\u0026rsquo;ve also updated the bylaws in line with the new membership revocation process in the new July 2025 membership terms. The new bylaws also allow for a new group of members to be created to help Crossref define Member Practices.\nYou can find a summary of the changes below, or take a look at this marked-up PDF showing all the changes to the bylaws.\nTopic Section Summary of Changes Terminology Various sections Eliminates gender-specific terminology, e.g. replaces “Chairman” with “Chair”. Makes minor clean-up edits (e.g. deletion of unused “Reserved” section and renumbering). Membership Qualification Art. I Sec. 1 Replaces “publishes” professional and scholarly materials with “produces” professional and scholarly materials to match the language in the already-current membership terms. Non-Voting Membership Art. I Sec. 2; Art. IV Secs. 7, 8; Art. VII Sec. 4 Reflects the establishment of a non-voting Member category as previously approved by the Board. Membership Procedures Art. I Sec. 3; Art. I Sec. 5 Clarifies that acceptance of new Members is delegable to Crossref personnel generally, replacing a narrow reference to the Executive Director. Eliminates superfluous procedural steps regarding Member resignation. Suspension and Termination of Membership Art. I Sec. 6 Significantly revises the provision regarding termination of a Member’s membership by Crossref: Updates the bases for ‘for-cause’ termination, to include various specific prongs (matching those already in the Member Terms), while maintaining the catch-all for conduct prejudicial to Crossref’s best interests. Authorises the Board to define standards and procedures for \u0026lsquo;for-cause\u0026rsquo; terminations, or establish a committee (which can be comprised of both Board members and non-Board members) for that purpose. Specifies that Crossref staff is responsible for implementing the ‘for-cause’ termination standards. Eliminates the existing procedures for automatic Board review of a termination or extended suspension; specifies the Board’s authority to delegate discretionary appeals/review to the ExCo or other committee of Board members. Restates that temporary suspension may be used in lieu of, or in advance of, termination. Annual Meeting Art. IV Sec. 1 Updates language around the timing of the annual Member meeting: Replaces reference to the “second week of November” with “during the month of October or November”. Eliminates language regarding avoiding legal or religious holidays; given Crossref’s global footprint, this is not feasible. Thanks for reading this far!\nDon’t forget, members do not need to do anything in response to these changes - by continuing to register metadata after 11th July, they are accepting the latest version of the terms. But do let us know if you have any questions by emailing member@crossref.org.\n",
"headings": ["Link to updated membership terms and link to updated bylaws","Changes to the membership terms","Changes to the bylaws"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/categories/terms/",
"title": "Terms",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Categories",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/crossref-metadata-awards/",
"title": "Meet six winners of the first ever Crossref Metadata Awards",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2025-05-07",
"lastmod_ts": 1746576000,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "Marking our 25th anniversary, we launch the Crossref Metadata Awards to emphasise our community’s role in stewarding and enriching the scholarly record.\nWe are pleased to recognise Noyam Publishers, GigaScience Press, eLife, American Society for Microbiology, and Universidad La Salle Arequipa Perú with the Crossref Metadata Excellence Awards, and Instituto Geologico y Minero de España wins the Crossref Metadata Enrichment Award. These inaugural awards highlight the leadership of members who show dedication to the best metadata practices.\n",
"content": "Marking our 25th anniversary, we launch the Crossref Metadata Awards to emphasise our community’s role in stewarding and enriching the scholarly record.\nWe are pleased to recognise Noyam Publishers, GigaScience Press, eLife, American Society for Microbiology, and Universidad La Salle Arequipa Perú with the Crossref Metadata Excellence Awards, and Instituto Geologico y Minero de España wins the Crossref Metadata Enrichment Award. These inaugural awards highlight the leadership of members who show dedication to the best metadata practices.\nCrossref exists to make scholarly communications better by making research objects easy to find, cite, link, assess, and reuse. Our members weave the research nexus: a rich and reusable open network of connections between works resulting from the scholarly process and the people and institutions engaged in it.\nRich metadata improves discoverability of and trust in published works. Many institutions now strive to turn towards open research information in their reporting, assessment and evaluation. And so we believe it’s time to give credit to members that are doing the best work in supporting others across the scholarly ecosystem with their metadata.\nThe awards presented today will be followed by a series of blog interviews, where the winners will share how they achieved their high level of metadata completeness.\nStarting in 2025, we will hold the awards every other year.\nRead on to get more acquainted with the winners, learn about other high performing organisations and overall trends in metadata practices we see at Crossref.\nRecognising Metadata Excellence Noyam Publishers is based in Ghana. Colleagues had the pleasure of meeting them in person, during the Crossref Accra event this March. Striving for visibility motivates Noyam\u0026rsquo;s high performance when it comes to metadata. With 57% coverage of key metadata elements across their records, they are a leader among the members in our Global Equitable Membership (GEM) program.\nAmong other GEM members who show high participation in the research nexus, we see more than 40% coverage of key metadata elements for the records registered by University of Sierra Leone Teaching Hospitals Complex in Sierra Leone, Queen Arwa University in Yemen, Kathmandu University School of Education in Nepal, and International Journal for Innovation Education and Research in Bangladesh.\nGigaScience Press, based in Hong Kong, is the leader among small members (organisations of less than USD 1 mln of publishing revenue or expenses). Discoverability drives their high metadata standards, and GigaSciencePress sees those having advantages in terms of service integrations and development too. They are quick to credit the expertise of their technology partner, River Valley Technologies as the strategic contributor to them achieving 82% coverage of key metadata elements across their records.\nIt\u0026rsquo;s worth highlighting that the competition among our small members was much closer than in any other category! Stichting SciPost (Netherlands) also show more than 80% coverage across their records, followed by Life Science Alliance, LLC (United States), National Institute for Health and Care Research (United Kingdom), and Universidad La Salle Arequipa (Peru), each of which achieved more than 70% metadata coverage across their registered works.\neLife leads among our medium members (organisations between USD 1 mln and 10 mln of publishing revenue or expenses) with 85% coverage of key metadata elements. They have shown dedication to metadata quality and consistently high performance over the years. They are also the first publisher to include Crossref grant IDs in their records, adopting the Grant Linking System.\nOther medium-sized organisations to note are MDPI AG in Switzerland, and XMLink in South Korea \u0026ndash; while there\u0026rsquo;s a significant gap to the leader, each of these organisations has more than 50% coverage of key metadata elements across their records.\nIt appears that large members (organisations with more than USD 10 mln of publishing revenue or expenses) struggle to achieve consistency in metadata quality across all of their records. Yet, we are delighted to recognise the American Society for Microbiology in the United States, who have embarked on a large metadata quality improvement project several years ago, and it continues to bear fruit as we see 56% of metadata coverage across ASM\u0026rsquo;s records. They\u0026rsquo;ve shared their experience on our blog already, so this time we\u0026rsquo;ll invite them to follow up with the latest updates on their metadata practices.\nAmerican Geophysical Union (AGU), Public Library of Science (PLOS), SAGE Publications, and Wiley, all based in the United States, are ASM\u0026rsquo;s closest runners up. While the gap is significant \u0026ndash; still each of these organisations has more than 40% of metadata coverage across their records. PLOS has an impressive proportion of Crossmark-enabled works (99%), and American Geophysical Union and Wiley are registering a significant proportion of abstracts for their records (87% and 59% respectively).\nIt often takes time to hone new processes and learn about metadata practices, so we decided to recognise metadata excellence among our new members: organisations that joined Crossref within the past two years. Our inaugural award for excellence among new members goes to Universidad La Salle Arequipa Perú, who joined Crossref in May 2023, and have 71% metadata coverage across their records.\nRewarding Metadata Enrichment Our members don\u0026rsquo;t just register their records with us \u0026ndash; they also steward and maintain their metadata over time. As new technical capabilities and metadata elements become available, members have the ability to update their metadata. We decided to recognise the member who achieved the biggest transformation to their records in the past two years: Instituto Geologico y Minero de España, based in Spain, jumped from just over 1% to more than 40% metadata coverage for their records in the space of the past two years.\nOthers who made more than 30% jump in their metadata completeness in the past two years are Cabrera Research Lab (United States), Centro de Investigaciones Sociologicas (Spain), Bon View Publishing PTE (Singapore), Asociacion Colombiana de Neurologia (Colombia), Instituto Superior Tecnológico Almirante Illingworth (Ecuador), and Tashkent State University of Economics (Uzbekistan).\nHow did we select the winners? Our Metadata Excellence Awardees have been selected on the basis of the overall highest coverage of metadata elements included in Participation Reports as of March 2025, and the Metadata Enrichment Award was based on the comparison between performance on the same criteria between March 2023 and March 2025. Participation Reports are openly available and provide information about the proportion of a given member\u0026rsquo;s records that include the following high-value metadata elements:\nReferences Abstracts ORCID iDs Affiliations ROR IDs Funder Registry IDs Funding award numbers Crossmark enabled Text mining URLs License URLs The report also includes Similarity Check URLs. However, since Similarity Check is an optional service that attracts a separate fee \u0026ndash; it wouldn\u0026rsquo;t be equitable to include it in our analysis.\nWe encourage all members to periodically monitor their participation reports, and we offer frequent drop-in metadata health-check sessions, where we review the reports together and offer advice on making improvements in areas where our members experience challenges.\nIn a membership of more than 22,000 organisations, it\u0026rsquo;s difficult to recognise just one organisation as a model of best practices. There are many nuances that influence the performance and we would like to be transparent about some considerations we made in our awarding process.\nFirst of all, we considered volume of publishing as a key variable, and decided to qualify organisations with a minimum of 20 items of registered content.\nWe also recognise that size matters \u0026ndash; and decided to award our Metadata Excellence Awards in four categories corresponding with organisational size and resourcing.\nBeyond the winners \u0026ndash; overview of good metadata practice across different types of works The scholarly communications landscape is always evolving, and new types of content arise all the time. Crossref schema enables rich metadata collection about journal articles, books, book chapters, preprints, conference proceedings, technical reports, as well as grants, and more.\nAt this point, the most prolific way of sharing scholarship - at least judging by the number of records registered with Crossref \u0026ndash; is a journal article. There are 112,982,290 journal articles in the Crossref database, and in 2024 alone our members created 6,747,031 journal articles records with us.\nWhen it comes to books (2,212,221 total records) and book chapters (22,892,785 total records), publishers with the richest metadata records include Universitatsbibliothek Kiel (Germany) with more than 50% coverage of key metadata elements across their book records, and 70% for their book chapters. RTI Press (US) also has strong metadata for books (52%), while Firenze University Press (Italy) has 56% of metadata coverage across their book chapters. Incidentally, Universitatsbibliothek Kiel (Germany) are also leaders in metadata for conference proceedings (53% metadata coverage of those records).\nPreprints and posted content (including preprints, eprints, working papers, reports) are relatively new on the scene and growing rapidly \u0026ndash; Crossref has 1,683,351 preprint records (413,742 registered in 2024). The richest metadata records for preprints belong to eLife (UK) - they cover more than 50% of key metadata elements across their preprints records in Crossref. Springer Science and Business Media LLC (Netherlands) have 48% metadata coverage for their preprints, American Chemical Society (ACS; United States) with 46%, and UNISA Press (South Africa) and PeerJ (US) follow with 44% coverage.\nThe newest of record types that can be registered with us are grants. At present this is an early adopters domain, with 152,810 registered grants so far. The European Union (represented in Crossref by the Publications Office of the European Union) registered the most grants to date.\nBeyond the winners \u0026ndash; overview of coverage in key metadata elements When speaking about key metadata elements reflected in our Participation Report, the coverage varies widely. For example, overall 21% of records in Crossref have abstract metadata; 2,000 members have a full coverage of their records with abstracts, while 1,000 don\u0026rsquo;t include any. Deposition of ORCID iDs is growing but still very low, with only 10% of records including ORCID iDs.\nAffiliation metadata, broadly sought after by many stakeholders in the scholarly ecosystem - not least because of its role as a key marker of trust - is growing steadily but slowly: only 16% of records included it at the end of March 2025. With recent improvements in our helper tools (especially the latest version of the record registration form), and the upcoming developments in other publishing software (notably the upcoming 3.5 version of OJS), which support affiliation metadata better \u0026ndash; we\u0026rsquo;re expecting a significant improvement in the coming months.\nAs with affiliations, when research integrity judgements are concerned, another key element is the funding information. The growing interest in metadata among funders further strengthens the case for increasing inclusion of funder information in this way, ideally including Crossref grant DOIs that funders are registering in the hope of using the Grant Linking System to help their assessment and evaluation work. At the moment the space for improvement is vast, with only 6% of Crossref metadata including funder IDs and award numbers.\nWe support ROR IDs in both affiliation and funding metadata, but adoption among our members is slow. So far the top five contributors of ROR IDs to Crossref are Fonds de recherche du Québec, eLife, American Physical Society (APS), Optica Publishing Group, and Wellcome.\nLicence metadata is currently included for 43% of records in Crossref, and we see that thousands of members don\u0026rsquo;t include it. Not all members realise that this is a practical challenge for their authors, as it hinders institutions and funders who seek to monitor compliance with their openness mandates.\nFinally, references metadata is the lifeblood of the research nexus, supporting transparency and discoverability of scholarship. We\u0026rsquo;ve got 44% coverage of reference metadata across records registered in Crossref. While reference linking is a member obligation, including references in the metadata is a recommended best practice. The way references are recognised and included in works varies by publication type and discipline, which makes it harder for some members to provide it.\nThere\u0026rsquo;s an ongoing need to raise awareness about the role of metadata among the wider community, including editors and researchers. We have collaborated with practitioners, supporters, and users of metadata to develop relevant resources as part of the Metadata 20/20 initiative.\nWe make efforts to educate our members about best practices when it comes to registering their metadata with us and offer a range of support options, including technical support on our Community Forum. Recognising the leaders in metadata participation is part of that process too. With the upcoming blog series from our awardees, we hope to spur peer-to-peer learning to facilitate widespread improvements and to raise the profile of metadata quality among the community.\n",
"headings": ["Recognising Metadata Excellence","Rewarding Metadata Enrichment","How did we select the winners?","Beyond the winners \u0026ndash; overview of good metadata practice across different types of works","Beyond the winners \u0026ndash; overview of coverage in key metadata elements"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/metadata-advisory-group-call-for-applications/",
"title": "Metadata Advisory Group call for applications",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2025-05-02",
"lastmod_ts": 1746144000,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "We’ve been accelerating our metadata development efforts and recently released version 5.4 of our metadata schema, and are planning to release version 5.5 (including support for multiple contributor roles and the CRediT taxonomy) this summer. We will also extend our grants schema based on the Funders Advisory Group work, and make progress on other changes as set out on our new metadata development roadmap.\nAs we work towards the vision of the rich and reusable open network of relationships connecting research organisations, people, things, and actions, dubbed the Research Nexus, our schemas need to change to accommodate the evolving landscape of research processes and communications.\n",
"content": "We’ve been accelerating our metadata development efforts and recently released version 5.4 of our metadata schema, and are planning to release version 5.5 (including support for multiple contributor roles and the CRediT taxonomy) this summer. We will also extend our grants schema based on the Funders Advisory Group work, and make progress on other changes as set out on our new metadata development roadmap.\nAs we work towards the vision of the rich and reusable open network of relationships connecting research organisations, people, things, and actions, dubbed the Research Nexus, our schemas need to change to accommodate the evolving landscape of research processes and communications.\nIn the past we convened the Metadata Interest Group that helped shape the current set of updates we’re now working through, including changes to names, expansion of support for abstracts, dates, and multilingual metadata. As we’ll soon move into new territory (support for subjects, keywords, and other metadata essential to developing a robust research nexus), we want to further enlist the support of our community to help shape the metadata we collect and the metadata best practices we promote.\nWe are inviting Crossref members, metadata users, and others with an interest in shaping metadata development at Crossref to apply to join our new Metadata Advisory Group.\nThe purpose of the group is to contribute your advice and insight to help shape our metadata development as we broaden the metadata we collect and outputs we support to better align with the Research Nexus. Group participants will help shape metadata development at Crossref, and will discuss potential new metadata to adopt, best practices, and the overall needs of metadata providers and users.\nWe’re looking for participants with experience with XML, JSON, and other metadata formats. We’ll cover a range of topics but we would particularly like to engage with those of you with an interest in emerging content types.\nThe Metadata Advisory Group will meet quarterly and we’ll accommodate multiple time zones as needed as we want participation to reflect the regional diversity of our membership.\nIf you’re interested, please submit an application!\n",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/reflections-from-crossref-accra-2025-strengthening-open-science-and-partnerships-in-ghana/",
"title": "Reflections from Crossref Accra 2025 - Strengthening open science and partnerships in Ghana",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2025-04-29",
"lastmod_ts": 1745884800,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref is a membership organisation, and it’s the global community of members that creates the Research Nexus together. Meeting our community locally is a highlight and an important learning experience. This year, we started by connecting with a growing community in Accra, Ghana - our first in-person event in the country included in our GEM program. From 14 members in 2023 to 31 in 2025, our community in Ghana is blooming.\nAt its core, Crossref Accra 2025 was about showing up for the community in Ghana - listening, learning, and building together. On the 20th of March, we welcomed 66 participants: journal editors, university staff, librarians, and researchers. People who are doing the real work of making scholarly publishing happen in the region.\n",
"content": "Crossref is a membership organisation, and it’s the global community of members that creates the Research Nexus together. Meeting our community locally is a highlight and an important learning experience. This year, we started by connecting with a growing community in Accra, Ghana - our first in-person event in the country included in our GEM program. From 14 members in 2023 to 31 in 2025, our community in Ghana is blooming.\nAt its core, Crossref Accra 2025 was about showing up for the community in Ghana - listening, learning, and building together. On the 20th of March, we welcomed 66 participants: journal editors, university staff, librarians, and researchers. People who are doing the real work of making scholarly publishing happen in the region.\nPhoto: Participants from across Ghana’s research and publishing landscape.\nWe started the day with a walkthrough of Crossref’s services, then shifted into more tailored conversations - talking metadata quality, improving discoverability, and making Crossref tools work for the local context. The panel featuring AJOL, WACREN, and CARLIGH was a key moment. We heard honest reflections about journal sustainability, the barriers to indexing, and how Open Access can grow if local infrastructure is supported. Each organisation shared how they’re working to strengthen research communities and where they see Crossref fitting into that bigger picture.\nPhoto: Crossref Ambassador Richard Lamptey moderates a panel with WACREN’s Effah Amponsah, CARLIGH’s Mac Anthony Cobblah, and AJOL’s Kylie van Zyl on sustaining journals and advancing Open Access in the region.\nDuring the dedicated listening session, participants spoke candidly about the cost burden of APCs, the over-reliance on foreign journals for recognition, and the uphill battle local journals face, from limited resources to slow workflows. There was a clear push for stronger local publishing platforms and more training around tools like OJS. People want technical clarity: How does Crossref fit into their workflows? What’s involved in registering metadata and DOIs? What’s the actual value? Many also voiced interest in strengthening relationships with indexing services, and connecting university presses more directly with Crossref. The afternoon breakout sessions were hands-on. One group explored how to use the Participation Reports to check metadata completeness, while the other dove into using the Crossref API. People started swapping tips, asking questions, and brainstorming ways to improve how their institutions handle metadata. Several wanted to know how to automate more of their workflows through OJS, boost reference linking, and pull better reports from the Crossref system.\nPhoto: A collage of snapshots capturing activities at the Crossref Accra event.\nOutside the main event, we also visited some of our members and stopped by the Association of African Universities. These visits gave us more time for deeper conversations about publishing workflows, ORCID uptake, metadata visibility, and the bigger picture of Open Access in Ghana. We heard a lot about the potential for more equitable partnerships and stronger local ownership of publishing infrastructure.\nPost-event feedback made one thing clear: people want more opportunities to learn - more practical workshops, more guidance on using Crossref tools, and more support navigating the technical side of things. There’s growing interest in forming a local user group, a space to keep sharing, troubleshooting, and moving forward together. And the desire to improve indexing and visibility was a recurring theme. People see registering identifiers for content as an essential step on that journey. There’s also a broader concern about long-term sustainability and ethical publishing practices. Many journals are doing their best in tough conditions, and there’s a real appetite for honest conversations about quality, trust, and resilience.\nPhoto: Crossref staff and ambassadors with member Amy Asimah from Regional Maritime University. Pictured: Johanssen Obanda, Oumy Ndiaye, Evans Atoni, Patience Mbum, Audrey Kenni Nganmeni, Ginny Hendricks, and Richard Lamptey.\nCrossref Accra 2025 reminded us how valuable these local gatherings are - not just for sharing tools and workflows, but for building lasting connections. We’re grateful to our Ambassadors and team who helped make it happen, and we’re committed to deepening our support across the region. There’s so much potential in Ghana’s scholarly community, and in West Africa more broadly, as we’ve seen again at WACREN in Senegal a couple of weeks later. We’re committed to working with local partners to help it grow.\n",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/enhancing-doi-accessibility-for-all-users/",
"title": "Enhancing DOI Accessibility for All Users",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2025-04-28",
"lastmod_ts": 1745798400,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "2025 Update In 2022, we set out to update our DOI display guidelines with the intention to adopt the proposals in 2025. It’s important to note from the outset that we are not mandating any immediate changes to the DOI display guidelines. Instead, we are working with our community to co-create a solution that addresses the diverse needs of all users, rather than imposing technical changes that may not suit everyone.\n",
"content": "2025 Update In 2022, we set out to update our DOI display guidelines with the intention to adopt the proposals in 2025. It’s important to note from the outset that we are not mandating any immediate changes to the DOI display guidelines. Instead, we are working with our community to co-create a solution that addresses the diverse needs of all users, rather than imposing technical changes that may not suit everyone.\nBackground DOI links are the lifeblood of scholarly communication. They’re the canonical identifiers that enable researchers to find, cite, and assess academic work. In essence, they’re stable, reliable, and easy to use—provided you can see them. But what happens when a user can’t rely on visual cues?\nThe Accessibility Challenge For users of screen readers and other assistive technologies, the full value of a DOI link can be lost. While sighted users benefit from the context surrounding a DOI link—such as the title, abstract, and other metadata—screen reader users often hear just the bare URL. This means they might not know what content the DOI link represents, leading to confusion and a diminished browsing experience.\nThe problem is compounded by the technical nature of DOI links. Being URIs (Uniform Resource Identifiers), they don\u0026rsquo;t naturally lend themselves to the same accessibility techniques as standard URLs. When we attempted to tweak DOI links directly, every change that improved accessibility for one group inadvertently hindered another. Whether it was a WCAG (Web Content Accessibility Guidelines) rule or an ARIA (Accessible Rich Internet Applications) attribute, a solution that worked in one area would break in another.\nA Community-Driven Approach Realizing that a one-size-fits-all fix wouldn’t work, we took a different approach - one that involved the community from the outset. After consulting with early adopters and attending an insightful session with the JATS4R accessibility group, it became clear that the answer lay in experimentation and iteration. Rather than modifying the DOI display guidelines immediately, we are developing a tool that enhances the user experience without disrupting the current standards.\nIt’s worth noting that this solution places the responsibility on the end user rather than on publishers and platform providers. However, by doing so, users can have a consistent browsing experience regardless of the platform they use to access scholarly content. This approach also serves as an important stepping stone toward a future publisher-provided solution—be it via accessibility-focused JavaScript or a mandated dual-link implementation—and any efforts to recommend or mandate such changes will benefit greatly from concrete evidence of the effectiveness and scalability of this approach.\nIntroducing the DOI Accessibility Enhancer First demonstrated at the recent Crossref Annual Meeting, here we share our DOI Accessibility Enhancer browser extension. Available now on the Firefox Add-on Store and the Chrome Web Store, this extension is designed to improve the experience of DOI links for screen reader users without altering the default behavior for sighted users.\nHow It Works Scanning for DOI Links: The extension scans any webpage for DOI links.\nQuerying Metadata: Once a DOI is detected, it queries the Crossref REST API to retrieve the title of the corresponding scholarly work.\nEnhancing the Link: The title is then injected as a screen-reader–only link. This means that when a screen reader user navigates to the DOI, they hear the title of the paper rather than the opaque URL.\nMaintaining Visual Integrity: For sighted users, the original DOI link remains unchanged—visible, clickable, and easy to copy-and-paste.\nHighlighting for Testing: An optional feature highlights updated links, making it easier for developers and testers to see the changes in action.\nGet Involved This project is very much a community effort. The extension is open-source, and we welcome feedback and contributions via our GitLab repository, email, or Community Forum. Your real-life experiences and insights will drive future improvements, ensuring that our solution meets the diverse needs of all users.\nTry It Out If you’re using Firefox, head over to the Firefox Add-on Store and install the DOI Accessibility Enhancer today. If you’re a Chrome user, you can find the extension directly in the Chrome Web Store. If you use a screen reader you’ll experience the difference firsthand - and if you don’t, give it a try with VoiceOver enabled (Command-F5 on a Mac).\nTogether, we can advance scholarly accessibility and ensure that critical research remains discoverable for everyone.\n",
"headings": ["2025 Update","Background","The Accessibility Challenge","A Community-Driven Approach","Introducing the DOI Accessibility Enhancer","How It Works","Get Involved","Try It Out"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/committees/membership-and-fees/",
"title": "Membership & Fees committee",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 3,
"lastmod": "2025-04-24",
"lastmod_ts": 1745452800,
"section": "Committees",
"tags": [],
"description": "The Membership \u0026amp; Fees Committee (M\u0026amp;F committee) was established in 2001 and plays an important role in our governance. Made up of organisations that include members, sponsored members, sponsor, and metadata user - some of whom are also board members.\nThe group makes recommendations to the board about fees and policies for all of our services and procedures in relation to fees and community work.\nThey review existing fees to discuss if any changes are needed. They also review new services while they are being developed, to assess if fees should be charged and if so, what those fees should be, in line with our fee principles, and the Principles of Open Scholarly Infrastructure (POSI). In addition, the board can also delegate specific issues about policies and services to the M\u0026amp;F committee.\n",
"content": "The Membership \u0026amp; Fees Committee (M\u0026amp;F committee) was established in 2001 and plays an important role in our governance. Made up of organisations that include members, sponsored members, sponsor, and metadata user - some of whom are also board members.\nThe group makes recommendations to the board about fees and policies for all of our services and procedures in relation to fees and community work.\nThey review existing fees to discuss if any changes are needed. They also review new services while they are being developed, to assess if fees should be charged and if so, what those fees should be, in line with our fee principles, and the Principles of Open Scholarly Infrastructure (POSI). In addition, the board can also delegate specific issues about policies and services to the M\u0026amp;F committee.\nMost recently, in 2021, the committee reviewed a proposal to evolve the \u0026ldquo;fee assistance\u0026rdquo; program into a mroe expansive Global Equitable Membership (GEM) program. In 2019 the committee undertook a regular fee review which led to three specific cases being recommended to the board, all of which passed:\nRemoving the Crossmark fee Removing the fees for versions and translations (registered by the same member) Updating a set of principles for guiding fee-setting 2024-25 Remit At the 2023 November Board meeting, the following scope of work was agreed to support the \u0026ldquo;Resourcing Crossref Long-term\u0026rdquo; project\u0026quot;:\nRecruit committee members as needed to represent Crossref stakeholders Review and provide feedback on project outputs, including SWOT analysis, modelling of new fees, and impact/effort assessments of fee changes Support staff in getting feedback from the community on fee models and possible changes to current fees. Committee work might also include advising on how we engage the community in the process, such as reviewing RFPs for a community engagement consultant, refining the questions we ask, and reviewing the input Make recommendations to the board for any proposed fee changes Share findings publicly with the community M\u0026amp;F committee members Chair: Vincas Grigas, Vilnius University\nCrossref facilitator: Amanda Bartell\nCommittee member Representative Country Size (records) Org/Member type Academicus Journal Arta Musaraj Albania 400 Publisher ACM Scott Delman USA 700,000 Society, Publisher AVES YAYINCILIK A.Ş. Ali Şahin Turkey 23,000 Publisher Beilstein Institut* Wendy Patterson Germany 7,000 Publisher, Research Institute Center for Open Science (COS)* Nici Pfeiffer USA 184,000 Researcher Service/Tool Clarivate Analytics* Francesca Buckland USA 2,000 Publisher, Metadata User DOAJ Joanna Ball USA N/A Metadata User eLife Damian Pattinson UK 234,000 Publisher Elsevier* Lilia Marinkova Netherlands 23,000,000 Publisher Frontiers Marie Souliere Switzerland 1,200,000 Publisher Indian Society for Education and Environment Gajendran Natarajan India 15,000 Society IP Innovative Publication Pvt Ltd Rakesh Pandit India 18,000 Publisher Institute of Research and Community Services, Diponegoro University Eko Didik Widianto Indonesia 24,000 University, Publisher Japan Association for Language Teaching (JALT) Theron Muller Japan 1,300 Society Kampala International University Ademola Olaniyan Uganda 700 University, Publisher l\u0026rsquo;Université de Parakou Honoré Biaou Benin 60 University, Publisher Noyam Publisher Naa Kai Amanor-Mfoafo Ghana 1,100 Publisher Open Library of Humanities Rose Harris-Birtill UK 12,000 Scholar-led Publisher Pakistan Journal of Botany Rehan Saleem Pakistan 1,800 Publisher Scope Med Recai Ogur Belgium 36,000 Publisher, Publishing tool, Data Repository TU Delft Open Publishing Frédérique Belliard Netherlands 3,800 University, Publisher Universidad de Guadalajara Ramón Willman Mexico 9,700 University, Publisher University of Lagos Yetunde Zaid Nigeria 200 University, Publisher University of Namibia Anna Leonard Namibia 170 University, Publisher Vilnius University* Vincas Grigas Lithuania 26,000 Society, University, Publisher, Sponsor Wits University Press Andrew Joseph South Africa 5,300 University, Publisher (*) indicates current Crossref board member\nAbout committee participation The M\u0026amp;F Committee meets via one-hour conference calls about four times a year, although this can vary depending on what issues the committee is considering and what topics the board has delegated to them. Often proposals are developed by staff and then reviewed and discussed by the committee – so there is reading to do in preparation for the calls. The committee Chair is a board member and acts as a link between the two groups, presenting M\u0026amp;F recommendations to the board for them to vote.\nThis is very important work and it\u0026rsquo;s essential the committee is broadly representative of Crossref’s diverse membership of over 25,000 organisations in 167 countries.\nAll members agree to abide by Crossref\u0026rsquo;s code of conduct.\nPlease contact the community team with any questions, or Amanda Bartell directly.\n",
"headings": ["2024-25 Remit","M\u0026amp;F committee members","About committee participation"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/categories/sponsors/",
"title": "Sponsors",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Categories",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/supporting-membership-through-the-sponsor-program/",
"title": "Supporting Membership through the Sponsor Program",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2025-04-18",
"lastmod_ts": 1744934400,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "Sponsors make Crossref membership accessible to organisations that would otherwise face barriers to joining us. They also provide support to facilitate participation, which increases the amount and diversity of metadata in the global Research Nexus. This in turn improves discoverability and transparency of scholarship behind the works.\n",
"content": "Sponsors make Crossref membership accessible to organisations that would otherwise face barriers to joining us. They also provide support to facilitate participation, which increases the amount and diversity of metadata in the global Research Nexus. This in turn improves discoverability and transparency of scholarship behind the works.\nGrowing number of sponsors Our first sponsors joined in 2008, but the program started to grow rapidly between 2012-2014, with the addition of sponsors in South Korea, Türkiye, Russia, India, and Ukraine. In 2015, we welcomed our first South American sponsor from Brazil, followed by more sponsors in Latin America starting in 2016, and our first sponsor in Indonesia in 2017.\nAs of December 2024, Crossref works with 124 sponsoring organisations that support 12,195 sponsored members.\nIn 2021, we updated the criteria for organisations to be accepted as sponsors, raising the bar to ensure that potential sponsors accurately and successfully represent Crossref in the community. We also paused the acceptance of new Sponsors from regions where such organisations are already prolific. By doing so, we can focus on growing the program in areas with the greatest need.\nIn 2024, we added eight new sponsors to the program; these included our first sponsor in Bangladesh (our first GEM sponsor), as well as sponsors in China, Kazakhstan, Pakistan, Türkiye, Tunisia, Iraq, and Kenya.\nSponsor growth by country by year Our five largest sponsors, based on the number of members they support (as of the end of 2024) are:\nRelawan Jurnal Indonesia, Indonesia - 3076 members Associacao Brasileira de Editores Cientificos do Brasil (ABEC Brasil) - 1312 Tubitak Ulakbim DergiPark, Türkiye - 1248 NEICON ISP, Russia- 713 Kyobobook Center, South Korea - 419 The majority of sponsors are much smaller than this, looking after 25 or fewer Sponsored Members.\nEach sponsor has specific criteria for what kind of organisations they work with. Some are dedicated to supporting organisations in a specific country or region, while others may be based on geography, language, subject area, or usage of a specific platform, e.g. OJS.\nOur sponsors are distributed across all regions of the world, and we’re continuously working to forge networks with organisations in regions with the least coverage, to ensure scholarly communicators anywhere can join Crossref and contribute to the Research Nexus.\nAsia Pacific: 22 Central and Eastern Europe: 29 Central and South Asia: 25 Latin America and the Caribbean: 24 North Africa and the Middle East: 3 Sub-Saharan Africa: 2 ​US and Canada: 5 Western Europe: 14 Currently, sponsored members represent 115 different countries, with the largest proportions from Latin America, South-eastern Asia, and Eastern Europe. Nearly two-thirds of sponsored members self-identify as universities, libraries, government agencies, foundations, scholar publishers, and research institutions.\nTo date, sponsored members have contributed 6.5 million works to the Research Nexus.\nImportantly, the sponsored members have the ability to fully participate in Crossref – they are stewards of their records (even if some choose to delegate this activity to their sponsor), they can vote, stand in for elections to our Board of Directors, and collaborate with others in the Crossref community, just as any other member.\nBenefits of the Sponsor Program Sponsors are key partners for us in making participation easier for organisations in their communities. They work with us to provide administrative, billing, technical, and local language support to the members they work with. Depending on the financial model, they may charge members for their services.\nTechnical support they provide for members makes it more tailored and often quicker than the Crossref team could offer. For example, sponsors can provide service in their local language using their preferred method (helpdesk, WhatsApp, phone, email), which varies widely by region; or, where they charge any fees – they tend to collect those in the local currency. Some sponsors even take care of all the records registration for the members they support.\nIt’s important to note that sponsors can only support the participation of organisations that would otherwise be in the current $275 fee tier (or up to $500 for funders) if these organisations were to join independently. Regardless of the number of sponsored members, the sponsor pays one membership fee on behalf of them all, and then they also pay all the registration fees that are due on behalf of their sponsored members, which alleviates challenges related to paying in foreign currency. Overall, sponsors make Crossref membership more economical for the organisations that participate this way, and Crossref benefits from billing efficiencies.\nIn a recent survey of sponsored members (carried out in July 2023, with 204 responses from members working with 53 sponsors), the majority of sponsored members (88%) said that sponsors met their expectations and 85% are likely or very likely to recommend their sponsors to another organisation.\nRespondents indicated that the aspects of working with a sponsor that were most valued are technical support (72%), financial assistance/no annual fee (37.3%), ability to pay in local currency (43%), and local language support (44%).\nIt’s important to note that sponsors often offer many non-Crossref services to members too, including anything from website design, copy editing, typesetting, set up of publishing platform, XML-JATS markup, to assistance with submitting content to third-party databases.\nSponsors represent Crossref in the community. They also assist us in connecting with their communities locally. In 2024, we collaborated with Biteca for an event in Bogotá, and Relawan Jurnal Indonesia for a two-day event in Jakarta. Both sponsors advised on venues, promoted the event to the members they support, coordinated local guest speakers, and provided translation services as needed. We also collaborated with Hipertexto-Netizen on engaging our community at the Guadalajara Book Fair. The success of these events was in part due to our collaboration with each sponsor.\nEnsuring quality experience for our members We try to make sure that every sponsor we work with will be able to commit to helping our members long-term. We offer training too, with an expectation that they can disseminate the learning to their members. The majority of sponsored members report receiving some training from their Sponsors (with 70% in our survey saying they’ve received adequate training on all services, while only 3% haven’t received any so far). Most recently we engaged sponsors with the Participation Reports to help them improve metadata completeness for their members.\nIn 2024, we’ve been meeting sponsors individually to review how things are going for them and their members – assessing member metadata quality, and additional services, as well as inviting their feedback about the program and suggestions for improvements that Crossref could make.\nWe’ve learnt a lot about practices related to record registration and training, business models and especially – a whole range of attitudes and approaches related to metadata completeness. Some sponsors register content for all or some of their members, while others provide technical support but do not register the content directly for members.\nMembers who used OJS often had higher scores because of the ease of use and availability of the plugins. Some sponsors noted that many journal editors are volunteers and don’t have the time or financial resources to collect extra metadata or update existing metadata records; they collect only what is required to register an item. Several sponsors also reported a barrier with authors\u0026rsquo; mindset – they don’t tend to see the value of including ORCiDs or ROR IDs in their submissions. Somewhat surprisingly, we learned that not all members see the value in including references in their deposits or don’t wish to take the time to add them – this is a concern, as relationships created by references are a cornerstone of the Research Nexus, and markedly support discoverability of the content.\nSometimes, sponsors are unable to continue to provide services, or they are unable to meet the obligations of being a sponsor and their accounts are closed. In the cases where a sponsor account is closed, we will work with their members to find an alternative sponsor when possible.\nSimilarity Check is an external service provided in partnership with iThenticate, that’s available to Crossref members at a more competitive price, and it is in demand among the sponsored members too. Currently, 78 Sponsors offer Similarity Check to their members (however, not all sponsored members working with these sponsors have elected to use the service).\nSponsor LIBCOM Piotr Karwasinski was pleased that “All the rules of Crossref are unified. Everything is the same for everyone - the same for big publishers as well as small. Equal for everyone.”\nCosts can sometimes be a concern; sponsors in India and Algeria both noted that $1USD is a lot of money for some. We mentioned the fee review being conducted with the RCFS project.\nIn summary As we move toward realizing our vision of a connected Research Nexus, building a network for the global community must include input from all of the global community. When Crossref began 25 years ago our first members were mainly from the United States and Western Europe, but today our membership is much more global and diverse. Though our membership has grown to more than 22,000 organisations around the world, we are not seeing significant membership growth from all regions.\nIn the last few years, almost half of our members came from Southeastern Asia, Eastern Europe, and Latin America combined. However, there is much slower growth in other regions, mostly notably Northern and Sub-Saharan Africa, and parts of Central Asia, with only 5% of new member applications coming from these regions collectively. We know there are organisations in those areas contributing to the scholarly record, however, many continue to face financial, technical, and administrative barriers to become members.\nThe Sponsor Program is one of the avenues established to address and reduce barriers and to help facilitate membership and participation to all knowledge-sharing organisations worldwide. Ensuring it remains strong and successful requires collaboration, communication, and comprehensive training.\n",
"headings": ["Growing number of sponsors","Sponsor growth by country by year","Benefits of the Sponsor Program","Ensuring quality experience for our members","In summary"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/request-for-proposals-crossref-website-information-architecture-review/",
"title": "Request for proposals: Crossref website information architecture review",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2025-04-17",
"lastmod_ts": 1744848000,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "We are looking for an organisation to perform an audit of, and propose changes to, the structure and information architecture underlying our website, with the aim of making it easier for everyone in our community to navigate the website and find the information they need.\nUPDATE, August 2025: We are partnering with Cazinc and Cactus AI Solutions on this work. Stay tuned for updates on the progress of this project over the coming months. ",
"content": "We are looking for an organisation to perform an audit of, and propose changes to, the structure and information architecture underlying our website, with the aim of making it easier for everyone in our community to navigate the website and find the information they need.\nUPDATE, August 2025: We are partnering with Cazinc and Cactus AI Solutions on this work. Stay tuned for updates on the progress of this project over the coming months. About Crossref Crossref is a nonprofit membership organisation that exists to make scholarly communications better. We run open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science and makes research outputs easy to find, cite, link, assess, and reuse.\nTogether with our 22,000 members in 160 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support nearly 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society. Our members include research institutions, publishers, libraries, funders, government bodies, and other stakeholders in the scholarly communications ecosystem.\nAbout the Crossref website We launched the current website in 2016. A few years later, we custom-developed the current Documentation section, moving from a separate site (Zendesk, and prior to that HelpIQ). We subsequently launched a Discourse community forum and actively encourage self-service there. Despite these efforts, we still answered about 50,000 support emails in 2024.\nWe use the Hugo static site generator, and all the content, assets, and code are open in GitLab. We have dedicated staging and sandbox branches, and use staging for editing instead of the usual git merge requests, and sandbox for testing more substantial code or navigation changes.\nWe share the responsibility for editing across the teams, with a page owner/author denoted for each page. Most staff use VSCode for editing; we don’t have or need a CMS. We deploy changes to the live site around twice a week. Several custom shortcodes are in place, such as for tables and displaying related information based on tags, or for presentation elements like highlight boxes or columns. We host (many) images and files directly in the repository, rather than using a CDN. We use Algolia for site search, which was chosen because it can support multiple languages.\nCurrent website structure There are currently four main sections of the website:\nGet involved: this landing page is the most up-to-date with our current positioning and messaging. The section includes how to join as a member and the ways you can participate, obligations and benefits; a welcome page for new members to get started; events and webinars like our annual meeting; special projects or campaigns that need landing pages; fees; programs such as for service providers and ambassadors; global equitable membership; code of conduct; and working groups (which are different from board committees). Find a service: listing the purpose and value/benefits for each service, such as content registration, metadata retrieval/APIs/Search, Crossmark, Similarity Check, Grant Linking System, and some other quasi-services that require members to develop or enable something, like reference linking or the Open Funder Registry or ROR. Documentation: following more-or-less our “managed member journey” pathway, this includes getting set up, how to create DOI suffixes, how to select the right tool for content registration, how to interpret the various reports that members receive, what to expect in terms of invoicing, schema library and best practices for metadata sharing incl. guidance on principles to follow and sample XML files to edit. Each ‘service’ then has it’s own documentation section too. About: governance, including information about our board, committees, and bylaws. Financial information and annual reports. Staff pages, org chart, jobs, and policies incl. employee handbooks. History of Crossref and mission. Under the sub-heading “Operations \u0026amp; sustainability”, there is also detailed information about membership processes such as revocations, managing legal sanctions, member practices, and member offboarding. Additionally, the website hosts our blog and allows users to sign up for our newsletter, which are two key ways in which we keep our community informed.\nProject overview End goal We want to allow our community to self-serve with information about what Crossref does, how to become a member, how to use our tools, and how to participate in our programs and services. The Principles of Open Scholarly Infrastructure are central to how we operate, and we want the information about the how, what, and why of Crossref to not only be openly available, but also easy to discover and reuse.\nVisitors to www.crossref.org should be offered the information that they are looking for quickly and intuitively. A reduction in the number of help-desk tickets we receive (in 2024 we answered 50,000 of them) would be an indication of an improved self-service website, as would lower bounce rates.\nScope and deliverables At the end of this information architecture review project, we expect to have agreed on a set of recommendations for tackling the problem statements laid out in the appendix of this document, as well as a plan for how the recommendations should be implemented. This plan will form the basis for an implementation project in 2026. We encourage applications both from organisations who would also be comfortable taking on the implementation project and from those who feel their expertise is specific to the review project described herein.\nSpecifically, we expect the following deliverables:\nAssessment of key user needs (through analytics and/or user interviews incl. editors) Audit and analysis of current site structure and how it serves key user pathways Recommendations for content re-architecture, navigation and search improvements Strategy for taxonomy and/or tagging system Strategy for documentation site setup Strategy for information pathways between website, docs, community forum, ticketing systems Recommended roadmap for 2026 implementation project Nice to have: Wireframes or annotated sitemaps for future site layout Problem statements It is difficult to find information about our services. Even Crossref staff often use search engines to find a page on our website rather than navigating to it or using the built-in search on the website. It’s often not clear whether the information you are looking for is on the “Find a service” page or the “Documentation” page for a given service, and there is no consistent cross-linking between the two groups of pages. There is a search bar prominently placed on the home page, but the search currently only looks for direct matches between the search terms and page contents (with some declensions, stopwords, and fuzziness to allow for typos). We have limited tracking available in Algolia, but can see that in a 7-day span in March 2025, a large portion of searches (78%) returned no results. It is difficult to navigate our website. The home page contains some quick links to key pages, but they are not very visible. In order to navigate the website from the home page, users have to expand a hamburger menu which takes up the whole page, and are then presented with an overwhelming amount of options. Once users have left the home page, the way they navigate depends on which section of the website a user finds themselves in: all pages have breadcrumbs going back to Home, while only Documentation pages have a hierarchical sidebar. In order to switch between the basic groups of pages (Get involved, Find a service, Documentation, About us), users have to use the global hamburger menu. Our home page doesn’t do a very good job of explaining who we are and what we do. A lot of real estate is taken up by images and recent news items without much context. Bounce rates from the home page are high (65% as of March 2025). Our user interfaces and reports are not easily accessible from our website. While we are not a SaaS organisation, there is an established pattern of being able to access an organisation’s services directly from its website (often via a login button at the top right). This is complicated by the fact that we don’t have one single frontend “platform”. In fact we don’t have a single page linking out to the various frontends and interfaces, nor do we have a consistent pattern of linking out to an interface from the documentation page describing how to use it. Some of the pages and grouping of pages are outdated and don’t reflect our current priorities or ways of working anymore. For example, the Get involved section still features Special programs and Service providers quite prominently, but the cross-functional programs that shape most of our strategic work now (Co-creation and Community Trends, Contributing to the Research Nexus, Open and Sustainable Operations, Metadata Development) are not represented. Find a service strongly suggests we’re a service provider, whereas most of our services are enabling infrastructure, requiring members to build or act on something. Some more recently created pages don’t fit neatly into any of the current groupings: e.g., API Learning Hub can be found under Get involved and in the home page footer, but doesn’t really belong in either. We also have time-limited, special projects or campaigns like the 25th anniversary of Crossref or the Resourcing Crossref for Future Sustainability project, for which there isn’t a great home. Lastly, we want to host additional content on our website in future, such as our own staff publications; instructions on how to find our codebases and how to contribute to them; how to build technical integrations; how to report bugs; and general best practices in scholarly communications (e.g. in the context of our work on the integrity of the scholarly record), which is not really part of the documentation of our services. Project budget and timeline We have a maximum budget of $20,000 allocated to the information architecture review project. The projected timeline is as follows:\nRFP issued: April 17, 2025 Final deadline for proposals: May 15, 2025 Shortlisted applicant interviews: May 2025 Appointment made: June 2025 Project kick-off: July 2025 Final deliverables due: October 2025 If you are interested in applying but don’t think this timeline is deliverable for you, please contact us to suggest what would be realistic for you or your organisation before applying.\nProposal submission requirements Proposals, as well as any questions, should be submitted to Lena Stoll by 15 May 2025.\nPlease include the following in your proposal:\nCompany background and relevant experience with open-source static sites and mission-driven communications Case studies or examples of comparable work Your approach to the proposed project and how you would structure it Team bios and roles incl. typical timezones Timeline and milestone estimates Proposed budget, including breakdown Proposed cadence of check-ins, communications, milestones, and deliverables Contact information Proposal evaluation criteria We will evaluate proposals based on:\nDemonstrated understanding of our mission and community needs Proven experience designing for multilingual and multinational audiences Expertise in mission-driven business-to-business communications and information architecture Quality of previous work and case studies Value for money We look forward to hearing from you!",
"headings": ["About Crossref","About the Crossref website","Current website structure","Project overview","End goal","Scope and deliverables","Problem statements","Project budget and timeline","Proposal submission requirements","Proposal evaluation criteria","We look forward to hearing from you!"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/operations-and-sustainability/membership-operations/title-ownership-disputes/",
"title": "Title ownership dispute resolution",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2025-04-10",
"lastmod_ts": 1744243200,
"section": "Operations & sustainability",
"tags": [],
"description": "We allow members to freely register DOI records for titles that do not yet exist in our system. Term 2c of our membership terms states:\nRights to Content. The Member will not deposit or register Metadata for any Content for which the Member does not have legal rights to do so.\nThis means that either the journal owner or their appointed publisher can register DOI records for a title.\nWhen the first submission for a title is processed, a title record is added to our database. This title record ties the title to the prefix belonging to the first registrant and they become the \u0026ldquo;owning member\u0026rdquo;. From this point, new DOIs for that title can only be created on the owning member prefix. If another member wishes to register DOIs belonging to that title on their own prefix, they can\u0026rsquo;t do this unless we move ownership of the title in our system to them. Only one member can be the owning member for a title at any given time.\n",
"content": "We allow members to freely register DOI records for titles that do not yet exist in our system. Term 2c of our membership terms states:\nRights to Content. The Member will not deposit or register Metadata for any Content for which the Member does not have legal rights to do so.\nThis means that either the journal owner or their appointed publisher can register DOI records for a title.\nWhen the first submission for a title is processed, a title record is added to our database. This title record ties the title to the prefix belonging to the first registrant and they become the \u0026ldquo;owning member\u0026rdquo;. From this point, new DOIs for that title can only be created on the owning member prefix. If another member wishes to register DOIs belonging to that title on their own prefix, they can\u0026rsquo;t do this unless we move ownership of the title in our system to them. Only one member can be the owning member for a title at any given time.\nTitle ownership transfers in our system are really common and usually straighforward, and we follow our standard title ownership transfer process.. But very occasionally there isn\u0026rsquo;t agreement between the two members about who should be registering DOIs going forward, and the member who wants to take on ownership of the title in our system becomes a \u0026ldquo;disputing member\u0026rdquo;. In these very rare cases, we follow this process:\nThe disputing member will notify us of the title dispute - an email to Support is sufficient We’ll contact the owning member informing them of the title dispute. If the owning member agrees that their ownership is incorrect or if they do not respond within 10 working days, we will re-assign title and record ownership to the disputing member, who then becomes the new owning member. If the owning member challenges the claim, the two parties must resolve the issue together within 90 days. We will move title ownership under instruction from the owning member, or under direction from legal authority. If the dispute is not resolved within 90 days, the disputing member can request that we remove the ability for any party to register further content for the publication under dispute until this is resolved. This remains the case until we receive notice of a legal conclusion. ",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/categories/programs/",
"title": "Programs",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Categories",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/categories/roadmap/",
"title": "Roadmap",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Categories",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/the-programs-approach-our-experiences-during-the-first-quarter-of-2025/",
"title": "The programs approach: our experiences during the first quarter of 2025",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2025-04-08",
"lastmod_ts": 1744070400,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "At the end of last year, we were excited to announce our renewed commitment to community and the launch of three cross-functional programs to guide and accelerate our work. We introduced this new approach to work towards better cross-team alignment, shared responsibility, improved communication and learning, and make more progress on the things members need.\n",
"content": "At the end of last year, we were excited to announce our renewed commitment to community and the launch of three cross-functional programs to guide and accelerate our work. We introduced this new approach to work towards better cross-team alignment, shared responsibility, improved communication and learning, and make more progress on the things members need.\nIn line with the Crossref strategic agenda, the three programs focus on:\nCo-creation and Community Trends (CCT): This program is responsible for interfaces such as reports/dashboards, record registration interfaces, connections and collaborations such as Open Funder Registry, ROR, ORCID auto-update, as well as OJS and other partner integrations. This program also includes the Crossref website and any front-end interfaces to support other programs. It includes initiatives aimed at upholding the integrity of the scholarly record and our tools in this area, such as Crossmark and retraction/correction tooling, and Similarity Check for text comparisons. Contributing to the Research Nexus (CRN): This program manages and oversees all activities relating to contributing to the Research Nexus. A lot of the work in this program revolves around our REST API, but also includes our other APIs, incorporating external data sources like Retraction Watch and Event Data, building out metadata matching services with the new data science team, supporting the community of metadata users with API sprints and more modern options for retrieving metadata based on usage and need. Open and Sustainable Operations (OSO): This program manages and oversees all activities related to making our operations more open, transparent, and sustainable. This program focuses on supporting and strengthening the core functions our members rely on and enabling future growth. It includes metadata deposit and processing, most apps for e.g. managing titles, authentication, and architectural and infrastructural projects like moving from the data centre to the AWS cloud service. This program also includes modernising our operations in general, which is not just technology but also finance and human resources, so projects like membership process automation, financial analyses, and business system integrations. The approach we are taking is to support the work within the programs through (internal) cross-functional steering groups. Led by three program leads (who share updates on their programs below), three program steering groups meet regularly to discuss the topics and work that fall within the scope of each program. The steering groups consist of representatives from all teams within Crossref, which means every steering group has people from the community team, membership team, technical team, data science team, and operations and finance team, bringing all the perspectives and expertise needed to prioritise the next steps for Crossref and fostering broad knowledge sharing and shared responsibility.\nAlthough the whole organisation contributes to these programs, they are coordinated by the Programs and Services team. The team was formed towards the end of 2024, and on the 1st of February, Helena Cousijn joined Crossref in the new role of Director of Programs and Services. Helena has a background in both product management and community engagement and is very excited to help Crossref shape the programs approach and work with all teams across the organisation to drive the strategic agenda forward!\nIf you’d like to keep an eye on the work that is happening within each program, you can find more information on the Crossref productboard.\nCo-creation and Community Trends (CCT) The mission of the CCT program is to build and foster relationships with our community and other services and organisations within it, so that Crossref can meet and anticipate community needs. Curiosity and listening are at the core of how we co-create to tackle emerging challenges, develop best practices, and explore new ideas for building the Research Nexus. We want our work to benefit all of Crossref’s diverse stakeholders - from our own colleagues and members to underrepresented communities in the wider scholarly ecosystem.\nIn the first quarter of 2025, our focus areas have been:\nImprovements to our new record registration form for journal articles, which already supports grants, and was launched in beta for articles in 2024. For example, the form now has a built-in reference deposit feature. Join the conversation on the community forum for updates and feedback on this new helper tool. Running a series of multilingual metadata health check webinars. There are more of these coming up throughout Q2, so it’s not too late to sign up for one if you are interested. Integrating with Rogue Scholar to automate the assignment of DOIs to, and the archiving of, posts on this very blog. Planning for the inaugural Crossref Metadata Awards - join our upcoming community call on 7 May to find out what this is all about. In the coming months, we are hoping to tackle the following:\nKick off a project to review the information architecture of this website and look into how we can make our documentation and related information more helpful and easier to navigate. Expand the record registration form for journal articles to allow easy editing of previously submitted records. This will allow us to sunset the long-deprecated Metadata Manager tool, as was first announced in 2021. Begin building new record registration forms for more work types. Watch this space. Explore options for supporting the integration of additional software systems with Crossref, building on our existing approach with OJS plugins, with a focus on open-source tools relied upon by our members for registering metadata. Restore faceted search on Crossref Metadata Search. This feature was disabled in 2022 following intermittent performance issues. We believe recent improvements to Metadata Search will allow us to bring some filters back, although we will need to start small so as not to overload our systems with these more complex queries. Contributing to the Research Nexus (CRN) The research nexus is a rich and reusable open network that represents scholarly activity. It consists of connections between research organisations, people, things, and actions; it’s an evolving model of the scholarly record that the global community can build on forever for the benefit of society.\nOur metadata is already a contribution to the research nexus, however, there is much more we would like to do. Our next steps will be to consolidate our existing data and services, and build the technical capacity, partnerships, and knowledge to enhance our contribution with new relationships. Some parts of our data storage and workflows don’t yet have the flexibility to fully capture all types of research objects and how they are connected.\nTo support this process, the main priorities in the program are:\nCollaborate with our community. We want to get to know users of our metadata better and work more collaboratively alongside them. Also, we seek partners to contribute new data sources that will enhance our metadata with additional relationships. Share the research nexus vision. We know that we aren’t alone in developing the research nexus, so we will reach out to others with a similar vision and identify where we have common goals. Maintain our technology. We have already identified technical improvements we can make to our REST API, and we need to keep on top of monitoring and fixing bugs. We also need to build capacity for new types of data and relationships. Our other endpoints, such as the XML API and forwardlinks (for citations), need maintenance and are likely to be affected by a planned redesign of our core architecture. Building a new matching service. Identifying relationships between metadata records is a key part of the research nexus. We have already improved reference matching over the years, and we’re looking to implement funding, affiliations, and version matching next. We’ve carried out research on several types of matching and are looking at building a new service to handle it in production. In the first quarter of 2025, we’ve been working on:\nSchema changes, making the first significant updates to our schema for several years, including adding the capacity for depositing ROR IDs for funding organisations in funding metadata. Delivering Retraction Watch retractions via the REST API, integrated with member-supplied retraction/correction data. Getting the community involved and understanding needs, planning a sprint and various workshops. Plenty of under-the-hood updates to the REST API, and more significant upgrades to come later this year. Next up, we will:\nPlan and build out the new matching service. Improve representation of some metadata in the REST API, including Crossref members, journals, and typed citations such as data citations. Update the grants schema to extend the award types and respond to new funder member requests Add contributor roles to the schema, including CRediT. Ask our community about metadata retrieval, including the various APIs and the Metadata Plus subscription service. Upgrade elements of the REST API and optimise the underlying technical infrastructure. Open and Sustainable Operations (OSO) The OSO program is centered on transparency and sustainability of our technical systems and our business and people operations. We focus on maintaining critical systems and operations and ensuring their security, addressing technical and operational debt, and controlling or reducing costs - to Crossref, our community, or the environment. We’re always keen to tackle projects to automate repetitive and manual tasks – of which we have many – and pay down technical debt, being as open and transparent as possible along the way.\nOur most recently completed work includes:\nMoving from Oracle to an open-source database, PostgreSQL. This work aligns with the POSI principles and sets us up for a more robust, reliable, and modern infrastructure. Implementing metadata schema changes for deposit submission and processing, so we can now accept ROR IDs in funding metadata, as well as the changes in latest schema version (5.4.0) which includes the new ability to label references with a type (such as dataset, software, blog post, article, etc.). Automating parts of the process to keep Sponsor information on our website up to date and make it easier to search, so our community can find relevant and accurate information about our Sponsors and how to work with them, and our membership team spends less time keeping the website current. Ongoing work in our program includes:\nMoving from a physical data center into the cloud (AWS). The PostgreSQL migration was the first step needed to enable our move to the cloud, which will allow us to operate more sustainably and efficiently. Automating new member setup in our systems, which is largely a manual process now. And coming up are:\nMaking changes in our core system to accept the upcoming 5.5 metadata schema version. Extracting billing code from our main codebase, to set up as its own service. This will allow us to simplify our code and make it easier to maintain. We’ll also be implementing the changes to billing enacted as part of the Resourcing Crossref for Future Sustainability program (TBD!). Holding a “systems workshop” in April, to understand how our current system(s) are and aren’t meeting staff, member, and community needs, and how we might go about building the open, sustainable Crossref system of the future. What have we learned so far? Internal communication One of the reasons to implement a programs approach was to improve internal communication across the organisation. With all teams being represented on all steering groups, everyone is in the loop when decisions are taken. We see that this way, people feel more connected to the strategic agenda and, importantly, the ‘why’ is clearer to people. It is easier to get perspectives from across the organisation because contributing to these conversations is now part of people’s day jobs and so it’s easier to ask for their time. We are still looking to improve how we facilitate group discussions and decision-making to ensure we make the most of the program steering groups.\nPlanning and delivery Working closely with people from across the organisation has helped with more effective planning. A closer collaboration between program leads and developers makes the delivery of new features and functionality more accurate and predictable. With the community and support teams also being part of the conversation, they can plan related comms and support/documentation efforts in a timely manner. So far, it has also been easier to get more things delivered. We have some big projects coming up this year that will be a good test for the programs approach!\nCross-cutting topics The implementation of a cross-functional approach facilitates discussions around cross-cutting topics, but also leads to the question of how cross-cutting topics fit within a specific program! Maybe you already noticed that work on metadata schema 5.4 and the planned work on 5.5 is included under both Contributing to the Research Nexus and Open and Sustainable Operations in the update above. Because metadata development impacts many of our systems, work was needed within all programs to enable these changes - the input, the output and the interfaces. Later this year, we’re planning to share some visuals that better explain which projects sit with which program and how we deal with cross-cutting topics.\nAlignment One of the most important things for the approach to be successful is that people are bought in and willing to participate and communicate. For cross-organisational alignment, a culture needs to be in place (or developed) where people are willing to collaborate and be open and transparent about their work. In a practical sense, we are still looking at how we can better align our code bases with the current programs so that it is easier to develop the relevant expertise within the programs.\nWe hope to see many of you at our upcoming community call on 7 May. Please register to join as we discuss some of the work included in this update.\n",
"headings": ["Co-creation and Community Trends (CCT)","Contributing to the Research Nexus (CRN)","Open and Sustainable Operations (OSO)","What have we learned so far?","Internal communication","Planning and delivery","Cross-cutting topics","Alignment"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/version-5.4.0-metadata-schema-update-now-available/",
"title": "Version 5.4.0 metadata schema update now available",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2025-03-19",
"lastmod_ts": 1742342400,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "This year, metadata development is one of our key priorities and we’re making a start with the release of version 5.4.0 of our input schema with some long-awaited changes. This is the first in what will be a series of metadata schema updates.\nWhat is in this update? Publication typing for citations This is fairly simple; we’ve added a ‘type’ attribute to the citations members supply. This means you can identify a journal article citation as a journal article, but more importantly, you can identify a dataset, software, blog post, or other citation that may not have an identifier assigned to it. This makes it easier for the many thousands of metadata users to connect these citations to identifiers. We know many publishers, particularly journal publishers, do collect this information already and will consider making this change to deposit citation types with their records.\n",
"content": "This year, metadata development is one of our key priorities and we’re making a start with the release of version 5.4.0 of our input schema with some long-awaited changes. This is the first in what will be a series of metadata schema updates.\nWhat is in this update? Publication typing for citations This is fairly simple; we’ve added a ‘type’ attribute to the citations members supply. This means you can identify a journal article citation as a journal article, but more importantly, you can identify a dataset, software, blog post, or other citation that may not have an identifier assigned to it. This makes it easier for the many thousands of metadata users to connect these citations to identifiers. We know many publishers, particularly journal publishers, do collect this information already and will consider making this change to deposit citation types with their records.\nSupport for version numbering Members can now supply a version number across all relevant record types, including journal articles, book chapters, conference papers, posted content/preprints, datasets, reports, standards, and dissertations. The versioning update also includes an optional description field.\nMembers who version content are encouraged to register a new DOI with each version and supply the isVersionOf’ relationship to connect versions to each other, facilitating the Research Nexus and allowing members to avoid additional content registration fees, which don\u0026rsquo;t apply for versions.\nPreprint status This is specific to the \u0026lsquo;posted content\u0026rsquo; record type and comes as a result of the recommendations of the Preprints Advisory Group. The new status field allows repositories to flag a preprint as ‘withdrawn’ or ‘removed,’ a situation specific to posted content.\nThere are some other minor updates as well, including:\nAn expansion of the language codes supported by a language attribute. Additions to the archive locations we collect. Our membership terms ask members to archive their content where possible, ensuring their DOIs are able to resolve to the content persistently, and we ask that the archive(s) they use are identified in the metadata records registered with us. We’ve increased the number of ISBNs supported per item from 6 to 100. If you would like to begin using this schema, a brief transition guide is here. A full set of schema files are in our GitLab repository, and more information is available in our website documentation for schema 5.4.0.\nWhat’s next? We’ve already begun working on our next update, which will be an expansion of contributor roles. We’ll allow multiple contributor roles instead of the single role we currently support, we’ll add ‘corresponding author’ and ‘other’ to the Crossref role vocabulary. We will be also adding full support for CRediT.\nWe\u0026rsquo;re also hoping to fit in a remodeling of our group contributor (currently labeled ‘organisation’ in our input schema) in the next update, and I would appreciate feedback on this planned update.\nMore changes are planned, including an update to our grants schema, and expanded support for abstracts. We’ll be circulating details about those updates soon.\nJoin us for the Mid-year Community Call on 7th May to hear more!\n",
"headings": ["What is in this update?","Publication typing for citations","Support for version numbering","Preprint status","What’s next?"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/2025-public-data-file-now-available/",
"title": "2025 public data file now available",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2025-03-12",
"lastmod_ts": 1741737600,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "Every year we release metadata for the full corpus of records registered with us, which can be downloaded for free in a single compressed file. This is one way in which we fulfil our mission to make metadata freely and widely available. By including the metadata of over 165 million research outputs from over 22,000 members worldwide and making them available in a standard format, we streamline access to metadata about scholarly objects such as journal articles, books, conference papers, preprints, research grants, standards, datasets, reports, blogs, and more.\n",
"content": "Every year we release metadata for the full corpus of records registered with us, which can be downloaded for free in a single compressed file. This is one way in which we fulfil our mission to make metadata freely and widely available. By including the metadata of over 165 million research outputs from over 22,000 members worldwide and making them available in a standard format, we streamline access to metadata about scholarly objects such as journal articles, books, conference papers, preprints, research grants, standards, datasets, reports, blogs, and more.\nOur metadata is used by thousands of services, researchers, and other organisations. We make it openly available through our APIs, which can be used to obtain a subset of records. If you want to work with our full corpus, the best way is to get a copy of the public data file and update it via the REST API with any new records created or changed since its release.\nBy providing an annual copy of the full corpus, we also expand the ways in which the metadata can be used and interrogated. It is ideal for groups using large samples of the scholarly record, such as metaresearchers or research integrity experts. You can find examples of the public data file used in research on journal editorial practices and in projects investigating gaps in the scholarly record.\nHow to access the public data file The total size of the file is 197 GB and it is available in JSON-lines format. We also provide an experimental tool to convert the file to an Sqlite database. Before downloading the full dataset, you may wish to download the sample dataset containing 100 files (with 100 records in each, around 24 MB). This is a randomly sampled subset of metadata records and can be used for prototyping and development.\nTo get a copy of the annual data file you can access it directly via https://doi.org/10.13003/87bfgcee6g, or get the sample dataset and previous public data files from Academic Torrents. We make a donation to Academic Torrents to support their work, which allows the data to be accessible in this way. Some organisations have reported policies that prevent access to torrents, so we provide a copy that can be downloaded from AWS, which requires an AWS account and a small payment to cover the data transfer costs. You can find the details about access here.\nWe have some tips for working with the public data file. If you would like to have access to monthly snapshots of the whole corpus, along with higher API rate limits and other benefits, you can subscribe to Metadata Plus.\nWhat’s different this year? This year\u0026rsquo;s public data file contains an additional 9 million records, and many updates to previously deposited records. The formats and method of access are the same as last year, except that it uses JSON lines, meaning that each metadata record is on a single line and the file suffix is jsonl instead of json. The records have been sorted by DOI, meaning it should be easier to navigate.\nA change this year is that the file does not contain aliased DOIs, which are DOI that are redirected to another DOI. Aliasing is necessary on rare occasions, for example when two DOIs are registered for the same content. Previously we haven’t indicated aliasing in the REST API and public data files; this year only the prime DOIs (the ones to which they are redirected) are included. This makes statistical analysis of the metadata more accurate, but beware that it may give different results in cases where many aliased DOIs were previously counted. See this community forum post for more details.\nThe file also contains retractions from the Retraction Watch database, which was acquired by Crossref in September 2023 and recently integrated into the REST API.\nIf you have questions, want to let us know how you will use the metadata, or want to discuss anything on the topic of retrieving Crossref metadata, head to our community forum. From there, you can also keep updated about changes to our schema and APIs.\n",
"headings": ["How to access the public data file","What’s different this year?"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/authors/carlos-del-ojo-elias/",
"title": "Carlos Del Ojo Elias",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Authors",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/board-and-governance/bylaws/",
"title": "Bylaws",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2025-03-06",
"lastmod_ts": 1741219200,
"section": "Board & governance",
"tags": [],
"description": "Article I\nMembership\nSection 1. Qualification. Membership in Publishers International Linking Association, Inc. d/b/a Crossref (the “Corporation” or \u0026ldquo;Crossref\u0026rdquo;) shall be open to any organisation that publishes professional and scholarly materials and content and otherwise meets the terms and conditions of membership established from time to time by the Board of Directors of the Corporation (the “Board”), and to such other entities as the Board shall determine from time to time. ",
"content": "Article I\nMembership\nSection 1. Qualification. Membership in Publishers International Linking Association, Inc. d/b/a Crossref (the “Corporation” or \u0026ldquo;Crossref\u0026rdquo;) shall be open to any organisation that publishes professional and scholarly materials and content and otherwise meets the terms and conditions of membership established from time to time by the Board of Directors of the Corporation (the “Board”), and to such other entities as the Board shall determine from time to time. Section 2. Membership Classes. The Corporation shall have two classes of members: voting members and non-voting members. Non-voting membership is open to any organisation described in the preceding paragraph for which, due to such organisation’s geographic links, international sanctions law prohibits voting membership but permits non-voting membership in the Corporation. Voting membership is open to all organisations otherwise eligible for membership except non-voting members. Non-voting members shall have identical rights and obligations as voting members, except that non-voting members shall not vote in member elections or otherwise participate in the governance of the Corporation, as more specifically set forth in these Bylaws and prescribed by applicable sanctions law from time to time. References in these Bylaws to a “vote of the members” means a vote of the voting members. Section 3. Acceptance of members. Applications for membership shall be approved by the Board, which may delegate the authority to approve applications to the Executive Director. An applicant shall become a member of the Corporation (a “member”) upon the Corporation’s approval of its membership application and receipt of its first annual membership fee. The record date of membership for the member shall be the date of the Corporation’s receipt of its first annual membership fee following the Corporation’s approval of its membership application. Section 4. Obligations of members. A member shall pay the dues and fees specified by the Corporation from time to time, and shall have the rights and obligations specified by the Board from time to time including, but not limited to, executing and complying with an agreement among the Corporation and its various members in the form adopted by the Board from time to time. Each member shall provide the Corporation with written notification designating the person who shall be deemed to be its representative to the Corporation for all purposes, which designation can be changed from time to time by written notification as set forth in the membership agreement.\nSection 5. Resignation. Any member may withdraw from the Corporation after fulfilling all obligations to it by giving written notice of such intention to the Secretary, which notice shall be presented to the Board or Executive Committee by the Secretary at the first meeting after its receipt. Dues and service fees paid shall not be refundable. Section 6. Suspension and termination (expulsion). A member’s membership in the Corporation may be terminated for cause. For-cause bases for termination include, but are not limited to, a misrepresentation in the member’s membership application or ongoing practices; legal sanctions or judgments against the member or its home country; fraudulent or misleading use or creation of digital object identifiers or metadata; failure to pay fees due; or violation of these By-Laws or any rules of the Corporation; or for conduct prejudicial to the best interests of the Corporation. At the discretion of the Corporation, membership may be temporarily suspended in lieu of, or in advance of, termination. The Board may from time to time define standards and procedures for for-cause terminations, or establish a committee for that purpose, which committee may be comprised of both Directors and non-Directors. Crossref personnel shall be responsible for implementing such standards, provided that the affected member may request that the Board review a final suspension or termination decision. The Board shall be empowered to temporarily or permanently ratify, modify or rescind such suspension or termination, and may, within its sole discretion, permit the member to seek reinstatement by presenting a defense to such suspension or termination. For the avoidance of doubt, the Board may delegate this review authority to the Executive Committee or other committee of the Board. Article II Fiscal Year\nThe fiscal year of the Corporation shall begin on the first day of January and end on the last day of December in each year.\nArticle III\nDues and Service Fees\nSection 1. Annual dues and service fees. The Board may determine from time to time the amount of all dues and service fees payable to the Corporation by members. Section 2. Payment of dues and service fees. Dues and service fees shall be payable on such terms and at such times specified by the Board from time to time. Dues and service fees of a new member shall be prorated from the first day of the month in which such new member is accepted for membership, for the remainder of the fiscal year of the Corporation. Section 3. Default and termination of membership. When any member shall be in default in the payment of dues and service fees for a period of three (3) consecutive months, its membership may thereupon be terminated in the manner provided in Article I, Section 5, of these By-Laws.\nArticle IV Meetings of Members\nSection 1. Annual meetings. There shall be an annual meeting of members of the Corporation during the month of October or November of each year, or at such other time as the Board may determine from time to time, for election of Directors and for receiving the annual reports of officers, Directors, and committees, and the transaction of other business. Section 2. Special meetings. Special meetings of the members may be called by the Board in its discretion. Upon the written request of members entitled to cast forty percent (40%) of the total number of votes entitled to be cast at any such meeting, the Board shall call a special meeting to consider a specific subject. No business other than that specified in the notice of meeting shall be transacted at any special meeting of the members.\nSection 3. Notice and waiver of notice. Notice of any meeting of the members, stating the place, date, and time of the meeting and, in the case of a special meeting, the purpose or purposes for which it is called, shall be given by the Secretary by delivering a copy thereof personally, by first class mail, by facsimile telecommunication (fax) or by electronic mail, not less than ten (10) days nor more than fifty (50) days before the meeting to each member at the address in the records of the Corporation. Notwithstanding the provisions of any of the foregoing sections, a meeting of the members may be held at any time and at any place designated by the Board, and any action may be taken thereat, if notice is waived in writing by every member having the right to vote at the meeting. Any member may waive notice of any meeting by submitting a waiver in person or by proxy either before or after the meeting. Waiver of notice may be written or electronic. If written, the waiver must be signed by the member’s authorized representative (including by facsimile signature). If electronic, the waiver must be sent by electronic mail, and must set forth or be submitted with information from which it can reasonably be determined that the transmission was authorized by the member. The attendance of any member at a meeting, in person or by proxy, without protesting the lack of notice of such meeting prior to the conclusion of the meeting shall constitute a waiver of notice by such member.\nSection 4. Record date. For the purpose of determining the members entitled to vote at any meeting of members or any adjournment thereof, or to express consent to or dissent from any proposal without a meeting, or for the purpose of any other action by the members, the Board may fix, in advance, a date as the record date for any such determination. Such record date shall not be more than fifty (50) nor less than ten (10) days before the date of such meeting.\nSection 5. Quorum. The presence in person or by proxy of the lesser of one-tenth of the members entitled to vote, or one hundred (100) members entitled to vote, or such other number as may be set by the laws of the State of New York as the minimum number necessary to constitute a quorum for meetings of members, shall be necessary to constitute a quorum for the transaction of business.\nSection 6. Inspectors of election. One (1) Inspector of Election shall be chosen by vote of the members at the annual meeting. Such person shall act as Inspector of Election at the meeting and at all special meetings until the next annual meeting.\nSection 7. Voting. Any voting member may be represented at any meeting by any member of its staff delegated by it for that purpose, but each voting member in good standing shall be entitled to only one vote. If the manner of deciding any question has not otherwise been prescribed, it shall be decided by majority vote of the voting members present in person or by proxy.\nSection 8. Proxies. Every member entitled to vote at any meeting of the members may vote by proxy. A voting member may authorize another person to act for the member as proxy by (i) executing a writing providing such authorization, signed (including facsimile signature) by the member’s authorized representative, or (ii) providing such authorization by electronic mail to the person who will be the holder of the proxy or to a proxy solicitation firm, proxy support service organisation or like agent, provided that such authorization must set forth information from which it can be reasonably determined that the authorization was given by the member. A proxy shall be revocable at the pleasure of the member executing it, to the extent permitted by law. Unless the duration of the proxy is specified, it shall be invalid after eleven (11) months from the date of its execution.\nSection 9. Order of business. The order of business at all the meetings of the members, Board, and Executive Committee shall be as determined by the Board or the Executive Committee, as the case may be, from time to time.\nAny question as to priority of business shall be decided by the Chair without debate.\nThis order of business may be altered or suspended at any meeting by a majority vote of the members, Directors, or Executive Committee members present, as appropriate.\nSection 10. Membership action without meeting. Whenever members are required or permitted to take any action by vote, such action may be taken without a meeting upon the consent of all the members entitled to vote thereon, setting forth the action so taken. Such consent may be written or electronic. If written, the consent must be executed by the member’s authorized representative by signing or causing their signature to be affixed to the consent by any reasonable means, including but not limited to facsimile signature. If electronic, the transmission of the consent must be sent by electronic mail and set forth, or be submitted with, information for which it can be reasonably determined that the transmission was authorized by the member.\nArticle V Directors\nSection 1. Number. The property, affairs, activities, and concerns of the Corporation shall be vested in the Board, which shall consist of not fewer than three (3) nor more than sixteen (16) Directors or such other number determined by the Board and as permitted or required by the Not-for-Profit Corporation Law and the Certificate of Incorporation. Directors shall, upon election, enter into the performance of their duties immediately upon the expiration or termination of the term then extant and shall continue in office until their successors shall be duly elected and qualified.\nSection 2. Election and term of Directors. Election of Directors and terms of service shall be as specified in the Certificate of Incorporation, as amended from time to time. Each candidate for Director shall be an employee or officer of a voting member and no member may designate more than one candidate for election to the Board in any election. Any member whose candidate is elected to the Board may designate an alternate for such Director. Each alternate so designated may attend meetings of the Board and shall be deemed to be a member of the Board for all purposes but only for the duration of such designation. No such designation shall operate to increase the representation on the Board of the member designating the alternate and in the event that both the alternate and the Director are present at any Board meeting only the Director shall have the right to vote at the meeting.\nSection 3. Duties of Directors. The Board may without limitation: (1) hold meetings at such times and places as it thinks proper; (2) admit members and suspend or expel them by ballot; (3) appoint committees on particular subjects from the Directors, or from the members; (4) audit bills and disburse the funds of the Corporation; (5) print and circulate documents and publish articles; (6) carry on correspondence and communicate with other associations interested in scholarly or scientific publishing; (7) employ agents; and (8) devise and carry into execution such other measures as it deems proper and expedient to promote the objects of the Corporation and to best protect the interests and welfare of the members.\nSection 4. Meetings of Board. Regular meetings of the Board shall be held during the next calendar quarter immediately following the annual meeting of the members and on such other days as the Board may determine commensurate with good corporate practice. The Chair may, when the Chair deems necessary, or the Secretary shall, at the request in writing of five (5) Directors, issue a call for a special meeting of the Board. The Chair shall preside at all meetings of the Board.\nSection 5. Notice and waiver of notice. Notice of each regular meeting, signed by the Secretary or another officer, shall be delivered personally, by first class mail, by facsimile telecommunication (fax) or by electronic mail to the last recorded address of each Director at least five (5) days before the time appointed for the meeting. Notice of each special meeting, signed by the Secretary or another officer, shall be delivered personally, by first class mail, by facsimile telecommunication (fax) or by electronic mail to the last recorded address of each Director at least three (3) days before the time appointed for the meeting. Notice of a meeting need not be given to any Director who submits a signed waiver of notice whether before or after the meeting, or who attends such meeting without protesting, prior thereto or at its commencement, the lack of notice. Waiver of notice may be written or may be given via electronic mail. If written, the waiver must be executed by the Director signing such waiver or causing their signature to be affixed to such waiver by any reasonable means, including facsimile signature. If sent by electronic mail, the waiver must include information from which it can be reasonably determined that the transmission was authorized by the Director.\nSection 6. Quorum. A majority of the entire Board shall constitute a quorum for the transaction of business. Any one or more Directors or any committee thereof may participate in a meeting of such Board or committee by means of a conference telephone, videoconference, or similar communications equipment, as long as all persons participating in the meeting can hear each other at the same time and each Director can participate in all matters before the Board. Participation by such means shall constitute presence in person at the meeting. If a quorum is not present, a lesser number by majority may adjourn the meeting to a later date, not more than ten (10) days later. The Secretary shall give written notice of the adjourned date to all Directors in the manner described for regular meetings in Article V, Section 5 above.\nSection 7. Absence. The Board shall have the right, power and authority to set minimum requirements for Board attendance and participation including without limitation rules and criteria for alternate Board members. Should any Director or their alternate violate such requirements without sending a communication to the Chair or Secretary stating their reason for so doing, or if their excuse should not be accepted by the Board, or if any Director or their alternate fails to be present at two (2) consecutive Board meetings, such Director or alternate will be deemed to have resigned. The seat shall be filled as set forth in Section 9.\nSection 8. Resignation of Directors. In addition to the procedures for the resignation of Directors set forth in Article Sixth of the Certificate of Incorporation, if the Board determines that two (2) or more Directors are affiliated with the same member, within ten (10) days following notice thereof by the Board, such member may designate in writing to the Board one Director affiliated with it to remain on the Board, and all other Directors affiliated with such member shall cease to be Directors, provided, that if such member does not make such designation within such time, it shall be made, with the same effect, by a majority of the Board without participation in such decision by the Directors so affiliated.\nSection 9. Vacancies. Except as set forth in the Certificate of Incorporation, any vacancy in the Board shall be filled without undue delay by a majority vote by ballot of the remaining members of the Board at the next regular meeting or at a special meeting which shall be called for that purpose. The election shall be held within sixty (60) days after the occurrence of the vacancy. The person so chosen shall hold office until the end of the term which the director was elected or appointed to fill, or for a term to be determined by the Board which ends at an annual meeting (but in no event longer than three (3) years), or until their successor shall have been chosen at a special meeting of the members.\nSection 10. Removal of Directors. Any one or more of the Directors may be removed either with or without cause, at any time, by a vote of two-thirds (2/3) of the members present at a regular meeting or at any special meeting called for that purpose.\nSection 11. Directors’ action without meeting. Any action required or permitted to be taken by the Board or by any committee thereof may be taken without a meeting if all the members of the Board or of such committee consent in writing to the adoption of a resolution authorizing the action, which consent may be sent by electronic mail, including information from which it can reasonably be determined that the transmission was authorized by the applicable Director. In the event of any such action without a meeting, the resolution and the written consent thereto shall be filed with the minutes of the proceedings of the Board or of the relevant committee, as the case may be.\nArticle VI Officers\nSection 1. Number. This Corporation shall, at a minimum, have the following officers: a Chair, a Secretary, and a Treasurer. The Board shall have the right, power and authority to specify additional offices and elect and/or appoint officers to fill such offices, from time to time.\nSection 2. Method of election. The Board shall elect all officers for a term of one (1) year, the Chair and Treasurer being elected from the Board. A majority vote of a quorum present shall be necessary to constitute an election. Officers shall serve until their respective successors are elected and have qualified.\nSection 3. Duties of officers. The duties and powers of the following officers of the Corporation shall be as set forth below:\nChair\nThe Chair shall preside over operations of the Corporation and shall be a member ex officio, without right to vote (unless such right may be conferred on the Chair by other or dual status) of the Board. The Chair shall also, at the annual meeting of the Corporation and such other times as the Chair deems proper, communicate to the Corporation or to the Board such matters and make such suggestions as may in the Chair\u0026rsquo;s opinion tend to promote the prosperity and welfare and increase the usefulness of the Corporation and shall perform such other duties as are necessarily incident to the office of the Chair.\nSecretary\nIt shall be the duty of the Secretary to give notice of and attend all meetings of the members and the Board and keep a record of their doings; to conduct all correspondence and to carry into execution all orders, votes, and resolutions not otherwise committed; to keep a list of the members of the Corporation; to collect the fees, annual dues and service fees, and subscriptions and pay them over to the Treasurer; to notify the officers and members of the Corporation of their election; to notify members of their appointment on committees; to furnish the Chair of each committee with a copy of the vote under which the committee is appointed, and at their request give notice of the meetings of the committee; to prepare, under the direction of the Board, an annual report of the transactions and condition of the Corporation, and generally to devote such person\u0026rsquo;s best efforts to forwarding the business and advancing the interests of the Corporation. In case of absence or disability of the Secretary, the Board may appoint a Secretary pro tem. The Secretary shall be the keeper of the Corporation’s seal. The offices of Secretary and Chair may not be held by the same person.\nTreasurer\nThe Treasurer shall keep an account of all moneys received and expended for the use of the Corporation, and shall make disbursements only upon vouchers approved in writing by any member of the Executive Committee. The Treasurer shall deposit all sums received in a bank, or banks, or trust company approved by the Board, and make a report at the annual meeting or when called upon by the Chair. Funds may be drawn only upon the signature of the Chair, the Treasurer or the Executive Director, if any.\nThe funds, books, and vouchers in the Treasurer\u0026rsquo;s hands shall at all times be under the supervision of the Board and subject to its inspection and control. At the expiration of such person\u0026rsquo;s term of office, the Treasurer shall deliver over to their successor all books, moneys, and other property, or, in the absence of a treasurer-elect, to the Chair. In case of the absence or disability of the Treasurer, the Board may appoint a Treasurer pro tem.\nIn case of the death or absence of the Chair, or of the Chair\u0026rsquo;s inability from any cause to act, the Treasurer shall perform the duties of the Chair.\nExecutive Director\nThe Executive Director shall have day-to-day responsibility for the operations of the Corporation and shall report to the Corporation’s senior officers and the Board.\nSection 4. Vacancies. All vacancies in any office shall be filled by the Board without undue delay, at its regular meeting, or at a meeting specially called for that purpose.\nSection 5. Compensation of officers. The officers shall receive no salary or compensation unless the Board otherwise determines, so long as such compensation does not violate the Not-for-Profit Corporation Law.\nSection 6. Reimbursement. The Corporation may reimburse its officers and Directors for their reasonable and documented expenditures which conform to the reimbursement criteria established by the Board from time to time, provided that such expenditures are incurred in furtherance of the Corporation’s purposes.\nArticle VII Committees\nSection 1. Executive Committee. There shall be appointed annually by the Board an Executive Committee to be comprised of the Chair, the Treasurer and three (3) other Directors at least one of whom shall be the employee or representative of a not-for-profit publishing entity which is a member. The Executive Committee may act on behalf of the Corporation in any matter when the Board is not in session, reporting to the Board on the Executive Committee’s actions at each regular meeting or any special meeting called for that purpose. Three (3) members of the Executive Committee shall constitute a quorum for the transaction of business. Meetings may be called by the Chair or by two (2) members of the Executive Committee.\nSection 2. Nominating Committee. The Board shall appoint a Nominating Committee of five (5) members, each of whom shall be either a Director or the designated representative of a voting member that is not represented on the Board, whose duty it shall be to nominate candidates for Directors to be elected at the next annual election. The Nominating Committee shall designate a slate of candidates for each election that is at least equal in number to the number of Directors to be elected at such election. Each such slate will be comprised such that, as nearly as practicable, one-half of the resulting Board shall be comprised of Directors designated by members then representing Revenue Tier 1; and one-half of the resulting Board shall be comprised of Directors designated by members then representing Revenue Tier 2. “Revenue Tier 1” means all consecutive membership dues categories, starting with the lowest dues category, that, when taken together, aggregate, as nearly as possible, to fifty percent (50%) of Crossref’s annual revenue. “Revenue Tier 2” means all membership dues categories above Revenue Tier 1. The Nominating Committee shall notify the Secretary in writing, at least twenty (20) days before the date of the annual meeting, of the names of such candidates, and the Secretary, except as herein otherwise provided, shall transmit a copy thereof to the last recorded address of each member of record simultaneously with the notice of the meeting.\nSection 3. Audit Committee. The Board shall appoint an Audit Committee comprised of three independent Directors (as defined in the Not-for-Profit Corporation Law) who are not officers of the Corporation or members of the Executive Committee. The Audit Committee shall oversee the accounting and financial reporting processes of the Corporation and the audit of its financial statements, annually retain or renew the retention of an independent auditor, review with the independent auditor the results of the audit, including the management letter, and oversee the adoption and implementation of, and compliance with, any conflict of interest or whistleblower policies. The Audit Committee shall report to the Board at regular meetings, or at special meetings called for that purpose, as requested by the Board but not less often than once per year. The Audit Committee has the authority to engage independent legal, accounting and other advisors as it determines necessary to carry out its duties, and to approve each such advisor’s fees and other retention terms.\nSection 4. Other committees. The Board may, at any time, appoint other committees on any other subject. The Board will appoint the Chair and the members of each such committee, to serve on the committee for the term specified by the Board. Unless specifically provided otherwise in the resolution forming such a committee, such committee shall remain in existence for one year from the date of its formation unless reauthorized by the Board for additional one- year terms. Unless specifically provided otherwise in the Certificate of Incorporation or these By- Laws, members of such committees are not required to be Directors, provided that any committee that is not composed solely of Directors shall not have authority to bind the Board. Unless expressly permitted under applicable sanctions laws, representatives of non-voting members may not serve on any committee.\nSection 5. Committee quorum. Unless specifically provided otherwise in these By- Laws, a majority of the members of any committee shall constitute a quorum for the transaction of business, unless any committee shall by a majority vote of its entire membership decide otherwise.\nSection 6. Committee vacancies. The various committees shall have the power to fill vacancies in their membership.\nArticle VIII Liability and Indemnification\nSection 1. Liability. The personal liability of the Directors and officers of the Corporation is hereby eliminated to the fullest extent permitted by Sections 719, 720 and 720-a of the Not-for-Profit Corporation Law, as the same may be amended and supplemented, from time to time.\nSection 2. Indemnification. The Corporation shall, to the fullest extent permitted by Sections 721 et seq. of the Not-for-Profit Corporation Law, as the same may be amended and supplemented from time to time, indemnify any and all persons whom it shall have power to indemnify under said sections from and against any and all of the expenses, liabilities or other matters referred to in, or covered by, said sections, and the indemnification provided for herein shall not be deemed exclusive of any other rights to which those indemnified may be entitled under any By-Law, agreement, vote of members or disinterested Directors or otherwise, both as to action in such person\u0026rsquo;s official capacity and as to action in another capacity while holding such office, and shall continue as to a person who has ceased to be a Director, officer, employee or agent of the Corporation and shall inure to the benefit of the heirs, executors and administrators of any such person.\nSection 3. Insurance. The Corporation shall procure and maintain errors and omissions insurance coverage against Director and officer liability in such amounts, upon such terms and from such insurer(s) as the Board may from time to time deem advisable.\nArticle IX\nAudit of Books and Records\nThe Board shall cause the Corporation’s books and records to be audited at least once each year by a certified public accountant and shall report thereon to the Corporation’s membership in the form of a written annual report meeting the requirements of Section 519 of the Not-for-Profit Corporation Law to be distributed to the members as soon after completion of the audit as is practicable.\nArticle X\nAmendments\nThese By-Laws may be amended, repealed, or altered in whole or in part by a majority vote of the entire Board. The proposed change or changes shall be transmitted to the last recorded address of each member of the Board at least ten (10) days before the time of the meeting which is to consider such change or changes.\nEffective July 1, 2014; adopted March 5, 2014; revised July 13, 2016; revised July 12, 2018; revised November 15, 2018; revised March 7, 2019, revised July 11, 2019, revised March 6, 2025.\n",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/come-ror-with-us-using-ror-ids-in-place-of-funder-ids/",
"title": "Come ROR with us: Using ROR IDs in place of Funder IDs",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2025-03-05",
"lastmod_ts": 1741132800,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "Today, we\u0026rsquo;re delighted to let you know that Crossref members can now use ROR IDs to identify funders in any place where you currently use Funder IDs in your metadata. Funder IDs remain available, but this change allows publishers, service providers, and funders to streamline workflows and introduce efficiencies by using a single open identifier for both researcher affiliations and funding organisations.\n",
"content": "Today, we\u0026rsquo;re delighted to let you know that Crossref members can now use ROR IDs to identify funders in any place where you currently use Funder IDs in your metadata. Funder IDs remain available, but this change allows publishers, service providers, and funders to streamline workflows and introduce efficiencies by using a single open identifier for both researcher affiliations and funding organisations.\nAs you probably know, the Research Organisation Registry (ROR) is a global, community-led, carefully curated registry of open persistent identifiers for research organisations, including funding organisations. It’s a joint initiative led by the California Digital Library, Datacite and Crossref launched in 2019 that fulfills the long-standing need for an open organisation identifier.\nIn 2023, we shared our plan to transition the Open Funder Registry into ROR. More recently, we announced that we were planning to update our schema so that it is possible to collect ROR IDs where we currently collect Funder IDs such as in the funding metadata section for works and funder section for grants. Now that we have completed this work, Crossref members can start depositing ROR IDs where they would normally deposit Funder IDs. This update also means that the community, including funders, service providers, researchers, and data scientists can retrieve this metadata via our API.\nSo come and ROR with us and start depositing ROR IDs for both researcher affiliations and funding organisations.\nOpen Funder Registry-ROR transition This is of course a significant first step in the Open Funder Registry to ROR transition.\nWe’ve always said that we would continue supporting Funder IDs in our schema and in our tools and services until the community is ready to transition - and we will. In the last year, Crossref and ROR conducted a series of Open Funder Registry user interviews to help us understand how it was being used and identify practical challenges to this transition in our members’ workflow (thank you to those who took part, it was incredibly useful!).\nOne major takeaway from this consultation was around the pivotal role that peer review management systems played in the Open Funder Registry-ROR transition. We look forward to seeing more service providers integrating with ROR in the future. If you are a service provider and are ready to integrate with ROR, drop support@ror.org an email.\nIncluding ROR IDs in Crossref metadata If you are ready to begin including ROR IDs in your funding metadata, you only need to include the ROR itself to identify a funder.\nFor example:\n\u0026lt;fr:program name=\u0026#34;fundref\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;fr:assertion name=\u0026#34;ror\u0026#34;\u0026gt;https://ror.org/00fq5cm18\u0026lt;/fr:assertion\u0026gt; \u0026lt;fr:assertion name=\u0026#34;award_number\u0026#34;\u0026gt;10.3030/725840\u0026lt;/fr:assertion\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/fr:program\u0026gt; Examples of more complex combinations of funding information are available in our documentation. This update has been made across all schema that support funding metadata.\nOur grants schema has recently been updated to version 0.2.0 to support ROR IDs in place of funder identifiers as well. As with funding metadata, only the ROR ID needs to be supplied within the record:\n\u0026lt;funding amount=\u0026#34;750\u0026#34; currency=\u0026#34;USD\u0026#34; funding-percentage=\u0026#34;75\u0026#34; funding-type=\u0026#34;APC\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;ROR\u0026gt;https://ror.org/02twcfp32https://ror.org/02twcfp32\u0026lt;/ROR\u0026gt; \u0026lt;funding-scheme\u0026gt;Sofa Lending Programme\u0026lt;/funding-scheme\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/funding\u0026gt; Although previously a funder name was collected with the funder identifier, for both grants records and funding data in an attempt to avoid redundant, incorrect or conflicting metadata, now we’re accepting an identifier only as the ROR ID has an existing metadata record. The organisation name exists within the record in the ROR registry and the ROR record is the authoritative source of the name.\nROR IDs in JSON outputs We have an existing legacy practice of representing Open Funder Registry IDs as just a DOI, but ROR IDs are represented in the JSON outputs as a full URL with id-type “ROR”, for example:\nFunding metadata\n\u0026#34;funder\u0026#34;: [ { \u0026#34;award\u0026#34;: [ \u0026#34;10.3030/725840\u0026#34; ], \u0026#34;id\u0026#34;: [ { \u0026#34;id\u0026#34;: \u0026#34;https://ror.org/02twcfp32\u0026#34;, \u0026#34;id-type\u0026#34;: \u0026#34;ROR\u0026#34;, \u0026#34;asserted-by\u0026#34;: \u0026#34;publisher\u0026#34; } ] } ], Grant funder information\n\u0026#34;funding\u0026#34;: [ { \u0026#34;type\u0026#34;: \u0026#34;infrastructure\u0026#34;, \u0026#34;award-amount\u0026#34;: { \u0026#34;amount\u0026#34;: 750.0, \u0026#34;currency\u0026#34;: \u0026#34;USD\u0026#34;, \u0026#34;percentage\u0026#34;: 75 }, \u0026#34;funder\u0026#34;: { \u0026#34;id\u0026#34;: [ { \u0026#34;id\u0026#34;: \u0026#34;https://ror.org/02twcfp32\u0026#34;, \u0026#34;id-type\u0026#34;: \u0026#34;ROR\u0026#34;, \u0026#34;asserted-by\u0026#34;: \u0026#34;publisher\u0026#34; } ] } } ] } ], If you have any questions or feedback, get in touch with us support@crossref.org !\n",
"headings": ["Open Funder Registry-ROR transition","Including ROR IDs in Crossref metadata","ROR IDs in JSON outputs"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/community/special-programs/25years/",
"title": "Crossref celebrating 25 years",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2025-03-05",
"lastmod_ts": 1741132800,
"section": "Get involved",
"tags": [],
"description": "25 years of enabling open science Our beginning demonstrated the need for collaboration from across the research ecosystem to improve research integrity and more responsible practices with better transparency. Now 25 years later, we remain community-led and responsibly driven to continue improving practices and research integrity.\nCrossref 25th anniversary timeline Community is at our core We could not do what we do without your support and community backing. You help us make research objects easy to find, cite, link, assess, and reuse. A huge THANK YOU from the entire Crossref team.\n",
"content": "25 years of enabling open science Our beginning demonstrated the need for collaboration from across the research ecosystem to improve research integrity and more responsible practices with better transparency. Now 25 years later, we remain community-led and responsibly driven to continue improving practices and research integrity.\nCrossref 25th anniversary timeline Community is at our core We could not do what we do without your support and community backing. You help us make research objects easy to find, cite, link, assess, and reuse. A huge THANK YOU from the entire Crossref team.\nWhat our community says Our community spans far and wide, from across the research ecosystem. Over the years, we have seen the use of metadata evolve and change how valuable research and data are showcased in new and exciting ways. Discover our community contributions from across the world celebrating our 25 years of collaboration, and diverse network supporting better metadata.\nAs part of our celebrations, we invite you to share your birthday message. Simply, take a video on your phone, recording device or through Teams/Zoom, for example, with two pointers:\nCrossref is celebrating 25 years. How has Crossref impacted the publishing/research community over the last 25 years? Please give us a happy 25th birthday message for Crossref Don’t worry about editing - send us your raw recording and we will make any edits required.\n+- We have created some helpful tips to improve your recording:\rMinimize background noise: choose a quiet space to ensure your message is clear, easy to hear and more accessible. Avoid windows behind you: position yourself so that there are no windows in the background, as this can cause glare and distract from your message. Framing: aim for a head-and-shoulders or head-and-top-half shot. This framing helps create a more personal and conversational feel. Distance from the camera: try not to sit too close to the screen; a comfortable distance will make your video more engaging. Speak in your local language: feel free to share your message in your native language. Send your video using our designated form, and we will add it to our playlist. By sending us your video, you consent to it being used for marketing purposes. Do get in contact should you want to remove at any time.\nEvents planned as part of our celebration throughout the year Crossref Metadata Excellence Awards Crossref held its first-ever metadata excellence awards for members exemplifying the best practices in metadata curation, which took place during our Midyear Community Call on 7 May. Meet six winners of the first ever Crossref Metadata Awards! Get Involved Colleagues missing from photo are Mike Gill, Kathleen Luscheck, Maria Sullivan, Patience Mbum, Ryan McFall, Sally Jennings, Shayn Smulyan, Dima Safonov, Evans Atoni, Irene Mokeira, and Panos Pandis.\nThis anniversary isn\u0026rsquo;t just ours—it\u0026rsquo;s yours too. Here’s how you can participate:\nContribute to our shared knowledge base—submit your metadata use cases or Crossref success stories.\nEngage on social media using the hashtag #CrossrefAt25\nWant to do something special with your organisation? Contact our community team to brainstorm.\n",
"headings": ["25 years of enabling open science","Community is at our core","What our community says","As part of our celebrations, we invite you to share your birthday message.","Events planned as part of our celebration throughout the year","Crossref Metadata Excellence Awards","Get Involved"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/funder-registry/",
"title": "Open Funder Registry",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2025-03-02",
"lastmod_ts": 1740873600,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": " The Open Funder Registry (OFR, formerly FundRef) and associated funding metadata allows everyone to have transparency into research funding and its outcomes. It’s an open and unique registry of persistent identifiers for grant-giving organisations around the world. It is good practice for authors to acknowledge support for and contributions to their research in their published articles. This support may be financial, such as a grant or salary award; or practical, such as the use or loan of specialist facilities and equipment. They do this by listing the funding agency and the grant number somewhere in their article - usually the first or last page, or in the acknowledgments or footnotes section. Members contribute by depositing the funding acknowledgements from their publications as part of their standard metadata, together with the unique funder IDs listed in the OFR. The deposit should include funder names, funder IDs, and associated grant numbers.\n",
"content": " The Open Funder Registry (OFR, formerly FundRef) and associated funding metadata allows everyone to have transparency into research funding and its outcomes. It’s an open and unique registry of persistent identifiers for grant-giving organisations around the world. It is good practice for authors to acknowledge support for and contributions to their research in their published articles. This support may be financial, such as a grant or salary award; or practical, such as the use or loan of specialist facilities and equipment. They do this by listing the funding agency and the grant number somewhere in their article - usually the first or last page, or in the acknowledgments or footnotes section. Members contribute by depositing the funding acknowledgements from their publications as part of their standard metadata, together with the unique funder IDs listed in the OFR. The deposit should include funder names, funder IDs, and associated grant numbers.\nThis means that anyone can make connections, for example, to identify which funders invest in certain fields of research. Funding data is also used by funders to track the publications that result from their grants.\nShow image × The Crossref OFR is an open registry of grant-giving organisation names and identifiers, which you use to find funder IDs and include them as part of your metadata deposits. It is a freely-downloadable RDF file. It is CC0-licensed and available to integrate with your own systems. Funder names from acknowledgements should be matched with the corresponding unique funder ID from the registry.\nYou can search funding metadata manually using our funding data search, or programmatically via our REST API. This data not only clarifies the scholarly record, but makes life easier for researchers who may need to comply with requirements to make their published results publicly available.\nWatch the introductory Open Funder Registry animation in your language: English 한국어 Japanese Chinese Español Français Bahasa Indonesia العربية Português do Brasil Benefits of the Open Funder Registry There are many benefits of clear, transparent, and measurable information on who funded research, and where it has been published. The OFR facilitates accurate funding metadata, which in turn enables multiple parties to better understand the research funding landscape:\nReaders and researchers can read and assess literature in the context of knowing who funded it; Research institutions can monitor the published outputs of their researchers; Publishers can track who is funding their authors, and check if they’re meeting funding mandates; Service providers can offer integrated time-saving features to their users; and Funders can easily track the reach and return of the work they have supported. How the Open Funder Registry works Authors acknowledge the funding sources for their research in their publications. Using the registry, members can find the unique IDs for these funders, standardize this metadata and send it to us.\nThe registry is donated by Elsevier, and is updated around every 4-6 weeks with new and updated funder records. Existing entries are also reviewed to make sure that they are accurate and up-to-date. We can then make it openly available through our funding data search and our API. If you spot anything that doesn’t look right, please let us know. You can also download a .csv file of the latest registry. Using the OFR, members can find the unique IDs for these funders, standardize this metadata to send it to us.\nObligations and fees for the Open Funder Registry The OFR is open to everyone. There are no fees for members depositing funding data. Open Funder Registry search and our API are also freely available.\nMembers must include the OFR ID for each funder if it is present in the Registry. If a funder is not in the Registry and does not have an ID, include the name of the funder.\nHow to participate in the Open Funder Registry To access the OFR, you do not need to be a member, but you need to be a member to include OFR IDs in your Crossref metadata. Anyone who’s interested can simply enter an organisation’s name into the Open Funder Registry search to view content connected to funding sources. The metadata in the registry is also openly available via our API, and as a downloadable RDF file. Learn more about accessing the OFR.\nDepositing metadata (members): collect funder names and grant numbers from your authors through your manuscript tracking system (or extract them from acknowledgements sections) and match them with the corresponding Funder IDs from the registry. Once this is done, it’s easy to add these three additional pieces of metadata - funder name, funder id, and grant number - as additional metadata in the regular Crossref content registration service. Learn more about how to collect and register funding data.\nWhenever you register content with us, make sure you include funder names and grant numbers in the submission:\nIf you are using a content registration helper tool - the Crossref XML plugin for OJS, the web deposit form, or the new Metadata Manager tool - simply enter funder names and grant numbers in the relevant fields. For OJS, you must be running at least OJS 3.1.2 and have the Crossref funding plugin enabled. If you’re depositing XML with Crossref, include your funding data in your XML. Retrieving metadata: you can view the content that has cited a particular funding source by entering the organisation’s name into the Open Funder Registry search. If you prefer a machine-readable query, use our REST API. If you have questions about how your organisation appears in the registry then please get in touch. Learn more about the OFR and our other services on our funder community page.\nShow image × Download the Open Funder Registry factsheet, and explore factsheets for other Crossref services and in different languages.\n",
"headings": ["The Open Funder Registry (OFR, formerly FundRef) and associated funding metadata allows everyone to have transparency into research funding and its outcomes. It’s an open and unique registry of persistent identifiers for grant-giving organisations around the world.","Benefits of the Open Funder Registry ","How the Open Funder Registry works ","Obligations and fees for the Open Funder Registry ","How to participate in the Open Funder Registry "]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/working-groups/similarity-check/",
"title": "Similarity Check advisory group",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2025-03-02",
"lastmod_ts": 1740873600,
"section": "Working groups",
"tags": [],
"description": "The purpose of the Similarity Check Advisory Group is to provide Crossref with policy and technical advice on changes and improvements to the Crossref Similarity Check service. The group comprises Crossref members, all of whom are active users of Similarity Check. The Similarity Check Advisory Group is led by a Chair and Crossref Facilitators, who together help to develop meeting agendas, lead discussions and outline group actions in an effort to help drive service improvements. Colleagues from Turnitin will be invited to attend meetings at the discretion of the Chair and Facilitators.\n",
"content": "The purpose of the Similarity Check Advisory Group is to provide Crossref with policy and technical advice on changes and improvements to the Crossref Similarity Check service. The group comprises Crossref members, all of whom are active users of Similarity Check. The Similarity Check Advisory Group is led by a Chair and Crossref Facilitators, who together help to develop meeting agendas, lead discussions and outline group actions in an effort to help drive service improvements. Colleagues from Turnitin will be invited to attend meetings at the discretion of the Chair and Facilitators.\nGroup members Chair: Lauren Flintoft, IOP Publishing\nFacilitators: Lena Stoll, Crossref; Madhura Amdekar, Crossref\nAdya Misra, Sage Barbara Ryan, Association for Computing Machinery Corrie Petterson, Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers Shelly Shochat, Karger Helen Beynon, BMJ Jack Patterson, Wiley John Dufour, American Chemical Society John Sivo, Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers Jyoti Bajaj, Taylor \u0026amp; Francis Lois Jones, American Psychological Association Mihail Grecea, Elsevier Jaya Venkitachalam, Frontiers Sam Parsons, IOP Publishing Tamara Welschot, Springer Nature (co-Chair) How the group works (and the guidelines) With the exception of Crossref staff, the group will be limited to one representative from each participating publisher, unless particular agenda items or topics call for additional expertise from additional colleagues or departments from within a single organisation. Members are, however, free to discuss the information shared during meetings with colleagues or any external party. Members can choose to leave the Advisory Group at any time but are asked to send their resignation in writing to the Chair and Facilitators.\nAdvisory Group members commit to attend all meetings by conference call, and may choose to send a named proxy if they are not available. The schedule of meetings is at the discretion of the Chair and Facilitators and may vary depending on whether there are relevant topics for discussion but are usually held three - four times per year. Notes are circulated by the Facilitator after each call, and any members who were unable to attend a call are asked to ensure they read these and take note of any action items.\nMembers are asked not to invite colleagues or any external party to join Advisory Group meetings unless they have discussed this with the Chair and Facilitators prior to the call. This ensures a consistency in development approach and a level of fluency during meetings.\nPlease contact Lena Stoll with any questions or to apply to join the advisory group.\n",
"headings": ["Group members","How the group works (and the guidelines)"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/the-gem-program-year-two-2024/",
"title": "The GEM program - Year Two 2024",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2025-02-27",
"lastmod_ts": 1740614400,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "We began our Global Equitable Membership (GEM) Program to provide greater membership equitability and accessibility to organisations in the world\u0026rsquo;s least economically advantaged countries. Eligibility for the program is based on a member\u0026rsquo;s country; our list of countries is predominantly based on the International Development Association (IDA). Eligible members pay no membership or content registration fees. The list undergoes periodic reviews, as countries may be added or removed over time as economic situations change.\n",
"content": "We began our Global Equitable Membership (GEM) Program to provide greater membership equitability and accessibility to organisations in the world\u0026rsquo;s least economically advantaged countries. Eligibility for the program is based on a member\u0026rsquo;s country; our list of countries is predominantly based on the International Development Association (IDA). Eligible members pay no membership or content registration fees. The list undergoes periodic reviews, as countries may be added or removed over time as economic situations change.\nThe program began in January 2023 with 214 existing members; and 131 more joined throughout the year. In 2024, we saw 127 organisations joining via the GEM program, bringing the total number of participants to 458. We welcomed our first-ever members from Sierra Leone and Honduras, as well as our first Sponsor in Bangladesh (Sponsors are organisations that work with us to provide administrative, billing, technical, and local language support to the members they work with).\nOf 458 organisations participating in the GEM program, 380 are independent members, 77 are sponsored, and there is one sponsoring organisation. To date, these members have contributed over 279,000 works to the Research Nexus, our concept of a fully connected global scholarly ecosystem.\nThough we have Sponsors based elsewhere, working with members who are in GEM countries (e.g. PKP), we will continue to consult with our ambassadors and other partners to identify potential new sponsors that are based in GEM countries.\nNumber of Crossref GEM members by country: GEM Country (Alphabetically) Total No. of Members Afghanistan 17 Bangladesh 120 Benin 5 Bhutan 6 Burkina Faso 4 Burundi 2 Cambodia 8 Central African Republic 1 Congo, Democratic Republic 15 Ethiopia 13 Ghana 27 Guyana 2 Haiti 1 Honduras 1 Kosovo 8 Kyrgyz Republic 23 Lao, People\u0026rsquo;s Democratic Republic 2 Madagascar 4 Malawi 2 GEM Country (Alphabetically) Total No. of Members Maldives 3 Mali 3 Mauritania 1 Mozambique 2 Myanmar 1 Nepal 50 Nicaragua 2 Rwanda 7 Senegal 7 Sierra Leone 1 Somalia 9 Sri Lanka 14 Sudan 19 Tajikistan 4 Tanzania, United Republic of 21 Togo 1 Uganda 17 Yemen 30 Zambia 5 Number of Crossref members in GEM Program Countries We are excited about our in-person event taking place in a few weeks in Accra, Ghana, as a direct result of the increasing participation and interest in Crossref from the region.\nWe can see a clear connection between outreach activities conducted by us and our Ambassadors and the increase in awareness and the number of members joining from related countries. These were Bangladesh, Nepal, Uganda, and Tanzania in 2023, and Ghana, Zambia, Sri Lanka, and Tanzania in 2024.\nFrom our Ambassadors’ activities in the GEM countries, some recurring questions emerged highlighting barriers to joining Crossref. It’s important to recognise that many institutions struggle with funding and technical expertise. It’s no surprise that they are often concerned with the maintenance of their membership over the long term. We emphasize that GEM is a sustained measure to accommodate knowledge-sharing organisations from the regions of financial strain. Whilst the program addresses the costs of membership and content registration, our Ambassadors can assist further, offering technical support with record registration, metadata best practices, and integrating Crossref services with existing systems, including Open Journal Systems (OJS); and discuss how registering metadata improves research visibility.\nWe are grateful to our Ambassadors for directly supporting the GEM program within their countries through webinars and presenting in person at conferences: Shaharima Parvin and MD Jahangir in Bangladesh, Richard Bruce Lamptey in Ghana, Niranjan Koirala in Nepal, Oumy Ndiaye in Senegal, Lasith Gunawardena in Sri Lanka, and Baraka Manjale Ngussa in Tanzania.\n",
"headings": ["Number of Crossref GEM members by country:","Number of Crossref members in GEM Program Countries"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/categories/rest-api/",
"title": "REST API",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Categories",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/categories/retraction-watch/",
"title": "Retraction Watch",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Categories",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/retraction-watch-retractions-now-in-the-crossref-api/",
"title": "Retraction Watch retractions now in the Crossref API",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2025-01-29",
"lastmod_ts": 1738108800,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "Retractions and corrections from Retraction Watch are now available in Crossref’s REST API. Back in September 2023, we announced the acquisition of the Retraction Watch database with an ongoing shared service. Since then, they have sent us regular updates, which are publicly available as a csv file. Our aim has always been to better integrate these retractions with our existing metadata, and today we’ve met that goal.\n",
"content": "Retractions and corrections from Retraction Watch are now available in Crossref’s REST API. Back in September 2023, we announced the acquisition of the Retraction Watch database with an ongoing shared service. Since then, they have sent us regular updates, which are publicly available as a csv file. Our aim has always been to better integrate these retractions with our existing metadata, and today we’ve met that goal.\nThis is the first time we have supplemented our metadata with a third-party data source. Until now, our APIs have included metadata provided by Crossref members along with outputs from our internal enrichment workflows, such as matches found for bibliographic reference matching and funders. Third party metadata has been gathered in Event Data, but this has been stored and delivered separately.\nKnowing when work has been retracted is critical for assessing the integrity of research, and this enhancement of the data will be a great benefit to the community.\nWhere does the data come from? Retraction Watch carefully curates retractions, pulling them from several non-Crossref sources, including PubMed and publisher websites. Each entry is manually checked and annotated before being added to the database. The high level of curation and broad coverage is what made a partnership between Crossref and Retraction Watch attractive, and our shared goal of making changes to metadata more visible.\n\u0026ldquo;Our goal with the Retraction Watch Database has always been for it to be as useful to as many people as possible, and available from as many sources as possible,” says Ivan Oransky, co-founder of Retraction Watch and executive director of The Center For Scientific Integrity, its parent nonprofit organisation. “Integration with Crossref’s REST API is a huge step in that direction.”\nWhere can I see the retractions? If you use a service that collects Crossref metadata, you will start to see the Retraction Watch retractions as they are picked up. To access the data directly, you can find retractions from both Crossref members and Retraction Watch in our REST API, for example with the following request for all retractions:\nhttps://api.crossref.org/v1/works?filter=update-type:retraction\nOr for an individual record:\nhttps://api.crossref.org/v1/works/10.1177/17588359231172420\nIn the results here you will see an update-to field:\n\u0026#34;update-to\u0026#34;: [ { \u0026#34;updated\u0026#34;: { \u0026#34;date-parts\u0026#34;: [ [2023,4,22] ], \u0026#34;date-time\u0026#34;: \u0026#34;2023-04-22T00:00:00Z\u0026#34;, \u0026#34;timestamp\u0026#34;: 1682121600000 }, \u0026#34;DOI\u0026#34;: \u0026#34;10.1177/1758835920922055\u0026#34;, \u0026#34;type\u0026#34;: \u0026#34;retraction\u0026#34;, \u0026#34;source\u0026#34;: \u0026#34;publisher\u0026#34;, \u0026#34;label\u0026#34;: \u0026#34;Retraction\u0026#34; }, { \u0026#34;updated\u0026#34;: { \u0026#34;date-parts\u0026#34;: [ [2023,4,22] ], \u0026#34;date-time\u0026#34;: \u0026#34;2023-04-22T00:00:00Z\u0026#34;, \u0026#34;timestamp\u0026#34;: 1682121600000 }, \u0026#34;DOI\u0026#34;: 10.1177/17588359231172420\u0026#34;, \u0026#34;type\u0026#34;: \u0026#34;retraction\u0026#34;, \u0026#34;source\u0026#34;: \u0026#34;retraction-watch\u0026#34;, \u0026#34;label\u0026#34;: \u0026#34;Retraction\u0026#34;, \u0026#34;record-id\u0026#34;: 44124 } ] The source field states where the retraction came from. Currently, it can have two values: publisher or retraction-watch. Note that the same retraction may be included multiple times from different sources.\nRetraction Watch retractions will remain available on Gitlab in csv format and be updated on working days. The record-id refers to the entry in the csv file with further details, such as the reason for retraction.\nThere is full documentation available for the Crossref REST API and if you are new to REST APIs, see our learning hub to get started which includes a tutorial about accessing retractions.\nWhat can I do with the retractions? Like the rest of our metadata, the retractions are freely available. If you use or operate a tool that ingests retractions, the new entries will start to be picked up immediately. The Retraction Watch database includes a larger number of retractions than the Crossref database, so you should see an increase in the total.\nWe have heard from organisations that would like to build new research integrity tools based on this data. We look forward to seeing the benefits brought by wider availability of the Retraction Watch retractions, and how they can provide better context to research outputs.\nWhile Crossref metadata is freely available to reuse without a license, if you make use of the Retraction Watch retraction metadata in a published work, we kindly request that you provide a citation to the source.\nIf you have questions or comments, please head over to the section of our forum dedicated to integrity of the scholarly record.\n",
"headings": ["Where does the data come from?","Where can I see the retractions?","What can I do with the retractions?"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/categories/posi/",
"title": "POSI",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Categories",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/posi-2.0-feedback/",
"title": "POSI 2.0 feedback",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2025-01-28",
"lastmod_ts": 1738022400,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "As a provider of foundational open scholarly infrastructure, Crossref is an adopter of the Principles of Open Scholarly Infrastructure (POSI). In December 2024 we posted our updated POSI self-assessment. POSI provides an invaluable framework for transparency, accountability, susatinability and community alignment. There are 21 other POSI adopters.\n",
"content": "As a provider of foundational open scholarly infrastructure, Crossref is an adopter of the Principles of Open Scholarly Infrastructure (POSI). In December 2024 we posted our updated POSI self-assessment. POSI provides an invaluable framework for transparency, accountability, susatinability and community alignment. There are 21 other POSI adopters.\nTogether, we are now undertaking a public consultation on proposed revisions for a version 2.0 release of the principles, which would update the current version 1.1 of the principles, released in November 2023.\nThis is a crucial step in ensuring that POSI evolves to meet the needs of the community. Whether you are part of an organisation that has adopted POSI, is considering adoption, interacts with POSI-aligned groups, or you have a personal interest in open scholarly infrastructure, your perspective is invaluable.\nSome additional context about POSI POSI is not an organisation; POSI adopters are an informal group of those that have conducted self-assessments.\nThe POSI principles are not rules or a checklist; organisations or groups can adopt or interpret them to fit many different circumstances.\nOur goal is for POSI self-assessments to be made publicly available and for interested communities to assess and monitor updates and progress.\nHow to Participate If your organisation has adopted POSI, is considering adoption, interacts with POSI-aligned groups, or you have a personal interest in open scholarly infrastructure, your perspective is invaluable.\nReview the Proposed POSI 2.0 Revisions.\nShare your thoughts via our short survey.\nDeadline: March 5, 2025\nTogether, we can shape the future of open scholarly infrastructure. Join the conversation and make your voice heard!\n",
"headings": ["Some additional context about POSI","How to Participate"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/authors/adam-buttrick/",
"title": "Adam Buttrick",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Authors",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/metadata-matching-beyond-correctness/",
"title": "Metadata matching: beyond correctness",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2025-01-08",
"lastmod_ts": 1736294400,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "In our previous entry, we explained that thorough evaluation is key to understanding a matching strategy\u0026rsquo;s performance. While evaluation is what allows us to assess the correctness of matching, choosing the best matching strategy is, unfortunately, not as simple as selecting the one that yields the best matches. Instead, these decisions usually depend on weighing multiple factors based on your particular circumstances. This is true not only for metadata matching, but for many technical choices that require navigating trade-offs. In this blog post, the last one in the metadata matching series, we outline a subjective set of criteria we would recommend you consider when making decisions about matching.\n",
"content": "In our previous entry, we explained that thorough evaluation is key to understanding a matching strategy\u0026rsquo;s performance. While evaluation is what allows us to assess the correctness of matching, choosing the best matching strategy is, unfortunately, not as simple as selecting the one that yields the best matches. Instead, these decisions usually depend on weighing multiple factors based on your particular circumstances. This is true not only for metadata matching, but for many technical choices that require navigating trade-offs. In this blog post, the last one in the metadata matching series, we outline a subjective set of criteria we would recommend you consider when making decisions about matching.\nOpenness Matching tools come in many different shapes and sizes: web applications, APIs, command-line tools, sometimes even enchanted crystal balls showing matched identifiers emerging from a mysterious mist! No matter what form they take, an important consideration is whether the source code and all the related resources for the matching are openly available.\nMatching strategies that are either closed-source, or rely on closed-source services for their matching logic, make it difficult to fully understand and explain matching processes. This lack of transparency also makes it impossible to adjust or improve the matching logic, since we cannot understand or improve code we cannot see.\nUsers are similarly impeded from identifying flaws or suggesting improvements to processes they are unable to examine. By blocking this community participation, we also lose the proven cycle of real-world testing, refinement, and validation that has strengthened myriad of open source projects. The cumulative impact of both minor and major community-driven refinements over time is incredibly valuable and should not be underestimated.\nUsing open source matching will also help build trust in the matching workflows and results. This is one reason why open source is one of the tenets of the Principles of Open Scholarly Infrastructure, adopted by Crossref, DataCite, ROR, and other organisations who build and maintain open scholarly infrastructure.\nWhen evaluating matching strategies, we strongly recommend prioritizing those that are fully open source. This not only ensures their transparency and trustworthiness, but also allows for the kind of continuous improvement that results from this visibility and community engagement.\nExplainability In terms of our ability to understand and improve a matching strategy, using an open source model is only the first step. What typically matters most in the context of building and maintaining matching services is that we are able to understand their underlying code and have a clear model of how matches are derived from their corresponding inputs. Even if the matching code itself and all of the resources used in the matching are open, if they are poorly documented, lack reproducibility or tests, or are otherwise opaque, there is no guarantee that it will be possible to understand or improve the strategy. Striving for a high level of interpretability in our matching plays a determinative role in how well we can understand and modify our strategies in the future.\nBeing able to explain the behaviour of the matching will also help you to respond to and incorporate user feedback. When users encounter errors, you will be able to do things like advise them on how to modify or clean their inputs so that the results are better. Conversely, examining the behaviour of the strategy relative to user inputs and feedback can provide you with ideas for improving the matching.\nTypically, heuristic-based strategies, such as those that use forms of search or string similarity measures, like edit distance, are easier to explain than, say, machine learning models. If a strategy uses machine learning, at least some internal decisions might be made by passing data through a complex network of algebraic equations. Those can be mysterious, non-deterministic, and are famous for being hard to interpret. This doesn\u0026rsquo;t mean they should be avoided entirely - we have built and use many machine-learning based tools ourselves! Instead, it is a good idea to weigh how their inherent lack of explainability could affect your ability to continue work on the strategy and respond to user needs, relative to all the available options.\nComplexity Complexity is another aspect that can greatly affect how easy it is to maintain the strategy. Complexity is related to how many different components the strategy has and how difficult they are to use and maintain. When a strategy has multiple interconnected parts, each component becomes a potential failure point that requires discrete assessment and maintenance.\nConsider, for example, two different approaches to a matching strategy: one that uses a single machine learning model versus another that uses an ensemble of models. A single model requires maintaining one set of training data, a single training pipeline, and one deployment process. If the model\u0026rsquo;s performance unexpectedly deteriorates, whether because of an issue with the training data, a configuration error, or the need for additional input sanitization, the source of the problem is easier to isolate and fix.\nThe ensemble, by contrast, combines multiple, specialized models, each requiring its own training data, tests, updates, and deployments. If one model in the ensemble is found to reduce the performance of the strategy, the interdependence between models can cause this degradation to cascade through the entire system and undermine its overall reliability. Correcting for these errors becomes more challenging. If fixing one model\u0026rsquo;s performance requires retraining or adjusting its outputs, this could require recalibrating the entire ensemble to maintain the balance between models, identify regressions, and prevent new errors from emerging.\nIn general, preferring simpler strategies not only reduces operational overhead, but also makes it easier to diagnose issues, test changes, and iterate on user feedback. When problems arise, having fewer moving parts means less places to look for the root cause and fewer components that could be affected by any fixes.\nFlexibility The metadata to which we match grows and changes over time. New records are created, existing ones are updated, with schemas changing and evolving alongside. The resources that underlie our matching are also not static. The libraries we depend on may deprecate features between versions or the taxonomies we used to categorize results might undergo significant revisions. We thus rarely have the luxury of deploying a matching strategy once and using it forever without any changes. A good strategy has to be flexible enough to adapt to such changes, with this adaptation also being both technically feasible and practical to implement.\nMuch of this flexibility is also determined by a matching strategy\u0026rsquo;s ability to incorporate new data. Strategies that use continuously updated databases or indices can immediately match against new metadata as it appears in the system. By contrast, some machine learning-based approaches require training on target matches and can thus be limited in flexibility and face more constraints. While some models can be incrementally updated to recognize new matches, others require retraining from scratch to incorporate these changes - a process that can be both time-consuming and resource-intensive.\nPaying close attention to a strategy\u0026rsquo;s flexibility and favoring this aspect, when possible, can significantly impact its long-term viability. When comparing different matching strategies, flexibility should thus be a primary concern in your decision-making process.\nResources Matching strategies can vary significantly in their resource requirements, including things like CPU and GPU utilization, memory consumption, storage capacity, and network bandwidth. These requirements are directly related to infrastructure costs and energy consumption, so when evaluating a matching strategy, it is necessary to assess its resource demands across all phases of the matching lifecycle. This includes things like initial model training, re-training, index construction, updates and management for all aspects of the strategy, as well as the real-world processing of matching requests. It is a good idea to measure and monitor resource usage carefully in considering which strategies to use, as the best performing strategy may also be too resource intensive to run as a service or might grow to this state over time with additional utilization.\nSpeed Matching strategies can operate at a wide range of speeds, from milliseconds to minutes per match. Since the overall response time of a strategy can affect both system scalability and user experience, we should always assess the strategy\u0026rsquo;s performance for different usage scenarios and scales of data. While some strategies might perform adequately with small datasets, they can also exhibit exponential slowdowns as data volume and complexity increases or as concurrent requests grow in number. We should therefore consider carefully how requirements for matching speed might evolve with increased usage, data complexity, and total anticipated growth. The fastest matching strategy might not always be the best choice if it comes at the cost of reduced accuracy or requires large amounts of resources, but unacceptable latency can make an otherwise excellent strategy unusable in practice for many use cases.\nPutting it all together The typical life cycle of developing a metadata matching strategy is as follows:\nScoping: we define the matching task, along with its inputs and outputs. Research: we research what existing strategies are available for our task and/or we develop our own. Evaluation: we evaluate all available strategies, internally or externally-developed, exploring all of the aspects described above. Decision: we choose which strategy (if any) we want to use in our production system. Production setup: we prepare the production models, indexes, and other resources needed for the matching. Maintenance: we monitor and adapt the strategy relative to changing data, user feedback, and new resource requirements. In practice, these phases do not happen all at once, nor in this strict order. Often we need to proceed through multiple iterations of them to arrive at the best strategy. For example, if initial evaluation of a strategy yields poor results, we might return to the research phase to investigate other strategies or refine our understanding of the task. Often, during the maintenance phase, we receive feedback from users that indicates potential areas of improvement and then pursue them with a new round of research and evaluation.\nAs we cycle through these phases, ideally all the aspects described in this entry, along with the results of the evaluation, would be taken into account. Of course, this means that these decisions have to be based on multiple criteria and by making trade-offs between their performance and all other considerations. In making these complex and difficult choices, it is useful to consider two primary questions:\nAre any of the considered matching strategies good enough for our use case? Out of all the considered strategies that are sufficient for our use case, which would be the best? The first question requires us to create clear and quantifiable criteria that allow for eliminating some of the potential strategies. As we have indicated, these could include things like the strategy being open source, minimum performance baselines using measures like precision or recall, and operational thresholds, like the strategy being able to return results quickly, relative to user expectations or the volume of data to be processed. It should be fairly easy to test these requirements and eliminate any strategies that fall short of them. If the strategies are difficult to assess, that is likely a mark against them.\nIf no strategies meet these criteria, we have two options: either to abandon matching entirely or to reassess and relax our criteria to align with the available options. While the former is always an option, adopting a more pragmatic lens, framing in terms of potential value (or harm) to the users, might be beneficial. Sometimes we approach matching tasks with too high expectations and a dose of realism helps us to re-center our perspectives. After more consideration, you might decide that your criteria were too stringent or realize that you need to better define and decompose the tasks to fit the available options.\nWhen multiple strategies appear viable, the selection process becomes more nuanced. When evaluating strategies across these various dimensions, we should try to avoid placing undue weight on minor performance differences. Evaluation metrics are useful estimates of performance, but do not always translate to real-world applications and changing data. In cases where a more complex strategy offers only marginal improvements over a simpler alternative, the maintenance and operational benefits of the simpler solution often outweigh small performance gains.\nThis concludes our series on metadata matching, where we described the conceptual, product, and technical aspects of matching and its applications. We hope this overview was instructive and helps you to make better decisions about the use of matching in your own tools and services!\n",
"headings": ["Openness","Explainability","Complexity","Flexibility","Resources","Speed","Putting it all together"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/archives/2024/",
"title": "2024",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Archives",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/a-progress-update-and-a-renewed-commitment-to-community/",
"title": "A progress update and a renewed commitment to community",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2024-12-12",
"lastmod_ts": 1733961600,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "Looking back over 2024, we wanted to reflect on where we are in meeting our goals, and report on the progress and plans that affect you - our community of 21,000 organisational members as well as the vast number of research initiatives and scientific bodies that rely on Crossref metadata.\nIn this post, we will give an update on our roadmap, including what is completed, underway, and up next, and a bit about what\u0026rsquo;s paused and why. We\u0026rsquo;ll describe how we have been making resourcing and prioritisation decisions, including a revised management structure, and introduce new cross-functional program groups to collectively take the work forward more effectively.\n",
"content": "Looking back over 2024, we wanted to reflect on where we are in meeting our goals, and report on the progress and plans that affect you - our community of 21,000 organisational members as well as the vast number of research initiatives and scientific bodies that rely on Crossref metadata.\nIn this post, we will give an update on our roadmap, including what is completed, underway, and up next, and a bit about what\u0026rsquo;s paused and why. We\u0026rsquo;ll describe how we have been making resourcing and prioritisation decisions, including a revised management structure, and introduce new cross-functional program groups to collectively take the work forward more effectively.\nIt’s important to acknowledge that Crossref has evolved significantly from just five years ago - our member count has more than doubled from 10,000 to 21,000 organisations since 2019 and they include all kinds of organisations such as funders, universities, government bodies, NGOs, and of course scholar- and library-led publishers. The smaller organisations now collectively contribute the majority of Crossref funding. We’ve gone from 100 million records to 160 million in five years, and our metadata is retrieved more than 2 billion times monthly, quadrupling what it was five years ago.\nIt’s within this context that we’ve spent quite a lot of time thinking about scalability, how we collect and process feedback and contributions from many organisations, how to automate our operations, and refining the plans for the next few years.\nOur strategic agenda remains the same A few times a year we update the strategy page where there is a quadrant of projects showing what’s completed, in progress, up next, and in planning/ideas - for each strategic theme. We also link from there to our live public roadmap which shows more specifics about individual projects, including projected timelines, and is updated more frequently.\nIf you’ve been watching the strategy page, checking in on the public roadmap or this blog, or joining webinars and annual meetings, you’ll know that we’ve had some longstanding plans to—among other things—reduce technical debt, rebuild our metadata management system, move to the cloud, modernise our schema, support multiple languages, and partner with multiple data sources to build the Research Nexus.\nYou’ve heard us talk about these initiatives a lot, but you\u0026rsquo;ve not seen particularly swift action.\nMoving the work forward more effectively Earlier this year, it became clear that our almost three-year project to build a new relationships API had not worked out. The project, dubbed ‘manifold’, was to initially deliver data citations, and eventually replace our central metadata system, but what was prototyped didn’t scale, even with a subset of our metadata. We weren’t confident enough about the project’s timeline or costs to justifiably continue investing further time and resources.\nMeanwhile, we’d barely scratched the surface of our aim to pay down technical and operational debt, and we’d also been neglecting to keep the live system up to date with the numerous metadata changes that have been queued up, waiting to be implemented.\nWe knew the manifold project was ambitious – our system has grown in complexity over the years. We were trying to rebuild the car while driving it (our system needed to continue to operate and be maintained by our team) while trying to design a new approach to manage the many relationships between 160+ million database records. In the years we worked on this project, we learned a lot that will inform future plans for a large system redesign.\nIn March this year, we decided to pause the manifold project. We apologised to our community partners for not delivering the promised data\u0026lt;-\u0026gt;literature matches they hoped to use. They were frustrated but thankfully understanding.\nWe then resolved to focus on backend infrastructural changes, conduct cross-training so that all of our staff would become familiar with current in-use systems instead of greenfield tech (for now), and start to make a dent in the backlog of bugs and long-promised schema updates in our mainstream services.\nWe’re happy to report some movement on these things and some milestones that have been achieved in these areas in recent months.\nFostering a happy and dedicated team Any kind of work can only happen when our staff are in a good place, feeling supported and comfortable to question things, and well-equipped with information, purpose, and clear priorities. In June, when the whole staff met up in person, we had some really good conversations about culture, communication, and about sharing responsibilities. Some people ran birds-of-a-feather sessions to explore the issues that had been keeping them up at night, such as authentication/security, and rebuilding the Crossref System (CS), and the team also co-created a set of prioritisation drivers that are now in use within our roadmap and planning processes.\nTaking on feedback from the all-staff meeting and then the July board meeting, we thought strategically about the organisational structure Crossref would need over the next few years to reflect the growth in scope and size, and fulfil its longer term goals. We have long had an ambitious agenda but realised we didn’t yet have the capacity to do it all. So we came to the conclusion that we needed an updated team and management structure to take us through the next phase of our development.\nThe structural changes were concluded at the end of November. They included:\nMoving Technology under Operations, since Technology\u0026mdash;though a vital enabler\u0026mdash;still works in service to our mission and in support of our community, just like other operational things like board governance and finance. Reframing product development as Programs and Services, and reducing our workstreams from five product portfolios to three programs. We formed cross-team steering groups around clearly articulated program areas (more on those below). Broadening the leadership to include an Executive team and an extended Director team, and forming a Senior Management Team (SMT). These changes ensure that the collective responsibility for Crossref now rests on a wider group of experts who can back each other up and share the risk and the knowledge, rather than on just a few individuals. We started recruiting for directors for two new leadership positions. We’ll welcome a new Director of Programs and Services and a new Director of Technology in the new year. Evolving the strategic initiatives team into a data science team, integrating research \u0026amp; development functions throughout all teams and with the SMT taking collective responsibility for strategic initiatives. Unfortunately, with the shift in approach for product development and by sharing responsibility for strategic initiatives and research among the wider team, we made the difficult decision that four positions would no longer work within the new structure.\nA new approach: joined-up initiatives and cross-functional programs Research has always been an important role for Crossref, but as this function had been annexed from our regular work, it became hard to coordinate strategic initiatives across the wider organisation. In recent years we inadvertently created more technical debt for ourselves, i.e., built multiple prototype tools without plans for adoption or moving them into production. Strategic initiatives, by their nature, need thorough research and high-level alignment, so we made such initiatives—things like Resourcing Crossref for Future Sustainability (RCFS) and improving the Integrity of the Scholarly record (ISR)—the responsibility of the whole senior management team.\nSome useful research had been conducted, but we were never in a position to act on any of it. Particularly promising work has been in the field of metadata matching, and with the growth in the community reliance on our metadata, and attention on data quality rightly increasing, we decided to create a new data science team to be dedicated to this work, led by Dominika Tkaczyk.\nWe had also struggled with a traditional product management approach since all our tools and activities are interconnected, and we found we were trying to do too many things at once but not all of them very effectively. We also acknowledged that product management comes from the commercial e.g. retail world and therefore is designed to help companies sell/upsell, which is not our goal. So we looked to other approaches more suitable to mission-based nonprofits.\nIntroducing three programs We have introduced cross-functional program management in order to work towards the following:\nbetter cross-team alignment shared responsibility improve communication and learning make more progress on the things members need. Supporting the strategic theme of co-creation, a new program, facilitated by Program Lead Lena Stoll, now manages and oversees all activities around co-creation and community trends. A cross-team steering group just began meeting regularly and will be responsible for interfaces such as reports/dashboards, record registration interfaces, connections and collaborations such as Open Funder Registry, ROR, ORCID auto-update, as well as OJS and other partner integrations. This program also includes the Crossref website and any front-end things to support other programs. And it includes ISR (the integrity of the scholarly record) and our tools in this area such as Crossmark and retraction/correction tooling, and Similarity Check for text comparisons.\nSupporting the strategic theme of complete and global metadata and relationships, a new program, facilitated by Program Lead Martyn Rittman, now manages and oversees all activities relating to contributing to the Research Nexus. Working particularly closely with the metadata team, led by Patricia Feeney, this program addresses how metadata is modelled, used, enriched, and extended. Work includes our APIs, incorporating external data sources like Retraction Watch and Event Data, building out metadata matching services with the new data science team, supporting the community of metadata users with API sprints and more modern options for retrieving metadata based on usage and need.\nSupporting the strategic theme of open and sustainable operations and keeping to the POSI framework, a new program, facilitated by Program Lead Sara Bowman, now manages and oversees all activities relating to making our operations more open, transparent, and sustainable. This program focuses on supporting and strengthening the core functions our members rely on and enabling future growth. It includes metadata deposit and processing, most apps for e.g. managing titles, authentication, and architectural and infrastructural projects like moving from the data centre to the AWS cloud service. This program also includes modernising our operations in general, which is not just technology but also finance and human resources, so projects like membership process automation, fee modelling and financial analyses, and business system integrations.\nThe Programs will start to be reflected across our website and in our communications from next year.\nWhat are Crossref\u0026rsquo;s new prioritisation drivers? These are the drivers that our ~40 staff co-created in June that are guiding decisions about the priorities on our roadmap. New ideas will be evaluated in the following areas:\nEncourage participation from new or under-represented communities Respond to and lead trends in scholarly communications Benefit the greatest number of members and users Reflect on how the community works with each other and allow members to self-serve Expand to support and connect relevant resource types and metadata fields Make it easier to create and update metadata Enhance metadata for completeness and accuracy Make it easier to retrieve and use metadata Automate repetitive/manual tasks Address technical and operational debt Maintain critical systems and operations and ensure their security Control or reduce costs - to Crossref, our community, or the environment We’re happy to report that the changes made this year have resulted in a productive last few months of the year. As reported in our annual meeting, here is the progress update.\nWhat’s paused A relationships API endpoint and, therefore, a specific data citation feed Manifold, the three-year effort to modernise our tech stack Most of the strategic initiatives prototypes that can’t yet be scaled, such as Labs API and Labs reports What’s recently completed We succeeded in moving the entire Crossref corpus to an open-source database, PostgreSQL Fixed numerous REST API data quality issues and lots of troublesome bugs Schema development - support for ROR as a Funder identifier is live and currently in testing We automated some very manual membership and billing processes, saving hundreds of staff hours a year Released a new form for journal article record registration, building on the grant registration form Upgraded Participation Reports to include Affiliations and ROR IDs Launched a new API Learning Hub Since the rest of the community stops for no Crossref product roadmap issue, we also progressed a number of community and governance initiatives:\nThe Grant Linking System (GLS) reached 5 years with over 40 funders joining Crossref and registering over 130,000 grants and awards, including use of facilities and projects Our research for Resourcing Crossref for Future Sustainability (RCFS) with the Membership \u0026amp; Fees Committee is going well, and we’ll have new fee proposals for review in 2025 The integrity of the Scholarly Record (ISR) conversations have deepened, and we’ve formed strong relationships with editorial experts and research integrity sleuths, who are getting up to speed on our metadata, and we’re working with some sleuthing consultants to change our processes to handle deceptive member behaviour such as paper mills, cloned journals, and citation manipulation. The new data science team plays a role here, along with membership and governance. What’s currently in focus In our efforts to do less but do it more effectively, we have two current priorities:\nGet out of the physical data centre and into the cloud. Develop Schema 5.4. These two projects are underway, involving lots of communication and learning. Since we haven’t released any schema updates in many years, all our staff are learning for the first time how a metadata schema model is interpreted in a systemic way, learning about the structure of research objects, and honing the process as they go. We’ve high hopes we’ll be in a position to release continuous metadata schema versions and catch up on the backlog over the coming years.\nWhat’s next Continuous metadata development, with contributor roles up next Retraction Watch data integrated into the REST API so users have a single source of retraction/correction data Upgraded preprint matching and notifications Modelling more equitable fees through the RCFS projects Piloting a non-voting membership category Once we’re fully in the cloud and in the groove of metadata updates, and with the support of newly-hired technology and program directors joining in the new year, we’ll turn our attention to rebuilding the central metadata system that we call the Crossref System, or “CS” and report more on this next year.\nSo that was our summary of 2024 and an indication of what’s coming in 2025 and beyond; sorry it’s so long, and thanks for reading this far! Next year we’ll get back to more regular updates as the strategic agenda and the programs progress.\n",
"headings": ["Our strategic agenda remains the same","Moving the work forward more effectively","Fostering a happy and dedicated team","A new approach: joined-up initiatives and cross-functional programs","Introducing three programs","What are Crossref\u0026rsquo;s new prioritisation drivers?","What’s paused","What’s recently completed","What’s currently in focus","What’s next"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/categories/product/",
"title": "Product",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Categories",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/a-summary-of-our-annual-meeting/",
"title": "A summary of our Annual Meeting",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2024-12-09",
"lastmod_ts": 1733702400,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "The Crossref2024 annual meeting gathered our community for a packed agenda of updates, demos, and lively discussions on advancing our shared goals. The day was filled with insights and energy, from practical demos of Crossref’s latest API features to community reflections on the Research Nexus initiative and the Board elections.\nOur Board elections are always the focal point of the Annual Meeting. We want to start reflecting on the day by congratulating our newly elected board members: Katharina Rieck from Austrian Science Fund (FWF), Lisa Schiff from California Digital Library, Aaron Wood from American Psychological Association, and Amanda Ward from Taylor and Francis, who will officially join (and re-join) in January 2025. Their diverse expertise and perspectives will undoubtedly bring fresh insights to Crossref’s ongoing mission. The meeting started with a recap of our mission and priorities. Ed Pentz reiterated the Research Nexus vision of increasing transparency of the connections that make up the scholarly record and underpin the research ecosystem.\n",
"content": "The Crossref2024 annual meeting gathered our community for a packed agenda of updates, demos, and lively discussions on advancing our shared goals. The day was filled with insights and energy, from practical demos of Crossref’s latest API features to community reflections on the Research Nexus initiative and the Board elections.\nOur Board elections are always the focal point of the Annual Meeting. We want to start reflecting on the day by congratulating our newly elected board members: Katharina Rieck from Austrian Science Fund (FWF), Lisa Schiff from California Digital Library, Aaron Wood from American Psychological Association, and Amanda Ward from Taylor and Francis, who will officially join (and re-join) in January 2025. Their diverse expertise and perspectives will undoubtedly bring fresh insights to Crossref’s ongoing mission. The meeting started with a recap of our mission and priorities. Ed Pentz reiterated the Research Nexus vision of increasing transparency of the connections that make up the scholarly record and underpin the research ecosystem.\nCrossref is dedicated to openness, community ownership, and a stable, accessible infrastructure that researchers, publishers, funders, and institutions can rely on for the long term. This is demonstrated by Crossref’s commitment to the the Principles of Open Scholarly Infrastructure (POSI), which constitute commitments to building a resilient and transparent infrastructure for research—sustainability, community governance, and openness. Ed emphasized how Crossref is aligning with these principles and collaborates with other adopters to reflect and continuously align these with the needs of the scholarly community, with a public consultation on proposed revisions to POSI forthcoming next year.\nGinny Hendricks highlighted key membership and metadata trends. She noted that as of 2024, half of Crossref members are based in Asia. This year, as always in recent years, we saw many new organisations from Indonesia, Turkey, India, and Brazil join us. Removing those fast-growing countries for the chart’s clarity, we can see that some of the next most active countries are Pakistan, Mexico, Spain, Bangladesh, and Ecuador, among others.\nThere are now ~163 million open metadata records with Crossref DOIs, and Ginny pointed out increases in the registration of preprints, peer-review reports, and grants. In terms of metadata elements, it\u0026rsquo;s good to see that more publishers recognize the importance of including abstracts and ROR IDs in their metadata records. Also, in line with the community’s concerns about integrity, our members have been enriching their records with direct assertions of retractions.\nThen, Ginny went on to report on the progress towards our strategic goals:\nContribute to an environment where the community identifies and co-creates solutions for broad benefit A sustainable source of complete, open, and global scholarly metadata and relationships Manage Crossref openly and sustainably, modernizing and making transparent all operations so that we are accountable to the communities that govern us. Foster a strong team because reliable infrastructure needs committed people who contribute to and realize the vision and thrive in doing it. Demos Lena Stoll and Patrick Vale’s session gave members a practical preview of our latest tools.\nPatrick started by reflecting on the challenge of making our identifiers useful for people using screen readers (and other assistive technologies). He thanked all who responded to our past consultation on the topic and presented the Crossref DOI Accessibility Enhancer – the browser plug-in initially available for Firefox (and soon also for Chrome). He shared the Gitlab repo for anyone interested in trying it and invited feedback as we’re hoping to iterate on this.\nPatrick then went on to talk about our openness to community contributions to Crossref tools, with an example of the recent contribution from CWTS Leiden to our Participation Reports. Thanks to their work, our members can now see the proportion of works they’ve registered that include affiliation information and ROR IDs, alongside the previously available key metadata such as references, abstracts, ORCID iDs, funding information, or Crossmark.\nFinally, Lena demonstrated the latest extension of our record management tool that’s just been made available to make manual registration of metadata records for journal articles easier. The new form is flexible and driven by our metadata schema. Importantly for our members, it simplifies the workflow with input validations and automated ISSN matching, and it enables members to register author affiliations with an integrated ROR look-up. We hope this will support our smaller members, who are relying on our helper tools to register their content.\nThroughout the session, members were encouraged to use these tools and explore new resources available through Crossref. We believe that by taking advantage of these resources, you can enhance your research and publishing experience, and contribute to the growth and development of the scholarly community.\nThe discussion about open scholarly infrastructure The panel on open scholarly infrastructure brought together experts with a wide range of experience in the field. Moderated by Lucy Ofiesh, Crossref’s Chief Operating Officer, the discussion featured six invited speakers who shared their insights on the opportunities and challenges facing the scholarly ecosystem: Ed Pentz, Crossref; Sarah Lippincott, Dryad; Amélie Church, Sorbonne University; Joanna Ball, DOAJ; Ann Li, Airiti; and Richard Bruce Lamptey, Kwame Nkrumah University of Science and Technology.\nThe panel talked about what openness in scholarly infrastructure means, why it’s important, its sustainability, and how to tackle challenges and gaps across the ecosystem. They highlighted frameworks like the Principles of Open Scholarly Infrastructure (POSI), the Barcelona Declaration, and the FOREST Framework as key tools for guiding work on governance, sustainability, and equity. The discussion highlighted the need for more collaboration, inclusivity, and practical ways to ensure open infrastructure remains sustainable in the long run.\nThey also stressed how openness supports research integrity. How transparent systems allow researchers to question methods, verify findings, and preserve data. Amelie Church expanded on this point, underscoring the important role of open infrastructure in addressing challenges to integrity. She explained that such transparency enables the scholarly community to scrutinize research processes, ensuring the quality of outputs and their impact on society. Without openness, researchers face barriers to maintaining trust in their work, making open infrastructure necessary for research integrity and public confidence in science.\n“By focusing on accessibility, transparency, and community engagement, open infrastructure can reshape academic and research ecosystems in transformative ways.” ~Richard Bruce Lamptey\nRegarding sustainability, Sarah Lippincott stressed the importance of aligning funding models with community needs while addressing governance challenges. She pointed out that while initial funding can launch infrastructure, long-term sustainability requires consistent community investment and robust governance frameworks. This balance, she explained, is essential to ensure equity and transparency.\nCollaboration was another important topic. Joanna Ball and Sarah Lippincott shared examples of how pooling expertise and resources—such as in the global support for ROR—can strengthen systems and make them more sustainable. These initiatives show the power of collective efforts in addressing technical and resource barriers. However, inclusivity remains an ongoing challenge.\nThe panel discussed the ways in which language barriers, resource limitations, and reliance on proprietary systems continue to exclude researchers from underrepresented regions. Ann Li highlighted how addressing these disparities is critical to ensuring the global accessibility of open infrastructure. By fostering inclusive practices, the scholarly community can mitigate biases and build tools that reflect a broader range of research contributions.\n”My hope is that open infrastructure can have the resources that it needs to thrive, not just merely survive, and also that open infrastructure communities and organisations look to the value of frameworks that we\u0026rsquo;ve talked about today to help align themselves and improve their policies and practices, because there\u0026rsquo;s always room for growth, even in the best, most well-intentioned communities.” ~Sarah Lippincott, Dryad\nThe panel wrapped up the discussion by expressing optimism for the future of open scholarly infrastructure and emphasized the importance of continued investment, collaboration across organisations, and transparency in operations. The discussion reinforced the idea that open infrastructure provides a strong foundation for research that is equitable, sustainable, and accessible to all.\nUpdates from our Community We enjoyed talks from our community about increasing their participation in the Research Nexus by adopting, using and enhancing metadata in different ways. Robbykha Rosalien hosted talks from the EuropePMC, Dutch Research Council, eLife, and CSIRO featured in Session I, and Amanda French hosted CLOCKSS, Sciety, and Redalyc in Session II.\nMichael Parkin talked about preprints in Europe PMC. Europe PMC is a database for life science literature and a platform for content-based innovation. They started indexing preprints via Crossref REST API in 2018. Michael presented their work on discoverability of preprints in their database, including reflections on early challenges, as well as the latest efforts in surfacing available community reviews.\nHans de Jonge talked about the Dutch Research Council\u0026rsquo;s (NWO) dedication to open science, with policies ensuring that publications and data funded by NWO are openly available. They embrace open science principles for their own metadata and is a signatory of the Barcelona Declaration on Open Research Information. Hans focused on NWO\u0026rsquo;s recent introduction of Grant IDs through Crossref’s Grant Linking System (GLS). He shared their approach, the motivations behind introducing Grant IDs, and some challenges they faced.\nFrederick Atherden explained how eLife, a nonprofit led by scientists, use Crossref’s Grant Linking System to include grant DOIs in their publication metadata. It allows authors to add grant DOIs during submission, and they developed a tool to match grant numbers with DOIs during the proofing process to improve accuracy. Their goal is to follow best practices for metadata, making content easier to find and link to.\nBrietta Pike covered how CSIRO is working to improve metadata quality for its journals, making research more discoverable and trustworthy. CSIRO faced challenges like inconsistent XML tagging, outdated systems, and data loss. To address these, they formed a project team, created a clear XML stylesheet, and updated their workflows. Recent progress includes better funding data, clearer license information, and more complete affiliation tagging. These efforts aim to support a more transparent and accessible research environment.\nAlicia Wise of CLOCKSS talked about recent collaborations seeking to safeguard our cultural and scholarly heritage over the long term. CLOCKSS, a community-run archive, is dedicated to preserving scholarly content to remain accessible and unchanged for future generations. True preservation requires securely storing content in trusted archives that are actively maintained. A group of librarians and publishers developed a guide to help publishers preserve content, they also established an archival standard for EPUB formats to ensure ebooks can be stored effectively, and launched a pilot project to track preserved books, helping libraries and scholars identify safely stored titles.\nMark Williams from Sciety talked about how Sciety uses Crossref metadata to create detailed preprint histories. By partnering with organisations and communities worldwide, Sciety platform gathers public reviews, highlights, and recommendations on preprinted research, helping researchers evaluate the quality and relevance of new studies. Through linking related preprints and journal articles, Sciety builds a connected view of each research work. Although challenges like inconsistent terminology and identifier gaps persist, these efforts enhance the visibility and credibility of preprints.\nArianna Becerril-García of AmeliCA/Redalyc shared insights on diamond open-access journals in Latin America. Redalyc is an open-access infrastructure that supports journals by providing free services like visibility and production tools. Redalyc has a role in sustaining Latin America’s unique approach to open-access publishing, where most journals are backed by academic institutions and public funds, allowing free access for both readers and authors. Arianna stressed the need to treat these journals as digital public goods and urged the communities they serve to help ensure their long-term sustainability. Despite limited resources and global under-recognition, these journals serve an international research audience, including authors from Europe, Africa, and Asia. Redalyc and other open infrastructures play a key role by offering tools that reduce production co-sts and improve discoverability, all without financial barriers. Noted was how this approach aligns with UNESCO’s open science framework, which promotes inclusivity and addresses long-standing inequalities in scholarly publishing.\nAfternoon of more resources and updates from Crossref After a mid-day break (in Europe), Luis Montilla kicked off the second session with a practical tutorial of Crossref’s REST API. Following his last year’s intro to the Crossref API, this time he offered a step-by-step guide to help attendees maximize the API’s capabilities for metadata retrieval with advice on:\nManaging large data requests with pagination and iterations Incorporating safety mechanisms - to avoid hitting rate limits, Luis recommended adding pauses between requests and sharing example scripts to streamline this. For those interested in learning more, look at the new Crossref API Learning Hub— a new resource offering guides, scripts, and training materials to simplify complex queries. Please share questions about things you\u0026rsquo;re not sure about in our community forum, to help guide development of future demos.\nPatricia Feeney followed with updates on metadata schema changes. She introduced our recent shift to integrate the Funder Registry with ROR, which allows members to use a single identifier system, simplifying data management by reducing redundancy. Patricia explained that, for now, the current identifiers remain valid, so members won’t need to make immediate changes. She also outlined planned support for version metadata, typed citations, and future plans to expand support for contributor role vocabularies, and invited community participation in a planned multilingual metadata working group.\nNext, Kora Korzec offered an update on the progress in our research on Resourcing Crossref for Future Sustainability and opened up a discussion about the best ways of assessing our members’ size and ability to pay. In light of our ambition to streamline discounts, we also invited suggestions for discounts to support accessibility and fuller participation in the Research Nexus.\nAs part of the discussion, we’ve learned who was in attendance during the session:\nWe’ve heard a lot of support for our current GEM program. While it was clear from our poll that publishing revenue is not the most relevant measure of size or capacity for all those present – establishing a good alternative proved challenging. The idea of considering the size of the organisation as its largest entity has been discussed, and important points were raised about budgets in different types of distributed organisations (e.g., on the position of libraries within large universities).\nThe official Annual Meeting part commenced after the discussion, with a report on the State of Crossref from Lucy Ofiesh, and commenced with our Board election. Lucy highlighted some of the key accomplishments of the year so far, including:\nResearch for Resourcing Crossref for Future Sustainability (RCFS) Integrity of the Scholarly Record (ISR) Grant Linking System (GLS) reached 5 years Automated some very manual membership processes Released new form for journal article record registration Upgraded Participation Reports to include Affiliations and ROR IDs Launched a new API Learning Hub Paused further development of a Relationships API Migrated to a new open-source database Schema development - ROR as Funder identifiers REST API bug fixes and metadata consistency fixes. Then she reflected on the membership growth––Crossref is now made up of 21,000 organisations from 160 countries. We reviewed our 2024 year-end financial forecast. As we’re bouncing back from COVID-19, our travel expenses have grown this year, and so have the fees for cloud services hosting. These are all as planned and happen in the context of healthy growth, including that from adoption and increased usage of paid services. We’re in a healthy financial position as membership revenue and usage fees, like content registration and Similarity Check document checking fees, continue to grow from the previous year.\nThank you to everyone who joined us for Crossref2024. This year\u0026rsquo;s meeting showcased our collective dedication to advancing open, accessible research infrastructure and underscored the power of collaboration in building a stronger scholarly community. As we reflect on the rich discussions and insights shared during the event, it’s clear our community is committed to advancing open and sustainable scholarly infrastructure.\nLooking ahead, we’ll continue collaborating with members and partners to tackle challenges, expand accessibility, and foster collaboration. A key focus will be enhancing tools and metadata standards to serve the community better. Through innovative solutions and strategic initiatives like the Research Nexus, our collective efforts will make research more connected and accessible for all.\nFor anyone who couldn’t attend live, recordings are now available on our website. We’re excited to see how the ideas exchanged during this meeting spark progress across the scholarly ecosystem in the coming months.\n",
"headings": ["Demos","The discussion about open scholarly infrastructure","Updates from our Community","Afternoon of more resources and updates from Crossref"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/categories/community-call/",
"title": "Community Call",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Categories",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/2024-posi-audit/",
"title": "2024 POSI audit",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2024-12-07",
"lastmod_ts": 1733529600,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "Background The Principles of Open Scholarly Infrastructure (POSI) provides a set of guidelines for operating open infrastructure in service to the scholarly community. It sets out 16 points to ensure that the infrastructure on which the scholarly and research communities rely is openly governed, sustainable, and replicable. Each POSI adopter regularly reviews progress, conducts periodic audits, and self-reports how they’re working towards each of the principles.\nIn 2020, Crossref’s board voted to adopt the Principles of Open Scholarly Infrastructure, and we completed our first self-audit. We published our next review in 2022.\n",
"content": "Background The Principles of Open Scholarly Infrastructure (POSI) provides a set of guidelines for operating open infrastructure in service to the scholarly community. It sets out 16 points to ensure that the infrastructure on which the scholarly and research communities rely is openly governed, sustainable, and replicable. Each POSI adopter regularly reviews progress, conducts periodic audits, and self-reports how they’re working towards each of the principles.\nIn 2020, Crossref’s board voted to adopt the Principles of Open Scholarly Infrastructure, and we completed our first self-audit. We published our next review in 2022.\nThe POSI adopters have continued to review the principles, reflecting on the effects of adopting them and providing a revision to the principles in late 2023. We use the revised principles for this latest review.\nKey We use a traffic light system to indicate where we believe we stand against each of the 16 principles. Now with up/down arrows to show any significant movement, and an \u0026lsquo;i\u0026rsquo; where there is something of note with narrative.\nred indicates we are not fulfilling the principle. yellow indicates we are making progress towards meeting the principle. green indicates we are fulfilling the principle. or means this is a new change, where we\u0026rsquo;ve moved \u0026lsquo;up\u0026rsquo; the traffic lights, in comparison to the previous audit. We would use the same if \u0026lsquo;down\u0026rsquo; ever happens too. or means that something has changed of note and in comparison to the previous audit.\nGOVERNANCE Coverage across the scholarly enterprise Stakeholder governed Non-discriminatory participation or membership Transparent governance Cannot lobby Living will Formal incentives to fulfil mission \u0026amp; wind-down\nWhat’s changed with governance Stakeholder governed We’ve been yellow and we’re still yellow, but it has been improving. In the past, we’ve reported that we are working towards this but we’re not there yet because we didn’t have representation on the board from certain types of members, specifically research funders and research institutions. In the incoming 2025 board class, we have both. Six out of our 16 board seats are held by universities, university presses, or libraries. We also look forward to adding a new research funder, the Austrian Science Fund (FWF), to the board in January.\nNone of this, though, is hardcoded into the structure of the board. We extend an open call for board interest; any active member can apply for consideration. The Nominating Committee prepares a slate with a diverse range of candidates and organisations, and it is then up to the membership to elect board members.\nWith only 16 board seats and \u0026gt;21,000 members in 160 countries, being fully stakeholder-governed is challenging. Further, there are important contributors to the community that we all rely on who are not eligible for board seats because they are not members, as defined in our by-laws, such as sponsors, service providers, and metadata users.\nWe don’t consider this principle fulfilled, and that’s a good thing to keep note of; we must keep aspiring to have a broader, more comprehensive representation of our evolving community. The board continues to discuss stakeholder representation.\nSUSTAINABILITY Time-limited funds are used only for time-limited activities Goal to generate surplus Goal to create financial reserves Mission-consistent revenue generation Revenue based on services, not data\nWhat’s changed with sustainability Goal to create financial reserves This was yellow and is now green. In 2023, we met our goal of maintaining a contingency fund of 12 months of operating costs. We also topped up this fund in 2024 to keep pace with our growing operating expenses. The revisions for POSI 1.1 actually removed the specificity of a 12-month timeline, allowing each adopting organisation to set its own goal; in Crossref’s case, 12 months remains appropriate.\nINSURANCE Open source Open data (within constraints of privacy laws) Available data (within constraints of privacy laws) Patent non-assertion\nWhat’s changed with insurance Open source This was yellow and still is, but we’re making improvements. In September of this year we migrated our database off of a closed-source solution and onto PostgreSQL. This has improved the performance of the system and is an important step towards paying down technical debt and moving the system fully into the cloud.\nPatent non-assertion This was yellow and is now green. We confirm that we do not hold any patents, and we have a published policy on it that is available for inspection and reuse by anyone in the community.\nIn summary These are the main changes of note for our 2024 POSI update. The summary is that we\u0026rsquo;ve maintained all our greens, and of the four principles that were yellow last time, two have moved to green (financial reserves; patent non-assertion) and two have remained yellow but seen some progress of note (stakeholder governed; open source).\nPlease let us have any comments or questions; by commenting here it will add a public record of the discussion on our community forum. Here is an image to share, if needed.\nWe continue to learn from the POSI adopters group\u0026mdash;now numbering 23 organisations\u0026mdash;and the group will soon share a draft of POSI v2 for community comment. We look forward to the ongoing discussions with this group, and others, to keep improving and holding ourselves to account.\n",
"headings": ["Background","Key","GOVERNANCE","What’s changed with governance","Stakeholder governed","SUSTAINABILITY","What’s changed with sustainability","Goal to create financial reserves","INSURANCE","What’s changed with insurance","Open source","Patent non-assertion","In summary"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/categories/posi-audit/",
"title": "POSI Audit",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Categories",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/summary-of-the-environmental-impact-of-crossref/",
"title": "Summary of the environmental impact of Crossref",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2024-12-05",
"lastmod_ts": 1733356800,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "In June 2022, we wrote a blog post “Rethinking staff travel, meetings, and events” outlining our new approach to staff travel, meetings, and events with the goal of not going back to ‘normal’ after the pandemic. We took into account three key areas:\nThe environment and climate change Inclusion Work/life balance We are aware that many of our members are also interested in minimizing their impacts on the environment, and we are overdue for an update on meeting our own commitments, so here goes our summary for the year 2023!\n",
"content": "In June 2022, we wrote a blog post “Rethinking staff travel, meetings, and events” outlining our new approach to staff travel, meetings, and events with the goal of not going back to ‘normal’ after the pandemic. We took into account three key areas:\nThe environment and climate change Inclusion Work/life balance We are aware that many of our members are also interested in minimizing their impacts on the environment, and we are overdue for an update on meeting our own commitments, so here goes our summary for the year 2023!\nTo be honest, the picture is mixed. On the positive side, we are traveling less and differently compared with 2019. Most of our events have been online, with some regional in-person ones, reducing our carbon footprint and increasing inclusivity with more people attending Crossref events. On the negative side, it hasn’t been easy to collect the data and figure out the best tools for calculating emissions, and we certainly haven’t captured all of our carbon emissions. Our approach has been to not let the perfect be the enemy of the good and we’ve focused on our largest source of carbon emissions - air travel.\nSome of the positive things: We have maintained our strategic approach to consider environmental, inclusion, and work/life balance issues when we plan travel and to make the most of in-person events by focusing on those that involve interaction, such as listening and learning from our members and users, deepening relationships, co-creating, and forming new alliances Crossref Annual Meetings and community updates have been online and in different time zones. Crossref board meetings have been reduced from three in-person meetings per year to one face-to-face and two online meetings per year. We had an optional all-staff in-person meeting in June 2023 (and this year too). For the in-person board and staff meetings, we have selected locations that minimize the overall amount of travel and maximize direct flights. We have maintained our country focus for in-person local meetings supported by regional Ambassadors. We met our goal of keeping total travel and meeting expenses below 60% of 2019 costs even though we have more staff and membership growth has continued. The amount of money spent is a rough proxy for our carbon impact. We no longer have an office in Oxford and will not renew the lease on our Lynnfield, MA office, so we will have no physical offices by the end of 2024. This is not a large carbon emission reduction and is more a result of being a “distributed first” organisation with staff in 11 different countries. We recorded data on staff travel (flights, trains, cars, hotels) for 2023 to use as a baseline for comparison with future years. In 2023 the carbon emissions from travel and meetings was about 105 tCO2e. We used tools provided by Amazon Web Services (AWS) and Zoom to estimate the impact of these services. In 2023 this was 0.266 tCO2e for AWS and .1 tCO2e for Zoom. Some challenges Compiling data is difficult and time-consuming for a small organisation There are many different calculators and metrics to use and it’s difficult to decide which to use and how much detail to go into We haven’t yet estimated the carbon footprint of staff home working We were able to calculate the emissions from AWS but not our data center We didn’t estimate the emissions from our offices. We had a small office in Oxford until November 2023, and we have an office near Boston - we won’t be renewing the lease in 2025 so won’t have any offices. Total travel and meetings spending Year Amount Percentage of 2019 2019 actuals $585,482 100% 2020 actuals $91,700 16% 2021 actuals $19,066 3% 2022 actuals $74,416 13% 2023 actuals $305,737 52% 2024 budget $333,500 56% We have recorded carbon emissions from travel at about 105 tCO2e, so we will compare 2023 with future years. Now that we have started collecting travel data, it will be easier—staff can do it as they travel throughout the year.\nOur Executive Director, Ed Pentz, looked at his personal and work flights and the carbon emissions in 2019 were 18 tCO2e and in 2023 were 2.7 tCO2e so this is a big change in the right direction.\nHosting services We use AWS for hosting our REST APIs, Crossref Metadata Search, the website, and Labs projects. Our main metadata registry is still in a data center, which is not included in this calculation. For 2023 Amazon reports Crossref’s carbon emissions were 0.216 tCO2e compared with 0.266 tCO2e in 2022. Crossref is planning to move out of the data center and fully to AWS by the end of 2024 so this will increase our AWS usage and therefore our emissions from related activities will increase. Compared to travel, the footprint from AWS is minimal.\nOnline meetings As a distributed, remote-first organisation Crossref is a heavy Zoom user –– it’s essential for staff and for engaging with our community. However, Zoom doesn’t provide tools or estimates of the carbon impact of Zoom meetings. We used a tool provided by Utility Bidder, which makes a lot of estimates and assumptions. In 2023 Crossref had almost 800,000 meeting minutes. This translated into an average of 1.92 kg of CO2 emissions per week, or 100 kg per year.\nSome studies have estimated that turning off video reduces the carbon footprint of meetings. However, this can be a false savings since video is often important for creating a connection and having a productive meeting, and a Zoom meeting with video is still much, much better than traveling, particularly if flying is involved.\nTools we used In order to calculate emissions for flights and train journeys, we chose to use Carbon Calculator. We didn’t calculate emissions from hotel stays but looked at the Hotel Footprinting tools and may add hotels to calculations in the future.\nOffsetting We don’t offset our emissions from travel or other operations and don’t have plans to do this. Offsetting emissions is problematic in a number of different ways so we don’t feel confident in doing it.\nWe did tree-planting as a “thank you” for the time of respondents in our metadata survey. Intended as an alternative to more commercial types of incentives rather than off-setting for our emissions, this resulted in 921 trees planted for the Gewocha Forest, Ethiopia via Ecologi.\nWrapping up Moving forward, we’ve learned a lot over the last couple of years. Collecting accurate data is challenging and time-consuming, especially for a small organisation. For us, this has been a new lens for viewing our activities, and it remains a true learning journey and we have made permanent changes. In 2024 and beyond we are going to continue to follow our travel, meetings, and events policies that we announced in 2022. We will continue to capture our air travel emissions, and in 2025 we will more accurately capture train journeys and hotel stays. We will also continue calculating our Zoom and AWS emissions as best as we can. What we\u0026rsquo;ve learnt in the process of capturing and calculating our 2023 emissions helped us set things up to enable more prompt reporting on these impacts in the future.\nWe expect that many of our members and our community at large assess their environmental impact or are embarking on similar projects, to understand and curb emissions. We’re keen to discuss this and learn together to reduce our environmental impact as an organisation.\n",
"headings": ["Some of the positive things:","Some challenges","Total travel and meetings spending","Hosting services","Online meetings","Tools we used","Offsetting","Wrapping up"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/operations-and-sustainability/patent-policy/",
"title": "Patent non-assertion policy",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2024-12-04",
"lastmod_ts": 1733270400,
"section": "Operations & sustainability",
"tags": [],
"description": "As part of our committment to the Principles of Open Scholarly Infrastructure we have adopted a patent non-assertion policy. The patent non-assertion policy is intended to prevent open infrastructure organisations from inhibiting the community\u0026rsquo;s ability to replicate the infrastructure.\nCrossref does not currently hold any patents.\nTo the extent possible, we make our policies publicly available for inspection or reuse by others.\n",
"content": "As part of our committment to the Principles of Open Scholarly Infrastructure we have adopted a patent non-assertion policy. The patent non-assertion policy is intended to prevent open infrastructure organisations from inhibiting the community\u0026rsquo;s ability to replicate the infrastructure.\nCrossref does not currently hold any patents.\nTo the extent possible, we make our policies publicly available for inspection or reuse by others.\n",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/authors/jen-mellor/",
"title": "Jen Mellor",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Authors",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/authors/keara-mickelson/",
"title": "Keara Mickelson",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Authors",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/authors/magaly-taylor/",
"title": "Magaly Taylor",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Authors",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/metadata-beyond-discoverability/",
"title": "Metadata beyond discoverability",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2024-12-03",
"lastmod_ts": 1733184000,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "Metadata is one of the most important tools needed to communicate with each other about science and scholarship. It tells the story of research that travels throughout systems and subjects and even to future generations. We have metadata for organising and describing content, metadata for provenance and ownership information, and metadata is increasingly used as signals of trust.\nFollowing our panel discussion on the same subject at the ALPSP University Press Redux conference in May 2024, in this post we explore the idea that metadata, once considered important mostly for discoverability, is now a vital element used for evidence and the integrity of the scholarly record. We share our experiences and views on the metadata significance and workflows from the perspective of academic and university presses – thus we primarily concentrate on the context of books and journal articles.\n",
"content": "Metadata is one of the most important tools needed to communicate with each other about science and scholarship. It tells the story of research that travels throughout systems and subjects and even to future generations. We have metadata for organising and describing content, metadata for provenance and ownership information, and metadata is increasingly used as signals of trust.\nFollowing our panel discussion on the same subject at the ALPSP University Press Redux conference in May 2024, in this post we explore the idea that metadata, once considered important mostly for discoverability, is now a vital element used for evidence and the integrity of the scholarly record. We share our experiences and views on the metadata significance and workflows from the perspective of academic and university presses – thus we primarily concentrate on the context of books and journal articles.\nThe communication of knowledge is facilitated by tiny elements of metadata flitting around between thousands of systems telling minuscule parts of the story about a research work. And it isn’t just titles and authors and abstracts – what we think of as metadata has really evolved as more nuance is needed in the assessment and absorption of information. Who paid for this research and how much, how exactly did everyone contribute, what data was produced and is it available for me to reuse it, as well as, increasingly, things like post-publication comments, assertions from “readers like me”, who has reproduced this research or refuted these conclusions.\nDifferent types of published works are described by different types of metadata – journal articles, book chapters, preprints, dissertations. And those metadata elements can be of varying importance for different users. In this article, we will talk about metadata from the perspectives of four personas highlighted by the Metadata 20/20:\nMetadata Creators, who provide descriptive information (metadata) about research and scholarly outputs. Metadata Curators, who classify, normalise and standardise this descriptive information to increase its value as a resource. Metadata Custodians, who store and maintain this descriptive information and make it available for consumers. Metadata Consumers, who knowingly or unknowingly use the descriptive information to find, discover, connect, and cite research and scholarly outputs. Our approach delineates the metadata lifecycle, from authorship, through production, discovery and through continuous curation. Though some of the metadata is generated outside of that linear process, and much happens before the authorship step, we see it as a clear and useful breakdown of how metadata contributes to a new piece of content.\nAuthorship The first stage in the metadata lifecycle, authorship, is just the beginning of a dynamic process with many collaborators. A formative piece of the puzzle, authorship involves the authors or contributors, the editorial team and/or the marketing team and this is when the shape of the project and its metadata takes form. During this stage, the book or journal\u0026rsquo;s metadata exists only between the originators and the publisher, allowing the most opportunity for creativity and enhancement. Once the metadata reaches the next checkpoint along the lifecycle and is sent out externally, it\u0026rsquo;s more difficult and riskier to make major changes to the key metadata elements. In scholarly monograph publishing especially, we have the advantage of longer production lead times during which to amend and manipulate metadata during this stage.\nAt this stage, authors may have ideas of titles, subtitles and descriptions and it is up to the editors and other team members at the publisher to think strategically about how this can be optimised. The marketing and sales teams may be thinking about how the abstracts, keywords, and classifications can be best optimised for the web, leading to increased sales. Discoverability and interoperability of metadata for a book or journal, especially the use of persistent identifiers, is beneficial both for the author – in that their book is easily discovered, used, and cited – and for the publisher – increased visibility, sales, and usage.\nCurrent challenges at the authorship stage include changing goalposts for metadata standards and accessibility requirements, which also have knock-on effects in subsequent stages in the metadata lifecycle. One of the key challenges with these is that they require buy-in from multiple players to keep up with and amend, and publishers must think closely about how these changes may affect metadata workflows for books at different stages of publication.\nProduction As a book or journal article comes into production, it’s time to update and release the metadata to retailers, libraries, data aggregators and distributors. The metadata should be updated and checked to make sure that it’s still a good reflection of the product or the content that it describes and complete enough to release, including a final cover image in the case of books. This is still very much a collaborative effort with multiple roles involved. Technical details, such as spine width, page extents, and weight, are added, capturing the final specification. The editorial team may update metadata entered into systems earlier in the process. For example reviewing the prices, updating subject classification codes or amending the chapter order. If any of the content is to be published open access, appropriate licensing and access metadata need to be included, so that users of the content are clear about what they can (and can’t!) do with it. Metadata that’s not yet captured upstream can be added or enhanced. For example, vendors already involved in the production process can verify that persistent identifiers (PIDs) are present and correct in funding metadata.\nMore and more metadata elements are being requested by supply chain partners. For example, new requirements being introduced to provide commodity codes, spine width, carton quantities, gratis copy value and country of manufacture. There may be differences in metadata depending on the methods of production. For example, country of manufacture will be supplied differently when using traditional print methods where the whole print run is carried out at a location, or where a title is manufactured print on demand and the location of printing is determined by the delivery address.\nIn an XML-first workflow, metadata can be captured with the content files to aid with discovery. This usually requires multiple systems, both internal and external. These systems need to be able to work together to ensure that only up-to-date metadata is used. Metadata will change throughout the production process, whether it’s the publication of an accepted manuscript through to the final version of record, or pre-order information to the published version, so updates need to feed out regularly.\nThe right metadata needs to go to the right recipient. Some is not useful or cannot be processed by certain recipients. For example, a printer, retailer, librarian or data aggregator each have their own needs and use cases and may receive and process metadata in different formats or require different fields.\nDiscovery Discovery is the series of actions taken by an end user to retrieve and access relevant content they do not know about. Discovery can happen everywhere: Google (a search engine), a library catalog, a publisher platform, etc. However, Discovery is associated with using Discovery systems in the academic sector.\nThe technological landscape of libraries has developed in the last 15 years. Discovery systems are tools libraries subscribe to in order to allow their end users to have one search experience within their library holdings. It is paramount for librarians that library collections are used; hence, it is very important for them that the discovery system of their choice contains all the relevant metadata. Libraries expect their discovery service to include their content coverage as comprehensively as possible. Content items not represented or misrepresented in a discovery system create challenges to libraries in how they might otherwise ensure that these materials are discovered and accessed.\nLibraries\u0026rsquo; adoption and usage of discovery systems are surrounded by the belief that the great benefits of this technology are the one search box and the configuration flexibility, which are the most important benefits. Libraries invest a significant amount of money in discovery services. The increase in usage is the success indicator of this adoption and a positive return on investment.\nThe backbone of discovery systems is formed by three crucial elements: a user interface, a metadata index, and a link resolver or Knowledge Base. These elements, along with a back-end control panel for librarian configuration, are the key components that enable the discovery process.\nThe discovery index, a database storing descriptive data from various content providers, data sets, and content types, is a testament to the collaborative efforts of content providers and discovery systems vendors. Their work under the Discovery Metadata Sharing partnership agreements, which establish the format, scope, frequency, and support of the collaboration, is instrumental in meeting librarians\u0026rsquo; expectations.\nFormat The discovery metadata integration processes have settled down for most cases in these two metadata delivery workflows.\nMetadata for the index of discovery: Discovery systems have traditionally made efforts to work with various metadata formats like MARC, proprietary templates, etc., but the preferred format is XML. This metadata could include all the bibliographic information data, including index terms and full text at the article and chapter level.\nMetadata for link resolvers and Knowledge bases: Knowledge bases are tools that contain information about what is included in a product, packages, and/or databases. KBART is the preferred format in this area. It includes a set of basic bibliographic descriptions at the publication level and linking information for direct and OpenURL syntaxes.\nFrequency The delivery channels vary, and the frequency could vary daily to yearly, depending on the publication schedule.\nScope Library collections include various content types, including archival materials, open access, and multimedia alongside the more traditional books and periodicals. Different content types will require different metadata elements to make a comprehensive discovery-friendly description, and the metadata elements will impact the formats in use.\nDiscovery services will receive this data and prioritise uploading. They will select and manipulate the required metadata elements according to their system requirements. These metadata tweaks and selections are not always communicated to the content providers and/or libraries. Ultimately, librarians decide which metadata will be visible on their discovery tool and the linking methods of their choice.\nAs described, Discovery is a complex area where the activities of its main stakeholders are interconnected. The success of the end users\u0026rsquo; discovery journey from search to access depends on the successful integration, implementation, and maintenance of the discovery systems. This necessitates a combined effort from the three discovery stakeholders: content providers, discovery system providers, and libraries. Their collaborative work is not just crucial, but integral to supporting discovery and fulfilment in the most efficient manner possible. Your active involvement in this process is what makes it successful.\nHow do we ensure discoverability? Electronic resources do not exist in isolation but are assessed and used depending on their level of integration in the discovery landscape where libraries and patrons are active. From a content provider\u0026rsquo;s perspective, discoverability is about the number and efficiency of entry points to our products created in third-party discovery products.\nThe level of discovery integration has a direct impact on sales and upsell opportunities. Products that are not discoverable are difficult to work with, and the opposite is true for products that are considered discoverable. Your role in ensuring discoverability directly influences the user experience and sales, making your work crucial and impactful. The term \u0026lsquo;Discoverability\u0026rsquo; is critical in discovery library systems. It refers to the extent to which eResources are searchable in a discovery system, and it directly influences the ease with which users can find the information they need, thereby enhancing their overall experience. In practical terms, the degree of discoverability will be impacted by the quality of the metadata supplied, the transformations the metadata suffers in the integration process to discovery systems, and the configuration\u0026rsquo;s maintenance.\nThe general principles of metadata quality also apply in this area: accuracy, completeness, and timely delivery. Your attention to these principles is crucial to contributing to the effectiveness of the discovery process. Metadata enrichment practices like identifiers and standards are also applicable. Your meticulous attention to detail in maintaining metadata quality ensures the effectiveness of the discovery process.\nDiscovery as a mindset in the publishing process will increase discoverability, as it will be influenced by product designs (whether the content is linkable) and which metadata outputs are possible. For example, author-generated index terms will be more effective for meeting research search terms, and detailed article titles will probably be more discoverable than general titles. Finally, all the integration, descriptive metadata, configurations, etc., leave much room for errors. The flow is complex; on occasion, the products and content are more complicated to describe than tools can handle, and there are millions of holdings per library to manage. Constant maintenance and troubleshooting are crucial elements to maintaining and increasing discoverability.\nMetadata beyond publication In the lead-up to publication, finalising rich complete metadata can seem like establishing a fixed set of information. Post-publication, however, the metadata workflow should be dynamic, able to evolve to keep pace with new demands and opportunities. Think of metadata as a journey rather than a one-time destination, and look at ways to futureproof your metadata by actively adapting to some of the following types of change.\nChanging Publisher Goals and Product Needs Metadata should align with changing priorities for a publisher. Developing new formats, shifts in commissioning focus or building new distribution partnerships may require metadata updates. For instance, re-releasing content in audiobook form or digitising a backlist title warrants a metadata review to ensure current and prospective readers find accurate, relevant information.\nChanging Technology and Metadata Standards Advances in technology, from artificial intelligence to emerging metadata standards, offer enhanced possibilities for capturing and updating metadata. AI, for example, can help enrich metadata with more precise subject tagging, while new metadata formats may offer greater compatibility across platforms and discovery services. Staying current with these tools can help publishers manage metadata more efficiently and enhance discoverability.\nChanging Societal Values As society evolves, so do expectations for inclusive and socially responsible metadata. Utilising new categorisation codes, such as those for the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals, can align metadata with emerging social goals. Similarly, publishers may need to revisit keywords and category codes to reflect language changes, balancing the integrity of historic records with the need for current, appropriate terminology.\nChanging Industry Priorities Commitments to accessibility and sustainability have prompted developments in metadata. Increasingly, publishers need to be able to use metadata to build a record of sustainable production methods, such as paper sources, printing methods or ink types. New metadata fields for accessibility specifications will also support more inclusive reader experiences going forward. Metadata will play an increasingly vital role in meeting industry standards for accessibility, EUDR and EAA compliance, and environmental transparency.\nChanging Customer and Librarian Expectations Finally, as the metadata expectations of customers grow and the nature of roles and responsibilities in library and collection management professions develops, teamwork and making good use of available resources are essential. Publishers don’t have to tackle this alone. Working with organisations such as Crossref or Book Industry Communication (BIC), signing up to newsletters and webinars, and forming an in-house discovery group are all great ideas for sharing ideas and best practice, and ensuring your metadata workflow is adaptable and responsive. Be part of the conversation now rather than struggling to keep up down the line!\nWhat are some challenges and opportunities with metadata? JM: Metadata that establishes permanence is a real opportunity in a digital landscape where content can move or be taken down, links can rot, website certificates can expire. Persistent identifiers like ORCiDs for people and DOIs for content are key examples of metadata that establish enduring routes to, and provenance of, published digital content.\nKM: Metadata creation, maintenance and change has long been seen as a manual process. AI tools offer a real opportunity for metadata creation and review, especially for keywords and classification codes, at a scale and speed that has the potential to transform metadata workflows. Especially for backlist transformation, AI could offer real opportunities in this area. A challenge we face for monograph metadata more specifically is that much of the scholarly metadata infrastructure is built around the journal article, and it can be difficult to fit longer form content into these systems of discovery.\nMT: Metadata is crucial. Good metadata (complete, accurate, and timely) is the base for smooth integrations and easy discovery interactions with eResources. Bad metadata (inaccurate, incomplete, late) will be the main reason for undiscovered content. At this point, the eResources industry is still based on different versions of the same metadata, which is the leading cause of problems. It is probably time to start considering a unique record approach. This unique record, which will be complete and accurate, could be used by different systems for different purposes. I know there are many details to define here, but if you think about it, it is not impossible and could solve the many known issues.\nHow do you ensure the quality and completeness of your metadata? Do you have ways of auditing it? SP: Validation of data is really important, so choosing or building a system that’s set up to do this is an important foundation. It’s straightforward to check for completeness of fields and I run daily checks on our book metadata to make sure there’s nothing missing in the files feeding out. Quality can be more challenging to monitor. Feedback from data recipients is key, and accreditation schemes such as the BIC Metadata Excellence Award are a great way to benchmark progress. Good training and clear documentation help to make sure that everyone involved in creating and updating metadata understands exactly what they need to do and the standards they need to meet.\nKM: Earlier this year we completed a year-long data cleansing project as part of our move to a new title management database. This gave us the time to address gaps in backlist metadata as well as to identify any inconsistencies across records for the same book, and enrich key metadata fields like classification codes, keywords and PIDs. For frontlist titles, each person owns a number of fields to ensure they are complete before a book\u0026rsquo;s metadata is distributed – some of these have validation tools which will prevent a book\u0026rsquo;s metadata from being sent out unless it is complete.\nMT: Strict and consistent internal processes are essential to ensure quality and completeness. Following the different standards and industry recommendations helps to keep the quality at high standards. Random manual checks and system-based checks help to ensure everything is good. We carry out projects where we work with specific aspects of the metadata. This building-blocks approach ensures the different data layers are as good as possible. As with any project, metadata projects should have specific goals, outcomes, resources, and documentation.\nHow do you know if (and how much) metadata helps achieve your goals? JM: Take any available opportunities to find out what people think of your metadata – via library conferences, institutional customer feedback, and by working with the library team at our home institution, we’ve had some really useful and interesting conversations about MUP’s metadata and where we can improve it to make it as relevant as possible for different stakeholder needs.\nMT: Customers and Discovery partners will inform us if something is incorrect. Usage data is also a good indicator of how healthy our metadata is. Following industry standards is another good reference point for assessing the metadata. Finally, the metadata is only good when we know what we want to use it for. So, always considering what we are trying to achieve helps us understand how effective the metadata is.\nKM: As the others have noted here, and we represent a range of different types and sizes of publishers, measuring the direct impact of metadata is an ongoing challenge. We think about the different end users who might encounter our metadata further down the supply chain – retail customers searching on Amazon, librarians filtering results on purchasing platforms, researchers finding our books and journals through citations on popular online search engines – and consider what elements of our metadata might help reach those people in the right ways.\nJM: Ideally, you’ll see an uplift in sales or usage for every metadata element that you add, review or expand, although it can be challenging to quantify and prove a direct correlation between richer metadata and higher revenue or discoverability, as there are will be other factors involved. For my Operations team, what is certain is that richer, more comprehensive metadata means fewer errors are thrown up by the distribution systems and feeds we use, which means colleagues save time and gain productivity by not having to resolve and rerun failed jobs, chase missing information from other teams, or manually send information to third parties. My job is also made easier because things like size and weight of every printed product are recorded in our bibliographic database as standard, easy to report on and analyse, which helps with forecasting costs for inventory storage or shipping. Metadata can be powerful.\n",
"headings": ["Authorship","Production","Discovery","Format","Frequency","Scope","How do we ensure discoverability?","Metadata beyond publication","Changing Publisher Goals and Product Needs","Changing Technology and Metadata Standards","Changing Societal Values","Changing Industry Priorities","Changing Customer and Librarian Expectations","What are some challenges and opportunities with metadata?","How do you ensure the quality and completeness of your metadata? Do you have ways of auditing it?","How do you know if (and how much) metadata helps achieve your goals?"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/authors/sylvia-pegg/",
"title": "Sylvia Pegg",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Authors",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/working-groups/books/",
"title": "Books interest group",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2024-11-29",
"lastmod_ts": 1732838400,
"section": "Working groups",
"tags": [],
"description": "The Books Interest Group serves as a resource for Crossref and its participants to surface, discuss and make progress on metadata and workflow issues unique to book publishers. The group comprises Crossref members and nonmembers, and is led by a Chair and Crossref staff facilitators.\nWhat we\u0026rsquo;re working on This year, the group is focused on:\nReviewing book and chapter types in our metadata schema, as well as books representation in JSON outputs. Best practice for books. This guide has had some recent revisions and work on it will continue this year. Bringing others from the industry into discussions on topics of particular interest, such as books on multiple platforms. Education and outreach: ongoing, with use cases of particular interest and most recently including Publisher Participation Reports Suggestions for topics are welcome.\n",
"content": "The Books Interest Group serves as a resource for Crossref and its participants to surface, discuss and make progress on metadata and workflow issues unique to book publishers. The group comprises Crossref members and nonmembers, and is led by a Chair and Crossref staff facilitators.\nWhat we\u0026rsquo;re working on This year, the group is focused on:\nReviewing book and chapter types in our metadata schema, as well as books representation in JSON outputs. Best practice for books. This guide has had some recent revisions and work on it will continue this year. Bringing others from the industry into discussions on topics of particular interest, such as books on multiple platforms. Education and outreach: ongoing, with use cases of particular interest and most recently including Publisher Participation Reports Suggestions for topics are welcome.\nParticipants Chair: David Woodworth, OCLC\nFacilitators: Kora Korzec\nDiane Needham, ACS Emily Ayubi, American Psychological Association (APA) Eva Winer, American Psychological Association (APA) Timothy McAdoo, APA Fatima Abulawi, Atypon Dawn Ingram, Atypon Elli Rapti, Atypon Dan Vernooj, Brill Mike Eden, Cambridge University Press Rachael Kendall, Cambridge University Press Saskia Wenzel, De Gruyter Mike Taylor, Digital Science Allison Belan, Duke University Press Patty Chase, Duke University Press Patty Van, Duke University Press Keara Mickelson, Edinburgh University Press Melissa Kreitzer, Elsevier Marc Segers, Geoscienceworld Jim Beardow, IMF Patricia Loo, IMF Bruce Rosenblum, Inera Wendy Queen, Johns Hopkins University Press Lauren Lissaris, JSTOR Jabin White, JSTOR Bill Kasdorf, Kasdorf \u0026amp; Associates, LLC Ardie Bausenbach, Library of Congress Sharla Lair, LYRASIS Todd Carpenter, NISO Christina Drummond, OAeBU Ursula Rabar, OAeBU/OPERAS Ronald Snijder, OAPEN Claire Holloway, OCLC David Woodworth, OCLC Rupert Gatti, Open Book Publishers Shawna Sadler, ORCID Mark Dunn, Oxford University Press Amber Fischer, Oxford University Press Matthew Treskon, Project MUSE Giovanna Brito Castelhano, SciELO Stephanie Dawson, ScienceOpen Nina Tscheke, ScienceOpen Nicola Parkin, Taylor and Francis John Normansell, The University of Manchester Paige MacKay, Ubiquity Press Tom Mowlam, Ubiquity Press Erich Van Rijn, University of California Press Krista Coulson, University of Chicago Press Charles Watkinson, University of Michigan Press Jeremy Morse, University of Michigan Press Peter Potter, Virginia Tech/TOME Pascal Ssemaganda, World Bank Publications Ron Denton Sun Huh How the group works (and the guidelines) The group meets quarterly and comprises a staff facilitator, a chair and number of members and subscribers who commit to regular attendance and participation. Guest attendance is welcome on a per-meeting basis.\nPlease contact our community team with any questions or to join the calls.\n",
"headings": ["What we\u0026rsquo;re working on","Participants","How the group works (and the guidelines)"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/membership/about-sponsors/",
"title": "Working with a sponsor",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2024-11-26",
"lastmod_ts": 1732579200,
"section": "Become a member",
"tags": [],
"description": "We have thousands of small members from all over the world. Being small-scale doesn’t limit your ability to connect your content with the global network of online scholarly research. Each Crossref member also gets to cast their vote to create a board that represents all types of organisations.\nWhy join via a Sponsor? If you publish one journal or thousands, you’re welcome to join our growing community.\nWe know that cost and technical capabilities can be barriers to participation. Joining through a Sponsor can help. Members who take this option have the same obligations and benefits as any other member, but they have someone representing them for Crossref services and they don\u0026rsquo;t pay fees to Crossref directly.\n",
"content": "We have thousands of small members from all over the world. Being small-scale doesn’t limit your ability to connect your content with the global network of online scholarly research. Each Crossref member also gets to cast their vote to create a board that represents all types of organisations.\nWhy join via a Sponsor? If you publish one journal or thousands, you’re welcome to join our growing community.\nWe know that cost and technical capabilities can be barriers to participation. Joining through a Sponsor can help. Members who take this option have the same obligations and benefits as any other member, but they have someone representing them for Crossref services and they don\u0026rsquo;t pay fees to Crossref directly.\nInstead, the sponsor pays one membership fee to Crossref for all the members that they work with, and sponsors also pay the content registration fees for any content registered by their members. Many sponsors then pass on these fees to members and/or charge the members for their services, so it’s important for members to discuss the agreement carefully with a sponsor before starting to work with them.\nSponsors have to fulfill strict criteria to be accepted. Different sponsors offer different services, but most:\nFacilitate content registration with Crossref on behalf of the members they work with Provide administrative, technical, and (if applicable) local language support Handle Crossref billing (which is in USD) on behalf of these members Are able to receive payment for their services in local currency. How to join via a Sponsor Step one: Choose the sponsor you would like to work with Each sponsor has specific criteria that organisations must meet in order to work with them. For example, some Sponsors only work with organisations that are connected to them in some way - for example, they may be part of the same university consortium or the organisation may be using a specific publishing platform. Others focus on a certain geographic region or language.\nTo learn more about eligibility for a specific sponsor, you may search the list below for your requirements using the filter ‘member criteria’. You can click on a Sponsor’s listing to see their full details. Each listing contains the country in which they are located, their geographic region, their membership criteria, additional information about their services, website, and contact details.\nStep two: Discuss your arrangement directly with the sponsor If you identify a Sponsor that you’d like to explore working with, do contact them directly; we cannot broker that arrangement for you.\nThe sponsor pays one membership fee to Crossref for all the members that they work with, and sponsors also pay the content registration fees for any content registered by their members. Many sponsors then pass on these fees to members and/or charge the members for their services, so it’s important that you discuss the financial arrangement carefully with a sponsor before starting to work with them.\nYou will also need to agree who will register your DOI records with Crossref - will you do this yourself with the support of your sponsor, or will your sponsor do this for you.\nStep three: Apply to join Crossref through your chosen sponsor If you agree to work together, your Sponsor will send you a dedicated link to apply for Crossref membership under their sponsorship. Please don’t use the standard link to apply for membership that you can find on this website.\nUpon receipt of your application, we usually provide your Sponsor with your prefix and Crossref account credentials within four working days and they will be in touch with you from there. If you will be registering your own DOI records, your sponsor will share account credentials with you. If you sponsor will be registering your DOI records on your behalf, they may not share the credentials with you.\nFind a Sponsor The following organisations are currently acting as Crossref Sponsors. Use the following navigation on the form to find your future sponsor:\nBase country - the geographical location of the sponsor, where they are based.\nRegion - the geographical region where the sponsor focuses in supporting organisations. (Additionally, each sponsor has specific criteria that organisations must meet to work with them. To learn more about the eligibility for a specific sponsor, click on the sponsor listing or search for your requirements using the filter ‘member criteria’)\nFilter - refine your search for a specific sponsor, member criteria, country, or other information about the sponsors (such as platform or language)\nFor more information please contact our membership team.\n",
"headings": ["Why join via a Sponsor?","How to join via a Sponsor","Step one: Choose the sponsor you would like to work with","Step two: Discuss your arrangement directly with the sponsor","Step three: Apply to join Crossref through your chosen sponsor","Find a Sponsor"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/research-integrity-roundtable-2024/",
"title": "Research Integrity Roundtable 2024",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2024-11-15",
"lastmod_ts": 1731628800,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "For the third year in a row, Crossref hosted a roundtable on research integrity prior to the Frankfurt book fair. This year the event looked at Crossmark, our tool to display retractions and other post-publication updates to readers.\nSince the start of 2024, we have been carrying out a consultation on Crossmark, gathering feedback and input from a range of members. The roundtable discussion was a chance to check and refine some of the conclusions we’ve come to, and gather more suggestions on the way forward. As in previous years, we were able to include a range of organisations, which led to lively and interesting discussions. See below for the full participant list.\n",
"content": "For the third year in a row, Crossref hosted a roundtable on research integrity prior to the Frankfurt book fair. This year the event looked at Crossmark, our tool to display retractions and other post-publication updates to readers.\nSince the start of 2024, we have been carrying out a consultation on Crossmark, gathering feedback and input from a range of members. The roundtable discussion was a chance to check and refine some of the conclusions we’ve come to, and gather more suggestions on the way forward. As in previous years, we were able to include a range of organisations, which led to lively and interesting discussions. See below for the full participant list.\nCrossmark feedback We started by presenting Crossmark and a summary of the consultation process. There are a number of areas where we have learned more about how the community operates or found that Crossmark needs to adapt. These include:\nImplementation: Our members have struggled to implement Crossmark and uptake is low. At the same time, in many organisations the workflows for handling retractions are not well-defined because they are rarely used, if ever. The responsibility for updating Crossref metadata can be unclear and this may be a factor in the low uptake.\nEducation: There are different levels of understanding about how to handle retractions. Some members are very defensive when asked about retractions, others state they will never make updates to published works. How can we have a constructive conversation where the value of communicating updates appropriately is recognised?\nCommunity engagement: Given the different scales, locations, disciplines, and technologies used by our members, it looks like one size will not fit all when it comes to updates. How can we get continual, representative feedback on new tools and processes?\nMetadata assertions: Crossmark allows the deposit of metadata using custom field names, however this metadata seems to have low usefulness and is not highly valued by the community. Should we continue to collect it? Can we make some of the most-used field names part of our standard schema?\nChanging the Crossmark UI: Although we didn’t specifically ask about it during the consultation, the look of the Crossref logo often came up, and concern that it is not recognised and not well-used. Can we change the look and behaviour so that it has more impact?\nNISO Recommendations Patrick Hargitt represented the NISO group on Communication of Retractions, Removals, and Expressions of Concern (CREC). The group’s recommendations were published earlier this year and cover how retractions are communicated. CREC arose from an earlier project, IRSRS. A large part of the motivation is that retracted works continued to be cited, with citing authors apparently unaware of the retraction. Patrick presented the CREC recommendations, which cover:\nMetadata receipt, display, and distribution, Which metadata elements to communicate, How to implement the recommendations, Discussion of some special cases, Key stakeholders and their responsibilities. The two presentations prompted discussion, which was taken into the first of two workshops.\nFirst workshop: Improving collection of retractions and Crossmark The first workshop looked at proposed changes to Crossmark and how to encourage more members to deposit their retractions, corrections, and other post-publication updates. Several important themes emerged.\nFirst, the question of whose responsibility it should be to provide metadata on retractions and similar updates. Crossref has a responsibility to work with the community to obtain high quality and complete metadata; publishers should take responsibility for handling issues of research integrity and reporting them to relevant downstream services, like Crossref; and platforms need to provide tools that allow easy reporting of retractions.\nThe value of Crossmark appearing in PDFs was reiterated. The fact that a PDF can be downloaded, and years later there is a way to tell whether it has been retracted or not is highly valued. There was also the suggestion that the Crossmark logo on web pages can indicate a change before it has been clicked. This is something that we have been considering at Crossref and it was useful to have the idea reinforced. Another suggestion was that a browser plugin would make a good complement to Crossmark.\nImplementation issues with Crossmark were raised, including that it’s difficult to validate whether a specific implementation is complete. There are a number of different changes (to metadata deposit and content, and websites) that need to work together to have Crossmark fully functional. There were several questions and a discussion about Retraction Watch data. Some were about understanding its collection and validation. A number of participants are actively using the data and it was great to see the variety of applications.\nSecond workshop: Community use of retraction metadata The second workshop focused on a broader set of downstream organisations that might want to make use of retraction metadata. We looked at stakeholders and their needs, and attempted to match them up with existing tools. Several gaps were identified as a result, which may provide opportunities for new services or collaborations to fill them.\nWe identified a number of tools available for publishers, editorial systems, metadata researchers, and readers. A good example is reference managers, many of which are now highlighting retracted works to authors. This can help to reduce the number of retracted works being cited. Publishing platforms are also providing support to editors, using tools that include retraction metadata.\nSome of the stakeholders identified have limited tools for identifying retractions that are relevant to them. These include funders, archives and repositories, journalists, and institutions.\nOften, there are pathways for retraction data to be communicated but they are not being sufficiently used. There needs to be a concerted effort to improve the quality of retraction metadata for tools to function better. For example, a second author on a paper might not know that a correction or retraction is planned for their article. If their email or ORCID isn’t included in the metadata, an alerting tool wouldn’t be able to let them know. A similar argument can be made for institutions or funders if they are not well-identified in the metadata.\nThe question of standardisation of metadata was raised. It seems too early to implement a full set of standards at the moment. CREC and similar initiatives have documented and accommodated for a range of practices while providing guidance and principles to work towards. More discussion is needed in the community to work out paths that could be applied across the broad spectrum of scholarly communication.\nConclusion The event was very valuable in bringing up a range of topics related to retraction and communication of post-publication changes to scholarly works. We are grateful to all of the participants for their contributions and sharing their diverse experience and opinions with us.\nResearch integrity is an area of flux, with significant changes over the past few years. While there has been progress, there remain gaps in metadata and tools to communicate retractions. This is something that Crossref will continue to contribute to, and Crossmark clearly still has a role to play.\nSome of the ideas and suggestions from the discussion can be implemented in the near future. Others need further development, and we will continue to engage the community. Reading this, there may be topics where you feel you have a role to play. We are keen to partner with other organisations in this space as we continue to improve the transparency and communication of metadata for post-publication updates.\nParticipants Many thanks to the participants. Here is the full list of those that attended:\nName Role Organisation Aaron Wood Head, Product \u0026amp; Content Management American Psychological Association Adya Misra Associate Director, Research Integrity Sage Bianca Kramer Sesame Open Science Constanze Schelhorn Head of Indexing MDPI Guillaume Cabanac Full Professor University of Toulouse Hong Zhou Director of AI Product Wiley Jennifer Wright Head of Publication Ethics and Research Integrity Cambridge University Press Johanssen Obanda Community Engagement Manager Crossref Joris van Rossum Program Director STM Solutions Kathryn Weber-Boer Data \u0026amp; Analytics Digital Science Kornelia Korzec Director of Community Crossref Kruna Vukmirovic Publisher- Journals The Institution of Engineering and Technology Lena Stoll Product Manager Crossref Leslie McIntosh VP, Research Integrity Digital Science Liying Yang Professor CAS Library Luis Montilla Technical Community Manager Crossref Madhura Amdekar Community Engagement Manager Crossref Martyn Rittman Progam Lead Crossref Maryna Kovalyova Member Experience Manager Crossref Mina Roussenova Project Manager, Strategic Projects Karger Osnat Vilenchik VP Content Operations Ex Libris, part of Clarivate Patrick Hargitt Senior Director of Product Management Atypon/Wiley Paul Davis Tech Support \u0026amp; R\u0026amp;D Analyst Crossref Sami Benchekroun CEO Morressier Scott Delman Director of Publications Association of Computing Machinery (ACM) Shilpi Mehra Head, Research Integrity \u0026amp; Paperpal Preflight Cactus Communications Sichao Tong Chinese Academy of Sciences, Library ",
"headings": ["Crossmark feedback","NISO Recommendations","First workshop: Improving collection of retractions and Crossmark","Second workshop: Community use of retraction metadata","Conclusion","Participants"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/how-good-is-your-matching/",
"title": "How good is your matching?",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2024-11-06",
"lastmod_ts": 1730851200,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "In our previous blog post in this series, we explained why no metadata matching strategy can return perfect results. Thankfully, however, this does not mean that it\u0026rsquo;s impossible to know anything about the quality of matching. Indeed, we can (and should!) measure how close (or far) we are from achieving perfection with our matching. Read on to learn how this can be done!\nHow about we start with a quiz? Imagine a database of scholarly metadata that needs to be enriched with identifiers, such as ORCIDs or ROR IDs. Hopefully, by this point in our series this is recognizable as a classic matching problem. In searching for a solution, you identify an externally-developed matching tool that makes one of the below claims. Which of the following would demonstrate satisfactory performance?\n",
"content": "In our previous blog post in this series, we explained why no metadata matching strategy can return perfect results. Thankfully, however, this does not mean that it\u0026rsquo;s impossible to know anything about the quality of matching. Indeed, we can (and should!) measure how close (or far) we are from achieving perfection with our matching. Read on to learn how this can be done!\nHow about we start with a quiz? Imagine a database of scholarly metadata that needs to be enriched with identifiers, such as ORCIDs or ROR IDs. Hopefully, by this point in our series this is recognizable as a classic matching problem. In searching for a solution, you identify an externally-developed matching tool that makes one of the below claims. Which of the following would demonstrate satisfactory performance?\nIt is a cutting-edge, state-of-the-art, intelligent-as-they-come, bullet-proof technology! All the big players are using it. You won\u0026rsquo;t find anything better! The tool was tested on the metadata of 10 articles we authored, and many identifiers were matched. The quality of our matching is 98%. Okay, okay, trick question. The correct answer here is to opt for secret answer #4: \u0026ldquo;I wouldn\u0026rsquo;t be satisfied by any of these claims!\u0026rdquo; Let\u0026rsquo;s dig in a bit more to why this is the correct response.\nThe importance of the evaluation Before we decide to integrate a matching strategy, it is important to understand as much as possible about how it will perform. Whether it is used in a semi or fully automated fashion, metadata matching will result in the creation of new relationships between things like works, authors, funding sources, and institutions. Those relationships will then, in turn, be used by the consumers of this metadata to guide their understanding and perhaps even to make important decisions about those same entities. As organisations providing scholarly infrastructure, we must therefore take it as our paramount responsibility to understand any caveats or shortcomings of the scholarly metadata we make available, including that resulting from matching.\nProper evaluation is what allows us to do this, as it is impossible to know how well a given matching strategy will perform in its absence. This is true no matter how simple or complex a matching strategy may seem. Complex methods can be tailored to data with specific characteristics and might fail when faced with something different from this. Simple methods might be only appropriate for clean metadata or a narrow set of use cases.\nBeyond complexity, matching strategies themselves vary widely in character, inheriting biases from their design, training data, or how a problem has been formulated. Some prioritise avoiding false negatives, while others focus on minimising false positives. Even a generally high-performing strategy might not be perfectly aligned with your specific needs or data. In some cases, the task also itself might be too challenging, or the available metadata too noisy, for any matching strategy to perform adequately.\nEvaluation is, again, how we understand these nuances and make informed decisions about whether to implement matching or avoid it altogether. By now, it should also be clear that the notion \u0026ldquo;we don\u0026rsquo;t need to evaluate\u0026rdquo; is far from ideal! Given its importance, let\u0026rsquo;s explore how evaluation is actually done.\nEvaluation process In general, a proper evaluation procedure should follow the following steps:\nPreparation of an evaluation dataset containing many examples of matching inputs and the corresponding expected outputs. Applying the strategy to all inputs from the dataset and recording the responses. Comparing the expected outputs with the outputs from the strategy. Converting the results of the above comparison into evaluation metrics. From this accounting, we can see that there are two primary components for the evaluation process: an evaluation dataset and metrics.\nEvaluation dataset It\u0026rsquo;s useful to conceive an evaluation dataset as the specification for an ideal matching strategy, describing what would be returned from our forever-elusive perfect matching. When creating such a dataset, what this means in practice is that it should contain a number of real-world, example inputs, along with the corresponding ideal or expected outputs, and that all data should be in the same format as the strategy is expected to process. The outputs should themselves also confirm the strategy\u0026rsquo;s overall requirements, for example, by being consistent with its cardinality, meaning whether zero, one, or multiple matches should be returned and under what circumstances. In terms of size, it\u0026rsquo;s generally useful to calculate the ideal number of evaluation examples using a sample size calculator or using standardised measures, but as a quick rule of thumb: less than 100 examples is probably insufficient, more than 1,000 or 2,000 is generally acceptable.\nIt is also important that the evaluation dataset be representative of the data to be matched in order to ensure reliable results. Using unrepresentative data, even if convenient, can lead to biassed or misleading evaluations. For example, if matching affiliations from various journals, building an evaluation dataset solely from one journal that already assigns ROR IDs to authors\u0026rsquo; affiliations might be tempting. The data, having been already annotated, allow us to avoid the tedious work of labelling, and we might even know that it is produced by a high-quality source. This is still, unfortunately, a flawed approach. In practice, such datasets are unlikely to represent the entire range of affiliations to be matched, potentially leading to a significant discrepancy between the evaluated quality and the actual performance of the matching strategy, when applied to the full dataset. To assess a matching strategy\u0026rsquo;s effectiveness, we have to resist shortcuts and instead do our best to create truly representative evaluation datasets to be confident that we\u0026rsquo;ve accurately measured their performance.\nEvaluation metrics Evaluation metrics are what allow us to summarise the results of the evaluation into a single number. Metrics give us a quick way to get an estimation of how close the strategy was to achieving perfect results. They are also useful if we want to compare different strategies with each other or decide whether the strategy is sufficient for our use case, removing the need to compare countless evaluation examples from different strategies against one another.\nThe simplest metric is accuracy, which can be calculated as the fraction of the dataset examples that were matched correctly. While a commonsense benchmark, accuracy can be misleading, and we generally do not recommend using it. To understand why, let\u0026rsquo;s consider the following small dataset and the responses from two strategies:\nInput Expected output Strategy 1 Strategy 2 string 1 ID 1 ID 1 ID 1 string 2 ID 2 ID 3 Empty output string 3 Empty output Empty output Empty output Both strategies achieved the same accuracy, 0.67, making one mistake each on the second affiliation string. However, a closer examination reveals that these error types are distinct. The first strategy matched to an incorrect identifier, while the second refused to return any value illustrating the limitation of accuracy as a measure: it generally fails to capture important nuances in strategy behaviour. In our example, the first strategy appears more permissive, returning matches even in unclear circumstances, while the second is more conservative, withholding them when uncertain. Although using such a small dataset would preclude drawing any definitive conclusions, it highlights how relying on accuracy alone can obscure differences in performance.\nFor evaluating matching strategies, we instead recommend using two metrics: precision and recall. To recap from our previous blog post:\nPrecision is calculated as the number of correctly matched relationships resulting from a strategy, divided by the total number of matched relationships. It can also be interpreted as the probability that a match is correct. Low precision indicates a high rate of false positives, which are incorrect relationships created by the strategy. Recall is calculated as the number of correctly matched relationships resulting from a strategy, divided by the number of true (expected) relationships. It can also be interpreted as the probability that a true (correct) relationship will be created by the strategy. Low recall means a high rate of false negatives, which are relationships that should have been created by the strategy but were not made. Applying these measures to our prior example, the strategies achieved the following results:\nStrategy 1: accuracy 0.67, precision 0.5, recall 0.5 Strategy 2: accuracy 0.67, precision 1.0, recall 0.5 As we can see, while both strategies have the same accuracy, using precision and recall better describes the difference between the two sets of results. Strategy 1\u0026rsquo;s lower precision indicates it made false positive matches, while Strategy 2\u0026rsquo;s perfect precision shows that it made none. The identical recall scores show both identified half of the possible matches.\nOf course, results calculated using such a small dataset are not very meaningful. If we obtained these scores from a large, representative evaluation dataset, it would indicate to us that Strategy 1 risks introducing many incorrect relationships, while Strategy 2 would be unlikely to do so. In both cases, we would still expect approximately half of the possible relationships to be missing from the strategies\u0026rsquo; outputs.\nWhich one is more important to prioritise, precision or recall? It depends on the use case. As a general rule, if you want to use the strategy in a fully automated way, without any form of manual review or correction of the results, we recommend paying more attention to precision. Privileging precision will allow you to better control the number of incorrect relationships added to your data. If you want to use the strategy in a semi-automated fashion, where there is a manual examination of and a chance to correct the results, pay more attention to recall. Doing so will guarantee that enough options are presented during the manual review stage and fewer relationships will be missed as a result.\nTo get a more balanced estimation of performance, we can also consider both precision and recall at the same time using a measure called F-score. F-score combines precision and recall into a single number, with variable weight given to either aspect. There are three commonly used types, each calculated as the weighted harmonic mean of precision and recall:\nF0.5: Precision is weighted more heavily. It can be understood as a score that is 50% more sensitive to precision than recall. A high F0.5 score indicates a measure of performance that minimises false positives. F1: Equal weight is given to both precision and recall. It can be interpreted as the most balanced score in this set. High F1 indicates good overall performance, with both false positives and false negatives being minimised equally. F2: Recall is weighted more heavily. It can be understood as a score that is 50% more sensitive to recall than precision. A high F2 score indicates a measure of performance where false negatives are minimised. Each of these variants allows for fine-tuning the evaluation metric to align with your expectations for a specific matching task. Choose whichever reflects the relative importance of precision versus recall for your use case.\nTo summarise, to avoid falling prey to misleading sales pitches or silly quizzes, it is important to have a good understanding of the performance of any strategies you are building or integrating. With thorough evaluation, including a representative dataset and carefully considered metrics, we can estimate the quality of matching and, by extension, its resulting relationships.\nNow that we\u0026rsquo;ve covered how to evaluate effectively, we can move on to some other aspects of metadata matching. Our next blog post will take a final, more holistic view of matching, exploring some complementary considerations to all of the preceding. Stay tuned for more!\n",
"headings": ["The importance of the evaluation","Evaluation process","Evaluation dataset","Evaluation metrics"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/update-rcfs/",
"title": "Update on the Resourcing Crossref for Future Sustainability research",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2024-10-28",
"lastmod_ts": 1730073600,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "We’re in year two of the Resourcing Crossref for Future Sustainability (RCFS) research. This report provides an update on progress to date, specifically on research we’ve conducted to better understand the impact of our fees and possible changes.\nCrossref is in a good financial position with our current fees, which haven’t increased in 20 years. This project is seeking to future-proof our fees by:\nMaking fees more equitable Simplifying our complex fee schedule Rebalancing revenue sources In order to review all aspects of our fees, we’ve planned five projects to look into specific aspects of our current fees that may need to change to achieve the goals above. This is an update on the research and discussions that have been underway with our Membership \u0026amp; Fees Committee and our Board, and what we’ve learned so far in each of these areas.\n",
"content": "We’re in year two of the Resourcing Crossref for Future Sustainability (RCFS) research. This report provides an update on progress to date, specifically on research we’ve conducted to better understand the impact of our fees and possible changes.\nCrossref is in a good financial position with our current fees, which haven’t increased in 20 years. This project is seeking to future-proof our fees by:\nMaking fees more equitable Simplifying our complex fee schedule Rebalancing revenue sources In order to review all aspects of our fees, we’ve planned five projects to look into specific aspects of our current fees that may need to change to achieve the goals above. This is an update on the research and discussions that have been underway with our Membership \u0026amp; Fees Committee and our Board, and what we’ve learned so far in each of these areas.\nGoal 1: More equitable fees. To ensure our fees going into the future are more equitable, we’re carrying out two parallel projects: evaluation of the lowest membership tier, and the review of the basis for deciding the membership tiers and distribution of membership across them.\nProject 1: Evaluate the lowest membership tier and propose a more equitable pricing structure. All Crossref members pay an annual membership fee. These fees are tiered, and different members pay a different fee depending on the annual publishing revenue that their organisation receives (or publishing expenses if they don’t receive any publishing revenue).\nWe entered into this project recognising that we have too many membership tiers and the definition we use to size members is not consistent and can be confusing (e.g. different basis for funders than other organisations, and both are different still from subscribers to our Metadata Plus service). The idea of the membership tiers was to use publishing revenue as a proxy for “ability to pay”. We really want to develop proposals for a more equitable pricing structure. However we don’t know enough about our members’ capacity to pay to be able to model an alternative approach.\nOur current lowest fee tier is $275 (USD) for any organisation with annual publishing revenue (or publishing expenses where the organisation doesn’t receive publishing revenue) of $0 to $1 million, and this is the tier where we focus our attention in our first project of the RCFS program. The difference between an organisation with revenue or expenses of USD 0, and an organisation with revenue or expenses of USD 1 million, is huge. Hardly any new members have joined in any other tier in the past several years. Of the 21,000 active members, more than 20,000 fall into the USD 275 tier - either directly (as an independent member) or indirectly (through a sponsor, where their fees would be lower). A fee structure that would fit better with the realities of our community might entail breaking our current $275 fee tier down into two or more more granular tiers.\nAt the moment, the majority of Crossref’s revenues come from the bottom membership tiers; 65% of membership revenues come from organisations in the USD 275 tier. We also know that many of those members (86%) are paying more in membership dues than in content registration, whereas other members have the inverse relationship between annual dues and content registration. Overall, the members in the USD 275 tier contributed 34% of Crossref’s revenue last year, and the members in the \u0026gt;USD 50 million tier – contributed 29%.\nMembers’ survey Between April and May this year, we surveyed all independent members in the USD 275 tier. We asked questions about their operating size, how they’re funded, and how Crossref’s fees affect them. At the time of the survey, there were 8,027 members in this category. We received 1,054 responses; with a 13% response rate and broad representation globally, we are confident in the sample size. One-third of respondents said they were part of a larger organisation (such as a department or a library in a research institution).\nChart 1: Organisation revenue or funding The majority of respondents in this category (65%) have annual revenue or expense of less than USD 100,000; with 48% operating with less than USD 10,000.\nChart 2: Sources of funding When asked about the sources of funding (as an indicator of how stable these organisations might be and how readily accessible their funding is) the most frequent answer was public or government funding, and then article processing charges. If organisations relied on two sources of funding, the most common combination was public funding and article processing charges, and it was relatively rare for these organisations to have multiple sources of funding.\nChart 3: What percentage of expenses do you spend on Crossref fees?\nThe majority (61%) of respondents spend less than 5% of their expenses on Crossref fees. However, we have also learnt that for some volunteer-run publications, Crossref fees might be some of the only expenses they incur. Interestingly, the percentage of expenses spent on Crossref is fairly consistently spread across the continents.\nProject 2: Review the basis and distribution of membership tiers This project examines options for how we define the capacity to pay, how members are distributed across tiers, and the right levels of member fees.\nThere are currently a range of prices for our annual fees, based on an organisation\u0026rsquo;s ability to pay. We have used the metric of annual publishing expense or revenue as an indicator of that ability, but in some cases it doesn’t apply. As per our fee principles, we have not differentiated between organisation types. Nonprofit and commercial entities pay the same price (caveat: research funders still have a separate fee schedule, but that was intended to be temporary).\nWe conducted a review of other annual fee models to benchmark our approach against six like-minded organisations working in the context of scholarly communications and infrastructure. We looked at whether these organisations based their fees on one more more of the following:\nVolume: e.g., research output, # of journals Budget: e.g., total annual revenue or expenses Relevant budget: e.g. publishing revenue Organisation type: e.g. variance in fee based on publisher, institution, or funder Country-level economic data: e.g., discounting based on World Bank classification, discounting based on purchasing power calculation. Chart 4: Annual fee schedules comparisons between Crossref and CORE, DOAJ, Dryad, OA Switch-board, OpenCitations and ORCID.\nThere are three consistent themes among our peers: the total annual revenue and volume levels are the most common basis for membership fees among other organisations, and almost all offer discounted fees to accommodate country-based economic circumstances, utilising World Bank’s data (this is currently achieved at Crossref via the GEM program, which we have full intention of incorporating into our future fees whatever other decisions we might take). Only one other organisation uses publishing revenue or expenses as a basis for annual fees, while the potentially more transparent and less ambiguous data point of the total revenue factors in three other annual fee models.\nFor subscribers to our Metadata Plus service, the fee tier is selected based on whichever is the higher between their total annual revenue (including earned and fundraised, e.g. grants) or annual operating expenses (including staff and non-staff, e.g. occupancy, equipment, licences etc.). At present, we have limited understanding of the budgets of our members and how this may compare to their publishing revenues or expenses. We are looking to learn more about this as part of our annual membership data checking process, where we email all our members to ask them to confirm contact details for their organisation and the staff involved in managing their Crossref account. This year, we’re also asking all members about their organisation’s annual operating budget (or planned annual expenses) to help inform our discussions. In our case, the volume of outputs (in this case the number of items and associated metadata registered with Crossref) is recognised by the registration fees mechanism.\nConsulting with organisations outside Crossref membership To help us inform how our fees can be more equitable, it’s important to invite voices of organisations that may currently be unable to join us - due to fees or technical barriers. We hope that learning more about their circumstances will help us make sure that we improve accessibility of Crossref membership to all organisations that publish scholarly and professional works. We commissioned Accucoms to carry out a consultation on our behalf.\nSo far, from a handful of interviews with publishers from Nigeria, DRC, Canada and USA, we’ve learnt that while virtually all offer open access to their publications, the majority has no publishing income, and where the income is derived via APCs it’s modest and only applicable in rare circumstances. Through institutional funding and/or grants, these organisations have modest operational budgets, yet our respondents lacked clarity over the particulars. In terms of participation in professional networks and international publishing organisations, only one of the organisations we interviewed participates in DOAJ, and another is a member of OASPA, in both cases their participation is free. Among the interviewees, two organisations were interested in Crossref membership in the past but encountered technical barriers to joining.\nWith only five interviews to date, the consultation is still open and we’re keen to hear from more organisations that are not Crossref members but have considered our membership at some point.\nGoal 2: Simplify complex fees Projects 3 \u0026amp; 4: Review volume and back-year discounts for Content Registration Along with our membership fees, our members also pay usage-based registration fees for records (scholarly works and grants) they register with us. Different content types render different costs for our members, and the fees are subject to discounts related to the age of publication and volume of registrations. Records for items older than two years have a lower fee associated with them, to help incentivise registration of such \u0026lsquo;back-year\u0026rsquo; materials with great gains for the Research Nexus. There are also discounts related to the volume of transactions – which again depend on the content types.\nThese discounts are intended to encourage certain behaviours, specifically encouraging members to register older records in large quantities to better complete the scholarly record. Not all content types have back-year or volume discounts, and the rate of discount varies. This creates quite a complex system of fees. To the extent that the discount is successful in encouraging this behaviour, we want to preserve it, but in many cases these discounts see little to no activity.\nFollowing the discussions of the Membership and Fees Committee, chaired by Vincas Grigas, Vilnius University, we are preparing to consult with the small number of members who currently receive volume discounts to discuss what the impact would be if we removed them.\nWe plan to identify and preserve the well-used back-year discounts, which encourage registration of old content, such as books, journal articles, grants. However, there are types of discounts that are hardly ever used and we are considering removing these to simplify the fees. This work will focus on the technical implications of removing some of the underused back-year discounts from the billing code and consulting with members to understand any impact .\nGoal 3: Rebalance revenue sources Project 5: Reflect increase in metadata usage and perceived shift of value toward metadata distribution All Crossref metadata is made freely and openly available to everyone. However, some organisations may be looking for a service level agreement in delivery of the metadata, plus more regular snapshots and priority service/rate limits. For those organisations, we have an optional Metadata Plus service.\nThe final project is looking at the fees for this service. We are interested in making sure that Crossref metadata is available and used by the community where it can contribute to their objectives – related to discovery, analysis, integrity, and more. The optional paid service we offer aims to support the external tools that facilitate business and scholarly processes for the community. We are heartened to see that the appetite for the use of metadata seems to be growing, and the value of open research information is increasingly and widely recognised. We want to ensure that the users of metadata contribute proportionally to the maintenance of the records created and curated by our members.\nConclusion At this point, most projects generate a lot of questions and the work is underway to deliver answers related to capacity to pay, discounts as well as available metadata usage, and barriers faced by organisations in our community.\nWhat we have found so far is that two of our goals – simplification and equity – are often at odds with each other, and this is especially true with the $275 tier.\nWe welcome comments, suggestions and questions.\n",
"headings": ["Goal 1: More equitable fees.","Project 1: Evaluate the lowest membership tier and propose a more equitable pricing structure.","Members’ survey","Project 2: Review the basis and distribution of membership tiers","Consulting with organisations outside Crossref membership","Goal 2: Simplify complex fees","Projects 3 \u0026amp; 4: Review volume and back-year discounts for Content Registration","Goal 3: Rebalance revenue sources","Project 5: Reflect increase in metadata usage and perceived shift of value toward metadata distribution","Conclusion"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/2024-board-election/",
"title": "Meet the candidates and vote in our 2024 Board elections",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2024-09-24",
"lastmod_ts": 1727136000,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "On behalf of the Nominating Committee, I’m pleased to share the slate of candidates for the 2024 board election.\nEach year we do an open call for board interest. This year, the Nominating Committee received 53 submissions from members worldwide to fill four open board seats.\nWe maintain a balanced board of 8 large member seats and 8 small member seats. Size is determined based on the organisation\u0026rsquo;s membership tier (small members fall in the $0-$1,650 tiers and large members in the $3,900 - $50,000 tiers). We have two large member seats and two small member seats open for election in 2024.\n",
"content": "On behalf of the Nominating Committee, I’m pleased to share the slate of candidates for the 2024 board election.\nEach year we do an open call for board interest. This year, the Nominating Committee received 53 submissions from members worldwide to fill four open board seats.\nWe maintain a balanced board of 8 large member seats and 8 small member seats. Size is determined based on the organisation\u0026rsquo;s membership tier (small members fall in the $0-$1,650 tiers and large members in the $3,900 - $50,000 tiers). We have two large member seats and two small member seats open for election in 2024.\nWe were pleased to see the diversity in candidates, with applicants from 24 countries. We also received three applications from research funders, which we specifically identified as a priority in the committee’s remit for this year. The committee was keen to prepare a diverse slate of organisation types, individual skills, and global representation.\nThe Nominating Committee presents the following slate.\nThe 2024 slate Tier 1 candidates (electing two seats): Katharina Rieck, Austrian Science Fund (FWF) Lisa Schiff, California Digital Library Ejaz Khan, Health Services Academy, Pakistan Journal of Public Health Karthikeyan Ramalingam, MM Publishers Tier 2 candidates (electing two seats): Aaron Wood, American Psychological Association Dan Shanahan, PLOS Amanda Ward, Taylor and Francis Please read the candidates\u0026rsquo; statements Every member has a vote If your organisation is a voting member in good standing as of September 11th, 2024, you are eligible to vote.\nThe voting contact for your organisation will receive a ballot from eBallot, a third party election platform. You should receive your ballot by Wednesday, September 25th, and you will have until 15:00 UTC on October 29th to submit your ballot.\nThe election results will be announced at Crossref2024, our anual online meeting on October 29th, 2024.\nIf you have any questions about our election process, please contact me\nHappy voting!\n",
"headings": ["The 2024 slate","Tier 1 candidates (electing two seats):","Tier 2 candidates (electing two seats):","Please read the candidates\u0026rsquo; statements","Every member has a vote"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/services/grant-linking-system/",
"title": "Grant Linking System (GLS)",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2024-09-04",
"lastmod_ts": 1725408000,
"section": "Find a service",
"tags": [],
"description": " The Crossref Grant Linking System (GLS) is a service for research funders to contribute to open science infrastructure. As members of Crossref, funders create unique links and open metadata about their support of all kinds, from financial grants to prizes to use of facilities. This metadata is distributed at scale openly and globally and the unique links are acknowledged in any outputs of the funding, such as publications, preprints, data and code - in order to streamline the reporting process. Background to the Grant Linking System In 2017, our board agreed that connecting more intentionally with research funding should be a key strategic priority for the Crossref infrastructure which already supported all kinds of research outputs like articles, preprints, standards, datasets, etc. Whilst the scholarly community has long been linking persistently between articles and other objects (Crossref), people (ORCID), and institutions (ROR), the record of the award was not captured in a consistent way across funders worldwide. Researchers and publishers have long been acknowledging funders in their publication metadata but the grants themselves were not easily and persistently linked up with the literature or with researchers or with institutions.\n",
"content": " The Crossref Grant Linking System (GLS) is a service for research funders to contribute to open science infrastructure. As members of Crossref, funders create unique links and open metadata about their support of all kinds, from financial grants to prizes to use of facilities. This metadata is distributed at scale openly and globally and the unique links are acknowledged in any outputs of the funding, such as publications, preprints, data and code - in order to streamline the reporting process. Background to the Grant Linking System In 2017, our board agreed that connecting more intentionally with research funding should be a key strategic priority for the Crossref infrastructure which already supported all kinds of research outputs like articles, preprints, standards, datasets, etc. Whilst the scholarly community has long been linking persistently between articles and other objects (Crossref), people (ORCID), and institutions (ROR), the record of the award was not captured in a consistent way across funders worldwide. Researchers and publishers have long been acknowledging funders in their publication metadata but the grants themselves were not easily and persistently linked up with the literature or with researchers or with institutions.\nAfter a board motion in 2017, we reconvened our Funder Advisory Group and worked with other community partners such as Europe PMC to create a new strategic plan. Part of that work was to agree on a sustainability model and fee schedule, and to design a schema that would capture relevant metadata about grants and projects, and in 2019 we launched the Crossref Grant Linking System (GLS).\nNow, over 35 funders have joined as members of Crossref created over 125,000 grants with metadata records and globally unique persistent links that can be connected with outputs, activities, people, and organisations.\nFeatures of the Grant Linking System Globally unique persistent link and identifier for each grant Connected with over 170 million published outputs Funder-designed metadata schema, including project, investigator, value, and award-type information Programmatic or no-code methods to send metadata Thanks to the Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation who funded development of the online grant registration form in 2023. Distributed openly to thousands of tools and services Open search and API for all to discover funding outcomes Crossref-hosted landing pages A global community of ~50 funder advisors and \u0026gt;35+ funders already in the Grant Linking System Membership of Crossref; influence the foundational infrastructure powering open research What our GLS funder members say Research funders are a part of the scholarly communications system. We not only provide the funding to do the actual research but can also be the authoritative source of data about the projects we have funded and the outputs arising from that funding. Increasingly, all these elements – grants, researchers, outputs - are linked with persistent identifiers to ensure that research is findable and accessible. As part of its open science policy, NWO will start participating in the Crossref Grant Linking System from July 2025\n\u0026ndash; Hans de Jonge, Director of Open Science NL, part of the Dutch Research Council (NWO)\nGrant DOIs enhance the discovery and accessibility of funded project information and are one of the important links in a connected research ecosystem. I\u0026rsquo;m grateful and proud to contribute to the robustness and interconnectedness of the research infrastructure. Few funders are currently participating in the Crossref Grant Linking System, and I encourage others to consider doing so. This adoption follows the \u0026ldquo;network effect,\u0026rdquo; where the value and utility increase as more people participate, encouraging even wider adoption.\n\u0026ndash; Kristin Eldon Whylly, Senior Grants Manager and Change Management Lead at Templeton World Charity Fund (TWCF)\nThe initiative by FCT to assign unique DOIs to national public funding through Crossref is a game-changer for open science, linking funding directly to scientific outcomes and boosting transparency. Join us in this effort—let\u0026rsquo;s make every grant count and ensure open access to research information!\u0026quot;\n\u0026ndash; Cátia Laranjeira, PTCRIS Program Manager at Fundacao para a Ciencia e a Tecnologis (FCT Portugal)\n+- Benefits for funders\rDuring research management (primarily coming from activity reporting):\nImproved analytics and data quality More complete picture of outputs and impact Better value from investments in reporting services Improved timeliness, completeness and accuracy of reporting More complete information to support analysis and evaluation Streamlined discovery of funded content During reporting and evaluation (with a special component for policy compliance):\nBetter information about publication pathways and policy compliance Better/more comprehensive data about the impact and outcomes of their policies Improved data on policy compliance Improved data on policy progress and impact Streamlined discovery of funded content Better understanding of the effects of investments on the research landscape Clearer data on impact and ‘ROI’ for facility/infrastructure investments Improved analysis and evidence of outcomes of career support Improved publication ethics and research integrity (COIs, funding transparency etc.) Improved picture of long-term ROI and impact +- Benefits for content hosts\rContent hosts include publishers, data repositories, and hosting platforms\nImproved publication ethics and research integrity Improved services to authors Improved transparency on content access More connections within and between platforms and content New platform opportunities and value added services Reduced administrative and information management/verification overhead New value add services Greater ecosystem integration Improved user experiences +- Benefits for research organisations\rThis includes benefits for research administrators and managers, resource managers, project managers, and institutional policy makers.\nResearch administrators and managers benefit from:\nOpportunities to provide additional effective and constructive support for proposal preparation (pre-award) Find it easier to perform due diligence (pre-award) Reduced overhead in data collection (research management) Reduced overhead in compliance and data checking (research management) Reduced time/effort and improved data quality (reporting and evaluation) Improved evidence for decision making (reporting and evaluation) Better evidence for career and organisational impact (reporting and evaluation) Resource managers benefit from:\nBetter intelligence on funding sources and dynamics (pre-award) Better understanding of who is using their facilities (research management) Clearer links to downstream benefits of their work and provision (reporting and evaluation) Improved reporting/analysis capacity (reporting and evaluation) Improved data quality (research management) Simplified data sharing (research management) Institutional policy makers and strategists benefit from:\nUnderstanding funder portfolios to improve grant targeting (pre-award) Reduced data gathering overhead and improved intelligence about their portfolio of outputs (research management) Richer understandings of their research activity portfolio (research management) Better management of APC budgets (research management) Greater insight and evidence for stronger strategic planning (research management) More complete information to support analysis and evaluation (reporting and evaluation) Improved analytics and data quality (reporting and evaluation) Better understanding of outcomes of studentships and postdoctoral positions (reporting and evaluation) Improved connections to alumni (reporting and evaluation) Better data for benchmarking (reporting and evaluation) +- Benefits for researchers\rIn applying for funding, researchers benefit from:\nReduced data entry and improved reusability of information in applications Better tailored institutional support Improved targeting and design of career supporting interventions from funders Improved review Easier completion of applications In conducting research, researchers can benefit from:\nBoosted current awareness Easier access to facilities Reduced administrative overhead In publishing researchers benefit as authors and as readers from:\nShorter publication delays Simplified acknowledgement processes Critical awareness of any potential bias Richer context and simplified discovery Reduced uncertainty and administration around policy compliance In reporting on their activities to funders:\nImproved reporting experiences A shift from data collation/entry to verification Easier acknowledgement of support for their careers In building their careers:\nBoosted impact and enhanced visibility As collaborators, from better understanding of the contributions of others and improved recognition for their own contributions Clearer, more complete and complex career records Enhanced career recognition and support More diverse data sources for recognition and reward At every stage, the core benefits for researchers include:\nBetter career representations and reputational enhancement Simplified administration, reporting and application processes with reduced overhead and duplication of effort Better intelligence about research support and future opportunities for funding and collaboration Funder-designed metadata model One thing to note about Crossref grant records is that they can be registered for all sorts of support for research, such as awards, use of facilities, sponsorship, training, or salary awards. Essentially any form of support provided to a research group. The award type list (agreed by the Funder Advisory Group) is currently:\nAPC: article processing charge award: a prize, award, or other type of general funding BPC: book processing charge contract: agreement involving payment crowdfunding: funding raised via multiple sources, typically small amounts raised online endowment: gift of money that will provide an income equipment: use of or gift of equipment facilities: use of location, equipment, or other resources fellowship: grant given for research or study grant: a monetary award infrastructure: developmnet of infrastructure to support research loan: money or other resource given in anticipation of repayment other: award of undefined type prize: an award given for achievement salary-award: an award given as salary, includes intramural research funding secondment: detachment of a person or resource for temporary assignment elsewhere seed-funding: an investor invests capital in exchange for equity training-grant: grant given for training Take a look at the metadata schema described in our schema markup guide for grant metadata, to see the details of how to send (or retrieve) metadata including investigators, funding values and types, unlimited numbers of projects with titles and descriptions, and more.\nOutcomes: funding and outputs connected Matching and analyses Over the years, since the Grant Linking System has evolved, we have been closely watching and analysing the effects of all funding data on the global Crossref infrastructure. This round-up of some of the community's analyses shows the breadth of applications.\nIn 2024, we updated some matching on award IDs in publications with grants registering in Crossref, really showing the linking system in effect.\nnumber of as of 2023-04-16 as of 2024-04-16 grants 76,621 120,819 (+58%) members registering grants 28 34 (+21%) matched relationships 98,593 155,475 (+58%) matched grants 18,114 27,199 (+50%) See earlier reports that show the same sort of analyses of grant\u0026lt;-\u0026gt;output matching as the above table, and their results with more explanation, from 2023: The more the merrier, or how more registered grants means more relationships with outputs; and from 2022: Follow the money, or how to link grants to research outputs.\nThe role of publishers Publishers have been including funding acknowledgements in their publication metadata at Crossref for over a decade. But they did not have a persistent link to allow seamless linking between article and grant. Now with the Crossref system they do - and as more and more funders join and register grants with us, more and more publishers will start to pick these up and include them in their article (and other) metadata. In fact, all 25,000+ Crossref members have a responsibility to use Crossref links wherever they can, in reference lists, on interfaces, in search engines, etc.\nReal life example from eLife\u0026lt;-\u0026gt;Wellcome of the GLS in action This unique Crossref link https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.90959.3 is for an eLife article that displays another unique Crossref link (https://doi.org/10.35802/212242) to the Wellcome grant on the Europe PMC page.\nThe same example now in the metadata using the funder-designed metadata schema for relationship is-financed-by.\nThat\u0026rsquo;s an example of funders and their grants and publishers and their publications connecting together, using the Grant Linking System within the global open science infrastructure.\nThe role of Grant Management Systems Following Europe PMC helping Wellcome and their other funders to create Crossref XML and host landing pages on their site, and Altum\u0026rsquo;s ProposalCentral integrating with Crossref since 2021, in 2024, the GLS started to see increased interest from other systems in integrating with Crossref. One such example is an open-source plugin for Fluxx, which was kindly funded by OA.Works: https://github.com/oaworks/create-grant-doi-in-fluxx.\nWe\u0026rsquo;re currently reviewing and supporting Crossref integrations within a number of other Grant Management Systems and will add a list of those integrations here soon. Please get in touch if you are able to contribute to this work.\nGetting started If you\u0026rsquo;re reading this far you must be about ready to get going. You\u0026rsquo;ll be joining Wellcome, European Research Council, NWO - Dutch Research Council, FWF - Austrian Science Fund, FCT - Foundation for Science and Technology, Portugal, JST - Japan Science and Technology Agency, CSIRO, Melanoma Research Alliance, OSTI at the US Department of Energy, and many other Crossref funder members.\nYou will need to be a Crossref member in order to participate in the Grant Linking System and register unique links for your grants.\nOnce you\u0026rsquo;re a member (or in preparation for becoming one), take a look at our documentation on registering grants which will walk you through what you need to know and what information you can to send to Crossref (which makes it globally and openly distributed at scale through our APIs). Some things you will need:\nUnique landing page for each grant, which should always also display the unique link An Open Funder Registry ID (find yours by searching for your organisation at search.crossref.org/funding) and noting the ID in the URL (or ask us) Ability to create and send XML metadata OR allocate staff to register using the manual form funded by the Moore Foundation Map your internal award types to the Crossref award types Create communications for your awardees and/or include the Grant Linking System in your agreements. We\u0026rsquo;ve compiled a few examples below. Membership \u0026amp; fees Funders who would like to participate in the Grant Linking System and register their research grants should apply to join as a member. In some cases, your organisation may already be a member - so we\u0026rsquo;ll check on that for you as you may be able to register grants under you existing membership. Membership comes with obligations to maintain the metadata record for the long term; our membership terms sets these out. You will also be able to participate in Crossref governance such as voting in or standing for our annual board elections - it\u0026rsquo;s very much encouraged to maintain funder voices in the oversight of Crossref. Your first year\u0026rsquo;s membership invoice needs to be settled before a DOI prefix is assigned and your grant registrations can begin.\nOur current fee structure for funders includes an annual membership fee (from USD $200 to USD $1200 depending on annual award value) and a higher per record fee of USD $1.00 for current grants. During 2026 and 2027, we are also piloting a waiver of fees for historical grants (those older than two full calendar years). The membership fees were proposed by the original Advisory Group of funders and approved by the board in 2018, and the registration fees were revised last December. Please see our fees page for more information. Please note that fees are currently subject to our community consultation as part of the Resourcing Crossref for Future Sustainability (RCFS) Program that started in 2024.\nCommunicating with grantees Some of our members have shared their standard notifications with the rest of the funder group. Some funders include mention of the Crossref unique link in their contracts, on acceptance, and some in emailed or online guidance. Some specify how the awardee should acknowledge their funding. We\u0026rsquo;ve noted a few examples that can be adapted depending on your process:\nIn an email notification Dear [principal investigator],\nThrough Crossref, [funder name] has assigned a globally unique identifier to your grant: https://doi.org/10.#####/#####. We ask that this link is used in all instances when referencing our funding such as when submitting a journal article, or when posting other elements of your research (e.g. preprints, data). Please enter this unique identifier link in the Award Number field (or equivalent) if one is available, and in the funding acknowledgement section of your work (sample included). The publisher can then collect it and associate it with your work.\nThis will help to accurately identify and recognize any funding you have received, connect your research outputs with the grant automatically, streamline the reporting process, track the outputs of the grant. It can also boost the impact of your research and demonstrate your accomplishments to other funders and the rest of the research community.\nPlease use the following text to acknowledge the funding: \u0026ldquo;This publication is based on research supported by [funder name] (open funder registry ID ##########) under the grant https://doi.org/10.#####/#####”.\nFurther details are available [\u0026hellip;link to guidance as relevant].\nIn an agreement Communications clause: Any publication based on or developed under the Grant must, unless otherwise requested by the Grantor, contain an acknowledgment in the following or similar language that includes the Grantor’s open funder registry identifier and the Grant digital object identifier (DOI): \u0026ldquo;This publication is based on research supported by [funder name] (open funder registry ID ##########) under the grant https://doi.org/10.#####/#####\".\nAcknowledgements In mid-2024, we celebrated five years of grant linking! While thanks certainly go to our current volunteers from the funding community, we acknowledge that the GLS would not have been possible without early dedicated time and input from the following people and organisations on our working groups for governance and fees, and for metadata modelling:\nYasushi Ogasaka and Ritsuko Nakajima, Japan Science \u0026amp; Technology Agency Neil Thakur and Brian Haugen, US National Institutes of Health Jo McEntyre and Michael Parkin, Europe PMC Robert Kiley and Nina Frentop, Wellcome Alexis-Michel Mugabushaka and Diego Chialva, European Research Council Lance Vowell and Carly Robinson, OSTI/US Dept of Energy Ashley Moore and Kevin Dolby, UKRI/Medical Research Council/Research Councils UK Salvo da Rosa, Children\u0026rsquo;s Tumor Foundation Trisha Cruse, DataCite Please contact our membership specialists with any questions about joining, or our technical support specialists with questions about the grants schema or how to register your grants.\n",
"headings": ["Background to the Grant Linking System","Features of the Grant Linking System","What our GLS funder members say","Funder-designed metadata model","Outcomes: funding and outputs connected","Matching and analyses","The role of publishers","Real life example from eLife\u0026lt;-\u0026gt;Wellcome of the GLS in action","The role of Grant Management Systems","Getting started","Membership \u0026amp; fees","Communicating with grantees","In an email notification","In an agreement","Acknowledgements"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/the-myth-of-perfect-metadata-matching/",
"title": "The myth of perfect metadata matching",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2024-08-28",
"lastmod_ts": 1724803200,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "In our previous instalments of the blog series about matching (see part 1 and part 2), we explained what metadata matching is, why it is important and described its basic terminology. In this entry, we will discuss a few common beliefs about metadata matching that are often encountered when interacting with users, developers, integrators, and other stakeholders. Spoiler alert: we are calling them myths because these beliefs are not true! Read on to learn why.\n",
"content": "In our previous instalments of the blog series about matching (see part 1 and part 2), we explained what metadata matching is, why it is important and described its basic terminology. In this entry, we will discuss a few common beliefs about metadata matching that are often encountered when interacting with users, developers, integrators, and other stakeholders. Spoiler alert: we are calling them myths because these beliefs are not true! Read on to learn why.\nIf you have stuck with us this far in our series, hopefully, you are at least a bit excited about the possibility of creating new relationships between the works, authors, institutions, preprints, datasets, and myriad other objects in our existing scholarly metadata. Who would not want all of these to be better connected?\nWe have to pause for a moment and be honest with you: metadata matching is a complex problem, and doing it correctly requires significant effort. What is worse, even if we do everything right, our matching won\u0026rsquo;t be perfect. This may be counterintuitive. Perhaps you\u0026rsquo;ve heard that matching is not a hard problem, or have encountered people surprised that a matching strategy returned a wrong or incomplete answer. Sometimes, it is obvious to a person from looking at some specific example that a match should (or should not) have been made, so they naturally assume that a change to account for this has to be simple.\nMisconceptions like these can be problematic. They create confusion around matching, drive users\u0026rsquo; expectations to unreasonable levels, and make people drastically underestimate the effort needed to build and integrate matching strategies. So let\u0026rsquo;s dive right in and debunk a few common myths about metadata matching.\nMyth #1: A metadata matching strategy should be 100% correct Anyone who has built or supported a matching strategy has likely encountered the following belief: it is possible to develop a perfect strategy, meaning one that always returns the correct results, no matter the inputs. The unfortunate truth is that while one\u0026rsquo;s aim should always be to design matching strategies that return correct results, once we move beyond the simplest class of problems or artificially clean data, no strategy can achieve this outcome. In thinking through why this is the case, some inherent constraints become obvious:\nThe inputs to matching are often strings in human-readable formats, which can vary wildly in their structure, order and completeness. Since they\u0026rsquo;re intended to be parsed by people, instead of machines, they\u0026rsquo;re inherently lossy and frequently unstructured, anticipating that a person can infer from the source context what is being referenced. Matching strategies, although built to make sense of unstructured data, unfortunately, don\u0026rsquo;t have the luxury of this flexibility. A strategy has to account for translating a messy, partial, or inconsistent input into a correct and structured match.\nConsider, for example, the following inputs to an affiliation matching strategy:\n\u0026ldquo;Department of Radiology, St. Mary\u0026rsquo;s Hospital, London W2 1NY, UK\u0026rdquo; \u0026ldquo;Saint Mary\u0026rsquo;s Hospital, Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust\u0026rdquo; \u0026ldquo;St. Mary\u0026rsquo;s Medical Center, San Francisco, CA\u0026rdquo; \u0026ldquo;St Mary\u0026rsquo;s Hosp., Dublin\u0026rdquo; \u0026ldquo;St Mary\u0026rsquo;s Hospital Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust\u0026rdquo; \u0026ldquo;聖マリア病院\u0026rdquo; In order to correctly identify the organisations mentioned here, the matching strategy must be able to distinguish between different ways of representing the same institution, disambiguate multiple institutions that have similar names, and handle variant forms for the parts of each name (Saint/St./St), identify the same name in different languages (\u0026ldquo;聖マリア病院\u0026rdquo; is Japanese for \u0026ldquo;St. Mary\u0026rsquo;s Hospital\u0026rdquo;), and make assumptions about partial or ambiguous locations translating to more precise references. While a person reviewing each of these strings might be able to accomplish these tasks, even here there are some challenges. Does \u0026ldquo;St Mary\u0026rsquo;s Hosp., Dublin\u0026rdquo; refer to the hospital in Ireland or a separate hospital in one of the many cities that share this name? Should we presume that because \u0026ldquo;聖マリア病院\u0026rdquo; is in Japanese, this refers to a hospital in Japan? Would someone, by default, be aware that St. Mary\u0026rsquo;s Hospital in London is part of the Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, such that inputs one and five refer to the same organisation?\nAn additional challenge lies in the quality of the data, which in the context of matching, encompasses both the input and the dataset being matched against. In real world circumstances, no dataset is fully accurate, complete, or current and certainly not all three. As a result, there will always be functionally random differences between inputs to the strategy and the entities to be matched. A theoretically perfect matching strategy would thus need to distinguish between inconsequential discrepancies resulting from gaps, errors, and variable forms of reference and actual, meaningful differences indicating an incorrect match. As one might imagine, this would require near total knowledge of the meaning and context for all inputs and outputs, a nigh-on impossible task for any person or system!\nAs a consequence, no metadata matching strategy will ever be perfect. It is unreasonable for us to expect them to be. This does not mean, of course, that all strategies are equally flawed or destined to forever return middling results. Some are better than others and we can improve them over time. Which brings us to the next myth:\nMyth #2: It is always a good idea to adapt the matching strategy to a specific input Matching strategies are not static. They can - and should - be improved. There is, however, a deceptive trap that one can fall into when attempting to improve a matching strategy. Whenever we encounter an incorrect or missing result for a specific input, we treat this problem like a software bug and try to adapt the strategy to work better for it, without considering all other cases.\nThe more complicated reality is that the quality of matching results is controlled through a complex set of trade-offs between precision and recall that determine the kind and number of relationships created between items:\nPrecision is calculated as the number of correctly matched relationships resulting from a strategy, divided by the total number of matched relationships. It can also be interpreted as the probability that a match is correct. Low precision indicates a high rate of false positives, which are incorrect relationships created by the strategy. Recall is calculated as the number of correctly matched relationships resulting from a strategy, divided by the number of true (expected) relationships. It can also be interpreted as the probability that a true (correct) relationship will be created by the strategy. Low recall means a high rate of false negatives, which are relationships that should have been created by the strategy but were not made. The diagram depicts false negatives and false positives. The ideal outcome would be that the ellipses are identical, matched relationships are exactly the same as true relationships, and there are no false negatives or false positives. In practice, we try to make the intersection as big as possible.\nThe tradeoff between precision and recall roughly means that modifying the strategy to improve recall will decrease precision, and vice versa.\nImagine, for example, we received a report about a relationship that was missed by matching because of a partial, noisy, or ambiguous input. We might be tempted to resolve this issue by relaxing our matching criteria. Unfortunately, this will have a cost of a higher overall rate of false positive matches.\nConversely, if we encounter a case where the matching has returned an incorrect match, we might attempt to make the matching strategy stricter to avoid this result. We should remember, however, that this may have the consequence of causing the strategy to skip many perfectly valid matches.\nThe tradeoff between precision and recall. (a) A strict strategy prioritises precision over recall resulting in more false negatives. (b) A relaxed strategy prioritises recall over precision resulting in more false positives.\nStriking this balance becomes even more difficult when attempting to address multiple issues at once, or considering constraints like the time and resources consumed by each aspect of the strategy. Each choice can compound the individual effects in unanticipated and expensive ways. The aim of matching ultimately then can\u0026rsquo;t be to achieve perfect results for every single case. Fixing one particular situation might not be desirable, as it can result in breaking multiple other cases. Instead, we have to find a locally optimal balance that optimises the strategy\u0026rsquo;s utility, relative to these inherent limitations. This means accepting some level of imperfection as not just inevitable, but necessary for implementing a workable strategy. When you consider all this, you might conclude that…\nMyth #3: We shouldn\u0026rsquo;t do large-scale, unsupervised matching Imperfect matching strategies, when applied automatically to real-world large datasets, might:\nFail to discover some relationships (false negatives), an outcome that may not be terribly problematic. In the worst case scenario, we have wasted a great deal of effort developing matching strategies that do not improve our metadata. Create incorrect relationships between items (false positives), what seems like a potentially larger problem, where we have added incorrect relationships to the metadata. Many have the instinct to avoid false positives at any cost, even if this means missing many additional correct relationships at the same time. They might come to the conclusion that if we cannot have 100% precision (see our previous myth), we simply should not allow matching strategies to act in an automated, unsupervised way on large datasets. While there might be circumstances where this belief is rational, in the context of the scholarly record, this notion is seriously flawed.\nFirst, if you are dealing with any medium to large-sized dataset, it almost certainly contains errors, even before you apply any automated processing to it. Even if data is submitted and curated by users, they can still make mistakes, and might themselves be using automated tools for extracting the data from other sources, without your knowledge. It is thus not entirely obvious that applying an (imperfect) matching strategy to create more relationships would actually make the data quality worse.\nSecond, while we cannot eliminate all matching errors, we can place a high priority on precision when developing strategies, with the aim of keeping the number of incorrectly matched results as low as possible. We can also make use of additional mechanisms to easily correct for incorrectly matched results, for example doing so manually, in response to error reports.\nFinally, the results of matching should always contain provenance information to distinguish them from those that have been manually curated. This way, the users can make their own decisions about whether to use and trust the matching results, relative to their use case.\nBy applying those additional checks, we can minimise the negative effects of incorrect matching, while at the same time reap the benefits of filling gaps in the scholarly record.\nMyth #4: We can only ever guess at the accuracy of our matching results In attempting to determine the correctness of our matching, we immediately encounter a number of inherent limitations. The sheer amount of entries in many datasets prevents a thorough, manual validation of the results, but if instead, we use too few or specific items as our benchmarks, these are unlikely to be representative of overall performance. The unpredictable nature of future data adds another wrinkle: will our matching always be as successful as when we first benchmarked it or will its performance degrade relative to some change in the data?\nWith so many unknowns, are we then doomed? No! We have rigorous and scientific tools at our disposal that can help us estimate how accurate our matching will be. How do we use them? Well, that is a big and fairly technical topic, so we will leave you with this little cliffhanger. See you in the next post!\n",
"headings": ["Myth #1: A metadata matching strategy should be 100% correct","Myth #2: It is always a good idea to adapt the matching strategy to a specific input","Myth #3: We shouldn\u0026rsquo;t do large-scale, unsupervised matching","Myth #4: We can only ever guess at the accuracy of our matching results"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/services/metadata-retrieval/metadata-plus/terms/",
"title": "Metadata Plus service terms",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2024-08-09",
"lastmod_ts": 1723161600,
"section": "Find a service",
"tags": ["Terms"],
"description": "",
"content": "",
"headings": ["Background"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/categories/best-practices/",
"title": "Best Practices",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Categories",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/categories/participation-reports/",
"title": "Participation Reports",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Categories",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/re-introducing-participation-reports-to-encourage-best-practices-in-open-metadata/",
"title": "Re-introducing Participation Reports to encourage best practices in open metadata",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2024-07-25",
"lastmod_ts": 1721865600,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "We’ve just released an update to our participation report, which provides a view for our members into how they are each working towards best practices in open metadata. Prompted by some of the signatories and organizers of the Barcelona Declaration, which Crossref supports, and with the help of our friends at CWTS Leiden, we have fast-tracked the work to include an updated set of metadata best practices in participation reports for our members. The reports now give a more complete picture of each member’s activity.\n",
"content": "We’ve just released an update to our participation report, which provides a view for our members into how they are each working towards best practices in open metadata. Prompted by some of the signatories and organizers of the Barcelona Declaration, which Crossref supports, and with the help of our friends at CWTS Leiden, we have fast-tracked the work to include an updated set of metadata best practices in participation reports for our members. The reports now give a more complete picture of each member’s activity.\nWhat do we mean by ‘participation’? Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record. As a not-for-profit with over 20,000 members in 160 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support nearly 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication.\nTo make this system work, members strive to provide as much metadata as possible through Crossref to ensure it is openly distributed throughout the scholarly ecosystem at scale rather than bilaterally, thereby realizing the collective benefit of membership. Together, our membership provides and uses a rich nexus of information— known as the research nexus—on which the community can build tools to help progress knowledge.\nEach member commits to certain terms, such as keeping metadata current, updating links for their DOIs to redirect to, linking references and other objects, and preserving their content in perpetuity. Beyond this, we also encourage members to register as much rich metadata as is relevant and possible.\nCreating and providing richer metadata is a key part of participation in Crossref; we’ve long encouraged a more complete scholarly record, such as through Metadata 20/20, and through supporting or leading initiatives for specific metadata, like open citations (I4OC), open abstracts (I4OA), open contributors (ORCID), and open affiliations (ROR).\nWhich metadata elements are considered best practices? Alongside basic bibliographic metadata such as title, authors, and publication date(s), we encourage members to register metadata in the following fields:\nExample participation report for Crossref member University of Szeged\nReferences A list of all the references used by a work. This is particularly relevant for journal articles but the references can include any type of object, including datasets, versions, preprints, and more. Additionally, we encourage these to be added into relationships, where relevant.\nAbstracts A description of the work. These are particularly useful for discovery systems that will promote the work, and are often used in downstream analyses such as for detecting integrity issues.\nContributor IDs (ORCID) All authors should be included in a work’s metadata, ideally alongside their verified ORCID identifier.\nAffiliations / Affiliation IDs (ROR) Members are able to register contributor affiliations as free text, but we are encouraging everyone to add ROR IDs for affiliations as the recommended best practice, as this differentiates and avoids mistyping. These two fields have newly been added to the participation reports interface in the most recent update.\nFunder IDs (OFR) Acknowledging the organisation(s) that funded the work. We encourage the inclusion of Open Funder Registry identifiers to make the funding metadata more usable. This will evolve into an additional use case for ROR over time.\nFunding award numbers / Grant IDs (Crossref) A number or identifier assigned by the funding organisation to identify the specific award of funding or other support such as use of equipment or facilities, prizes, tuition, etc. The Crossref Grant Linking System includes a unique persistent link that can be connected with outputs, activities, people, and organisations.\nCrossmark The Crossmark service gives readers quick and easy access to the current status of a record, including any corrections, retractions, or updates, via a button embedded on PDFs or a web article. Openly adding corrections, retractions, and errata is critical part of publishing, and the button provides readers with an easy in-context alert.\nSimilarity Check URLs The Similarity Check service helps editors to identify text-based plagiarism through our collective agreement for the membership to access to Turnitin’s powerful text comparison tool, iThenticate. Specific full-text links are required to participate in this service.\nLicense URLs URLs pointing to a license that explains the terms and conditions under which readers can access content. These links are crucial to denote intended downstream use.\nText mining URLs Full-text URLs that help researchers in meta-science easily locate your content for text and data mining.\nWhat is a participation report? Participation reports are are a visualization of the data representing members’ participation to the scholarly record which is available via our open REST API. There’s a separate participation report for each member, and each report shows what percentage of that member’s metadata records include 11 key metadata elements. These key elements add context and richness, and help to open up members’ work to easier discovery and wider and more varied use. As a member, you can use participation reports to see for yourself where the gaps in your organisation’s metadata are, and perhaps compare your performance to others. Participation reports are free and open to everyone - so you can also check the report for any other members you are interested in.\nWe first introduced participation reports in 2018. At the time, Anna Tolwinska and Kirsty Meddings wrote:\nMetadata is at the heart of all our services. With a growing range of members participating in our community—often compiling or depositing metadata on behalf of each other—the need to educate and express obligations and best practice has increased. In addition, we’ve seen more and more researchers and tools making use of our APIs to harvest, analyze and re-purpose the metadata our members register, so we’ve been very aware of the need to be more explicit about what this metadata enables, why, how, and for whom.\nAll of that still rings true today. But as the research nexus continues to evolve, so should the tools that intend to reflect it. For example, in 2022, we removed the Open references field from participation reports after a board vote to change our policy and update the membership terms meant that all references deposited with Crossref would be open by default. And now we’ve expanded the list of fields again, adding coverage data for contributor affiliation text and ROR identifiers.\nPutting it in practice To find out how you measure up when it comes to participation, type the name of your member organisation into the search box. You may be surprised by what you find—we often speak to members who thought they were registering a certain type of metadata for all their records, only to learn from their participation report that something is getting lost along the way.\nYou can only address gaps in your metadata if you know that they exist.\nMore information, as well as a breakdown of the now 11 key metadata elements listed in every participation report and tips on improving your scores, is available in our documentation.\nAnd if you have any questions or feedback, come talk to us on the community forum or request a metadata Health Check by emailing the community team.\n",
"headings": ["What do we mean by ‘participation’?","Which metadata elements are considered best practices?","References","Abstracts","Contributor IDs (ORCID)","Affiliations / Affiliation IDs (ROR)","Funder IDs (OFR)","Funding award numbers / Grant IDs (Crossref)","Crossmark","Similarity Check URLs","License URLs","Text mining URLs","What is a participation report?","Putting it in practice"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/metadata-schema-development-plans/",
"title": "Metadata schema development plans",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2024-07-22",
"lastmod_ts": 1721606400,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "It’s been a while, here’s a metadata update and request for feedback In Spring 2023 we sent out a survey to our community with a goal of assessing what our priorities for metadata development should be - what projects are our community ready to support? Where is the greatest need? What are the roadblocks?\nThe intention was to help prioritize our metadata development work. There’s a lot we want to do, a lot our community needs from us, but we really want to make sure we’re focusing on the projects that will have the most immediate impact for now.\n",
"content": "It’s been a while, here’s a metadata update and request for feedback In Spring 2023 we sent out a survey to our community with a goal of assessing what our priorities for metadata development should be - what projects are our community ready to support? Where is the greatest need? What are the roadblocks?\nThe intention was to help prioritize our metadata development work. There’s a lot we want to do, a lot our community needs from us, but we really want to make sure we’re focusing on the projects that will have the most immediate impact for now.\nSeveral projects were proposed, based on community demand over time. All are projects we intend to support long-term.\nProjects The projects included in the survey were:\nAlternate names - We proposed adding a repeatable ‘name’ element to allow for names that aren’t separated by given/family/surname. Updates to funding data -this update will be released in the near future and includes: Expand ROR support - Allow members to supply ROR ID instead of funder ID in funding data and grant records. Include Grant DOIs in funding metadata. Publication typing in citations - Support citation type in citation metadata (for example article, preprint, data, software, etc.). Expand contributor role support - Allow multiple contributor roles to be provided per contributor and add support for external vocabularies (like CRediT) Expand abstract support - We currently require all abstracts to be formatted using JATS. We will be adding new abstract formats, including BITS and ONIX (which have been requested), as well as a generic abstract format (non-JATS). Statements - Add support for free text statements such as data availability, acknowledgments, funding, and conflict of interest. Contributor identifiers - Accept contributor identifiers such as ISNI (in addition to ORCID, which is already supported). Conference event IDs - Identifiers for conference events. What’s next? There is a clear preference for publication types in citations and abstract markup, expanded support for multilingual metadata, followed by expanding contributor roles to support multiple roles and the CRediT taxonomy. The results have helped us prioritize our work and we’re advancing several projects soon based on our readiness to move forward.\nFirst up is publication typing in citations and statements - we hope to be able to make this ready for registration in the coming months, but want to confirm a few things first, primarily the list of ‘types’ to apply to citations, so please review and comment: Metadata updates in need of feedback July 2024\nWe also have been discussing expansions to our support for preprints metadata with our Preprints Advisory Group and have a number of preprint-specific updates that will be rolled out in the coming months as well, including support for versions and status. These proposed changes are also available for comment.\nAnd finally, we will be expanding support for contributor roles to include multiple roles per contributor, as well as adding support for the CRediT taxonomy. This update is yet to be scheduled but we do have the inputs and output planning done and welcome any comments on this as well.\nWe will also be continuing work on other projects highlighted in the survey that aren’t quite ready to go:\nMultilingual metadata: Support for multilingual metadata in particular is very important and will require a fairly significant technical effort, so we want to be sure we get this right - at minimum we need to include repeatable fields flagged with language metadata for most items, there may be other considerations as well such as the scope of languages supported.\nAs we develop new metadata segments we’re keeping language metadata in mind, but I’d like to form a short-term working group to help shape this update - this group will be focused on the details of supporting multilingual metadata in our inputs and outputs, so conversations will be very XML and JSON heavy. If you are interested and available please contact pfeeney@crossref.org. Abstract markup: we are currently in the research phase of this project but will be proposing updates and asking for input this fall. At the moment support for BITS and ONIX abstracts have been requested, as well as an agnostic format.\nExpansion of name and contributor ID support: work is under way for this as well, and I should have inputs and outputs for feedback in the coming months.\nWe anticipate more developments and requests for feedback in the future as we still have other projects from the list above to get to. I’ve opened up a ‘Metadata Development’ section in our Community Forum to invite discussion and will be kicking off a renewed Metadata Interest Group in the fall.\n",
"headings": ["It’s been a while, here’s a metadata update and request for feedback","Projects","What’s next?"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/community/special-programs/research-integrity/",
"title": "Integrity of the scholarly record (ISR)",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2024-07-16",
"lastmod_ts": 1721088000,
"section": "Get involved",
"tags": [],
"description": " Upcoming events\nThe integrity of the scholarly record is an essential aspect of research integrity. Every initiative and service that we’ve launched since our founding has been focused on documenting and clarifying the scholarly record in an open, machine-actionable and scalable form, and all of this has been done to make it easier for the research community to assess the trustworthiness of scholarly outputs.\nWe want to ensure that we are definitely collecting and distributing the right metadata “trust signals” that the community needs to preserve the integrity of the scholarly record, while ensuring that we are really clear on the role that Crossref can and cannot play in this. With this in mind, we’ve created a focused program around Integrity of the Scholarly Record - the “ISR Program”.\n",
"content": " Upcoming events\nThe integrity of the scholarly record is an essential aspect of research integrity. Every initiative and service that we’ve launched since our founding has been focused on documenting and clarifying the scholarly record in an open, machine-actionable and scalable form, and all of this has been done to make it easier for the research community to assess the trustworthiness of scholarly outputs.\nWe want to ensure that we are definitely collecting and distributing the right metadata “trust signals” that the community needs to preserve the integrity of the scholarly record, while ensuring that we are really clear on the role that Crossref can and cannot play in this. With this in mind, we’ve created a focused program around Integrity of the Scholarly Record - the “ISR Program”.\nThis page lists the rationale behind this program, and our ongoing and planned initiatives under this program.\nBackground The outputs of the research and publishing process create a “scholarly record”. This scholarly record is more than just the published outputs - it’s also a network of inputs, relationships, and contexts. At Crossref, we talk about the “Research Nexus”,\na rich and reusable open network of relationships connecting research organisations, people, things, and actions; a scholarly record that the global community can build on forever, for the benefit of society.\nWhen published outputs are tied to a persistent and unique identifier, they get a persistent record. Maintaining this record for the long term and having a layer of context associated with the record, establishes the integrity of the scholarly record. The context comes from the metadata associated with the work. In simpler words, scholarly metadata tells us:\nWho are the authors of a work? What are the affiliations of the authors? Which funding programs supported the work? Which datasets arose out of the work, OR how is dataset A connected to paper A? Was the work updated after its publication, i.e. was it retracted or corrected? And more.. By providing this important context, scholarly metadata can act as a signal of trustworthiness.\nCrossref is focused on providing infrastructure which enables those who produce scholarly outputs to provide metadata and relationships (evidence and context) about how they ensure the quality of their content, and how their outputs fit into the wider scholarly record. We do not assess the quality of our members’ content- the presence of a DOI record is not a signal of quality, but the community can use the presence (or lack of) rich metadata associated with a DOI record as evidence of integrity.\nRead more: ISR part one: What is our role in preserving the integrity of the scholarly record and learn about our upcoming webinar series to connect with the publishing community in India.\n",
"headings": ["Background"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/crossmark-community-consultation-what-did-we-learn/",
"title": "Crossmark community consultation: What did we learn?",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2024-07-02",
"lastmod_ts": 1719878400,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "In the first half of this year we’ve been talking to our community about post-publication changes and Crossmark. When a piece of research is published it isn’t the end of the journey—it is read, reused, and sometimes modified. That\u0026rsquo;s why we run Crossmark, as a way to provide notifications of important changes to research made after publication. Readers can see if the research they are looking at has updates by clicking the Crossmark logo. They also see useful information about the editorial process, and links to things like funding and registered clinical trials. All of this contributes to what we call the integrity of the scholarly record.\n",
"content": "In the first half of this year we’ve been talking to our community about post-publication changes and Crossmark. When a piece of research is published it isn’t the end of the journey—it is read, reused, and sometimes modified. That\u0026rsquo;s why we run Crossmark, as a way to provide notifications of important changes to research made after publication. Readers can see if the research they are looking at has updates by clicking the Crossmark logo. They also see useful information about the editorial process, and links to things like funding and registered clinical trials. All of this contributes to what we call the integrity of the scholarly record.\nCrossmark has been around a long time and the context around it is constantly changing. It last had a major update in 2016 and in 2020 we removed fees for its use.\nThe past few years have seen a more intense focus on research integrity among the scholarly communications community, leading to more retractions and calling out large-scale manipulation of editorial processes. At the same time, we haven’t seen an increase in the uptake of Crossmark, which is still used by only a minority of our members. We would like to know why the uptake is low and whether there is more we can do in this area. To dig into this, in the first part of 2024 we reached out to members of our community.\nWhat did we do? We wanted to learn about attitudes towards Crossmark and related aspects of research integrity. This was done in several ways:\nStructured interviews with eight of our members. Round tables at Crossref LIVE events in Bogota and Nairobi Surveying a selection of our members, which led to 94 responses. The topics we asked about were related to how post-publication updates are made and communicated, and which metadata demonstrates good practice.\nWe are extremely grateful to the members who contributed. They provided valuable feedback and have helped to shape the future of Crossmark and our approach to the integrity of the scholarly record.\nWhat did we find? Across the various groups there were a few common themes, which fell into several areas.\nCommunication of updates is highly valued, and seen as the most important role that Crossmark can play. Some of those we spoke to would like readers to see if there is an update as soon as a page opens, without having to open a popup. This could be done by having a logo that changes colour, shape, or size.\nConversely, not as much enthusiasm was shown for the metadata assertions. These are additional fields that can be displayed to readers in the Crossmark popup. There wasn’t a strong consensus on which commonly-made assertions are the most important for research integrity.\nThere is diversity in attitudes towards making updates to published works, what research integrity means, and approaches to workflows for updates. Even within a single organisation, a number of different workflows and multiple staff members might be called on to update published research. This makes things complex and means that it can be difficult to fit Crossmark in.\nThere are technical challenges to getting started with Crossmark. Those responsible for implementing Crossmark are often technical staff who struggle with the documentation we provide in English. There is also no plugin for OJS, a widely-used open source editorial software. It is more difficult to deposit Crossmark metadata for books than journal articles, and many article types don’t permit Crossmark metadata at all. On the other hand, those who successfully installed Crossmark found it easy to use and low-maintenance.\nOverall, it seems that Crossmark still has an important role to play but there are changes and improvements we can make.\nWhat’s next? Here are the main areas we intend to follow up on in the coming months.\nImplementation We need to look at how to make implementation more straight-forward. Can we provide multilingual documentation, plugins, run workshops or webinars, or make changes to Crossmark to lower the barrier to entry?\nUnderstanding workflows Can we collaborate with our members and other organisations to reach a better understanding of how to update published works? Are there alternative workflows we need to support? Have we made it too difficult to understand and implement the options we currently have?\nWhile updates are always likely to be rare, we want to help members understand the benefits of making them. We talked to some members who were proud of never having published a retraction or correction, which left us wondering whether they are missing legitimate opportunities to correct the scholarly record. We also know that for some members and many work types (preprints, for example), updates are made without a separate published notification. Can we better understand the role that the published updates play and communicate updates even if there isn’t a published notice?\nOngoing feedback Clearly one size doesn’t fit all when it comes to implementing and communicating updates. We need to find ways of keeping in touch with the community to test new solutions with as broad a range of members as possible. We want to avoid catering to a minority and leaving others struggling to find ways to implement a solution.\nCustom metadata? Is there an ongoing need for metadata assertions? Many of the assertions currently made are possible as standard metadata and others could be included in our deposit schema. We want to consider removing the option to add assertions. This needs more feedback from the community, especially those who currently make use of assertions.\nRedesign the UI Crossmark doesn’t have the recognition with readers we would like. Is there a way we can redesign it to make it more associated with Crossref and accurate metadata? We intend to explore different designs, and test them with members and readers.\n",
"headings": ["What did we do?","What did we find?","What’s next?","Implementation","Understanding workflows","Ongoing feedback","Custom metadata?","Redesign the UI"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/celebrating-five-years-of-grant-ids-where-are-we-with-the-crossref-grant-linking-system/",
"title": "Celebrating five years of Grant IDs: where are we with the Crossref Grant Linking System?",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2024-07-01",
"lastmod_ts": 1719792000,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "We’re happy to note that this month, we are marking five years since Crossref launched its Grant Linking System. The Grant Linking System (GLS) started life as a joint community effort to create ‘grant identifiers’ and support the needs of funders in the scholarly communications infrastructure.\nThe system includes a funder-designed metadata schema and a unique link for each award which enables connections with millions of research outputs, better reporting on the research and outcomes of funding, and a contribution to open science infrastructure. Our first activity to highlight the moment was to host a community call last week where around 30 existing and potential funder members joined to discuss the benefits and the steps to take to participate in the Grant Linking System (GLS). Some organisations at the forefront of adopting Crossref’s Grant Linking System presented their challenges and how they overcame them, shared the benefits they are reaping from participating, and provided some tips about their processes and workflows.\n",
"content": "We’re happy to note that this month, we are marking five years since Crossref launched its Grant Linking System. The Grant Linking System (GLS) started life as a joint community effort to create ‘grant identifiers’ and support the needs of funders in the scholarly communications infrastructure.\nThe system includes a funder-designed metadata schema and a unique link for each award which enables connections with millions of research outputs, better reporting on the research and outcomes of funding, and a contribution to open science infrastructure. Our first activity to highlight the moment was to host a community call last week where around 30 existing and potential funder members joined to discuss the benefits and the steps to take to participate in the Grant Linking System (GLS). Some organisations at the forefront of adopting Crossref’s Grant Linking System presented their challenges and how they overcame them, shared the benefits they are reaping from participating, and provided some tips about their processes and workflows.\nThe funding organisations whose experiences were shared included Wellcome, FCT (Foundation for Science and Technology, Portugal), and NWO (Dutch Research Council). They were joined by a new group of foundations, research councils, and private research funders from around the world\u0026mdash;from Kenya to Singapore to Estonia\u0026mdash;to have a first introduction to the GLS and connect them with colleagues who are further along on their journey.\nWe also heard about tools such as a new open source Crossref plugin for the Fluxx platform, grant management systems with in-built Crossref integrations such as ProposalCentral, Europe PMC GrantFinder which was first to implement the GLS on Wellcome’s behalf and hosts their grants, and one of the first publishers, eLife to start referencing Crossref grant links in their publications both online and in the open metadata for others to retrieve.\nRead on for further information or watch the recording of the event.\nWhat is the Crossref Grant Linking System? The Crossref Grant Linking System, conceptualised in 2017, and launched in 2019, captures and helps clarify funding relationships for scholarly outputs. Thanks to interconnectedness with the 160 million metadata records collected and curated by Crossref members, it enables funders as well as scholars to track and analyse funding patterns and evaluate programmes, and it supports assertions about the integrity of scholarly records.\nFeatures of the GLS Globally unique persistent link and identifier for each grant Connected with 160 million published outputs Funder-designed metadata schema, including project, investigator, value, and award-type information Programmatic or no-code methods to send metadata Thanks to the Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation who funded development of the online grant registration form Open search and API for all to discover funding outcomes; all metadata is distributed openly to thousands of tools and services Crossref-hosted landing pages A global community of ~50 funder advisors and 35+ funders already in the Grant Linking System Membership of Crossref; influence the foundational infrastructure powering open research The last five years has seen the GLS grow through membership, metadata, and community contributions.\nThe momentum for this programme is building - as illustrated by increasing numbers of metadata records (and related relationships we’re seeing). The 35 funder members represent over 100 funding programmes and have created 125,000 grant records already.\nDuring last week\u0026rsquo;s call, it was helpful to hear from the community what they see as key benefits of the Crossref Grant Linking System:\nMeaningfully delivering on and supporting Open Science policies and mandates, and contributing ‘their bit’ to the transparency of the evidence trail in the scholarly ecosystem. Reporting and evaluating the funding programmes, essential for the public funders who need to demonstrate the value for money in allocating their funds and other support. Supporting a more holistic assessment of scholarship and scholars, especially as and when metadata becomes included with a full array of outputs, not limited to books and articles. How the Crossref Grant Linking System supports Open Science policy Since 2020, all the grant records are openly available through our REST API which is queried more than 1.8 billion times every month so these metadata records are distributed to thousands of systems across the research enteprise. In a 2022 blog, Ed Pentz and Ginny Hendricks laid out guidelines for research funders to meet open science guidelines using existing open infrastructure such as Crossref, ORCID, and ROR. Syman Stevens, a grantmaking and private philanthropy consultant, highlighted on the call that the funders he works with are increasingly interested in ways to deliver on their open science policy and that participation in the GLS is a tangible thing they can do to meet this goal.\nAs part of its open science policy, NWO will start participating in the Crossref Grant Linking System from July 2025. Research funders are a part of the scholarly communications system; we not only provide the funding to do the actual research but can also be the authoritative source of data about the projects we have funded and the outputs arising from that funding. Increasingly, all these elements – grants, researchers, outputs - are linked with metadata and unique identifiers to ensure that research is findable and accessible.\n\u0026ndash; Hans de Jonge, Director of Open Science NL, part of the Dutch Research Council (NWO)\nHow funders leverage the Grant Linking System in their reporting and assessment Looking back to the origins of the system, it’s important to recognise the work of the initial working groups. Through their contribution, funders helped design the initial metadata schema for grants as well as establish the governance and fees for this service, and our Advisory Group continues to inform further developments. In this way, the Grant Linking System enables the needs and wishes of funders to contribute and see their data as part of the wider ecosystem.\nAn excellent example of that synergy in action is the use case presented by Cátia Laranjeira, manager of the PTCRIS programme at the Foundation for Science and Technology, Portugal (FCT). PTCRIS is the Foundation’s integrated national information ecosystem that supports scientific activity management. Cátia reflected on the relative fragmentation of spaces where the scientific outputs are found, and PTCRIS’s ambition for aggregating metadata in one place to be able to trace and evaluate programmes in light of the related outputs. At the start of the programme, they identified lack of a persistent identifier for grants as a major shortcoming of the system. Crossref GLS naturally fits in with their goals.\nThe initiative by FCT to assign unique DOIs to national public funding through Crossref is a game-changer for open science, linking funding directly to scientific outcomes and boosting transparency. Join us in this effort—let\u0026rsquo;s make every grant count and ensure open access to research information!\u0026quot;\n\u0026ndash; Cátia Laranjeira, PTCRIS Program Manager at Fundacao para a Ciencia e a Tecnologis (FCT Portugal)\nFCT initially piloted a small subset of their grants (approximately 6,000 recent awards) at the end of 2023. Cátia pointed to researchers’ keen participation in this programme as one of its successes – and thanks to the word of mouth, FCT has already been approached by researchers requesting unique Crossref links for their grants! This appetite for grant IDs will soon be more fully satisfied, as FCT is readying to register all of their grants with Crossref, to enable further insights into funding and outcome flows, supporting them in demonstrating the value for money for the public resources they manage. Via interfaces for grant management and standardised online CVs, the system is also enabling researchers to use the system in their own future reporting and career development.\nIn the ensuing discussion, Rachel Bruce of UKRI mentioned that she’s hopeful that GLS will help funders ‘close the loop’ on more holistic reward and recognition, allowing for inclusion of evidence for a broader set of outputs in those processes.\nHow the community is working to integrate open infrastructure Melissa Harrison, Team Leader at EMBL-EBI, manages Europe PMC and a complementary data science team, who were part of the initial FREYA project – supporting infrastructure delivery for unique identifiers for grants. The team has been adding grant records to Crossref on Wellcome’s behalf since 2019. Melissa highlighted the shortcomings of internal award numbers, which don’t tend to be understood outside of the ecosystem where they are produced (that is the funder’s administrative system), are almost certainly not unique, and don’t resolve to or connect with anything in the wider ecosystem. Therefore internal award numbers can’t signify relationships with other outputs or assets in the wider world. By contrast, Crossref’s Grant IDs are unique, persistent, resolvable, and interrelated with other Crossref metadata, whilst being retrievable for other systems to link to too.\nPersistent identifiers for grants was the next logical step after identifiers for funders - open metadata registered with a PID in a central service like Crossref is invaluable to build the full picture of the research enterprise.\n\u0026ndash; Melissa Harrison, Team Leader, Literature Services at EMBL-EBI)\nEase of execution is important for scaling the Grant Linking System, and enabling its use in a diverse set of circumstances in the open science ecosystem. Altum was the trailblazer, first integrating its grant management platform Proposal Central with GLS. It was good to hear that others are now joining the integration efforts. Syman Stevens talked about the recent work initiated by Joe McArthur at OA Works, to develop a simple, open-source plug-in for any of the major grant management systems, to enable funders to deposit their grant metadata with Crossref GLS with a click of the button. Syman demonstrated the resulting interface in Fluxx, that allows for creating a record and sending grant metadata to Crossref as part of the regular grant management within the platform. He pointed out that, while this integration was developed for Fluxx, all code and documentation is openly available on GitHub and this can potentially be forked or adapted as necessary for reuse in other grant management systems.\nIt is heartening that others in the community are seeing such a need for this that they\u0026rsquo;re funding and creating their own tools to advance participation and use of the GLS.\nFinally, Fred Atherden, Head of Production Operations at eLife, presented how they include Crossref grant identifiers in publication metadata for the version of record of the works published on their platform. eLife is the first publisher to fully integrate Crossref grant identifiers both within the article display and in the metadata. Fred shared that in addition to collecting the data from the authors, eLife also attempts matching, albeit using very restrictive methodology, to enable more grant metadata in their publication records. They recognise that so far there are very few publishers including persistent links for grants in this way, and talked about plans to start collecting and including this data further upstream, and including them in the future for reviewed preprints.\nAcknowledgements and how to participate in the GLS Reflecting on the last five years, thanks must go to the \u0026gt;35 funders who are already participating (see logo mashup below), to our current volunteers and to those partners working to promote and make use of the Grant Linking System. We also acknowledge that the GLS would not have been possible without the Crossref board members at the time, our staff including alumni Josh Brown, Jennifer Kemp, Rachael Lammey, and Geoffrey Bilder, or without the early dedicated time and input from the following people and organisations on our working groups for governance and fees, and for metadata modelling:\nYasushi Ogasaka and Ritsuko Nakajima, Japan Science \u0026amp; Technology Agency Neil Thakur and Brian Haugen, US National Institutes of Health Jo McEntyre and Michael Parkin, Europe PMC Robert Kiley and Nina Frentop, Wellcome Alexis-Michel Mugabushaka and Diego Chialva, European Research Council Lance Vowell and Carly Robinson, OSTI/US Dept of Energy Ashley Moore and Kevin Dolby, UKRI (Research Councils UK / Medical Research Council) Salvo da Rosa, Children\u0026rsquo;s Tumor Foundation Trisha Cruse, DataCite To learn more about the Crossref Grant Linking System, the best place to start is our service page. And for the next step, please reach out to us for a conversation about any questions specific to your organisation and any questions that may need to be addressed in order to enable your full participation.\nGrant DOIs enhance the discovery and accessibility of funded project information and are one of the important links in a connected research ecosystem. I\u0026rsquo;m grateful and proud to contribute to the robustness and interconnectedness of the research infrastructure. Few funders are currently participating in the Crossref Grant Linking System, and I encourage others to consider doing so. This adoption follows the \u0026ldquo;network effect,\u0026rdquo; where the value and utility increase as more people participate, encouraging even wider adoption.\n\u0026ndash; Kristin Eldon Whylly, Senior Grants Manager and Change Management Lead at Templeton World Charity Fund (TWCF)\nYou can email me via feedback@crossref.org or set up a call with me when it suits you (you can overlay your own calendar using the toggle at the top right). We look forward to welcoming even more funders and to see those relationships in the open science infrastructure grow even further in the coming years.\n",
"headings": ["What is the Crossref Grant Linking System?","Features of the GLS","How the Crossref Grant Linking System supports Open Science policy","How funders leverage the Grant Linking System in their reporting and assessment","How the community is working to integrate open infrastructure","Acknowledgements and how to participate in the GLS"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/the-anatomy-of-metadata-matching/",
"title": "The anatomy of metadata matching",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2024-06-27",
"lastmod_ts": 1719446400,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "In our previous blog post about metadata matching, we discussed what it is and why we need it (tl;dr: to discover more relationships within the scholarly record). Here, we will describe some basic matching-related terminology and the components of a matching process. We will also pose some typical product questions to consider when developing or integrating matching solutions.\nBasic terminology Metadata matching is a high-level concept, with many different problems falling into this category. Indeed, no matter how much we like to focus on the similarities between different forms of matching, matching affiliation strings to ROR IDs or matching preprints to journal papers are still different in several important ways. At Crossref and ROR, we call these problems matching tasks.\n",
"content": "In our previous blog post about metadata matching, we discussed what it is and why we need it (tl;dr: to discover more relationships within the scholarly record). Here, we will describe some basic matching-related terminology and the components of a matching process. We will also pose some typical product questions to consider when developing or integrating matching solutions.\nBasic terminology Metadata matching is a high-level concept, with many different problems falling into this category. Indeed, no matter how much we like to focus on the similarities between different forms of matching, matching affiliation strings to ROR IDs or matching preprints to journal papers are still different in several important ways. At Crossref and ROR, we call these problems matching tasks.\nSimply put, a matching task defines the kind or nature of the matching. Examples of matching tasks are bibliographic reference matching, affiliation matching, grant matching, or preprint matching.\nEvery matching task has an input, which is all the data that is needed to perform the matching. Input data can come in many shapes and forms, depending on the matching task. For example, all of the following could be inputs to a matching task:\nDepartment of Molecular Medicine, Sapporo Medical University, Sapporo 060-8556, Japan \u0026lt;fr:program xmlns:fr=\u0026#34;http://www.crossref.org/fundref.xsd\u0026#34; name=\u0026#34;fundref\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;fr:assertion name=\u0026#34;fundgroup\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;fr:assertion name=\u0026#34;funder_name\u0026#34;\u0026gt; European Union\u0026#39;s Horizon 2020 Research and Innovation Program through Marie Sklodowska Curie \u0026lt;fr:assertion name=\u0026#34;funder_identifier\u0026#34;\u0026gt;http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100000780\u0026lt;/fr:assertion\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/fr:assertion\u0026gt; \u0026lt;fr:assertion name=\u0026#34;award_number\u0026#34;\u0026gt;721624\u0026lt;/fr:assertion\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/fr:assertion\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/fr:program\u0026gt; Everitt, W. N., \u0026amp; Kalf, H. (2007). The Bessel differential equation and the Hankel transform. Journal of Computational and Applied Mathematics, 208(1), 3–19. { \u0026#34;title\u0026#34;: \u0026#34;Functional single-cell genomics of human cytomegalovirus infection\u0026#34;, \u0026#34;issued\u0026#34;: \u0026#34;2021-10-25\u0026#34;, \u0026#34;author\u0026#34;: [ {\u0026#34;given\u0026#34;: \u0026#34;Marco Y.\u0026#34;, \u0026#34;family\u0026#34;: \u0026#34;Hein\u0026#34;}, {\u0026#34;given\u0026#34;: \u0026#34;Jonathan S.\u0026#34;, \u0026#34;family\u0026#34;: \u0026#34;Weissman\u0026#34;, \u0026#34;ORCID\u0026#34;: \u0026#34;http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2445-670X\u0026#34;} ] } Every matching task also has an output. For our purposes, this is almost exclusively zero or more matched identifiers. In the context of a specific matching task, output identifiers may be of a specific type (e.g. we might match to a ROR ID, and never to an ORCID ID). In some cases, there can be a certain target set as well (i.e. matching only to DataCite DOIs). The output identifiers can have different cardinality depending on the task, meaning that the matching task might allow for zero, one, or more identifiers as a result of matching to a single input.\nA matching strategy defines how the matching is done. Multiple strategies can exist for a specific matching task. Compound strategies can run other strategies and combine their outcomes into a single result.\nIn some cases, we may also want the matching strategy to output a confidence score for each matched identifier. A confidence score represents the degree of certainty or likelihood that the matched identifier is correct, typically expressed as a value between 0 and 1. This score may help with post-processing or further interpretation of the results.\nTo summarise, the anatomy of the matching task can be diagrammed as follows:\nHow to specify a matching task Whenever we plan the development or integration of a matching solution, it is good to begin by answering a few basic questions:\nWhat problem do we plan to solve with our matching task? What would we call our matching task and how would we describe it? What do we expect as the input for this matching task? Which input formats do we need to be able to accept? What information do we expect to find in this input? What kind of identifiers should be output? Is there a target set of identifiers? Can our matching output zero/one/or multiple identifiers, and under what conditions might that occur? These sound fairly simple, but the answers to these questions can be remarkably complex. Once one tries to apply these concepts to real-world problems, they might encounter several non-obvious challenges.\nFor example, one common concern is at what level we should define each matching task. Consider the following problems:\nMatching bibliographic reference strings to DOIs. Example input: Everitt, W. N., \u0026amp; Kalf, H. (2007). The Bessel differential equation and the Hankel transform. Journal of Computational and Applied Mathematics, 208(1), 3–19. Matching structured bibliographic reference to DOIs. Example input: { volume: \u0026#34;208\u0026#34;, author: \u0026#34;Everitt\u0026#34;, journal-title: \u0026#34;J. Comput. Appl. Math.\u0026#34;, article-title: \u0026#34;The Bessel differential equation and the Hankel transform\u0026#34;, first-page: \u0026#34;3\u0026#34;, year: \u0026#34;2007\u0026#34;, issue: \u0026#34;1\u0026#34; } Are those discrete matching tasks (unstructured reference matching vs. structured reference matching), or are they the same task (reference matching) that can accept different types of inputs (unstructured or structured)?\nSimilarly, let\u0026rsquo;s compare the following tasks:\nMatching affiliation strings to ROR IDs. Example input: Department of Molecular Medicine, Sapporo Medical University, Sapporo 060-8556, Japan Matching funder names to ROR IDs. Example input: Alexander von Humboldt Foundation Are these different matching tasks (affiliation matching vs. funder matching), or the same task with different inputs (organisation matching)?\nDefining the boundaries of a matching task can also be difficult. Consider, for example, the need to obtain ROR IDs for organisations mentioned in the acknowledgements section of a full-text academic paper. To begin, one may first extract the acknowledgement section from the full text, then run something like a named entity recognition (NER) tool to isolate the organisation names from the extracted text, and finally match these names to ROR IDs. Is this entire process matching, with the input being the full text of a paper? Or perhaps matching starts with the acknowledgement section as the input? Instead, is it only the last phase, where we try to match the extracted name to the ROR ID, that constitutes the matching task, with the extraction phases being completely separate processes?\nThere are also important questions related to the expected behaviour of a matching strategy. Consider, for example, developing an affiliation matching strategy where we define our input as \u0026ldquo;an affiliation string\u0026rdquo;. What should happen when the strategy gets something else on the input, for example, song lyrics? Perhaps the strategy should simply return no matches, or an error, or we could say that in such a situation the behaviour is undefined and it simply doesn\u0026rsquo;t matter what is returned. But what should happen if in this input we have the lyrics of Street Life by Roxy Music, a song that mentions the names of a few universities that happen to have ROR IDs?\nIt is likewise important to consider what should happen if different parts of the input match to different identifiers, like in the following example:\nDepartment of Haematology, Eastern Health and Monash University, Box Hill, Australia Here, \u0026ldquo;Eastern Health\u0026rdquo; matches to https://ror.org/00vyyx863 and \u0026ldquo;Monash University\u0026rdquo; to https://ror.org/02bfwt286. Should the matching strategy return all the identifiers, one of them (if so, which one?), or nothing at all?\nSimilar questions arise when it is possible to match to multiple versions (or duplicates) in the target identifier set. This can happen, for example, in the context of bibliographic reference matching or preprint matching. Multiple matches may occur when there are different editions, reprints, or variations of the same publication in the target dataset, each with its own unique identifier.\nIf you are waiting for an answer to these questions, we unfortunately must disappoint you here. These can only be answered in the context of a specific problem, considering who the users are and what it is they need and expect.\nDid you notice any other subtleties related to metadata matching and its concerns? Are there other non-obvious questions that should be considered when planning to develop or integrate metadata matching strategies? Let us know—we\u0026rsquo;d love to hear from you!\n",
"headings": ["Basic terminology","How to specify a matching task"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/subscribe-newsletter/",
"title": "Receive updates from us",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2024-06-24",
"lastmod_ts": 1719187200,
"section": "",
"tags": [],
"description": "If you are already a Primary or Technical contact on a Crossref member or Sponsor account, you will receive our bimonthly newsletter automatically. Otherwise, sign up here.\nSubscribing to email updates from us means that every two months you’ll receive our community newsletter which aims to keep you up-to-date with our latest developments. We may also send you the occasional blog post or other (relevant) communication.\nYou can unsubscribe from these communications at anytime using the ‘unsubscribe’ link located at the bottom of each newsletter.\n",
"content": "If you are already a Primary or Technical contact on a Crossref member or Sponsor account, you will receive our bimonthly newsletter automatically. Otherwise, sign up here.\nSubscribing to email updates from us means that every two months you’ll receive our community newsletter which aims to keep you up-to-date with our latest developments. We may also send you the occasional blog post or other (relevant) communication.\nYou can unsubscribe from these communications at anytime using the ‘unsubscribe’ link located at the bottom of each newsletter.\nℹ️ Note: if you are using an adblocker, you may not be able to see the form above. If this is the case, please temporarily disable your adblocker on this page and refresh.\nNewsletter Archive +- 2025\rJanuary - March 2025 Newsletter\nApril - May 2025 Newsletter\nJune - July 2025 Newsletter\n[August - September 2025 Newsletter\nSeptember 2025 Spanish Newsletter\nNovember - December 2025 Newsletter\n+- 2024\rDecember 2024 Newsletter\nAugust / September 2024 Newsletter\nJune / July newsletter 2024\nApril / May 2024 Newsletter\nFebruary / March 2024 Newsletter\n",
"headings": ["Newsletter Archive"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/drawing-on-the-research-nexus-with-policy-documents-overtons-use-of-crossref-api/",
"title": "Drawing on the Research Nexus with Policy documents: Overton’s use of Crossref API",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2024-06-15",
"lastmod_ts": 1718409600,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "Update 2024-07-01: This post is based on an interview with Euan Adie, founder and director of Overton._\nWhat is Overton? Overton is a big database of government policy documents, also including sources like intergovernmental organisations, think tanks, and big NGOs and in general anyone who\u0026rsquo;s trying to influence a government policy maker. What we\u0026rsquo;re interested in is basically, taking all the good parts of the scholarly record and applying some of that to the policy world. By this we mean finding all the documents, finding what\u0026rsquo;s out there, collecting metadata for them consistently, fitting to our schema, extracting references from all the policy documents we find, adding links between them, and then we also do citation analysis.\n",
"content": "Update 2024-07-01: This post is based on an interview with Euan Adie, founder and director of Overton._\nWhat is Overton? Overton is a big database of government policy documents, also including sources like intergovernmental organisations, think tanks, and big NGOs and in general anyone who\u0026rsquo;s trying to influence a government policy maker. What we\u0026rsquo;re interested in is basically, taking all the good parts of the scholarly record and applying some of that to the policy world. By this we mean finding all the documents, finding what\u0026rsquo;s out there, collecting metadata for them consistently, fitting to our schema, extracting references from all the policy documents we find, adding links between them, and then we also do citation analysis.\nWhat do you mean by the good parts of the scholarly record? What I mean by the good parts of the scholarly record is, from a data perspective, having persistent open metadata for items on different stable, interoperable platforms and being able to build up layers of data to suit specific use cases. That\u0026rsquo;s a better approach than trying to do everything in a silo here and a silo there and trying to do stuff bit by bit or in a hundred different ways.\nThere’s also a bad part, which is less to do with metadata and more around citation analysis and responsible metrics. With all this data… as the famous Spiderman quote goes… with great power comes a great responsibility: once you start systematically collecting this data, it’s very easy to fall into the trap of thinking that if we can put numbers on it, and then maybe we could start reading meaning into those numbers, and then it spirals out of control. So the idea for Overton was: can we take the system, some of the infrastructure and apply those ideas? But then come at it already knowing where the later pitfalls are and try to avoid them.\nWhat is your main use of Crossref resources? We rely heavily on Crossref to link policy documents to the scholarly record. The question we’re trying to answer is: does this government document cite academic work? We work a lot with universities, think tanks, and IGOs. They’re asking where is the research we produce ending up? Is it being used by the government? In some countries, like the UK, there\u0026rsquo;s a big impact agenda where it\u0026rsquo;s quite important to demonstrate that for government funding. In the US as well, state universities for example aim to impact the local policy environment. Right? Are we producing things that went on to change life for local residents for the better? And that\u0026rsquo;s really what we\u0026rsquo;re trying to support. And so that\u0026rsquo;s one of the main use cases of the database.\nCan you tell us a little bit more about the story of Overton, how did this idea start? It really came from two things. The first one is that I\u0026rsquo;d always been interested in this area and before Overton, I founded a company called Altmetric.com, which was looking at kind of broader impact metrics for papers. And we looked at Twitter, and news, and blogs, and other things, including policy. But policy wasn\u0026rsquo;t a primary focus.\nWhen I left Altmetric two things were happening in the UK – not that everything is about Brexit, but Brexit was happening, and then COVID happened as well. And in both cases, I think it just drove home to me that other people seemed to be very interested in the evidence that the government has used to make decisions. Be they good decisions like some of the evidence based initatives in COVID or bad decisions like Brexit. So, how can you find out what it was? And it is actually very difficult to do. You can\u0026rsquo;t really track back how this decision was made. I thought that there is a growing need for that kind of impact analysis. So the second thing was, can we do something that helps make it easy to see what evidence goes into policy? The scholarly evidence but also the other kind of policy influence that goes into any document or discussion.\nWhat are the main challenges that you face when you are trying to retrieve these policy documents? Well, first is another thing that the scholarly record does well, which is persistence. We have CLOCKSS and all the dark archives1. So the whole idea is that if you have a DOI, if something moves, we can track it and it maintains the ID, and even if the publisher goes bust it\u0026rsquo;ll never disappear. For citing it, then there\u0026rsquo;s always going to be a copy of it somewhere available even if it\u0026rsquo;s in a library or a dark archive.\nOne of the biggest challenges with policy documents is that kind of persistence doesn’t exist\u0026hellip; There are a lot of statistics about link rot2, and they hold true for policy documents as much as anywhere else. Every year a percentage of the links everywhere basically break because websites are redesigned or a government changes, it\u0026rsquo;s even worse because it can be by design. If you think about it, a new government comes into power, they change… let’s say the Department of Agriculture and they merge it with the Department of Fisheries. That would refer to a completely new third thing. And the other two departments disappear or they start linking off, like, redirecting or whatever.\nOne of the challenges is just keeping track of all the changes in the landscape and constantly trying to stay on top of the data. And that\u0026rsquo;s a big part of what we do. Another challenge for us, and I think about it compared to journals, when you cite something in a scholarly document, you cite it in a given style, but there are no standards for referencing styles in policy documents. So even in the same document, we can see, like, four or five different ways of referring to something, and sometimes they\u0026rsquo;re missing important data and sometimes they\u0026rsquo;re not. And it means when we\u0026rsquo;re using Crossref search, we usually have much more unparsable text.\nHow has your experience been so far using our Crossref API or our services in general? It\u0026rsquo;s been great. I would happily say this anywhere, I always talk about the Crossref API as being one of the best examples of a well-done scholarly infrastructure API. It\u0026rsquo;s well-documented. It\u0026rsquo;s fast. It\u0026rsquo;s clear. The rate limits are clear. It\u0026rsquo;s up when it should be up. I like that you can trust it. So the technical aspect is great. From an organisational aspect, in contrast with a lot of infrastructure in the scholarly world that you don’t know if it\u0026rsquo;s even going to be there in a given time, Crossref is pretty stable.\nWhat would you say are the main challenges or things that we can improve in the future? What other expectations or suggestions do you have? It depends, if we\u0026rsquo;re talking about how the service could be improved versus how the data could be improved. Data-wise, and I appreciate this is a publisher problem, not a Crossref one, but, we still have to pull other data from OpenAlex, for example, for things like affiliations just because it\u0026rsquo;s missing from so many articles. And then equally things like ORCID for authors. And in fact also disambiguation in general. This is a huge problem that either the user doesn’t solve or you end up using a hundred different author disambiguation systems. I don\u0026rsquo;t know if there\u0026rsquo;s necessarily something Crossref wants to get into, but there\u0026rsquo;s definitely not something out there generally accepted already.\nAnother kind of improvement I see is to make sure that changes in one API are reflected in the other, and they don\u0026rsquo;t get out of sync. When somebody updates their ORCID record, I’d like it reflected in the Crossref record if we’re using that as the “canonical” metadata record for the DOI. Retrospectively enriching records.\nI think it\u0026rsquo;s harder than I expected to just find preprints because you can\u0026rsquo;t simply use the item type but I understand that this is maybe a bigger issue. So maybe it\u0026rsquo;s not for a short time.\nFinally, this is very specific, but we experienced friction when going from the snapshots to having something useful, either in Elasticsearch or in, like, Postgres. It might be nice to have some open-source scripts to download and process everything, convert it to relational tables, or send it to an Elasticsearch cluster or something.\nPlatt, C. (2022). What is a Dark Archive? Wiley. Retrieved 10 January, 2024, from\u0026#160;\u0026#x21a9;\u0026#xfe0e;\nLink rot. (n.d.). In Wikipedia. Retrieved 10 January, 2024, from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Link_rot.\u0026#160;\u0026#x21a9;\u0026#xfe0e;\n",
"headings": ["What is Overton?","What do you mean by the good parts of the scholarly record?","What is your main use of Crossref resources?","Can you tell us a little bit more about the story of Overton, how did this idea start?","What are the main challenges that you face when you are trying to retrieve these policy documents?","How has your experience been so far using our Crossref API or our services in general?","What would you say are the main challenges or things that we can improve in the future? What other expectations or suggestions do you have?"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/authors/euan-adie/",
"title": "Euan Adie",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Authors",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/categories/api/",
"title": "API",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Categories",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/authors/patrick-polischuk/",
"title": "Patrick Polischuk",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Authors",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/rebalancing-our-rest-api-traffic/",
"title": "Rebalancing our REST API traffic",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2024-06-04",
"lastmod_ts": 1717459200,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "Since we first launched our REST API around 2013 as a Labs project, it has evolved well beyond a prototype into arguably Crossref’s most visible and valuable service. It is the result of 20,000 organisations around the world that have worked for many years to curate and share metadata about their various resources, from research grants to research articles and other component inputs and outputs of research.\nThe REST API is relied on by a large part of the research information community and beyond, seeing around 1.8 billion requests each month. Just five years ago, that average monthly number was 600 million. Our members are the heaviest users, using it for all kinds of information about their own records or picking up connections like citations and other relationships. Databases, discovery tools, libraries, and governments all use the API. Research groups use it for all sorts of things such as analysing trends in science or recording retractions and corrections.\n",
"content": "Since we first launched our REST API around 2013 as a Labs project, it has evolved well beyond a prototype into arguably Crossref’s most visible and valuable service. It is the result of 20,000 organisations around the world that have worked for many years to curate and share metadata about their various resources, from research grants to research articles and other component inputs and outputs of research.\nThe REST API is relied on by a large part of the research information community and beyond, seeing around 1.8 billion requests each month. Just five years ago, that average monthly number was 600 million. Our members are the heaviest users, using it for all kinds of information about their own records or picking up connections like citations and other relationships. Databases, discovery tools, libraries, and governments all use the API. Research groups use it for all sorts of things such as analysing trends in science or recording retractions and corrections.\nSo the chances are high that almost any tool you rely on in scientific research has somewhere incorporated metadata through us.\nOptimising performance For some time, we’ve been noticing reduced performance in a number of ways, and periodically we have a flurry of manually blocking/unblocking IP addresses from requesters that are hammering and degrading the service for everyone else, and this is of course only minimally effective and very short term. You can always watch our status page for alerts. This is the current one about REST API performance: https://status.crossref.org/incidents/d7k4ml9vvswv.\nAs the number of users and requests has grown, our strategies for serving those requests must evolve. This post discusses how we’re approaching balancing the growth in usage for the immediate term and provides some thoughts about things we could try in the future on which we’ll gladly take feedback and advice.\nLoad balancing In 2018, we started routing users through three different pools (public, polite, and plus). This coincided with the launch of Metadata Plus, a paid-for service with monthly data dumps and very high rate limits. Note that all metadata is exactly the same and real-time across all pools. We also, more recently, introduced an internal pool. Here\u0026rsquo;s more about them:\nPlus: This is the aforementioned premium option; it’s really for ‘enterprise-wide’ use in production services and is not really relevant here. Public: This is the default and is the one that is struggling at the moment. You don’t have to identify yourself and, in theory, we don’t have to work through the night to support it if it’s struggling (although we often do). Public currently receives around 30,000 requests per minute. Polite: Traffic is routed to polite simply by detecting a mailto in the header. Any system or person including an email is being routed to a currently-quieter pool, this means we can always get in touch for troubleshooting (and only troubleshooting). Polite currently receives around 5,000 requests per minute. Internal: In 2021, we introduced a new pool just for our own tools where we can control and predict the traffic. Internal currently receives around 1,000 requests per minute. The volumes of traffic across public, polite and internal pools are very different and yet each pool has always had similar resources. The purpose of each of these pools has been long-established but our efforts to ask the community to use polite by default have not been particularly successful and it is clear that we don’t have the right balance.\nThe internal pool has been dedicated to our internal services that have predictable usage and that have requests that are not initiated by external users. The internal pool has previously included reference matching but not Crossmark, Event Data, or search.crossref.org, which all use the polite pool instead, along with the community. We have the capacity on the internal pool to shift all of this “internal” traffic across, and in doing so we will create more capacity for genuine polite users and redefine what we consider to be “internal”.\nCreating more capacity on polite will also give us the opportunity to load-balance requests to both polite and public across the two pools. We are at a point where we cannot eke more performance out of the API without architectural changes. In order to buy ourselves time to address this properly, we will modify the routing of polite and public and evenly distribute requests to the two pools 50/50.\nThe public and polite pools have equal resources at the moment yet handle very different volumes of traffic (30,000 req/min vs 5,000 req/min), and with the proposed changes to internal traffic the polite pool would handle a fraction of this. The result would look something like 31,000 req/min evenly distributed across public and polite.\nRate limiting Our rate-limiting also needs review. We track a number of metrics in our web proxy but only deny requests on one of them - the number of requests per second. On public and polite we limit each IP address to sending 50 req/sec and if this rate is exceeded users are denied access for 10 seconds. These limits are generous and we cannot realistically support this volume of request for all users of the public or polite API.\nHowever, when requests are taking a long time to return, we potentially have a separate problem of high concurrency as hundreds of requests could be sent before the first one has returned. We intend to identify and impose an appropriate rate limit on concurrent requests from each IP to prevent a small number of users from disproportionately affecting all users with long-running queries.\nLonger-term So, in the short-term we will revise our pool traffic as described above. We’ll do that this week. Then we will review the current rate limits and reduce them to something more reasonable for the majority of users. And we’ll identify and introduce a rate limit for concurrent requests from each user.\nLonger-term, we need to rearchitect our Elasticsearch pools so that we can:\nReduce shard sizes to improve performance of queries Balance data shards and replicas more evenly Optimise our instance types for our workload Want to help? Thanks for asking!\nFirstly, please, everyone, do always put an email in your API request headers - while the short term plan will help stabilise performance, this habit will always help us troubleshoot e.g. we can always contact you instead of blocking you!\nSecondly, we know many of you incorporate Crossref metadata, add lots of value to it in order to deliver important services, and also develop APIs of your own. We’d love any comments or recommendations from those of you handling similar situations on scaling and optimising API performance. You can comment on this post which is managed via our Discourse forum. We’ll also be adding updates to this thread as well as on status.crossref.org. If you’d like to be in touch with any of us directly, all our emails are firstinitiallastname@crossref.org.\n",
"headings": ["Optimising performance","Load balancing","Rate limiting","Longer-term","Want to help?"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/authors/stewart-houten/",
"title": "Stewart Houten",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Authors",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/metadata-matching-101-what-is-it-and-why-do-we-need-it/",
"title": "Metadata matching 101: what is it and why do we need it?",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2024-05-16",
"lastmod_ts": 1715817600,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "At Crossref and ROR, we develop and run processes that match metadata at scale, creating relationships between millions of entities in the scholarly record. Over the last few years, we\u0026rsquo;ve spent a lot of time diving into details about metadata matching strategies, evaluation, and integration. It is quite possibly our favourite thing to talk and write about! But sometimes it is good to step back and look at the problem from a wider perspective. In this blog, the first one in a series about metadata matching, we will cover the very basics of matching: what it is, how we do it, and why we devote so much effort to this problem.\n",
"content": "At Crossref and ROR, we develop and run processes that match metadata at scale, creating relationships between millions of entities in the scholarly record. Over the last few years, we\u0026rsquo;ve spent a lot of time diving into details about metadata matching strategies, evaluation, and integration. It is quite possibly our favourite thing to talk and write about! But sometimes it is good to step back and look at the problem from a wider perspective. In this blog, the first one in a series about metadata matching, we will cover the very basics of matching: what it is, how we do it, and why we devote so much effort to this problem.\nWhat is metadata matching? Would you be able to find the DOI for the work referenced in this citation?\nEveritt, W. N., \u0026amp; Kalf, H. (2007). The Bessel differential equation and the Hankel transform. Journal of Computational and Applied Mathematics, 208(1), 3–19. We bet you could! You might begin, for example, by pasting the whole citation, or only the title, into a search engine of your choice. This would probably return multiple results, which you would quickly skim. Then you might click on the links for a few of the top results, those that look promising. Some of the websites you visit might contain a DOI. Perhaps you would briefly compare the metadata provided on the website against what you see in the citation. If most of this information matches (see what we did there?), you would conclude that the DOI from that website is, in fact, the DOI for the cited paper.\nWell done! You just performed metadata matching, specifically, bibliographic reference matching. Matching in general can be defined as the task or process of finding an identifier for an item based on its structured or unstructured \u0026ldquo;description\u0026rdquo; (in this case: finding a DOI of a cited article based on a citation string).\nBut matching doesn\u0026rsquo;t have to just be about citations and DOIs. There are many other instances of matching we can think of, for example:\nfinding the ROR ID for an organisation based on an affiliation string, finding the ORCID ID for a researcher based on the person\u0026rsquo;s name and affiliation, finding the ROR ID for a funder based on the acknowledgements section of a research paper, finding the grant DOI based on an award number and a funder name. Matching doesn\u0026rsquo;t have to be done manually. It is possible to develop fully automated strategies for metadata matching and employ them at scale. It is also possible to use a hybrid approach, where automated strategies assist users by providing suggestions.\nDeveloping automated matching strategies is not a trivial task, and if we want to do it right, it takes a great deal of time and effort. This brings us to our next question: is it worth it?\nWhy do we need matching? In short, metadata matching gives us a more complete picture of the research nexus by discovering missing relationships between various entities within and throughout the scholarly record:\nThese relationships are very powerful. They provide important context for any entity, whether it is a research output, a funder, a research institution, or an author. Imagine for a moment the scholarly record without any such relationships, where all bibliographic references, affiliations (institution names and addresses), and funding information (funder names and grant titles) are provided as unstructured strings only. In such a world, how would you calculate the number of times a particular research paper was cited? How would you get a list of research outputs supported by a specific funder? It would be incredibly challenging to navigate, summarise, and describe research activities, especially considering the scale. Thankfully, these and many other questions can be answered thanks to metadata matching that discovers relationships between entities in the scholarly record.\nThere are two primary ways we can use metadata matching in our workflows: as semi-automated tools that help users look up the appropriate identifiers or as fully automated processes that enrich the metadata in various scholarly databases.\nThe first approach is quite similar to the example we described at the beginning. If you are submitting scholarly metadata, for example of a new article to be published, you can use metadata matching to look up identifiers for the various entities and include these identifiers in the submission. For example, with the help of metadata matching, instead of submitting citation strings, you could provide the DOIs for works cited in the paper and instead of the name and address of your organisation, you could provide its ROR ID. To make this easier for people, metadata submission systems and applications sometimes integrate metadata matching tools into user interfaces.\nThe second approach allows large, existing sources of scholarly metadata to be enriched with identifiers in a fully automated way. For example, we can match affiliation strings to ROR IDs using a combination of machine learning models and ROR\u0026rsquo;s default matching service, effectively adding more relationships between people and organisations. We can also compare journal articles and preprints metadata in the Crossref database by calculating similarity scores for titles, authors, and years of publication to match them with each other and provide more relationships between preprints and journal articles. This automated enrichment can be done at any point in time, even after research outputs have been formally published.\nThere are fundamental differences between these two approaches. The first is done under the supervision of a user, and for the second, the matching strategy makes all the decisions autonomously. As a result, the first approach will typically (although not always) result in better quality matches. By contrast, the second approach is much faster, generally less expensive, and scales to even very large data sources.\nIn the end, no matter what approach is used, the goal is to achieve a more complete accounting of the relationships between entities in the scholarly record.\nThis blog is the first one in a series about metadata matching. In the coming weeks, we will cover more detail about the product features related to metadata matching, explain why metadata matching is not a trivial problem, and share how we can develop, assess, compare, and choose matching strategies. Stay tuned!\n",
"headings": ["What is metadata matching?","Why do we need matching?"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/2024-public-data-file-now-available-featuring-new-experimental-formats/",
"title": "2024 public data file now available, featuring new experimental formats",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2024-05-14",
"lastmod_ts": 1715644800,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "This year’s public data file is now available, featuring over 156 million metadata records deposited with Crossref through the end of April 2024 from over 19,000 members. A full breakdown of Crossref metadata statistics is available here.\nLike last year, you can download all of these records in one go via Academic Torrents or directly from Amazon S3 via the “requester pays” method.\nDownload the file: The torrent download can be initiated here. Instructions for downloading via the “requester pays” method, along with other tips for using these files, can be found on the “Tips for working with Crossref public data files and Plus snapshots” page.\n",
"content": "This year’s public data file is now available, featuring over 156 million metadata records deposited with Crossref through the end of April 2024 from over 19,000 members. A full breakdown of Crossref metadata statistics is available here.\nLike last year, you can download all of these records in one go via Academic Torrents or directly from Amazon S3 via the “requester pays” method.\nDownload the file: The torrent download can be initiated here. Instructions for downloading via the “requester pays” method, along with other tips for using these files, can be found on the “Tips for working with Crossref public data files and Plus snapshots” page.\nIn January, Martin Eve announced that we had been experimenting with alternative file formats meant to make our public data files easier to use by broader audiences. This year’s file will be published alongside the tools that can be used on the public data file to produce two experimental formats: JSON-lines and SQLite (and a bonus Rust version). You can read more about our thinking behind this work in Martin’s blog post, and we are keen to hear your thoughts on these alternatives.\nOur annual public data file is meant to facilitate individuals and organisations interested in working with the entirety of our metadata corpus. Starting with the majority of our metadata records in one file should be much easier than starting from scratch with our API, but because Crossref metadata is always openly available, you can use the API to keep your local copy up to date with new and updated records.\nIf you’re curious about what you’ll get with the public data file, we’ve also published a sample version so that you can take a peek before committing to downloading the ~212 gb file. This file includes a random sample of JSON files and is available exclusively via torrent here.\nWe hope you find this public data file useful. Should you have any questions about how to access or use the file, please see the tips below, or share your questions below (you will be redirected to our community forum).\nTips for using the torrent and retrieving incremental updates Use the public data file if you want all Crossref metadata records. Everyone is welcome to the metadata, but it will be much faster for you and much easier on our APIs to get so many records in one file. Here are some tips on how to work with the file.\nUse the REST API to incrementally add new and updated records once you have the initial file. Here is how to get started (and avoid getting blocked in your enthusiasm to use all this great metadata!).\nWhile bibliographic metadata is generally required, because lots of metadata is optional, records will vary in quality and completeness.\nQuestions, comments, and feedback are welcome at support@crossref.org.\n",
"headings": ["Tips for using the torrent and retrieving incremental updates"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/isr-online-event-with-research-institutions-2024/",
"title": "Integrity of the Scholarly Record (ISR): what do research institutions think?",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2024-05-09",
"lastmod_ts": 1715212800,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "Earlier this year, we reported on the roundtable discussion event that we had organised in Frankfurt on the heels of the Frankfurt Book Fair 2023. This event was the second in the series of roundtable events that we are holding with our community to hear from you how we can all work together to preserve the integrity of the scholarly record - you can read more about insights from these events and about ISR in this series of blogs.\n",
"content": "Earlier this year, we reported on the roundtable discussion event that we had organised in Frankfurt on the heels of the Frankfurt Book Fair 2023. This event was the second in the series of roundtable events that we are holding with our community to hear from you how we can all work together to preserve the integrity of the scholarly record - you can read more about insights from these events and about ISR in this series of blogs.\nResearch institutions are one of the most important stakeholders in the endeavour of research integrity, and any conversation around ISR is incomplete without the views of this key community. This fact was acknowledged at the second ISR roundtable event, and one of the main takeaways from the discussions was to make more focused efforts to hear the viewpoints of researchers and academics.\nAs the first step in this direction, we organised an online discussion on the integrity of the scholarly record, to which we invited: researchers and academics, research integrity experts based at academic institutions, Crossref members, as well as other organisations working on this topic such as COPE and Digital Science. The primary objective of this event was to hear from this community their perspectives on preserving and leveraging the integrity of the scholarly record and to identify opportunities for collaboration in this area. To ensure common ground, we also wanted to share information about Crossref metadata, the Research Nexus vision, and our position and role in the integrity of the scholarly record.\nTo facilitate this, the event started with an introduction by Kora Korzec, Head of Community Engagement and Communication at Crossref, to our mission and vision and the importance of capturing the relationships between the objects, people and places involved in research through the Research Nexus. Amanda Bartell, Head of Member Experience, was next and she spoke about the scholarly record and the role that Crossref plays in preserving the record’s integrity. In her presentation, Amanda emphasised that Crossref’s role is not to assess the quality of content deposited by the members but rather to provide infrastructure that enables the community to provide and use metadata about the scholarly content produced by members. It’s important not to put up barriers to entry, but to work with all publishers to encourage best practices.\nDominika Tkaczyk, Head of Strategic Initiatives, shared details of a few Crossref projects that focus on monitoring and improving metadata completeness, thereby supporting ISR. These projects include improving the Participation Reports, using metadata matching to discover new relationships (e.g., preprint published as work, work supported by funder, etc), and importing more retractions and other updates from the Retraction Watch database that was acquired and made openly available by Crossref. Dominika used these examples to highlight the ways in which open and complete metadata can help in uncovering large scale trends and systemic concerns. The final speaker was Amanda French, ROR Technical Community Manager, who introduced the audience to the Research Organisation Registry, or ROR.\nTo accomplish the primary aim of the event, which was to hear the community’s viewpoints, the participants were divided into breakout groups for discussions and given three prompts to answer. The rest of the blog is a summary of what we heard from the participants.\n1. Is Crossref’s role what you expected? What surprised you? What are we missing? An overarching sentiment from the academics in the audience was that Crossref does so much more than is known to researchers! They were surprised by the range of activities underway at Crossref. At the same time, there were calls for Crossref to play a bigger role. Suggestions included playing a leadership role in deciding which metadata elements are a priority, providing guidance on the main metadata components important for signalling trust, playing a greater role in connecting various identifiers to ensure that relationships between different content types are preserved well, and to coordinate the efforts being taken by institutions, publishers and service providers around research integrity, by virtue of Crossref’s unique position in the community. There was a broad agreement that by providing the essential infrastructure, Crossref acts as the base upon which other actors in the scholarly community can build.\n2. What metadata elements do you consider important for signalling trust? Many participants spoke about the various ways in which author identity and affiliation are important as trust signals. Being able to identify when an author has changed institutions, or being able to make a distinction between authors who have the same name is important. Author affiliations that are authentic and verified would go a long way in establishing trust.\nMultiple assertions, e.g. for affiliations, would be welcome. The use cases for this could be when research starts at one institution and is carried over to another, or when researchers affiliated with an institution may perform part of the research overseas. Some of the participants, who actively investigate research data, shared that abstracts are valuable because they can be used for large scale analyses related to research integrity.\nOther metadata elements that came up during this discussion were data on peer review, ethics approval, patient and donor consent in medical research, editorial boards (especially of special issues), pre-registration, funding metadata, datasets and programming scripts.\n3. What value do you see in the integrity and completeness of the scholarly record in the way you operate? How do you contribute to it? How can it support you to achieve your own goals? Participants acknowledged that integrity of the metadata and the scholarly record is essential. Ensuring this integrity is a dynamic process, much akin to the concept of organised scepticism which is the notion that all scientific work should be trusted subject to its verification. Several ideas were shared on how to progress the integrity and completeness of the scholarly record. One recommendation was to use multiple metadata trust markers as that can make it harder for bad actors to game the system, but this may run the risk of making things complicated. Another suggestion was to make metadata part of the onboarding procedure- by gathering staff ORCID iDs during the onboarding process and sharing the institutional ROR ID with staff to promote its use, institutions can ensure that this information is routinely made available. The metadata deposited with Crossref should be integrated with downstream workflows to better facilitate the use of this rich metadata. An example of this is to integrate Crossmark with other research tools such as reference management software.\nThe participants acknowledged that this discussion underlined for them the fact that having identifiers in itself is not an indicator of quality and that the underlying metadata records and wider context is key to understanding trustworthiness of the content.\nThis event was a good first step towards engaging researchers and academics in the conversation about ISR. It connected folks working in different parts of the world who are united by their interest in research integrity. There was good engagement among all and commitment to continue these conversations in the future, with many participants planning to connect at the World Conference on Research Integrity in June (I’ll be attending as well, for anyone who wants to continue the conversation - along with my colleagues Fabienne and Evans).\nAt Crossref, we plan on continuing these conversations with all segments of the community to understand their needs and perceptions around metadata. The greater the awareness about the importance of metadata and its applications, including for research integrity, the richer the metadata that we are able to collect together. This will lead to building a comprehensive Research Nexus and emergence of more relationships therein. Please write in response to this post on our Community Forum if you have any thoughts on this as we’d love to hear from you.\nList of participants Manu Goyal International Journal of Cancer Panagiotis Kavouras University of Oslo Dorothy Bishop University of Oxford Zhesi (Phil) Shen Centre of Scientometrics, National Science Library, Chinese Academy of Sciences Wouter Vandevelde KU Leuven Leslie McIntosh Digital Science Elizabeth Noonan University College Cork Radek Gomola* Masaryk University Press Queensland University of Technology London School of Hygiene \u0026amp; Tropical Medicine Vilnius Gediminas Technical University Library Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) Ginny Hendricks Chif Program Officer, Crossref Kornelia Korzec Director of Community, Crossref Amanda Bartell Director of Membership, Crossref Dominika Tkaczyk Director of Data Science, Crossref Amanda French Technical Community Manager, Crossref Madhura Amdekar Community Engagement Manager, Crossref *Note: name added 21-May-2024\n",
"headings": ["1. Is Crossref’s role what you expected? What surprised you? What are we missing?","2. What metadata elements do you consider important for signalling trust?","3. What value do you see in the integrity and completeness of the scholarly record in the way you operate? How do you contribute to it? How can it support you to achieve your own goals?","List of participants"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/categories/trustworthiness/",
"title": "Trustworthiness",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Categories",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/categories/request-for-information/",
"title": "Request for Information",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Categories",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/seeking-consultancy-understanding-joining-obstacles-for-non-member-journals/",
"title": "Seeking consultancy: understanding joining obstacles for non-member journals",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2024-05-01",
"lastmod_ts": 1714521600,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref is undertaking a large program, dubbed 'RCFS' (Resourcing Crossref for Future Sustainability) that will initially tackle five specific issues with our fees. We haven’t increased any of our fees in nearly two decades, and while we’re still okay financially and do not have a revenue growth goal, we do have inclusion and simplification goals. This report from Research Consulting helped to narrow down the five priority projects for 2024-2025 around these three core goals:\n",
"content": "Crossref is undertaking a large program, dubbed 'RCFS' (Resourcing Crossref for Future Sustainability) that will initially tackle five specific issues with our fees. We haven’t increased any of our fees in nearly two decades, and while we’re still okay financially and do not have a revenue growth goal, we do have inclusion and simplification goals. This report from Research Consulting helped to narrow down the five priority projects for 2024-2025 around these three core goals:\nScope of the RCFS Program 2024-2025 GOAL: MORE EQUITABLE FEES Project 1: Evaluate the USD $275 annual membership fee tier and propose a more equitable pricing structure, which might entail breaking this down into two or more different tiers. Project 2: Define a new basis for sizing and tiering members for their capacity to pay GOAL: SIMPLIFY COMPLEX FEES Project 3: Address and adjust volume discounts for Content Registration Project 4: Address and adjust back-year discounts for Content Registration GOAL: REBALANCE REVENUE SOURCES Project 5: Reflect the increasing value of Crossref as a metadata source, likely increasing Metadata Plus fees Work to date As part of the RCFS program, we are working closely with our Membership \u0026amp; Fees Committee to discuss insights, gather feedback, and make recommendations to the Board. As a first step, we have surveyed and received responses from around 1000 of the current 8000 Crossref members in our lowest membership fee tier (USD $275). We are now starting to distill that data and will discuss it on our community call on May 8th and subsequently with the M\u0026amp;F Committee to inform recommendations for fee changes that may going into effect in 2025 or 2026.\nRequest For Information (RFI) about community consultation project While we have useful data from existing Crossref members, we know that there are many thousands of journals that are not (yet) members, and we need to understand this group better, in particular, to document and address the financial obstacles as well as the technical or social challenges.\nWe are looking for community facilitation expertise, with multiple language skills, to conduct a series of focus groups with non-member journals, with a summary and insights report (in English) provided by the end of June 2024.\nAll the data and documentation will be available publicly on the dedicated RCFS Program website\nAs well as designing, conducting, and summarising the results of some focus groups (participants for which will be gathered via our own contacts and those of partners such as DOAJ, EIFL, and the Free Journal Network) we would like the consultant to review work such as the DIAMAS institutional publishing report, and identify data relevant to Crossref’s fee model.\nIf you would like to respond, please provide the following information and send it to Kora Korzec at feedback@crossref.org by 15th May:\nYour consultancy organisation and your role within it Examples of similar market research undertaken Languages spoken within your team Confirmation that the timeline is workable Approximate fee, likely range, or structure/basis for your fee Equally, if you represent a journal or group of journals, such as Diamond Open Access journals, and are not yet using Crossref, please get in touch and we can include your group in the research.\nThank you!\n",
"headings": ["Scope of the RCFS Program 2024-2025","GOAL: MORE EQUITABLE FEES","GOAL: SIMPLIFY COMPLEX FEES","GOAL: REBALANCE REVENUE SOURCES","Work to date","Request For Information (RFI) about community consultation project"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/this-years-call-for-expressions-of-interest-to-join-our-board/",
"title": "This year’s call for expressions of interest to join our board",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2024-04-26",
"lastmod_ts": 1714089600,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "The Crossref Nominating Committee is inviting expressions of interest to join the Board of Directors of Crossref for the term starting in January 2025. 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.\nExpressions of interest will be due Monday, May 27th, 2024\nThis is an exciting time to join the board, as we have a number of active projects underway: We are considering resourcing Crossref for a sustainable future and board members will be part of deciding any changes to our fees scheme and overseeing its implementation. We\u0026rsquo;re focusing on how our community and metadata can contribute to ensuring the integrity of the scholarly record. We’re broadening our metadata record to capture richer funding and institutional affiliations. We\u0026rsquo;re working towards a future where the scholarly record prioritizes relationships between research outputs to build a holistic research nexus. The board helps guide this work.\n",
"content": "The Crossref Nominating Committee is inviting expressions of interest to join the Board of Directors of Crossref for the term starting in January 2025. 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.\nExpressions of interest will be due Monday, May 27th, 2024\nThis is an exciting time to join the board, as we have a number of active projects underway: We are considering resourcing Crossref for a sustainable future and board members will be part of deciding any changes to our fees scheme and overseeing its implementation. We\u0026rsquo;re focusing on how our community and metadata can contribute to ensuring the integrity of the scholarly record. We’re broadening our metadata record to capture richer funding and institutional affiliations. We\u0026rsquo;re working towards a future where the scholarly record prioritizes relationships between research outputs to build a holistic research nexus. The board helps guide this work.\nAbout the board elections The board is elected through the “one member, one vote” policy wherein every member organisation of Crossref has a single vote to elect representatives to the Crossref board. Board terms are for three years, and this year, there are four seats open for election.\nThe board maintains a balance of seats, with eight seats for smaller members and eight seats for larger members (based on total revenue to Crossref). This is an effort to ensure that the scholarly community\u0026rsquo;s diversity of experiences and perspectives is represented in decisions made at Crossref.\nThis year, we will elect two of the larger member seats (membership tiers $3,900 and above) and two of the smaller member seats (membership tiers $1,650 and below). You don’t need to specify which seat you are applying for; we will provide that information to the nominating committee.\nThe online election will open in September, with results announced at the annual meeting on October 29th, 2024. New members will begin their term in January 2025.\nAbout the Nominating Committee The Nominating Committee reviews the expressions of interest and selects a slate of candidates for election. The slate put forward will exceed the total number of open seats. The committee considers the statements of interest, organisational size, geography, and experience.\n2024 Nominating Committee\nJames Phillpotts*, Director of Content Transformation and Standards, Oxford University Press, committee chair Oscar Donde*, Editor in Chief, Pan Africa Science Journal Rose L’Huillier*, Senior Vice President Researcher Products, Elsevier Ivy Mutambanengwe-Matanga, Chief Operating Officer, African Journals Online Adam Sewell, Chief Technology Officer, IOP Publishing (*) indicates Crossref board member\nWhat is the committee looking for this year The committee looks for skills and experience that will complement the rest of the board. Candidates from countries and regions not currently reflected on the board are strongly encouraged to apply. Successful candidates often have some or all of these characteristics:\nDemonstrate a commitment to or understanding of our strategic agenda or the Principles of Open Scholarly Infrastructure; Have expertise that may be underrepresented on the board currently; Hold senior/director-level positions in their organisations; Have experience with governance or community involvement; Represent member organisations that are active in the scholarly communications ecosystem; Demonstrate metadata best practices as shown in the member’s participation report The board is also encouraging Crossref members who are research funders to apply.\nBoard roles and responsibilities Crossref’s services provide a central infrastructure for scholarly communications. Crossref’s board helps shape the future of our services and by extension, impacts the broader scholarly ecosystem. We are looking for board members to contribute their experience and perspective.\nThe role of the board at Crossref is to provide strategic and financial oversight of the organisation, as well as guidance to the Executive Director and the staff leadership team, with the key responsibilities being:\nSetting the strategic direction for the organisation; Providing financial oversight; and Approving new policies and services. The board is representative of our membership base and guides the staff leadership team on trends affecting scholarly communications. The board sets strategic directions for the organisation while also providing oversight into policy changes and implementation. Board members have a fiduciary responsibility to ensure sound operations. They do this by attending board meetings as well as joining more specific board committees.\nWho can apply to join the board? Any active member of Crossref can apply to join the board. Crossref membership is open to organisations that produce content, such as academic presses, commercial publishers, standards organisations, and research funders.\nWhat is expected of board members? Board members attend four meetings each year that typically take place in January, March, July, and November. Meetings have taken place in a variety of international locations and travel support is provided when needed. January, March, and November board meetings are held virtually, and all committee meetings take place virtually. Each board member should sit on at least one Crossref committee. Care is taken to accommodate the wide range of time zones in which our board members live.\nWhile the expressions of interest are specific to an individual, the seat that is elected to the board belongs to the member organisation. The primary board member also names an alternate who may attend meetings in the event that the primary board member is unable to. There is no personal financial obligation to sit on the board. The member organisation must remain in good standing.\nBoard members are expected to be comfortable assuming the responsibilities listed above and to prepare and participate in board meeting discussions.\nHow to apply Please click here to submit your expression of interest. We ask for a brief statement about how your organisation could enhance the our board and a brief personal statement about your interest and experience with Crossref.\nPlease contact me with any questions at lofiesh@crossref.org\n",
"headings": ["About the board elections","About the Nominating Committee","What is the committee looking for this year","Board roles and responsibilities","Who can apply to join the board?","What is expected of board members?","How to apply"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/common-views-and-questions-about-metadata-across-africa/",
"title": "Common views and questions about metadata across Africa",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2024-04-24",
"lastmod_ts": 1713916800,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "This past year has been a captivating journey of immersion within the Crossref community, a mix of online interactions and meaningful in-person experiences. From the engaging Sustainability Research and Innovation Conference in Port Elizabeth, South Africa, to the impactful webinars conducted globally, this has been more than just a professional endeavour; it has been a personal exploration of collaboration, insights, and a shared commitment to pushing the boundaries of scholarly communication.\n",
"content": "This past year has been a captivating journey of immersion within the Crossref community, a mix of online interactions and meaningful in-person experiences. From the engaging Sustainability Research and Innovation Conference in Port Elizabeth, South Africa, to the impactful webinars conducted globally, this has been more than just a professional endeavour; it has been a personal exploration of collaboration, insights, and a shared commitment to pushing the boundaries of scholarly communication.\nWorking collaboratively with research funders and research organisations Cocreation activity in smaller groups at the SRI conference.\nThe adventure began with a significant in-person event, the Sustainability Research and Innovation Conference. In the coastal city of Port Elizabeth, South Africa, I had the honour of hosting a parallel co-creation session titled \u0026ldquo;Connecting Science to Society: A Network Approach to Improving Science Communication in the Global South.\u0026rdquo; The co-creation session addressed research discoverability and accessibility among early-career researchers. Apart from some immediate feedback from the researchers in the room about how they might use co-creation beyond the conference to improve their research experience and outcome, I also had conversations with research funders from the Belmont Forum, Future Earth, and National Research Foundation - South Africa and the National Research Foundation - Mozambique about connecting their grants and grantees with their published outputs referencing Crossref’s Open Funder Registry and research grants registration. A different side conversation was about a community organisation in Botswana that is interested in registering patents with Crossref for proper referencing and protecting the intellectual property of their research on the indigenous communities’ innovations and the associated published work. These conversations are ongoing, unveiling a new understanding of unique needs and opportunities to pursue with research funders and research organisations working on indigenous knowledge and innovations.\nLearning from organisations in GEM-eligible countries The journey extended globally through a series of webinars conducted in Bangladesh, Tanzania, Nepal, and Ghana. Collaborating with dedicated Ambassadors and my colleagues leading the Global Equitable Membership (GEM) program, we witnessed an increase in Crossref membership from the GEM countries and initial metadata registration. The GEM Program offers relief from both Crossref membership and Crossref content registration fees for organisations in the least economically advantaged countries in the world, based on the World Bank\u0026rsquo;s IDA list. Susan, in her blog post, \u0026ldquo;The GEM Program: Year One\u0026rdquo;, elaborated on the significance of these efforts and their impact on fostering equitable access to scholarly resources and communication through the expansion of Crossref\u0026rsquo;s membership base in underrepresented regions, such as Bangladesh, Tanzania, Nepal, and Ghana. Specific concerns encountered while presenting the GEM program included feedback expressing reservations about the program\u0026rsquo;s approach, particularly in deciding on eligible countries, and advocating eligibility for the program to be extended to all the non-GEM countries in Africa. Additionally, a conversation with some organisations brought up concerns regarding the program\u0026rsquo;s sustainability, with inquiries about whether GEM was merely a free trial or freemium service, and seeking assurances against future fees. The audience found these sessions helpful, acknowledging that joining fees were no longer going to be a barrier, yet questions about the program\u0026rsquo;s longevity brought out the need for sustained support.\nDiscussing how The Research Nexus can support the community My journey then led me to Makerere University in Uganda for the Consortium of Uganda University Libraries (CUUL 2023) conference and the Forum for Open Research in MENA (FORM 2023) in Abu Dhabi. In Uganda, I noticed the synergy between university libraries, institutional repositories, and the research and education network service provider formed a consortium that played a crucial role in bridging the digital gap and supporting the adoption of open infrastructure. The event was mainly attended by librarians from different universities in Uganda. Most of those I connected with needed more information about Crossref and had questions about how Crossref DOIs are different from ARKs, which they commonly use in their publishing workflows. At FORM 2023, in my presentation titled, \u0026ldquo;The Research Nexus: A Rich and Reusable Open Network of Relationships in the Scholarly Record,\u0026rdquo; I shared Crossref\u0026rsquo;s vision for a connected research ecosystem with the audience that comprised of researchers, research administrators, and funders, and a good number of big publishers like IEEE and Taylor \u0026amp; Francis. The Research Nexus seeks to reveal relationships beyond persistent identifiers, utilising rich metadata to connect various scholarly components. I also took the opportunity at both events to share about The Publishers Learning And Community Exchange (PLACE), an online forum promoting best practices in scholarly publishing. The goal was to show attendees how they can actively contribute to and benefit from this vision, fostering a robust and interconnected research community through Crossref\u0026rsquo;s open infrastructure.\nPhoto with Dr. Salwan Abdulateef, rossref Ambassador - Iraq\nI enjoyed the opportunity to join the National Open Science Dialogue by TCC Africa, which provided crucial insights, emphasising the need for assessing awareness, implementing comprehensive policies, and fostering collaboration around Open Science. Higher education institutions were recognized as influencers in the global Open Science movement, while a call for an inclusive research environment was underscored through open access and data sharing. The dialogue emphasized a collective effort involving policymakers, educators, researchers, and institutions, focusing on inclusivity and collaboration to advance Open Science in East Africa.\nExploring how rich metadata can provide trust signals with members in Kenya Reflecting on the Crossref Nairobi event that happened in February 2024, it was an enriching experience exploring key issues shaping scholarly publishing in Kenya. The discussions also touched on the role of metadata as a trust signal and a tool for the persistence of the scholarly record, particularly in regions where data protection challenges persist. This is exemplified by concerns raised during the event about the fear of data theft, misuse, or loss, especially in places with comparatively weaker data protection laws. The presence of robust metadata, particularly with detailed provenance information, becomes crucial in such contexts, as it enables better identification and handling of potential misuse. Thus, through effective metadata implementation and the persistence facilitated by identifiers, the management of data risks can be significantly improved.\nThe insights from existing Crossref members pointed out contextual challenges, regional differences, and the importance of effective post-publication processes. The conference served as a valuable platform for dialogue, emphasising the collective commitment to continuous improvement of scholarly communication in the country, and the need for continuous awareness and training on making the most of Crossref services. The roundtable discussions during the Crossmark service consultation brought to light various reflections and considerations regarding post-publication changes in publishing workflows. The Crossmark service was a new discovery for most participants, with potential value recognized in facilitating current updates on articles. However, there are existing barriers such as a lack of awareness and technical expertise, suggesting the need for further education to facilitate adoption. Overall, the consultation provided a platform for introspection and exploration of avenues for improving post-publication practices in scholarly publishing.\nCrossref Nairobi group photo\nWe organised the Crossref Nairobi event with the help of colleagues from the community team and local Ambassadors, Mercury Shitindo of Kenya, Baraka Ngussa of Tanzania and our Board Members in Kenya, Oscar Donde. It was the first time I saw both my colleagues and Ambassadors in action and working closely together - making presentations and accommodating last-minute facilitation changes to the program. Compared to attending or speaking at an event, organising one was a unique experience requiring a lot of planning in advance for logistics and the event program, identifying and keeping in touch with important stakeholders, ushering guests and being on standby for any matters that come up about the event. All of that went very well thanks to the team on the ground and cooperative participants.\nExploring the role of open infrastructure for African universities Attending the recent WACREN 2024 conference was an eye-opening experience, unfolding the role of open infrastructure in addressing challenges faced by African universities. A focus on open access systems and advocacy for decolonizing knowledge were voiced too, including challenges of affordability of DOIs and questions of local ownership amidst global initiatives. Global persistent identifier providers, including ORCID and DataCite too, had a presence at the conference, alongside passionate advocates for more locally managed, decentralised infrastructure. These are concerns that Crossref needs to understand better, as we seek to find effective ways of supporting equitable participation in the Research Nexus. The conference resonated with a call for continued work in fostering accessibility, sharing, and leveraging resources to accelerate research and innovation in Africa.\nPhoto with our Ambassadors from West Africa at WACREN 2024 event: Blessing Abumere - Nigeria, Audrey Kenni Nganmeni - Cameroon, Richard Lamptey - Ghana and Oumy Ndiaye - Senegal.\nConversations with Crossref Ambassadors brought about a shared narrative across universities in some African countries. These institutions are actively embracing digital shifts, setting up institutional repositories using platforms like DSpace and OJS. However, challenges persist, particularly in funding and technical capacity. It\u0026rsquo;s heartening to see how national and regional research and education networks step in to help in internet connectivity, opening up collaboration opportunities with other interoperable infrastructure, setting up repositories, providing hosting services and event managing content identifiers.\nDeceptive publishing practices remain a shared concern, and we’ve had requests at these meetings for stricter inclusion criteria for membership of Crossref to ensure quality and trustworthiness of articles accessible through Crossref metadata.\nWe’ve explained to those we’ve met that Crossref doesn’t (and can’t) assess the quality of content or the integrity of the research process. We don’t have the people or the skills, and it isn’t our mission to be the gatekeepers of research quality. A DOI record is just an indication that something was published, it isn’t an indication of quality.\nHowever, we do still have a vital role in preserving the integrity of the scholarly record. We provide the infrastructure which enables those who produce scholarly outputs to provide metadata (effectively evidence) about how they ensure the quality of content and how the outputs fit into the scholarly record. The scholarly record - that network of published outputs, inputs, relationships and contexts - is captured through the metadata records that our members register with us, and that we then distribute freely and openly through our API. The richer and more comprehensive Crossref records are, the more context there is for our members and for the whole scholarly research ecosystem to make their own decisions around trustworthiness. Blocking access to the infrastructure creates gaps in the scholarly record, but also potentially blocks legitimate newcomers.\n“Crossref is focused on enriching metadata to provide more and better trust signals while keeping barriers to membership and participation as low as possible to enable an inclusive scholarly record.” Read more about Crossref’s role in preserving the integrity of the Scholarly record in the blog post by Amanda Bartell.\nWhile the landscape of digital scholarly publication witnesses significant strides, a crucial need persists, the importance of preserving and interconnecting metadata to the global scholarly record. It\u0026rsquo;s not just about discoverability, a theme resonating strongly within the community, but about enabling reproducibility, upholding research and editorial integrity, and facilitating reporting and assessment.\nThe path forward As I reflect on this year of immersing myself within the Crossref community, building awareness in new communities, and learning more about the different perceptions across the region, it feels like a personal progression of growth and discovery. From the captivating in-person moments to the global webinars and collaborative efforts to address challenges in scholarly communication, this journey is not just a professional pursuit; it\u0026rsquo;s a personal exploration. The path forward involves continued support, intensified awareness-building, and sustained dialogue, ensuring that the scholarly ecosystem continues to thrive, evolve, and leave a lasting impact.\n",
"headings": ["Working collaboratively with research funders and research organisations","Learning from organisations in GEM-eligible countries","Discussing how The Research Nexus can support the community","Exploring how rich metadata can provide trust signals with members in Kenya","Exploring the role of open infrastructure for African universities","The path forward"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/authors/martin-eve/",
"title": "Martin Eve",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Authors",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/categories/rd/",
"title": "R&D",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Categories",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/testing-times/",
"title": "Testing times",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2024-04-03",
"lastmod_ts": 1712102400,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "One of the challenges that we face in Labs and Research at Crossref is that, as we prototype various tools, we need the community to be able to test them. Often, this involves asking for deposit to a different endpoint or changing the way that a platform works to incorporate a prototype.\nThe problem is that our community is hugely varied in its technical capacity and level of ability when it comes to modifying their platform. Some mega-publishers, for instance, outsource their platforms and so are dependent on third party developers/organisations when they want to make a change. Many smaller publishers, by contrast, use systems such as OJS, which come with Crossref plugins that make life very easy… but that require hard code changes to accommodate prototypes. Such changes are way beyond the technical capacity of most journal editors.\n",
"content": "One of the challenges that we face in Labs and Research at Crossref is that, as we prototype various tools, we need the community to be able to test them. Often, this involves asking for deposit to a different endpoint or changing the way that a platform works to incorporate a prototype.\nThe problem is that our community is hugely varied in its technical capacity and level of ability when it comes to modifying their platform. Some mega-publishers, for instance, outsource their platforms and so are dependent on third party developers/organisations when they want to make a change. Many smaller publishers, by contrast, use systems such as OJS, which come with Crossref plugins that make life very easy… but that require hard code changes to accommodate prototypes. Such changes are way beyond the technical capacity of most journal editors.\nSo how can we prototype new ideas and test them? One way is by creating new interstitial interfaces that allow people to manually supplement metadata or register for prototype services. Of course, this requires additional work on behalf of the user. Every time they wish to participate they have to visit an extra web page and re-input details that, surely, were included in the original deposit.\nAnother way would be for plugin developers to have an advanced option field that allowed end-users to change their deposit endpoint. It would be excellent to see this feature in OJS, Janeway, and also proprietary systems. This would allow us to work with the community to test new prototype mechanisms, without forcing anyone to edit code. Many systems already include the ability to switch between Crossref’s “test” system and our live deposit API. All I am really suggesting here is the logical next step: allow advanced users to specify a deposit endpoint of their own choosing so that we can give them access to prototype systems.\nOf course, it’s not always that simple. Sometimes, prototype systems will require new data fields on submission, for example. In those cases, there is nothing for it except to modify the plugin or to provide a separate interface. But sometimes, as in the case of the Op Cit project (more on which soon), all the data is already in place; we just need to direct users to a different endpoint. Such changes would definitely make testing times less trying.\n",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/categories/engineering/",
"title": "Engineering",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Categories",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/authors/joe-wass/",
"title": "Joe Wass",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Authors",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/mending-chestertons-fence-open-source-decision-making/",
"title": "Mending Chesterton’s Fence: Open Source Decision-making",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2024-03-18",
"lastmod_ts": 1710720000,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "When each line of code is written it is surrounded by a sea of context: who in the community this is for, what problem we\u0026rsquo;re trying to solve, what technical assumptions we\u0026rsquo;re making, what we already tried but didn\u0026rsquo;t work, how much coffee we\u0026rsquo;ve had today. All of these have an effect on the software we write.\nBy the time the next person looks at that code, some of that context will have evaporated. There may be helpful code comments, tests, and specifications to explain how it should behave. But they don\u0026rsquo;t explain the path not taken, and why we didn\u0026rsquo;t take it. Or those occasions where the facts changed, so we changed our mind.\n",
"content": "When each line of code is written it is surrounded by a sea of context: who in the community this is for, what problem we\u0026rsquo;re trying to solve, what technical assumptions we\u0026rsquo;re making, what we already tried but didn\u0026rsquo;t work, how much coffee we\u0026rsquo;ve had today. All of these have an effect on the software we write.\nBy the time the next person looks at that code, some of that context will have evaporated. There may be helpful code comments, tests, and specifications to explain how it should behave. But they don\u0026rsquo;t explain the path not taken, and why we didn\u0026rsquo;t take it. Or those occasions where the facts changed, so we changed our mind.\nSome parts of our system are as old as Crossref itself. Whilst our process still involves coffee, it\u0026rsquo;s safe to say that most of our working assumptions have changed, and for good reasons! We have to be very careful when working with our oldest code. We always consider why it was written that way, and what might have changed since. We\u0026rsquo;re always on the look out for Chesterton\u0026rsquo;s Fence!\nLeaving a Trail We\u0026rsquo;re building a new generation of systems at Crossref, and as we go we\u0026rsquo;re being deliberate about supporting the people who will maintain it.\nWhen our oldest code was written, the software development team all worked in an office with a whiteboard or three, and the code was proprietary. Twenty years later, things are very different. The software development team is spread over 8 timezones. Thanks to POSI, all the new code we write is open source, so the next people to read that code might not even be Crossref staff.\nWorking increasingly asynchronously, without that whiteboard, we need to record the options, collect evidence, and peer-review them within the team.\nSo for the past couple of years the software team has maintained a decision register. The first decision we recorded was that we should record decisions! Since then we have recorded the significant decisions as they arise. Plus some historical ones.\nThese aren\u0026rsquo;t functional specifications, which describe what the system should do. It\u0026rsquo;s the decisions and trade-offs we made along the way to get to the how. Look out for another blog post about specifications.\nBy leaving a trail of explanations as we go, we make it easier for people to understand why code was written, and what has changed. We\u0026rsquo;re writing the story of our new systems. This makes it easier to alter the system in future in response to changes in our community, and the metadata they use.\nDifficult Decisions There are some fun challenges to building systems at Crossref. We have a lot of data. Our schema is very diverse, and has a vast amount of domain knowledge embedded in it. It\u0026rsquo;s changed over time to accommodate 20 years of scholarly publishing innovations. Our community is diverse too, from small one-person publishers with a handful of articles, through to large ones that publish millions.\nWhat might be an obvious decision for a database table with a thousand rows doesn\u0026rsquo;t always translate to a million. When you get to a billion, things change again. An initially sensible choice might not scale. And a scalable solution might look over-engineered if we had millions of DOIs, rather than hundreds of millions.\nThe diversity of the data also poses challenges. A very simple feature might get complicated or expensive when it meets the heterogeneity of our metadata and membership. What might scale for journal article or grant metadata might not work for book chapters.\nThe big decisions need careful discussion, experimentation, and justification.\n2NF or not 2NF One such recent decision was how we structure our SQL schema for the database that powers our new \u0026lsquo;relationships\u0026rsquo; REST API endpoint, currently in development.\nThe data model is simple: we have a table of Relationships which connect pairs of Items. And each Item can have properties (such as a type). The way to model this is straightforward, following conventional normalization rules:\nWe built the API around it, and all was well.\nWe then added a feature which lets you look up relationships based on the properties of the subject or object. For example \u0026ldquo;find citations where the subject is an article and the object is a dataset\u0026rdquo;. This design worked well in our initial testing. We loaded more data into it, and it continued to work well.\nAnd then, the context changed. Once we tested loading a billion relationships in the database, the performance dropped. The characteristics of the data: size, shape and distribution, reached a point where the database was unable to run queries in a timely way. The PostgreSQL query planner became unpredictable and occasionally produced some quite exciting query plans (to non-technical readers: databases are neither the time nor the place for excitement).\nThis is a normal experience in scaling up a system. We expected that something like this would happen at some point, but you don\u0026rsquo;t know when it will happen until you try. We bounced around some ideas and came up with a couple of alternatives. Each made trade-offs around processing time, data storage and query flexibility. The best way to evaluate them was to use real data at a representative scale.\nOne of the options was denormalisation. This is a conventional solution to this kind of problem, but was not our first choice as it involves extra machinery to keep the data up-to-date, and more storage. It would not have been the correct solution for a smaller dataset. But we had the evidence that the other two approaches would not scale predictably.\nBy combining the data into one table, we can serve up API requests much more predictably, and with much better performance. This code is now running with the right performance. Technical readers note that this diagram is simplified. The real SQL schema is a little different.\nWithout writing this history down, and explaining what we tried, someone might misunderstand the reason for the code and try to simplify it. Decision record DR-0500 guards against that.\nBut one day, when the context changes, future developers will be able to come back and modify the code, because they understand why it was like that in the first place.\n",
"headings": ["Leaving a Trail","Difficult Decisions","2NF or not 2NF"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/credential-checking-at-crossref/",
"title": "Credential Checking at Crossref",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2024-03-15",
"lastmod_ts": 1710460800,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": " It turns out that one of the things that is really difficult at Crossref is checking whether a set of Crossref credentials has permission to act on a specific DOI prefix. This is the result of many legacy systems storing various mappings in various different software components, from our Content System through to our CRM. To this end, I wrote a basic application, credcheck, that will allow you to test a Crossref credential against an API.\n",
"content": " It turns out that one of the things that is really difficult at Crossref is checking whether a set of Crossref credentials has permission to act on a specific DOI prefix. This is the result of many legacy systems storing various mappings in various different software components, from our Content System through to our CRM. To this end, I wrote a basic application, credcheck, that will allow you to test a Crossref credential against an API.\nThere are two modes of usage. First, a command-line interface that allows you to run a basic command and get feedback:\nUsage: cli.py [OPTIONS] USERNAME PASSWORD DOI\nSecond, you can use it as a programmatic library in Python:\nimport cred\ncredential = cred.Credential(username=username, password=password, doi=doi)\nif not credential.is_authenticated():\n\u0026hellip;\nif credential.is_authorised():\n\u0026hellip;\nThe tool splits down authentication (whether the given username and password are valid) and authorisation (whether the valid credentials are usable against a specific DOI/prefix).\nFor technical information, the way this works is by attempting to run a report on the specific DOI in question and then scraping the response page. We hope, at some future point, that there will be a real API for this, but for now this solves the problem as a bridge.\n",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/subject-codes-incomplete-and-unreliable-have-got-to-go/",
"title": "Subject codes, incomplete and unreliable, have got to go",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2024-03-13",
"lastmod_ts": 1710288000,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "Subject classifications have been available via the REST API for many years but have not been complete or reliable from the start and will soon be deprecated. dfdfd\nThe subject metadata element was born out of a Labs experiment intended to enrich the metadata returned via Crossref Metadata Search with All Subject Journal Classification codes from Scopus. This feature was developed when the REST API was still fairly new, and we now recognize that the initial implementation worked its way into the service prematurely.\n",
"content": "Subject classifications have been available via the REST API for many years but have not been complete or reliable from the start and will soon be deprecated. dfdfd\nThe subject metadata element was born out of a Labs experiment intended to enrich the metadata returned via Crossref Metadata Search with All Subject Journal Classification codes from Scopus. This feature was developed when the REST API was still fairly new, and we now recognize that the initial implementation worked its way into the service prematurely.\nWhile subject classifications in Crossref metadata could be very useful, the current implementation in the REST API is problematic for three primary reasons:\nThey are misleadingly exposed in the API as a property of the work, when in fact they are a property of the container (e.g. a journal or conference proceeding). Just because a journal’s broad topic category is “X” doesn’t mean that a particular article in the journal is about “X.”\nExisting works may have outdated subjects. Originally, subject codes were not updated periodically. However, subjects exposed in the /journals route are now updated once a day. Those exposed via the /works endpoint are indexed along with works, and so when a new subject list is ingested, new DOIs start getting new subjects, but existing works may have outdated subjects. We don’t have a mechanism for forcing updates when incorrect subject values are returned via the REST API, so this data can be stale and incorrect.\nThey are not applied to everything. This is because the Scopus list does not cover all the journals that Crossref has (conversely, the Scopus list contains some journals Crossref does not have), and does not contain other container types.\nThe Labs team investigated options for improving subject classification coverage but ultimately concluded that there are insufficient solutions to the coverage problem. For more, please see Esha Datta’s findings published at Force11’s Upstream: https://doi.org/10.54900/n6dnt-xpq48\nWhere does that leave us? Rather than continuing to supply unreliable and misleading subject category metadata, we will be deprecating this feature in the coming weeks. To minimize disruption and avoid breaking changes at this time, we will be removing this data from our index, so the subject element will simply be empty. We may remove the subject element in the future.\nWe know that the community’s desire for subject-based analysis of metadata is very strong, and we have supported efforts to establish a multidisciplinary taxonomy. Inaccurate codes in the meantime do not help but actually hinder these efforts, giving the false impression that they are correct.\nWe aim to deprecate the subject codes in April of this year.\nPlease let us know if you have any questions or concerns by leaving a comment below, which will start a thread in our community forum.\nFrequently asked questions\nQ. Will the subject field continue to be available and functional?\nA. The subject metadata element will continue to be included in the JSON response but will not return any values.\nQ. Will new subject codes be added in the future?\nA. We do not have any current plans to add new subject codes in the future.\nQ. I received a notification about this, but we don’t use subject codes. Do I need to do anything?\nA. No, if you do not currently use the subject element, you do not need to do anything about this change.\nQ. I noticed that wrong or inaccurate subject codes were assigned to my works. Is this a solution?\nA. Yes. Until we can identify an accurate and sustainable system for assigning subject codes to Crossref metadata records, we want to stop assigning inaccurate subject codes and remove all existing assignments.\n",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/learning/",
"title": "API Learning Hub",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2024-03-07",
"lastmod_ts": 1709769600,
"section": "API Learning Hub",
"tags": [],
"description": "We want everybody to have access to the metadata in our API but we also acknowledge that this is not a trivial task and some help does not hurt. Here we will collect some of the tools and resources that our team prepare and that you can freely use to start your metadata exploring adventure.\nChoose your path: First steps API 101 for publishers, researchers, and librarians with Postman and Crossref: Postman offers an friendly interface to build and modify your API queries. In this collection you will find templates to which you can add or modify the parameters of your choice. Postman collection | Video tutorial Intro to Crossref API using code: if your aim is to create workflows to download, analyze, and visualize data, you will probably want to create programs and scripts. We currently have available the following tutorials using R and/or Python that you can use and modify to your convenience. Python notebook | R notebook Retrieve specific metadata Crossref API for funding data: how to query data from the funders endpoint and grant-type records.\n",
"content": "We want everybody to have access to the metadata in our API but we also acknowledge that this is not a trivial task and some help does not hurt. Here we will collect some of the tools and resources that our team prepare and that you can freely use to start your metadata exploring adventure.\nChoose your path: First steps API 101 for publishers, researchers, and librarians with Postman and Crossref: Postman offers an friendly interface to build and modify your API queries. In this collection you will find templates to which you can add or modify the parameters of your choice. Postman collection | Video tutorial Intro to Crossref API using code: if your aim is to create workflows to download, analyze, and visualize data, you will probably want to create programs and scripts. We currently have available the following tutorials using R and/or Python that you can use and modify to your convenience. Python notebook | R notebook Retrieve specific metadata Crossref API for funding data: how to query data from the funders endpoint and grant-type records.\nR dashboard Get Crossref citations: this project contains a Jupyter notebook that shows how to compare citation counts from different Crossref endpoints.\nPython notebook Get journal-level metadata from Crossref’s API using R: how to retrieve journal-level metadata from a list of ISSN.\nNotebook Get Retraction Watch metadata from Crossref’s API: how to retrieve Retraction Watch and general updates.\nR notebook Cursor-based pagination using R: how to retrieve long lists of records using cursors.\nR notebook Retrieve all the metadata You have an alternative to the REST API if your goal is to obtain the entire body of Crossref’s records. With the public data file you have access to every DOI ever registered with Crossref. Learn more about the Public Data File\nSome convenient tools: API cheatsheet: we prepared a quick-reference sheet that you can use to get started with building your queries.\nJSON-file viewer: When you make a request to the REST API you will get a JSON file in the output. If you are making requests from your web browser and depending on its version, perhaps you will need a JSON-viewer plugin. For example, click this simple request. If you see a string of seemingly disorganized text, you will need to install a plugin. Alternatively, you can use other viewers such as JSON hero, which provides an extra layer of interactivity.\nRelated resources Crossref Unified Resource API: Here you will find a detailed list of the REST API endpoints, and parameters that you can use. Tips for using the Crossref REST API: This section from our documentation should be one of the first resources you should check for your API journey. Crossref Gitlab tutorial repository: Download the source code of our selection of tutorials. ",
"headings": ["Choose your path:","First steps","Retrieve specific metadata","Retrieve all the metadata","Some convenient tools:","Related resources"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/services/metadata-retrieval/public-data-file/",
"title": "Crossref Public Data File",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2024-03-07",
"lastmod_ts": 1709769600,
"section": "Find a service",
"tags": [],
"description": "You have an alternative to the REST API if your goal is to obtain the entire body of Crossref’s records. With the public data file you have access to every DOI ever registered with Crossref.\n2026 Public data file Release notes. Public data file. Data file sample. Tips for working with Crossref public data files and Plus snapshots\nImportant considerations: The records are in JSON-lines. Metadata is supplied by our members and, as such, not all records have the same completeness or quality of metadata. Every year our metadata corpus grows. The first data file was 65GB and held 112 million records; this year the file weighs in at 208 GB and contains metadata for 180 million records, or all Crossref records registered up to and including part of March 2026. Decompressing the .tar.gz files will take you several hours. Additional convenient tools: Given the size and the amount of files that the public data files comprises, last year we started experimenting with some additional tools to improve access to the data and repack the data into additional formats:\n",
"content": "You have an alternative to the REST API if your goal is to obtain the entire body of Crossref’s records. With the public data file you have access to every DOI ever registered with Crossref.\n2026 Public data file Release notes. Public data file. Data file sample. Tips for working with Crossref public data files and Plus snapshots\nImportant considerations: The records are in JSON-lines. Metadata is supplied by our members and, as such, not all records have the same completeness or quality of metadata. Every year our metadata corpus grows. The first data file was 65GB and held 112 million records; this year the file weighs in at 208 GB and contains metadata for 180 million records, or all Crossref records registered up to and including part of March 2026. Decompressing the .tar.gz files will take you several hours. Additional convenient tools: Given the size and the amount of files that the public data files comprises, last year we started experimenting with some additional tools to improve access to the data and repack the data into additional formats:\nPacker: A python application that allows you to repack the Crossref data dump into JSON-L. dois2SQLite: This tool will help you load Crossref metadata into a SQLite database. Crossref Data Dump Repacker: Rust Edition A Rust application that allows you to repack the Crossref data dump into SQLite. API for Interacting with the Crossref Annual Data File: A python API for interacting with the Crossref Annual Data File dump, allowing you to build various indexes for working with the annual data dump from Crossref. These tools are experimental, so please remember that we they are released without warranties and support, but are happy to hear about your experience using them. You can read more about them in this blog post\nPrevious releases (Click to expand)\n+- 2025\rRelease notes. 2024 March public data file (197GB). Data file sample. +- 2024\rRelease notes. 2024 March public data file (212GB). Data file sample. +- 2023\rRelease notes 2023 March public data file (185GB) +- 2022\rRelease notes 2022 April public data file (167GB) +- 2021\rRelease notes 2021 January public data file (102GB) +- 2020\rRelease notes 2020 March public data file (67GB) ",
"headings": ["2026 Public data file","Important considerations:","Additional convenient tools:","Previous releases"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/doaj-and-crossref-renew-their-partnership-to-support-the-least-resourced-journals/",
"title": "DOAJ and Crossref renew their partnership to support the least-resourced journals",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2024-03-06",
"lastmod_ts": 1709683200,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref and DOAJ share the aim to encourage the dissemination and use of scholarly research using online technologies and to work with and through regional and international networks, partners, and user communities for the achievement of their aims to build local institutional capacity and sustainability. Both organisations agreed to work together in 2021 in a variety of ways, but primarily to ‘encourage the dissemination and use of scholarly research using online technologies, and regional and international networks, partners and communities, helping to build local institutional capacity and sustainability around the world.’ Some of the fruits of this labour are:\n",
"content": "Crossref and DOAJ share the aim to encourage the dissemination and use of scholarly research using online technologies and to work with and through regional and international networks, partners, and user communities for the achievement of their aims to build local institutional capacity and sustainability. Both organisations agreed to work together in 2021 in a variety of ways, but primarily to ‘encourage the dissemination and use of scholarly research using online technologies, and regional and international networks, partners and communities, helping to build local institutional capacity and sustainability around the world.’ Some of the fruits of this labour are:\nDOAJ added support for Crossref XML to make it easier for publishers to upload metadata Closer collaboration between customer/member support at both organisations, making it easier for publishers and journal editors to navigate both service’s technologies the launch of PLACE: ‘a ‘one-stop shop’ for information to support publishers in adopting best practices the industry developed’ (together with other partners) a pilot gap analysis of the journals in DOAJ with the possibility of helping them start to use and resolve DOIs. The new agreement, signed earlier this month, will slightly shift focus to build upon existing collaborations, particularly around metadata. One of the primary sections of the MOU is enhancing support for the least-resourced journals by:\nAssigning DOIs and depositing the metadata with Crossref Finding ways to improve their DOAJ application experience to help them become indexed Collect and ingest their Crossref metadata into DOAJ Help them to get preserved via JASPER or similar initiatives Help identify other local partners, such as Crossref Sponsoring Organisations, to support their use of Crossref services It’s great that we can further underpin what is already a good working relationship. Both Crossref and DOAJ are central to discovery so it’s a natural partnership. Helping journals meet better standards and become indexed to make them more discoverable on a global scale is at the heart of our strategy. This agreement opens up a new avenue that allows the community to really focus on supporting those journals and the research they publish.’\n\u0026ndash; Joanna Ball, Managing Director of DOAJ\n‘The collaborations with DOAJ so far only reconfirmed our shared goal to help make the global scholarly communications system more equitable wherever we can. Our joint projects aim to seek out and devise support for resource-constrained journals in multiple ways. DOAJ’s work is essential in helping journals to develop good practice, while Crossref offers an open infrastructure to ensure all journals can be included and discoverable in the global scholarly record.’\n\u0026ndash; Ginny Hendricks, Director of Member and Community Outreach at Crossref\n\u0026mdash;\u0026mdash;\u0026ndash; END \u0026mdash;\u0026mdash;\nAbout DOAJ DOAJ is a community-curated online directory that indexes and provides access to high quality, open access, peer reviewed journals. DOAJ deploys around one hundred carefully selected volunteers from the community of library and other academic disciplines to assist in curating open access journals. This independent database contains over 20,400 peer-reviewed open access journals covering all areas of science, technology, medicine, social sciences, arts and humanities. DOAJ is financially supported worldwide by libraries, publishers and other like-minded organisations. DOAJ services (including the evaluation of journals) are free for all, and all data provided by DOAJ are harvestable via OAI/PMH and the API. See https://doaj.org/ for more information.\nAbout Crossref Crossref is a global community-governed open scholarly infrastructure that makes all kinds of research objects easy to find, assess, and reuse through a number of services critical to research communications, including an open metadata API that sees over 1.5 billion queries every month. Crossref’s ~20,000 members come from 155 countries and are made up of universities, publishers, funders, government bodies, libraries, and research groups. Their ~155 million DOI records contribute to the collective vision of a rich and reusable open network of relationships connecting research organisations, people, things, and actions; a scholarly record that the global community can build on forever, for the benefit of society.\nFor more information please contact: dominic@doaj.org and rclark@crossref.org\n",
"headings": ["About DOAJ","About Crossref"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/what-do-we-know-about-dois/",
"title": "What do we know about DOIs",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2024-02-29",
"lastmod_ts": 1709164800,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref holds metadata for approximately 150 million scholarly artifacts. These range from peer reviewed journal articles through to scholarly books through to scientific blog posts. In fact, amid such heterogeneity, the only singular factor that unites such items is that they have been assigned a document object identifier (DOI); a unique identification string that can be used to resolve to a resource pertaining to said metadata (often, but not always, a copy of the work identified by the metadata).\n",
"content": "Crossref holds metadata for approximately 150 million scholarly artifacts. These range from peer reviewed journal articles through to scholarly books through to scientific blog posts. In fact, amid such heterogeneity, the only singular factor that unites such items is that they have been assigned a document object identifier (DOI); a unique identification string that can be used to resolve to a resource pertaining to said metadata (often, but not always, a copy of the work identified by the metadata).\nWhat, though, do we actually know about the state of persistence of these links? How many DOIs resolve correctly? How many landing pages, at the other end of the DOI resolution, contain the information that is supposed to be there, including the title and the DOI itself? How can we find out?\nThe first and seemingly most obvious way that we can obtain some of these data is by working through the most recent sample of DOIs and attempting to fetch metadata from each of them using a standard python script. This involves using the httpx library to attempt to resolve each of the DOIs to a resource, visiting that resource and seeing what the landing page yields.\nEven this is not straightforward. Landing pages can be HTML resources or they can be PDF files, among other things. In the case of PDF files, to detect a run of text is not simple as a single line break can be enough to foil our search. Nonetheless, when using this strategy we find the following statistics:\nTotal DOI count in sample: 5000\nNumber of HTTP 200 response: 3301*\nPercentage of HTTP 200 responses: 66.02%\nNumber of titles found on landing page: 1580\nPercentage of titles found on landing page: 31.60%\nNumber of DOIs in recommended format found on landing page: 1410\nPercentage of DOIs in recommended format found on landing page: 28.20%\nNumber of titles and DOIs found on landing page: 929\nPercentage of titles and DOIs found on landing page: 18.58%\nNumber of PDFs found on landing page: 1469\nPercentage of PDFs found on landing page: 29.38%\nPercent of PDFs found on landing pages that loaded: 44.50%\n* an HTTP 200 response means that the web page loaded correctly\nWhile these numbers look quite low, the problem here is that a large number of scholarly publishers use Digital Rights Management techniques on their sites that block a crawl of this type. We can use systems like Playwright to remote control browsers to do the crawling, so that the request looks as much like a genuine user as possible and to evade such detection systems. However, lots of these sites detect headless browsers (where the browser is invisible and running on a server) and block them with a 403 Permission Denied error.\nThere\u0026rsquo;s a great Github javascript suite that aims to help evade headless detection. The tests it uses are:\nUser Agent: in a browser running with puppeteer in headless mode, user agent includes Headless.\nApp Version: same as User Agent above.\nPlugins: headless browsers don\u0026rsquo;t have any plugins. So we can say that if it has plugin it\u0026rsquo;s headful, but not otherwise since some browsers, like Firefox, don\u0026rsquo;t have default plugins.\nPlugins Prototype: check if the Plugin and PluginsArray prototype are correct.\nMime Type: similar to Plugins test, where headless browsers don\u0026rsquo;t have any mime type\nMime Type Prototype: check if the MimeType and MimeTypeArrayprototype are correct.\nLanguages: all headful browser has at least one language. So we can say that if it has no language it\u0026rsquo;s headless.\nWebdriver: this property is true when running in a headless browser.\nTime elapse: it pops an alert() on page and if it\u0026rsquo;s closed too fast, means that it\u0026rsquo;s headless.\nChrome element: it\u0026rsquo;s specific for chrome browser that has an element window.chrome.\nPermission: in headless mode Notification.permission and navigator.permissions.query report contradictory values.\nDevtool: puppeteer works on devtools protocol, this test checks if devtool is present or not.\nBroken Image: all browser has a default nonzero broken image size, and this may not happen on a headless browser.\nOuter Dimension: the attributes outerHeight and outerWidth have value 0 on headless browser.\nConnection Rtt: The attribute navigator.connection.rtt,if present, has value 0 on headless browser.\nMouse Move: The attributes movementX and movementY on every MouseEvent have value 0 on headless browser.\nUsing the stealth plugin for Playwright also allows us to evade most of these checks. This just leaves Mouse Move and Broken Image detection, which I thought would not outweigh all the other factors. We can also jitter the connection with arbitrary delays so that it should appear to be coming at random intervals, rather than a robotic crawl.\nYet the basic fact is that we are still blocked from crawling many sites. This does not happen when we put the browser into headful mode, so current detection techniques have clearly evolved in the past half decade (since Detect Headless) was designed.\nIf, however, we run the browser in a headful mode, the results are somewhat stunningly different:\nTotal DOI count in sample: 5000\nNumber of HTTP 200 response: 4852\nPercent of HTTP 200 responses: 97.04%\nNumber of titles found on landing page: 2547\nPercentage of titles found on landing page: 50.94%\nNumber of DOIs in recommended format found on landing page: 2424\nPercentage of DOIs in recommended format found on landing page: 48.48%\nNumber of titles and DOIs found on landing page: 1574\nPercentage of titles and DOIs found on landing page: 31.48%\nNumber of PDFs found on landing page: 2085\nPercentage of PDFs found on landing page: 41.70%\nPercentage of PDFs found on landing pages that loaded: 42.97%\nLet\u0026rsquo;s talk about the resolution statistics. Other studies, looking at general links on the web, have found a link-rot rate of about 60%-70% over a ten-year period (Lessig, Zittrain, and Albert 2014; Stox 2022). The DOI resolution rate that we have, with 97% of links resolving (or a 3% link-rot rate), is far better and more robust than a web link in general.\nIs 3% a good or a bad number? It\u0026rsquo;s more robust than the web in general, but it still means that for every 100 DOIs, just under 3 will fail to resolve. We also cannot tell whether these DOIs are resolving to the correct target, except by using the metadata detection metrics (are the title and DOI on the landing page, which we could only detect at a far lower rate). It is entirely possible for a website to resolve with an HTTP 200 (OK) response, but for the page in question to be something very different to what the user expected, a phenomenon dubbed content drift. A good example is domain hijacking, where a domain name expires and spam companies buy them up. These still resolve to a web page, but instead of an article on RNA, for a hypothetical example, the user gets adverts for rubber welding hose. That said, other studies are also prone to this and there is no guarantee that content drift doesn\u0026rsquo;t affect a huge proportion of supposedly good links in the other studies, too.\nOf course, one of the most frustrating elements of this exercise is having to work around publisher blocks on content when visiting using a server-only robot script. It\u0026rsquo;s important for us periodically to monitor the uptime rate of the DOI system. We also recognise, though, that publishers want to block malicious traffic. However, we can\u0026rsquo;t perform our monitoring in an easy, automatic way if headless scripts are blocked from resolving DOIs and visiting their respective landing pages. This is not even a call for open access; it\u0026rsquo;s just saying that current anti-bot techniques, sometimes implemented for legitimate reasons, stifle our ability to know the landscape. Even if the bot resolved a DOI to just a paywall, it would be easier for us to monitor this than it is now. Similarly, CAPTCHA systems such as Cloudflare that would seem to offer an easy way to distinguish between humans (good) and robots (bad) can make life very difficult at the monitoring end. We would certainly be grateful for any proposed solution that could help us to work around these mechanisms.\nConclusion The context in which I wanted to know this information was so that we can take a snapshot of a page and then, at a later stage, determine whether it is down or has changed substantially. To do this, we are developing Shelob, an experimental content drift spider system; that\u0026rsquo;s what we\u0026rsquo;ve used so far to conduct this analysis. Over time, Shelob will evolve, we hope, to give us a way to detect when content has drifted or gone offline. If, however, we can\u0026rsquo;t detect whether an endpoint is good in the first place, then we likewise cannot detect when things have gone wrong. On the other hand, if, when we first visit, we find the DOI and title on the landing page, but at some future point this degrades, we might be able to say with some confidence that the original has died. I, personally, would encourage publishers not to block automated crawlers, because it\u0026rsquo;s good when we can determine these types of figures.\nWorks Cited Lessig, Lawrence, Jonathan Zittrain, and Kendra Albert. 2014. \u0026lsquo;Perma: Scoping and Addressing the Problem of Link and Reference Rot in Legal Citations\u0026rsquo;. Harvard Law Review 127 (4). https://harvardlawreview.org/forum/vol-127/perma-scoping-and-addressing-the-problem-of-link-and-reference-rot-in-legal-citations/.(https://www.zotero.org/google-docs/?970bfS\nStox, Patrick. 2022. \u0026lsquo;Ahrefs Study on Link Rot\u0026rsquo;. SEO Blog by Ahrefs. 29 April 2022. https://ahrefs.com/blog/link-rot-study/.\n",
"headings": ["Conclusion","Works Cited"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/working-groups/conferences-projects/",
"title": "PIDs for Conferences & Projects",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2024-02-26",
"lastmod_ts": 1708905600,
"section": "Working groups",
"tags": [],
"description": "This group ran through 2020 but is currently inactive.\nThis group aims to establish a persistent identifier (PID) system and registry for scholarly conferences. PIDS enable creation of a persistent metadata record about a conference and, when applied to published proceedings, enables more efficient decision making for researchers, libraries, publishers, funding and evaluation bodies. Longer term, it also helps to identify fraudulent and/or low-quality conferences. This group initially intended to research PIDs for Conferences and projects, but has limited the scope to Conferences for the first phase.\n",
"content": "This group ran through 2020 but is currently inactive.\nThis group aims to establish a persistent identifier (PID) system and registry for scholarly conferences. PIDS enable creation of a persistent metadata record about a conference and, when applied to published proceedings, enables more efficient decision making for researchers, libraries, publishers, funding and evaluation bodies. Longer term, it also helps to identify fraudulent and/or low-quality conferences. This group initially intended to research PIDs for Conferences and projects, but has limited the scope to Conferences for the first phase.\nMetadata specifications were circulated for comment in Spring 2018, and a set of metadata to define conferences has been decided. The working group held a kick-off meeting at CERN in February 2019. Both DataCite and Crossref will be implementing this metadata set to allow conferences to be registered as DOIs.\nCurrently the group involves a good number of representative publishers and has regular calls every 1-2 months. You can follow the group activity on twitter using #confpid tag or via the DataCite blog and our own.\nPlease see blog posts Taking the con out of conferences and Towards persistent identification for conferences for background information.\nGroup Members Chair: Aliaksandr Birukou, Springer Nature\nFacilitator: Patricia Feeney, Crossref\nMarcel R. Ackermann, DBLP / Schloss Dagstuhl Nhora Cortes-Comerer, ASME Philip DiVietro, ASME Martin Fenner, DataCite Gerry Grenier, IEEE Christina Hoppermann, Springer Nature Bethan Keall, Elsevier Anna Lacson, ACM Andres Mori, Digital Science Lisa Nienhaus, Springer Nature Craig Rodkin, ACM Sweitze Roffel, Elsevier Judy Salk, Elsevier Kruna Vukmirovic, The IET Alexander Wagner, DESY Please contact Patricia Feeney with any questions or to apply to join the working group.\n",
"headings": ["Group Members"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/authors/crossref/",
"title": "Crossref",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Authors",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/the-lammey-effect/",
"title": "The Lammey Effect",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2024-02-16",
"lastmod_ts": 1708041600,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "We’re equally sad and proud to report that Rachael Lammey is moving on in her career to the very lucky team at 67Bricks. Her last day at Crossref is today, Friday 16th February. Which is too soon for us, but very exciting for her!\nIt’s hard to overstate Rachael\u0026rsquo;s impact on Crossref’s growth and success in her 12 years here. She started as a Product Manager where she developed that role into a broad and central function, and soon moved into the newly-formed community team as International Outreach Manager where she grew important programs such as Sponsors, Ambassadors, a series of ‘LIVE’ events around the world, and she went on to manage her own team and establish some of the most important strategic relationships that Crossref now feels fortunate to have.\n",
"content": "We’re equally sad and proud to report that Rachael Lammey is moving on in her career to the very lucky team at 67Bricks. Her last day at Crossref is today, Friday 16th February. Which is too soon for us, but very exciting for her!\nIt’s hard to overstate Rachael\u0026rsquo;s impact on Crossref’s growth and success in her 12 years here. She started as a Product Manager where she developed that role into a broad and central function, and soon moved into the newly-formed community team as International Outreach Manager where she grew important programs such as Sponsors, Ambassadors, a series of ‘LIVE’ events around the world, and she went on to manage her own team and establish some of the most important strategic relationships that Crossref now feels fortunate to have.\nRachael was a significant part of the growth and adoption of new initiatives such as Crossmark, Similarity Check, the REST API, preprints, grants, data citation, and ROR. She's contributed to numerous organisations such as EASE, ALPSP, SSP, ISMTE, STM, and most recently co-Chaired the NISO working group on retractions and corrections. As Head of Strategic Initiatives, and most recently, Director of Product, Rachael has shown dedication and leadership, supporting and strengthening not just her own teams but all of us across the organisation, encouraging us to do better while being one of the easiest people to work with.\nThe \u0026lsquo;butterfly effect\u0026rsquo; is the notion that the world is deeply interconnected and that one small occurrence can influence a much larger complex system. Rachael embodies that notion, having created positive ripples and waves\u0026mdash;and certainly many connections\u0026mdash;in the scholarly record, in our organisation, and across the community.\nMessages from colleagues Rachael, I was saddened when I first heard the news that you were moving on to another opportunity. Your professionalism, work ethic, and positive attitude have been inspirational to work around. I have enjoyed the opportunities we have had to collaborate. As you move on to a new experience I wish you success and happiness in your future endeavors. Your presence will be missed at Crossref! Best Wishes.\n\u0026ndash; Ryan\nI will miss you, Rachael. It has been great working with you for the few months that I have been at Crossref. I also cannot forget kayaking together with you and capsizing on the return to the shore, but almost professionally recovering. We would have made the best team this time around. I wish you all the best and many wins in your new role.\n\u0026ndash; Obanda\nI feel like the luckiest human to have worked with Rachael over the last 4 years. She’s the perfect mix of smart and funny and knowing how to get things done. Rachael is a big part of what makes Crossref culture so special — I’ve never felt so supported in a role as when Rachael was my manager and for that I am very grateful. I will miss her wit and humor and her pragmatic approach to work and life!\n\u0026ndash; Sara\nOne of my first ‘Crossref LIVE’ events was with Rachael in Brazil in 2016. At the time, my role mostly focused on membership, and we had just started working more closely with ABEC, a large organisation in Brazil that sponsored quite a few members. Rachael managed the sponsor program then and thought this would be a good opportunity to collaborate with a sponsor on an event, and she asked me to join her. There is so much planning for these - venues, local partners, presentations, meetings - and she had all the details in order and made the event such a success. Rachael was supportive, encouraging, and I learned so much from working with her. The Brazil trip was such a positive experience that I realised I wanted to focus more closely on community engagement. Rachael encouraged me to do so.\nShe and I went on to partner on more LIVE events together. Our time in Indonesia was perhaps one of the most memorable for me - as well as our LIVE event, we had an unexpected tour of Yogyakarta with our Indonesian hosts, involving a tour of Prambanan Temple (see photo below), batik fabric shopping, visiting a few universities, and a stop at our hosts’ home. All the while trying not to let the winding car ride and traffic get the better of us. Our event the next day went perfectly, and I told her, half-jokingly, that the whole experience renewed my faith in humanity. Of note, we also drank the only bottle of wine available in the hotel bar.\nRachael was also my Crossref running buddy, and we spent quite a few miles together - in Brazil, NH, Maine, Oxford, and Spain. During our runs, topics ranged from Game of Thrones to Idris Elba to sportsing, but not so much about work. The next time I find myself in England, we will run a few more miles together, followed by a pint. Thank you for everything!\n\u0026ndash; Susan\nMany have pointed out how talented, wise, or skilled you are and I certainly will not contradict a single word of it but that\u0026rsquo;s not what comes to mind first for me. Those traits, while true, pale in comparison to the person you are. Your positive, bright demeanor and the way everyone always feels better just being around you. I have dreaded some meetings from time to time. But whenever I\u0026rsquo;ve been involved in something with you, I\u0026rsquo;ve always left feeling better than when I started (no matter how grumpy I may have entered). You have been a consistent bright light in the Crossref constellation and you will truly be missed.\n\u0026ndash; Jon\nRachael! You are the best at cutting through all the bulls**t to get at what really needs to happen and why! Your knowledge is broad and deep, as is your institutional memory for all things Crossref and scholarly publishing. And your unflappability in pretty much any context is admirable and inspiring. We’ll miss you big time! Wishing you all the success at 67Bricks and otherwise.\n\u0026ndash; Shayn\nHey Rachael - I’m happy to be writing this note of Congratulations!! to you, particularly because it would be awkward to explain this bit of verklempt I’m feeling. Our interactions have been limited, but my impressions of you are of confidence, calm, capability, and collegiality. Thanks so much for your work with the Billing team. I’m sorry we are losing you, and am also so glad to know that you are out there at the forefront of inspiring others elsewhere, not only in the work you do, but also how you go about it.\n\u0026ndash; Laura\nHey Rachael, Just a big THANK YOU for helping me out all this time. I've had so many questions, and you've always been there to answer them. I always knew I could count on you. Thanks for those heartening chats when I needed a boost, and for including me in webinars and recordings - it really helped me improve. Remember that funny mistake I made on a recording when I called us 'Rochael'? We sure had a good laugh! I'm gonna miss those times and working with you. Can't wait to catch up with you over a drink the next time I'm in town. Wishing you all the very best and once again, thanks for everything! \u0026ndash; Rosa\nI am happy we got to enjoy some delicious vegetarian/vegan meals and wine together. I guess I should also mention that I enjoyed recruiting, HR and business fun with you too. Thank you for being such a big part of Crossref for 12 years! Have fun conquering your new chapter. Congratulations!\n\u0026ndash; Michelle\nRachael! You will be missed. I have really enjoyed our chats and work together. I will miss our wide ranging talks about food, books, and your descriptions of all the sportsing, which I would admire because I can barely manage a short run. :-) Thanks so much for being you and let’s stay in touch! Congratulations on your new endeavor, you’re going to be great.\n\u0026ndash; Esha\nWhen Rachel joined Crossref she brought a lot of enthusiasm and interest in learning about all that we were doing and also about what we could do. Her ideas and engaging leadership are wonderful for creating interest and drive to make projects happen. It has been wonderful to work with her over the 12 years here. I always look forward to seeing her and hearing what she has been doing outside of Crossref as well as inside. I will miss her but I know she will be doing great things wherever she may be.\n\u0026ndash; Tim\nWe’ve had a number of opportunities to reminisce, gassing each other up about how great it has been to work together, so I won’t do too much more of that here. But we will continue building on all of your contributions at Crossref and will carry forward your truth-telling and problem-solving approach to the work we do here. Best of luck with all the future has to offer, and we will certainly miss having you on the team.\n\u0026ndash; Patrick P\nRachael - I will miss you. I’ve really enjoyed working with you, hanging out while traveling, and getting recommendations on good books to read. Crossref won’t be the same without you. I think you have worked in the most different areas of Crossref and on the most projects of anybody, ever. Your commitment, professionalism and humour helped make Crossref what it is today. Your sportsing is also very impressive. All the best. \u0026ndash; Ed\nNot all heroes wear capes! Rachael defines that saying so much with her ethic of getting things DONE! I know she loves to get things done but the speed and quality in which that happens is second-to-none. Rachael will be massively missed at Crossref and 67Bricks don’t yet know what they have found. I enjoyed working with Rachael throughout my tenure at Crossref, she has helped me a huge amount in developing my programming skills and has always been encouraging throughout, especially with the \u0026rsquo;toil-bashing’ which is substantial and overwhelming at times.\nOn a more personal note, she is a great drinking buddy and always motivates me to be more active… by making me feel lazy. The number of hours Rachael would work was crazy, but then I always thought that anyone who gets up that early to go for runs must be a little crazy! AIl the best in your future endeavors and don’t be a stranger.\n\u0026ndash; Paul\nWhen I started at Crossref in March 2015—at the UKSG conference in Glasgow—Rachael was leading a workshop on text mining, showing off in full glory her ‘unicorn’ mix of skills from her technical knowledge of metadata and APIs to her facilitation techniques with a large group of people, clearly a community whose needs she knew inside out. Later that evening, Rachael took it upon herself to induct me in the ways of Crossref. One of the most important things she thought I should know was that we were all trusted and treated like adults - there was no micromanagement and I was to feel completely free to challenge the status quo. After one of the first ‘LIVE’ events, in Vilnius, I realised that it was Rachael who had created and embodied that trusted vibe through her own approach. She has been entrusted with so many programs, projects, teams, and tricky situations. Almost every launch, release, announcement, or achievement at Crossref very likely had Rachael’s eye on it at some stage, certainly the ‘actually-getting-it-done’ stage. Our close working relationship over the last nine years grew into a great friendship and I’m not quite sure how I’ll feel when the reality sets in and she’s not here for a quick chat, always a reality check. Working with Rachael has been inspiring, exciting, reassuring, and hilarious (that dry 'Norn Iron' humour!). 67Bricks is so fortunate and I can’t wait to watch her help them go from strength to strength, just like she has done for Crossref. See you soon, Ranty Rachael, no doubt putting the world to rights over a bottle of Malbec and many eyerolls 🙄. \u0026ndash; Ginny\nAlthough our time working together only overlapped the short span of two years, I appreciate how much of a champion you were for ROR and everything else you did at Crossref! I’m sure you’ll continue to do the same, among many other great things, in your new journey at 67 Bricks. You will be missed!\n\u0026ndash; Adam\nRachael, It has been wonderful working with you!! You are truly a special person. I always looked forward to when we chatted over slack, had a call together, or got to spend time together in person. You are sure to do amazing things on your next adventure. You will truly be missed!! I hope we can stay in touch! Good luck, Rachael!!! Fondly, Amy.\n\u0026ndash; Amy\nI am happy I got to meet Rachael when I joined Crossref in December 2023. We spoke generally about the Products team at Crossref, the differences and similarities between the African and British culture and upcoming projects on automation. You were really patient towards explaining and providing great information on metadata and research. Thank you so much for always responding swiftly to my requests pertaining to Finance issues. I have no doubt that you would be missed at Crossref and would keep doing great things into the future!!! Congratulations Rachael.\n\u0026ndash; Patience\nI will greatly miss working with you, Rachael; you have been a stalwart of reliability and enthusiasm during my time at Crossref and the organisation will not be the same without you. That said, of course, I wish you all the best of luck and success in your future endeavours!\n\u0026ndash; Martin\nRachael- Congratulations on this new opportunity, I am thrilled for you! I am also very sorry that our time at Crossref did not overlap much and I am grateful for all the chances I had of interacting with you (including being able to meet you in London recently)- you were always very helpful and kind to me. I am hopeful that our paths will cross again in the future. We will definitely miss you here, and I wish you all the best for all the exciting things ahead.\n\u0026ndash; Madhura\nMy third week at Crossref back in 2017 was at the annual meeting in Singapore, and not getting into the timezone and not sleeping for 4 days was eased by our visit to a rooftop nightclub on the penultimate night - just before you headed off to Indonesia for a series of meetings with members and sponsors. I still don’t know where you get all your energy! I’m so sorry you’re leaving - I’ll really miss your honesty, your approach to getting things done, and of course seeing Rosie on our zoom calls. Looking forward to seeing what’s next for 67 Bricks - exciting times!\n\u0026ndash; Amanda B\nRachael, it’s been a pleasure to work with you. You’re always ready to help and ever full of information. We’ve only just got coordinated on the perennial challenge of timelines! You took things on and got them done, as you said. The world of schol comms won’t even know how much it has to thank you for, probably chiefly for seeing the Retraction Watch data acquisition through and opening it up for all. I will miss your honesty and energy, and the opportunity to challenge you again on the amount of food consumed in one sitting… I don’t think you’ll need luck in your next place, but I wish you that it is all you want it to be.\n\u0026ndash; Kora\nI’m so glad to have met you in person over these couple of days in London shortly after I joined Crossref and it’s such a shame we didn’t have much time to work together more and spend more time (not working) together. Thanks for the introduction to the Scampi Fries - you’ve changed my life forever (for the best obviously)!\n\u0026ndash; Maryna\nThank you for your collaboration and friendship over the past decade! You will be missed. We've worked on a long series of abbreviations, acronyms, and portmanteaus! Thanks for organizing countless things, from conference satellites to conference rooms. Your long record as fire warden was unblemished. 67bricks will benefit from your singular drive and attention to detail. All the best! \u0026ndash; Joe\nRachael! One thing I admire most in a person is a facility with metaphor accompanied by the ability to see to the heart of a matter, and hoo boy do you have those qualities in spades. I remember so clearly your talk at the Crossref team meeting in Spain in 2023 in which you clarified the Big Picture for us all in an extremely enlightening way, and then, in a smaller but equally impressive achievement, casually mentioning in a Funder Registry meeting that funders should start \u0026ldquo;stretching and warming up\u0026rdquo; for the transition to ROR – boy did I latch on to that terrific image. I wish you all the best at 67 Bricks.\n\u0026ndash; Amanda F\nRachael, thank you so much for all the support, patience, honesty, and determination. I will certainly miss our chats, work-related and non-work related. I wish you all the best in your new ventures! \u0026ndash; Dominika\nRachael - thank you for your boundless patience, generosity, and sense of humour. I’m very grateful I got to learn the Crossref ropes (cropes?) from you. Looking forward to randomly running into you on the Bristol karaoke circuit in 10 years’ time and performing an epic duet of Dancing in the Dark together. There’s a joke in there somewhere about you being the boss.\n\u0026ndash; Lena\nRachael, Congrats on your new opportunity. You will be greatly missed here. Through the years we have only been at the same events in person a handful of times but I will always remember your amazing personality and sense of humor. I am thankful to have spent some time with you at 2020 PIDapalooza.\n\u0026ndash; Maria\nThank you, Rachael. Thank you. I know everyone is telling you that they’re sad to see you go (I am too; we all are). I keep thinking if I delay telling you that, maybe the day won’t come when you walk out the Crossref doors. But here it is. Just wanted to you to know that I appreciate you. I appreciate you pushing us forward. I appreciate you being an advocate for all things Crossref. We’ll all miss you. Best of luck at 67bricks!\n\u0026ndash; Isaac\nOn one of our first meet ups together, I drove us from the Lynnfield office to Logan airport in rush hour, and we managed to survive the Bostonian road rage in one piece. We spent the ride talking through the intricacies of a sponsoring organisation’s agreement. Rachael has been a safe set of hands and an encyclopedia of institutional memory for Crossref for 12 years. Rachael is one of those people who’s as equally competent as she is a pleasure to work with. She’s an innate leader because people want to get behind her. She shows her depth of understanding while also inviting input from everyone in the room. I’ll miss our Zoom calls, our marathon Friday sessions, and our post-meeting pub visits.\n\u0026ndash; Lucy\nHello! Here\u0026rsquo;s to hoping your new workplace appreciates you as much as you were here – they\u0026rsquo;re lucky to have you. I only wish we had the chance to interact more. Many hugs!\n\u0026ndash; Luis\nRachael, I will really really miss you, professionally and personally (but you know this already !). I'll miss all our work, dog, book and putting the world to rights chats. You'll be brilliant whatever you do and wherever you go (67Bricks have no idea how lucky they are !). Just keep 'getting stuff done' and have fun 😀 \u0026ndash; Fabienne\nYou will be sorely missed but can be very proud of what you’ve done during your time at Crossref, I’m sure you’ll continue to have a big impact. You’ve always been a pleasure to work with: efficient, supportive, and always with a sense of fun and enjoyment. That’s probably one of the things that drew me to Crossref even before we worked together as colleagues. Thanks for the support and positivity you’ve brought on many, many occasions and best wishes for the future!\n\u0026ndash; Martyn\nHey Rachael! I might have not had the chance to meet with you much while still around but I’ll definitely miss your jokes and the good vibes you were bringing to each call! Looking forward to taking over your place for board games when around Bristol ;) Wishing you a great start in the new place!\n\u0026ndash; Panos\nThunderCats are on the move. ThunderCats are loose. Says it all, really. Best of luck in your new endeavours.\n\u0026ndash; Mike\nCrossref won\u0026rsquo;t be the same without Rachael and we wish her well on her way to even greater things. Good luck, Lammey! ",
"headings": ["Messages from colleagues","Crossref won\u0026rsquo;t be the same without Rachael and we wish her well on her way to even greater things.","Good luck, Lammey!"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/ed-pentz-accepts-the-2024-niso-miles-conrad-award/",
"title": "Ed Pentz accepts the 2024 NISO Miles Conrad Award",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2024-02-13",
"lastmod_ts": 1707782400,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "Great news to share: our Executive Director, Ed Pentz, has been selected as the 2024 recipient of the Miles Conrad Award from the USA\u0026rsquo;s National Information Standards organisation (NISO). The award is testament to an individual\u0026rsquo;s lifetime contribution to the information community, and we couldn\u0026rsquo;t be more delighted that Ed was voted to be this year\u0026rsquo;s well-deserved recipient.\nDuring the NISO Plus conference this week in Baltimore, USA, Ed accepted his award and delivered the 2024 Miles Conrad lecture, reflecting on how far open scholarly infrastructure has come, and the part he has played in this at Crossref and through numerous other collaborative initiatives.\n",
"content": "Great news to share: our Executive Director, Ed Pentz, has been selected as the 2024 recipient of the Miles Conrad Award from the USA\u0026rsquo;s National Information Standards organisation (NISO). The award is testament to an individual\u0026rsquo;s lifetime contribution to the information community, and we couldn\u0026rsquo;t be more delighted that Ed was voted to be this year\u0026rsquo;s well-deserved recipient.\nDuring the NISO Plus conference this week in Baltimore, USA, Ed accepted his award and delivered the 2024 Miles Conrad lecture, reflecting on how far open scholarly infrastructure has come, and the part he has played in this at Crossref and through numerous other collaborative initiatives.\nEstablished in 1965, the Miles Conrad Award gives recognition to those who\u0026rsquo;ve made substantial contributions to the information community over a lifetime. Named after the founder of the National Federation of Abstracting and Indexing Services (NFAIS)—an association that since merged with NISO—the award encourages innovation in content management and dissemination. Over the years, leaders and innovators who have significantly influenced the field of information exchange have been honored with the award. Ed has joined an illustrious group!\nEd’s leadership in collaboration and diplomacy has led to Crossref\u0026rsquo;s success in making research objects more accessible and useful to a wide global audience, including publishers, researchers, funders, societies, libraries, and more. Crossref\u0026rsquo;s founding purpose is stated as:\n“To promote the development and cooperative use of new and innovative technologies to speed and facilitate scientific and other scholarly research”.\nAcknowledging his privilege as a Western, university-educated, white man, which he comments has helped his career, Ed prioritises collaboration, open communication, teamwork, and equity in creating a positive, trusted environment that has brought together a diverse team of 49 colleagues from 11 countries. The organisation’s culture allows everyone to grow and contribute to the mission of a connected research nexus by including and developing solutions for community members across the globe.\nBefore his journey with Crossref, Ed held a number of roles at Harcourt Brace, including launching Academic Press\u0026rsquo;s first online journal. This experience led to his involvement with the DOI-X pilot project, which became the foundation for Crossref. Since its launch in 2000, under his leadership, Crossref has become an important component of the research ecosystem, an open scholarly infrastructure with nearly 20,000 members across more than 150 countries. Crossref is now the main source of \u0026gt;155 million records about all kinds of research objects and this open metadata registry is relied upon by thousands of tools and services across the whole research system.\nEd’s influence is also evident throughout the wider world of open scholarly infrastructure; aside from establishing Crossref, he co-founded ROR and was a founding member of ORCID, where he also served as board Chair. Further, he has engaged with the community by holding various advisory positions, including the DOI Foundation, the Digital Object Naming Authority (DONA), and the Coalition for Diversity in Scholarly Publishing (C4DISC).\nEd also emphasised that the long-term success of community initiatives lies in patience and the ability to agree on high-level principles of purpose and governance, which oil the wheels of collaboration, encourage participation, and enable more progressive change that builds and lasts over time. He says, \u0026ldquo;to solve collective problems it takes collaboration and diplomacy, bringing together a group of stakeholders, balancing their different concerns, building trust, and reaching consensus.\u0026rdquo;\nThe adoption of the Principles of Open Scholarly Infrastructure (POSI), along with (so far) 14 other organisations, was a key turning point for Crossref, Ed said, and one which has already paved the way for more openness of key metadata for the community, including references and retractions, as well as closer partnerships with many of the other POSI adoptees, given their shared understanding and experience.\nReferencing the current \u0026ldquo;peak hype\u0026rdquo; around artificial intelligence (AI), Ed points to the challenge of research integrity and the \u0026ldquo;growing field of science sleuthing\u0026rdquo; as a forthcoming area that Crossref and open metadata may help tackle at scale, including through Crossref\u0026rsquo;s Integrity of the Scholarly Record (ISR) Program and\u0026mdash;of course\u0026mdash;community-wide collaboration.\nIn concluding his talk, Ed describes his hopes and dreams for scholarly communications in the future. He would like to see more balance in diversity in the leadership of open scholarly infrastructure, extended integrations among the various foundational infrastructures, and a fully connected system where the scholarly record is inclusive globally.\nEd, on behalf of all your proud colleagues at Crossref, thank you and congratulations! ",
"headings": ["Ed, on behalf of all your proud colleagues at Crossref, thank you and congratulations!"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/frankfurt-isr-roundtable-event-2023/",
"title": "ISR Roundtable 2023: The future of preserving the integrity of the scholarly record together",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2024-02-06",
"lastmod_ts": 1707177600,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "Metadata about research objects and the relationships between them form the basis of the scholarly record: rich metadata has the potential to provide a richer context for scholarly output, and in particular, can provide trust signals to indicate integrity. Information on who authored a research work, who funded it, which other research works it cites, and whether it was updated, can act as signals of trustworthiness. Crossref provides foundational infrastructure to connect and preserve these records, but the creation of these records is an ongoing and complex community effort. Crossref has always shown a deep commitment to preserving the integrity of the scholarly record in an open and scalable manner.\n",
"content": "Metadata about research objects and the relationships between them form the basis of the scholarly record: rich metadata has the potential to provide a richer context for scholarly output, and in particular, can provide trust signals to indicate integrity. Information on who authored a research work, who funded it, which other research works it cites, and whether it was updated, can act as signals of trustworthiness. Crossref provides foundational infrastructure to connect and preserve these records, but the creation of these records is an ongoing and complex community effort. Crossref has always shown a deep commitment to preserving the integrity of the scholarly record in an open and scalable manner.\nGiven the increasing concerns in the community about matters of research integrity and integrity of the scholarly record (ISR), we at Crossref have been engaging with community members to understand what developments are needed. In 2022, we organised a roundtable discussion to talk about our role and the applicability of Crossref’s services in preserving and assessing the integrity of the scholarly record. We’ve acted on much of that feedback since, and so in October 2023, we organised a follow-up event, once more gathering representatives of publishers, research integrity experts, policy-makers, academic institutions, funders, and researchers (the full list of participants can be found in the appendix). This post aims to offer insight into the discussions at this event and the next steps. The objective of this event was to take the conversation forward by:\nSharing the progress made by Crossref on matters related to ISR since the last roundtable event. Sharing information about how metadata contributes to the Research Nexus, and can act as trust markers for research outputs. Apprising the community about the latest membership trends and examples of activities that we see, such as title transfer disputes, unregistered DOIs, requests for deleting records, and sneaked references . Building upon the ideas discussed during the 2022 roundtable event to progress the conversation about issues related to ISR. Learning from the participants about their experiences of pursuing research integrity initiatives. Last but no less importantly, hearing from the participants their perspectives on strategies for preserving the integrity of the scholarly record, and opportunities for collaborating to leverage metadata to assess the integrity of the scholarly record. The event was kicked off by Ed Pentz, who spoke to the participants about how integrity is key to Crossref’s mission, and Crossref’s vision of the Research Nexus. Next, Amanda Bartell, the Head of Member Experience at Crossref, shared the recent developments and trends in community behaviour. She expanded upon the actions taken by Crossref as part of its ISR program since the last roundtable event, which include:\nAcquisition and opening of the Retraction Watch database, which makes it easier to access information on retractions and corrections. Increased participation in the Global Equitable Membership (GEM) program, enabling a wider section of the community to provide and access trust signals. Newer developments around metadata that act as trust signals: e.g. 120K grants or awards now have a Crossref DOI, and the planned transition of the Open Funder Registry into ROR. Recruitment of a Community Manager to focus on working with publishers and editors, including on ISR (that’s me!), and recruitment of a Technical Community Manager to enable greater use of our APIs. Amanda highlighted that all Crossref members should be using ROR IDs to provide affiliations for authors (along with ORCID iDs) in their Crossref metadata. She also shared some latest examples of community behaviours that we have seen, such as requests from authors to delete records of works that were published without their permission, title ownership disputes between publishers, and the recent instance of sneaked references.\nIvan Oransky, co-founder of Retraction Watch, and Lena Stoll, Product Manager at Crossref, were next, and they spoke about the future of the Retraction Watch database, and about the Crossmark service. After this, some of the other roundtable participants shared initiatives that they have undertaken that support ISR:\nJodi Schneider from the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign spoke about NISO’s CREC Working Group that has created a Recommended Practice that should be followed by relevant stakeholders for communicating retracted research (Crossref’s Director of Product Rachael Lammey was the co-chair of that group). Kihong Kim from the Korean Council of Science Editors shared information about the workshops that the Council has organised for researchers on publishing in journals. Alberto Martín-Martín from Universidad de Granada presented his thoughts on how to reconcile the publishing system and the institutional view of tracking research outputs. Bianca Kramer from Sesame Science spoke about her analysis of and the implications of sneaked references, duplicate references, and missing references for citation integrity. Joris van Rossum from STM Solutions spoke about the STM Integrity Hub and the integrity tools that are being developed in collaboration with some publishers. Some of the most valuable reflections stemmed from discussions in small groups on these three key questions:\nWhat value do you see in the integrity and completeness of the scholarly record in the way you operate? How do you contribute to it? How can it support you to achieve your own goals? Are you aware of Crossref services? What are the barriers to more uptake? What are the challenges and opportunities? What information is essential and nice to have for you in the scholarly records to support trust signalling and ascertaining trustworthiness? As groups shared their discussions, a few themes became apparent that I would like to elaborate on further.\nWhat is “complete”? Given the prompt to talk about the value of completeness of the scholarly record, an immediate reaction at most tables was: how much metadata qualifies as “complete” metadata? Can the scholarly record be considered complete if some publishers or journals do not use Crossref? What is the optimum level of metadata that should be deposited by members - should a minimum data standard be defined by disciplines, or should there be standard data requirements for all? The composition of metadata appears to change over time, too, as the processes change and our ability to record their facets increases. While there were spirited discussions about what constitutes a complete scholarly record, everyone agreed that “completeness” of metadata, as much as is possible, should be the aim. Unambiguous and consistent standards may help with this, for example, the Metadata 20/20 community creation of principles and best practices, and potentially also using a set of recognition standards and reproducibility badges.\nGlobal participation is equally important for a truly “complete” scholarly record. In order to enable as many in the scholarly community as possible to participate in Crossref services and metadata, Crossref launched the Global Equitable Membership (GEM) program in 2023. Under this initiative, membership and content registration fees are waived off for members from the least economically advantaged countries. We are seeing first signs that this initiative meaningfully lowers the barriers to participation for organisations based in those countries, and allows the global community to contribute towards the building of a comprehensive research ecosystem.\nAt the end of the day, it is important to recognize that rich metadata is crucial because it can be used for all kinds of analysis, which in turn can drive decision-making. Even if some of the metadata components are sporadically missing, that could be acceptable, because every piece of data counts!\nCorrections and Retractions Similar to last year, retractions and corrections continued to be a topic of great interest in this year’s roundtable. This was not surprising given their relevance as trust indicators as well as the recent development with the acquisition of the Retraction Watch database by Crossref. Having heard from Ivan about the Retraction Watch taxonomy of reasons for retractions and the metadata included in the database, participants expressed the need to investigate this taxonomy as a community standard. While the Retraction Watch taxonomy is not widely known, we at Crossref are working to map the Crossmark taxonomy with the Retraction Watch taxonomy, which will enable complete integration of the Retraction Watch database with the Crossref database.\nIt would also be useful to add more information to retraction notices. Having more information about the reasons for retraction will not only destigmatize retractions, but certain additional information, such as submission dates for those outputs, might help with ethical investigations to determine whether manuscripts were being submitted to multiple publishers simultaneously.\nOn the topic of retractions, another aspect that came up in the room was about incentives for researchers to publish as much and as quickly as possible. If researchers indulge in unethical publishing practices due to this pressure to publish, that is hugely detrimental to the cause of research integrity and to the progress of scientific research in general. However, there is a distinction to be made between the integrity of the research and the integrity of the scholarly record - unethical research and publishing practices, including but not limited to data falsification, fabrication, and plagiarism, affect research integrity while integrity of the scholarly record is affected by unavailability of metadata, outdated metadata, incomplete metadata records, and incorrect metadata (e.g. as seen in the case of sneaked references).\nThere was a lot of discussion about Crossmark, a cross-platform service provided by Crossref that allows readers to discover whether an item has been updated, corrected, or retracted just by clicking a button that is standardised across publication platforms. While most participants acknowledged its importance, they also pointed out that its uptake has been limited and publishers do not use it as much, perhaps because it is difficult to implement and there’s a matter of providing more clarity about it to the readers. There were suggestions to add a notification system to Crossmark such that every time a published output is retracted, a notification goes out. This seemed of particular interest to funders, whose grievance was that they are usually the last to find out when research that they have funded is retracted. They would welcome notifications that would alert them to such events.\nWe already have plans to consult with the community more specifically about what changes they’d like to see to Crossmark that will enable them to implement it easily and use it more frequently. Take a look at this thread on our community forum and add your thoughts for our next steps on Crossmark.\nThe importance of education There was an overwhelming sentiment that there was a need for collective arbitration of research integrity issues. However, everyone recognized that this is not a role for Crossref. We can act as a “trust broker” by bridging different metadata and identifiers that otherwise might not interact, creating a network of research outputs whose credibility can be verified by others. Many participants called for Crossref to increase its efforts in educating community members about the importance of metadata and how different pieces can be linked together to make meaningful connections.\nResearch practices vary between countries, and between institutions. Correspondingly, the metadata being provided by diverse Crossref members may also vary. There is an opportunity here for the global research community to work together to increase awareness about ethical standards, so that a lack of specific metadata or its variances (e.g. unusually formatted metadata, or non-standard metadata fields) may not be construed as “lower quality” metadata. Many felt that the greatest need for education about metadata is for the academic community – although individual researchers contribute a wealth of metadata associated with any published research output, they do not necessarily understand how metadata contributes to the completeness of the scholarly record. There is a further opportunity to talk to the academic community about how different metadata components link together to form a rich network, supporting visibility and confidence in their work. A greater awareness about these topics is likely to encourage researchers to provide more metadata and identifiers.\nWhile most participants at the roundtable event agreed about the need for this conversation and the educational opportunities here, if Crossref were to lead these efforts, it would represent, in some eyes, a diversion from its mission. We do have several initiatives already to support our communities. As part of the Crossref Ambassadors program, volunteers from the international scholarly community who believe in Crossref’s mission liaise with our team to conduct training in their communities about using Crossref services and, generally, about the importance of metadata. In 2023, we also launched a new online public forum, the PLACE, in collaboration with the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), the Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ), and the Open Access Scholarly Publishers Association (OASPA). This forum is a place where new publishers can connect with these organisations and learn about best practices in scholarly publishing via discussion posts and by asking questions, as they get started. Another initiative that is designed to help new Crossref members is the “Managed Member Journey”: as members join and move through the various stages of membership, key information is shared with them during each of these stages in the form of triggered automated emails, web pages, and webinars.\nWhile Crossref\u0026rsquo;s direct interactions with researchers are limited, we welcome the community\u0026rsquo;s recognition of the need to raise awareness about these matters. We have started engaging more closely with the reporters of metadata issues, in many cases investigators and ‘sleuths’ in the area of research integrity, and plan some closer collaborations with this group in 2024. We are open to supporting community efforts to inform other stakeholders about the importance and uses of metadata.\nIncentives for the community Another theme that was heard repeatedly was “incentives”: incentives for researchers to contribute to a “complete” scholarly record, incentives for publishers to improve metadata, and incentives for everyone to report on and register retractions.\nAs I mentioned before, a shared sentiment is that researchers may not be aware of the value of rich metadata. While more publications, increased citations, and greater grant funding are some examples of incentives that are part of the current academic settings, the right incentives probably do not exist for researchers to provide complete metadata. With the diverse set of participants present at this meeting, some groups also discussed how the current research assessment system can change to incorporate other metrics, perhaps those based on open science and open data.\nWhat could be the incentives for publishers to improve the metadata collected and deposited by them? One suggestion was that clearly defined benefits of rich metadata can incentivise publishers. Being aware of what funders are mandating, can be another incentive. On the same note, funders will benefit from knowing what metadata is being provided by publishers. This metadata is available through our open API, and nine key checks on members’ activity are available through our public Participation Reports.\nRetractions featured again in the discussion on the topic of incentives. As shared by Ivan, retractions are on the rise every year, with about 43k retractions currently in the Retraction Watch database. On the other hand, retractions registered in Crossmark at the time of the meeting numbered just 14k and have recently jumped up to 25k thanks to Hindawi/Wiley’s dedication to good open metadata. Besides the fact that the uptake of Crossmark by Crossref members is limited, another reason for the low number of retractions being registered is the associated stigma. Corrections and errata are usually conflated with retractions, and all these terms, which represent different kinds of updates that may happen to a published item, have a stigma associated with them in the academic community. There is a need to destigmatize retractions, and perhaps incentivize them by noting that these updates are essential to uphold the integrity of the scholarly record and to highlight the publishers that are showing leadership in addressing the issues openly through up-to-date Crossref metadata.\nWhat metadata is nice to have in the scholarly record? We asked everyone what information they think is essential as well as “nice to have” in the scholarly record to support trust signalling, and we heard a range of answers. Peer review information was recognized to be important. This would include data on who the peer reviewers were and standard peer review terminology that has been published by NISO. More generally, as much metadata as possible about the main actors of the peer review process was considered important - such as designating who the corresponding author is, and who the handling editor or the decision-making editor was.\nAs special issues led by guest editors in journals have been brought to the attention of late due to the uncovering of irregularities in some of them, one of the first suggestions in this context was more metadata about special issues. Participants thought that it would be useful to collect and distribute information on handling/guest editors of special issues, peer reviewers, as well as submission and acceptance dates. Recently, COPE has released guidance on “best practices for guest-edited collections” , highlighting that this topic looms at the forefront for the scholarly information industry.\nAdding information on ethical approvals provided by institutional review boards would add more nuance to the research outputs. Metadata about clinical trials helps to add transparency to research in a field, where reproducibility is of primary importance. Conflicts of interest are another factor that could be a cause of concern if not reported accurately; these declarations were mentioned by the participants as important for signalling trust.\nRecognizing that it is the relationships in the metadata that add context to research output, participants echoed that better interlinking between preprints and their published versions is required. To aid with all of this, it has been suggested that a complete list of all metadata that can be deposited with Crossref be made available in a simple format, so that members have more visibility about all the possibilities that exist for providing metadata.\nNext steps We asked all participants if the discussions prompted them to plan to take any actions in the near future. Several attendees reflected that the discussion encouraged them to go back and review the metadata that they are depositing with Crossref, and how they can make more use of the data openly available from Crossref. We also heard how some found training opportunities therein - discussion points from the event could be included in workshops for affiliated researchers, and in COPE guidance for members. As encouraged by members of the NISO’s CREC Working Group, some participants were looking to respond in the (then open) consultations of the draft Recommended Practice, NISO RP-45-202X, Communication of Retractions, Removals, and Expressions of Concern (CREC). One message resonated loud and clear: preserving the integrity of the scholarly record cannot be a lone endeavour and has to be a community effort. Attendees expressed their commitment to continue these conversations, with the next most opportune time being at the STM week. Everyone recognised that collaboration in this space is the need of the hour: facilitating information and data sharing across all the players in the ecosystem would be crucial to progressing this topic. As Bianca Kramer declared during her presentation, “I am committed to using only open data in my research, as access to data is important for the community to detect problems at scale”.\nAt our end, we are looking to act on suggestions that are specific to Crossref:\nConsultation with the community about Crossmark One of the first things that we are doing in early 2024 is to consult with our community about the developments needed in the Crossmark service. Our key aim with this exercise would be to understand how we can enable a more effective uptake of this service so that Crossref members can easily fulfil their obligation of keeping their records updated. We are keen to understand what we can do to help our members to send us metadata about updates to an output, and how we can help downstream services that use this data. Insights from this consultation will also help inform how the Retraction Watch data can be most effectively integrated into Crossmark and communicated to users. Please visit the discussion and add your thoughts here: https://community.crossref.org/t/communicating-post-publication-updates-inviting-feedback-on-the-next-steps-for-crossmark/.\nDevelopment of resources for using our API As there is clearly no dearth of metadata components that the community thinks would be “nice to have” for signalling trust, it is equally important to equip users and downstream service providers to be able to access the rich metadata that is available with Crossref. This rich metadata opens up new avenues for the development of services and resources that can benefit the scholarly community. On account of this, we plan to prioritise development of resources for using Crossref APIs. These efforts would include making available workbooks with a variety of API use cases - ranging from how to use basic API queries, to how to use APIs for obtaining grant information or for obtaining citation data and so on, as well as retrieving corrections, retractions, and update information, especially when the Retraction Watch dataset merges in with the rest of the Crossref metadata.\nWorking group to facilitate community efforts for preserving ISR We are looking to set up a working group that will facilitate the various stakeholders in the scholarly ecosystem to work together towards preserving the integrity of the scholarly record. One direction for the group could be to consider the role and impact of Crossref metadata in ISR. Another area of focus will be to enrich information about retractions, corrections, and expressions of concern. Raising industry-wide awareness about the current concerns in upholding the integrity of the scholarly record, and how comprehensive metadata can act as markers of trust about research output, would be another focal point.\nContinued community outreach We will continue our efforts to engage with the community on the very important issues surrounding ISR. We are particularly keen to redouble our efforts to include more funders and institutions in these conversations. Preserving the integrity of the scholarly record needs to be a truly inclusive effort and will benefit from diverse voices in the community. With that in mind, consulting with the community in Asia is next on our radar.\nWe look forward to working with the community further on this important topic - if you are keen to participate in these discussions and want to contribute towards preserving the integrity of the scholarly record, we would love to hear from you. Please write to us at feedback@crossref.org if you have any suggestions on this topic.\nAppendix: Participant list Name Role organisation Ed Pentz Executive Director Crossref Amanda Bartell Head of Member Experience Crossref Madhura Amdekar Community Engagement Manager Crossref Luis Montilla Technical Community Manager Crossref Lena Stoll Product Manager Crossref Kora Korzec Head of Community Engagement and Communications Crossref Ivan Oransky Co-Founder Retraction Watch Jennifer Wright Research Integrity Manager Cambridge University Press Guntram Bauer Director of Science Policy \u0026amp; Communications Human Frontier Science Program Wendy Patterson Scientific Director Beilstein-Institut Sarah Jenkins Director, Research Integrity \u0026amp; Publishing Ethics Elsevier Helene Stewart Director, Editorial Relations Web of Science Clarivate Bianca Kramer Advisor, Research Analyst, Facilitator Sesame Open Science Adya Misra Research Integrity and Inclusion Manager Sage Andrew Joseph Wits University Press Theodora Bloom Executive Editor BMJ Alberto Martín-Martín Assistant Professor Universidad de Granada Aaron Wood Head, Product \u0026amp; Content Management American Psychological Association Fred Atherden Head of Production Operations eLife Kihong Kim Korean Council of Science Editors David Flanagan Senior Director, Data Science Wiley Chiara Di Giambattista Communications Director OpenCitations Scott Delman Director of Publications ACM Chi Wai (Rick) Lee General Manager World Scientific Publishing Co (WSPC) Leslie McIntosh VP, Research Integrity Digital Science Adam Day Director Clear Skies Damaris Critchlow Project Manager Karger Tamara Welschot Head of Research Integrity, Prevention Springer Nature Kathryn Dally Research Integrity and Policy Lead Research Services, University of Oxford Masahiko Hayashi Director, JSPS Bonn Office Japan Society for the Promotion of Science Simone Taylor Chief, Publishing American Psychiatric Association Christna Chap Head of Editorial Development Karger Publishers Coromoto Power Febres Research Integrity Manager Emerald Publishing Carole Chapin Project Manager French Office for Research Integrity Jodi Schneider Associate Professor of Information Sciences University of Illinois Urbana Champaign Oliver Koepler Head of Lab Linked Scientific Knowledge TIB - Leibniz Information Centre for Science and Technology Heather Staines Delta Think Eri Anno JSPS Bonn office Joris van Rossum STM Solutions Anita de Waard VP Research Collaborations Elsevier ",
"headings": ["What is “complete”?","Corrections and Retractions","The importance of education","Incentives for the community","What metadata is nice to have in the scholarly record?","Next steps","Consultation with the community about Crossmark","Development of resources for using our API","Working group to facilitate community efforts for preserving ISR","Continued community outreach","Appendix: Participant list"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/services/metadata-retrieval/",
"title": "Metadata Retrieval",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2024-02-03",
"lastmod_ts": 1706918400,
"section": "Find a service",
"tags": [],
"description": " Analyse Crossref metadata to inform and understand research\nCrossref is the sustainable source of community-owned scholarly metadata and is relied upon by thousands of systems across the research ecosystem and the globe.\nSome of the typical users (outer) and uses (inner) of Crossref metadata\nShow image\n× People using Crossref metadata need it for all sorts of reasons including metaresearch (researchers studying research itself such as through bibliometric analyses), publishing trends (such as finding works from an individual author or reviewer), or incorporation into specific databases (such as for discovery and search or in subject-specific repositories), and many more detailed use cases.\n",
"content": " Analyse Crossref metadata to inform and understand research\nCrossref is the sustainable source of community-owned scholarly metadata and is relied upon by thousands of systems across the research ecosystem and the globe.\nSome of the typical users (outer) and uses (inner) of Crossref metadata\nShow image\n× People using Crossref metadata need it for all sorts of reasons including metaresearch (researchers studying research itself such as through bibliometric analyses), publishing trends (such as finding works from an individual author or reviewer), or incorporation into specific databases (such as for discovery and search or in subject-specific repositories), and many more detailed use cases.\nAll Crossref metadata is open and available for reuse without restriction. Our 170 million records include information about research objects like articles, grants and awards, preprints, conference papers, book chapters, datasets, and more. The information covers elements like titles, contributors, descriptions, dates, references, connecting identifiers such as Crossref DOIs, ROR IDs and ORCID iDs, together with all sorts of metadata that helps to determine provenance, trust, and reusability\u0026mdash;such as funding, clinical trial, and license information.\nTake a look at a list of some of the organisations who rely on our REST API and read some of the case studies from a selection of users. Download the metadata retrieval fact sheet or read more about the types of metadata and records we have.\nAnyone can retrieve and use \u0026gt;170 million records without restriction. So there are no fees to use the metadata but if you really rely on it then you might like to sign up for Metadata Plus which offers greater predictability, higher rate limits, monthly data dumps in XML and JSON, and access to dedicated support from our team.\nOptions for retrieving metadata All Crossref metadata is completely open and available to all. Whatever your experience with metadata, there are several tools, techniques, and support guides to help\u0026mdash;whether you\u0026rsquo;re just beginning, exploring occasionally, or need an ongoing reliable integration.\nBEGINNING? You\u0026rsquo;ve heard Crossref metadata might be useful and want to know where to start.\nWe recommend you start with metadata search, funder search, or simple text query for matching references to DOIs. Also take a look at the REST API which only needs you to get a JSON plugin to view the results. We are building tutorials to demonstrate the possibilities, starting with a Python notebook and an R notebook. If it\u0026rsquo;s retractions and corrections that you need, check out the frequently-updated csv file of the Retraction Watch dataset that we acquired and opened in 2023.\nEXPLORING? You have some specific queries and want a lightweight way to use Crossref metadata.\nTake a look at the in-depth documentation for our REST API on this site and try it out at api.crossref.org, including tips for how to get the most from our metadata. If you\u0026rsquo;re comfortable with tar data files you can download our latest annual public data file. Our Crossref Learning Hub is also another helpful resource.\nINTEGRATING? You rely on Crossref metadata and need to incorporate it into your product at scale.\nYou might want to jump straight to subscribing to Metadata Plus, which is our premium service for the REST API that comes with monthly data dumps in JSON and XML, higher rate limits, and fast support. But we always recommend that you try out the public version first to make sure it will work for your product. If you\u0026rsquo;re looking for a single DOI record in multiple formats (e.g. RDF, BibTex, CSL) you can use content negotiation.\nWatch the animated introduction to metadata retrieval English 한국어 Japanese Chinese Español Français Bahasa Indonesia العربية Português do Brasil READ THE DOCS\nLearn more by visiting our learning hub. \u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;CROSSREF LEARNING HUB\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp; ",
"headings": ["Options for retrieving metadata","BEGINNING?","EXPLORING?","INTEGRATING?","Watch the animated introduction to metadata retrieval","Learn more by visiting our learning hub."]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/categories/open-funder-registry/",
"title": "Open Funder Registry",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Categories",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/authors/rachael-lammey/",
"title": "Rachael Lammey",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Authors",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/roring-ahead-using-ror-in-place-of-the-open-funder-registry/",
"title": "RORing ahead: using ROR in place of the Open Funder Registry",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2024-01-30",
"lastmod_ts": 1706572800,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "A few months ago we announced our plan to deprecate our support for the Open Funder Registry in favour of using the ROR Registry to support both affiliation and funder use cases. The feedback we’ve had from the community has been positive and supports our members, service providers and metadata users who are already starting to move in this direction.\nWe wanted to provide an update on work that’s underway to make this transition happen, and how you can get involved in working together with us on this.\n",
"content": "A few months ago we announced our plan to deprecate our support for the Open Funder Registry in favour of using the ROR Registry to support both affiliation and funder use cases. The feedback we’ve had from the community has been positive and supports our members, service providers and metadata users who are already starting to move in this direction.\nWe wanted to provide an update on work that’s underway to make this transition happen, and how you can get involved in working together with us on this.\nOverall, we are building more comprehensive support for ROR into Crossref’s services. Some of this work is specifically to support using ROR to identify funding organisations in place of funder registry IDs. We have a number of parallel, complementary projects underway to support different elements of this work:\nWe are evolving our metadata schema so that we can collect ROR IDs in places where we currently support the collection of Funder IDs. We are analysing the coverage of Funder ID to ROR ID mappings and testing the way we expose them in our APIs. We are developing new matching strategies to match text strings to ROR IDs. 1. Schema updates Everything flows from being able to get ROR IDs into the Crossref metadata!\nWe are evolving our metadata schema so that we can collect ROR IDs in places where we already support the collection of Funder IDs – for instance, in the funding section of the metadata for works and in the funder section for grants.\nWe’re working with members and service providers so that they can try sending us this data via a pipeline our Labs team has built to test schema updates before they go live. We are actively recruiting members to help us test our new pipeline by providing sample XML for registration. Planned metadata inputs and outputs are detailed in Including ROR as a funder identifier in your metadata (metadata prototyping instructions), we’d encourage you to provide feedback on these in the document, ideally in the next two weeks. We’re aiming to release an updated schema that supports these changes in Q1 2024.\n2. Modelling ROR ID/Funder ID mappings in our metadata model We have integrated the ROR registry into our evolving metadata model, and we have started work to integrate the Funder Registry. The aim is to create more flexibility in how Crossref’s metadata can be supplemented and queried, and give more clarity as to which party asserted or created a metadata element.\nWe’re working on an early iteration of how the model handles ROR IDs, funder IDs and their equivalencies. Once we have something to share, we’ll welcome community feedback on this approach and on the metadata model in general.\n3. Developing new matching strategies to match text strings to ROR IDs Ideally, everyone would always use persistent identifiers to exchange information about contributor and awardee affiliations, organisations related to works, as well as funders supporting the research. In practice, this information is often exchanged as data without identifiers, such as affiliation strings (e.g. “University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA”), funder names, or even funding acknowledgements (e.g. “Funding and support generously provided by the Ford Foundation”). In such situations, a good metadata matching strategy can help map these to persistent identifiers.\nCurrently, we are focused on developing reliable strategies for matching affiliation strings to ROR IDs. In the future, we will adapt the strategies to support funder names and funding acknowledgements as well. All the strategies will be rigorously evaluated using real-life data. We will make the strategies, as well as the evaluation datasets and evaluation results, publicly available for anyone to use. If you are interested in collaborating on the development or the evaluation of the matching strategies, please get in touch!\nIn the future, we might also apply some of the new matching strategies at Crossref, to the metadata our members send us. This would allow us to insert matched identifiers to the metadata to better connect organisations with other items in the scholarly record. We already have a process that matches the names of funders supporting research against the Funder Registry and enriches the metadata with matched Funder Registry IDs. Developing and evaluating reliable matching strategies will allow us to modify this process to use ROR IDs instead, and extend it to support other use cases, such as contributor affiliations.\nWhat will the transition mean for you? We do recommend that you begin looking at what it will take to integrate ROR into your systems and workflows for identifying funders. Talk to your service providers about this to ready them for this change. To reiterate the point from the earlier post, in the short term, and even in the medium term, Funder IDs aren’t going away and the Funder IDs will continue to resolve – they are persistent, after all. Eventually, however, the Funder Registry will cease to be updated, so any new funders will only be registrable in Crossref metadata with ROR IDs. Legacy Funder IDs and their mapping to ROR IDs will be maintained, so if Crossref members submit a legacy Funder ID, it will get mapped to a ROR ID automatically. Note, too, that Crossref is committed to maintaining the current funder API endpoints until ROR IDs become the predominant identifier for newly registered content. We also know that there are questions that we’ll want to tackle with the community as we all make progress, some we know and some we don’t know. With that in mind:\nTell us what you need! We want to hear from you! We have set up several channels of communication meant to ensure that you can tell both ROR and Crossref what will make this transition easier for you and that you can get answers to your questions.\nFirst, we are conducting a series of Open Funder Registry user interviews designed to deepen our understanding of where Funder IDs are being used in workflows and systems. Write community@ror.org if you\u0026rsquo;d like to participate in these interviews to show and tell us how you\u0026rsquo;re using Funder IDs.\nSecond, in 2024, we will be running a follow-up to the funding data workshop we ran in June 2023. Please get in touch if your organisation would be interested in participating in the discussion.\n",
"headings": ["1. Schema updates","2. Modelling ROR ID/Funder ID mappings in our metadata model","3. Developing new matching strategies to match text strings to ROR IDs","What will the transition mean for you?","Tell us what you need!"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/authors/evans-atoni/",
"title": "Evans Atoni",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Authors",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/authors/kathleen-luschek/",
"title": "Kathleen Luschek",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Authors",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/categories/open-support/",
"title": "Open Support",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Categories",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/authors/poppy-riddle/",
"title": "Poppy Riddle",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Authors",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/categories/references/",
"title": "References",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Categories",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/categories/reports/",
"title": "Reports",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Categories",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/authors/shayn-smulyan/",
"title": "Shayn Smulyan",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Authors",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/solving-your-technical-support-questions-in-a-snap/",
"title": "Solving your technical support questions in a snap!",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2024-01-25",
"lastmod_ts": 1706140800,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "My name is Isaac Farley, Crossref Technical Support Manager. We’ve got a collective post here from our technical support team - staff members and contractors - since we all have what I think will be a helpful perspective to the question: ‘What’s that one thing that you wish you could snap your fingers and make clearer and easier for our members?’ Within, you’ll find us referencing our Community Forum, the open support platform where you can get answers from all of us and other Crossref members and users. We invite you to join us there; how about asking your next question of us there? Or, simply let us know how we did with this post. We’d love to hear from you!\n",
"content": "My name is Isaac Farley, Crossref Technical Support Manager. We’ve got a collective post here from our technical support team - staff members and contractors - since we all have what I think will be a helpful perspective to the question: ‘What’s that one thing that you wish you could snap your fingers and make clearer and easier for our members?’ Within, you’ll find us referencing our Community Forum, the open support platform where you can get answers from all of us and other Crossref members and users. We invite you to join us there; how about asking your next question of us there? Or, simply let us know how we did with this post. We’d love to hear from you!\nA little about us and what drives the team I’m fortunate to manage a great team - Evans, Kathleen, Paul, Poppy, and Shayn - who enjoy and are hardwired to guide. We have different strengths and interests, but the thing that unites us is that we are energized when we can unpick tricky problems for all of you, our members and users. In 2023, the technical support team answered around 11,000 questions from all of you. We do that with one-to-one requests sent to us via email and within our support center (using a closed-source software called Zendesk). And, we’ve been providing more and more support in our Community Forum, where we’re aiming for open interactions, so we can all learn from the rich exchanges with all of you (the Forum has an integration with Zendesk, so posts made in the Forum are delivered to us there, so our team won’t miss any of your questions).\nWe established in the previous paragraph that we have a great technical support team who all pride themselves on helping you. But we’re also human; the reality is that many of those ~11,000 technical support questions asked of us in 2023 were repetitive, and there are always trends in the questions asked. That’s another important reason why we’re hoping to have more and more of these questions asked and answered within our Community Forum; again, so we can all learn from one another. We know certain parts of content registration, metadata retrieval, and everything in between are, well, complicated. The Crossref learning curve can be steep for all of us. Collectively, our technical support team has more than 25 years of Crossref experience, and we’re continuously learning new things about the Research Nexus and the scholarly ecosystem from one another and all of you.\nLearning through this complexity is one of the most enriching parts of our days. Our daily stand-up, modeled off of different software development methodologies, where together we troubleshoot tangly questions from all of you, share ideas, and just keep up-to-date on the latest from across the organisation leads to a lot of knowledge exchange. So, years ago, we decided to transform the issues we discuss in those stand-ups into public-facing posts in our Community Forum. It gave us the opportunity to share much-needed examples in a new community space; and, we knew, since these were the issues we were all discussing and learning from ourselves, that many of you would also benefit from us surfacing the topics openly. We call these posts tickets of the month, since the majority of topics we discuss have originated from tickets in our support center.\nExamples of some of the most popular topics in the last two-plus years have been:\nGetting started with REST API queries and the follow-up post Using Postman for API Queries Content Registration: Did it work? The new Labs Reports are here Are you an OJS user? Are the below questions familiar? Get Citation Counts for all Articles in a Particular Journal Snapping our fingers Like I said, these posts originated from real-life questions of us from our community members. In most cases, we’ve been asked these questions by many of you. These Community Forum posts are our attempts to unlock understanding of our services, rich metadata, or the larger Research Nexus. Said another way: we all see value in putting in the effort to post one more example or answer that nuanced question. Perhaps one of our posts will include an example that really resonates with you and/or your work.\nIn that spirit, I asked Evans, Kathleen, Paul, Poppy, and Shayn to answer this question below (yes, I’m going to weigh in, too):\nWhat’s that one thing that you wish you could snap your fingers and make clearer and easier for our members?\nEvans, Technical Support Specialist As a publisher and a Crossref member, at one point or another, you might have made a mistake in the metadata deposited for a given DOI. I’m sure after the slight ‘shock’, the next question you had in mind was, ‘How can I correct this mistake?’ Well, here is a simplified guide on how to do that correction/update!\nCan I modify/ update the metadata of a registered DOI? As indicated by my colleague Shayn below in this blog post, Crossref DOIs are designed to be persistent (and cannot be changed/deleted once registered). And YES, you can update the metadata associated with any of your registered DOIs whenever necessary, at no additional fee.\nHow can I perform a standard metadata update? To add, change, or remove any metadata element from your existing records, you generally just need to resubmit your complete metadata record with the correct/new changes included. How you choose to update a DOI metadata record is highly dependent on the content registration tool/platform you are using/comfortable working with, as described below:\nOJS: Navigate to the article record you wish to update, add in your new metadata/delete relevant metadata fields, and deposit it again using the Crossref import/export plugin. You must be running at least OJS 3.1.2 and have the Crossref import/export plugin enabled.\nWeb deposit form: Open the web deposit form, and re-enter all the metadata, including the new changes - leave the relevant field blank to delete it, or add in your new metadata to update it - and resubmit the form (note: there are a handful of exceptions to this for the web deposit form).\nDepositing XML files with Crossref: Make changes to the relevant XML file and resubmit it to Crossref via the admin tool. When making an update, you must supply all the bibliographic metadata for the record being updated, not just the fields that need to be changed. During the update process, we overwrite the existing metadata with the new information you submit, and insert null values for any fields not supplied in the update. This means, for example, that if you’ve supplied an online publication date in your initial deposit, you’ll need to include that date in subsequent deposits if you wish to retain it. Note that the value included in the element must be incremented each time a DOI is updated.\nIf you’re looking for real-life examples of other members who have updated their metadata, the Community Forum is a great starting point. If you have follow-up questions on any of the existing threads, I invite you to post a message today.\nKathleen, Technical Support Specialist One of my favorite types of queries to tackle are those regarding content registration problems. I love a good mystery and getting to the bottom of why that pesky submission just didn\u0026rsquo;t succeed. Sometimes members come to us with an error message and specific questions about what has gone awry. But, in fact, two of the most common questions we receive are: 1) I deposited something; did it work? and 2) I deposited something; why isn\u0026rsquo;t it showing up?!\nTo address the first question of whether your submission went through or not, I wrote a forum post back last June talking about how to use the admin tool to see whether your registration was successful or not. We know there are also email alerts and perhaps status messages within your own registration platform, but using the admin tool is a great way to concretely check where your submission has ended up. If it\u0026rsquo;s not there, we didn\u0026rsquo;t get it!\nUsing the admin tool is also a great way to get more details about the submission and more information in case the submission happened to fail. You may have had the experience in which you contacted us with a question about a failed deposit, and we asked you for the submission ID. You can find that info in the admin tool! And we ask for that, because that helps us get to the bottom of those error message mysteries.\nAnd, as for the second question of when will your DOI be active, my colleague, Paul, wrote a fantastic post on the forum (with an excellent flowchart and all!), explaining when you can expect to see your DOI up and running. Often members will submit a deposit and expect the DOI to resolve immediately. When that doesn\u0026rsquo;t happen, many think that something has gone wrong or perhaps there is an error, but, in fact, our systems may still be updating and processing the metadata.\nI recommend giving these two posts a read if you\u0026rsquo;re at all concerned about whether you\u0026rsquo;re depositing your content correctly or not. Hopefully, they\u0026rsquo;ll help ease your content-registration worries.\nIsaac, Technical Support Manager Oh, thanks for asking! Many of our members, after receiving one of our reports, will respond to us in support with a message similar to: ‘What did I do wrong? Please help me fix this. I don’t want to be out of compliance!’\nThe receipt of one of our reports does not necessarily mean that you’ve done anything wrong. In truth, the reports we send to our official member contacts are produced using very simple logic. It’s true that they may signal larger, more complicated problems, but we really need your help to determine next steps (and, in some cases, no action is needed because there is no issue for members to fix (e.g., many failed resolutions within the resolution reports)).\nLet’s look at the conflict and resolution reports since those are the reports we get the most questions about:\nConflict reports are the most complicated of our reports to navigate. But, the reports are generated using simple logic: if you register two or more DOIs with matching bibliographic metadata, we’ll flag those DOIs as being in conflict, which will generate a warning message at the time of registration and a subsequent conflict report. When members receive this report, we often get the sense that members simply want us, the technical support team, to tell them how to fix it. The problem is we don’t know your content, so we don’t know if the two DOIs do represent a duplicate, or if both DOIs, while having very similar bibliographic metadata, are legitimate and will be maintained going forward (e.g., for errata). Paul wrote a great post in our community forum about what conflicts are and how to resolve them.\nResolution reports, like conflict reports, are generated using simple logic: a resolution is the result of a click on that DOI. If a DOI has been registered, that click results in a successful resolution. If that DOI has not been registered, that click results in a failed resolution. Our monthly report is a count of those resolutions - successful and failed. Failures can represent content registration errors in a member’s workflow. Or, they can signal that an end user has made a mistake when attempting to click the DOI in question. So, for example, an end user perhaps added an extra period onto their DOI link. Instead of trying to resolve https://doi.org/10.5555/cupnfcm2wj, a legitimate DOI, they added a period to the end and tried to resolve https://doi.org/10.5555/cupnfcm2wj. instead. That extra period at the end of the DOI has made it a completely different DOI that is not registered with us, thus they get a failed resolution. This is pretty common. For members with content being regularly clicked, there will be user errors in the logs appearing as failed resolutions. The first question members should ask themselves when reviewing the failed .csv report within the resolution report is: ‘are any of these DOIs legitimate DOIs that I thought we had registered?’ We have more on the basics of resolution reports also over in our Community Forum.\nPaul, Technical Support Specialist \u0026amp; R\u0026amp;D Support Analyst I know we were asked to name “one thing” but I have two that are closely related. May I snap my fingers twice and fix two issues? [Of course, Paul! Take it away!]\nPaul’s first snap\nOne of the most asked questions we get in support is “why is my DOI not working?” 90% of the time it is down to a failed submission. A good proportion of those failures are a result of title mismatches between the deposited container title and the one we have stored on the system here. There are other error messages that occur, too, which I wrote about back in 2020.\nSo, “why do we fail submissions because of title differences?” You might ask.\nWell, the title and ISSN/ISBN and/or the title level DOIs act like locks to the title record, which need the right keys to unlock the title so that you can add or update the records against it. So if you don’t match what was in the original submission, you get a failure. Without that stringent check, we would have way too many iterations of titles and matching to those would be a nightmare. Not to mention sorting those DOIs into one container in the REST API.\nIsaac wrote a great forum post about these title-level issues as well.\nIf a title update is required due to an error with an original title deposit, then these need to be made by the support team, so get in touch with us on the Community Forum.\nAnd, a second\nPermissions against titles and DOIs: Lots of our members don’t realise that each DOI has its own permissions against the prefix that currently ‘owns’ or is associated with that DOI in the background.\nIt would be fair to assume you can tell just by looking at a DOI who the current publisher is, based on the prefix at the start —but that’s not always the case. Things can (and often do) change. Individual journals get purchased by other publishers, and whole organisations get bought and sold.\nWhat you can tell from looking at a DOI prefix is who originally registered it, but not necessarily who it currently belongs to. That’s because if a journal (or whole organisation) is acquired, DOIs don’t get deleted and re-registered to the new owner. The update will of course be reflected in the relevant metadata, but the prefix on the DOI will stay the same. It never changes—and that’s the whole point, that’s what makes the DOI persistent. Isaac also wrote this in much more detail and explains the internal Crossref processes in his blog “What can often change, but always stays the same?“\nThese permissions are very important to understand when it comes to title transfers and working with updating your metadata against transferred DOIs to prevent duplicate DOIs for the same work.\nPoppy, Technical Support Contractor As a researcher myself, I’d like to talk about references in a journal article, book, conference paper, etc. (I’ll just use ‘article’ going forward for simplicity). These are the references included in an article by the author. References in one article result in citations for another article. It\u0026rsquo;s the thing every author dreams of and accruing citations can be a big deal for authors, journals, and publishers.\nFor readers, articles with no references can be less discoverable using systems that use citation links for relevance, and that discoverability is of critical importance for our members who decide to register references with us. We all want your content to be shared, cited, linked, and used far and wide.\nWe receive many questions from authors asking why citations don’t show up; it\u0026rsquo;s usually due to metadata deposits with no references included. There may be an assumption that our process is like Google Scholar, which crawls full text and websites. This misunderstanding has a big impact on references and citation counts. However, as we do not store a copy of the paper, our intake system does not extract references from the article, regardless if they have a DOI. This is one of the main reasons that Crossref citation counts are lower than services that use extraction methods. We only store the data that a publisher registers and maintains with us. On deposit of a metadata record that includes references, our system performs a matching process - if there is a match, a cited-by connection is applied to the metadata. With deposits with no references, however, there is no data to match to other articles (and, therefore limitations on the discoverability and no cited-by count increase).\nAn article with no references has big impacts for the authors, the journal, the publisher, researchers, and ultimately, the readers. This can mean decreased distribution of the content itself, reduced citation counts for cited articles, lower impact metrics for journals, and can ultimately affect value for publishers. For example, researchers just don’t include articles without references for scientometric analysis.\nOur documentation on references includes the elements for both structured and unstructured data. Including the DOI in the structured data is best practice as it provides a precise location with rich data for matching. If the matcher does not see a link between the deposited DOI and the cited DOI at the time of deposit, then the references are stored to be crawled with other matching algorithms later. So, we\u0026rsquo;re always working to create those rich cited-by linkages between works (raising the content’s profile and overall discoverability), no matter when you register reference metadata. You can also see how your publisher is doing on depositing references by viewing their Participation Report. If you are an author, you can check if your DOIs that were registered contained any references by using our REST API. Don’t see them? You can always contact the editor of the journal or the publisher that published your paper and ask them to add them. Didn’t hear back? Just drop us a line in the Community Forum, we’re happy to help.\nShayn, Technical Support Specialist Let\u0026rsquo;s \u0026lsquo;zoom out\u0026rsquo; to the big picture. What are DOIs for? What makes them useful? What are we all doing here anyway?!\nThere are a lot of different answers to those questions. It\u0026rsquo;s a complex picture. But, way back in the late ‘90s, the DOI system was designed in order to allow for the creation of unique and persistent identifiers. Crossref members use these identifiers to represent their research outputs and publications. This allows for reliable linking to those items, and the ability to identify and communicate the relationships between them, notably (but not exclusively!) citation relationships.\nSo, what do we mean when we say that Crossref DOIs should be unique and persistent? In basic terms, unique means that there is only a single Crossref DOI registered for a given citable research output. And, persistent meaning that the DOI associated with a given research output today will continue to be associated with, and link to, that same research output indefinitely into the future.\nYes, there are some grey areas, and we know that everything doesn\u0026rsquo;t always work 100% perfectly all the time. But, the more deviations from persistence and uniqueness, the harder it becomes for end-users, publishers, Crossref, and other services which make use of our metadata to reliably find research outputs and reliably relate them to one another. It weakens the value and utility of DOIs for everyone.\nSo, what does this mean in practice?\nBe certain that every item you register with Crossref is something you can maintain in the long-term. Have an arrangement with an archive that can take responsibility for your content if your organisation stops hosting it or ceases to exist. Don’t register things that you know will only exist for a short time. When you\u0026rsquo;re about to register new content, be absolutely sure that it hasn’t been registered already, either by your organisation or any other organisation. If you acquire a new journal from another publisher, have a process in place to check what content has already been registered and adopt the use of the DOIs registered by the prior publisher for that content. We can always provide a list of the existing DOIs for a journal. If you publish books, and have a co-publishing agreement with another publisher, distributor, or hosting platform, be aware that one of those other parties may have already registered DOIs for your books. Adopt the use of those DOIs rather than assigning and registering new ones. And, if you don’t want them to do that going forward, communicate that to your co-publishing partners. When mistakes happen, inadvertently resulting in duplicate DOIs for a single item, identify them quickly. Alias the new duplicate DOI to the long-standing original DOI, and remove all instances of the new DOI from your website or platform. Ensure that your publishing software, platform, or journal management system can accommodate DOIs with various prefixes for the same publication. You should be able to use (display, link, update metadata and URLs for) the DOIs registered for older content by any prior publishers as easily as you use the DOIs that you registered yourself for more recent content. Things like persistence and uniqueness can sound like theoretical abstractions, but they actually play an important role in the day-to-day grind of your publishing operations. Their impact on linking, citing, discovery, and analysis of your content is concrete and important. Thus, it’s not surprising that we often hear from members and others in the research community who share this commitment to persistence, uniqueness, and overall rich, accurate metadata. You’ll see that play out in the Community Forum where members and users get involved to troubleshoot issues, compare notes, and share ideas with us and one another. We appreciate the commitment to the Research Nexus and the overall spirit to serve in this growing community. Like we said at the top, we’re all wired to contribute in this way, so building an open, welcoming space that moves us forward excites us.\nAgain, we invite you to join the discussion on this and many other Crossref-related topics over in our Community Forum.\n",
"headings": ["A little about us and what drives the team","Snapping our fingers","Evans, Technical Support Specialist","Kathleen, Technical Support Specialist","Isaac, Technical Support Manager","Paul, Technical Support Specialist \u0026amp; R\u0026amp;D Support Analyst","Poppy, Technical Support Contractor","Shayn, Technical Support Specialist"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/the-gem-program-year-one/",
"title": "The GEM program - year one",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2024-01-24",
"lastmod_ts": 1706054400,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "In January 2023, we began our Global Equitable Membership (GEM) Program to provide greater membership equitability and accessibility to organisations located in the least economically advantaged countries in the world. Eligibility for the program is based on a member\u0026rsquo;s country; our list of countries is predominantly based on the International Development Association (IDA). Eligible members pay no membership or content registration fees.\nThe list undergoes periodic reviews, as countries may be added or removed over time as economic situations change. Sri Lanka was added to the GEM program in March 2023 as they were recategorised to the IDA classification by the World Bank.\n",
"content": "In January 2023, we began our Global Equitable Membership (GEM) Program to provide greater membership equitability and accessibility to organisations located in the least economically advantaged countries in the world. Eligibility for the program is based on a member\u0026rsquo;s country; our list of countries is predominantly based on the International Development Association (IDA). Eligible members pay no membership or content registration fees.\nThe list undergoes periodic reviews, as countries may be added or removed over time as economic situations change. Sri Lanka was added to the GEM program in March 2023 as they were recategorised to the IDA classification by the World Bank.\nWhen the program launched, we had 214 existing members eligible for the program who then were no longer charged for membership or content registration. Since the program began, we have welcomed an additional 131 new members into the program, including our first members from Cambodia and Togo.\nCountry As of 1/1/2023\n(start of GEM) Additions in 2023 (end of first year of GEM) Total Afghanistan 6 4 10 Bangladesh 56 33 89 Benin 1 1 2 Bhutan 4 2 6 Burkina Faso 2 0 2 Burundi 1 0 1 Cambodia 0 2 2 Central African Republic 1 0 1 Congo, Democratic Republic 1 11 12 Ethiopia 4 6 10 Ghana 14 7 21 Guyana 1 1 2 Haiti 1 0 1 Kosovo 2 2 4 Kyrgyz Republic 22 3 25 Laos 1 0 1 Madagascar 1 1 2 Malawi 1 0 1 Maldives 1 0 1 Mali 2 0 2 Mauritania 1 0 1 Myanmar 1 0 1 Nepal 20 18 38 Nicaragua 1 0 1 Rwanda 4 1 5 Senegal 3 3 6 Somalia 2 2 4 Sri Lanka 13 5 18 Sudan 9 2 11 Tajikistan 5 1 6 Tanzania 9 7 16 Togo 0 1 1 Uganda 3 6 9 Yemen 16 12 28 Zambia 5 0 5 With help from our ambassadors based in GEM countries, we organised and co-hosted several webinars to introduce the program, along with an introduction to Crossref, and the benefits of including all kinds of research objects in the Research Nexus.\nIn April, our team, together with ambassador Binayak Raj Pandey, provided an overview of Crossref for members and organisations in Nepal. Our team and ambassadors, Dr Md Jahangir Alam and Shaharima Parvin hosted two webinars in May for members and organisations in Bangladesh. The first webinar provided an introduction to Crossref, our services, and the GEM Program. The second webinar focused on the methods to register content and how to add and update metadata. In September, ambassador Baraka Manjale Ngussa joined us for an introductory webinar aimed at organisations in Tanzania\nIn November, CARLIGH (the Consortium of Academic and Research Libraries in Ghana), Crossref, and EIFL co-hosted a webinar for librarians and journal editors in Ghana with a discussion on the GEM program and Crossref services.\nIn 2024, we will continue to collaborate with our ambassadors and other members of the community to offer more opportunities for organisations in GEM-eligible countries to learn about the program and the benefits of membership for content discovery.\nThe program was initially met with scepticism by some organisations in GEM-eligible countries, who wanted to be certain that it wasn\u0026rsquo;t a free trial, that there are no hidden fees, or that they would be required to pay later for other services. Others expressed concern that Crossref would introduce fees after a year or two. Though we were able to clarify these aspects of the program, we understand the concerns and are working to ensure we provide clarity and transparency about the program. Additionally, we will be conducting a complete review of our fees in 2024, and we will ensure that GEM-eligible members will have input.\nAlthough the program offers relief from fees, many organisations require technical assistance and language support. The GEM program would benefit from an increase in local Sponsors to facilitate membership and provide support, particularly In countries with the highest growth, such as Bangladesh, Nepal, Yemen, Kyrgyz Republic, and Ghana. Though we have Sponsors working with members who are in GEM countries (e.g. PKP), we do not yet have any Sponsors who are based in a GEM country.\nWe will be working with relevant like-minded organisations, such as PKP, DOAJ, INASP, OASPA, EIFL, and others, to help identify suitable candidates for new Sponsors in underserved regions and engage them proactively. Additionally, we will consult with our ambassadors in GEM countries to help identify potential Sponsors. We are beginning the year by making the most of the momentum created in African countries (Uganda, Ghana, Tanzania) and looking to develop new networks in other parts of the world in Q2-Q4 of this year.\n",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/increasing-crossref-data-reusability-with-format-experiments/",
"title": "Increasing Crossref Data Reusability With Format Experiments",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2024-01-19",
"lastmod_ts": 1705622400,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "Every year, Crossref releases a full public data file of all of our metadata. This is partly a commitment to POSI and partly just what we do. We want the community to re-use our metadata and to find interesting ends to which they can be put!\nHowever, we have also recognized, for some time, that 170GB of compressed .tar.gz files, spread over 27,000 items, is not the easiest of formats with which to work. For instance, there\u0026rsquo;s no indexing capacity on these files, meaning that it is virtually impossible simply to pull out the record for a DOI. Decompressing the .tar.gz files takes a good three hours or more even on high-end hardware, without any additional processing.\n",
"content": "Every year, Crossref releases a full public data file of all of our metadata. This is partly a commitment to POSI and partly just what we do. We want the community to re-use our metadata and to find interesting ends to which they can be put!\nHowever, we have also recognized, for some time, that 170GB of compressed .tar.gz files, spread over 27,000 items, is not the easiest of formats with which to work. For instance, there\u0026rsquo;s no indexing capacity on these files, meaning that it is virtually impossible simply to pull out the record for a DOI. Decompressing the .tar.gz files takes a good three hours or more even on high-end hardware, without any additional processing.\nTo that end, the Crossref Labs team has been experimenting with different formats for trial release that might allow us to reach broader audiences, including those who have not previously worked with our metadata files. The two new formats, alongside the existing data file format, with which we have been experimenting, are JSON lines and SQLite.\nJSON-L\nThe first format with which we\u0026rsquo;ve been experimenting is JSON-L (JSON lines). With one JSON entry per line, as opposed to one giant JSON file/block, JSON-L lends itself to better parallelisation in systems such as SPARC, because the data can easily be partitioned.\nThis data format also has the benefit of being appendable, one line at a time. Unlike conventional JSON, which requires the entire structure to be parsed in-memory before an append is possible, JSON-L can simply be written to and updated. It\u0026rsquo;s also possible to do multi-threaded write operations on the file, without each thread having to parse the entire JSON structure and then sync with other threads.\nIn our experiments, JSON-L came with substantial parallelisation benefits. Our routines to calculate citation counts can be completed in ~20-25 minutes. Calculating the number of resolutions per container title takes less than half an hour.\nSQLite\nSQLite is a library written in C with client bindings for Python, Java, C#, and many other languages that produces an on-disk, portable, single-file SQL database. You can produce the SQLite file using our openly available Rust program, rustsqlitepacker. We also have a Python script that can produce the final SQLite file, for those happier working in this language.\nThe resultant SQLite file is approximately 900GB in size, so it requires quite a lot of free disk space to create in the first place (alongside storage of the data file that is needed to build it). However, queries are snappy when looking up by DOI and other indexes can be constructed (the indexing part of the procedure takes about 1.5 hours per field).\nThe database structure, at present, is the bare minimum that will work. It contains a list of fields for searching/indexing \u0026ndash; DOI, URL, member, prefix, type, created, and deposited \u0026ndash; and a metadata field that contains the JSON response that would be returned by the API for this value.\nThis allows for the processing and extraction of individual JSON elements using SQLite\u0026rsquo;s built-in json_extract method. For example, to get just the title of an item, you can use:\nSELECT json_extract(metadata, \u0026lsquo;$.title\u0026rsquo;) from works WHERE doi=\u0026ldquo;10.1080/10436928.2020.1709713\u0026rdquo;;\nThe balance that we have had to strike here is between flattening the JSON so that more fields are indexable and searchable, as against the trade-off in time and processing that this takes to create the database in the first place. The first draft version of our experiment was wildly ambitious in flattening all the records and using an Object Relation Mapper (ORM) to present Python models of the database. Like painting the Forth Bridge, this initial attempt would not finish in any sane length of time. Indeed, by the time we\u0026rsquo;d created this year\u0026rsquo;s data file, we\u0026rsquo;d need to begin work on the next.\nWhat are the anticipated use cases here? When people need to do an offline metadata search on an embedded device, for instance, the portability and indexed lookup of the SQLite database can be very appealing. One of our team has even got the database running on a Raspberry Pi 5. You can also load the database into Datasette if you want to explore it visually.\nWhere do we go from here with this? It would be good to flatten a few more fields, but we would welcome feedback on use cases that we haven\u0026rsquo;t anticipated for SQLite and we\u0026rsquo;d love to hear whether this is already too unwieldy (at 900GB).\nData Files\nAs usual, we will be releasing the annual data file in the next few months. As an experiment this year, we will also be releasing the tools that can be used on that file to produce these alternative file formats. We will consider releasing the final data files for each of these formats, too.\nWhat we would like to hear from the community is whether there are other data file formats that you might wish to use. Are there use cases that we haven\u0026rsquo;t anticipated? What would you ideally like in terms of file formats?\n",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/categories/140a/",
"title": "140A",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Categories",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/categories/abstracts/",
"title": "Abstracts",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Categories",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/authors/bianca-kramer/",
"title": "Bianca Kramer",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Authors",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/i4oa-hall-of-fame-2023-edition/",
"title": "I4OA Hall of Fame - 2023 edition",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2024-01-09",
"lastmod_ts": 1704758400,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "The Initiative for Open Abstracts (I4OA) was launched in September 2020 to advocate and promote the unrestricted availability of the abstracts of the world\u0026rsquo;s scholarly publications, particularly journal articles and book chapters, in trusted repositories where they are open and machine-accessible. I4OA calls on all scholarly publishers to open the abstracts of their published works and, where possible, to submit them to Crossref.\n",
"content": "The Initiative for Open Abstracts (I4OA) was launched in September 2020 to advocate and promote the unrestricted availability of the abstracts of the world\u0026rsquo;s scholarly publications, particularly journal articles and book chapters, in trusted repositories where they are open and machine-accessible. I4OA calls on all scholarly publishers to open the abstracts of their published works and, where possible, to submit them to Crossref.\nSince the launch of I4OA, we have been tracking the openness of abstracts for all Crossref members over time (for data and code, see this GitHub repository). For a subset of 40+, mostly larger, publishers, the proportion of current journal articles (published in the current year and preceding two years) that have abstracts deposited in Crossref is shown in a chart on the I4OA website, which is updated quarterly (Figure 1).\nFigure 1: Proportion of current journal articles from selected publishers that have open abstracts in Crossref. Data collected on January 1, 2024 for publication years 2021-2023. Publishers already supporting I4OA are shown in orange.\nThese longitudinal data and accompanying visualisations allow us to identify and highlight good examples from 2023: publishers (both large and small) who newly started to make abstracts openly available last year and/or who managed to get the proportion of their articles with open abstracts close to 100%1.\nWhile we highlight some of these examples below in our \u0026lsquo;Hall of Fame\u0026rsquo;, it\u0026rsquo;s important to also acknowledge all the publishers that already were depositing abstracts to Crossref for most or all of their journal articles prior to 2023, thereby contributing to the availability of abstracts as part of a rich ecosystem of open metadata, for others to use and build upon. Hall of Fame - Part 1: publishers included in I4OA visualisation For the set of (mostly larger) publishers included in the visualisation on the I4OA website, Figure 2 shows the difference in the proportion of abstracts available in Crossref between January and December 2023 for journal articles published in 2021-2023.\nA number of publishers stand out from this figure:\nWiley announced in October 2022 that it was joining I4OA and would be making abstracts available through Crossref. In August 2023, Wiley started to deposit abstracts to Crossref, and at the end of 2023, the proportion of current journal articles with open abstracts was 77%.\nThis makes Wiley the first of the four largest traditional commercial publishers to deposit abstracts for the majority of journal articles they publish. Springer Nature does this only for their current open access articles, while Elsevier and Taylor \u0026amp; Francis2 do not yet provide abstracts to Crossref at all. SAGE, the fifth largest traditional commercial publisher, was a founding member of I4OA and has open abstracts for 85% of current journal articles. Among society publishers, the American Geophysical Union (AGU) went from 7% to 99% open abstracts for current journal articles last year, which is a great achievement. The publishing arm of the American Institute of Physics (AIP Publishing) joins them in reaching close to 100% open abstracts, going from 41% to 95% in 2023.\n1Depending on the type of journal(s) of a given publisher, the maximal coverage of open abstracts will often be somewhat below 100%, as in Crossref, all journal content is assigned the type ‘journal article’. This includes e.g. editorials, letters to the editor and other publication types that are not always expected to have abstracts.\n2The numbers for Wiley and Taylor \u0026amp; Francis do not include Hindawi and F1000 Research, respectively, as these have separate Crossref member IDs. As most full open access publishers, both Hindawi and F1000 Research have high proportions of open abstracts (81% and 98%, respectively).\nCAIRN and Project Muse, two publishing platforms in the humanities and social sciences representing a number of individual publishers, both started including abstracts in the metadata they provide to Crossref in 2023. At the end of 2023, CAIRN had abstracts available for 41% of current journal articles, while Project Muse was just starting out at 5%. Both will hopefully increase further this coming year.\nReturning to traditional commercial publishers, Wolters Kluwer Health, part of Wolters Kluwer, had seen a slow growth in the proportion of journal articles with open abstracts in the years prior to 2023, going from 2% to 10%. However, they showed a rapid increase in 2023, ending the year with 52% open abstracts.\nWhile it is good to see publishers who have publicly committed their support for I4OA follow through with opening their abstracts (like Wiley and AIP), it is also very encouraging to see publishers who are not (yet) listed as I4OA supporters do so. This shows a growing awareness and action on this issue beyond advocacy through I4OA alone. And of course, we would love to list these publishers on our website as official supporters of I4OA!\nFigure 2 also shows some cases where the proportion of open abstracts has gone down during the year. This can be due to temporary technical issues in depositing abstracts (as was the case for Hindawi). Theoretically, the proportion of open abstracts can also go down when publishers stop providing abstracts altogether during the year, but we have not observed that to be the case.\nFigure 2: Development in the proportion of open abstracts in 2023 for current journal articles (publication years 2021-2023) from selected publishers. Publishers already supporting I4OA are shown in orange. Light orange/blue dots show the proportion of open abstracts in January 2023, and dark orange/blue dots in December 2023.\nHall of Fame - Part 2: other publishers Among the many publishers not included in the limited selection shown in the I4OA visualisation, there are also some interesting highlights of publishers either starting out to deposit abstracts (and reaching a sizeable proportion) or having deposited open abstracts for almost all their current journal articles in 2023. The examples below drew our attention in 2023; they include a number of medium-sized publishers as well as a group of smaller publishers that deserve special attention.\nThe European Molecular Biology organisation (EMBO) went from 0% to 42% open abstracts in 2023. However, from January 2024 onwards, several EMBO journals were transferred to Springer Nature, so EMBO can no longer be tracked at publisher level in Crossref. It will still be possible to look at the development of open abstracts for individual EMBO journals.\nThe Institution of Engineering and Technology (IET), a medium-sized publisher, started to deposit abstracts in 2023, reaching 33% open abstracts for current journal articles at the end of the year.\nThe Acoustical Society of America (ASA) had open abstracts for almost all their current journal articles at the end of 2023, increasing from 50% to 97%.\nFinally, in the second quarter of 2023, a group of over 200 smaller Turkish publishers saw large increases in their coverage of open abstracts, resulting in open abstracts for 95%-100% of their current journal articles. Consultation with Crossref pointed to the potential supporting role of DergiPark, one of the largest Crossref sponsors in Turkey. This is a great example of developments in open metadata at smaller publishers.\nLooking forward At the beginning of 2024, the proportion of current journal articles published by Crossref members with open abstracts has reached 49.7%, up from 20.7% when I4OA was launched in September 2020. This is thanks to a growing number of publishers who are depositing abstracts to Crossref, often depositing open abstracts for close to 100% of their journal articles.\nThis blog post has highlighted a number of publishers who contributed to this growth in the availability of open abstracts in 2023. We hope these examples will inspire other publishers to start doing the same and are looking forward to following the growth in the availability of open abstracts in 2024.\nFor publishers that started to deposit abstracts in recent years and are doing so for newly published articles only, our data on open abstracts for current journal articles will look better in 2024 than in 2023, as only articles published in the current year and two preceding years are taken into account.\nHowever, the benefits of having abstracts openly available from a central location such as Crossref (both for direct usage and for integration in other open scholarly infrastructures) are not limited to recent publications only. Hopefully, publishers currently depositing abstracts to Crossref will continue to do so both for newly published articles as well as for the backfiles of journal articles already published.\nPublishers who would like to be added to the list of I4OA supporters, or who would like more information on how to deposit abstracts for both new and existing journal articles, are very welcome to reach out to I4OA. More information about open abstracts in general, and I4OA in particular, can also be found in the FAQ on the I4OA website.\nThe author would like to thank Ludo Waltman (CWTS) and Ginny Hendricks (Crossref) for useful feedback on an earlier draft of this post.\nThis blog post is published under a CC BY 4.0 license. The header image is an adaptation of an image by Adam Jones available from Wikimedia Commons (https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Interior_02_of_Rock_%26_Roll_Hall_of_Fame_and_Museum,_Cleveland_%28by_Adam_Jones%29.jpg) and is shared under a CC BY-SA license.\n",
"headings": ["Hall of Fame - Part 1: publishers included in I4OA visualisation","Hall of Fame - Part 2: other publishers","Looking forward "]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/operations-and-sustainability/working-at-crossref/policies/",
"title": "Organisational policies & procedures",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2024-01-04",
"lastmod_ts": 1704326400,
"section": "Operations & sustainability",
"tags": [],
"description": "Our policies and procedures handbook details organisational policies related to how we work. Along with our employee manual, we share these policies for inspection or reuse by others.\n",
"content": "Our policies and procedures handbook details organisational policies related to how we work. Along with our employee manual, we share these policies for inspection or reuse by others.\n",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/archives/2023/",
"title": "2023",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Archives",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/discovering-relationships-between-preprints-and-journal-articles/",
"title": "Discovering relationships between preprints and journal articles",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2023-12-07",
"lastmod_ts": 1701907200,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "In the scholarly communications environment, the evolution of a journal article can be traced by the relationships it has with its preprints. Those preprint–journal article relationships are an important component of the research nexus. Some of those relationships are provided by Crossref members (including publishers, universities, research groups, funders, etc.) when they deposit metadata with Crossref, but we know that a significant number of them are missing. To fill this gap, we developed a new automated strategy for discovering relationships between preprints and journal articles and applied it to all the preprints in the Crossref database. We made the resulting dataset, containing both publisher-asserted and automatically discovered relationships, publicly available for anyone to analyse.\n",
"content": "In the scholarly communications environment, the evolution of a journal article can be traced by the relationships it has with its preprints. Those preprint–journal article relationships are an important component of the research nexus. Some of those relationships are provided by Crossref members (including publishers, universities, research groups, funders, etc.) when they deposit metadata with Crossref, but we know that a significant number of them are missing. To fill this gap, we developed a new automated strategy for discovering relationships between preprints and journal articles and applied it to all the preprints in the Crossref database. We made the resulting dataset, containing both publisher-asserted and automatically discovered relationships, publicly available for anyone to analyse.\nTL;DR We have developed a new, heuristic-based strategy for matching journal articles to their preprints. It achieved the following results on the evaluation dataset: precision 0.99, recall 0.95, F0.5 0.98. The code is available here.\nWe applied the strategy to all the preprints in the Crossref database. It discovered 627K preprint–journal article relationships.\nWe gathered all preprint–journal article relationships deposited by Crossref members, merged them with those discovered by the new strategy, and made everything available as a dataset. There are 642K relationships in the dataset, including:\n296K provided by the publisher and discovered by the strategy, 331K new relationships discovered by the strategy only, 15K provided by the publisher only. In the future, we plan to replace our current matching strategy with the new one and make all discovered relationships available through the Crossref REST API.\nIntroduction Relationships between preprints and journal articles link different versions of research outputs and allow one to follow the evolution of a publication over time. The Crossref deposit schema allows Crossref members to provide these relationships for new publications, either as a has-preprint relationship deposited with a journal article, or an is-preprint-of relationship deposited with a preprint.\nTo assist members who deposit preprints, we also try to connect deposited journal articles with preprints. The current method looks for an exact match between the title and first authors. We send possible matches as suggestions to the preprint server, which decides whether to update the metadata with the relationship.\nAt the time of writing, 137,837 journal articles in the Crossref database have a has-preprint relationship1, and 562,225 works of type posted-content (preprints belong to this type) have an is-preprint-of relationship2.\nWe suspected that many preprint–journal article relationships are missing, as some members inevitably fail to deposit them, even after suggestions from the current matching strategy. Another factor is that the current strategy is fairly conservative, and probably misses a significant number of relationships. For these reasons, we decided to investigate whether we could improve on the current process. Doing so would allow us to infer missing relationships on a large scale, similar to how we automatically match bibliographic references to DOIs.\nThis preprint matching task can be defined in two directions:\nWe start with a journal article and we want to find all its preprints. We start with a preprint and we want to find a subsequently published journal article. On the one hand, matching from journal articles to preprints would allow us to enrich the database continually with new relationships, either periodically or every time new content is added. Since journal articles tend to appear in the database later than their preprints, it makes sense for a new journal article to trigger the matching and not the other way round. This way we can expect the potential matches to be already in the database at the time of matching.\nOn the other hand, matching from preprints to journal articles can be useful in a situation where we want to add relationships in an existing database retrospectively. In our case, the database contains many more journal articles than preprints, so for performance reasons it is better to start with preprints.\nIn both cases we are dealing with structured matching, meaning that we match a metadata record of a work (preprint or journal article), rather than unstructured text.\nAs a result of matching a single preprint or a single journal article, we should expect zero or more matched journal articles/preprints. Multiple matches occur when:\nthere are multiple versions of the matched preprint and/or matched works have duplicates. The image shows the result of matching a journal article to two versions of a preprint:\nMatching strategy Our matching strategy uses the following workflow:\nGathering a short list of candidates using the Crossref REST API. Scoring the similarity between the input item and each candidate. A final decision about which candidates, if any, should be returned as matches. Gathering candidates is done using the Crossref REST API\u0026rsquo;s query.bibliographic parameter. The query is a concatenation of the title and authors\u0026rsquo; last names of the input item. We filter the candidates based on their type, to leave only preprints or only journal articles, depending on the direction of the matching. In the future, instead of getting the candidates from the REST API, we will be using a dedicated search engine, optimised for preprint matching.\nScoring candidates is heuristic-based. Similarities between titles, authors, and years are scored independently, and the final score is their average. Titles are compared in a fuzzy way using the rapidfuzz library. Authors are compared pairwise using the ORCID ID, or first/last names if ORCID ID is not available. The similarity score between issued years is 1 if the article was published no earlier than one year before the preprint and no later than three years after the preprint, or 0 otherwise.\nThe final decision is made based on two parameters: minimum score and maximum score difference, both chosen based on a validation dataset. The following diagram depicts the results of applying these two parameters in all possible scenarios. First, any candidate scoring below the minimum score is rejected (grey area in the diagram). Second, the scores of the remaining candidates are compared with the score of the top candidate. If the score of a candidate is close enough to the score of the top candidate, it is returned as a match (blue area).\nThis process can result in the following scenarios:\nScenario A: there is no candidate above the minimum score. This means nothing matches sufficiently, so nothing is returned. Scenario B: there is only one candidate above the minimum score. This means it is the best match and we don\u0026rsquo;t have much of a choice, so it is returned. Scenario C: there are multiple candidates above the minimum score, and they all have similar scores. This means they all are similarly good matches, so all are returned. Scenario D: there are multiple candidates above the minimum score, but their scores differ a lot. In this case, we don\u0026rsquo;t want to return all of them, but only those that are close to the top match. Intuitively, we don\u0026rsquo;t want to return less-than-great matches if we have really great ones. This is when the maximum score difference comes into play: we return the candidates with the “score distance” to the top candidate lower than the maximum score difference. We evaluated this strategy on a test set sampled from the Crossref metadata records. The test set contains 3,000 pairs (journal article, set of corresponding preprints). Half of the journal articles have known preprints and the other half don\u0026rsquo;t. The test set can be accessed here.\nWe used precision, recall, and F0.5 as evaluation metrics:\nPrecision measures the fraction of the matched relationships that are correct. Recall measures the fraction of the true relationships that were matched. F0.5 combines precision and recall in a way that favours precision. The strategy achieved the following results: precision 0.9921, recall 0.9474, F0.5 0.9828. The average processing time was 0.96s.\nWe have made this strategy (journal article -\u0026gt; preprints) available through the (experimental) API: https://marple.research.crossref.org/match?task=preprint-matching\u0026strategy=preprint-sbmv\u0026input=10.1109/access.2022.3213707. The input is the DOI of a journal article we want to match to preprints, and the output is a list of matches found, along with the score for each.\nWe have investigated other approaches to making decisions about which candidates to return as matches (step 3 above), including using machine learning. At present none have outperformed the heuristic approach described above. The heuristic method is also preferred because of its fast performance.\nPreprint–journal article relationship dataset We applied the strategy to the entire Crossref database:\nWe selected all preprints published until the end of August 2023. This included only works with type posted-content and subtype preprint, as reported by the REST API. There were 1,050,247 of them. We ran the matching strategy (preprint -\u0026gt; journal article) on them. This resulted in 627,011 preprint–journal article relationships. The resulting relationships were combined with the relationships deposited by the Crossref members. We included relationships of types has-preprint or is-preprint-of, where both sides of the relationship exist in our database, were published until the end of August 2023, and are of proper types and subtypes (type=journal-article for the journal article and type=posted-content, subtype=preprint for the preprint). The resulting dataset is a single CSV file with the following fields:\npreprint DOI (string) journal article DOI (string) whether the publisher of the journal article deposited this relationship (boolean) whether the publisher of the preprint deposited this relationship (boolean) the confidence score returned by the strategy (float, empty if the strategy did not discover this relationship) The dataset contains:\n641,950 relationships in total, including 580,532 preprints and 565,129 journal articles, 14,939 of them were deposited by the Crossref members, but not discovered by the strategy, 330,826 of them were discovered by the strategy, but not provided by any Crossref member, 296,185 of them were both deposited by a Crossref member and discovered by the strategy. The dataset can be downloaded here.\nConclusions and what\u0026rsquo;s next Overall, based on the number of existing and newly discovered preprint–journal article relationships, it seems that employing automated matching strategies would approximately double the number of these relationships in the Crossref database. In the future, we would like to match new journal articles on an ongoing basis. We also plan to make all discovered relationships available through the REST API.\nIn the meantime, we will be publishing the discovered relationships in the form of datasets, and we invite anyone interested to further analyse this data. And if you find out something interesting about preprints and their relationships, do let us know!\nhttps://api.crossref.org/types/journal-article/works?filter=relation.type:has-preprint\u0026#160;\u0026#x21a9;\u0026#xfe0e;\nhttps://api.crossref.org/types/posted-content/works?filter=relation.type:is-preprint-of\u0026#160;\u0026#x21a9;\u0026#xfe0e;\n",
"headings": ["TL;DR","Introduction","Matching strategy","Preprint–journal article relationship dataset","Conclusions and what\u0026rsquo;s next"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/categories/perspectives/",
"title": "Perspectives",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Categories",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/perspectives-madhura-amdekar-meeting-community-pursuing-research-integrity/",
"title": "Perspectives: Madhura Amdekar on meeting the community and pursuing passion for research integrity",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2023-12-05",
"lastmod_ts": 1701734400,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "\rThe second half of 2023 brought with itself a couple of big life changes for me: not only did I move to the Netherlands from India, I also started a new and exciting job at Crossref as the newest Community Engagement Manager. In this role, I am a part of the Community Engagement and Communications team, and my key responsibility is to engage with the global community of scholarly editors, publishers, and editorial organisations to develop sustained programs that help editors to leverage rich metadata.\n",
"content": "\rThe second half of 2023 brought with itself a couple of big life changes for me: not only did I move to the Netherlands from India, I also started a new and exciting job at Crossref as the newest Community Engagement Manager. In this role, I am a part of the Community Engagement and Communications team, and my key responsibility is to engage with the global community of scholarly editors, publishers, and editorial organisations to develop sustained programs that help editors to leverage rich metadata.\nThis represents an exciting phase in my professional journey, as I now have the chance to learn and develop new skills, broaden my understanding of the publishing landscape, and at the same time be able to leverage the experience I gained so far. I originally trained as an ecologist, obtaining a PhD studying colour change in a tropical agamid lizard in India at the Indian Institute of Science (Bengaluru, India). Having immensely enjoyed the process of writing manuscripts based on the data that resulted from my PhD thesis, I was drawn to working in the scholarly publishing industry. I worked for 3.5 years as a Senior Associate at Wiley, overseeing an editor support service by devising strategic scale-up planning and process improvement initiatives.\nI then moved countries as well as jobs and joined Crossref. The world of scholarly communications is a rapidly changing ecosystem, that is ably supported by scholarly infrastructure - the sets of tools and services that support this industry. Being a part of Crossref, a global organisation that provides open scholarly infrastructure, allows me to work with and make an impact on the broad scholarly community that ranges from publishers of all shapes and sizes, funders, to academic institutions, and researchers.\nSo far, the integrity of the scholarly record (ISR) has been the focus of my work. Now more than ever, the community is cognizant of the need to uphold the integrity of the scholarly output. Metadata and relationships between research outputs can support this endeavour in a substantial manner because information such as who contributed to a research output, who funded it, who cites it, whether it was updated after publication, aids provenance and provides signals about whether the output is trustworthy.\nMost of Crossref’s tools and services play a key role here: be it reference linking to allow researchers to increase discoverability of their work, tracking post-publication updates to research outputs via Crossmark, or detecting text plagiarism via Similarity Check. We noticed that not all editors and editorial teams associate metadata as signals of integrity, and might be unaware of the benefits of rich metadata. Therefore, my priority is to utilise opportunities to engage with editors about how metadata can provide trust indicators about a research output. I aim to empower editors to collect and leverage rich metadata.\nWhile I am no stranger to the world of scholarly communications, engaging with the broader Crossref community has been a new experience for me. In my day to day work, I employ a range of different skills such as program design and management, content planning and outreach, networking, and meeting facilitation. I have also been participating in trainings to enhance my skill set – I recently completed a training course on Community Engagement Fundamentals, which has equipped me with a better understanding of the concepts and strategies that I will need as a community manager. Additionally, I also underwent the Group Facilitation Methods training course led by the Institute of Cultural Affairs (ICA) where I learnt a couple of effective methods for group facilitation and leading workshops.\nEquipped with these skills, I have moderated a few community events already – most prominently the community call about Crossref and Retraction Watch to discuss Crossref’s acquisition and opening up of the Retraction Watch database. It was a valuable experience to contribute to the planning of an online event and host a panel of distinguished guests.\nI was also fortunate to be able to meet our community members in-person: I supported the organisation of the Frankfurt roundtable event that was held as part of Crossref’s Integrity of the Scholarly Record (ISR) program, where we engaged with community members to get their perspectives on how to work together towards preserving the integrity of the scholarly record (keep watching this space for a forthcoming blog summarising the outcomes from this event!). Additionally, I attended the Frankfurt Book Fair – the experience of getting to meet our members and to hear from them first-hand about all things Crossref, was unparalleled! I used this opportunity to meet several of our publisher members and discuss their view points about engaging with editors on ISR. The idea was received positively: we heard specific suggestions of metadata that would be of interest to readers of scientific manuscripts, and our members also expressed interest in finding out more about how metadata can act as markers of trust for a research output. I plan to use the insights from these meetings for the development of the ISR editor engagement program.\nAs I reflect on the past three months, there are a few things that have stood out to me. In terms of work, no two days are the same. My work plan for the day can range from making presentations for outreach activities, creating content such as this blogpost, working on an engagement strategy, to planning events, attending online or offline community meetings, facilitating or moderating some of those events, and networking with community members. This variety in work keeps me motivated to give my best each day. I am also grateful that I have the ability to make an impact with my work in an area that I am passionate about. In my previous job, I had developed a good understanding of research integrity and publication ethics. As a community manager now, I’m looking to work with editorial teams on the integrity of the scholarly record. This role gives me an opportunity to further nurture this interest of mine.\nAt times, working from home remotely has been a challenge. However, I have enjoyed attending in-person events as they are not just a chance to meet our community members, but also a chance to meet my colleagues and connect with them.\nI feel privileged to be able to connect with research communities all over the world and make a meaningful contribution towards supporting the discoverability and impact of their work. I am particularly excited to work at the forefront of shaping the future of preserving the integrity of the scholarly record, in tandem with our community. If this is a topic that excites you as well, I am keen to hear from you. It has been a wonderful three months at Crossref so far and I look forward to future collaborations with our community to develop effective ways of supporting and empowering editors to make the most of metadata for their publications.\n",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/categories/data-citation/",
"title": "Data Citation",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Categories",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/authors/hylke-koers/",
"title": "Hylke Koers",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Authors",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/joint-statement-on-research-data/",
"title": "Joint statement on research data",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2023-11-28",
"lastmod_ts": 1701129600,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "\rSTM, DataCite, and Crossref are pleased to announce an updated joint statement on research data.\nIn 2012, DataCite and STM drafted an initial joint statement on the linkability and citability of research data. With nearly 10 million data citations tracked, thousands of repositories adopting data citation best practices, thousands of journals adopting data policies, data availability statements and establishing persistent links between articles and datasets, and the introduction of data policies by an increasing number of funders, there has been significant progress since. It now seems appropriate to focus on providing updated recommendations for the various stakeholders involved in research data sharing.\n",
"content": "\rSTM, DataCite, and Crossref are pleased to announce an updated joint statement on research data.\nIn 2012, DataCite and STM drafted an initial joint statement on the linkability and citability of research data. With nearly 10 million data citations tracked, thousands of repositories adopting data citation best practices, thousands of journals adopting data policies, data availability statements and establishing persistent links between articles and datasets, and the introduction of data policies by an increasing number of funders, there has been significant progress since. It now seems appropriate to focus on providing updated recommendations for the various stakeholders involved in research data sharing.\nThe premise of the original joint statement still stands: most stakeholders across the spectrum of researchers, funders, librarians and publishers agree about the benefits of making research data available and findable for reuse by others. This improves utility and rigor of the scholarly record. Still, research data sharing is not yet a self-evident step in the research lifecycle. We now have sufficient scholarly communication infrastructure in place to bring about widespread change and believe momentum is building for collective action.\nIt is in this context that DataCite, a global membership community working with over 2800 repositories around the world, and STM, whose membership consists of over 140 scientific, technical, and medical publishing organisations, are issuing this joint statement. Crossref, a nonprofit open infrastructure with over 18,000 institutional members from 150 countries, joins this call, recognising the need for an amplified focus on data citation. The aim of this statement is to accelerate adoption of best practices and policies, and encourage further development of critical policies in collaboration with a wide group of stakeholders.\nSignatories of this statement recommend the following as best practice in research data sharing:\nWhen publishing their results, researchers deposit related research data and outputs in a trustworthy data repository that assigns persistent identifiers (DOIs where available). Researchers link to research data using persistent identifiers. When using research data created by others, researchers provide attribution by citing the datasets in the reference section using persistent identifiers. Data repositories enable sharing of research outputs in a FAIR way, including support for metadata quality and completeness. Publishers set appropriate journal data policies, describing the way in which data is to be shared alongside the published article. Publishers set instructions for authors to include Data Citations with persistent identifiers in the references section of articles. Publishers include Data Citations and links to data in Data Availability Statements with persistent identifiers (DOIs where available) in the article metadata registered with Crossref. In addition to Data Citations, Data Availability Statements (human- and machine-readable) are included in published articles where appropriate. Repositories and publishers connect articles and datasets through persistent identifier connections in the metadata and reference lists. Funders and research organisations provide researchers with guidance on open science practices, track compliance with open science policies where possible, and promote and incentivize researchers to openly share, cite and link research data. Funders, policymaking institutions, publishers and research organisations collaborate towards aligning FAIR research data policies and guidelines. All stakeholders collaborate in the development of tools, processes, and incentives throughout the research cycle to enable sharing of high-quality research data, making all steps in the process clear, easy and efficient for researchers by providing support and guidance. Stakeholders responsible for research assessment take into account data sharing and data citation in their reward and recognition system structures. We, the following signatories shall adopt and promote the relevant best practices laid out above. We hope that our action inspires the community, including researchers, research funders, research institutions, data repositories and publishers, to join us in making it easy for researchers to share, link and cite research data.\nEndorse the statement here.\n",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/what-was-the-talk-of-crossref2023/",
"title": "What was the talk of #Crossref2023?",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2023-11-21",
"lastmod_ts": 1700524800,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "Have you attended any of our annual meeting sessions this year? Ah, yes – there were many in this conference-style event. I, as many of my colleagues, attended them all because it is so great to connect with our global community, and hear your thoughts on the developments at Crossref, and the stories you share.\nLet me offer some highlights from the event and a reflection on some emergent themes of the day. You can browse the recordings and slides archived on our Annual Meeting page.\n",
"content": "Have you attended any of our annual meeting sessions this year? Ah, yes – there were many in this conference-style event. I, as many of my colleagues, attended them all because it is so great to connect with our global community, and hear your thoughts on the developments at Crossref, and the stories you share.\nLet me offer some highlights from the event and a reflection on some emergent themes of the day. You can browse the recordings and slides archived on our Annual Meeting page.\nGinny Hendricks opened the meeting by reminding everyone about the research nexus vision, and the work that’s underway to bring us closer to it. Ginny went on to highlight progress in metadata and relationships being registered by our members, and mentioned members that have particularly rich metadata records – with the special joint recognition for learned societies of South Korea. Participation statistics can be reviewed in our Labs Member Metadata Metrics Tables.\nSince 2018 we’ve seen a 512% increase in the number of abstracts included in the metadata; with Wiley’s recent addition of millions of abstracts to their records largely contributing to this change. On the relationships side, in the same period, we’ve noted a staggering 3004% growth in preprint-to-article links, and we’re pleased to report a growing number of funding relationships being made available thanks to more and more funders registering Crossref DOIs for grants.\nFor those who couldn’t join us at such an early hour, Ed Penz included some of these highlights in his own strategic update later in the day. However, he focused on our activity and plans towards fulfilling our four strategic goals:\nTo contribute to an environment where the community identifies and co-creates solutions for broad benefit To be a sustainable source of complete, open, and global scholarly metadata and relationships To be publicly accountable to the Principles of Open Scholarly Infrastructure (POSI) practices of sustainability, insurance, and governance To foster a strong team—because reliable infrastructure needs committed people who contribute to and realise the vision, and thrive doing it Speakers from across our global community shared their initiatives too. Most of these talks have been accompanied by posters or abstracts shared on our Community Forum and still available for preview and discussion:\nMaking data citations available at scale: The Global Open Data Citation Corpus by Iratxe Puebla; “Who Cares?” Defining Citation Style in Scholarly Journals by Vincas Grigas and Pavla Vizváry; DOI registration for scholarly blogs by Martin Fenner; Enhancing Research Connections through Metadata: A Case Study with AGU and CHORUS by Tara Packer, Kristina Vrouwenvelder, Shelley Stall; Index Crossref, Integrity, Professional And Institutional Development by Engjellushe Zenelaj; Brazilian retractions in the Retraction Watch Database - RWDB by Edilson Damasio; and Now that you’ve published, what do you do with Metadata? - by Joann Fogleson. In addition to these updates, we’ve heard from:\nIzabela Szyprowska (OP, European Commission), Nikolaos Mitrakis (RTD, European Commission), and Paola Mazzucchi (mEDRA) talked about the process and rationale of implementing Crossref DOIs for grants at the European Commission; and Amanda French from ROR/Crossref about the new ‘ROR / Open Funder Registry overlap’ tool. We also assembled a diverse panel and invited the community to discuss “What we still need to build a robust Research Nexus?” The discussion ranged from how different parts of our community currently use existing metadata, to how we can come together to make improvements, especially in the area of standards and equitability, and touched on metadata priorities. I’ll highlight some of the threads below, but it’s certainly worth engaging with the full recording of the discussion, and offering your own perspective on the Community Forum, commenting below.\nHaving participated in the whole day of talks, I found that a few themes emerged as popular in the community: data citations, making it easier to register metadata, making better use of metadata, retractions, and equity of participation in the research nexus.\nData citations With the advances in the Crossref API relationships endpoint, Martyn Rittman demonstrated how we’re now providing more comprehensive support for data citations. You can follow his demonstration in the Collab Notebook he used for the demo and shared for your perusal. He also mentioned that the developments in this feature of our API will soon replace the current service provided via the Events API. Feel free to connect with Martin on the community forum and comment with questions and suggestions.\nAs mentioned above, DataCite’s Iratxe Puebla mentioned the Make Data Count initiative and the leaky pipeline of data citations we’ve got at the moment in the scholarly literature, obscuring the true picture of data reuse. This prevents the community from recognising and incentivising data creation and reuse appropriately. One way of addressing this is the Global Open Data Citation Corpus. Crossref and DataCite collaborate closely in connecting and making that data available.\nLinking datasets, as well as software, was reported as part of the AGU and CHORUS initiative in Enhancing Research Connections through Metadata.\nData sharing and citing is as much a culture as a technology problem. As Iratxe Puebla admitted, there are many norms and processes for capturing and sharing that information,and DataCite is interested to hear about different use cases. As highlighting data’s relationship with works is a growing interest for our community, hopefully more understanding and perhaps even commonality can be built soon.\nMaking it easier to register metadata As part of the Demonstrations session, we’ve seen two developments to support members with registering their metadata more easily.\nCrossref’s Lena Stoll shared plans for the new version of the Crossref Registration Form, the helper tool for manual registration of metadata, which translates the submission into XML, for inclusion in the Crossref database. At the moment, the form only accepts grant registrations, but it will be bolstered before the end of the year to include journal articles then other record types in time.\nErik Hanson from PKP demonstrated the latest OJS version, commenting on specific changes made in the new version in response to the key pain points reported by users of the previous release.\nIn addition, we’ve heard of two independent projects by Martin Fenner and Esha Data to enable metadata registration and Crossref DOIs for scholarly blogs.\nMaking better use of metadata Supported by the beginner’s demo of our REST API by Luis Montilla, there were many voices about opportunities for making good use of Crossref’s open metadata. Nikolaos Mitrakis of the European Commission talked about the implementation of Crossref IDs for grants as a step towards tracing and connecting the grants with not just academic but also societal outcomes of the awards, and the plans for using those in the evaluation and steering of their funding programmes.\nJoann Fogleson of the American Society of Civil Engineers gave a buzzy metaphor of publishers’ role in their work with metadata being comparable with that of a pollinator – collecting the metadata at one end, then registering, displaying and making it available to different services, in order to enable a reacher scholarly environment for discovery.\nMany of the major themes have found their way to the discussion of what is still needed to build a robust network of connections between scholarly objects, institutions and individuals. One of the ways Ludo Waltman of CWTS, Leiden University, intends to use our open metadata is as part of the upcoming open-source version of the Laiden rankings and he invited the community to contribute and help optimise this project to provide an alternative to closed and selective databases.\nPanellists also spoke of new opportunities in the light of data mining and machine learning. Ran Dang, Atlantis Press, as a publisher shared a concern about the standard of metadata across cultures and disciplines, and the need to digitise past publications – which can then help better leverage multi-lingual scholarship. Matt Buys of DataCite, pointed out to the Global Data Citation Corpus they are developing, which leverages a SciBERT model to pull out data citations, which is brought together with Crossref/DataCite citation metadata.\nOpening the data is essential to enabling its wider use, and here Ludo gave the example of the fantastic outcome for references metadata, which has been made open by default for the entire corpus of Crossref-registred works. He hopes that this can inspire us to make similar progress in other areas.\nA little on a tangent with regards to metadata use, yet speaking of excellent examples of the community making progress together, Ginny pointed out ROR, how this is becoming a new standard for solving a longstanding problem of standardising affiliations metadata.\nRetractions Perhaps not entirely surprising, given the recent acquisition of the Retraction Watch database by Crossref and making the data openly available, retractions featured in a few different talks at the meeting. First, Lena Stoll and Martin Eve from Crossref, shared how that data can be accessed – that is as the csv file from https://api.labs.crossref.org/data/retractionwatch?[your-email@here](add your email as indicated), and the Crossref Labs API also displays information about retractions in the /works/ route when metadata is available. There are plans for incorporating this information with our REST API in the future.\nEd and Ginny have shown stats for increases in retraction metadata registered in Crossmark but commented on limited participation in Crossmark overall. Recording retraction information in this way is still important, alongside the Retraction Watch data, this allows for multiple assertions of that information, and increases confidence in its accuracy. We’re preparing to consult with the community at large about the future direction of the Crossmark service, to make it easier to implement and more useful for the readers.\nFinally, Edilson Damasio from State University of Maringá-UEM, Brazil, and a long-time Crossref Ambassador, presented the analysis of Brazilian records in the Retraction Watch data, and he promises further analysis to come, comparing the situation across geographies.\nEquity of participation in the research nexus Amanda Bartell opened the research nexus discussion with a reminder of what that vision entails and pointing out commonality of goals in the community – “Like others, Crossref has a vision of a rich and reusable open network of relationships connecting research organisations, people, things, and actions; a scholarly record that the global community can build on forever, for the benefit of society. We call this interconnected network the Research Nexus, but others in the community have different names for it, such as knowledge graph or PID graph.”\nThe richness of this network depends upon the participation of all those who produce and publish scholarship, so naturally the topic of equality emerged in that discussion. In addition to Ran Dang’s concern for multilingualism and digitisation of past publications from all parts of the world, Mercury Shitindo of St Paul\u0026rsquo;s University, Kenya talked of the need for more education, training and accessible resources for her community, to be able to participate more effectively in this ecosystem. She can see that affiliations and citations are of priority there, as these enable transparency and facilitate collaborations. Matt Buys of DataCite echoed her point, talking about the importance of the role of contributors “It\u0026rsquo;s important not to lose sight of people and places – to recognise the importance of contributor roles in the PID-graph”.\nEarlier in the day, we mentioned the launch of our Global Equitable Membership, or GEM programme. Since January, 110 new organisations from eligible countries have joined Crossref fee-free. Ginny was quick to admit that the need for a fee-waiver programme like this stems from the regular fees schedule not being in tune with our global membership, and she mentioned the upcoming fees review.\nFinancial barriers are often what get attention, yet reducing barriers to participation with technology is equally important for building a robust research nexus. With the planned changes to our registration form, we’ll make it easier to register works for those who don’t regularly use XML.\nJohanssen Obanda took time to show the examples of community activity and events organised by our global network of Ambassadors, and to thank all our advocates and partners for their tireless work. They are also helping tackle barriers, supporting our members to actively participate in the research nexus with their metadata, and help enable the community to make good use of the network of relationships that data denotes.\nShowcasing our “One member one vote” truth, the Board election was the focal point of the annual meeting, as always. We closed the ballot and announced the results, with seven members selected to join the Board in 2024.\nThe event went very smoothly overall. Talks were delivered efficiently, the panellists shared diverse perspectives and we elected our new Board members. Huge thanks to Rosa Clark, our Communications and Events Manager, who orchestrated the event and has been a constant behind-the-scenes presence supervising the entire show. I’m grateful to all colleagues at Crossref, who helped make it an enjoyable experience and an informative event for our community. Finally – it wouldn’t be a real meeting without the active participation of the speakers and panellists, who shared their metadata stories, and even joined us for some relaxed unplugged chats.\n",
"headings": ["Data citations","Making it easier to register metadata","Making better use of metadata","Retractions","Equity of participation in the research nexus"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/perspectives-luis-montilla-sci-fi-concepts-reality-scholarly-ecosystem/",
"title": "Perspectives: Luis Montilla on making science fiction concepts a reality in the scholarly ecosystem",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2023-11-20",
"lastmod_ts": 1700438400,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "\rHello, readers! My name is Luis, and I\u0026rsquo;ve recently started a new role as the Technical Community Manager at Crossref, where I aim to bridge the gap between some of our services and our community awareness to enhance the Research Nexus. I\u0026rsquo;m excited to share my thoughts with you.\nMy journey from research to science communications infrastructure has been a gradual transition. As a Masters student in Biological Sciences, I often felt curious about the behind-the-scenes after a paper is submitted and published. For example, the fate of data being stored in the drawer or copied and forgotten in the hard drive after the paper is online. I come from a university that shares its name with at least three completely different universities in Latin America, and that also is pretty similar to another one with multiple offices across the region, which made me wonder if there was a standard way of identifying our affiliations. And then we have the topic of our names in hispanoamerica. We use two family names, and more often than not, we have a middle name (and then I could tell you stories about multiple-word middle names), which inevitably leads to authors having many combinations of full names and hyphenations.\n",
"content": "\rHello, readers! My name is Luis, and I\u0026rsquo;ve recently started a new role as the Technical Community Manager at Crossref, where I aim to bridge the gap between some of our services and our community awareness to enhance the Research Nexus. I\u0026rsquo;m excited to share my thoughts with you.\nMy journey from research to science communications infrastructure has been a gradual transition. As a Masters student in Biological Sciences, I often felt curious about the behind-the-scenes after a paper is submitted and published. For example, the fate of data being stored in the drawer or copied and forgotten in the hard drive after the paper is online. I come from a university that shares its name with at least three completely different universities in Latin America, and that also is pretty similar to another one with multiple offices across the region, which made me wonder if there was a standard way of identifying our affiliations. And then we have the topic of our names in hispanoamerica. We use two family names, and more often than not, we have a middle name (and then I could tell you stories about multiple-word middle names), which inevitably leads to authors having many combinations of full names and hyphenations.\nThis curiosity led me to volunteer in the Journal of the Venezuelan Society of Ecology. This role has been a transformative experience because my goal was to learn more about the publishing aspect of science. Still, today I realize that this is a fraction of what the scholarly ecosystem represents. The experience allowed me to grasp the importance of having a community with a sense of belonging, the relevance of multilingualism, and the importance of having access to an open infrastructure that allows smaller communities to be participants in the global dynamics. Moreover, it seemed to me that a research paper is more than the capstone of a building that we place and then move on to the next project or the next experiment; instead, it is a node in the vast network of human knowledge, connected to other papers through references, but also to all the other elements that are produced as part of the research, namely datasets, protocols, code, presentations, posters, preprints, peer-review reports and more. In short, the research metadata extends the life of the research output and makes it visible to the rest of the community.\nThis brings us to my onboarding to the Crossref team. At Crossref, I became part of a team and a driving force whose idea of the Research Nexus 1 aligns perfectly with my aspirations. And to explain myself better, I\u0026rsquo;ll draw an analogy using one of my favorite authors. In Isaac Asimov\u0026rsquo;s Second Foundation, a character shows to another a wall covered to the last millimeter with equations and writings. He describes his contribution to \u0026ldquo;The Plan\u0026rdquo; as follows: \u0026ldquo;\u0026hellip;Every red mark you see on the wall is the contribution of a man among us who lived since Seldon\u0026rdquo;.2 This idea sounded fascinating to me and only possible in a sci-fi book; a massive integrated research ecosystem where scientists focused more on how their contributions fit in the big picture. Today I have come to think that metadata helps materialize this idea by interconnecting all knowledge, and more importantly, in stark contrast to Asimov\u0026rsquo;s plan developed and guarded by a secret society, Crossref\u0026rsquo;s research nexus is a \u0026ldquo;reusable open network,\u0026rdquo; \u0026ldquo;a scholarly record that the global community can build on forever.\u0026rdquo; In a world with undeniably unequal access to resources, providing open access and fostering community efforts to contribute to this growing collective effort is a fundamental condition to empower and visualize underrepresented voices.\nWe make available a series of tools to access and probe this data, including our REST API, but we know its potential is far from being realized. As Technical Community Manager at Crossref, my primary responsibility is to understand the needs of our community members who interact with our REST API. I aim to build and maintain relationships with new and existing metadata users to promote the effective usage of our API. I will also be working closely with organisations such as hosting platforms, manuscript submission systems, and general publisher services. In essence, I want to ensure that our community across the globe is aware of the vast possibilities that imply using and contributing to the Research Nexus.\nI am committed to fostering an engaged and collaborative technical community. As we move forward, I look forward to sharing insights, experiences, and knowledge with all of you. Stay tuned for more updates, and let\u0026rsquo;s explore the world of APIs, metadata, and scholarly communities together!\nCrossref (2021) The research nexus. Accessed on 20 October 2023.\u0026#160;\u0026#x21a9;\u0026#xfe0e;\nAsimov, I. (1953) Second Foundation. Gnome Press.\u0026#160;\u0026#x21a9;\u0026#xfe0e;\n",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/authors/fabienne-michaud/",
"title": "Fabienne Michaud",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Authors",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/categories/similarity-check/",
"title": "Similarity Check",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Categories",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/similarity-check-update-a-new-similarity-report-and-ai-writing-detection-tool-soon-to-be-available-to-ithenticate-v2-users/",
"title": "Similarity check update: A new similarity report and AI writing detection tool soon to be available to iThenticate v2 users",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2023-11-01",
"lastmod_ts": 1698796800,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "In May, we updated you on the latest changes and improvements to the new version of iThenticate and let you know that a new similarity report and AI writing detection tool were on the horizon.\nOn Wednesday 1 November 2023, Turnitin (who produce iThenticate) will be releasing a brand new similarity report and a free preview to their AI writing detection tool in iThenticate v2. The AI writing detection tool will be enabled by default and account administrators will be able to switch it off/on.\n",
"content": "In May, we updated you on the latest changes and improvements to the new version of iThenticate and let you know that a new similarity report and AI writing detection tool were on the horizon.\nOn Wednesday 1 November 2023, Turnitin (who produce iThenticate) will be releasing a brand new similarity report and a free preview to their AI writing detection tool in iThenticate v2. The AI writing detection tool will be enabled by default and account administrators will be able to switch it off/on.\nTurnitin will be running a webinar on their new similarity report and AI writing detection tool on Tuesday 28 November (EDIT 23/11/16: Monday 11 December 2023). More information on the webinar and how to register will be communicated by Turnitin in the coming weeks.\nNew similarity report On Wednesday, all iThenticate v2 users will have access to the new version of the similarity report which will include:\na word count and the number of text blocks for each matched source the ability to include or exclude overlapping sources from the overall similarity score a clearer colour differentiation between the different sources improved accessibility features Enabling the new similarity report The new similarity report will be enabled as a default for all your journals. Account administrators wishing to switch off the new similarity report can do so by going to Settings and selecting from the General tab, under the New Similarity Report Experience heading, the Disable option.\nClassic view / new view As this will be a significant change to your current experience, Turnitin have provided access for a period of time to the ‘classic view’ and you will be able to toggle between the original interface and the new one by clicking on ‘Switch to the classic view’ or ‘Switch to the new view’ buttons at the top of your report.\nThe similarity score will continue to be available at the top right-hand corner of the similarity report.\nExclusions By clicking on the Filters button you’ll be able to check and/or adjust your report’s section and repository exclusions.\nPlease note that the exclusions previously set up by account administrators should be unchanged by this release.\nSources / Match Groups view The Sources view will be the default view and will list all sources. By using the on/off button next to ‘Show overlapping sources’, you’ll be able to include or exclude overlapping sources. This will be ‘off’ as a default.\nThe Match Groups view is completely new and may not suit everyone’s needs. It is divided into four categories ‘Not Cited or Quoted’, ‘Missing Quotations’, ‘Missing Citation’ and ‘Cited and Quoted’ and will highlight matches found in your text.\nPDF report You’ll also now find the PDF report in the top right-hand corner of the similarity report, by clicking on the ‘download’ icon.\nSubmission details ‘Submission Details’ is located now under the ‘i’ icon in the top right-hand corner of your report. This is where you will find the oid (or unique number) for your manuscript which Turnitin will ask you to provide when you are reporting a technical issue.\nTurnitin’s documentation for the new similarity report\nAI writing detection tool Many of you have been concerned about the use of AI writing in the research papers you’ve received since the launch of ChatGPT last November and have been in touch to enquire about the availability of an AI writing detection tool for Crossref members.\nYou will also have read that Turnitin have developed an AI writing detector tool and have made it available to their education sector customers since April. Turnitin have published an update in May, a helpful video and further information on the false positive rates in June based on the feedback they’ve received from the education community.\nI am pleased to announce that Turnitin’s AI writing detection tool will be available as a free preview to iThenticate v2 users, via the new version of the similarity report, from Wednesday 1 November until the end of December 2023.\nEnabling AI writing detection Our preference was to have the new AI writing detection tool turned ‘off’ as a default, however this hasn’t been possible. Account administrators can turn this feature off by going to Settings and selecting the Crossref Web tab and scrolling down to the AI Writing section at the very bottom of the page. The feature is applied to all submissions when it is enabled.\nPlease note that AI Writing detection is only available in the new similarity report.\nIntegrations There is currently no integration between manuscript tracking systems and the AI writing detection tool. However the AI score will be available via the similarity report. If the AI writing detection tool has been set as ‘off’ by the account administrator, there will be no score and the ‘AI Writing’ heading will not be visible on the similarity report:\nFile requirements Turnitin have made some important file requirements available for the tool to run a report:\nMust be written in English A minimum 300 words A maximum of 15,000 words The file size must be less than 100 MB Accepted file types are .docx, .pdf, .rtf and .txt If your file does not meet the above requirements, iThenticate v2 will display the following message:\nTurnitin’s AI writing detection tool has been developed to detect GPT 3, 3.5, 4 and other variants. More information on this is available on their FAQs page.\nTurnitin have provided the following guidance regarding the AI scores:\n\u0026ldquo;Blue with a percentage between 0 and 100: The submission has processed successfully. The displayed percentage indicates the amount of qualifying text within the submission that Turnitin’s AI writing detection model determines was generated by AI. As noted previously, this percentage is not necessarily the percentage of the entire submission. If text within the submission was not considered long-form prose text, it will not be included.\nOur testing has found that there is a higher incidence of false positives when the percentage is between 1 and 20. In order to reduce the likelihood of misinterpretation, the AI indicator will display an asterisk (*) for percentages between 1 and 20 to call attention to the fact that the score is less reliable.\nTo explore the results of the AI writing detection capabilities, select the indicator to open the AI writing report. The AI writing report opens in a new tab of the window used to launch the Similarity Report. If you have a pop-up blocker installed, ensure it allows Turnitin pop-ups.\u0026rdquo;\nPlease note that unlike the similarity report, the AI writing report will only provide a score and highlight the blocks of texts likely to have been written by an AI tool and will not list source matches.\nWe encourage you to test the writing detection tool as much as possible during the free preview period (1 November-31 December 2023).\nNext Paraphrase detection Turnitin are planning to release a beta version of their new paraphrase detection tool at the end of this year/Q1, 2024. It will be initially available as a free preview for a short period of time. (EDIT 23/11/16: There is currently no timeline available for Turnitin\u0026rsquo;s paraphrase detection tool which is having a knock-on effect on the availiblity of the AI writing and paraphrase detection bundle and associated fees previously mentioned in this post)\nAI and paraphrase detection bundle (EDIT 23/11/16: AI writing detection tool) Once the free preview period ends, Turnitin would like to offer Crossref members an AI and paraphrase detection bundle (EDIT 23/11/16: are planning to make their AI writing detection tool available) from 2024 - this means that if you choose to subscribe to this new service, you will be charged an additional fee each time you upload a manuscript.\nFixes Many of you have been waiting for fixes to the aggregation of URLs issues in the matched sources of the similarity report and to the doc-to-doc PDF report in iThenticate v2. Turnitin are planning to release fixes for these before the end of 2023.\n✏️ Do get in touch via support@crossref.org if you have any questions about iThenticate v1 or v2 or start a discussion by commenting on this post below or in our Community Forum.\n",
"headings": ["New similarity report","Enabling the new similarity report","Classic view / new view","Exclusions","Sources / Match Groups view","PDF report","Submission details","AI writing detection tool","Enabling AI writing detection","Integrations","File requirements","Next","Paraphrase detection","AI and paraphrase detection bundle (EDIT 23/11/16: AI writing detection tool)","Fixes"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/authors/audrey-kenni-nemaleu/",
"title": "Audrey Kenni-Nemaleu",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Authors",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/authors/kora-korzec/",
"title": "Kora Korzec",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Authors",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/perspectives-audrey-kenni-nemaleu-on-scholarly-communications-in-cameroon/",
"title": "Perspectives: Audrey Kenni-Nemaleu on scholarly communications in Cameroon",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2023-10-05",
"lastmod_ts": 1696464000,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "\rOur Perspectives blog series highlights different members of our diverse, global community at Crossref. We learn more about their lives and how they came to know and work with us, and we hear insights about the scholarly research landscape in their country, the challenges they face, and their plans for the future.\nNotre série de blogs Perspectives met en lumière différents membres de la communauté internationale de Crossref. Nous en apprenons davantage sur leur vie et sur la manière dont ils ont appris à nous connaître et à travailler avec nous, et nous entendons parler du paysage de la recherche universitaire dans leur pays, des défis auxquels ils sont confrontés et de leurs projets pour l\u0026rsquo;avenir.\n",
"content": "\rOur Perspectives blog series highlights different members of our diverse, global community at Crossref. We learn more about their lives and how they came to know and work with us, and we hear insights about the scholarly research landscape in their country, the challenges they face, and their plans for the future.\nNotre série de blogs Perspectives met en lumière différents membres de la communauté internationale de Crossref. Nous en apprenons davantage sur leur vie et sur la manière dont ils ont appris à nous connaître et à travailler avec nous, et nous entendons parler du paysage de la recherche universitaire dans leur pays, des défis auxquels ils sont confrontés et de leurs projets pour l\u0026rsquo;avenir.\nToday, we meet Audrey Kenni-Nemaleu, Crossref Ambassador in Cameroon and Assistant Editor of the Pan-African Medical Journal (PAMJ). Audrey is excited about engaging Crossref\u0026rsquo;s community in French West Africa. Please take a moment to read and listen to Audrey\u0026rsquo;s perspective.\nAujourd\u0026rsquo;hui, nous rencontrons Audrey Kenni-Nemaleu, ambassadrice Crossref au Cameroun et rédactrice adjointe du Pan-African Medical Journal (PAMJ). Audrey est enthousiaste à l\u0026rsquo;idée d\u0026rsquo;impliquer la communauté Crossref en Afrique occidentale française. Veuillez prendre un moment pour lire et écouter le point de vue d\u0026rsquo;Audrey.\nEnglish\nFrançais\nTell us a bit about your organisation, your objectives, and your role\nPouvez-vous nous parler de votre organisation, vos objectifs et votre rôle ?\nMy name is Audrey Kenni Nganmeni-Nemaleu, assistant editor for the Pan-African Medical Journal. I am specifically responsible for editing the articles in terms of form, ensuring that they meet the journal\u0026rsquo;s standards. Furthermore, I am the focal point of my journal for Crossref, that is to say I am responsible for managing all the problems that all publishers may encounter with DOIs and the various Crossref services to which our journal has subscribed. My role is also to manage all the conflicts that we may encounter with the DOIs submitted to Crossref. I train our journal staff in using Crossref services. I am also the focal point of my journal for COPE (Committee of Publications Ethics) which is an organisation that helps to regulate ethical publishing practices. It is in this capacity that I participate COPE\u0026rsquo;s webinars on behalf of our journal.\nJe m’appelle Audrey Kenni Nganmeni Nemaleu, éditrice assistante pour le Pan African Medical Journal. Je m’occupe précisément de traiter les articles sur le plan de la forme en m’assurant qu’ils respectent les normes du journal. Par ailleurs je suis point focal de mon journal pour Crossref c’est-à-dire je suis chargée de gérer tous les problèmes que l’ensemble des éditeurs peuvent rencontrer avec les DOIs et les différents services de Crossref auxquels notre journal a souscrit. Mon rôle également c’est de gérer tous les conflits qu’on peut rencontrer avec les DOIs soumis à Crossref. Je forme également le personnel de notre journal à l’utilisation des services de Crossref. Je suis aussi point focal de mon journal pour COPE (Committee of Publications ethics) qui est un organisme qui aide dans la régulation des pratiques éthiques en matière de publication. C’est dans ce cadre que je participe à tous les webinaires de cette organisation afin qu’il y ait toujours au moins une personne qui participe à ces webinaires pour le compte de notre journal.\nWhat is one thing that others should know about your country and its research activity?\nQue doivent savoir les autres sur les activités de recherche dans votre pays ?\nIn my country, Cameroon, the research activity is still young. There are few scientific journals and we are actually the most influential journal in our country and subregion. There are also few schools or institutions that focus especially on research. For the time being, research activities in my country mainly revolve around congresses and conferences where researchers can exhibit their works. There is very little support for scientific research in my country.\nDans mon pays, le Cameroun, la recherche scientifique est encore jeune. Il existe peu de revues scientifiques et nous sommes en fait le journal le plus influent de notre pays et de notre sous-région. Il existe également peu d\u0026rsquo;écoles ou d\u0026rsquo;nstitutions qui spécialisées sur la recherche. Pour l\u0026rsquo;instant, les activités de recherche dans mon pays s\u0026rsquo;articulent principalement autour de congrès et de conférences où les chercheurs peuvent exposer leurs travaux. Il y a très peu de soutien à la recherche scientifique dans mon pays.\nAre there trends in scholarly communications that are unique to your part of the world?\nExiste-t-il des tendances particulières en matière de recherche scientifique dans votre région ?\nIn this part of the world, we do our best to follow the code of ethics of the various organisations in which we are a member: Committee of publication ethics (COPE), World Association of Medical Editors (WAME), Open Access Scholarly Publishing Association (OASPA). What we have seen emerging recently is the organisation, by professional scientific societies, of small conferences, workshops and meetings to exchange information. These small events are less costly to organize, hence their gain in popularity. We support these activities through sponsorship, and use them as opportunities to strengthen young researchers\u0026rsquo; capacities in areas such as scientific writing, publication ethics. We also use those opportunities to introduce to young researchers concepts such as Open Access, Open Science, DOIs and other modern publishing services.\nDans notre pays, nous nous efforçons de suivre le code de déontologie des différentes organisations dont nous sommes membre : Committee of publication ethics (COPE), World Association of Medical Editors (WAME), Open Access Scholarly Publishing Association (OASPA). Ce que l\u0026rsquo;on a vu émerger récemment, c\u0026rsquo;est l\u0026rsquo;organisation, par des sociétés scientifiques professionnelles, de petits colloques, ateliers et réunions d\u0026rsquo;échange d\u0026rsquo;informations. Ces petits événements sont moins coûteux à organiser, d\u0026rsquo;où leur gain en popularité. Nous soutenons ces activités par le sponsoring et les utilisons comme des opportunités pour renforcer les capacités des jeunes chercheurs dans des domaines tels que l\u0026rsquo;écriture scientifique, l\u0026rsquo;éthique de la publication. Nous utilisons également ces opportunités pour leur présenter des concepts tels que le libre accès, la science ouverte, les DOIs et d\u0026rsquo;autres services d\u0026rsquo;édition modernes.\nWhat about any political policies, challenges, or mandates that you have to consider in your work?\nQuels sont les politiques, défis ou mandats auxquels vous faites face dans votre travail ?\nOperating a journal in our context is challenging. The critical challenges are as basic as constant availability of electricity or stable and fast internet connectivity. How to maintain a stable stream revenue to support the journal is also a critical challenge. Most of our authors are young, self-funded and with limited resources. Most cannot afford the amount we charge for article publishing fees, which in comparison, is very limited. So we have to be extremely creative to operate.\nFaire fonctionner une revue dans notre contexte est difficile. Les défis critiques sont aussi fondamentaux que la disponibilité constante de l\u0026rsquo;électricité ou une connexion Internet stable et rapide. Comment maintenir un flux stable des revenus pour soutenir la revue constitue également un défi crucial. La plupart de nos auteurs sont jeunes, autofinancés, avec des ressources limitées et par conséquent n’arrivent pas à payer les frais de publication d\u0026rsquo;articles pourtant très bas. Nous devons donc être extrêmement créatifs pour gérer nos charges.\nHow would you describe the value of being part of the Crossref community; what impact has your participation had on your goals?\nComment décririez-vous la valeur de faire partie de la communauté Crossref ? Quel est l’impact de votre participation sur vos objectifs ?\nAs a Crossref ambassador, I talk about Crossref around me, among my colleagues whether they are in Kenya or Cameroon. I shared the links to participate in Crossref webinars with my colleagues. I invited them to become ambassadors by sharing with them the links to join the community. I participated in several ambassador training webinars on different themes including: how to submit DOI to Crossref, ORCID. I participated in a Crossref event in Nairobi, Kenya. It was a memorable moment where I was able to meet other ambassadors. We were able to have a small meeting on the difficulties we encountered in growing the Crossref community in Africa. We produced a document to this effect which we submitted to Crossref in 2022. For the moment, I have not yet been able to organize an event as an ambassador, but I would like to with the help of Crossref. But being an ambassador is not the easiest thing because sometimes in our context people do not understand the use of Crossref\u0026rsquo;s services because we are in an environment where the DOI is not yet very well known, and where even publishers know nothing about this. A question I am often asked is whether this work is paid and are discouraged when they learn that it is voluntary work.\nComme ambassadrice de Crossref, je parle autour de moi de Crossref, parmi mes collègues qu’ils soient au Kenya ou au Cameroun. J’ai partagé les liens pour participer à des webinaires de Crossref à mes collègues. Je les ai invités à devenir des ambassadeurs en partageant avec eux les liens pour rejoindre la communauté. J’ai participé à plusieurs webinaires de formation des ambassadeurs sur différents thèmes notamment ORCID. J’ai également participe à un évènement de Crossref à Nairobi au Kenya. C’était un moment mémorable ou j’ai pu rencontrer d’autres ambassadeurs. Nous avons pu faire une petite réunion sur les difficultés que nous rencontrons pour faire grandir la communauté Crossref en Afrique. Nous avons d’ailleurs produit un document à cet effet que nous avons soumis à Crossref en 2022. Pour l’instant, je n’ai pas encore pu organiser d’évènement dans le cadre d’ambassadeur, mais j’aimerais avec l’aide de Crossref voir comment le faire. Etre ambassadrice n’est pas la chose la plus facile car parfois dans notre contexte les gens ne comprennent pas le bien-fondé des services de Crossref car on est dans un environnement ou le DOI n’est pas encore très connu, et où beaucoup de journaux et même d’editeurs ne savent rien de cela. Une question qu’on me pose souvent est celle savoir si ce travail est remunere et se découragent quand ils apprennent que c’est du bénévolat.\nFor you, what would be the most important thing Crossref could change (do more of/do better in)?\nPour vous, quelle serait la chose la plus importante que Crossref pourrait changer (faire plus/faire mieux) ?\nCrossref could invest in more capacity building, events, and communications in this part of the world. Why not localize Crossref in the francophone part of Africa? Crossref could offer continuing educational activities to professionals in order to improve their skills or acquire new knowledge in metadata and correlative disciplines. Crossref could also sponsor/support journal publishing and scholarship in Africa.\nCrossref pourrait investir dans davantage de renforcement des capacités, d\u0026rsquo;événements et de communications dans cette partie du monde. Pourquoi ne pas localiser Crossref dans la partie francophone de l’Afrique ? Crossref pourrait proposer des activités de formation continue aux professionnels afin d\u0026rsquo;améliorer leurs compétences ou d\u0026rsquo;acquérir de nouvelles connaissances dans les métadonnées et les disciplines corrélatives. Crossref pourrait également sponsoriser/soutenir la publication de revues et les bourses d’études en Afrique.\nWhich other organisations do you collaborate with or are pivotal to your work in open science?\nAvec quelles autres organisations collaborez-vous ou alors quelles sont les organismes pivot au cœur de votre travail en science ouverte ?\nI collaborate with various institutions such as COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics), AJOL African Journals Online, and OASPA (Open Access Scholarly Publishing Association). I attend webinars of these organisations on behalf of my journal.\nJe collabore avec diverses institutions telles que COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics), AJOL African Journals Online, et OASPA (Open Access Scholarly Publishing Association). J\u0026rsquo;assiste à des webinaires de ceux-ci organisations au nom de ma revue.\nWhat are your plans for the future?\nQuels sont vos plans pour l\u0026rsquo;avenir ?\nMy plan for the future is to continue working in science communication with different other organisations, and more within my community.\nMon plan pour l\u0026rsquo;avenir est de continuer à travailler dans le domaine de la communication scientifique avec différentes autres organisations, et davantage au sein de ma communauté.\nThank you, Audrey!\nMerci, Audrey !\n",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/feedback-on-automatic-digital-preservation-and-self-healing-dois/",
"title": "Feedback on automatic digital preservation and self-healing DOIs",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2023-09-28",
"lastmod_ts": 1695859200,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "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.\nWe 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. There is low level of trust in the Internet Archive, also given a number of ongoing court cases and erratic behavior in the past. People are questioning the sustainability and stability of IA, and given it is not funded by publishers or other major STM stakeholders there is low confidence in IA setting their priorities in a way that is aligned with that of the publishing industry.\n",
"content": "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.\nWe 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. There is low level of trust in the Internet Archive, also given a number of ongoing court cases and erratic behavior in the past. People are questioning the sustainability and stability of IA, and given it is not funded by publishers or other major STM stakeholders there is low confidence in IA setting their priorities in a way that is aligned with that of the publishing industry.\nWe acknowledge that some of our members have a low level of trust in The Internet Archive, but many of our (primarily open access members) work very closely with the IA and our research has shown that, without the IA, the majority our smaller open access members would have almost no preservation at all. We have already had conversations with CLOCKSS and Portico about involvement in the pilot and thinking through what a scale-to-production would look like. That said, for a proof-of-concept, the Internet Archive presents a very easy way to get off the ground, with a stable system that has been running for almost 30 years.\nThis seems to be a service for OA content only, but people wonder for how long. Someone already spotted an internal CrossRef comment on the working doc that suggested “why not just make it default for everything \u0026amp; everyone”, and that raises concern.\nThe primary audience for this service is small OA publishers that are, at present, poorly preserved. These publishers present a problem for the whole scholarly environment because linking to their works can prove non-persistent if preservation is not well handled. Enhancing preservation for this sector therefore benefits the entire publishing industry by creating a persistent linking environment. We have no plans to make this the “default for everything and everyone” because the licensing challenges alone are massive, but also because it isn’t necessary. Large publishers like Elsevier are doing a good job of digitally preserving their content. We want this service to target the areas that are currently weaker.\nCrossref will always respect the content rights of our members. We never force our members to release their content through Crossref that they don\u0026rsquo;t ask us to release.\nThe purpose of the Op Cit project is to make it easier for our members to fulfil commitments they already made when they joined Crossref.\nCrossref is fundamentally an infrastructure for preserving citations and links in the scholarly record. We cannot do that if the content being cited or linked to disappears.\nWhen signing the Crossref membership agreement, members agree to employ their best efforts to preserve their content with archiving services so that Crossref can continue to link citations to it even in extremis. For example- if they have ceased operations.\nSome of our members already do this well. They have already made arrangements with the major archiving providers. They do not need the Op Cit service to help them with archiving. However, the Op Cit service will still help them ensure that the DOIs that they cite continue work. So it will still benefit them even if they don\u0026rsquo;t use it directly.\nHowever, our research shows that many of our members are not fulfilling the commitments they made when joining Crossref. Over the next few years, we will be trying to fix this. Primarily through outreach- encouraging members to set up and record with Crossref archiving arrangements with the archives of their choice.\nBut we know some members will find this too technically challenging and/or costly. [And frankly, given what we\u0026rsquo;ve learned of the archiving landscape, we can see their point.] The proposed Op Cit service is for these members. The vast majority of these members are Open Access publishers, so the \u0026ldquo;rights\u0026rdquo; questions are far more straightforward- making the implementation of such a service much more tractable.\nSomeone asked what this means for the publisher-specific DOI prefix for this content? Will this be lost?\nNo.\nThere is concern about the interstitial page that Crossref would build that gives the user access options. The value of Crossref to publishers is adding services that are invisible and beneficial to users, not adding a visible step that requires user action.\nThere is nothing in Crossref’s terms that says that we have to be invisible. The basic truth is that detecting content drift is really hard and several efforts to do so before have failed. Without a reliable way of knowing whether we should display the interstitial page, which may become possible in future, we have to display something for now, or the preservation function will not work.\nCrossref has, also, supported user-facing interstitial services for over a decade, including:\nMultiple Resolution Coaccess CrossMark Crossref Metdata Search REST API So we have a long track record of non-B2B service provision.\nThere is confusion about why Crossref seems to want to build the capacity to “lock” records in absence of flexibility. People feel no need for Crossref to get involved here.\nThis is a misunderstanding of the terminology. The Internet Archive allows the domain owner to request content to be removed. This would mean that, in future, if a new domain owner wanted, they could remove previously preserved material from the archive, thereby breaking the preservation function. When we say we want to “lock” a record, we mean that a future domain owner cannot remove content from the preservation archive. This also prevents domain hijackers from compromising the digital preservation.\nThere is concern about the possibility to hack this system to give uncontrolled access to all full-text content by attacking publishing systems and making them unavailable. This is an unhappy path scenario but something on people’s minds.\nThe system only works on content that is provided with an explicitly stated open license (see response above).\nI think this project would be improved by better addressing the people doing the preservation maintenance work that this requires. Digital preservation is primarily a labor problem, as the technical challenges are usually easier than the challenge of consistently paying people to keep everything maintained over time. Through that lens, this is primarily a technical solution to offload labor resources from small repositories to (for now) the Internet Archive, where you can get benefits from the economies of scale. There are definitely cases where that could be useful! But I think making this more explicit will further a shared understanding of advantages and disadvantages and help you all see future roadblocks and opportunities for this approach.\nThis consultation phase was designed, precisely, to ensure that those working in the space could have their say. While this is a technical project, we recognize that any solution must value and understand labor. That means that any scaling to production must and will also include a funding solution to address the social labor challenge.\nIs there any sense in polling either the IA Wayback Machine or the LANL Memento Aggregator first to determine if snapshot(s) already exist?\nWe could do this, but it would add an additional hop/lookup on deposit. Plus, we want to store the specific version deposited at the specific time it is done, including re-deposits.\nI would encourage looking at a distributed file system like IPFS (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/InterPlanetary_File_System). This would allow easy duplication, switching and peering of preservation providers. Correctly leveraged with IPNS; resolution, version tracking and version immutability also become benefits. Later after beta the IPNS metadata could be included as DOI metadata.\nWe had considered IPFS for other projects, but really, for this, we want to go with recognised archives, not end up running our own infrastructure for preservation.\nIt might be useful to look into the 10320/loc option for the Handle server: the https://www.handle.net/overviews/handle_type_10320_loc.html. I can imagine a use case where a machine agent might want to access an archive directly without needing to go to an interstitial page.\nIt is good to see reference to the HANDLE system and alternative ways that we might use it. We will consult internally on the technical viability of this.\nIn general, though, we prefer to use web-native mechanisms when they are available. We already support direct machine access via HTTP redirects and by exposing resource URLs in the metadata that can be retreivd via content negotiation. In this case, we would be looking at supporting the 300 (multiple choice) semantics.\nI\u0026rsquo;m curious to see how this will work for DOI versioning mechanisms like in Zenodo, where you have one DOI to reference all versions as well as version specific DOIs. If your record contains metadata + many files and a new version just versions one of the several files my assumption is that within the proposed system an entire new set (so all files) is archived. In theory this could also be a logical package, where simply the delta is stored, but I guess in a distributed preservation framework like the one proposed here, this would be hard to achieve.\nThis is a good point and it could lead to many more, frustrating, hops before the user reaches the content. We will conduct further research into this scenario, but we also note that Zenodo\u0026rsquo;s DOIs do not come from Crossref, but from DataCite.\nThere\u0026rsquo;s a decent body of research at this point on automated content drift detection. This recent paper: https://ceur-ws.org/Vol-3246/10_Paper3.pdf likely has links to other relevant articles.\nWe have no illusions about the difficulty of detecting semantic drift but this is helpful and interesting. We will read this material and related articles to appraise the current state of content drift detection.\nOut of curiosity, will we be using one type of archive (i.e., IA or CLOCKSS or LOCKSS or whatever) or will it possibly be a combination of a few archives? Reading the comments, it looks like some of them charge a fee, so I see why we\u0026rsquo;d use open source solutions first. Also, eventually could it be something that the member chooses? i.e. which archive they might want to use. Again, the latter question isn\u0026rsquo;t something for the prototype, but I\u0026rsquo;m curious about this use case. Also, I wonder about the implementation details if it is more than one archive. The question is totally moot of course, if we\u0026rsquo;re sticking with one archive for now.\nThe design will allow for deposit in multiple archives – and we will have to design a sustainability model that will cover those archives that need funding. As above, this is an important part of the move to production.\nWill be good for future interoperability to make sure at least one of the hashes is a SoftWare Hash IDentifier (see swhid.org). The ID is not really software specific and will interoperate with the Software Heritage Archive and git repositories.\nWe will certainly ensure best practices for checksums.\nComments on the Interstitial Page\nI\u0026rsquo;d keep the interstitial page without planning its eradication. (See why in the last paragraph) I\u0026rsquo;d even advocate for it to be a beautiful and useful reminder to users that \u0026ldquo;This content is preserved\u0026rdquo;. I\u0026rsquo;d go further and recommend that publishers deposit alternate urls of other preservation agents like PMC etc, that would also be displayed. This page could even be merged with multi-resolution system.\nThe why: I\u0026rsquo;m concerned of hackers and of predatory publishers exploiting the spider heuristics by highjacking small journals and keeping just enough metadata as in them as to fool the resolver and then adding links to whatever products, scams and whatnots\u0026hellip;\nTechnical. Scraping landing pages is hard. We\u0026rsquo;ve had a lot of projects to do this over the years. You can mitigate the risk by tiering / heuristics. Maybe even feedback loop to publishers to encourage them to put the right metadata on the landing page.\nThis is the only part of this proposal that I don\u0026rsquo;t like. People are used to DOIs resolving directly to content, and I don\u0026rsquo;t think that should be changed unless absolutely necessary. I would prefer that the DOI resolves to the publisher\u0026rsquo;s copy if it exists, and the IA copy otherwise.\nWe will continue the discussion about the interstitial page. The basic technical fact, as above, is that detecting content drift is hard and so we may need, at least, to start with the page. However, some commentators presented reasons for keeping it.\nWe also have already supported interstitial pages for multiple resolution and co-access for over a decade.\nIt is member\u0026rsquo;s choice whether they wish to deposit alternative URLs and we already have a mechanism for this.\n",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/categories/preservation/",
"title": "Preservation",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Categories",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/2023-board-election-slate/",
"title": "2023 board election slate",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2023-09-27",
"lastmod_ts": 1695772800,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "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.\nWe 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. We have two large member seats and five small member seats open for election in 2023.\n",
"content": "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.\nWe 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. We have two large member seats and five small member seats open for election in 2023.\nThe Nominating Committee presents the following slate.\nThe 2023 slate Tier 1 candidates (electing five seats): Beilstein-Institut, Wendy Patterson Korean Council of Science Editors, Kihong Kim Lujosh Ventures Limited, Olu Joshua NISC Ltd, Mike Schramm OpenEdition, Marin Dacos Universidad Autónoma de Chile, Dr. Ivan Suazo Vilnius University, Vincas Grigas Tier 2 candidates (electing two seats): Association for Computing Machinery (ACM), Scott Delman Oxford University Press, James Phillpotts Public Library of Science (PLOS), Dan Shanahan University of Chicago Press, Ashley Towne Here are the candidates\u0026rsquo; organisational and personal statements You can be part of this important process by voting in the election If your organisation is a voting member in good standing of Crossref as of September 10th, 2023, you are eligible to vote when voting opens on September 27th, 2023.\nHow can you vote? Your organisation’s designated voting contact will receive an email from eBallot the week of September 25th with the Formal Notice of Meeting and Proxy Form with concise instructions on how to vote. The email will include a username and password with a link to our voting platform.\nThe election results will be announced at the LIVE23 online meeting on October 31st, 2023. Save the date! Incoming members will take their seats at the March 2024 board meeting.\n",
"headings": ["The 2023 slate","Tier 1 candidates (electing five seats):","Tier 2 candidates (electing two seats):","Here are the candidates\u0026rsquo; organisational and personal statements","You can be part of this important process by voting in the election","How can you vote?"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/authors/geoffrey-bilder/",
"title": "Geoffrey Bilder",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Authors",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/news-crossref-and-retraction-watch/",
"title": "News: Crossref and Retraction Watch",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2023-09-12",
"lastmod_ts": 1694476800,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "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\n12th September 2023 —\u0026ndash; 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. An agreement between the two organisations will allow Retraction Watch to keep the data populated on an ongoing basis and always open, alongside publishers registering their retraction notices directly with Crossref.\n",
"content": "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\n12th September 2023 —\u0026ndash; 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. An agreement between the two organisations will allow Retraction Watch to keep the data populated on an ongoing basis and always open, alongside publishers registering their retraction notices directly with Crossref.\nBoth organisations have a shared mission to make it easier to assess the trustworthiness of scholarly outputs. Retractions are an important part of science and scholarship regulating themselves and are a sign that academic publishing is doing its job. But there are more journals and papers than ever, so identifying and tracking retracted papers has become much harder for publishers and readers. That, in turn, makes it difficult for readers and authors to know whether they are reading or citing work that has been retracted. Combining efforts to create the largest single open-source database of retractions reduces duplication, making it more efficient, transparent, and accessible for all.\nProduct Director Rachael Lammey says, “Crossref is focused on documenting and clarifying the scholarly record in an open and scalable form. For a decade, our members have been recording corrections and retractions through our infrastructure, and incorporating the Crossmark button to alert readers. Collaborating with Retraction Watch augments publisher efforts by filling in critical gaps in our coverage, helps the downstream services that rely on high-quality, open data about retractions, and ultimately directly benefits the research community.”\nThe Center for Scientific Integrity and the Retraction Watch blog will remain separate from Crossref and will continue their journalistic work investigating retractions and related issues; the agreement with Crossref is confined to the database only and Crossref itself remains a neutral facilitator in efforts to assess the quality of scientific works. Both organisations consider publishers to be the primary stewards of the scholarly record and they are encouraged to continue to add retractions to their Crossref metadata as a priority.\n“Retraction Watch has always worked to make our highly comprehensive and accurate retraction data available to as many people as possible. We are deeply grateful to the foundations, individuals, and members of the publishing services industry who have supported our efforts and laid the groundwork for this development,” said Ivan Oransky, executive director of the Center for Scientific Integrity and co-founder of Retraction Watch. “This agreement means that the Retraction Watch Database has sustainable funding to allow its work to continue and improve.”\nPlease join Crossref and Retraction Watch leadership, among other special guests, for a community call on 27th September at 1 p.m. UTC to discuss this new development in the pursuit of research integrity.\nSupporting details Crossref retractions number 14k, and the Retraction Watch database currently numbers 43k. There is some overlap, making a total of around 50k retractions. The full dataset has been released through Crossref’s Labs API, initially as a .csv file to download directly: https://api.labs.crossref.org/data/retractionwatch?name@email.org (add your ‘mailto’). Edit: 2024-10-10: The full dataset is available in a git repository at https://gitlab.com/crossref/retraction-watch-data. The Crossref Labs API also displays information about retractions in the /works/ route when metadata is available, such as https://api.labs.crossref.org/works/10.2147/CMAR.S324920?name@email.org (add your ‘mailto’). If you don\u0026rsquo;t have a .json viewer, please see below for screenshot. Crossref is paying an initial acquisition fee of USD $175,000 and will pay Retraction Watch USD $120,000 each year, increasing by 5% each year. The initial term of the contract is five years. The full text of the contract will be made public in the coming fortnight. EDIT 2023-09-26: Here is the signed agreement. There will be a community call on 27th September at 1 p.m. UTC (your time zone here). Please register. An open FAQ document is available to collect questions to be answered at the webinar. This announcement will always be accessible via Crossref DOI https://doi.org/10.13003/c23rw1d9; please use this persistent link for sharing. About Retraction Watch and The Center for Scientific Integrity The Center for Scientific Integrity is a U.S. 501(c)3 non-profit whose mission is to promote transparency and integrity in science and scientific publishing, and to disseminate best practices and increase efficiency in science. In addition to maintaining and curating the Retraction Watch Database, the Center is the home of Retraction Watch, a blog founded in 2010 that reports on scholarly retractions and related issues in research integrity.\nAbout Crossref Crossref is a global community infrastructure that makes all kinds of research objects easy to find, assess, and reuse through a number of services critical to research communications, including an open metadata API that sees over 2 billion queries every month. Crossref’s \u0026gt;19,000 members come from 151 countries and are predominantly university-based. Their ~150 million DOI records contribute to the collective vision of a rich and reusable open network of relationships connecting research organisations, people, things, and actions; a scholarly record that the global community can build on forever, for the benefit of society.\nEnquiries For Retraction Watch/Center for Scientific Integrity: Ivan Oransky, ivan@retractionwatch.com For Crossref: Ginny Hendricks, ginny@crossref.org A screenshot of an example Labs API metadata record with a Retraction Watch-asserted retraction\n",
"headings": ["Crossref acquires Retraction Watch data and opens it for the scientific community","Supporting details","Enquiries"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/categories/retractions/",
"title": "Retractions",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Categories",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/authors/maria-gould/",
"title": "Maria Gould",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Authors",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/open-funder-registry-to-transition-into-research-organisation-registry-ror/",
"title": "Open Funder Registry to transition into Research Organisation Registry (ROR)",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2023-09-07",
"lastmod_ts": 1694044800,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "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 Organisation 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. Crossref and ROR are therefore working together to ensure that Crossref members and funders can use ROR to simplify persistent identifier integrations, to register better metadata, and to help connect research outputs to research funders.\n",
"content": "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 Organisation 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. Crossref and ROR are therefore working together to ensure that Crossref members and funders can use ROR to simplify persistent identifier integrations, to register better metadata, and to help connect research outputs to research funders.\nJust yesterday, we published a summary of a recent workshop between funders and publishers on funding metadata workflows that we convened with the Dutch Research Council (NWO) and Sesame Open Science. As the report notes, \u0026ldquo;open funding metadata is arguably the next big thing\u0026rdquo; [in Open Science]. That being the case, we think this is the ideal time to strengthen our support of open funding metadata by beginning this transition to ROR.\nComparing the features of ROR and the Funder Registry Let\u0026rsquo;s look at some of the major similarities and differences between the two registries, including their history, features, scope, and usage, since there are important nuances and distinctions that are helpful to understand.\nOverview ROR Funder Registry Launched in 2019 Launched in 2013 Primary use case is contributor affiliation Primary use case is funding acknowledgement 105k+ records 35k+ records CC0 data CC0 data REST API REST API Free to use Free to use Entire registry downloadable as JSON and CSV Entire registry downloadable as RDF; funder names and IDs downloadable as CSV Records contain mappings to other IDs Records do not contain mappings to other IDs organisation relationships and hierarchy organisation relationships and hierarchy 8 organisation types 2 funder types, 8 funder subtypes Open source code and multiple open-source tools available Open source code Web-based registry search Web-based search for works in Crossref associated with each Funder ID Web-based landing pages for each ROR record JSON landing pages for each Funder Registry record Updated monthly Updated monthly Public curation process Private curation process Anyone can request changes and additions Anyone can request changes and additions Stable financial support Stable financial support Beginning to be supported in funding and publishing workflows Somewhat well supported in most funding and publishing workflows Currently used by 260+ Crossref members 1 Currently used by 2100+ Crossref members 2 History The Open Funder Registry was launched as FundRef over a decade ago to enable the community to cite research financing and assert it within the scholarly record, acknowledging the organisations granting their support. Elsevier generously donated the seed data for the Funder Registry and has managed its curation for the last ten years, while we have maintained the technical operations and promoted community adoption of the Funder Registry.\nThe Research Organisation Registry (ROR) was introduced in 2019 by the California Digital Library, DataCite, and Crossref to enable the community to cite contributor affiliations and assert them within the scholarly record, acknowledging the organisations that housed or performed the research. Digital Science generously donated the seed data for the Research Organisation Registry from its Global Research Identifier Database (GRID) initiative, and Crossref, DataCite, and the California Digital Library have contributed labor and resources to turn ROR into a mature, independent, freely available offering.\nScope One key difference between the registries is that ROR has always included funding organisations, and ROR records have always included mappings to Funder IDs where available, while the reverse is not true: the Funder Registry includes only funding organisations, not other kinds of organisations, and Funder Registry records do not currently include mappings to ROR IDs or other identifiers. It therefore makes sense to expand ROR\u0026rsquo;s initial contributor affiliation use case to include the function of identifying research financing.\nUsage More Crossref members use Funder IDs than use ROR IDs, to be sure. You can see from the table above that the number of Crossref members using Funder IDs in Crossref records is higher by almost a factor of 10 than the number of Crossref members using ROR IDs in Crossref records. But note too that the current rate of adoption is far higher for ROR than it is for the Funder Registry. Since January of 2022, we\u0026rsquo;ve seen a gratifying number of publishers and service providers beginning to use ROR identifiers for contributor affiliations in Crossref. In the last year, the number of Crossref members depositing ROR IDs has increased by 356%, while the number depositing Funder IDs has increased only by 12%. As evidenced by its ballooning API traffic, too, with more than 20 million requests last month,3 ROR is clearly being used by many scholarly research systems for many purposes. The more systems that use an identifier, the more valuable that identifier becomes as a vehicle for exchanging information.\nEven though ROR\u0026rsquo;s primary use case has been to identify contributor affiliations, ROR is in fact already being used by funders. Nineteen funding organisations are depositing ROR IDs in their grant records with Crossref to denote principal investigator affiliations,4 and, following a meeting of the Crossref Funder Advisory Group last month, all eighty funder members are primed to start using ROR IDs to identify themselves in grant records. DataCite has allowed ROR IDs as a funding identifier since 20195, and while there are currently over 877,000 DataCite records that use Funder IDs to identify funders,6 there are also over 161,000 DataCite records that use ROR IDs to identify funders.7\nTools and services Both the Funder Registry and ROR offer open data and open source code, but we think that ROR\u0026rsquo;s suite of free and open source utilities (some of which were developed by Crossref staff) gives it a competitive advantage. We know that publishers and their service providers have ongoing challenges in collecting and matching funding information from authors and in validating Funder IDs. With ROR’s extensive toolkit, publishers and their technology providers who adopt ROR will be in a much better position to improve the accuracy of funding acknowledgements in metadata, which can in turn enable the development of reliable analytics, tools, and services for funders, regulators, research facilities, and the public.\nCrossref has built tools based on OpenRefine for both the Funder Registry and ROR: the Open Funder Registry Reconciliation Service and the ROR Reconciler are both useful ways to clean messy data. ROR, however, also offers a much-used API endpoint that helps match organisation names to ROR IDs, and several third parties have also developed and shared open source matching tools and services for ROR. Crossref and ROR are also collaborating on new strategies for affiliation matching that will be able to match funding references.\nCommunity engagement models The Funder Registry has been curated for over a decade through time and expertise generously donated by Elsevier. ROR offers more transparency and community involvement; it is openly governed by Crossref, DataCite, and the California Digital Library and is advised by a global network of community stakeholders through its Steering Group and Community Advisory Group. ROR is openly curated and is aided by a global Curation Advisory Board of volunteers.\nSummary For all of the above reasons, then, we believe that in the long term ROR will serve the community better as an identifier for funders. In a future post, we\u0026rsquo;ll do an even deeper dive into comparing the Funder Registry and ROR, comparing the metadata and data in each registry and giving statistics on funder assertions in our metadata.\nWhat will this mean for you? The many organisations whose tools, services, and workflows have been architected to use Funder Registry IDs will find this transition a challenge, and we don\u0026rsquo;t want to make light of that issue. Over the last ten years, we have encouraged the community to adopt Funder IDs, and the community has demonstrably recognized the benefits of doing so. Publishers have put a great deal of time, thought, and effort into collecting funder data and including it in Crossref metadata, and they have built internal reports and workflows around the Funder Registry. Both Crossref and ROR are committed to making the transition from the Funder Registry to the Research Organisation Registry as simple as possible for those who have adopted the Funder Registry.\nIf you are not already using the Funder Registry and are planning to begin standardizing funding data, we recommend that you use ROR to identify funders. If you are currently using the Funder Registry in your systems and workflows, don\u0026rsquo;t worry! In the short term, and even in the medium term, Funder IDs aren\u0026rsquo;t going away. Eventually, however, the Funder Registry will cease to be updated, so any new funders will only be registrable in Crossref metadata with ROR IDs. Legacy Funder IDs and their mapping to ROR IDs will be maintained, so if Crossref members submit a legacy Funder ID, it will get mapped to a ROR ID automatically. Note, too, that Crossref is committed to maintaining the current funder API endpoints until ROR IDs become the predominant identifier for newly registered content.\nIn short, if you are already using Funder IDs, you can and should continue to do so. However, we do recommend that you begin looking at what it will take to integrate ROR into your systems and workflows for identifying funders. Think of it as warming up before a workout: it\u0026rsquo;s time to start swinging your arms and stretching your hamstrings.\nWe face challenges in this transition, too. Of these, we think the largest will be (1) completing the reconciliation work involved in mapping Funder IDs to ROR IDs, and (2) overhauling Crossref\u0026rsquo;s schemas, APIs, and deposit tools to support ROR IDs in all the ways we currently support Funder IDs. We\u0026rsquo;ll discuss both of these challenges in future blog posts, but it\u0026rsquo;s worth saying that any challenges pale in comparison to the benefit of enabling the whole community to use a single open identifier in multiple places in the scholarly record.\nTell us what you need! We want to hear from you. You can use our Community Forum talk to us about the Crossref Funder Registry, and you can join the ROR Slack to talk to the ROR team and community. You can also contact Crossref via our request form or email ROR at info@ror.org, and you can attend online Crossref events and ROR events to get updates from us and ask us your questions.\nOne of the major messages we\u0026rsquo;re already hearing from funders and publishers is expressed in yesterday\u0026rsquo;s post on open funding metadata: \u0026ldquo;While many concluded that there was still a long way to go to solve the many technical challenges related to funding metadata, attendees were unanimous on its importance.\u0026rdquo; We look forward to beginning this important work together.\nCrossref API works with ROR IDs faceted by publisher name\u0026#160;\u0026#x21a9;\u0026#xfe0e;\nCrossref API works with Funder IDs faceted by publisher name\u0026#160;\u0026#x21a9;\u0026#xfe0e;\nROR API Public API Usage Insights\u0026#160;\u0026#x21a9;\u0026#xfe0e;\nCrossref API works of type \u0026ldquo;Grant\u0026rdquo; with ROR IDs faceted by publisher name\u0026#160;\u0026#x21a9;\u0026#xfe0e;\nDataCite Metadata Schema 4.3 release notes, August 2019\u0026#160;\u0026#x21a9;\u0026#xfe0e;\nDataCite API Funder ID in funding reference\u0026#160;\u0026#x21a9;\u0026#xfe0e;\nDataCite API ROR ID in funding reference\u0026#160;\u0026#x21a9;\u0026#xfe0e;\n",
"headings": ["Comparing the features of ROR and the Funder Registry","Overview","History","Scope","Usage","Tools and services","Community engagement models","Summary","What will this mean for you?","Tell us what you need!"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/open-funding-metadata-community-workshop-report/",
"title": "Open funding metadata through Crossref; a workshop to discuss challenges and improving workflows",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2023-09-06",
"lastmod_ts": 1693958400,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "Ten years on from the launch of the Open Funder Registry (OFR, formerly FundRef), there is renewed interest in the potential of openly available funding metadata through Crossref. And with that: calls to improve the quality and completeness of that data. Currently, about 25% of Crossref records contain some kind of funding information. Over the years, this figure has grown steadily. A number of recent publications have shown, however, that there is considerable variation in the extent to which publishers deposit these data to Crossref. Technical but also business issues seem to lie at the root of this. Crossref - in close collaboration with the Dutch Research Council NWO and Sesame Open Science - brought together a group of 26 organisations from across the ecosystem to discuss the barriers and possible solutions. This blog presents some anonymized lessons learned.\n",
"content": "Ten years on from the launch of the Open Funder Registry (OFR, formerly FundRef), there is renewed interest in the potential of openly available funding metadata through Crossref. And with that: calls to improve the quality and completeness of that data. Currently, about 25% of Crossref records contain some kind of funding information. Over the years, this figure has grown steadily. A number of recent publications have shown, however, that there is considerable variation in the extent to which publishers deposit these data to Crossref. Technical but also business issues seem to lie at the root of this. Crossref - in close collaboration with the Dutch Research Council NWO and Sesame Open Science - brought together a group of 26 organisations from across the ecosystem to discuss the barriers and possible solutions. This blog presents some anonymized lessons learned.\nThere is no Open Science without open metadata The interest in the potential of this open-source funding metadata seems to be entering a new stage. When registering (or updating) a DOI record for a publication, publishers can include information about the funding of the research. The Open Funder Registry grew out of recommendations in the report from the US Scholarly Publishing Roundtable in 2010. During the Annual Meeting of Crossref that year, Frederick Dylla, CEO of the American Institute of Physics, argued that in order to make research funding information in publications accessible, it needed to be presented in a standard way and stored in a central location.\nThe benefits of having open funding metadata available, listed by Dylla in his presentation 13 years ago, are still very valid:\nResearchers benefit because it increases transparency of their funding sources and supports the requirements they already have from their funders. For funders, having this data available is essential because it allows them to identify the published outcomes of publicly funded research. Essential to monitor compliance with open access policies, but also important given the pressures funders face to account for their spending of public money. For publishers, funding metadata provides a valuable service, as it provides insight into how the research they publish is funded. Although Crossref has been collating funding metadata for many years, there seems to be a renewed interest in this service. Publishers have long expressed a desire to solve the challenges, meta-researchers need this information in order to analyze research on research, editors are concerned with research integrity, including funding trends, and funders themselves need to track the reach and return of their support.\nOpen Science seems to be an important driver: As we move to an ecosystem built on Open Science principles, not only publications, data, and software need to be openly available, but also the metadata associated with those scholarly outputs. Indeed, in an Open Science world, all meta information should be open, and academia should not be dependent anymore on data from proprietary bibliographic databases. Indicators for research assessment and policy development should be open indicators, derived from open metadata. Much has been done in this area already, in the context of Open Citations and Open Abstracts. While many in the community have focused on the bigger picture of advocating for all open metadata, e.g. Metadata 20/20, open funding metadata is arguably the next big thing. Open Research Information, including open metadata, must be a strategic priority for science and society.\nRoom for improvement After ten years of collecting funding metadata, 25% of records in Crossref contain some kind of funding information, and this figure was reached by a steady growth over that time. A number of recent studies have shown, however, that there is room for improvement. A case study published by two of the present authors has shown that the extent to which publishers deposit funding information to Crossref varies considerably. Some larger society presses - American Chemical Society (ACS), American Physical Society (APS), and Royal Society of Chemistry (RSC) - perform exceptionally well, with almost 100% of publications containing funding information. But there is still a large number of publishers - among them large legacy publishers - that attain substantially lower figures or do not seem to deposit funding metadata at all. Our case study has shown that often this cannot be explained by the fact that authors have not provided any funding information, as often this information is available in the acknowledgement sections of the papers. Somehow, however, this data does not find its way to Crossref.\nWorkflows and challenges: collect, retain, validate, deposit In order to chart the challenges that publishers face when collecting this information, we organized a roundtable session. 26 organisations were invited from across the ecosystem. These included: major publishers (American Chemical Society, British Medical Journal, Elsevier, IOP Publishing, PLOS, Royal Society of Chemistry, Sage, Springer Nature, Taylor \u0026amp; Francis, and Wiley), funders (European Research Council, Austrian Research Council, Dutch Research Council, OSTI-DOE, UKRI, and Michael J Fox Foundation) as well as service providers (Aries Editorial Manager, PKP / OJS, Scholastica, and eJournal Press).\nIn order to map the potential barriers and challenges publishers face, participants were presented with a workflow scheme representing a hypothetical production process.\nThis workflow outlined the steps in the production process at which funder information would potentially be handled, as well as some of the considerations that might be at play at each step.\ncollecting funder information (upon submission or acceptance) extracting funder information from full text retaining funder information through the production workflow including funder information in article metadata making metadata and/or full text available for indexing Participants were invited to comment on this workflow and place digital dots in the scheme to identify challenges in the collection, retention, and deposit of funding information. These pain points were afterwards fleshed out in break-out groups.\nLessons learned 1. Still a lack of awareness among editors and authors For many journals and publishers, collecting funding information starts when papers are submitted through submission systems. Many publishers use the same systems: ScholarOne and Editorial Manager, though many have multiple systems in place for different portfolios of journals. Around 25,000 journals use PKP’s Open Journal System, and Scholastica and eJournal Press are growing in popularity and importance. All of them provide the possibility for authors to enter funder information but this does not by all means mean that all journals make use of it. Submission systems are highly customizable, and publishers tend to tailor systems to the needs and wishes of their journals. Editors who do not see much value in collecting funding metadata therefore present a first ‘weak link’. Publishers and tech providers agreed that more outreach is needed about the importance of funding metadata among editors and authors.\n2. Improvements are needed in submission systems Where journals and publishers agree on asking authors to register funding information through the submission systems, many express a tension between collecting structured metadata and making it as easy as possible for authors. Many are hesitant to use mandatory input fields. Instead, funding metadata is often collected as free text, giving rise to a plethora of ambiguities. Most systems provide suggestions based on the input of the author based on the Open Funder Registry. A lot seems to go wrong at this stage. Authors often persist in the wrong spelling of their funder and do not choose predefined suggestions, making it very difficult to match input to Funder IDs. Publishers estimated the number of non-matches up to 50%. Trivial issues like “Bill \u0026amp; Melinda” versus “Bill and Melinda” or “Netherlands organisation” versus “Netherlands Organisation” result in errors. Here, autocomplete techniques seem to be in dire need of improvement. Based on a preliminary analysis of funder name variants used in Crossref, adding up to 3 of the most frequently used name variants to the list of ‘alternative funder names’ in the Funder registry could solve around 60% of missed matches.\n3. A lot can be learned from how some publishers have changed and organized their workflows Faced with these issues, the Royal Society of Chemistry has invested in innovative workflows to enhance the availability of funding metadata. Instead of relying solely on the free text input of the authors, RSC presented to the group the details of how they have tackled the issue. In addition to author-provided acknowledgements, they work with third-party production vendors to programmatically extract information from the acknowledgement section of papers. Data from the two sources are compared, and when differences or conflicts are being noted, the data is fixed, completed, and reformatted. The next step is crucial - the newly-cleansed funding data is fed back to the author for validation, and retained during the production phase of the paper. Implementation of this validation stage has increased the availability of funding metadata by 30%. In 2023 80% of papers published by RSC have some kind of structured funding metadata. An additional benefit of this feedback loop was its educational effect by alerting authors to the importance of correct funding information. But even RSC continues to struggle with issues of funder name ambiguity, use of acronyms, authors reporting grant or award names instead of funder names, issues with phraseology of funding acknowledgements, and frustrations with the user experience of the service provider integrations with the OFR.\nMany publishers agreed that collecting funding information from full-text papers is the preferred option. Not only because it lowers the burden for authors, but also because this potentially renders better data as this is where authors are expected to include this information as part of their funder’s commitments.\n4. Retaining information and submitting: no big deal At the beginning of the workshop, it was expected that maybe the retention of funding information and the propagation through various interlinked systems might pose problems for publishers. However, this was not identified as a problem by participants. Nor was there mention of any challenges in depositing information to Crossref, nor of downstream databases having difficulties retrieving the metadata.\n5. There is a genuine interest across the ecosystem to improve funding information in Crossref While many concluded that there was still a long way to go to solve the many technical challenges related to funding metadata, attendees were unanimous on its importance. Participants agreed that these improvements would require investments from publishers. A willingness to do those was expressed, but also a sense that publishers who do should be incentivised for it, maybe as part of the agreements they have with library consortia. JISC’s recent contract with Taylor \u0026amp; Francis (page 164, Section 7a (iii)) is a good example of how consortia can successfully negotiate the supply of high quality metadata, including funding metadata. It was agreed that another solution could be to allow the additional deposit of the free-text acknowledgement section as a metadata field in Crossref. Instead of educating authors to enter their data correctly or relying on publishers and tech providers to improve their systems to turn free text funder acknowledgement text to structured data, text mining and machine learning could facilitate the improvement of this data.\nNext steps For this workshop, we concentrated on the collection and registration of funding metadata by publishers and did not go into the important, related, issue of the Crossref Grant Linking System (Grant IDs) nor of the plans to further align funder IDs with ROR IDs, both projects that help the community to better record funding information.\nNext steps resulting from this community workshop, as\nFunders are encouraged to join and register their grants with Crossref DOIs so that registered grants can in future be linked directly to publications and other outputs. About 50 funders have already created around 90,000 grant records. The more grant DOIs that are created by funders, the more likely publishers will be able to prioritize collecting them in their own publication metadata. Publishers are encouraged to work with their service providers to prioritize the quality of the open funding metadata through Crossref, which is a source for downstream analyses and inclusion by many thousands of tools and services. Other stakeholders are also offering opportunities to focus on funding metadata, showing a growing interest in the completeness of funder metadata. For example, OA Switchboard’s funder pilot, which also looks at the potential to feed enriched metadata back to Crossref to make them publicly available, and the Open Research Funder Group’s work to promote the improvement of tracking research output, including funding metadata, which includes an active working group in this area. Crossref will continue to work with publishers and service providers to encourage and make it easier to include funder information in article metadata, including the use of grant identifiers and funder identifiers. Work is underway to bring the Open Funder Registry closer to ROR (Research Organisation Registry), and is planning, at some point in the future, to merge the OFR into ROR, as ROR has a much wider scope and is more broadly community-governed. Crossref has also begun some work on collecting ROR IDs where we currently collect Funder IDs. More technical information is available in this ticket). We would like to thank all the participants of the workshop for their openness and commitment to working through these issues together. It was a rare opportunity to share insights from publishers, service providers, funders, and researchers - and a useful first step in co-creating a shared understanding of the challenges and charting a path forward.\n",
"headings": ["There is no Open Science without open metadata","Room for improvement","Workflows and challenges: collect, retain, validate, deposit","Lessons learned","1. Still a lack of awareness among editors and authors","2. Improvements are needed in submission systems","3. A lot can be learned from how some publishers have changed and organized their workflows","4. Retaining information and submitting: no big deal","5. There is a genuine interest across the ecosystem to improve funding information in Crossref","Next steps"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/membership/",
"title": "Become a member",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 6,
"lastmod": "2023-09-01",
"lastmod_ts": 1693526400,
"section": "Become a member",
"tags": [],
"description": "Join 25,000+ organisations using Crossref to register DOIs, make content discoverable, and connect with the global scholarly community.",
"content": " If you’re a Funder, learn more here. Organisations need to be members of Crossref to create metadata records that identify, describe, and locate their work. You don\u0026rsquo;t need to be a member to retrieve metadata (read about our open metadata retrieval tools).\nBenefits of membership You can create and steward rich metadata records, adding relationships, provenance, contributor, and funding information, ensuring accuracy and persistence over time. By doing so, you are adding to and benefiting from reciprocal connections among a global network of research objects, co-creating a Research Nexus for the benefit of society including future generations.\nWorks are more likely to be discovered if they have a Crossref record. Your organisation will be joining the world\u0026rsquo;s largest registry of Digital Object Identifiers (DOIs) and metadata for scholarly research; your work is connected with over 177 million other records from over 25,000 other member organisations from 167 countries. Crossref facilitates an average of 1.4 billion DOI resolutions (clicks of a DOI link) every month, which is 93% of all DOI activity.\nYour metadata is freely and openly shared in a consistent, machine-readable way. You don\u0026rsquo;t have to duplicate the information for multiple parties as your metadata is discoverable by thousands of other systems in the global research ecosystem; there are over 1 billion calls to our API every month.\nYour organisation can have access to unique tools that support research integrity, such as incorporating Crossmark status buttons on your landing pages and PDFs, and using Similarity Check to screen for text-based plagiarism.\nYou can vote in our board elections and/or stand for a seat, participating in the governance of Crossref. There are also many opportunities to get involved with the whole community, to co-create solutions to shared problems, help shape and influence our roadmap, and to join the discussions.\nIt\u0026rsquo;s so much more than just getting a DOI.\nAre you eligible? Many types of organisations register their research objects with Crossref. You could be a research institution, a publisher, a government agency, a research funder, or a museum! In order to become a member, you need to meet the criteria set out in our membership terms approved by our governing board which defines eligibility as:\nMembership in Crossref is open to organisations that produce professional and scholarly materials and content.\n(NB: We are bound by international sanctions so membership is restricted in certain countries; see our sanctions page for details.)\nIn most cases, if your work is likely to be cited in the research ecosystem and you consider it part of the evidence trail, then you’re eligible to join.\nMember obligations When you apply for membership, you agree to our membership terms which include several obligations. Some of the important obligations to note, are:\n1. Deposit accurate metadata and create DOI links in a timely fashion All members join in order to create records with metadata and DOIs and share these throughout Crossref infrastructure for others to use. The metadata in these records needs to be accurate, and the DOI records should be created to coincide with the online publication of the work. If you publish journals, you are obliged to create records for all articles going forward.\n2. Register only what you have the legal rights to Our terms (3 (c)) stipulate that \u0026ldquo;The Member will not deposit or register Metadata for any Content for which the Member does not have legal rights to do so\u0026rdquo;.\n3. Make sure you have a unique and active landing page for each metadata record/DOI Make sure that your DOI links resolve to a unique landing page URL. For example, if you are registering journal articles, each article needs to have a unique landing page URL. It is the same if you are, for example, a funder: each DOI link needs to resolve to a page with information about the specific grant. You should not display DOI links for records that you haven\u0026rsquo;t registered with Crossref.\n4. Follow our DOI display guidelines Follow our DOI display guidelines and position your DOI links on the page or PDF near the descriptive information such as title and contributors. Always use DOI links to communicate and share your work across the web whether in documents or databases.\n5. Maintain and update your metadata and landing page URLs over the long term You\u0026rsquo;ll need to maintain and update your metadata, including updating URLs if your content moves or changes, and adding rich metadata as you collect more. Look into archiving or other preservation services to ensure your records live on after you.\n6. Link references Reference linking was the original reason that the community decided to start Crossref. It is so that members don\u0026rsquo;t have to establish bilateral linking agreements with each other and instead can create and exchange connections through the Crossref infrastructure. If your work is the kind that typically has a list of references (e.g. articles or preprints), you are obliged to retrieve and use the DOI links that your fellow Crossref members create. You can do this using our reference linking tools.\nWe also strongly encourage you to include references within your own metadata records. This benefits you and others by further maximising the network effect.\n7. Pay your fees Crossref is sustained by fees and not reliant on grant funding, which would conflict with our sustainability model, guided by our commitment to the Principles of Open Scholarly Infrastructure (POSI). Your fees keep the organisation afloat and the system running. We are a not-for-profit organisation so any surpluses are invested back into improving the infrastructure and solving new problems for the community. Please pay your invoices on time 👍🏽\nWhat are the fees? All our fees are set out on the fees page. Our fees are all in USD, and we can only accept payment in USD.\nIndependent membership Members pay an annual membership fee, which is tiered depending on your organisation\u0026rsquo;s revenue or expenses. After you apply, we will send you a pro-rated membership invoice for the remainder of the current year and this is due to be paid before your membership can be activated. You then pay the same annual membership fee each year, every January. Membership renews automatically unless you actively cancel.\nThere are also one-off registration fees for each new metadata record and DOI that you create. There are never any fees to add to and update the metadata. We send you this invoice quarterly, after calculating the quantity and type of records you have registered that quarter.\nOrganisations located in the least economically-advantaged countries in the world do not pay an annual membership fee and do not pay registration fees - find out more on our Global Equitable Membership (GEM) program page.\nIf you have further questions about billing, visit our fees page and our billing FAQs page.\nMembership via a Sponsor The Sponsor Program is for members who do not have the resources or capabilities to work directly with and pay Crossref. More than half of our members have joined via a Sponsor, which means they don\u0026rsquo;t pay Crossref a membership fee, and they receive technical support and expertise locally, through their sponsor.\nIf a sponsored member is eligible for the Global Equitable Membership (GEM) program, we do not charge the sponsor any membership or registration fees. Find out more about working with a sponsor.\n(NB: some Sponsors may charge you for their services, so it\u0026rsquo;s important that you clarify their terms before joining).\nReady to apply? Option 1: Apply as an independent member Option 2: Find a Sponsor to join through If you have questions, please consult our forum at community.crossref.org or open a ticket with our membership team where we\u0026rsquo;ll reply within a few days.\n",
"headings": ["If you’re a Funder, learn more here.","Benefits of membership","Are you eligible?","Member obligations","1. Deposit accurate metadata and create DOI links in a timely fashion","2. Register only what you have the legal rights to","3. Make sure you have a unique and active landing page for each metadata record/DOI","4. Follow our DOI display guidelines","5. Maintain and update your metadata and landing page URLs over the long term","6. Link references","7. Pay your fees","What are the fees?","Independent membership","Membership via a Sponsor","Ready to apply?","Option 1: Apply as an independent member","Option 2: Find a Sponsor to join through"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/community/ror/",
"title": "Research Organisation Registry (ROR)",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2023-07-31",
"lastmod_ts": 1690761600,
"section": "Get involved",
"tags": [],
"description": " ROR IDs and Affiliations of authors can now be tracked in Participation Reports! Check your own Participation Report to see how many of your publications have author affiliations and ROR IDs in Crossref metadata. If you deposit metadata via XML, see our guide on Affiliations and ROR for instructions on how to include affiliations and ROR IDs in your metadata. Crossref encourages our members to include ROR IDs in metadata in order to help make research organisation information clear and consistent as it is shared between systems. ROR IDs are essential to realize a rich and complete Research Nexus because they enable connections between research outputs and the organisations that support researchers.\n",
"content": " ROR IDs and Affiliations of authors can now be tracked in Participation Reports! Check your own Participation Report to see how many of your publications have author affiliations and ROR IDs in Crossref metadata. If you deposit metadata via XML, see our guide on Affiliations and ROR for instructions on how to include affiliations and ROR IDs in your metadata. Crossref encourages our members to include ROR IDs in metadata in order to help make research organisation information clear and consistent as it is shared between systems. ROR IDs are essential to realize a rich and complete Research Nexus because they enable connections between research outputs and the organisations that support researchers.\n\u0026ldquo;At Scholastica, we care about taking steps to enrich metadata – like adding ROR IDs, for example, on behalf of our customers, so they don’t have to worry about the technical aspects of metadata collection or creation and can instead focus on maximizing the discovery benefits.\u0026rdquo; \u0026ndash; Cory Schires, Co-founder and Chief Technology Officer, Scholastica\nRead the case study on ROR in Scholastica publishing products.\n\u0026ldquo;If we’re talking about misconduct, then you might need to be able to contact the institution that the author is from. On an individual manuscript, it doesn’t matter if there’s no identifier – an address will do. But if you find some signal that is on manuscripts at scale, and you’ve got thousands of them, well, you need an identifier. You can’t go through them and try and search for every single one of those institutions.\u0026rdquo; \u0026ndash; Adam Day, CEO, Clear Skies Ltd.\nRead the case study on why Clear Skies uses ROR to help detect paper mills.\nWhat is ROR? ROR is the Research Organisation Registry \u0026ndash; a global, community-led registry of open persistent identifiers for research organisations. The registry currently includes globally unique persistent identifiers and associated metadata for more than 110,000 research organisations.\nROR IDs are specifically designed to be implemented in any system that captures institutional affiliations and to enable a richer networked research infrastructure. ROR IDs are interoperable with other organisation identifiers, including GRID (which provided the seed data that ROR launched with), the Open Funder Registry, ISNI, and Wikidata. ROR data is available under a CC0 Public Domain waiver and can be accessed at no cost via a public API and a data dump.\nROR record for the University of St. Andrews\nWho is ROR? ROR is operated as a joint initiative by Crossref, DataCite, and the California Digital Library, and was launched with seed data from GRID in collaboration with Digital Science. These organisations have invested resources into building an open registry of research organisation identifiers that can be embedded in scholarly infrastructure to effectively link research to organisations. ROR is not a membership organisation (or an organisation at all!) and charges no fees for use of the registry or the API. Read more about ROR\u0026rsquo;s sustainability model.\nWhy ROR IDs are an important element of Crossref metadata For a long time, Crossref only collected affiliation metadata as free-text strings, which made for ambiguity and incomplete data. An author affiliated with the University of California at Berkeley might give the name of the university in any of several common ways:\nUniversity of California, Berkeley University of California at Berkeley University of California Berkeley UC Berkeley Berkeley And likely more … While it isn’t too difficult for a human to guess that “UC Berkeley,” “University of California, Berkeley,” and “University of California at Berkeley” are all referring to the same university, a machine interpreting this information wouldn’t necessarily make the same inference. If you are trying to easily find all of the publications associated with UC Berkeley, you would need to run and reconcile multiple searches at best, or, at worst, miss some data completely.\nThis is where an organisation identifier comes in: a single, unambiguous, standardized identifier that will always stay the same. For UC Berkeley, that would be https://ror.org/01an7q238.\nIn 2019, Crossref members indicated that the ability to associate research outputs with organisations in a clean and consistent fashion was one of their most desired improvements to Crossref metadata. In January of 2022, therefore, Crossref added support for ROR IDs in its metadata schema and APIs. Since then, more and more Crossref members have been including ROR IDs in DOI metadata.\nPublishers and service providers can implement ROR in their systems so that submitting authors and co-authors can easily choose their affiliation from a ROR-powered list instead of typing in free text. Authors themselves do not have to provide a ROR ID or even know that a ROR ID is being collected. This affiliation information can then be sent to Crossref alongside other publication information.\nDemo of collecting ROR IDs in a typeahead field\nIf the submission system you use does not yet support ROR, or if you don\u0026rsquo;t use a submission system, you\u0026rsquo;ll still be able to provide ROR IDs in your Crossref metadata. ROR IDs can be added to JATS XML, and Crossref helper tools will start to support the deposit of ROR IDs. There\u0026rsquo;s also an OpenRefine reconciler that can map your internal identifiers to ROR identifiers.\nROR IDs for affiliations stand to transform the usability of Crossref metadata. While it’s crucial to have IDs for affiliations, it’s equally important that the affiliation data can be easily used. The ROR dataset is CC0, so ROR IDs and associated affiliation data can be freely and openly used and reused without any restrictions.\nThe ROR IDs registered by members in their Crossref metadata are available via Crossref’s open APIs so that they can be detected, analyzed, and reused by anyone interested in linking research outputs to research organisations. Examples include\nInstitutions who want to monitor and measure their research output by the articles their researchers have published Funders who want to be able to discover and track the research and researchers they have supported Academic librarians who want to find all of the publications associated with their campus Journals who want to know where authors are affiliated so they can determine eligibility for institutionally sponsored publishing agreements The inclusion of ROR IDs in Crossref metadata will eventually help all these entities make all these connections much more easily.\nGet ready to ROR 🦁! ROR is already working with publishers, funders and service providers who are integrating ROR in their systems, mapping their affiliation data to ROR IDs, and/or including ROR IDs in publication metadata. Libraries and institutional repositories are also beginning to build ROR into their systems and to send ROR IDs to Crossref in their metadata. See the growing list of active and in-progress ROR integrations for more stakeholders who are supporting ROR.\nIf you deposit metadata with Crossref via XML, see our guide on Affiliations and ROR for instructions on how to include author affiliations and ROR IDs.\nFor further information on how ROR IDs are supported in the Crossref metadata, you can take a look at this .xsd file (under the ‘institution’ element) or in this journal article example XML. ROR also has some great help documentation for publishers and anyone else working with the ROR Registry.\nGet in touch with ROR if you have questions or want to be more involved in the project. If you have questions about adding ROR IDs to your Crossref metadata, get in touch with our support specialists or ask on the Crossref Community Forum.\n",
"headings": ["What is ROR?","Who is ROR?","Why ROR IDs are an important element of Crossref metadata","Get ready to ROR 🦁!"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/perspectives-my-thoughts-on-starting-my-new-role-at-crossref/",
"title": "Perspectives: My thoughts on starting my new role at Crossref",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2023-07-06",
"lastmod_ts": 1688601600,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "My name is Johanssen Obanda. I joined Crossref in February 2023 as a Community Engagement Manager to look after the Ambassadors program and help with other outreach activities. I work remotely from Kenya, where there is an increasing interest in improving the exposure of scholarship by Kenyan researchers and ultimately by the wider community of African researchers. In this blog, I’m sharing the experience and insights of my first 4 months in this role.\n",
"content": "My name is Johanssen Obanda. I joined Crossref in February 2023 as a Community Engagement Manager to look after the Ambassadors program and help with other outreach activities. I work remotely from Kenya, where there is an increasing interest in improving the exposure of scholarship by Kenyan researchers and ultimately by the wider community of African researchers. In this blog, I’m sharing the experience and insights of my first 4 months in this role.\nRight before joining Crossref, I was working as Stakeholder Manager with AfricArXiv, a community-led digital archive for African research communication. I transitioned to working with Crossref to take up a more challenging role, so I can apply the community-building and social innovation skills I gained over the last five years in my profession.\nWhat surprised me the most here is realising that such a robust infrastructure is being administered by a relatively small team. I wondered how the team keeps the services running and builds new solutions for the community. However, I am impressed by the collaborative culture, positive and healthy work environment, and great systems.\nI work within the Community Engagement and Communications team, where we collaboratively address members’ questions and challenges, plan events, create helpful content for our community and keep in touch with them. We help grow our community and create a better experience using our products and services.\nMy main focus has been the Ambassador programme, which started in 2018 and currently comprises 48 Ambassadors globally. The Ambassadors are our trusted contacts who support and engage our communities locally to make scholarly communications better. Through one-on-one virtual interaction with most of them, I noted that there was little interaction among the Ambassadors. Most of our Ambassadors want to connect more, both face-to-face and online. In the coming months, we aim to design our meetings together with the Ambassadors to encourage better exchange and relationships.\nI value Crossref’s insistence on diversity, equity and inclusion, and I enjoy contributing to those activities. Working with my colleagues in the outreach team to organise webinars and activities for the Global Equitable Membership (GEM) programme has been an exciting experience. I particularly enjoyed engaging with our Ambassadors Shaharima Parvin and Jahangir Alam from Bangladesh, and Binayak Pandey from Nepal, in organising the initial webinars for the GEM program in their countries. I feel it is one of the ways of creating more in-depth connections between our communities and our Ambassadors while making it possible for more institutions to be part of Crossref and contribute to scholarly communication.\nI have made a few webinar presentations online and recently did one in-person poster presentation in South Africa at the Sustainability, Research and Innovation conference. I gained more confidence interacting with the wider Crossref community and a deeper understanding of Crossref’s services. I look forward to more opportunities to discuss Crossref’s mission with the community and to collaborate with like-minded organisations, contributing to joint initiatives, such as the upcoming Better Together webinar series with ORCID and DataCite, and the Forum for Open Research in MENA events.\nI experienced the challenges of working remotely in many ways. A couple of days, there was no power, other days the internet connection was painfully slow, and hopping from one restaurant to another was something I had to deal with from time to time, with the hopes of finding quiet most times to have a good meeting with my colleagues, until I had more dependable work station. On the positive side, coordinating meeting times with colleagues, taking on tasks asynchronously and collaborating in real-time across different tools are making me more agile, patient and empathetic with myself and my colleagues.\nI am driven by the impact I want to contribute in my career working with Crossref, which is to build an inclusive research ecosystem where researchers across the globe can easily access scientific knowledge and make meaningful connections. And I feel confident about my colleagues, our systems and infrastructure and my capabilities to be part of a thriving community and organisation.\n",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/a-request-for-comment-automatic-digital-preservation-and-self-healing-dois/",
"title": "A Request for Comment - Automatic Digital Preservation and Self-Healing DOIs",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2023-06-29",
"lastmod_ts": 1687996800,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "Digital preservation is crucial to the \u0026ldquo;persistence\u0026rdquo; of persistent identifiers. Without a reliable archival solution, if a Crossref member ceases operations or there is a technical disaster, the identifier will no longer resolve. This is why the Crossref member terms insist that publishers make best efforts to ensure deposit in a reputable archive service. This means that, if there is a system failure, the DOI will continue to resolve and the content will remain accessible. This is how we protect the integrity of the scholarly record.\n",
"content": "Digital preservation is crucial to the \u0026ldquo;persistence\u0026rdquo; of persistent identifiers. Without a reliable archival solution, if a Crossref member ceases operations or there is a technical disaster, the identifier will no longer resolve. This is why the Crossref member terms insist that publishers make best efforts to ensure deposit in a reputable archive service. This means that, if there is a system failure, the DOI will continue to resolve and the content will remain accessible. This is how we protect the integrity of the scholarly record.\nI will write another post, soon, on the reality of preservation of items with a Crossref DOI, but recent work in the Labs team has determined that we have a situation of drastic under-preservation of much scholarly material that has been assigned a persistent identifier. In particular, content from our smaller Crossref members, with limited financial resources, is often precariously preserved. Further, DOI URLs are not always updated, even when, for instance, the underlying domain has been registered by a different third party. This results in DOIs pointing to new, hijacked, and elapsed content that does not reflect the metadata that we hold.\nWe (Geoffrey) have (has) long-harboured ambitions to build a system that would allow for automatic deposit into an archive and then to present access options to the resolving user. This would ensure that all Crossref content had at least one archival solution backing it and greatly contribute to the improved persistent resolvability of our DOIs. We refer to this, internally, as \u0026ldquo;Project Op Cit\u0026rdquo;. And we\u0026rsquo;re now in a position to begin building it.\nHowever, we need to get this right from the design phase out. We need input from librarians working in the digital preservation space. We need input from members on whether they would use such a service. We are not digital preservation experts and we are acutely aware that we need the expertise of those who are, particularly where we\u0026rsquo;ve had to take some shortcuts. For instance: we are aware that the Internet Archive is perhaps not the first choice of many digital preservation librarians and specialists, who opt for specific scholarly-communications solutions. However, it is easy, open, and free. Hence, we propose for the prototype to use IA, on the assumption that this will be a proof-of-concept only, which we will expand to other archives if there is demand and once it works.\nSo: please do read the below and add your comments and questions to this thread in the community forum (link below), or send me queries/concerns by email. It would be excellent if we could receive comments by mid-August 2023. If you would rather comment on a Google doc, that\u0026rsquo;s also possible.\nIf enough people are interested, we could also host a community call to discuss this design and its prototyping. Do please, when emailing, let me know if this is of interest.\nProject Op Cit (Self-Healing DOIs) Request for Comment This document sets out the problem statement, a proposed prototype solution, and a transition path to production if successful.\nProposed Prototype Solution For members who opt-in to the service, We have a special class of DOI (only for open-access content) where, when the DOI is registered:\nWe immediately make an archive of the item with any archiving services that care to participate in the project (minimally, the Internet Archive, which is the easiest for us to begin with, but a modular/pluggable archival system). The Internet Archive Python Library should let us submit to them. We could pursue other arrangements with CLOCKSS, LOCKSS, and Portico.\nWe update the XML to reflect the archives to which it has been submitted.\nThe DOI landing page is redirected to an interstitial page that we control. This page gives the user access options.\nWe develop processes to determine whether the original URL \u0026ldquo;works\u0026rdquo;. The heuristics that define whether a resource has changed substantially or works need long-term consideration and real-world testing. Using the interstitial page approach will allow us to refine this, with a long-term goal of eradicating it.\nFigure 1: The Deposit Process\nFigure 2: The Resolution Process\nPotential Challenges Content drift. It would be extremely difficult to detect content change vs. (eg) page structure change, except in the case of binary fulltext. However, we can poll for the DOI at an HTML endpoint and detect when binary fulltext items, such as a PDF, change.\nLatency on resolver if lookup is real-time. For this reason, we need a periodic crawler so that resolvers do not wait for real-time detection on access.\nIf using Internet Archive, the domain owner (at the present moment) can request the removal of content. We would need the capacity to \u0026ldquo;lock\u0026rdquo; records that are being used as Op Cit redirection archival copies. This requires a further conversation with the Internet Archive.\nPrototype Components/Architecture Registration Proxy and Database (\u0026ldquo;Fleming\u0026rdquo;) The registration proxy implements a pass-through to the deposit API and hosts a relational database of self-healing DOIs (Postgres). It will be hosted at api.labs.crossref.org/deposit/opcit and clients will have to use this endpoint to deposit. Simultaneously, the proxy will:\nDetermine the license status of the incoming item.\nIf the license is open and fulltext is provided, deposit a copy in selected digital preservation archives. Store proof of licensing attestation.\nIn the case of binary files (fulltext PDF), store a hash of the content.\nStore the DOI, binary hash, and all URLs in a relational database under \u0026ldquo;pending\u0026rdquo; state.\nPass through the request to Crossref\u0026rsquo;s content registration system.\nMonitor the result of this request and remove stored data if registration fails.\nRe-registration through Fleming will update existing entries and re-fix their data against content drift at this time.\nSpider (\u0026ldquo;Shelob\u0026rdquo;) A series of components that:\nCheck that \u0026ldquo;pending\u0026rdquo; DOIs have been successfully registered. Remove those that have not and move those that have to \u0026ldquo;active\u0026rdquo; state.\nDereference \u0026ldquo;active\u0026rdquo; DOIs and ensure that we have the most current URL in case updates have gone directly to the live resolver.\nPeriodically crawl URLs in the self-healing database.\nOn HTTP 301 code, update database entry to point to new permanent URL.\nOn HTTP 302 code, follow the temporary redirect expecting the original content.\nOn HTTP 4xx codes, mark the entry as dead.\nOn HTTP 200 code of HTML landing page, parse the page for the presence of the DOI. If the DOI is not present, mark the entry as dead.\nResolver Proxy (\u0026ldquo;Hippocrates\u0026rdquo;) Display an interstitial landing page with archival versions and an explanation.\nAt some future point, for active entries, resolve to the stored URL (faster but could be de-synced) or pass the request to the live resolver (requires an extra hop but will always be in-sync with deposit).\nObservability and statistics Metrics we will collect:\nCount of DOIs using Op Cit\nCount of visitors arriving on Op Cit landing pages\nUsage count of each outgoing link/access option\nA daily report will present:\nNewly \u0026ldquo;failed\u0026rdquo; entries that we believe have died\nThese will be checked extensively, particularly at first, to ascertain whether our failure heuristics are valid\nEntries that have recovered\nErrors will be logged and monitored via Grafana.\nDocumentation and Automated Tests Core assumptions and new behaviours of the platform will be documented as part of the prototype.\nAutomated tests will be written, especially for the spider (\u0026ldquo;Shelob\u0026rdquo;), which must handle a diverse variety of real-world situations.\nPrototype Architecture Requirements Postgres RDS for resolution/self-healing DOI data (AWS).\nFastAPI hosting for passthrough proxy (fly.io).\nEC2 hosting for the spider (AWS).\nFastAPI hosting for resolver proxy (fly.io).\nTransition to Production If this prototype garners popular appeal, a transition to production would need to keep some prototype components and rewrite others.\n\u0026ldquo;Fleming\u0026rdquo; would need to be rewritten as a deposit module / integrated with Manifold\u0026rsquo;s (the next-generation system at Crossref) deposit. If this would create too much overhead, it need not be a blocking process in the deposit.\n\u0026ldquo;Shelob\u0026rdquo; would continue to need to run continuously and to scale with the adoption of self-healing DOIs unless one of the other options were used.\nPrototype architecture will be written so that spidering can be distributed between several servers, if required.\n\u0026ldquo;Hippocrates\u0026rdquo; would need to be integrated into the live link resolver. Depending on how a field for a self-healing DOI is embedded in Manifold, this may not need any additional database hits.\nBack Content We also have a database of back content stored by the Internet Archive, mapped to DOIs where they have been able to do so. This data source could be used to enable self-healing DOIs on all content in this archive.\n",
"headings": ["Project Op Cit (Self-Healing DOIs)","Request for Comment","Proposed Prototype Solution","Potential Challenges","Prototype Components/Architecture","Registration Proxy and Database (\u0026ldquo;Fleming\u0026rdquo;)","Spider (\u0026ldquo;Shelob\u0026rdquo;)","Resolver Proxy (\u0026ldquo;Hippocrates\u0026rdquo;)","Observability and statistics","Documentation and Automated Tests","Prototype Architecture Requirements","Transition to Production","Back Content"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/crossref-research-and-development-releasing-our-tools-from-the-ground-up/",
"title": "Crossref Research and Development: Releasing our Tools from the Ground Up",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2023-06-21",
"lastmod_ts": 1687305600,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "This is the first post in a series designed to showcase what we do in the Crossref R\u0026amp;D group, also known as Crossref Labs, which over the last few years has been strengthened, first with Dominika Tkaczyk and Esha Datta, last year with part of Paul Davis’s time, and more recently, yours truly. Research and development are, obviously, crucial for any organisation that doesn’t want to stand still. The R\u0026amp;D group builds prototypes, experimental solutions, and data-mining applications that can help us to understand our member base, in the service of future evolution of the organisation. One of the strategic pillars of Crossref is that we want to contribute to an environment in which the scholarly research community identifies shared problems and co-creates solutions for broad benefit. We do this in all teams through research and engagement with our expanding community.\n",
"content": "This is the first post in a series designed to showcase what we do in the Crossref R\u0026amp;D group, also known as Crossref Labs, which over the last few years has been strengthened, first with Dominika Tkaczyk and Esha Datta, last year with part of Paul Davis’s time, and more recently, yours truly. Research and development are, obviously, crucial for any organisation that doesn’t want to stand still. The R\u0026amp;D group builds prototypes, experimental solutions, and data-mining applications that can help us to understand our member base, in the service of future evolution of the organisation. One of the strategic pillars of Crossref is that we want to contribute to an environment in which the scholarly research community identifies shared problems and co-creates solutions for broad benefit. We do this in all teams through research and engagement with our expanding community.\nFor example, if the metadata team wants to implement a new field in our schema, it helps to have a prototype to show to members. The Labs team would implement such a prototype. If we want to know the answer to a question about the 150m or so metadata records we have – e.g. how many DOIs are duplicates? – it’s the Labs team that will work on this.\nWhen building such prototypes, which can often seem esoteric and one-off, though, it can be easy to believe that there is no way anybody else would re-use our components. At the same time, we find ourselves consistently working with the same infrastructures, re-using different code blocks across many applications. One of the tasks I have been working on is to extract these duplicated functions and to get them into external code libraries.\nWhy is this important? As many readers doubtless know, Crossref is committed to The Principles of Open Scholarly Infrastructure. For reasons of insurance, everything we do and newly develop is open source and we want our members to be able to re-use the software that we create. It’s also important because, if we centralize these low-level building blocks, we make it much easier to fix bugs when they occur, which would otherwise be distributed across all of our projects.\nAs a result, Crossref Labs has a series of small code libraries that we have released for various service interactions. We often find ourselves needing to interact with AWS services. Indeed, Crossref’s live systems are in the process of transitioning to running in the cloud, rather than our own data centre. It makes sense, therefore, for prototype Labs systems to run on this infrastructure, too. However, the boto3 library is not terribly Pythonic. As a result, many of our low-level tools interact with AWS. These include:\nCLAWS: the Crossref Labs Amazon Web Services toolkit. The CLAWS library gives speedy and Pythonic access to functions that we use again and again. This includes downloading files from and pushing data to S3 buckets (often in parallel/asynchronously), fetching secrets from AWS Secrets Manager, generating pre-signed URLs, and more. Longsight: A range of common logging functions for the observability of Python AWS cloud applications. Less mature than CLAWS, this is the starting point for observability across Labs applications. It supports running in AWS Lambda function contexts or pushing your logs to AWS Cloudwatch from anywhere else. It also supports logging metrics in structured forms. Crucially, the logs are all converted into machine-readable JSON format. This allows us to export the metrics into Grafana dashboards to visualize failure and performance. Distrunner: decentralized data processing on AWS services. Easily the least mature and experimental of these libraries, distrunner is one of the ways that we distribute the workloads of our recurrent data processing. A number of the Labs projects require us to run recurrent data-processing tasks. For instance, my colleague Dominika Tkaczyk has developed the sampling framework that is regenerated once per week. We use Apache Airflow (and, specifically, Amazon Managed Workflows for Apache Airflow) to host these periodic tasks. This is useful because it gives us quick, visual oversight if tasks fail. However, the Airflow worker instances on AWS are quite severely underpowered and unsuitable for large in-memory activities. Hence, the sampling framework fires up a Spark instance for its processing. Often, though, we do not need the parallelization of Spark and just want to be able to run a generic Python script in a more powerful environment. That’s what distrunner is designed to do. The current version uses Coiled but this may change in the future. While these tools will be useful to nobody except programmers – and this has been quite a technical post – there is a broader philosophical point to be made about this approach, in which everything is available for re-use, “from the ground up”. The point is: we also try, in Labs and in the process of “R\u0026amp;Ding”, to work without privileged access. That is: I don’t get “inside” access to a database that isn’t accessible to external users. I have to work with the same APIs and systems as would an end-user of our services. This means that, when we develop internal libraries, it’s worth releasing them. Because they use systems that are accessible to any of our users.\nI should also say that our openness is more than unidirectional. While we are putting a lot of effort into ensuring that everything new we put out is openly accessible, we are also open to contributions coming in. If we’ve built something and you make changes or improve it, please do get in touch or submit a pull request. Openness has to work both ways if projects are truly to be used by the community.\nFuture posts – coming soon! – will introduce some of the technologies and projects that we have been building atop this infrastructure. This includes a Labs API system; new functionality to retrieve unpaginated datasets of whole API routes; a study of the preservation status of DOI-assigned content; and a mechanism for modeling new metadata fields.\n",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/categories/presevation/",
"title": "Presevation",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Categories",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/committees/audit/",
"title": "Audit committee",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 2,
"lastmod": "2023-06-01",
"lastmod_ts": 1685577600,
"section": "Committees",
"tags": [],
"description": "The Audit Committee is made up of three board members who aren\u0026rsquo;t officers. They oversee our accounting and financial reporting processes and the audit of our financial statements. The committee also appoints an independent auditor, reviews the results of the audit and oversees the compliance with any conflict of interest or whistleblower policies. You can see our financial statements in our annual report that we produce in the November of each year.\n",
"content": "The Audit Committee is made up of three board members who aren\u0026rsquo;t officers. They oversee our accounting and financial reporting processes and the audit of our financial statements. The committee also appoints an independent auditor, reviews the results of the audit and oversees the compliance with any conflict of interest or whistleblower policies. You can see our financial statements in our annual report that we produce in the November of each year.\n2026 Audit Committee members Staff facilitator: Lucy Ofiesh\nAshley Towne, University of Chicago Press (Chair) committee in formation ",
"headings": ["2026 Audit Committee members"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/our-annual-call-for-board-nominations/",
"title": "Our annual call for board nominations",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2023-05-30",
"lastmod_ts": 1685404800,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "The Crossref Nominating Committee invites expressions of interest to join the Board of Directors of Crossref for the term starting in March 2024. The committee will gather responses from those interested and create the slate of candidates that our members will vote on in an election in September.\nExpressions of interest will be due Monday, June 26th, 2023.\nAbout the board elections The board is elected through the “one member, one vote” policy wherein every member organisation of Crossref has a single vote to elect representatives to the Crossref board. Board terms are for three years; this year, seven seats are open for election.\n",
"content": "The Crossref Nominating Committee invites expressions of interest to join the Board of Directors of Crossref for the term starting in March 2024. The committee will gather responses from those interested and create the slate of candidates that our members will vote on in an election in September.\nExpressions of interest will be due Monday, June 26th, 2023.\nAbout the board elections The board is elected through the “one member, one vote” policy wherein every member organisation of Crossref has a single vote to elect representatives to the Crossref board. Board terms are for three years; this year, seven seats are open for election.\nThe board maintains a balance of seats, with eight seats for smaller members and eight seats for larger members (based on total revenue to Crossref). This is to ensure that the diversity of experiences and perspectives of the scholarly community are represented in decisions made at Crossref.\nThis year we will elect two of the larger member seats (membership tiers $3,900 and above) and five of the smaller member seats (membership tiers $1,650 and below). You don’t need to specify which seat you are applying for. We will provide that information to the nominating committee.\nThe election takes place online, and voting will open in September. Election results will be shared at the annual meeting on October 31st. New members will commence their term in March 2024.\nAbout the Nominating Committee The Nominating Committee reviews the expressions of interest and selects a slate of candidates for election. The slate put forward will exceed the total number of open seats. The committee considers the statements of interest, organisational size, geography, and experience.\n2023 Nominating Committee:\nAaron Wood, American Psychological Association, chair* Oscar Donde, Pan Africa Science Journal* David Haber, American Society for Microbiology Rose L’Huillier, Elsevier* Marie Souliere, Frontiers (*) indicates Crossref board member\nWhat does the committee look for The committee looks for skills and experience that will complement the rest of the board. Candidates from countries and regions that are not currently reflected on the board are strongly encouraged to apply. Successful candidates often have some or all of these characteristics:\ndemonstrate a commitment to or understanding of our strategic agenda or the Principles of Open Scholarly Infrastructure; have expertise that may be underrepresented on the board currently; hold senior/director-level positions in their organisations; have experience with governance or community involvement; represent member organisations that are active in the scholarly communications ecosystem; demonstrate metadata best practices as shown in the member’s participation report Board roles and responsibilities Crossref’s services provide a central infrastructure to scholarly communications. Crossref’s board helps shape the future of our services and, by extension, impacts the broader scholarly ecosystem. We are looking for board members to contribute their experience and perspective.\nThe role of the board at Crossref is to provide strategic and financial oversight of the organisation, as well as guidance to the Executive Director and the staff leadership team, with the key responsibilities being:\nSetting the strategic direction for the organisation; Providing financial oversight; and Approving new policies and services. The board is representative of our membership base and guides the staff leadership team on trends affecting scholarly communications. The board sets strategic directions for the organisation while also providing oversight into policy changes and implementation. Board members have a fiduciary responsibility to ensure sound operations. Board members do this by attending board meetings, as well as joining more specific board committees.\nWho can apply to join the board? Any active member of Crossref can apply to join the board. Crossref membership is open to organisations that produce content, such as academic presses, commercial publishers, standards organisations, and research funders.\nWhat is expected of board members? Board members attend three meetings each year that typically take place in March, July, and November. Meetings have taken place in various international locations, and travel support is provided when needed. March and November board meetings are held virtually, and all committee meetings take place virtually. Each board member should sit on at least one Crossref committee. Care is taken to accommodate the wide range of timezones in which our board members live.\nWhile the expressions of interest are specific to an individual, the seat that is elected to the board belongs to the member organisation. The primary board member also names an alternate who may attend meetings if the primary board member cannot. There is no personal financial obligation to sit on the board. The member organisation must remain in good standing.\nBoard members are expected to be comfortable assuming the responsibilities listed above and to prepare and participate in board meeting discussions.\nHow to apply Please click here to submit your expression of interest. We ask for a brief statement about how your organisation could enhance the Crossref board and a brief personal statement about your interest and experience with Crossref.\nPlease contact me with any questions at lofiesh@crossref.org\n",
"headings": ["About the board elections","About the Nominating Committee","What does the committee look for","Board roles and responsibilities","Who can apply to join the board?","What is expected of board members?","How to apply"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/metadata-connects-the-global-community-summary-of-our-community-update-2023/",
"title": "Metadata connects the global community – summary of our Community update 2023",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2023-05-12",
"lastmod_ts": 1683849600,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "We were delighted to engage with over 200 community members in our latest Community update calls. We aimed to present a diverse selection of highlights on our progress and discuss your questions about participating in the Research Nexus. For those who didn’t get a chance to join us, I’ll briefly summarise the content of the sessions here and I invite you to join the conversations on the Community Forum.\nYou can take a look at the slides here and the recordings of the calls are available here.\n",
"content": "We were delighted to engage with over 200 community members in our latest Community update calls. We aimed to present a diverse selection of highlights on our progress and discuss your questions about participating in the Research Nexus. For those who didn’t get a chance to join us, I’ll briefly summarise the content of the sessions here and I invite you to join the conversations on the Community Forum.\nYou can take a look at the slides here and the recordings of the calls are available here.\nTL;DR The membership is growing, including that in the GEM programme countries, and we focus on adding new Sponsors in areas where we have insufficient coverage to support prospective members The grant registration form is available for funders who don’t use XML, and we’re working to expand to other record types The preview of the Relationship API endpoint is available – start exploring relationships between different records and record types, from citations to funding, and more Usefulness of metadata records for inferring integrity of the content or publisher relies on all members of the community contributing to this effort. Crossref will continue to enrich our schema to capture new types of relevant information and to promote the best metadata practices. Cited-by is now open for everyone to use 🎉 – no need for additional authorisation steps – Registering your references will have even greater impact now! The Labs participation report is available and it’s been a hit. Please note that this tool is still underdevelopment – new functionalities can be added but there might also be bugs that we are yet to resolve, so don’t hold off with feedback. We’ve received close to 1,000 responses in our first ever Metadata Priorities Survey. It’s still open until 18th of May and we encourage all members to take it. So far we’ve learnt that majority of our respondents are keen to deposit as much metadata as possible – and some would like to register more than we currently enable. Metadata completeness and integrity A key theme of the call was encouraging greater participation in the Research Nexus and the importance of complete metadata. One particular benefit of a rich and transparent metadata network is the opportunity to infer judgments on the integrity of the scholarly record (ISR). Amanda Bartell, Head of Member Experience, highlighted that the community agrees that availability of information about relationships between research outputs, institutions and other elements of the scholarly ecosystem together provide essential context for deciding about trustworthiness of organisations and their published content. Conversely, it can make it harder for parties to pass off information as trustworthy when that context is missing. Amanda summarised community feedback related to Crossref’s role in the integrity of the scholarly record in her recent blog post.\nOur members can contribute to that rich network of relationships by curating their metadata and providing contextual information – especially the highly sought for elements highlighted in the presentation.\nOur community Since LIVE22, we have had 1,130 new members join us. That includes 51 organisations from countries included in our Global Equitable Membership (GEM) programme. You can find out more in the latest news about the programme on our Community Forum from Susan Collins, Community Engagement Manager.\nWe see great opportunities with enriching our metadata corpus with works carried out in some of the least economically-advantaged regions of the world. Registering their content with us will increase its discoverability for the global scholarship, while adding important relationships into the Research Nexus. We’re glad at the new members joining us under the auspices of the Global Equitable Membership (GEM) programme and we’re reaching out to existing and new communities with our Ambassadors, to encourage more metadata registrations.\nOur Sponsors and Ambassadors, alongside our Outreach and Membership Team, support members to participate as effectively as possible in the Research Nexus. We’re delighted to see both programmes growing, with eight new Sponsors and seven new Ambassadors having joined us since October.\nSimultaneously, we’re working with like-minded organisations to provide useful resources for the growing and changing scholarly communications community. The recent launch of the online forum for new publishers seeking to learn about best practices in the industry, The PLACE, is another way in which we hope to support wider participation in the Research Nexus, and promote open and sustainable practices.\nWith our growing community, there’s always interest in We have planned a webinar later this month to provide an overview of Crossref – including the members benefits and obligations, and how to use our services.\nService news References metadata is essential for connecting works with one another. It enables provision of citation information, aids discoverability for researchers, as well as assessment and evaluation for institutions and funders. It’s almost a year since all the references metadata deposited with Crossref has been made openly available. At the moment, 52.0% of journal articles, and 44.5% of all works have references. Martyn Rittman, Product Manager for the Cited-by service says “It’s not bad, but we can do better!”\nWith three different mechanisms for doing it available to our members, we hope that all have a suitable tool to fit with their needs. You can register references with XML via HTTPS POST (structured or unstructured), with the dedicated OJS Plugin if you’re an OJS user, or with our Simple Text Query (unstructured text) – this is especially relevant to the Web Deposit Form users. We find that journal articles with deposited references seem to be cited more than those without, and by a lot: 21.8 vs. 6.1 incoming citations on average!\nWe have now made our Cited-by service open to all. To realise its full benefit, it is essential to register your references.\nThere were concerns in the community about references ‘lost’ as part of supplementary material that may not be registered in its own right. Colleagues advised that if the data has an identifier, such as a DataCite DOI, you can add a relationship to say that it\u0026rsquo;s supplementary material (see https://www.crossref.org/documentation/schema-library/markup-guide-metadata-segments/relationships/) or add them as a reference. Martyn is curious to hear from others in the community on this topic. There is an increasing focus on data citations and we\u0026rsquo;d like to see how we can better support them.\nMany members have questions related to plans for replacing Metadata Manager. Rachael Lammey, Director of Product, explained that we’re working on broadening our new Grant Registration Form to include more record types over the course of 2023. It has a few advantages over the current Web Deposit Form. It allows you to save a local copy once you first register a piece of content. It makes updating your records easier, as you can drop that file onto the form to add the metadata so that you can update it and redeposit rather than having to fill out the information all over again, and we have started adding automatic lookup fields to help users populate information on affiliations using ROR IDs more accurately. We will keep you posted on the progress with new developments and ask for beta testers for new record types as they are added.\nMetadata information about individual work is not as useful as the opportunity to interrogate the relationships between works and within the global scholarly output. [The preview of the Relationship API endpoint](https://community.crossref.org/t/relationships-are-here/3523, modest as it is at this stage – with only 1% of our relationship metadata included (or 10 mln relationships) – offers a powerful demonstration of the way in which metadata contextualises research outputs within the entangled network of ever-progressing scholarship.\nWe’ve also mentioned the recent transition of our website to GitLab, which allows everyone to contribute by creating merge requests and issues. Through this open collaboration, which supports our commitment to meet the Principles of Open Scholarly Infrastructure, we aim to cultivate a sense of ownership among contributors and make our information and documentation more useful and efficient for everyone.\nLabs participation report For organisations who wish to keep a close eye on their metadata – to understand what they deposit, how that compares with other members, and what could be improved, can start using our Lab participation reports. We encourage you to test this not-yet-finished tool and let us know your feedback. Participants at our updates found it very informative, with the opportunity to preview contents of recent deposits, see the participation breakdowns by a prefix, and improved data visualisation. We had questions about how data citation counts are generated in the report. Martyn Rittman explained that: “This is a prototype and that\u0026rsquo;s one of the issues we need to tidy up! We know via Event Data and our Scholix endpoint what is a dataset, but that hasn\u0026rsquo;t yet been incorporated to the Labs Reports”. There was also a suggestion of enabling export of simple lists of all member’s DOIs with respective URLs from the report and the team might look into that. Yet, lists of DOIs missing specific metadata types are already downloadable.\nTo learn more about the reports, try them out, and to provide feedback, please take a look at the information shared recently by Paul Davis, Tech Support Specialist \u0026amp; R\u0026amp;D Support Analyst.\nMetadata priorities Patricia Feeney, Head of Metadata, shared some updates about the current metadata corpus registered with Crossref, and some recent trends.\nShe then went on to summarise some preliminary results of our ongoing metadata priorities survey, which all members are encouraged to take part in by 18th of May. So far, we’ve received close to 1,000 responses. We’ve learnt that majority of our respondents are keen to deposit as much metadata as possible – and some would like to register more than we currently enable. Close to a half of the respondents who did not express an interest in sharing all metadata are still interested to learn more about the value of their metadata.\nShe then went on to summarise some preliminary results of our ongoing metadata priorities survey, which all members are encouraged to take part in by 18th of May. So far, We’ve received close to 1,000 responses. We’ve learnt that majority of our respondents are keen to deposit as much metadata as possible – and some would like to register more than we currently enable. However, close to a half of the respondents are interested to learn more about the value of their metadata.\nThe survey consults our members about their preferences for developing any of the potential projects under consideration:\nContributor IDs Contributor roles/ CRediT Alternate names Multilingual metadata Expand abstract support Citation types (content) Conference event IDs It appears that support for citation types is the strongest among our respondents, while very polarised views have been shared about multilingual metadata and expanding support for abstracts. Among other suggestions, we received a lot of comments related to keywords. Overall, support for all projects was strong.\nThe verdicts are not in yet – still time to respond to the survey and make your metadata priorities known!\nThank you and keep in touch With much of the content shared ahead of the time through our Community Forum, the sessions were bubbling with questions and valuable comments from the community. We look forward to continuing the conversations asynchronously on the Community Forum. Please don’t hesitate to share your thoughts and ask further questions. We’d also love to hear suggestions for topics of the most interest for our future updates.\nThe more complete the metadata we collect together, the more connections in the ecosystem become transparent. This creates opportunities for discovery and collaborations, and greater insights about the scholarly process. Our community is growing in numbers, diversity, and technical capacity for building the Research Nexus together. We welcome your questions and suggestions of initiatives that support the fullest participation possible.\n",
"headings": ["TL;DR","Metadata completeness and integrity","Our community","Service news","Labs participation report","Metadata priorities","Thank you and keep in touch"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/2023-public-data-file-now-available-with-new-and-improved-retrieval-options/",
"title": "2023 public data file now available with new and improved retrieval options",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2023-05-02",
"lastmod_ts": 1682985600,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "We have some exciting news for fans of big batches of metadata: this year’s public data file is now available. Like in years past, we’ve wrapped up all of our metadata records into a single download for those who want to get started using all Crossref metadata records.\nWe’ve once again made this year’s public data file available via Academic Torrents, and in response to some feedback we’ve received from public data file users, we’ve taken a few additional steps to make accessing this 185 gb file a little easier.\n",
"content": "We have some exciting news for fans of big batches of metadata: this year’s public data file is now available. Like in years past, we’ve wrapped up all of our metadata records into a single download for those who want to get started using all Crossref metadata records.\nWe’ve once again made this year’s public data file available via Academic Torrents, and in response to some feedback we’ve received from public data file users, we’ve taken a few additional steps to make accessing this 185 gb file a little easier.\nFirst, we’re proactively hosting seeds in a few locations around the world to improve torrent download performance in terms of both speed and reliability.\nAnd second, we’ve added an option to download this year’s public data file directly from Amazon S3 for a small transaction fee paid by the recipient, bypassing the need to use the torrent altogether. The fee just covers the AWS cost of the download. Instructions for downloading the public data file via the \u0026ldquo;Requester Pays\u0026rdquo; method are available on the \u0026ldquo;Tips for working with Crossref public data files and Plus snapshots\u0026rdquo; page.\nThe 2023 public data file features over 140 million metadata records deposited with Crossref through the end of March 2023, including over 76,000 grant records. Because Crossref metadata is always openly available, you can use our API to keep your local copy of our metadata corpus up to date with new and updated records.\nIn previous years, closed and limited references were removed from the public data file. Since we updated our membership terms to make all deposited references open in 2022, the 2023 public data file for the first time includes all references deposited with us.\nWe hope you find this public data file useful. Should you have any questions about how to access or use the file, please see the tips below, or bring your questions to our community forum.\nTips for using the torrent and retrieving incremental updates Use the public data file if you want all Crossref metadata records. Everyone is welcome to the metadata, but it will be much faster for you and much easier on our APIs to get so many records in one file. Here are some tips on how to work with the file.\nUse the REST API to incrementally add new and updated records once you have the initial file. Here is how to get started (and avoid getting blocked in your enthusiasm to use all this great metadata!).\nWhile bibliographic metadata is generally required, because lots of metadata is optional, records will vary in quality and completeness.\nQuestions, comments, and feedback are welcome at support@crossref.org.\n",
"headings": ["Tips for using the torrent and retrieving incremental updates"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/similarity-check-look-out-for-a-refreshed-interface-and-improvements-for-ithenticate-v2-account-administrators/",
"title": "Similarity Check: look out for a refreshed interface and improvements for iThenticate v2 account administrators",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2023-05-01",
"lastmod_ts": 1682899200,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "In 2022, we flagged up some changes to Similarity Check, which were taking place in v2 of Turnitin\u0026rsquo;s iThenticate tool used by members participating in the service. We noted that further enhancements were planned, and want to highlight some changes that are coming very soon. These changes will affect functionality that is used by account administrators, and doesn\u0026rsquo;t affect the Similarity Reports themselves.\nFrom Wednesday 3 May 2023, administrators of iThenticate v2 accounts will notice some changes to the interface and improvements to the Users, Groups, Integrations, Statistics and Paper Lookup sections.\n",
"content": "In 2022, we flagged up some changes to Similarity Check, which were taking place in v2 of Turnitin\u0026rsquo;s iThenticate tool used by members participating in the service. We noted that further enhancements were planned, and want to highlight some changes that are coming very soon. These changes will affect functionality that is used by account administrators, and doesn\u0026rsquo;t affect the Similarity Reports themselves.\nFrom Wednesday 3 May 2023, administrators of iThenticate v2 accounts will notice some changes to the interface and improvements to the Users, Groups, Integrations, Statistics and Paper Lookup sections.\nLogging in iThenticate v2 account administrators and browser users will see a new login page when logging in to iThenticate v2:\nA refreshed interface Once logged in to iThenticate v2, account administrators will see an updated design, with improved notifications to let them know whether a task/action has been successfully completed or not.\nUsers There will be improvements to the user management system for account administrators, including a much clearer navigation menu for managing active, pending and deactivated users.\nThere will also be a filtering option on the Users page to search for active, pending and deactivated users by first name, last name, email address, group and date added. In addition coloured labels will be introduced to easily identify the level of access (or \u0026lsquo;Role\u0026rsquo;) for each user.\nAn improved bulk user import process will be available, with clearer guidance on any issues that may arise during the upload. This new development will also include new screens for adding and editing users with more notifications to help prevent mistakes.\nIntegrations For account administrators managing peer review management system integrations and needing to generate API keys, the Integrations page will be improved to make copying API keys simpler.\nStatistics iThenticate v2 administrators will also notice some improvements to the Statistics page. Usage data should load faster and will be sortable by user group. They will also be able to generate large usage reports of over 100k submissions.\nPaper lookup The Paper lookup will allow iThenticate v2 account administrators to find submissions that have been made from any integration connected to their iThenticate v2 account. They can be found by searching the paper ID (or oid number) of the submission.\nPlease note: the ability to search for submissions by the user\u0026rsquo;s name is available for manuscripts submitted via the iThenticate v2 website only and not for papers submitted via an integration.\nNew password requirements To improve the security of users\u0026rsquo; accounts, new password requirements will be introduced, including a minimum of 8 symbols, 1 special symbol, 1 upper case letter, and 1 number.\nNext in iThenticate v2 Turnitin, who produce iThenticate, are currently working on a number of new features and developments including an improved similarity report, paraphrase and AI writing detection. A detailed timeline is not yet available but we\u0026rsquo;ll be updating you on these new developments in the coming months.\n✏️ Do get in touch via support@crossref.org if you have any questions about iThenticate v1 or v2 or start a discussion by commenting on this post below.\n",
"headings": ["Logging in","A refreshed interface","Users","Integrations","Statistics","Paper lookup","New password requirements","Next in iThenticate v2"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/isr-part-four-working-together-as-a-community-to-preserve-the-integrity-of-the-scholarly-record/",
"title": "ISR part four: Working together as a community to preserve the integrity of the scholarly record",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2023-04-26",
"lastmod_ts": 1682467200,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "We\u0026rsquo;ve been spending some time speaking to the community about our role in research integrity, and particularly the integrity of the scholarly record. In this blog, we\u0026rsquo;ll be sharing what we\u0026rsquo;ve discovered, and what we\u0026rsquo;ve been up to in this area.\nWe’ve discussed in our previous posts in the “Integrity of the Scholarly Record (ISR)” series that the infrastructure Crossref builds and operates (together with our partners and integrators) captures and preserves the scholarly record, making it openly available for humans and machines through metadata and relationships about all research activity. This Research Nexus makes it easier and faster for everyone involved in research performance, management, and communications to understand information in context and make decisions about the trustworthiness of organisations and their published research outputs. Conversely, it can make it harder for parties to pass off information as trustworthy when the information doesn\u0026rsquo;t include that context.\n",
"content": "We\u0026rsquo;ve been spending some time speaking to the community about our role in research integrity, and particularly the integrity of the scholarly record. In this blog, we\u0026rsquo;ll be sharing what we\u0026rsquo;ve discovered, and what we\u0026rsquo;ve been up to in this area.\nWe’ve discussed in our previous posts in the “Integrity of the Scholarly Record (ISR)” series that the infrastructure Crossref builds and operates (together with our partners and integrators) captures and preserves the scholarly record, making it openly available for humans and machines through metadata and relationships about all research activity. This Research Nexus makes it easier and faster for everyone involved in research performance, management, and communications to understand information in context and make decisions about the trustworthiness of organisations and their published research outputs. Conversely, it can make it harder for parties to pass off information as trustworthy when the information doesn\u0026rsquo;t include that context.\nThe community needs open scholarly infrastructure that can adapt to the changes in scholarly research and communications, and we’ve been changing and adapting already by building on the concept of the scholarly record with our vision:\nLike others, we envision a rich and reusable open network of relationships connecting research organisations, people, things, and actions; a scholarly record that the global community can build on forever, for the benefit of society.\nWe don’t assess the quality of the work that our members register, and we keep the barriers to membership deliberately low to ensure that we are capturing as much of the scholarly record as possible and encouraging best practice. We are careful to talk about Crossref’s specific role being with the Integrity of the Scholarly Record (ISR), and not the broader area of ‘research integrity’ (i.e. the integrity of the research process or content itself).\nBut there are many challenges and threats to research integrity and the integrity of the scholarly record, and there are tradeoffs with keeping the barriers to membership low. With that in mind, we have been dedicating more time to speaking with the community to explore what part we are and should in future play to help the community assess and improve trustworthiness in the scholarly record. We also want to work out where we can make use of our neutral, central role to convene different groups in scholarly communications to work together on these challenges.\nA revealing afternoon in Frankfurt Our starting point was a roundtable discussion in Frankfurt in October 2022. We organized it to coincide with the Frankfurt Book Fair, but the invited participants were from a wider spectrum than just publishers. The 40 invited participants represented editors, funders, research integrity professionals at publishers, representatives of ministries of science, and other partner organisations such as OASPA, COPE, STEM and DOAJ.\nThis half-day session enabled us to sense-check our thinking with the community and get input into whether our position is the best one for their needs.\nEd Pentz introduced the session by reminding participants that integrity is key to Crossref’s mission and is the basis of the shared Research Nexus vision. Amanda (that’s me) talked through our current membership processes, recent membership trends, and why wider participation is key and also the sort of questions the community comes to Crossref to solve (eg title ownership disputes). And finally, Ginny Hendricks talked through the specific services and metadata that Crossref has already developed to support the community as signals of trustworthiness, and introduced some new activities and ideas.\nYou can check out the slide deck and for more background, read our previous posts in the ISR series.\nParticipants then split into small groups representing a mix of communities, and we asked them to discuss three key questions:\nIs Crossref’s role what you expected? What surprised you? What are we missing? Are you aware of Crossref services? What are the barriers to more uptake? What are the challenges and opportunities? What more could Crossref or its members do? After discussion, each small group fed back to the room, and we followed up with a whole group discussion, before ending the day with a post-it note exercise for what Crossref should start doing, stop doing, and continue doing.\nHere\u0026rsquo;s what we learned.\nThe importance of whole community involvement in research integrity and ISR The need for all parts of the community to come together to solve the problems of research integrity came through loud and clear - there is no single group that can solve this problem on its own.\nPublishers expressed frustration that responsibility for research integrity has been placed seemingly solely in their hands when institutions and funders can “unwittingly incentivise bad behaviour”. But it was clear that funders are just as concerned with research integrity issues, with many having made a dedicated trip for the roundtable. There were comments that bringing publishers and funders together around these issues was a rare but important opportunity, and there were calls for this to be an annual event. Both funders and publishers called for more involvement from and inclusion of research institutions in the discussion.\nThe group agreed that Crossref’s main focus should continue to be capturing and sharing the scholarly record, and that metadata and relationships are key for attribution, evidence, and provenance. One participant commented that “you can’t make open science work unless the metadata is complete” and that this would only happen with efforts throughout the community. Accurate and complete metadata needs to be:\npushed for by funders and institutions (through advocacy and policy) provided by the authors and other contributors collated, curated, and registered by the publishers and repositories collected, matched, (sometimes cleansed), and distributed by Crossref. (and we would add “prioritised by all who want to support open infrastructure over commercial alternatives”) Interestingly, this echoes the ‘metadata personas’ output of the Metadata 20/20 initiative which defined roles in the community’s collective metadata effort:\nMetadata Creators: providing descriptive information (metadata) about research and scholarly objects. Metadata Curators: classifying, normalising, and standardising this descriptive information to increase its value as a resource. Metadata Custodians: storing and maintaining this descriptive information and making it available for consumers. Metadata Consumers: knowingly or unknowingly using the descriptive information to find, discover, connect, cite, and assess research objects. Importance of whole-publisher involvement A few participants, particularly those in editorial or integrity roles at publishing organisations, had not previously made the connection that metadata could be important signals of integrity. This highlighted a key problem - working with Crossref is seen by publishers as a technical/production workflow issue, and so knowledge of the benefits of metadata can be siloed within those teams. Crossref needs to reach out to editorial and research integrity teams to explain that good metadata isn’t just an end in itself and reinforce the impact it has on research integrity. This buy-in from across publisher organisations is vital.\nWe’re currently recruiting a Community Engagement Manager with editorial or research integrity experience to dedicate time to this area, to advocate for richer metadata within the editorial community, and progress this important conversation.\nAgreement of the importance of metadata but an acknowledgment that this brings extra cost Most participants agreed that rich metadata and relationships provide a core tool in establishing and protecting integrity. But they also acknowledged that collecting and registering more metadata often comes with an extra cost - whether that’s from system changes or just extra staff time. This is particularly true where publishers are working with third-party platforms and suppliers where there may be additional costs for adding fields and functionality to collect more metadata and register it with Crossref. Where knowledge of metadata is siloed in technical and production teams, and the wider benefits aren’t acknowledged, it can be hard to get internal buy-in for these extra costs and efforts.\nThe Frankfurt group also pointed out that the benefits of more comprehensive metadata (and what this means for ISR) are spread across the research ecosystem, but it is the publisher that usually bears the costs.\nNeed to define which metadata elements are trust signals and make it easier for the community to provide and access them Through the course of the discussion, various elements were determined to be important to capture as “trust signals” and to identify relationships such as for retractions, conferences, reviewers, data, and when Crossref membership has been revoked for cause. We need to spend time identifying and prioritising these so that our members can do the same.\nWe need to make it easier for smaller, less technically-resourced members to provide this metadata, both through our tools and our documentation, as “doing this work can be very geeky and the documentation isn’t easy to understand as a layperson”.\nThere was also a discussion about where the metadata comes from - should community members be able to contribute metadata and assertions to other members’ records? If the provenance is captured then yes.\nOnce the metadata is captured, there remain challenges for users in where to start with the 145 million Crossref records. The groups asked Crossref to make it easier for community members to understand and use these records to make informed decisions, including by creating and sharing sample queries, libraries, and case studies.\nWe’re currently recruiting a Technical Community Manager to help improve the support we provide in this area to API users, service providers, and other metadata integrators .\nThe importance of retractions/corrections information There was a lot of discussion about retractions and their importance as trust indicators. The group was surprised by how few retractions are currently registered with Crossref through Crossmark (12k). There was a lot of discussion around why Crossmark isn’t currently being adopted, and interest in taking this forward.\nThis needs to be a focus for Crossref, to encourage members to register retractions, corrections, and updates, and to make it easier for smaller publishers. There are new and emerging publishers who really want tools to help them demonstrate the legitimacy of their research, and an easy way for them to record corrections and retractions is key.\nIn their paper Towards a connected and dynamic scholarly record of updates, corrections, and retractions (September 17th, 2022), Ginny Hendricks, Rachael Lammey, and Martyn Rittman discuss how retraction information could be more effectively used - for example, letting a preprint reader know that the resulting article has been retracted, or letting the author of an article know the data that they’ve based their work on has been withdrawn.\nCollecting the information is just the start - cascading retraction information throughout the research ecosystem is the main goal, and Crossref plays a central role here. As noted in the Information Quality Lab’s project Reducing the inadvertent spread of retracted science: Shaping a research and implementation agenda, “Many retracted papers are not marked as retracted on publisher and aggregator sites, and retracted articles may still be found in readers’ PDF libraries, including in reference management systems such as Zotero, EndNote, and Mendeley”.\nIt’s particularly important that this information is fed back to funders and institutions, and the group discussed having push notifications to these audiences for retractions. Some funders even employ staff members whose main purpose is to identify retractions.\nIt was pointed out that there may be good sources of retraction information (such as Retraction Watch) that Crossref could incorporate and match in our metadata.\nGaps in ‘ownership’, and Crossref’s role The group discussed the many gaps in ownership for elements of research integrity, and some groups wondered if Crossref should actually change our approach and take on more responsibility for vetting content. However, after discussion, the group mostly agreed that this would mean a change of mission (and more staff) for Crossref and potentially limit global participation, thus making the metadata corpus less useful. Crossref should provide the widest possible metadata in an easy-to-consume format, and “other organisations can provide the verification layer”.\nIt was acknowledged that it would be easy for Crossref to get overwhelmed, so we ended the day by discussing not only what we should start doing, but also what we should stop doing. Unsurprisingly, there was a lot more to continue or start doing than stop doing!\nHowever, the fact remains that there are gaps in ownership - for example, there is no central arbiter of who ‘owns’ a journal. Also, where do you go if you have a problem with a journal? Often the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) is seen as a solution, but they can’t solve this problem alone - it needs a coordinated effort from funders, institutions, publishers, and other partner organisations such as the Open Access Scholarly Publishing Association (OASPA), the Directory of Opena Access Journals (DOAJ), and like-minded organisations.\nMany noted that Crossref is well-positioned to convene horizontal multi-stakeholder discussions to start to find solutions.\nWe also know that there are other industry initiatives aimed at supporting this work. The STM Association’s work on an Integrity Hub is gathering pace and aims to provide, among other things ‘a cloud-based environment for publishers to check submitted articles for research integrity issues’.\nWhat happened next? Turns out, it really is all about relationships… Since this meeting in Frankfurt last October, we’ve been focusing on relationships - thinking about how we capture them in our metadata, and working in partnership with other organisations to bolster our support for ISR.\nThe rest of this blog post highlights some of the activities underway:\nIncreasing participation in Crossref In January 2023, we launched our new GEM Program, which offers relief from fees for members in the least economically-advantaged countries in the world. By opening up participation even further, we aim to extend the corpus of open metadata, giving opportunities for more connections, more context, and more relationships.\nSupporting members in meeting best practices ISR blog 2 explained more about how we help new members become “good Crossref citizens” with automated onboarding emails, extensive documentation, events and webinars, and help from our support team, Ambassadors, and other members in our Community Forum.\nWe’ve recently joined forces with COPE, DOAJ, and OASPA to create a new online public forum for organisations interested in adopting best practices in scholarly publishing. At the Publishers Learning And Community Exchange or The PLACE, new scholarly publishers can access information from multiple agencies in one place, ask questions of the experts, and join conversations with each other. Do take a look!\nBeing clearer on the impact of better metadata As discussed earlier, better metadata can sometimes bring extra costs, and it’s helpful to understand the impact of this investment. We know from our ongoing outreach work that it’s difficult for our members to keep hearing that Crossref needs more and better metadata. They ask us for resources and increasingly want to see hard evidence of benefits to them. We recently showcased the journey of the American Society for Microbiology which went from ‘zero to hero’ in terms of metadata participation and completeness in Crossref. They describe their efforts to increase their registered metadata over the last few years, and note a significant increase in their average monthly successful DOI resolutions from ~390,000 in 2015 to an average of ~3.7 million in 2022. They found that “the more metadata we push out into the ecosystem, the more it appears to be used… Remembering that your publishing program benefits as much as everyone else’s when you deposit more metadata can help refine your short-term and long-term priorities.”\nWe know we sound like a broken record sometimes, but now other members can take it from ASM!\nEncouraging better metadata and more relationships and identifying \u0026rsquo;trust signals' We’re trying to make it easier for members to accurately register key metadata fields, with the launch of our new grants registration form which will be extended to journals and other record types soon. This includes a ROR lookup - adding this unique identifier for research organisations gives even better context for the metadata.\nWe are also working to make it possible for anyone to contribute to metadata records, and have the provenance of these contributions clearly asserted.\nMetadata adoption is still a key goal for our staff; indeed our new 2023-2025 strategic roadmap specifies…\n“We want to be a sustainable source of complete, open, and global scholarly metadata and relationships. We are working towards this vision of a ‘Research Nexus’ by demonstrating the value of richer and connected open metadata, incentivising people to meet best practices, while making it easier to do so.”\n… with item number one under projects ‘in focus’, being: “Adoption activities to focus on top metadata adoption priorities, which are:\nreferences; abstracts; grants; and ROR”. We’re continuing to talk with the community to work out which metadata elements are most useful as trust signals, and we’re trying to prioritise some of the schema changes required to capture new elements. If you haven’t already, please respond to Patricia Feeney’s metadata priorities survey.\nThinking about retractions and corrections We’ve been closely involved with the NISO CREC working group, and they should be making the initial draft recommendations public soon - watch this space!\nMaking it easier to view and compare metadata and expand the relationships Our Participation Reports provide a visualisation of the metadata that’s available via our free REST API. There’s a separate Participation Report for each member, and it shows what percentage of that member\u0026rsquo;s content includes nine key metadata elements. It’s an important tool to help those in the community understand our metadata more easily.\nWe have been working on a new version of Participation Reports, allowing more comparison between members, and extra metadata elements to communicate trustworthiness, including whether each member has thought about the long-term preservation of their content, and whether it has been added to a repository. There is a test version to look at in our Labs sandbox. Do take a look and provide feedback.\nWe’ve also made public our list of members whose membership was revoked for contravention of the membership terms.\nContinuing to work with funders We’re continuing to work with funders through our growing funder membership, the Funder Advisory Group and other groups, including the Open Research Funders Group, the HRA, Altum, Europe PMC, and the ORCID Funder Interest Group. And we’re continuing to build the important relationships between funding and outputs (see Dominika Tkaczyk’s recent report) and engage with this key audience for research integrity.\nDiscussions with the community We’ll be talking about ISR at our next community update on May 3rd - there are two versions of the meeting depending on your timezone - do sign up if you haven’t already. And if you’re attending the SSP conference in June, do come along to our panel “Working together to preserve the integrity of the scholarly record in a transparent and trustworthy way”.\n",
"headings": ["A revealing afternoon in Frankfurt","The importance of whole community involvement in research integrity and ISR","Importance of whole-publisher involvement","Agreement of the importance of metadata but an acknowledgment that this brings extra cost","Need to define which metadata elements are trust signals and make it easier for the community to provide and access them","The importance of retractions/corrections information","Gaps in ‘ownership’, and Crossref’s role","What happened next? Turns out, it really is all about relationships…","Increasing participation in Crossref","Supporting members in meeting best practices","Being clearer on the impact of better metadata","Encouraging better metadata and more relationships and identifying \u0026rsquo;trust signals'","Thinking about retractions and corrections","Making it easier to view and compare metadata and expand the relationships","Continuing to work with funders","Discussions with the community"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/categories/jobs/",
"title": "Jobs",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Categories",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/authors/michelle-cancel/",
"title": "Michelle Cancel",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Authors",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/were-hiring-new-technical-community-and-membership-roles-at-crossref/",
"title": "We’re hiring! New technical, community, and membership roles at Crossref",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2023-04-21",
"lastmod_ts": 1682035200,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "Do you want to help make research communications better in all corners of the globe? Come and join the world of nonprofit open infrastructure and be part of improving the creation and sharing of knowledge.\nWe are recruiting for three new staff positions, all new roles and all fully remote and flexible. See below for more about our ethos and what it\u0026rsquo;s like working at Crossref.\n🚀 Technical Community Manager, working with our \u0026lsquo;integrators\u0026rsquo; so all repository/publishing platforms and plugins, all API users incl. managing contracts with subscribers, and generally helping a very nice bunch of RESTful API dabblers, both novice and intermediate. The goal is to offer more interactive engagement such as sprints, and more technical consultation to help the community with things like query efficiency, public data dump ingestion, etc. Thousands of users exist, from individual researchers and small academic tools to giant technology companies. Researching and analysing usage and building tools to meet their needs is key, so this role works closely with Product and R\u0026amp;D colleagues and likely needs a developer or developer-advocacy background.\n",
"content": "Do you want to help make research communications better in all corners of the globe? Come and join the world of nonprofit open infrastructure and be part of improving the creation and sharing of knowledge.\nWe are recruiting for three new staff positions, all new roles and all fully remote and flexible. See below for more about our ethos and what it\u0026rsquo;s like working at Crossref.\n🚀 Technical Community Manager, working with our \u0026lsquo;integrators\u0026rsquo; so all repository/publishing platforms and plugins, all API users incl. managing contracts with subscribers, and generally helping a very nice bunch of RESTful API dabblers, both novice and intermediate. The goal is to offer more interactive engagement such as sprints, and more technical consultation to help the community with things like query efficiency, public data dump ingestion, etc. Thousands of users exist, from individual researchers and small academic tools to giant technology companies. Researching and analysing usage and building tools to meet their needs is key, so this role works closely with Product and R\u0026amp;D colleagues and likely needs a developer or developer-advocacy background.\n🎯 Member Experience Manager, ramping up to handle the mammoth operation that is\u0026hellip; membership, currently 18,000 members from 150 countries, and onboarding the ~180 new joiners we welcome monthly, mostly from Africa and Asia. This role involves lots of education and relationship management, but because of the scale, we also need someone with a real business process/analysis approach, improving how our systems function so that the operation flows seamlessly and isn\u0026rsquo;t a pain for people (both members and staff). This role manages two full-time Member Support Specialists (UK and Indonesia) and three part-time contractors (USA, France, and one other as yet unknown).\n🎈 Community Engagement Manager, working with the global community of scholarly editors at a time when research integrity is top of mind for our entire ecosystem. This is a classic community role for someone keen to cross over from managing or editing journals or books and perhaps make your volunteer work official. Activities will include program and project management, event and working group facilitation, communications and content creation. You\u0026rsquo;d be interacting with groups like the Asian Council of Science Editors, the European Association of Science Editors, and the Council of Science Editors, plus many more that you\u0026rsquo;d identify. It\u0026rsquo;s all about helping editors, who work hand-in-hand with authors, to think about metadata as signals of trust and better use available services, such as those for retraction management or plagiarism checking, and helping to define needs for emerging activity too, such as machine-generated content.\nWorking at Crossref We’re a not-for-profit membership organisation that exists to make scholarly communications better. We rally the community; tag and share metadata; run an open infrastructure; play with technology; and make tools and services—all to help put research in context.\nCrossref sits at the heart of the global exchange of research information, and our job is to make it possible—and easier—to find, cite, link, assess, and reuse research, from journals and books, to preprints, data, and grants. Through partnerships and collaborations we engage with members in 150 countries (and counting) and it’s very important to us to nurture that community.\nWe’re about 45 staff and remote-first. This means that we support our teams working asynchronously and with flexible hours. We are dedicated to an open and fair research ecosystem and that’s reflected in our ethos and staff culture. We like to work hard but we have fun too! We take a creative, iterative approach to our projects, and believe that all team members can enrich the culture and performance of our whole organisation. Check out the organisation chart.\nWe are active supporters of ongoing professional development opportunities and promote self-learning at every opportunity. Crossref has a healthy financial situation and we only continue to grow. While we won’t have a clear hierarchical path for staff to follow, there are always evolving opportunities to progress and be challenged.\nWe especially encourage applications from people with backgrounds historically under-represented in research and scholarly communications.\nBookmark our jobs page to watch for future opportunities!\n",
"headings": ["Working at Crossref"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/the-place-for-new-publishers-a-one-stop-shop-for-information-and-a-friendly-community/",
"title": "The PLACE for new publishers – a one-stop-shop for information and a friendly community",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2023-04-17",
"lastmod_ts": 1681689600,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "The Publishers Learning And Community Exchange (PLACE) at theplace.discourse.group is a new online public forum created for organisations interested in adopting best practices in scholarly publishing. New scholarly publishers can access information from multiple agencies in one place, ask questions of the experts and join conversations with each other.\nScholarly publishing is an interesting niche of an industry – it appears at the same time ancillary and necessary to the practice and development of scholarship itself. The sooner and more easily a piece of academic work is shared, the greater the chance that others will find and build upon it. Many practices of the publishing industry have been developed to support discovery and integrity of the scholarship that produces shareable works, and as the landscape of scholarly communications constantly evolves, a number of agencies arose to promote and continuously update the standards and best practices within it.\n",
"content": "The Publishers Learning And Community Exchange (PLACE) at theplace.discourse.group is a new online public forum created for organisations interested in adopting best practices in scholarly publishing. New scholarly publishers can access information from multiple agencies in one place, ask questions of the experts and join conversations with each other.\nScholarly publishing is an interesting niche of an industry – it appears at the same time ancillary and necessary to the practice and development of scholarship itself. The sooner and more easily a piece of academic work is shared, the greater the chance that others will find and build upon it. Many practices of the publishing industry have been developed to support discovery and integrity of the scholarship that produces shareable works, and as the landscape of scholarly communications constantly evolves, a number of agencies arose to promote and continuously update the standards and best practices within it.\nWe realise that the sheer number of agencies involved in regulating and preserving scholarly content is in itself a challenge and can be confusing. Newer publishers may find it difficult to know where to go to find the right information, what policies they need to follow or international criteria they need to meet and how to go about doing so. When time or finances are tight, it’s not easy to try to reinvent the wheel.\nFollowing the long-established practice of signposting organisations between us, we’ve worked together with the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), the Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ), and the Open Access Scholarly Publishers Association (OASPA) to establish the PLACE. We share values and goals to work more effectively to better support the needs of our communities. Each organisation is taking actions to lower barriers to participation and provide greater support for the organisations that publish scholarly and professional content that we work with.\nHence, we envisaged the PLACE as a ‘one stop shop’ for access to more consolidated and plainly put information, to support publishers in adopting best practices the industry developed. We also hope that by setting the information service as a forum, we will encourage open exchange with publishers who aspire to do things right, as well as between them.\n",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/renewed-persistence/",
"title": "Renewed Persistence",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2023-04-01",
"lastmod_ts": 1680307200,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "We believe in Persistent Identifiers. We believe in defence in depth. Today we\u0026rsquo;re excited to announce an upgrade to our data resilience strategy.\nDefence in depth means layers of security and resilience, and that means layers of backups. For some years now, our last line of defence has been a reliable, tried-and-tested technology. One that\u0026rsquo;s been around for a while. Yes, I\u0026rsquo;m talking about the humble 5¼ inch floppy disk.\n",
"content": "We believe in Persistent Identifiers. We believe in defence in depth. Today we\u0026rsquo;re excited to announce an upgrade to our data resilience strategy.\nDefence in depth means layers of security and resilience, and that means layers of backups. For some years now, our last line of defence has been a reliable, tried-and-tested technology. One that\u0026rsquo;s been around for a while. Yes, I\u0026rsquo;m talking about the humble 5¼ inch floppy disk.\nThis may come as surprise to some. When things go well, you\u0026rsquo;re probably never aware of them. In day to day use, the only time a typical Crossref user sees a floppy disk is when they click \u0026lsquo;save\u0026rsquo; (yes, some journals still require submissions in Microsoft Word).\nHistory But why?\nLet me take you back to the early days of Crossref. The technology scene was different. This data was too important to trust to new and unproven technologies like Zip disks, CD-Rs or USB Thumb Drives. So we started with punched cards.\nIBM 5081-style punched card.\nPunched cards are reliable and durable as long as you don\u0026rsquo;t fold, spindle or mutilate them. But even in 2001 we knew that punched cards\u0026rsquo; days were numbered. The capacity of 80 characters kept DOIs short. Translating DOIs into EBCDIC made ASCII a challenge, let alone SICIs. We kept a close eye on the nascent Unicode.\nBreathing Room In 2017 the change of DOI display guidelines from http://dx.doi.org to https://doi.org shortened each DOI by 2 characters, buying us some time. But eventually we knew we had to upgrade to something more modern.\nSo we migrated to 5¼ inch floppy disks.\n5¼ Floppy disk in drive\nAt 640 KB per disk these were a huge improvement. We could fit around 20,000 DOIs on one floppy. Today we only need around 10,000 floppy disks to store all of our DOIs (not the metadata, just the DOIs). Surprisingly this only takes about 20 metres of shelf space to store.\nTypical work from home setup. Getting ready to backup some DOIs!\nThe move to working-from-home brought an unexpected benefit. Staff mail floppy disks to each other and keep them in constant rotation, which produces a distributed fault tolerant system.\nPersistence Means Change But it can\u0026rsquo;t last forever. DOIs registration shows no sign of slowing down. It\u0026rsquo;s clear we need a new, compact storage medium. So, after months of research, we\u0026rsquo;ve invested in new equipment.\nToday we announce our migration to 3½ inch floppies.\nIf it goes to plan you won\u0026rsquo;t even notice the change.\nImage credits Punched card: IBM 5081-style punched card. Derived from public domain by Gwern.\n",
"headings": ["History","Breathing Room","Persistence Means Change","Image credits"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/start-citing-data-now.-not-later/",
"title": "Start citing data now. Not later",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2023-03-23",
"lastmod_ts": 1679529600,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "Recording data citations supports data reuse and aids research integrity and reproducibility. Crossref makes it easy for our members to submit data citations to support the scholarly record.\nTL;DR Citations are essential/core metadata that all members should submit for all articles, conference proceedings, preprints, and books. Submitting data citations to Crossref has long been possible. And it’s easy, you just need to:\nInclude data citations in the references section as you would for any other citation Include a DOI or other persistent identifier for the data if it is available - just as you would for any other citation Submit the references to Crossref through the content registration process as you would for any other record And your data citations will flow through all the normal processes that Crossref applies to citations. And it will be distributed openly to the community (including DataCite!) via Crossref’s services and APIs. All data citations deposited with Crossref will be exposed in the (soon-to-be launched) Data Citation Corpus.\n",
"content": "Recording data citations supports data reuse and aids research integrity and reproducibility. Crossref makes it easy for our members to submit data citations to support the scholarly record.\nTL;DR Citations are essential/core metadata that all members should submit for all articles, conference proceedings, preprints, and books. Submitting data citations to Crossref has long been possible. And it’s easy, you just need to:\nInclude data citations in the references section as you would for any other citation Include a DOI or other persistent identifier for the data if it is available - just as you would for any other citation Submit the references to Crossref through the content registration process as you would for any other record And your data citations will flow through all the normal processes that Crossref applies to citations. And it will be distributed openly to the community (including DataCite!) via Crossref’s services and APIs. All data citations deposited with Crossref will be exposed in the (soon-to-be launched) Data Citation Corpus.\nAnd then, you can sit back and congratulate yourself for making your publication more useful to researchers who want to be able to reuse the data underlying your publications.\nBackground You might ask, “So if submitting Data Citations to Crossref has long been possible, why do you have to write this?”\nHistorically, authors did not cite data in the way they cited publications. Instead, they would often refer to the data in the main text of the article. This has made it hard to determine what data lay behind the research and/or access the data.\nBut the research community has increasingly recognized that data is a first-class research output and that we should treat it as such. In short, we should formally cite data.\nBut because citing data is a comparatively new practice, it has been subject to a lot of new analysis. And unsurprisingly, people analyzing data citation have discovered that there is a lot of nuance to citation of any kind.\nThere are lots of reasons for citing something. There are lots of internalized conventions for citing things. And there are different conventions for citation for different research objects. And SSH citation practice differs from STEM. And legal citation practices are different from scholarly citation practices. And citation practices even vary by subdiscipline and by journal.\nThose who have been looking at what it means to “cite data” have naturally stumbled into a thicket of divergent practices - some of which are historical holdovers, some of which are stylistic preferences, and some of which are clearly adaptations to deal with the specific needs of certain research objects/containers or different disciplines.\nThe temptation has been to try and rationalize this before extending the practice of citation to data.\n“Maybe because data is a distinct record type, we should include the fact that it is a data citation in the citation itself?”\n“Maybe because people cite data for different reasons, we should include a typology of citation types in all data citations?”\nAnd so you may hear some people say, “hold off on data citation - we don’t have an optimal way to do it yet, and it can be very complicated.”\nBut guess what?\nWe currently don’t label citations to monographs as “citation to monograph.”\nAnd we don’t currently include the reason for citation when we are citing a journal article.\nIt would be very cool if we did. And it would likely make citations even more useful if we did.\nBut citations are already useful even without these features. And so, to delay citing data indefinitely because we have an opportunity to improve the act of citation is just perverse. Our community has always opted for progress over perfection.\nFor one thing - the efforts are not mutually exclusive. We can start citing data with the current limitations of citation practices and simultaneously propose mechanisms for making citation more useful in the future, including new guidelines to deal with the unique issues that citing data poses.\nBut in the meantime, we will be doing researchers a giant favour if we at least include our imperfect and ambiguous, and unconventional references to data in the references section of an article so that they can be accessed and processed along with all the other imperfect, ambiguous and variant citations that we find so useful.\nSome of our members are already doing this. They have been for a long time. And they haven’t found it any more complicated than managing non-data references in the past.\nJoin them and make your metadata more useful.\nCite data now. Don’t put it off.\nAnd Crossref will continue to work with DataCite and the rest of the community to make the distribution even easier and more useful.\nSo who is already citing data? Top 10 members depositing data citations from November-May 2022 (broken down by DOI prefix, which is why you see some publishers listed twice):\nPrefix Member name Data citations deposited 10.1038 Springer Science and Business Media LLC 7174 10.1016 Elsevier BV 6527 10.1007 Springer Science and Business Media LLC 4748 10.5194 Copernicus GmbH 3017 10.1080 Informa UK Limited 2346 10.1177 SAGE Publications 2082 10.1002 Wiley 2048 10.1111 Wiley 1888 10.1108 Emerald 1876 10.3390 MDPI AG 1827 Top 10 data citations per deposited work (again, broken down by prefix)\nMember name Prefix Data citations deposited Data citations per work Consortium Erudit 10.7202 580 1.149 SLACK, Inc. 10.3928 462 0.646 S. Karger AG 10.1159 1653 0.532 Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 10.1073 973 0.502 American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) 10.1542 486 0.397 F1000 Research Ltd 10.12688 552 0.341 American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) 10.1126 952 0.317 Springer Science and Business Media LLC 10.1038 7174 0.231 JMIR Publications Inc. 10.2196 864 0.187 American Geophysical Union (AGU) 10.1029 692 0.166 These are for the prefixes with the most data citations deposited (\u0026gt;500 in 6 months) so there might be smaller members doing better than this.\nSummaries are great, but I want to see some actual examples! Here are some examples showing how data is cited by our members:\nThis eLife article: https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.26410 cites this dataset in Dryad https://doi.org/10.5061/dryad.854j2. This Copernicus article: https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-22-7105-2022 cite to this dataset https://doi.org/10.24381/cds.bd0915c6 This Sciendo article: https://doi.org/10.2478/plc-2021-0008 cites this APA-hosted language competence test https://doi.org/10.1037/t15159-000 This De Gruyter article: https://doi.org/10.1515/opth-2020-0160 cites this bibliography at Oxford Bibliographies: https://doi.org/10.1093/OBO/9780195396584-0012 And here are some example API requests for discovering more metadata citations. You can use these API requests as examples and adapt to your own needs.\nFind all the DOIs that cite Dataset X (identified by DOI) https://api.eventdata.crossref.org/v1/events?rows=20\u0026amp;scholix=true\u0026amp;obj-id=10.5061/dryad.854j2\nFind all data citations from Crossref member X (identified by member prefix) https://api.eventdata.crossref.org/v1/events?rows=20\u0026amp;scholix=true\u0026amp;subj-id.prefix=10.7202\nFind papers with supplementary data https://api.crossref.org/v1/works?filter=prefix:10.3390,relation.type:is-supplemented-by\nFind all data citations to Crossref member X https://api.eventdata.crossref.org/v1/events?rows=20\u0026amp;scholix=true\u0026amp;obj-id.prefix=10.7202\nFind all data citations to DataCite member X https://api.eventdata.crossref.org/v1/events?rows=20\u0026amp;scholix=true\u0026amp;obj-id.prefix=10.5061\n",
"headings": ["TL;DR","Background","So who is already citing data?","Top 10 members depositing data citations from November-May 2022","Top 10 data citations per deposited work","Summaries are great, but I want to see some actual examples!","Find all the DOIs that cite Dataset X (identified by DOI)","Find all data citations from Crossref member X (identified by member prefix)","Find papers with supplementary data","Find all data citations to Crossref member X","Find all data citations to DataCite member X"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/authors/deborah-plavin/",
"title": "Deborah Plavin",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Authors",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/shooting-for-the-stars-asms-journey-towards-complete-metadata/",
"title": "Shooting for the stars – ASM’s journey towards complete metadata",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2023-03-14",
"lastmod_ts": 1678752000,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "At Crossref, we care a lot about the completeness and quality of metadata. Gathering robust metadata from across the global network of scholarly communication is essential for effective co-creation of the research nexus and making the inner workings of academia traceable and transparent. We invest time in community initiatives such as Metadata 20/20 and Better Together webinars. We encourage members to take time to look up their participation reports, and our team can support you if you’re looking to understand and improve any aspects of metadata coverage of your content.\n",
"content": "At Crossref, we care a lot about the completeness and quality of metadata. Gathering robust metadata from across the global network of scholarly communication is essential for effective co-creation of the research nexus and making the inner workings of academia traceable and transparent. We invest time in community initiatives such as Metadata 20/20 and Better Together webinars. We encourage members to take time to look up their participation reports, and our team can support you if you’re looking to understand and improve any aspects of metadata coverage of your content.\nIn 2022, we have observed with delight the growth of one of our members from basic coverage of their publications to over 90% in most areas, and no less than 70% of the corpus is covered by all key types of metadata Crossref enables (see their own participation report for details). Here, Deborah Plavin and David Haber share the story of ASM’s success and lessons learnt along the way.\nCould you introduce your organisation? The American Society for Microbiology publishes 16 peer-reviewed journals advancing the microbial sciences, from food microbiology, to genomics and the microbiome, comprising 14% of all microbiology articles. Six of those are open-access journals, and 56% of ASM’s published papers are open access. Together, our journals contribute 25% of all microbiology citations.\nWould you tell us a little more about yourselves? DH: David Haber, Publishing Operations Director at the American Society for Microbiology. I live in a century-old house that is in a perpetual state of renovation due to my inability to stop starting new projects before I complete old ones.\nDP: Deborah Plavin, Digital Publishing Manager at the American Society for Microbiology. Following David’s example, my apartment in Washington D.C. is just up the block from one of the homes Duke Ellington lived in https://www.hmdb.org/m.asp?m=142334.\nWhat value do society publishers in general see in metadata in your view? DP: In my view, robust metadata allows publishers to look at changes over time, do comparative analysis within and across research areas, more easily identify trends, and plan for future analysis (e.g., if we deposit data citation information and we change our processes to make it more straightforward, do we see any change in the percentage of articles that include that information, etc.).\nDH: To echo Deborah\u0026rsquo;s point, to be able to name something distinctly and clearly identify its specific attributes is vital to understanding past research and planning for future possibilities. One of our fundamental roles as a publisher for a non-profit society is to properly lay this metadata foundation so that we can provide services and new venues for our members, authors, and readers that match their needs and track with the trends in research. Without good and robust metadata, it is impossible to truly understand the direction in which our community is pointing us.\nMetadata for your own research outputs in the last year has grown rapidly. Why such focus on metadata in 2022? DP: This is something that ASM has been chipping away at over time. Years ago we found that it wasn’t always easy to take advantage of deposits that included new kinds of metadata. That was either because we needed to work out how and where to capture it in the process or because platform providers weren’t always ready — coming up with ways to process the XML that publishers supply in many different ways takes time. These back-end processes that feed the infrastructure aren’t usually of great interest to stakeholders, and so it allowed us to play around, flounder, fail, refine, and try again.\nWe looked at having 3rd parties deposit metadata for us, and while that helped expand the kind of metadata we were delivering, it created workflow challenges of its own. What turned out to be most effective was budgeting for content cleanup projects and depositing updated and more robust metadata to Crossref.\nWe also benefited from a platform migration, which allowed us to take advantage of additional resources during that process.\nDH: Coming from a production background, I have always been fascinated with the when and how of capturing key metadata during the publishing process. When are those data good and valuable, and when should they be tossed or cleaned up for downstream deliveries? Because Deborah and ASM directors saw a more complete Crossref metadata set for our corpus as a truly valuable target, we were able to really think hard about what kind of data we were capturing and when, how those requirements may have influenced our various policies and copyediting requirements over the years, and how best to re-engineer our processes with the goal of good metadata capture throughout our publishing workflows. From our perspective, Crossref gave us a target, a “this-is-cool-bit-of-info\u0026quot; that Crossref can collect in a deposit; therefore, how can we capture that during our processes while driving further efficiencies? ASM journals had been so driven by legacy print workflows that such a change in perspective (toward metadata as a publishing object) really allowed us to re-imagine almost everything we do as a publisher.\nHas the OSTP memo influenced your effort? DP: I think that the Nelson memo hasn’t changed our focus; instead, I think it’s been another data point supporting our efforts and work in this area.\nDH: Deborah is exactly right. The release of this memo only re-affirmed our commitment to creating complete and rich metadata. The Nelson memo points to many possible paths forward, in terms of both Open Access and Open Science, but we feel our work on improving our metadata outputs positions us well to pick a path that best suits our goals as a non-profit society publisher.\nHow big was this effort? Could you draw us a picture of how many colleagues or parts of the organisation were involved? Did you involve any external stakeholders, such as authors, editors, or others? DH: It was simple. Took five minutes… In all seriousness, the key is having the support of the organisation as a whole. To do this properly, it is vitally important to know the end from the beginning, so to speak. It is one thing to say let’s start capturing ORCID IDs and deliver them to Crossref, but it is completely another to create a cohesive process in which those IDs are authenticated and validated throughout the workflow. So something as simple as a statement “ORCID IDs seem cool, let’s try to capture them” could affect how researchers submit files, how reviewers log into various systems (i.e., ORCID as SSO), how data are passed to production vendors, what copyeditors and XML QC people need to be focused on, and what integrations authors may expect at the time of publication. Being part of an organisation that embraced such change allowed us to proceed with care with each improvement to the metadata we made.\nBut that is more about incremental improvement. The beginning of this process started when we were making upgrades to our online publishing platform, and we were trying to figure out how best to get DOIs registered for our older content. When we started looking at this, we soon realized that, sure, we could do the bare minimum and just assign DOIs to this older content outside the source XML/SGML, but did that make sense? Wouldn’t it make more sense, especially since we were updating the corpus to a new DTD, to populate the source content with these newly assigned DOIs? Once we decided that we were going to revise the older content with DOIs, it made sense for us to create a custom XSL transform routine to generate Crossref deposits that would capture as much metadata as possible. So, working with a vendor to clean and update our content for one project (an online platform update) allowed us also to make massive improvements to our Crossref metadata as a side benefit.\nOf course, I do have to apologize to the STM community for the Crossref outages in late 2019. That was just me depositing thousands of records in batches one sleepless night.\nWhat were the key challenges you encountered in this project, and how did you overcome them? DH: Resources and time are always an issue. Much of the work was done in-house in spare moments captured here and there. But there are great resources in github and at Crossref to help focus on defining what is important and what is possible in such a project. And, honestly, defining what was important and weighing that against the effort to find said important bit in the corpus of articles we have was the most challenging part of this process. In other words, limiting the focus. Once one decides to start looking at the inconsistencies in older content, it is hard not to say: “Oh, look. That semi-important footnote was treated as a generic author note rather than a conflict-of-interest statement; let’s fix that.” Once you start down that path, you can spend years fiddling with stuff. For me, a key mantra was: “We now have access to the content. We can always do another Crossref metadata update if things change or shift over time.”\nHave there been any important milestones along the way you were able to celebrate? Or any set-backs you had to resolve in the process? DP: For as long as I can remember, the importance of good metadata has been among the loudest messages of best practice in the industry. I don’t think that I have been able to really quantify/ demonstrate the value of that work. Looking at the consistent increases in the Crossref monthly resolution reports that we saw between 2015 and 2022 and looking at our participation reports has helped provide some measure of progress. For example, the number of average monthly successful resolutions in that Crossref report in 2015 was ~390,000. The last time I checked, the 2022 numbers were ~ 3.7 million. In 2023, I hope that we will be able to leverage Event Data for this as well.\nThe setbacks have fallen into two categories: timing and process. Our internal resourcing to get this done within our preferred time frame, to have the content loaded and delivered, and triage problems—it’s a battle between the calendar and competing priorities.\nDH: When Deborah first shared those stats with me, I was floored. I don’t think either of us suspected such an increase was possible. For me, the biggest setback was mistakenly sending about ~50,000 DOI records to queue and watching them all fail because I grabbed the wrong batch. Ooops. I never made that mistake again, though.\nWas any specific type of metadata or any part of the schema particularly easy or particularly difficult to get right in ASM’s production process? DH: For us, the most difficult piece of metadata revolves around data availability and how we capture linked data resources (outside of data citation resources). Because of our current editorial style (which had been print-centric for years), we did not do a good job of identifying whether there are data associated with published content in a consistent machine-readable way. We did some experiments with one of our journals to capture this outside of our normal Crossref deposit routine, but that was not as accurate or sustainable as we would have liked. But, in that experiment, we learned a few things about how we treat these data throughout our publishing process and we have plans to create a sustainable integrated workflow for this to capture resource/data linkages in our Crossref deposits.\nWhat were your thoughts on last year’s move to open references metadata? Has that impacted on your project in any way? DP: We were really excited about this; based on the rather limited approach to sorting out impact at the moment, the more metadata we push out into the ecosystem, the more it appears to be used. In my view, that is at the core of what society publishers want to do—ensure that research is accessible and discoverable wherever our users expect to find it.\nDH: 100% agree.\nHow did you keep motivated and on-course throughout? DP: These kinds of things are never done; for example, we have placeholders for CRediT roles, and getting ready for that work as part of a DTD migration will be the next big thing. The motivation for that is really meeting our commitment to the community, seeing the impact of the author metadata versus article metadata, and seeing what we can learn.\nDH: Metadata at its core is one of the pillars of our service as a publisher. To provide the best service, we need to provide the best metadata possible. Just remembering that this can be incremental, allows us to celebrate the large moments and the small. And whether one is partying with a massive 7 layer cake or a smaller cake pop, both are sweet and motivating.\nNow that the project is completed, are you seeing the benefits you were hoping to achieve? DP: This is a hard one to answer as we are using limited measurements at this time. At a high level, I am pleased. While I am eager to leverage event data in the coming year, it would be really helpful to get feedback from the community on how we can improve as well as other ways to evaluate impact.\nDH: I want to take up this idea of metadata as a service once more. I don’t mean in terms of discoverability or searchability, either. Let’s take ORCID deposited into Crossref as an example. When done properly (with the proper authentication and validation occurring in the background), we are able to integrate citation data directly to an author\u0026rsquo;s ORCID profile. We have found that this small service is really appreciated.\nIs there any metadata that you’d like to be able to include with your publishing records in the future that isn’t possible currently? What would it be and why? DP: CRediT roles would be great because it could give greater insight into collaboration within and across disciplines, it could allow for some automation and integration opportunities in the peer review process, and maybe it would visualize aspects of authors’ careers.\nDH: I second capturing CRediT roles. What would be really interesting is also creating a standard that quantifies the accessibility conformance/rating of content and passing that into Crossref.\nWhat was the key lesson you learned from this project? DP: Incremental change can be just as challenging as a massive overhaul, and so it’s important to reevaluate your goals along the way—things always change. There have been cases where we were able to do things that we hadn’t initially thought were feasible.\nDH: Always keep the larger goal in mind and remember that any project can birth a new project. Everything does not happen at once.\nWhat’s your next big challenge for 2023? DP: There is a lot to contend with in the industry right now, and in addition to that we are going through some serious infrastructure changes in our program. With all that madness comes many opportunities. For that reason, when I take a step back from the tactical implications of all that and what we are interested in doing, I think our biggest challenge in 2023 will be identifying what has made an impact and why.\nDH: In the short-term, it is making sure that none of our production process changes has negatively affected the past metadata work we spent so much time honing. Once that settles down, it will be determining the best way forward from a publishing perspective in handling true versioning and capturing accurate event data.\nBased on your experience, what would be your advice for colleagues from other scholarly publishing organisations? DP: It can seem daunting, but the small wins can create momentum and do not have to be expensive. Remembering that your publishing program benefits as much as everyone else’s when you deposit more metadata can help refine your short-term and long-term priorities.\nDH: Don’t be afraid of making a mess of things. Messes are okay. They aren’t risky. They just reveal the clutter. And clutter gives one reason to clean things up.\nTHANK YOU for the interview!\nAbout the American Society for Microbiology The American Society for Microbiology is one of the largest professional societies dedicated to the life sciences and is composed of 30,000 scientists and health practitioners. ASM\u0026rsquo;s mission is to promote and advance the microbial sciences.\nASM advances the microbial sciences through conferences, publications, certifications and educational opportunities. It enhances laboratory capacity around the globe through training and resources. It provides a network for scientists in academia, industry and clinical settings. Additionally, ASM promotes a deeper understanding of the microbial sciences to diverse audiences. For more information about ASM visit asm.org.\n",
"headings": ["Could you introduce your organisation?","Would you tell us a little more about yourselves?","What value do society publishers in general see in metadata in your view?","Metadata for your own research outputs in the last year has grown rapidly. Why such focus on metadata in 2022?","Has the OSTP memo influenced your effort?","How big was this effort? Could you draw us a picture of how many colleagues or parts of the organisation were involved? Did you involve any external stakeholders, such as authors, editors, or others?","What were the key challenges you encountered in this project, and how did you overcome them?","Have there been any important milestones along the way you were able to celebrate? Or any set-backs you had to resolve in the process?","Was any specific type of metadata or any part of the schema particularly easy or particularly difficult to get right in ASM’s production process?","What were your thoughts on last year’s move to open references metadata? Has that impacted on your project in any way?","How did you keep motivated and on-course throughout?","Now that the project is completed, are you seeing the benefits you were hoping to achieve?","Is there any metadata that you’d like to be able to include with your publishing records in the future that isn’t possible currently? What would it be and why?","What was the key lesson you learned from this project?","What’s your next big challenge for 2023?","Based on your experience, what would be your advice for colleagues from other scholarly publishing organisations?","About the American Society for Microbiology"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/committees/nominating/",
"title": "Nominating committee",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 2,
"lastmod": "2023-03-10",
"lastmod_ts": 1678406400,
"section": "Committees",
"tags": [],
"description": "The Nominating Committee is defined in the by-laws. There are five members of the committee and they can be either representations of organisations on the board or other regular members. Common practice is for membership to be made up of three board members not up for election that year, and two regular (non-board) members. The purpose of this committee is to review and create the slate each year for nominations to the board, ensuring fair representation of membership.\n",
"content": "The Nominating Committee is defined in the by-laws. There are five members of the committee and they can be either representations of organisations on the board or other regular members. Common practice is for membership to be made up of three board members not up for election that year, and two regular (non-board) members. The purpose of this committee is to review and create the slate each year for nominations to the board, ensuring fair representation of membership.\nThe Committee meets to discuss the charge, process, criteria, and potential candidates, and puts forward a slate which is at least equal to or greater than the number of Board seats up for election. The slate may or may not consist of some Board members up for re-election.\n2026 Nominating Committee members Staff facilitator: Lucy Ofiesh\nNick Lindsay*, MIT Press, committee chair Oscar Donde*, Pan Africa Science Journal Shaharima Parvin, East West University Nicolas Mejia Torres, Universidad de la Sabana Amanda Ward*, Taylor \u0026amp; Francis (*) Indicates Crossref board member\nPlease contact Lucy Ofiesh with any questions\n",
"headings": ["2026 Nominating Committee members"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/in-the-know-on-workflows-the-metadata-user-working-group/",
"title": "In the know on workflows: The metadata user working group",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2023-02-28",
"lastmod_ts": 1677542400,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "What’s in the metadata matters because it is So.Heavily.Used.\nYou might be tired of hearing me say it but that doesn’t make it any less true. Our open APIs now see over 1 billion queries per month. The metadata is ingested, displayed and redistributed by a vast, global array of systems and services that in whole or in part are often designed to point users to relevant content. It’s also heavily used by researchers, who author the content that is described in the metadata they analyze. It’s an interconnected supply chain of users large and small, occasional and entirely reliant on regular querying.\n",
"content": "What’s in the metadata matters because it is So.Heavily.Used.\nYou might be tired of hearing me say it but that doesn’t make it any less true. Our open APIs now see over 1 billion queries per month. The metadata is ingested, displayed and redistributed by a vast, global array of systems and services that in whole or in part are often designed to point users to relevant content. It’s also heavily used by researchers, who author the content that is described in the metadata they analyze. It’s an interconnected supply chain of users large and small, occasional and entirely reliant on regular querying.\nTl;dr Crossref recently wrapped up our first Working Group for users of the metadata, a group that plays a key role in discoverability and the metadata supply chain. You can jump directly to the stakeholder-specific recommendations or take a moment to share your use case or feedback.\nWhy a metadata user group? Why now? A majority of Crossref metadata users rely on our free, open APIs and many are anonymous. A small but growing group of users pay for a guaranteed service level option and while their individual needs and feedback have long been integrated into Crossref’s work, as a group they provide a window into the workflows and use cases for the metadata of the scholarly record. As this use grows in strategic importance, to both Crossref and the wider community, it was clear that we might be overdue for a deeper dive into user workflows.\nIn 2021, we surveyed these subscribers for their feedback and brought together a few volunteers over a series of 5 calls to dig into a number of topics specific to regular users of metadata. This group, the first primarily non-member working group at Crossref, wrapped up in December 2022, and we are grateful for their time:\nAchraf Azhar, Centre pour la Communication Scientifique Directe (CCSD) Satam Choudhury, HighWire Press Nees Jan van Eck, CWTS-Leiden University Bethany Harris, Jisc Ajay Kumar, Nova Techset David Levy, Pubmill Bruno Ohana, biologit Michael Parkin, European Bioinformatics Institute (EMBL-EBI) Axton Pitt, Litmaps Dave Schott, Copyright Clearance Center (CCC) Stephan Stahlschmidt, German Centre for Higher Education Research and Science Studies (DZHW) This post is intended to summarize the work we did, to highlight the role of metadata users in research communications, to provide a few ideas for future efforts and, crucially, to get your feedback on the findings and recommendations. Though this particular group set out to meet for a limited time, we hope this report helps facilitate ongoing conversations with the user community.\nSurvey Highlights If you’re looking for an easy overview of users and use cases, here’s a great starting point.\nShow image × If you interpret this graphic to mean that there is a lot of variety centered on a few high level use cases, the survey and our experiences with users certainly supports that. A few key takeaways from the 2021 survey may be useful context:\nFrequency of use: At least 60% of respondents query metadata on a daily basis Use cases Finding and enhancing metadata as well as using it for general discovery are all common use cases For most users, matching DOIs and citations is a common need but for a significant group, it is their primary use case Analyzing the corpus for research was a consistent use case for 13% of respondents Metadata of particular interest Abstracts are the most desirable non-bibliographic metadata, followed by affiliation information, including RORs Some other elements (beyond citation information) that respondents find useful are: Corrections and retractions Relationship metadata Book chapters Grant information NB: The survey did not ask about references but we are frequently asked why they’re not included more often.\nIt’s also worth noting that about a third of respondents said that correct metadata is more important to them than any particular element.\nThere is more to this survey that isn’t covered here but it was kept fairly short to help with the response rate. Knowing we would have some focused time to discuss issues too numerous or nuanced to reasonably address in a survey, we compiled a long list of questions and topics for the Working Group then followed up with a second, more detailed survey to kick off the meeting series.\nWhat we set out to address We had three primary goals for this Working Group:\nHighlight the efforts of metadata users in enabling discovery and discoverability Determine direction(s) for improved engagement Inform the Crossref product development roadmap for metadata retrieval services Of course, everyone involved had some questions and topics of interest to cover, including (but not limited to):\nUnderstanding publisher workflows How best to introduce changes, e.g. for a high volume of updated records Understanding the Crossref schema Query efficiencies, i.e. ‘tips and tricks’ (here for the REST API) Which scripts, tools and/or programs are used in workflows What other metadata sources are used What kind of normalization or processing is done on ingest How metadata errors are handled What did we learn? Workflows\nI started with the admittedly ambitious goal of collecting a library of workflows. After a few years of working with users, I learned never to assume what a user was doing with the metadata, why or how. For example, some subscribers use Plus snapshots (a monthly set of all records), regularly or occasionally and some don’t use them at all. Understanding why users make the choices they do is always helpful.\nIn my experience, workflows are frequently characterized as “set it and forget it.” It’s hard to know how often and how easily they might be adapted when, for example, a new record type like peer review reports becomes available. So, it’s worth exploring when and how to highlight to users changes that might be of interest.\nAs it turned out, half the group had their workflows mostly or fully documented. The rest are partially documented, not documented at all or the availability of documentation was unknown. Helping users document their workflows, to the extent possible, should be a mutually beneficial effort to explore going forward. We\u0026rsquo;re doing similar work with the aim of making ours more transparent and replicable.\nFeedback on subscriber services\nUser feedback might be the most obvious and directly consequential work of this group, at least for Crossref - understanding how well the services used meet their needs and what might be improved.\nOne frequent suggestion for improvement is faster response time on queries. This is an area we’ve focused on for some time, because refining queries to be more efficient is often the most straightforward way to improve response times and one reason for the emphasis on workflows.\nWe also discussed the possibility of whether or how to notify users of changes of interest. Just defining “change” is complex since they are so frequent and may often be considered very minor. We’ve been experimenting a bit over the past few years with notifying these users in cases where we’re aware of upcoming large volumes of changes, which is sometimes the case when landing page URLs are updated due to a platform change, for example. It was incredibly useful to discuss with the group what volume of records would be a useful threshold to trigger a notification (100K if you’re curious).\nBut perhaps the most common feedback we get from all users is on the metadata itself and the myriad quality issues involved. The group spent a fair amount of time discussing how this affects their work and shared a few examples of notable concerns:\nAuthor name issues, e.g. ‘Anonymous’ is an option for authors but that or things like ‘n/a’ are sometimes used in surname fields Invalid DOIs are sometimes found in reference lists Garbled characters from text not rendering properly Affiliation information is often not included or incomplete (e.g. doesn’t include RORs) Inconsistencies in commonly included information, e.g. ISSNs It’s worth noting that a common misunderstanding - not just among users - is what is required in the metadata. Users nearly always expect more metadata and more consistency than is actually available. The introduction of Participation Reports a few years ago was a very useful start to what is an ongoing discussion about the variable nature of metadata quality and completeness.\nUsers in the metadata supply chain\nA few years ago, our colleague Joe Wass used Event Data to put together this chart of referrals from non-publisher sources in 2015.\nThe role of metadata users in discoverability of content is key in my view and one that often doesn’t get enough attention, especially given that the systems and services that use this information often use it to point their own users to relevant resources. And because they work so closely with the metadata, users frequently report errors and so serve as a sort of de facto quality control. So, unfortunately, the effects of incomplete or incorrect metadata on these users might be the most powerful way to highlight the need for more and better metadata.\nWhat are the recommendations? In discussions with the Working Group, a few themes emerged, largely around best practices, which, by their nature, tend to be aspirational.\nIf you’re not already familiar with the personas and Best Practices and Principles of Metadata 2020, that is a useful starting point (I am admittedly biased here!) and many are echoed in the following recommendations:\nFor users:\nDocument and periodically review workflows Report errors to members or to Crossref support and reflect corrections when they’re made (metadata and content) Understand what is and isn’t in the metadata Follow best practices for using APIs For Crossref:\nDefine a set of metadata changes, e.g. to affiliations, to further the discussion around thresholds for notifying users of ‘high volumes’ of changes Provide an output schema. Continue refining the input schema to include information like preprint server name, journal article sub types (research article, review article, letter, editorial, etc.), corresponding author flags, raw funding statement texts, provenance information, etc. Collaborate on improving processes for reporting metadata errors and making corrections and enhancements For metadata providers (publishers, funders and their service providers):\nFollow Metadata 2020 Metadata Principles and Practices Consistency is important, e.g. using the same, correct relationship for preprint to VoR links for all records Workarounds such as putting information into a field that is ‘close’ but not meant for it can be considered a kind of error Understand the roles and needs of users in amplifying your outputs Respond promptly to reports of metadata errors Whenever possible, provide PIDs (ORCID IDs, ROR IDs, etc.) in addition to (not as a substitute for) textual metadata What is still unclear or unfinished? Honestly, a lot. We knew from the outset that the group would conclude with much more work to be done, in part because there is so much variety under the umbrella of metadata users and many answers lead to more questions and in part because the metadata and the user community will continue to evolve. Even without a standing group that meets regularly, it’s very much an ongoing conversation and we invite you to join it.\nNow it’s your turn–can you help fill in the blanks? Does any or all of this resonate with you? Do you take exception to any of it? Do you have suggestions for continuing the conversation?\nSpecifically, can you help fill in any of the literal blanks? We\u0026rsquo;ve prepared a short survey that we hope can serve as a template for collecting (anonymous) workflows. Please take just a few minutes to answer a few short questions such as how often you query for metadata.\nIf you are willing to share examples of your queries or have questions or further comments, please get in touch.\n",
"headings": ["Tl;dr","Why a metadata user group? Why now?","Survey Highlights","What we set out to address","What did we learn?","What are the recommendations?","What is still unclear or unfinished?","Now it’s your turn–can you help fill in the blanks?"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/authors/jennifer-kemp/",
"title": "Jennifer Kemp",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Authors",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/categories/users/",
"title": "Users",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Categories",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/authors/mohamad-mostafa/",
"title": "Mohamad Mostafa",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Authors",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/perspectives-mohamad-mostafa-on-scholarly-communications-in-uae/",
"title": "Perspectives: Mohamad Mostafa on scholarly communications in UAE",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2023-02-27",
"lastmod_ts": 1677456000,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "\rOur Perspectives blog series highlights different members of our diverse, global community at Crossref. We learn more about their lives and how they came to know and work with us, and we hear insights about the scholarly research landscape in their country, the challenges they face, and their plans for the future.\nتسلط سلسلة مدونة توقعات - وجهات نظر الخاصة بنا الضوء على أعضاء مختلفين من مجتمعنا العالمي المتنوع في كروس رف .نتعلم المزيد عن حياتهم وكيف تعرفوا وعملوا معنا، ونسمع رؤى حول مشهد البحث العلمي في بلدهم، والتحديات التي يواجهونها، وخططهم للمستقبل. ",
"content": "\rOur Perspectives blog series highlights different members of our diverse, global community at Crossref. We learn more about their lives and how they came to know and work with us, and we hear insights about the scholarly research landscape in their country, the challenges they face, and their plans for the future.\nتسلط سلسلة مدونة توقعات - وجهات نظر الخاصة بنا الضوء على أعضاء مختلفين من مجتمعنا العالمي المتنوع في كروس رف .نتعلم المزيد عن حياتهم وكيف تعرفوا وعملوا معنا، ونسمع رؤى حول مشهد البحث العلمي في بلدهم، والتحديات التي يواجهونها، وخططهم للمستقبل. As we continue with our Perspectives blog series, today, we meet Mohamad Mostafa, Crossref Ambassador in the UAE and Production Manager at Knowledge E. Mohamad is passionate about helping improve the discoverability of research through rich metadata. We invite you to read and listen to what Mohamad has to say!\nبينما نواصل سلسلة مدونة توقعات - وجهات نظر الخاصة بنا، نلتقي اليوم مع محمد مصطفى، سفير كروس رف في الإمارات العربية المتحدة ومدير الإنتاج في نوليدج اي . محمد متحمس للمساعدة في تحسين إمكانية اكتشاف البحث من خلال البيانات الوصفية الغنية. ندعوكم لقراءة ما يقوله محمد والاستماع إليه! English عربي Tell us a bit about your organisation, your objectives, and your role\nأخبرنا قليلاً عن مؤسستك وأهدافك ودورك\nMy name is Mohamad Mostafa, and I am the Production Manager at Knowledge E. Within our publishing program, we publish around 2000 articles across 13 titles that are fully Open Access, which is something that I really value. اسمي محمد مصطفى، وأنا مدير الإنتاج في نولدج إي. ضمن برنامج النشر الخاص بنا، ننشر حوالي 2000 مقالة عبر 13 عنوانًا مفتوح الوصول بالكامل، وهو أمر أقدره حقًا. In a world that’s moving faster than ever, the availability, quality, and pursuit of knowledge are fundamental for advancement. Knowledge E, in line with its vision of developing a more knowledgeable world, helps institutions advance the quality of their research; move towards teaching excellence; upgrade library technology, services, and practices; and advance scholarship through journal publication, management, and training. In other words, it works with higher education institutions, research centres, ministries, publishers, and scholars to solve our society’s most significant challenges. في عالم يتحرك بشكل أسرع من أي وقت مضى، يعد توافر المعرفة وجودتها والسعي وراءها أمورًا أساسية للتقدم. إن نوليدج إي، تماشياً مع رؤيتها لتطوير عالم أكثر معرفة ودراية، تساعد المؤسسات على تحسين جودة أبحاثها؛ التحرك نحو التميز في التدريس؛ ترقية مكتباتها الرقمية والخدمات والممارسات المتعلقة بها؛ ودعم المنح الدراسية المتقدمة من خلال نشر المجلات وإدارتها والتدريب. بمعنى آخر، تعمل شركة نولدج إي مع مؤسسات التعليم العالي ومراكز البحث والوزارات والناشرين والعلماء لحل أهم التحديات التي تواجه مجتمعنا.\nI am also a Crossref Ambassador. As part of the ambassador program, we aim to raise awareness about Crossref services among librarians, publishers, editors, and authors in the Middle East and North Africa region. As part of this, we run workshops in English and Arabic, emphasizing the importance of comprehensive metadata and persistent identifiers. We also help research communities improve their understanding of how to use Crossref services. The importance of making regional research objects easy to find, cite and reuse encouraged me to join the ambassador program.\nأنا أيضًا سفير كروس رف. كجزء من برنامج السفراء، نهدف إلى زيادة الوعي حول خدمات Crossref بين أمناء المكتبات والناشرين والمحررين والمؤلفين في منطقة الشرق الأوسط وشمال إفريقيا. وكجزء من هذا، فإننا ندير ورش عمل باللغتين الإنجليزية والعربية، للتأكيد على أهمية البيانات الوصفية الشاملة والمعرفات المستمرة. نحن أيضًا نساعد مجتمعات البحث على تحسين فهمهم لكيفية استخدام خدمات .Crossref شجعتني أهمية تسهيل العثور على عناصر البحث الإقليمية والاستشهاد بها وإعادة استخدامها على الانضمام إلى برنامج سفراء كروس رف.\nWhat is one thing that others should know about your country and its research activity?\nما هو الشيء الذي يجب أن يعرفه الآخرون عن بلدك ونشاطه البحثي؟\nA lot of regional research is being produced (in Arabic) and even without proper infrastructure (the lack of language support within the international publishing ecosystems such as peer review systems, indexes, citations databases, submissions systems, etc.) and the inadequate awareness about the various services (such as Crossref solutions) that can help with the discoverability and visibility of this research, the Arab region is increasingly recognised as a global leader in research outputs. Generally, these are some of the challenges and frustrations associated with the MENA (Middle East/North Africa) region. يتم إنتاج الكثير من الأبحاث الإقليمية (باللغة العربية) وحتى بدون بنية تحتية مناسبة (نقص الدعم اللغوي داخل أنظمة النشر الدولية مثل أنظمة مراجعة الأقران، والفهارس، وقواعد بيانات الاستشهادات، وأنظمة التقديم، وما إلى ذلك) وعدم كفاية الوعي حول الخدمات المختلفة (مثل حلول(Crossref التي يمكن أن تساعد في اكتشاف هذه البحوث وإبرازها، يتم الاعتراف بالمنطقة العربية بشكل متزايد كرائد عالمي في مخرجات البحث. بشكل عام، هذه بعض التحديات والإحباطات المرتبطة بمنطقة الشرق الأوسط وشمال إفريقيا. Are there trends in scholarly communications that are unique to your part of the world?\nهل توجد اتجاهات في الاتصالات العلمية فريدة من نوعها في الجزء الذي تعيش فيه من العالم؟\nIn general, Open Access and Open Research are getting more and more attention in our region currently. We have recently launched the Forum for Open Research in MENA to raise awareness about all the new scholarly communications trends and support the Middle East and North Africa movement towards Open Science. بشكل عام، يحظى الوصول الحر والبحث المفتوح باهتمام متزايد في منطقتنا حاليًا. لقد أطلقنا مؤخرًا منتدى الأبحاث المفتوحة في منطقة الشرق الأوسط وشمال إفريقيا لزيادة الوعي حول الاتصالات العلمية الجديدة ودعم حركة الشرق الأوسط وشمال إفريقيا نحو العلوم المفتوحة. The Forum for Open Research in MENA (FORM) is a non-profit membership organisation supporting the advancement of open science policies and practices in research communities and institutions across the Arab world. منتدى البحوث المفتوحة في الشرق الأوسط وشمال إفريقيا (FORM) هو منظمة غير ربحية ذات عضوية تدعم النهوض بسياسات وممارسات العلوم المفتوحة في المجتمعات والمؤسسات البحثية في جميع أنحاء العالم العربي. We believe the Arab world has the resources and capability to play a pivotal role in the global transition towards more accessible, sustainable, and inclusive research and education models. And we want to support all our research communities and stakeholder groups in the journey towards a more ‘open’ world. Our vision is to help unlock research for and in the Arab world. Our mission is to support the advancement of open science practices in research libraries and universities across the Arab world by facilitating the exchange of actionable insights and developing practical policies. نعتقد أن العالم العربي لديه الموارد والقدرة على لعب دور محوري في التحول العالمي نحو نماذج بحث وتعليم أكثر سهولة واستدامة وشمولية. ونريد دعم جميع مجتمعاتنا البحثية ومجموعات أصحاب المصلحة في رحلتنا نحو عالم أكثر \"انفتاحًا\". رؤيتنا هي دعم الوصول الحر والبحوث المفتوحة في العالم العربي. ومهمتنا هي دعم تقدم ممارسات العلوم المفتوحة في مكتبات البحث والجامعات في جميع أنحاء العالم العربي من خلال تسهيل تبادل الأفكار القابلة للتنفيذ وتطوير السياسات العملية. Our first Annual Forum was held in Cairo in October 2022 (as part of the global Open Access Week initiative). The event was a huge success, with over 1,100 delegates from over 48 countries across the globe. The next Annual Forum will be hosted in the UAE in October 2023, and details will be available shortly on our website. عقد المنتدى السنوي الأول في القاهرة في أكتوبر 2022 (كجزء من مبادرة أسبوع الوصول الحر العالمي). حقق الحدث نجاحًا كبيرًا، حيث حضره أكثر من 1100 مندوب من أكثر من 48 دولة حول العالم. سيتم استضافة المنتدى السنوي القادم في دولة الإمارات العربية المتحدة في أكتوبر 2023، وستتوفر التفاصيل قريبًا على موقعنا. How would you describe the value of being part of the Crossref community; what impact has your participation had on your goals?\nكيف تصف قيمة أن تكون جزءًا من مجتمعCrossref ؟ ما هو تأثير مشاركتك على أهدافك؟\nI have been a Crossref ambassador for more than 5 years now, and I can really say that it has been a great experience being part of such an amazing and collaborative community. We got the chance to interact with different publishers and service providers and participate in different Crossref annual events. It’s also perfectly aligned with our vision of supporting Open Research. لقد كنت سفيرًا لـ Crossref لأكثر من 5 سنوات حتى الآن، ويمكنني حقًا أن أقول إنها كانت تجربة رائعة أن أكون جزءًا من هذا المجتمع المذهل والتعاوني. لقد أتيحت لنا الفرصة للتفاعل مع مختلف الناشرين ومقدمي الخدمات والمشاركة في الأحداث السنوية المختلفة لـ .Crossref كما أنه يتماشى تمامًا مع رؤيتنا لدعم البحث المفتوح. Recently, we have delivered a series of three Arabic webinars that offered basic metadata information and advanced insights about the role of metadata and how Crossref services can help an institution. These webinars have been well received by the community of regional publishers, university presses, and librarians. Dozens of questions have been answered, and technical enquires have been resolved. It was a great experience, and it was good to see that kind of interest in our community. Also, more educational webinars are yet to come! قدمنا مؤخرًا سلسلة من ثلاث ندوات عربية عبر الإنترنت تمحورت حول معلومات البيانات الوصفية الأساسية ورؤى متقدمة حول دور البيانات الوصفية وكيف يمكن لخدمات Crossref أن تساعد المؤسسات البحثية. لقيت هذه الندوات عبر الإنترنت استحسان مجتمع الناشرين الإقليميين دور النشر الجامعية وأمناء المكتبات. تمت الإجابة على عشرات الأسئلة، وتم الرد على الاستفسارات الفنية. لقد كانت تجربة رائعة، وكان من المفرح أن نرى هذا النوع من الاهتمام في مجتمعنا. بالإضافة إلى ذلك، سيتم تقديم المزيد من الندوات التعليمية على الإنترنت في المستقبل. For you, what would be the most important thing Crossref could change (do more of/do better in)?\nبالنسبة لك، ما هو الشيء الأكثر أهمية الذي يمكن لـ Crossref تغييره (القيام بالمزيد / القيام بعمل أفضل في)؟\nLanguage is still a barrier in some parts of the Arab region, so producing more educational content in different formats (webinars, flyers, videos with subtitles, etc.) would be highly appreciated here. لا تزال اللغة تشكل حاجزًا في بعض المناطق العربية، لذا سيكون إنتاج المزيد من المحتوى التعليمي بتنسيقات مختلفة (ندوات عبر الإنترنت، ونشرات، ومقاطع فيديو مع ترجمة، وما إلى ذلك) موضع تقدير كبير هنا. Which other organisations do you collaborate with or are pivotal to your work in open scholarship?\nما هي المنظمات الأخرى التي تتعاون معها أو التي تلعب دورًا محوريًا في عملك في مجال الابحاث المفتوحة؟\nWe work closely with ORCiD and invite them to our events, support DOAJ via our charitable Foundation, and rely heavily on PKP products mainly the Open Journal Systems (OJS) with plans to expand and start using Open Monograph Press (OMP). إننا نعمل عن كثب مع ORCiD ونقدر دعمهم لفاعلياتنا، كما ندعم DOAJ عبر موقعنا ومؤسستنا الخيرية، ونعتمد بشكل كبير على منتجات مشروع المعرفة العامة وخاصة المجلة المفتوحة أنظمة (OJS) كما أننا نود التوسع والبدء في استخدام Open Monograph Press (OMP). What are the post-pandemic challenges/hopes you are facing and how are you adapting to them/what you’re looking forward to?\nما هي التحديات / الآمال التي تواجهها في فترة ما بعد الجائحة وكيف تتكيف معها / ما الذي تتطلع إليه؟\nWe aim for more face-to-face meetings and onsite workshops/conferences as the world opens up again. In addition, we have launched the Forum for Open Research in MENA (FORM) (a non-profit membership organisation supporting the advancement of Open Science policies and practices in research communities and institutions across the Arab region.) نحن نهدف إلى المزيد من الاجتماعات وجهًا لوجه وورش العمل / المؤتمرات. بالإضافة إلى ذلك، أطلقنا منتدى البحث المفتوحMENA (FORM) ، وهي منظمة غير ربحية ذات عضوية تدعم النهوض بسياسات وممارسات العلوم المفتوحة في مجتمعات ومؤسسات البحث في جميع أنحاء المنطقة العربية. A catalyst for positive action, we work with key stakeholders to develop and implement a pragmatic programme to facilitate the transition toward more accessible, inclusive, and sustainable research and education models in the Arab region. Our driving focus is on building the resources, the membership, the organisational structures, and the broader community to support the advancement of Open Science in research communities and research institutions across the Arab world. كمحفز للعمل الإيجابي، نحن نعمل مع أصحاب المصلحة الرئيسيين للتطوير وتنفيذ برنامج عملي لتسهيل الانتقال نحو المزيد من نماذج البحث والتعليم الشاملة والمستدامة والتي يسهل الوصول إليها في المنطقة العربية. ينصب تركيزنا الدافع على بناء الموارد، والعضوية، والهياكل التنظيمية، والمجتمع الأوسع لدعم تقدم العلوم المفتوحة في المجتمعات البحثية والمؤسسات البحثية عبر العالم العربي. Following the huge success of our 2022 Annual Forum (held in Cairo with the support and endorsement of UNESCO and the Egyptian Knowledge Bank), which attracted over 1100 delegates from 48 countries, our 2023 Annual Forum will be held in Abu Dhabi in the UAE. For more details about the event and the call for papers, see our website: https://forumforopenresearch.com\nبعد النجاح الكبير لمنتدى 2022 السنوي (الذي عقد في القاهرة مع دعم وتأييد اليونسكو وبنك المعرفة المصري)، التي اجتذبت أكثر من 1100 مندوب من 48 دولة، المنتدى السنوي لعام 2023 سيعقد في أبو ظبي في دولة الإمارات العربية المتحدة. لمزيد من التفاصيل حول الحدث والدعوة للمشاركة، راجع موقعنا على الإنترنت:https://forumforopenresearch.com\nWhat are your plans for the future?\nما هي خططك المستقبلية؟\nKeep working with different global and regional stakeholders to help the transition of our region towards Open Science. استمر في العمل مع مختلف الشركاء العالميين والإقليميين للمساعدة في انتقال منطقتنا العربية نحو العلوم المفتوحة. Thank you, Mohamad! شكرا لك يا محمد! ",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/the-more-the-merrier-or-how-more-registered-grants-means-more-relationships-with-outputs/",
"title": "The more the merrier, or how more registered grants means more relationships with outputs",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2023-02-22",
"lastmod_ts": 1677024000,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "One of the main motivators for funders registering grants with Crossref is to simplify the process of research reporting with more automatic matching of research outputs to specific awards. In March 2022, we developed a simple approach for linking grants to research outputs and analysed how many such relationships could be established. In January 2023, we repeated this analysis to see how the situation changed within ten months. Interested? Read on!\n",
"content": "One of the main motivators for funders registering grants with Crossref is to simplify the process of research reporting with more automatic matching of research outputs to specific awards. In March 2022, we developed a simple approach for linking grants to research outputs and analysed how many such relationships could be established. In January 2023, we repeated this analysis to see how the situation changed within ten months. Interested? Read on!\nTL;DR The overall numbers changed a lot between March 2022 and January 2023:\nthe total number of registered grants doubled (from ~38k to ~76k) the total numbers of relationships established between grants and research outputs quadrupled (from 21k to 92k) the percentage of linked grants increased substantially (from 10% to 23%) Most of this growth can be attributed to one funder, the European Union. They started registering grants with us in December 2022, and:\ntheir grants constitute 47% of all grants registered by January 2023 and 95% of grants registered between March 2022 and January 2023 72% of all established relationships involve their grants We have further work planned both internally and with the community to consolidate and build out important relationships between funding and research outputs.\nIntroduction When we started to develop, think and talk about grant registration at Crossref back in 2017, one of the key things we expected this to support was easier, more efficient, accurate analysis of research outputs funded by specific awards.\nThis is backed up by conversations with funders who are keen to fill in gaps in the map of the research landscape with new data points and better quality information, search for grants, investigators, projects or organisations associated with awards and simplify the process of research reporting and with automatic matching of outputs to grants.\nThis is in keeping with and informed our recent recommendations about how funding agencies can meet open science guidance using existing open infrastructure, which included input from ORCID and DataCite. It\u0026rsquo;s also in keeping with recent studies on how important funding and grant metadata is to help the community use this information in their own research.\nTo meet these expectations, we need not only identifiers and metadata of grants, but also relationships between them and research outputs supported by them. Unfortunately, our schema does not make it easy to directly deposit such relationships, and so there are only a handful of them available. But we wouldn\u0026rsquo;t let such a minor obstacle stop us! In March 2022 we analysed the metadata of registered grants and developed a simple matching approach to automatically link grants to research outputs supported by them. Back then, we were able to find 20,834 relationships, involving 17,082 research outputs and 3,858 grants (which was 10% of all registered grants).\nNow that we are seeing the accumulation of grant metadata being registered with Crossref, we have a bigger dataset to test these expectations against than we did a year ago. So we decided to do the analysis again. And the results are in, they\u0026rsquo;re open, and they\u0026rsquo;re positive. We\u0026rsquo;ll explain below. The methodology To spare you from having to read the old analysis in detail, here is a very brief summary of the matching methodology. To find relationships between grants and research outputs, we iterated over all registered grants, and for each grant we searched for research outputs that looked like they might have been supported by this grant. We established a relationship between a grant and a research output if one of the following three scenarios was true:\nThe research output contained the DOI of the grant (deposited as the award number).\nThe award number in the grant was the same as the award number in the research output, the research output contained the funder ID, and one of the following was true: a. Funder ID in the grant was the same as the funder ID in the research output b. Funder ID in the grant replaced or was replaced by the funder ID in the research output c. Funder ID in the grant was an ancestor or the descendant of the funder ID in the research output\nThe award number in the grant was the same as the award number in the research output, the research output did not contain the funder ID, and one of the following was true:\na. Funder name in the research output was the same as the funder name in the grant\nb. Funder name in the research output was the same as the name of a funder that replaced or was replaced by the funder in the grant\nc. Funder name in the research output was the same as the name of an ancestor or a descendant of the funder in the grant\nNote that the replaced/replaced-by relationships and ancestor/descendant hierarchy are taken from the Funder Registry.\nCurrent results Since March 2022, six additional funders have started registering grants with us. As a result, the total number of grants doubled, and the total number of established relationships between grants and research outputs, linked grants, and linked research outputs quadrupled. Here is the comparison of the total numbers of grants, established relationships, linked grants, and linked research outputs in March 2022 and in January 2023:\n95% of grants registered within ten months between March 2022 and January 2023 were registered by one funder: the European Union. This suggests that this funder contributed a lot to this rapid increase in the number of established relationships. It looks like this funder\u0026rsquo;s grant metadata is of high quality and matches well the funding information given in the research outputs supported by this funder\u0026rsquo;s grants.\nLet\u0026rsquo;s also compare the breakdowns of all established relationships by the matching method:\nThe distributions are a bit different. Currently, the percentage of relationships established based on the replaced/replaced-by relationship is much smaller than before, suggesting that newer data uses correct funder IDs instead of deprecated ones. Also, the percentage of the relationships matched by the funder ID increased from 40% to 48%, which is great, because this is the most reliable way of matching.\nAnd here we have the statistics broken down by grant registrants. Only funders with at least 100 registered grants are included. The table shows the number of relationships, grants, linked grants, and linked research outputs, and is sorted by the percentage of linked grants.\nfunder relationships linked research outputs grants linked grants European Union 66,562 60,630 35,530 12,688 (36%) Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation 93 92 113 33 (29%) Japan Science and Technology Agency (JST) 15,584 13,464 9,923 2,323 (23%) James S. McDonnell Foundation 519 513 577 121 (21%) Melanoma Research Alliance 188 185 425 82 (19%) Muscular Dystrophy Association 50 50 178 25 (14%) Parkinson\u0026rsquo;s Foundation 30 29 107 15 (14%) Asia-Pacific Network for Global Change Research 127 127 560 70 (13%) The ALS Association 96 90 477 58 (12%) Wellcome 8,868 6,436 17,537 1,735 (10%) American Cancer Society 19 19 266 15 (6%) Templeton World Charity organisation 2 2 281 2 (0.7%) Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI) 73 69 8,723 62 (0.7%) Children\u0026rsquo;s Tumor Foundation 1 1 662 1 (0.1%) There are substantial differences between the percentages of linked grants from different funders. One of the newest registrants, the European Union, is at the top of the table with 36% of their grants linked to research outputs. This further confirms the high quality of the metadata registered by this member. It is worth noticing that this member is responsible for the majority of the growth reported here as they cover Horizon Europe, the European Research Council, and many other funding bodies and schemes. Why are these percentages so low for some funders? It could be caused by systematic discrepancies between the award numbers attached to the grants and those reported in research outputs. It could also be the case that most grants registered by a given funder are new grants, and the research outputs supported by them simply have not been published yet. Time will tell! What\u0026rsquo;s next We\u0026rsquo;re dedicating lots of time in 2023 to examine, evolve, and expose the matching we do and can do at Crossref across different metadata fields. We then plan to incorporate matching improvements into our services so that everyone can benefit.\nThis isn\u0026rsquo;t a standalone piece of work. As you can see, the more award metadata we have connected to grants by funders and connected to outputs by those who post or publish research, the better we\u0026rsquo;ll be able to do this. To make it easier for more funders to participate, and based on funder feedback, we\u0026rsquo;ve built a simple tool for members to register their grants. We will also work to help incorporate grant identifiers into publishing and funder workflows, and further our discussions with the funders in our Funder Advisory Group and the wider community, including working together with the Open Research Funders Group, the HRA, Altum, Europe PMC, the OSTP, and the ORCID Funder Interest Group. And there will be more to come as we work together to consolidate and build out important relationships between funding and outputs - for everyone.\nFollow-up Every new thing takes time to get off the ground and to show evidence of its value. We\u0026rsquo;ve seen a significant step forward recently with funders joining and contributing to the research nexus. Publishers have been contributing funding data for years, and it\u0026rsquo;s now becoming much clearer to see how these two communities and these two sets of metadata are coming together to make research smoother and easier to manage and evaluate. If you are ready to register grants, talk about linking up your outputs, or just want to learn more about this work, we\u0026rsquo;d love to hear from you.\n",
"headings": ["TL;DR","Introduction","The methodology","Current results","What\u0026rsquo;s next","Follow-up"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/dont-take-it-from-us-funder-metadata-matters/",
"title": "Don’t take it from us: Funder metadata matters",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2023-02-16",
"lastmod_ts": 1676505600,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "Why the focus on funding information? We are often asked who uses Crossref metadata and for what. One common use case is researchers in bibliometrics and scientometrics (among other fields) doing meta analyses on the entire corpus of records. As we pass the 10 year mark for the Funder Registry and 5 years of funders joining Crossref as members to register their grants, it’s worth a look at some recent research that focuses specifically on funding information. After all, there is funding behind so much scholarly work it seems obvious that it would be routinely documented in the scholarly record. But it often isn’t and that’s a problem. These sources make clear the need for accurate funding information and the problems that the lack of it creates.\n",
"content": "Why the focus on funding information? We are often asked who uses Crossref metadata and for what. One common use case is researchers in bibliometrics and scientometrics (among other fields) doing meta analyses on the entire corpus of records. As we pass the 10 year mark for the Funder Registry and 5 years of funders joining Crossref as members to register their grants, it’s worth a look at some recent research that focuses specifically on funding information. After all, there is funding behind so much scholarly work it seems obvious that it would be routinely documented in the scholarly record. But it often isn’t and that’s a problem. These sources make clear the need for accurate funding information and the problems that the lack of it creates.\nFirst, a few notes for context on these sources and the issues they discuss :\nThe percent of records with funding information reached about 25% as of 2021. Not all items registered are the result of funding but surely it is much higher than 25% so there is considerable room for improvement. The authors cite publishers that omit funding information as well as those that include it routinely. Overall, society publishers are at the top of the list of those that do it well. Three of the four sources found problems in some cases confirming funding information from the metadata in the original sources. This initially surprised me though less so once I thought about the strange nature of metadata workflows. The complexity of fully and correctly acknowledging multiple sources of funding in any given publication is a recurring theme. All of the sources mention the need for manual work in analyzing funding and publication information. The first two papers are from the same 2022 issue of Quantitative Science Studies and are complementary.\nAlexis-Michel Mugabushaka, Nees Jan van Eck, Ludo Waltman; Funding COVID-19 research: Insights from an exploratory analysis using open data infrastructures. Quantitative Science Studies 2022; 3 (3): 560–582. doi: https://doi.org/10.1162/qss_a_00212\nThis first paper tackles the timely question of determining which funders have supported publications of COVID-19 research and compares coverage of funding data in Crossref to that in Scopus and Web of Science. Even with so much urgent attention focused on the pandemic, the authors found that only 17% of publications in the COVID-focused CORD-19 database have funding identified in their Crossref records. We’re often asked about differences in the metadata (and citation counts) between Crossref and other sources such as Scopus. In this case, both proprietary sources studied have more funder coverage. If you are disappointed in these results or want to learn more, I encourage you to read the authors’ recommendations for improving funding data in Crossref or get in touch with us.\nBianca Kramer, Hans de Jonge; The availability and completeness of open funder metadata: Case study for publications funded by the Dutch Research Council. Quantitative Science Studies 2022; 3 (3): 583–599. doi: https://doi.org/10.1162/qss_a_00210\nThis next paper focuses on a set of outputs funded by the NWO (the Dutch Research Council). Since the funder is already known, the authors could look at multiple sources (Crossref and others) to see whether or where the NWO is correctly identified as the funder. This study also found better coverage than Crossref in proprietary sources like Web of Science. Knowing that not all outputs are the result of funded research, this paper provides a new and useful baseline for comparing percentages of coverage. Discussions of research funding so often focus on the physical and life sciences so it’s very good to see that 37% of works in this study are in the humanities and social sciences.\nBorst, T., Mielck, J., Nannt, M., Riese, W. (2022). Extracting Funder Information from Scientific Papers - Experiences with Question Answering. In: , et al. Linking Theory and Practice of Digital Libraries. TPDL 2022. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 13541. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-16802-4_24\nGiven the considerable effort required to conduct these analyses, it’s only logical to consider automating as much of the work as possible. This next paper focuses on automatic recognition of funders in economics papers in digital libraries. An interesting complication described here is the inclusion of funding for open access fees in acknowledgments and while the authors conclude that automated text mining of funder information performs better than manual curation, they also state that manual indexing is still necessary “for a gold standard of reliable metadata.”\nHabermann, T. (2022). Funder Metadata: Identifiers and Award Numbers. https://metadatagamechangers.com/blog/2022/2/2/funder-metadata-identifiers-and-award-numbers\nFinally, this concise blog post looks at RORs as well as funder names and acronyms. The author shows how acronyms contribute to the need for manual analysis. He also spends some time on award numbers, which is one of the three funding elements publishers can (and, as we’ve seen, should) include in their metadata. Award numbers are also a focus of this work and, unfortunately, another frequent reason for additional manual work.\nA common theme: More metadata needed Though collectively, this research paints a fairly dim picture of the current availability, completeness and accuracy of existing funding information in publication metadata, all is not lost. This is a good opportunity to point out the value and availability of grant records since unique, persistent identifiers for grants (yes, DOIs for grants) paired with more and better funding metadata from publishers go a very long way to realizing the vision of the Research Nexus. And it certainly would make things a whole lot easier for the researchers who use this open metadata to analyze the scholarly record for the rest of us.\n",
"headings": ["Why the focus on funding information?","A common theme: More metadata needed"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/operations-and-sustainability/membership-operations/sanctions/",
"title": "Sanctions compliance",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2023-02-14",
"lastmod_ts": 1676332800,
"section": "Operations & sustainability",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref\u0026rsquo;s mission is to support global research in and between all countries and we will always do that to the maximum extent possible. But we are also bound by laws in the US, the UK, and the EU. Where sanctions apply, we have to comply with these.\nDue to extensive sanctions, we’re currently unable to accept applications for membership from organisations based in (or with significant links with) the following countries or regions:\n",
"content": "Crossref\u0026rsquo;s mission is to support global research in and between all countries and we will always do that to the maximum extent possible. But we are also bound by laws in the US, the UK, and the EU. Where sanctions apply, we have to comply with these.\nDue to extensive sanctions, we’re currently unable to accept applications for membership from organisations based in (or with significant links with) the following countries or regions:\nCuba Iran North Korea And because of sanctions instituted in response to the war in Ukraine, we are currently unable to accept applications for membership from organisations:\nThat are part of the Russian Government, or are under sanctions by the US, UK or EU. That are located or have physical operations in the disputed oblasts of Crimea, Donetsk, Kherson, Luhansk or Zaporizhzhia. All member applications from organisations based in Russia or Belarus are subject to sanctions checks, and in some cases a more detailed and extended review will be necessary. Because of this, these applications may take longer to process than other new member applications. (We are also currently unable to offer the Similarity Check service to members based in Russia).\nMember organisations based in other countries are able to work with journals and authors in these countries, but they are obligated to check the organisations and individuals that they are working with extremely carefully. By accepting our membership terms, all members confirm that:\n“\u0026hellip;neither it nor any of its affiliates, officers, directors, employees, or members is (i) a person whose name appears on the list of Specially Designated Nationals and Blocked Persons published by the Office of Foreign Assets Control, U.S. Department of Treasury (\u0026ldquo;OFAC\u0026rdquo;), (ii) a department, agency or instrumentality of, or is otherwise controlled by or acting on behalf of, directly or indirectly, any such person; (iii) a department, agency, or instrumentality of the government of a country subject to comprehensive U.S. economic sanctions administered by OFAC; or (iv) is subject to sanctions by the United Nations, the United Kingdom, or the European Union.\nSponsoring organisations (and any remaining Sponsoring Members) are also required to ensure that their engagement with any Sponsored Member or Sponsored organisation is fully compliant with sanctions by the US, UK, UN, and EU.\nIf we discover that an existing member may be subject to sanctions and/or has misrepresented their location, identity, ownership or any other material information on their application form in order to evade sanctions or a prior revocation of membership, or any other illicit reason, we will follow our defined processes to revoke membership. Sanctions also change over time, and we periodically review our membership against the list of sanctioned organisations and individuals. This may lead to membership suspension or revocation of membership in accordance with these same processes.\n",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/",
"title": "Documentation",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2023-02-07",
"lastmod_ts": 1675728000,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "Documentation for Crossref members and the community — DOI registration, metadata deposit, REST API guides, schema reference, and service documentation.",
"content": "Take a look at the topics on the right to browse and page through our documentation, or search using the box above the topic list Common questions; how do I\u0026hellip;? Construct DOI suffixes Verify a metadata registration Update an existing metadata record Interpret and act on reports Query the API to retrieve metadata See system status and maintenance If you have questions please consult other users on our forum at community.crossref.org or open a ticket with our technical support team where we\u0026rsquo;ll reply within a few days. Please also visit our status page to find out about scheduled (and unscheduled) maintenance and subscribe to updates.\n",
"headings": ["Common questions; how do I\u0026hellip;?"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/refocusing-our-sponsors-program-a-call-for-new-sponsors-in-specific-countries/",
"title": "Refocusing our Sponsors Program; a call for new Sponsors in specific countries",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2023-02-06",
"lastmod_ts": 1675641600,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "Some small organisations who want to register metadata for their research and participate in Crossref are not able to do so due to financial, technical, or language barriers. To attempt to reduce these barriers we have developed several programs to help facilitate membership. One of the most significant\u0026mdash;and successful\u0026mdash;has been our Sponsor program.\nSponsors are organisations that are generally not producing scholarly content themselves but work with or publish on behalf of groups of smaller organisations that wish to join Crossref but face barriers to do so independently. Sponsors work directly with Crossref in order to provide billing, technical, and, if applicable, language support to Members.\n",
"content": "Some small organisations who want to register metadata for their research and participate in Crossref are not able to do so due to financial, technical, or language barriers. To attempt to reduce these barriers we have developed several programs to help facilitate membership. One of the most significant\u0026mdash;and successful\u0026mdash;has been our Sponsor program.\nSponsors are organisations that are generally not producing scholarly content themselves but work with or publish on behalf of groups of smaller organisations that wish to join Crossref but face barriers to do so independently. Sponsors work directly with Crossref in order to provide billing, technical, and, if applicable, language support to Members.\nBecause Sponsors are important partners in facilitating membership there is a high bar to meet to be accepted as a Sponsor. To ensure that an organisation can accurately represent Crossref and has the resources to be successful we created a set of criteria that must be met to be considered.\nOur Sponsors program has grown considerably over the last decade and has now become the primary route to membership for emerging markets and small or academic-adjacent publishing operations.\nThe program began in 2012 with four Sponsors, based primarily in South Korea and Turkey, representing fewer than 100 members. In the next stage of development, the program covered Brazil, India, and Ukraine, and nearly 1300 members. At the end of 2022, the program had grown to over 100 sponsors from 45 countries representing over 11,000 of our members.\nThough the program continues to expand, there are still regions where we lack Sponsors, while having an abundance in others. We are working with members, ambassadors, and the community to help identify organisations that may be a fit with the Sponsor program and based in those regions where coverage is lacking.\nThis January we announced our Global Equitable Membership (GEM) Program which offers relief from membership and content registration fees for members in the least economically-advantaged countries in the world. Eligibility for the program is based on a member\u0026rsquo;s country on our curated list.\nThough the GEM program reduces financial barriers to becoming a member, many organisations still require technical assistance and local language support. Working with a Sponsor would help organisations overcome these burdens. However, there is little or no Sponsor coverage for organisations located in most GEM-eligible countries. That means that in places like Bangladesh, Nepal, and Senegal, where we\u0026rsquo;ve seen a lot of growth, more organisations could join us if a suitable local Sponsor could support them.\nWe have made the decision to pause accepting new Sponsors from regions where Sponsor numbers are already very high or not based in a GEM region. By doing so we can focus on growing the program in areas where there is the greatest need.\nWe are also going to focus on how best to support our current 100+ Sponsors and work with them to evaluate ways to improve the program. We will bolster the training and resources, outreach activities, and solicit feedback on additional ways we can help.\nWe would love to hear from organisations based in GEM countries who might consider becoming a Sponsor. But our invitation for Sponsors is not limited to the support for the GEM program. There are countries where the GEM program won\u0026rsquo;t apply, but where growth is high and no Sponsor is present. In particular, we seek support in the following countries where member numbers are growing but could be better supported.\nCountry/state Region No. Crossref members Nigeria Sub-Saharan Africa (Western) 99 Philippines South-eastern Asia 81 Kenya Sub-Saharan Africa (Eastern) 40 Egypt Northern Africa 26 Sri Lanka Southern Asia 13 If your organisation is based in one of these regions and supports or provides services to scholarly publishers in one of the above countries \u0026mdash;please take a look at the criteria set out on our website and do get in touch to start the conversation if you think you can meet them. We\u0026rsquo;re excited to hear from you!\n",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/authors/lettie-conrad/",
"title": "Lettie Conrad",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Authors",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/measuring-metadata-impacts-books-discoverability-in-google-scholar/",
"title": "Measuring Metadata Impacts: Books Discoverability in Google Scholar",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2023-01-25",
"lastmod_ts": 1674604800,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "This blog post is from Lettie Conrad and Michelle Urberg, cross-posted from the The Scholarly Kitchen.\nAs sponsors of this project, we at Crossref are excited to see this work shared out.\nThe scholarly publishing community talks a LOT about metadata and the need for high-quality, interoperable, and machine-readable descriptors of the content we disseminate. However, as we’ve reflected on previously in the Kitchen, despite well-established information standards (e.g., persistent identifiers), our industry lacks a shared framework to measure the value and impact of the metadata we produce.\n",
"content": "This blog post is from Lettie Conrad and Michelle Urberg, cross-posted from the The Scholarly Kitchen.\nAs sponsors of this project, we at Crossref are excited to see this work shared out.\nThe scholarly publishing community talks a LOT about metadata and the need for high-quality, interoperable, and machine-readable descriptors of the content we disseminate. However, as we’ve reflected on previously in the Kitchen, despite well-established information standards (e.g., persistent identifiers), our industry lacks a shared framework to measure the value and impact of the metadata we produce.\nIn 2021, we embarked on a Crossref-sponsored study designed to measure how metadata impacts end-user experiences and contributes to the successful discovery of academic and research literature via the mainstream web. Specifically, we set out to learn if scholarly books with DOIs (and associated metadata) were more easily found in Google Scholar than those without DOIs.\nInitial results indicated that DOIs have an indirect influence on the discoverability of scholarly books in Google Scholar \u0026ndash; however, we found no direct linkage between book DOIs and the quality of Google Scholar indexing or users’ ability to access the full text via search-result links. Although Google Scholar claims to not use DOI metadata in its search index, the results of our mixed-methods study of 100+ books (from 20 publishers) demonstrate that books with DOIs are generally more discoverable than those without DOIs.\nAs we finalize our analysis, we are sharing some early results and inviting input from our community. What relevant lessons can we glean from this exercise? What changes might book publishers consider based on the outcomes of this study?\nBackground on the study This study was designed to evaluate metadata impacts \u0026amp; benefits to users. Given its popularity with a range of stakeholders in our industry, we set out to measure metadata impacts on discoverability in the mainstream web – namely, Google Scholar.\nOur test method and analysis rubric was developed based on our own information-user research, in particular how readers search and retrieve scholarly ebooks, as well as published studies about academic information experiences and research practices. We rated the search performance of more than 100 scholarly books using preset test queries (two for each title). The books tested in this study came from publishers of all sorts and sizes, and represent both monographs and edited volumes from a range of fields; some were open access and others were published under traditional licensing models.\nWe developed and executed known-item test searches that were designed to simulate common researcher practices. Heuristic analysis of the search results was used to rate the search performance on a 5-point scoring rubric, which was designed to measure the degree of friction in locating the book in question. This method allowed us to assess specific book and metadata attributes by their search performance scores to assess the impact of book metadata on content discoverability in Google Scholar.\nResults and findings In this study, we learned that high-value fields include the primary title paired with subtitles, author/editor surnames and/or field of study. Queries using full book titles performed the best across the board. Those using publication dates and/or author/editor surnames and/or publisher names, but without the book title, were the lowest performers.\nSurprisingly, our discoverability scores show no significant variation in performance by the type of book, whether edited or authored. Open-access titles performed somewhat better than traditional ones. Books covering humanities and social science fields performed a bit better than STM books, but only by a slim difference (that is not statistically significant).\nWe primarily tested the discoverability of book titles, from equal numbers of books with and without chapter-level DOIs. We ran similar tests for chapter-title discoverability but found the majority of test queries for chapters lead users to the full book itself. While books without title-level DOIs were found to be less discoverable, we did not find a measurable difference between books with or without chapter-level DOIs. (Note: All books in this study with chapter-level DOIs assigned also carried a title-level DOI, which was found to be fairly common.)\nBased on these results, we are developing a theory that books with DOIs perform better in Google Scholar because they benefit from the structured, open metadata associated with those DOIs – which are used by hundreds of platforms and services, and therefore are “seeded” throughout the mainstream web, which Scholar may draw on for indexing, linking, etc. That said, however, these results also suggest that publishers are best served by a metadata strategy that is well attuned to the protocols expected of each channel for book search and discovery. In a recent conversation about our findings, Anurag Acharya himself noted that these results underscore the need for publishers to invest in the robust construction and broad distribution of book metadata.\nIn this study, we have observed that the metadata protocols surrounding Google Scholar are not fully integrated into our industry’s established scholarly information standards bodies, like NISO, or infrastructure organisations, like Crossref. While some mainstream data standards prevail in the Scholar index, like the use of schema.org and HTTP, some key metadata attributes seem to be lacking. For example, an indicator of the type of scholarly book (monograph, handbook, etc.) would improve Google Scholar’s search index and could be used to filter search results, thereby improving users’ experiences discovering scholarly books. One clear challenge for book publishers today is the fact that Google Scholar operates outside of our community-governed scholarly information infrastructure.\nWhat comes next While this study focused on Google Scholar, the results and lessons learned are applicable to other mainstream channels of information seeking/discovery. Our report, due out spring 2023, will contribute to the literature intended to support user-centric information systems design and content architecture by scholarly publishers and service providers.\nAs we write up our findings, we intend to develop a framework that can help publishers and others measure the impact of their work to enrich and distribute scholarly metadata. We hope this first systematic review of the impacts of metadata on the discoverability of books in Google Scholar will provide valuable insights for this community. In the meantime, please share your thoughts and questions in the comments below \u0026ndash; or reach out to us directly (see Lettie’s profile here and Michelle’s profile here).\nAcknowledgments: The authors would like to thank Jennifer Kemp at Crossref for the inspiration to take this dive into the metadata literature and reflect on its impact on research information experiences. Special thanks to Anurag Acharya at Google Scholar for his consultation during this study.\n",
"headings": ["Background on the study","Results and findings","What comes next"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/authors/michelle-urberg/",
"title": "Michelle Urberg",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Authors",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/categories/search/",
"title": "Search",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Categories",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/working-groups/preprints/",
"title": "Preprint advisory group",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 3,
"lastmod": "2022-12-16",
"lastmod_ts": 1671148800,
"section": "Working groups",
"tags": [],
"description": "The purpose of the preprint Advisory Group is to support Crossref to collect and improve the quality of metadata for preprints. The group is comprised of both our members as well as non-members (third party platforms and organisations) who are interested in preprints.\nGroup Members Chair: Oya Rieger, Ithaka\nFacilitator: Martyn Rittman, Crossref\nAlainna Wrigley, California Digital library Ben Mudrak, ChemRxiv Bianca Kramer, Sesame Open Science Carolina Tanigushi, SciELO Clare Stone, SSRN / Elsevier Dasapta Erwin Irawan, RINarxiv David Woodworth, OCLC Elisa Pettinelli Barrett, Research Square Emily Marchant, Cambridge University Press Frederick Atherden, eLife Ginny Hendricks, Crossref Gunther Eysenbach, JMIR Ioana Craciun, Preprints / MDPI Jingyu Liu, ChinaXiv Johanna Havemann, AfricaArxiv Johannes Wagner, Copernicus Katie Corker, ASAPbio Michael Evans, F1000 Research Michael Parkin, Europe PMC Michele Avissar-Whiting, Research Square Nici Pfeiffer, Center for Open Science Nici Taylor, Wiley Patricia Feeney, Crossref Richard Sever, OpenRxiv Richard Wynne, Rescognito Thomas Lemberger, EMBO Tony Alves, HighWire Press Wendy Patterson, Beilstein-Institut How the group works (and the guidelines) The preprint Advisory Group is led by a Chair and a Crossref Facilitator, who together help to develop meeting agendas, lead discussions, outline group actions and rally the community outside of the Advisory Group for support with the service where appropriate.\n",
"content": "The purpose of the preprint Advisory Group is to support Crossref to collect and improve the quality of metadata for preprints. The group is comprised of both our members as well as non-members (third party platforms and organisations) who are interested in preprints.\nGroup Members Chair: Oya Rieger, Ithaka\nFacilitator: Martyn Rittman, Crossref\nAlainna Wrigley, California Digital library Ben Mudrak, ChemRxiv Bianca Kramer, Sesame Open Science Carolina Tanigushi, SciELO Clare Stone, SSRN / Elsevier Dasapta Erwin Irawan, RINarxiv David Woodworth, OCLC Elisa Pettinelli Barrett, Research Square Emily Marchant, Cambridge University Press Frederick Atherden, eLife Ginny Hendricks, Crossref Gunther Eysenbach, JMIR Ioana Craciun, Preprints / MDPI Jingyu Liu, ChinaXiv Johanna Havemann, AfricaArxiv Johannes Wagner, Copernicus Katie Corker, ASAPbio Michael Evans, F1000 Research Michael Parkin, Europe PMC Michele Avissar-Whiting, Research Square Nici Pfeiffer, Center for Open Science Nici Taylor, Wiley Patricia Feeney, Crossref Richard Sever, OpenRxiv Richard Wynne, Rescognito Thomas Lemberger, EMBO Tony Alves, HighWire Press Wendy Patterson, Beilstein-Institut How the group works (and the guidelines) The preprint Advisory Group is led by a Chair and a Crossref Facilitator, who together help to develop meeting agendas, lead discussions, outline group actions and rally the community outside of the Advisory Group for support with the service where appropriate.\nThe group is currently active. Please contact Martyn Rittman with any questions.\nOutputs Over its first year of operation, the Advisory Group has developed recommendations in four key areas of preprint metadata. These are:\npreprint withdrawal and removal preprints as an article type versioning of preprints preprint relationship metadata. In July 2022, the AG published a set of recommendations (https://doi.org/10.13003/psk3h6qey4) and invited public comment, available on our Community Forum. An in-depth report of discussions of the AG is available at https://doi.org/10.31222/osf.io/qzusj.\nMinutes Minutes of the group are available on this page.\n",
"headings": ["Group Members","How the group works (and the guidelines)","Outputs","Minutes"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/archives/2022/",
"title": "2022",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Archives",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/introducing-our-new-global-equitable-membership-gem-program/",
"title": "Introducing our new Global Equitable Membership (GEM) program",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2022-12-07",
"lastmod_ts": 1670371200,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "When Crossref began over 20 years ago, our members were primarily from the United States and Western Europe, but for several years our membership has been more global and diverse, growing to almost 18,000 organisations around the world, representing 148 countries.\nAs we continue to grow, finding ways to help organisations participate in Crossref is an important part of our mission and approach. Our goal of creating the Research Nexus\u0026mdash;a rich and reusable open network of relationships connecting research organisations, people, things, and actions; a scholarly record that the global community can build on forever, for the benefit of society\u0026mdash;can only be achieved by ensuring that participation in Crossref is accessible to all. Building a network for the global community must include input from all of the global community. ",
"content": "When Crossref began over 20 years ago, our members were primarily from the United States and Western Europe, but for several years our membership has been more global and diverse, growing to almost 18,000 organisations around the world, representing 148 countries.\nAs we continue to grow, finding ways to help organisations participate in Crossref is an important part of our mission and approach. Our goal of creating the Research Nexus\u0026mdash;a rich and reusable open network of relationships connecting research organisations, people, things, and actions; a scholarly record that the global community can build on forever, for the benefit of society\u0026mdash;can only be achieved by ensuring that participation in Crossref is accessible to all. Building a network for the global community must include input from all of the global community. Although Crossref membership is open to all organisations that produce scholarly and professional materials, cost and technical challenges can be barriers to joining for many organisations. To address some of these challenges, we created our Sponsors Program, which provides technical, financial and local language support. We also collaborate with the Public Knowledge Project on the Open Journals Platform to develop plugins for OJS users.\nAdditionally, we had a limited \u0026lsquo;fee assistance\u0026rsquo; program to waive the content registration fees for members working under specific Sponsor arrangements, including INASP, and African Journals Online (AJOL). Learning from the experiences of such successful partnerships, starting in January 2023, we are expanding this program to provide greater membership equitability and accessibility to organisations located in the least economically-advantaged countries in the world through our Global Equitable Membership (GEM) Program. This new scheme now encompasses the annual fee as well as the content registration fees.\nEligibility for the program is based on a member\u0026rsquo;s country. We have curated the list, predominantly based on the International Development Association (IDA) list and excluding anywhere we are bound by international sanctions. From January 2023, organisations based in countries listed in our GEM program will be eligible to join Crossref and contribute with their metadata to a robust scholarly record at no cost. This also applies to 187 existing members in eligible countries who will no longer be charged for Crossref membership or content registration.\nExisting Crossref members in GEM-eligible countries Bangladesh (54) Burundi (1) Kiribati (0) Kyrgyz Republic (20) Central African Republic (1) Lesotho (0) Nepal (19) Democratic Republic of the Congo (1) Liberia (0) Ghana (15) Guyana (1) Marshall Islands (0) Yemen (10) Haiti (1) Mauritania (0) Sudan (7) Honduras (1) Micronesia (0) Tanzania (7) Laos (1) Mozambique (0) Afghanistan (6) Madagascar (1) Nicaragua (0) Ethiopia (5) Malawi (1) Niger (0) Zambia (5) Maldives (1) Samoa (0) Bhutan (4) Myanmar (1) Sao Tome and Principe (0) Rwanda (4) Cambodia (1) Sierra Leone (0) Tajikistan (4) Chad (1) Solomon Islands (0) Kosovo (3) Comoros (1) South Sudan (0) Senegal (3) Cote d’Ivoire (1) Togo (0) Uganda (3) Djibouti (1) Tonga (0) Burkina Faso (2) Eritrea (1) Tuvalu (0) Mali (2) Gambia (1) Vanuatu (0) Somalia (2) Guinea (1) Benin (1) Guinea-Bissau (1) The list of countries will undergo an annual review, to follow the latest guidance from IDA, which uses the somewhat simplistic World Bank income classifications but applies a more granular blend of criteria for economic health, thereby allowing for greater nuance, such as indicating countries where the gap between rich and poor is very wide.\nThe program results from our experience working with and knowing the communities through Sponsors and working with past members who have struggled to pay. It aims to bring us closer to our vision of building an inclusive, rich and open network of relationships underpinning the scholarly record. With the support of the Membership and Fees Committee, the launch of the program was confirmed with the recent unanimous vote of our Board to evolve our fee assistance program into a more expansive scheme. GEM presents a more comprehensive and equitable solution than our former arrangements. It involves an opportunity to join Crossref and contribute scholarly metadata to our global community on a zero-fee basis for membership and content registration. This offering will be applied by default to organisations based in all eligible countries, irrespective of joining through any specific Sponsor, or independently.\nWhile the GEM Program will alleviate financial barriers, and we hope to see the numbers above grow significantly, the GEM program will not necessarily help ease technical or administrative burdens. We still need our valued Sponsors for that and we seek new Sponsors in the above locations. We would love to hear from organisations based in GEM countries who might consider becoming a Sponsor or otherwise support local colleagues in building experience of metadata and working with global open scholarly infrastructure systems like Crossref. Please reach out to me to discuss ideas or with any other questions or comments.\n",
"headings": ["Existing Crossref members in GEM-eligible countries"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/how-funding-agencies-can-meet-ostp-and-open-science-guidance-using-existing-open-infrastructure/",
"title": "How funding agencies can meet OSTP (and Open Science) guidance using existing open infrastructure",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2022-11-17",
"lastmod_ts": 1668643200,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "In August 2022, the United States Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) issued a memo (PDF) on ensuring free, immediate, and equitable access to federally funded research (a.k.a. the “Nelson memo”). Crossref is particularly interested in and relevant for the areas of this guidance that cover metadata and persistent identifiers—and the infrastructure and services that make them useful.\nFunding bodies worldwide are increasingly involved in research infrastructure for dissemination and discovery. While this post does respond to the OSTP guidelines point-by-point, the information here applies to all funding bodies in all countries. It will be equally useful for publishers and other systems that operate in the scholarly research ecosystem.\n",
"content": "In August 2022, the United States Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) issued a memo (PDF) on ensuring free, immediate, and equitable access to federally funded research (a.k.a. the “Nelson memo”). Crossref is particularly interested in and relevant for the areas of this guidance that cover metadata and persistent identifiers—and the infrastructure and services that make them useful.\nFunding bodies worldwide are increasingly involved in research infrastructure for dissemination and discovery. While this post does respond to the OSTP guidelines point-by-point, the information here applies to all funding bodies in all countries. It will be equally useful for publishers and other systems that operate in the scholarly research ecosystem.\nIn response to calls from our community for more specifics, this post:\nProvides an overview of the specific ways that Crossref (along with organisations and initiatives like DataCite, ORCID, and ROR) helps U.S. federal agencies\u0026mdash;and indeed any other funder\u0026mdash;meet critical aspects of the recommendations. Restates our intent to collaborate with all stakeholders in the scholarly research ecosystem, including the OSTP, the US federal agencies, our existing funder, publisher, and university members, to support the recommendation as plans develop. References the work and adoption of Crossref Grant DOIs, including analyses of existing metadata matching funding to outputs. Highlights that what’s outlined in the memo aligns with our longstanding mission to capture and maintain the scholarly record and our vision of the Research Nexus, as we describe in our current blog series, regarding our role in preserving the integrity of the scholarly record (ISR). Infrastructure already exists to support funder goals; it just needs more adoption Ensuring free, immediate, and equitable access to metadata that captures the scholarly record is an essential part of meeting the aims of the memo but also supporting Open Science globally.\nIn September, Crossref ORCID, DataCite, and ROR participated in the 2022 Forum on Global Grants Management run by Altum and the summary provides a good example of the importance of open infrastructure and open metadata to the goals of Open Science:\nOpen Science begins with open infrastructure: Attendees agreed that Open Science relies on many other \u0026lsquo;opens’ – most notably, open metadata, open infrastructure, and open governance. Metadata and DOIs (digital object identifiers) for publications, grants, and research outputs, are essential to illuminate the connections that exist between funding and outcomes. That metadata runs on infrastructure powered by organisations such as Crossref, ORCID, ROR, and DataCite. As a foundational scholarly infrastructure committed to meeting the Principles of Open Scholarly Infrastructure (POSI) of governance, insurance, and sustainability, Crossref plays an essential role in implementing and supporting key aspects of the guidance. For many years, we have been focused on the integrity of the scholarly record (ISR), and the shared vision to collectively achieve what we call the Research Nexus, which is described as\nA rich and reusable open network of relationships connecting research organisations, people, things, and actions; a scholarly record that the global community can build on forever, for the benefit of society.\nMetadata\u0026mdash;including persistent identifiers and relationships between different research objects\u0026mdash;is the foundation of the Research Nexus and is critical to openly and sustainably fulfilling the OSTP memo\u0026rsquo;s recommendations.\nThis topic of open metadata and identifiers isn’t just an issue for research resulting from US federal funding. We are working to implement open scholarly infrastructure globally, bringing significant benefits to the whole scholarly research ecosystem.\nThe current situation brings to mind the William Gibson quote, “The future is already here - it’s just not evenly distributed yet”. Much of the open infrastructure to support the identifier, metadata and reporting requirements of the OSTP memo already exists, but it is unevenly implemented. Increased collaboration and effort will be needed to bring this all to fruition.\nWe set out below some steps that all stakeholders can take to meet not just the OSTP guidelines, but Open Science goals more broadly, and globally.\nWhat does ‘adoption’ look like? How exactly do funders and other stakeholders work with this infrastructure? The OSTP memo calls for specific actions concerning metadata and identifiers where, fortunately, open and global solutions already exist.\nFor example, item 4 a) says, “Collect and make publicly available appropriate metadata associated with scholarly publications and data resulting from federally funded research.” Crossref and DataCite make metadata, including persistent identifiers (DOIs to be specific), openly available for a broad range of research objects from publications to data. Item 4 b) reads, “Assign unique digital persistent identifiers to all scientific research and development awards and intramural research protocols”. Again, federal agencies and other funders are already joining to register awards and grants and distribute these records openly through Crossref. However, this is an example of uneven adoption as registering awards and grants with DOIs is only being done by a few funders so far, which needs to increase.\nHere is an ideal workflow that funders and publishers can already follow Funders join Crossref to register grants and awards (or indeed any other object such as reports). They apply on our website, accept our terms, and provide key information such as contact details. An annual membership fee ranges from $200-$1200 USD. Funders and publishers collect ROR IDs and authenticated ORCID iDs for all authors/awardees and their affiliations. Funders register a Crossref DOI for the award/grant, including awardees’ ORCID iDs and ROR IDs. They send us XML information about the grant (note that we will imminently release an online form to make it easier for the less technical funders). Many funder members register the metadata through a third party, such as Altum (if they use ProposalCentral) or Europe PMC. At the same time, funders update the awardees’ ORCID record directly with the Crossref Grant DOI and metadata. Grantees produce research objects and outputs such as data, protocols, code, preprints, articles, conference papers, book chapters, etc. These objects are registered with Crossref or DataCite, and DOIs are created by the publisher or repository members who include ORCID iDs, Crossref Grant DOIs (gathered from the author), ROR IDs for affiliations for all contributors, and other key metadata such as licensing information, and in the case of publications - references and abstracts. Note that the publisher works its magic (actually, publishers do a lot of editorial and production work, such as including data citations in the references using DataCite DOIs for the data in data repositories). On the Crossref side, we do a bunch of processing and matching and are planning to refine this and do more. Sometimes relationships are notified and added, such as data citation, preprints related to articles or funding acknowledgements converted from free text to Open Funder Registry IDs and names. Grant records with Crossref DOIs are now part of the scholarly record. All stakeholders may retrieve the open metadata and relationships through our public APIs. Crossref and DataCite will always provide open metadata, as safeguarded by our respective commitments to POSI. Anyone can use the open metadata registered with Crossref, DataCite and ORCID as connections have been established between (ideally all) research objects and entities through open metadata and identifiers. This means that:\nFunding agencies can monitor compliance with their policies Publishers can identify the funder and meet their requirements Funding agencies can assess and report on the reach and return of their funding programs The provenance and integrity of the scholarly record is preserved and discoverable, benefitting all stakeholders. Suggestions for meeting OSTP and Open Science guidance, point by point OSTP Recommendation Publishers should… Funding agencies should… 4 a) Collect and make publicly available appropriate metadata associated with scholarly publications and data resulting from federally funded research For scholarly publications: register comprehensive metadata \u0026 DOIs with Crossref. For scholarly data: register comprehensive metadata and DOIs with DataCite. Use Crossref’s API to retrieve publication and other metadata. Use DataCite’s API to retrieve data/repository metadata. i) all author and co-author names, affiliations, and sources of funding, referencing digital persistent identifiers, as appropriate; Collect and validate the following from authors at manuscript submission: ROR \u0026 ORCiD IDs, Crossref Grant DOIs. Include data citations in reference lists, preferably with DataCite DOIs. Register awards and grants with Crossref and create DOI records for them. Use ORCID’s API to retrieve validated contributor metadata. Update contributors’ ORCID records with Crossref Grant DOIs and metadata. Use ROR API to retrieve and verify affiliation metadata. Recommend data citations be included in published outputs. ii) the date of publication; and, Include acceptance and publication dates in Crossref metadata. Use Crossref’s API to retrieve publication dates. iii) a unique digital persistent identifier for the research output; For scholarly publications and research outputs: register full metadata \u0026 DOIs with Crossref. For scholarly data: register full metadata and DOIs with DataCite. Use Crossref and DataCite APIs to retrieve DOIs for research outputs. 4 b) Instruct federally funded researchers to obtain a digital persistent identifier that meets the common/core standards of a digital persistent identifier service defined in the NSPM-33 Implementation Guidance, include it in published research outputs when available, and provide federal agencies with the metadata associated with all published research outputs they produce, consistent with the law, privacy, and security considerations. Collect ORCID iDs on manuscript submission for all authors. Register Crossref and DataCite DOIs and metadata for research outputs, including data. Recommend that researchers applying for funding obtain an ORCID iD and collect them upon grant application for all applicants. Prepopulate grant applications with CV and publication information from applicants’ ORCID records. ORCID iDs should be included in the grants registered by the agencies with Crossref. Agencies can use our open APIs to retrieve the metadata on publications and data rather than ask researchers to do it, saving time and effort. 4 c) Assign unique digital persistent identifiers to all scientific research and development awards and intramural research protocols that have appropriate metadata linking the funding agency and their awardees through their digital persistent identifiers. Join Crossref to register Crossref Grant DOIs, including ROR IDs and ORCID iDs Ensure grant proposal and assessment systems integrate with Crossref, ROR for affiliations and with ORCID for applicants/awardees. 5 a) coordinate between federal science agencies to enhance efficiency and reduce redundancy in public access plans and policies, including as it relates to digital repository access; Work with agencies to ensure a smooth, automated workflow. Using and supporting existing open scholarly infrastructure and using open identifiers will avoid duplication of effort and make the overall ecosystem more efficient . 5 b) improve awareness of federally funded research results by all potential users and communities; Collect Crossref Grant DOIs from authors and use them to link from publications to grant information. Communicate your Crossref Grant DOIs and open grant metadata widely via human and machine interfaces. Inclusion in the Crossref API will enhance dissemination and discoverability Update contributors’ ORCID records with Crossref Grant DOIs and metadata 5 c) consider measures to reduce inequities in the publishing of, and access to, federally funded research and data, especially among individuals from underserved backgrounds and those who are early in their careers; Registering grants and sharing metadata through Crossref means it’s part of the world’s largest open community-governed metadata exchange and makes it available to the entire world without restriction. 5 d) develop procedures and practices to reduce the burden on federally funded researchers in complying with public access requirements; Ensure your systems and those you work with make it as easy as possible for authors to provide the necessary metadata and persistent identifiers - work towards as much automation as possible and pulling from other systems rather than asking for data to be re-keyed. Ensure the platforms you work with, such as grant proposal or assessment systems, retrieve and prepopulate ROR IDs, ORCID iDs, and Crossref and DataCite DOIs and associated metadata whenever possible so that the researchers don’t have to manually rekey or reformat data. 5 e) recommend standard consistent benchmarks and metrics to monitor and assess implementation and iterative improvement of public access policies over time; Ensure that platforms and systems integrate with ROR, ORCID, Crossref, and DataCite so that this open metadata can lead to the creation of benchmarks and metrics. 5 f) improve monitoring and encourage compliance with public access policies and plans; Use open infrastructure to help authors easily comply with public access and funder/institution policies. Automate systems as much as possible. Using the open infrastructure, metadata, and identifiers outlined in this post will make monitoring more straightforward and compliance easier for all stakeholders. The community can build services on open infrastructure and metadata. 5 g) coordinate engagement with stakeholders, including but not limited to publishers, libraries, museums, professional societies, researchers, and other interested non-governmental parties on federal agency public access efforts; Work with the global open infrastructure organisations (Crossref, DataCite and ORCID) whose members include funding agencies, societies, publishers, universities, libraries, repositories, museums, NGOs, and many other stakeholders - all looking to improve the efficiency of the research ecosystem. Work with the global open infrastructure organisations (Crossref, DataCite and ORCID) whose members include funding agencies, societies, publishers, universities, libraries, repositories, museums, NGOs, and many other stakeholders - all looking to improve the efficiency of the research ecosystem. 5 h) develop guidance on desirable characteristics of—and best practices for sharing in—online digital publication repositories; Support automated systems that use metadata and identifiers to populate repositories automatically. Collaborate with publishers, Crossref and others to develop automated systems to populate repositories. 5 j) develop strategies to make federally funded publications, data, and other such research outputs and their metadata are findable, accessible, interoperable, and re-useable, to the American public and the scientific community in an equitable and secure manner. Provide and support a range of discovery services based on open infrastructure. Encourage discovery services - and develop services - that use the open infrastructure, metadata and persistent identifiers to enable. Everybody needs to play their part A lot of the work on making the above happen is already underway, and there is widespread adoption of open identifiers and metadata, but as noted above, funders are still early in the adoption journey, and implementation among all stakeholders is patchy.\nCritical parts of the infrastructure rely on third-party platforms that supply tools and systems to authors, funders, and publishers - so coordinating the support for the appropriate metadata and identifiers in these systems and tools is very important.\nWe are emphasising how our existing open scholarly infrastructure systems are helping. But we also know that it’s not all perfect yet. Infrastructure is always evolving, metadata is never complete, refactoring workflows and systems can be costly, and integration can always be smoother. But our existing open infrastructure has already delivered significant benefits, and broader adoption will bring additional benefits to the whole scholarly research and communications ecosystem and help achieve the promise of Open Science in advancing human knowledge.\nWhile working on this coordination and integration, we all try to remember that it should minimise work for researchers, and processes should be as automated as possible.\nCollaboration is key to making this all work.\nWe already work with many funders through our Advisory Group, our 30 funder members, 25 of whom have so far collectively registered around 40,000 Crossref Grant DOIs, retrievable from our open API. Some grants are even matched to resulting outputs already, and some funders have recently dug into Crossref metadata to analyse outcomes from their investments, such as the Dutch Research Council (NWO) which presents findings and makes a case for greater emphasis on Crossref funding metadata.\nWe also work closely with partners Europe PMC and Altum, and we engage in community research and discussion, for example, through the Open Research Funders Group.\nAlongside our fellow infrastructures and open identifier registries ORCID, DataCite, and ROR, we integrate with and support each other operationally and out in the community.\nWe will continue focusing our resources and efforts on engaging with funders, including US federal agencies responding by the OSTP guidelines, and all stakeholders to support the entire global scholarly research ecosystem.\nEveryone has a part to play, and we must all pull together to prioritize this work. Who’s in?\nPlease get in touch with Ed, Ginny, or Jennifer (or indeed DataCite or ORCID or ROR) if you’d like to have a discussion about the workflows described here, or just to make sure you’re up to date on the latest developments and opportunities we describe. We look forward to working with all funding agencies to support them as they develop their plans.\n",
"headings": ["Infrastructure already exists to support funder goals; it just needs more adoption","What does ‘adoption’ look like? How exactly do funders and other stakeholders work with this infrastructure?","Here is an ideal workflow that funders and publishers can already follow","Suggestions for meeting OSTP and Open Science guidance, point by point","Everybody needs to play their part","Everyone has a part to play, and we must all pull together to prioritize this work."]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/better-preprint-metadata-through-community-participation/",
"title": "Better preprint metadata through community participation",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2022-11-09",
"lastmod_ts": 1667952000,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "Preprints have become an important tool for rapidly communicating and iterating on research outputs. There is now a range of preprint servers, some subject-specific, some based on a particular geographical area, and others linked to publishers or individual journals in addition to generalist platforms. In 2016 the Crossref schema started to support preprints and since then the number of metadata records has grown to around 16,000 new preprint DOIs per month.\n",
"content": "Preprints have become an important tool for rapidly communicating and iterating on research outputs. There is now a range of preprint servers, some subject-specific, some based on a particular geographical area, and others linked to publishers or individual journals in addition to generalist platforms. In 2016 the Crossref schema started to support preprints and since then the number of metadata records has grown to around 16,000 new preprint DOIs per month.\nPreprints aren’t the same as journal articles, books, or conference papers. They have unique features, and how they are viewed and integrated into the publishing process has evolved over the past six years. For this reason, we have been revisiting the preprint metadata schema and decided that the best approach would be to form an advisory group (AG) of preprint practitioners and experts to help us.\nThe AG has identified a number of areas in which preprint metadata could be improved. Four of these were considered to have the highest priority:\nWithdrawal and removal of preprints. Preprints as an article type (not a subtype of posted content) in the schema. Relationships between preprints and other outputs. Versioning of preprints. The members of the AG set to work with great enthusiasm, sharing perspectives and expertise. This led to a first tranche of recommendations shared for feedback earlier this year, and we’re grateful for engagement and feedback from the community over the last few months.\nWhat did the community say? Some of the points raised in the feedback were:\nCould the origin of a withdrawal be included in the metadata, in particular whether it was requested by an author or another party? Can the metadata represent when a preprint has been submitted to a journal and what stage it is in the editorial process? Crossref is not alone in looking at preprint metadata, and several NISO groups are also engaged in related work. Interoperability and the ability to create relationships with identifiers beyond DOIs is important to maintain an accurate and comprehensive record of research outputs. These will form the basis for ongoing discussions.\nWhat happens next? There are three next steps that we will be taking.\nThe recommendations outline only the outcomes of discussions in a relatively brief format. We have been working on a more detailed paper to communicate more about what was discussed and provide some extra justification and alternatives. The AG will continue to meet and discuss the points raised during consultation on the recommendations, along with topics that were considered a lower priority at an earlier stage. We will draw up a set of proposals for specific changes to the metadata schema that will reflect the outcomes of the recommendations and discussions. Although the initial period for feedback on preprint metadata has ended, we welcome feedback at any time. If you would like to get in touch, please contact me or any member of the advisory group.\n",
"headings": ["What did the community say?","What happens next?"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/forming-new-relationships-contributing-to-open-source/",
"title": "Forming new relationships: Contributing to Open source",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2022-10-19",
"lastmod_ts": 1666137600,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "TL;DR One of the things that makes me glad to work at Crossref is the principles to which we hold ourselves, and the most public and measurable of those must be the Principles of Open Scholarly Infrastructure, or POSI, for short. These ambitions lay out how we want to operate - to be open in our governance, in our membership and also in our source code and data. And it\u0026rsquo;s that openness of source code that\u0026rsquo;s the reason for my post today - on 26th September 2022, our first collaboration with the JSON Forms open-source project was released into the wild.\n",
"content": "TL;DR One of the things that makes me glad to work at Crossref is the principles to which we hold ourselves, and the most public and measurable of those must be the Principles of Open Scholarly Infrastructure, or POSI, for short. These ambitions lay out how we want to operate - to be open in our governance, in our membership and also in our source code and data. And it\u0026rsquo;s that openness of source code that\u0026rsquo;s the reason for my post today - on 26th September 2022, our first collaboration with the JSON Forms open-source project was released into the wild.\nLike most organisations, we depend heavily on open-source software for our operations - the software is universally available, generally high quality and \u0026lsquo;free\u0026rsquo;. And it\u0026rsquo;s easy to take that dependency, and the associated dependency on free time and effort on the part of the maintainers, for granted - but that\u0026rsquo;s not very sustainable. In fact, we believe relying on open-source software without helping to sustain it is an anti-pattern, and this project marks the start of our efforts to make funding open-source software a standard part of our technology budget.\nThis isn\u0026rsquo;t the first time we\u0026rsquo;ve supported or released open-source software. Indeed for the past few years, all our new software is open source, and we\u0026rsquo;re in the process of replacing old closed code with new, so that eventually all our code will be open source. But this is the first time we\u0026rsquo;ve contributed extensively to something that isn\u0026rsquo;t focussed primarily on us, and our services. This is a project that we will find very useful, but it is a general purpose tool, and it\u0026rsquo;s already gaining traction in the community.\nBackground and motivations A while back, I was tasked to do a quick spike of work on testing the theory that we could use automated form generation tools to bring new interfaces to our users more quickly, and make them easier for \u0026ldquo;people who aren\u0026rsquo;t devs\u0026rdquo; to adapt and manage. We wanted to build a new user interface for registering content, and especially we wanted to make it easier for funders to register the grants they were awarding. As well as being more approachable by a less-technical audience, we also wanted these forms to be accessible (in terms of a11y and users of assistive technology) and localisable - we wanted a solution that would cater to the needs of our rapidly diversifying membership.\nEnter JSON Schema We were clear about one side of the puzzle - we knew that we had to look beyond the XML ecosystem upon which much of our existing system is built - and landed on JSON Schema. JSON Schema is a \u0026lsquo;vocabulary that allows you to annotate and validate JSON documents\u0026rsquo;. This means you can describe the shape you expect your data to take, and apply constraints-based validation to that. Which means, in terms of a form library, that you can infer the structure of the form and test that the data entered into it matches what you expect. More than that, you can use that built-in validation to provide error messages to help people get the data right, first time.\nWorking backwards from the outcome, the argument for adopting JSON Schema is compelling. It provides a mechanism for checking that data you are handling (for example, receiving input from a form) conforms to the constraints that you declare, but also allows you to tell people up-front, in a human and machine-readable way, what structure and format you will accept. This closed-loop of data annotation and validation gets more appealing when you look at the wide adoption of JSON Schema across languages and libraries. You can pretty much guarantee that for whatever client or server -side technology you are using, there will be a JSON Schema validator for it. Being able to share schemas across your systems (and equally importantly, with third parties) moves JSON schema from \u0026lsquo;just\u0026rsquo; being about data validation, to a key supportive technology.\nBuilding a form derived from a JSON Schema is an equally attractive prospect. JSON Schema was conceived during the AjaxWorld conference in 2007 as a \u0026lsquo;JSON-based format for defining the structure of JSON data\u0026rsquo;, and its use as a form-generation tool is relatively new, but there is growing community interest. There is even a discussion about how to best create a JSON Schema vocabulary, specifically geared towards addressing some of the needs of form generation users. However, even in its current form, a JSON Schema can be passed to a library, and a very serviceable user interface appears. The devil is always in the detail, and the client-side libraries differ in their abilities to customise areas such as layout (you may not always want your form fields to appear in exactly the same order as they do in your JSON Schema), custom elements (you might want something that wasn\u0026rsquo;t a form input, or that changes based on user input) and localisation. The ability to flexibly customise the appearance and behaviour of the interface was a key factor in our selection of a client-side form generation library.\nChoosing a library The other side of the puzzle was less clear - choosing a UI library that would take this JSON Schema, and turn it into a useful, and usable, form. I made the prototype using the venerable React JSON Schema form. This worked well as a proof of concept, but veered dramatically off our chosen Frontend stack of VueJS and Vuetify, and had some architectural constraints that would limit the scope of customisations we could make to our forms. So I went off looking for libraries that would work with our stack and came up with Vuetify JSON Schema Form, and JSON Forms.\nVuetify JSON Schema Form matched our stack perfectly, but made some interesting decisions about the layout of data within the form, and that wouldn\u0026rsquo;t suit our purposes without dramatic modification.\nJSON Forms was an abstracted library, with a core handling the JSON Schema transformation and validation, and separate rendering libraries to handle the form generation. This was great - they had renderers for Angular, React, and even some support for VueJS. But not Vuetify.\nClearly, we were going to have to make something.\nWe made contact with the maintainers of both short-listed libraries to see how we could collaborate in creating a tool that would meet all of our (and hopefully, much of the wider community\u0026rsquo;s) requirements. Both maintainers were very helpful, and we had constructive discussions in both cases. In the end, we decided that the abstracted nature of the JSON Forms project was a better fit for our needs, providing a flexible platform on which we - and others - could extend. We were fortunate to receive funding from the Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation (Grant Agreement #10485) in order to accelerate this work, so we could provide a Grant Registration UI more quickly. We paid a large portion of that funding to the library maintainers, and Crossref contributed a portion of my time on the project. This allowed us to enter into an agreement with EclipseSource, the maintainers of JSON Forms, to collaboratively develop the new VueJS and Vuetify renderer library. Stefan Dirix, the lead maintainer, worked with me to build it.\nWe didn\u0026rsquo;t forget about Vuetify JSON Schema Form though, and by way of appreciation for their help in the early stages, Crossref made a contribution towards the continued development of that library.\nJSON Forms - now with Vuetify Work started on the JSON Forms Vuetify renderer set in September 2021 - Stefan quickly created the first early prototypes of the new form renderers - but then we had a stroke of luck. Our repository received more input from the community. The one that made us sit up and take real notice was the news that someone else had already ported the JSON Forms React renderer set to Vue/Vuetify - and was offering this as a contribution. Krasimir Chobantonov\u0026rsquo;s fantastic first contribution got merged in at the end of the month. This propelled the project forward massively, and was an early validation of the value of working in the open. Needless to say, we were very grateful. Another example of the open source value chain was that Stefan - as the maintainer - could take the time to carefully review and tidy up the incoming code, so what was merged was the product of two great developers.\nHaving this great head start meant we could turn our attention to one of the other big areas we wanted to get right - localisation. Traditionally, JSON Schema -generated forms have handled localisation (translation of text and adjustment of date and numerical formats) by wholesale duplication and translation of the schema. This is cumbersome, and doesn\u0026rsquo;t integrate very well with custom error messages, nor external sources of interface messages (think form labels, descriptions, placeholders). So Stefan came up with a proposal, which we accepted, to add complete i18n support to the library. We now have a mechanism by which you can hook up a translation engine of your choice, and JSON forms will use that to lookup messages, before falling back to the validator (also localised!) and finally, the JSON Schema\u0026rsquo;s defaults. This gives much stronger integration and allows the community to plug in their existing localisation methods - no wasted effort.\nSince the localisation addition, we\u0026rsquo;ve been working on fine-tuning the layout engine, making bug fixes, and integrating more closely with the underlying Vuetify library. This allows developers to more easily use the existing Vuetify parameters to change the style and behaviour of their form widgets. Again, no wasted effort. We\u0026rsquo;re lucky to have an active community - @kchobantonov continues to make great contributions and push the library forward in unexpected ways - and the library is gaining popularity, with an average of a few hundred downloads per day. Some of our funder members have already seen this work in action, and given their feedback on early iterations of the user interface that supports registering grant records. We\u0026rsquo;ll be releasing this publicly very soon to get feedback from members - and then using that feedback to iterate on the grants registration form, and look towards extending it to other record types. Open source POSItivity A continuous theme throughout this project has been the willingness of people working on these open source projects to be generous with their time and experience. Whether it has been form generation libraries, the JSON Schema project or maintainers of localisation plug-ins - help, advice and encouragement have never been far away. And that\u0026rsquo;s appreciated. But it\u0026rsquo;s not something that we, or any other organisation who relies on the software they produce, should take for granted. Open source software helps everyone who uses it, and there\u0026rsquo;s a real opportunity within our community to make meaningful steps towards supporting its sustainability. Ironically, it\u0026rsquo;s often the most-used general purpose tools that get the least attention. We can change that.\nLook out for more Look out for more posts from the engineering team, coming soon!\nReferences JSON Binpack: A space-efficient schema-driven and schema-less binary serialization specification based on JSON Schema (Chapter 3.2.1 History and Relevance)\nhttps://web.archive.org/web/20071026190426/http://www.json.com/2007/09/27/json-schema-proposal-collaboration/\n",
"headings": ["TL;DR","Background and motivations","Enter JSON Schema","Choosing a library","JSON Forms - now with Vuetify","Open source POSItivity","Look out for more","References"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/isr-part-three-where-does-crossref-have-the-most-impact-on-helping-the-community-to-assess-the-trustworthiness-of-the-scholarly-record/",
"title": "ISR part three: Where does Crossref have the most impact on helping the community to assess the trustworthiness of the scholarly record?",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2022-10-17",
"lastmod_ts": 1665964800,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "Ans: metadata and services are all underpinned by POSI.\nLeading into a blog post with a question always makes my brain jump ahead to answer that question with the simplest answer possible. I was a nightmare English Literature student. \u0026lsquo;Was Macbeth purely a villain?\u0026rsquo; \u0026lsquo;No\u0026rsquo;. *leaves exam*\nJust like not giving one-word answers to exam questions, playing our role in the integrity of the scholarly record and helping our members enhance theirs takes thought, explanation, transparency, and work.\n",
"content": "Ans: metadata and services are all underpinned by POSI.\nLeading into a blog post with a question always makes my brain jump ahead to answer that question with the simplest answer possible. I was a nightmare English Literature student. \u0026lsquo;Was Macbeth purely a villain?\u0026rsquo; \u0026lsquo;No\u0026rsquo;. *leaves exam*\nJust like not giving one-word answers to exam questions, playing our role in the integrity of the scholarly record and helping our members enhance theirs takes thought, explanation, transparency, and work.\nSome of the elements Amanda outlines in the previous posts in this series (Part 1, Part 2) really resonated from a product perspective:\nWe must be cautious that our best practices for demonstrating legitimacy and identifying deceptive behaviour do not raise already-high barriers for emerging publications or organisations that present themselves in ways that some may not recognize as professional standards. Disruption is different from deception. Crossref has an opportunity to think about how to identify deceptive actions and pair that with our efforts to bring more people on board and support their full participation in our ecosystem.\nWe don\u0026rsquo;t have the means or desire to be the arbiter of research quality (whatever that means). However, we operate neutrally, at the center of scholarly communications, and we can help develop a shared consensus or framework. Our metadata elements and tools can be positioned to signal or detect trustworthiness. An important distinction is that we can play a role in assessing legitimacy (activities of the actors) but not in quality (calibre of the content itself).\nCrossref has lots of plans (and lots to do) to improve our role in ISR Rather than a long list of things we want to do in terms of tools, services, and functionality, it feels more manageable to break this work into three key areas.\n1. Collecting better information in better ways We think many elements of the metadata our members record with us help expose important information about the research, e.g., authors, publication dates, and abstracts. We also help our members assess submissions for originality via our Similarity Check service, and the ongoing migration to iThenticate V2 aims to better support this aspect of the publication process.\nBeyond this, as Amanda points out, \u0026lsquo;once members start registering their content, their metadata speaks about their practices\u0026rsquo;. Seeing who published a work along with the metadata they provide; validated ORCID IDs to identify the authors, reference lists and links to related research and data, and important updates to the work via Crossmark, all contribute to showing not just the \u0026lsquo;what\u0026rsquo; but the \u0026lsquo;how\u0026rsquo; so that the community can use that information to support their decision-making.\nI always want to stress that this work is not just an \u0026lsquo;ask\u0026rsquo; for our members. We are moving in the same direction as we improve the things we do to support organisations in registering their records with us, answering their questions, working with partner organisations like PKP, consulting with our community on pain points, and thinking about how we can better enhance and facilitate their work. We\u0026rsquo;ve been fortunate that our community has taken the time to engage in discussions with Turnitin on iThenticate improvements, do user testing sessions as we build simple user interfaces to record grants, lead calls and conversations on improving grant metadata and supporting the uptake of ROR and data citation, and provide thoughtful feedback on our recent preprint on CRE metadata. This all helps us to explain, structure, and prioritize our product work.\nThere are also some closely related R\u0026amp;D-led projects that are already informing our thinking:\nA more responsive version of participation reports so that it\u0026rsquo;s easier for members to identify gaps in their metadata and compare against others. Making it easier to get metadata back in a format where members can easily redeposit it. Better matching to help us and our members augment the metadata they send us to add value to the work we all do. We said in the previous blog posts that we\u0026rsquo;ll pose questions about what kinds of metadata give what kind of levels of trustworthiness, and have previously highlighted the following activities:\nReporting corrections and retractions through Crossmark metadata. We know that our members are collecting this information, but often it isn\u0026rsquo;t making it through metadata workflows to us. We\u0026rsquo;re part of the NISO CREC (Communication of Retractions, Removals, and Expressions of Concern) working group with many of our members and metadata users, as this feels like something critical to address.\nAssessing originality using Similarity Check. On average, we\u0026rsquo;re seeing 320 new Similarity Check subscribers each year, with over 10 million checks being done each year by our members. Establishing provenance and stakeholders through ORCID and ROR. At the time of writing, we have over 30,000 ROR IDs in Crossref, and this is growing steadily across different record types. ROR is keen to support adoption and so are we. Acknowledging funding and other support through the use of the Open Funder Registry and registering grants metadata. This has improved in quality and completeness since we launched the Funder Registry in 2014 and with more comprehensive support for grants in more recent years. But we still have work to do, as this paper by Kramer and de Jonge points out: The availability and completeness of open funder metadata.\nCiting data for transparency and reproducibility, including linking to related research data. Scholix, MDC and STM Research Data groups. Demonstrating open peer review by registering peer review reports. Members have already recorded over 300,000 peer reviews with Crossref, opening up this information on their processes.\nIn your organisation, what weight do you give these? We know that some of our members register some of these things in more volume than others - is that due to their perceived value, technical limitations, or \u0026lsquo;we\u0026rsquo;re working on it, give us time?\u0026rsquo; Do you think of them in the context of the integrity of the record or are we off the mark? Are there other things we haven\u0026rsquo;t mentioned in this blog that we could capture, report on and highlight? 2. Disseminating this information and supporting its downstream use We want to make it as easy as possible for everyone to access and use the metadata our members register with us. Especially as some of the biggest metadata users are our members and, more selfishly, us! But there\u0026rsquo;s no point collecting metadata to support ISR if it\u0026rsquo;s unwieldy and difficult to access and use.\nWe\u0026rsquo;re working on a project, described in the mid-year community update by a number of my colleagues to break down internal metadata silos and model it in a more flexible way. This will lend itself to better information collection and exchange, and support of the Research Nexus by building a relationships API to let anyone see all of the relationships Crossref can see between a given work and well, anything else related to it (citations, links to preprints, links to data to name but a few).\nPart of that work will involve supplementing the metadata our members register with high-quality, curated data from selected sources, making it clear where those assertions have come from.\nWe want our API to perform consistently and well, to contain all the metadata our members register, handle it appropriately, and be able to keep the information in it up-to-date.\nOur API will underpin the reports we provide our members (among other things) so that we can provide simple interfaces for organisations to check how they\u0026rsquo;re doing along with more functional requests. Do their DOIs resolve? Are they submitting metadata updates when they publish a correction? How much will they be billed in a given quarter? We have a lot of internal reporting and need to build more, and if we want to use these, chances are many others do too, so we should open those up.\n3. Trying to live up to POSI to underpin this work When I see a new project, initiative, tool or service in the research ecosystem the first thing I want to do is find out about the organisation itself so that I can base some decisions on that. Lateral reading in action.\nAt Crossref, we want to show who we are beyond just our tools, services, and products and be transparent about our values. That\u0026rsquo;s why we have adopted the Principles of Open Scholarly Infrastructure or POSI for short. Now we need to meet these principles and we\u0026rsquo;re working towards that. POSI proposes three areas that an Open Infrastructure organisation like Crossref can address to garner the trust of the broader scholarly community: accountability (governance), funding (sustainability), and protection of community interests (insurance). POSI also proposes a set of concrete commitments that an organisation can make to build community trust in each area.\nSo POSI isn\u0026rsquo;t just opening code and metadata, it\u0026rsquo;s telling our community how we handle membership, governance, product development, technical and financial stability and security, holding our hands up when we\u0026rsquo;ve got something wrong, and actively looking to improve upon the things we do.\nAre you still reading? If so, you\u0026rsquo;ve done better than many of my examiners, I\u0026rsquo;m sure. So stay with us as we work together to ensure we bring quality, transparency, and integrity to the work we all do.\nThe next part in this series will report back on the feedback and discussions and potentially propose some new or adjusted priorities. Join us at the Frankfurt bookfair this week (hall 4.2, booth M5) or comment on this post below.\n",
"headings": ["Crossref has lots of plans (and lots to do) to improve our role in ISR ","1. Collecting better information in better ways","2. Disseminating this information and supporting its downstream use","3. Trying to live up to POSI to underpin this work"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/isr-part-two-how-our-membership-approach-helps-to-preserve-the-integrity-of-the-scholarly-record/",
"title": "ISR part two: How our membership approach helps to preserve the integrity of the scholarly record",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2022-10-10",
"lastmod_ts": 1665360000,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "In part one of our series on the Integrity of the Scholarly Record (ISR), we talked about how the metadata that our members register with us helps to preserve the integrity of the record, and in particular how \u0026rsquo;trust signals\u0026rsquo; in the metadata, combined with relationships and context, can help the community assess the work. In this second blog, we describe membership eligibility and what you can and cannot tell simply from the fact that an organisation is a Crossref member; why increasing participation and reducing barriers actually helps to enhance the integrity of the scholarly record; and how we handle the very small number of cases where there may be a question mark.\n",
"content": "In part one of our series on the Integrity of the Scholarly Record (ISR), we talked about how the metadata that our members register with us helps to preserve the integrity of the record, and in particular how \u0026rsquo;trust signals\u0026rsquo; in the metadata, combined with relationships and context, can help the community assess the work. In this second blog, we describe membership eligibility and what you can and cannot tell simply from the fact that an organisation is a Crossref member; why increasing participation and reducing barriers actually helps to enhance the integrity of the scholarly record; and how we handle the very small number of cases where there may be a question mark.\nWho can become a Crossref member and do we check new applicants? Membership is open to organisations that \u0026ldquo;produce professional and scholarly materials and content\u0026rdquo;, and this is deliberately defined broadly. We’re a global community of members with content in all disciplines, in many formats, with all kinds of business models - research institutions, publishers, government agencies, research funders, banks, museums and many more. Essentially, if your content is likely to be cited in the research ecosystem and you consider it part of the evidence trail, then you’re eligible to join.\nWe ask organisations to complete an online application form and accept our member terms. On receipt of the application, we run a few very basic checks to ensure that:\nThe applicant can meet the membership criteria and seems to have the capacity to fulfill the obligations (and follow our code of conduct). We are legally permitted to accept them as a member (for example, we can’t accept applications from some countries due to sanctions. They haven\u0026rsquo;t previously been a member of Crossref whose membership was revoked. They haven\u0026rsquo;t misrepresented themselves in the application (such as their location). The applicant or an affiliate is not already a member of Crossref (so that we can advise they join under a single membership fee). As long as the applicant can meet these requirements, and as long as they are able to pay any membership fees upfront for their first year of membership, they are able to become a Crossref member, get a DOI prefix, and start registering their metadata to share it with the global scholarly community. We are aware that some organisations in some regions may not be able to join Crossref independently. There may be barriers for them - the cost of membership fees, the fact that we only accept payment in US dollars, language barriers or technical barriers. To help increase participation globally, we work with sponsors in some regions. All sponsors facilitate membership for organisations who wish to participate in Crossref. They pay one central membership fee on behalf of all the members they work with, and they also pay content registration fees on behalf of their members. Many sponsors register content on behalf of their members, and even if they don’t, most provide local language and technical support. Sponsors are able to charge for their services, but it can be a very economical route for a member to join. In the last year, out of the 2,322 new members that we’ve welcomed, almost 58% joined via a sponsor.\nWe also waive registration fees for members in certain lower income countries who join via three of our sponsors, and we are planning to expand this program soon (pending board approval in November). [EDIT 2022-November-23: The new Global Equitable Membership (GEM) Program was approved and takes effect 1st January 2023]\nThe importance of keeping barriers to entry low As you can see, the checks that we run on new applicants are fairly limited in scope. In the last year, we’ve welcomed 2,322 new members and we only declined 39 applications. And 34 of these declined applications were effectively from one organisation whose membership was revoked in 2019.\nEven this minimal set of checks takes a lot of research and keeps our member support specialists very busy - thank you Sally Jennings and Robbykha Rosalien (as well as contractors Kim and Collin). So why shouldn\u0026rsquo;t we run more extensive checks on new member applicants? Why don’t we check the quality of their content, or that they are following best practices? Why don’t we decline membership for organisations that can’t demonstrate editorial integrity or that aren’t meeting 100% of the membership obligations from the start?\nNevermind the additional capacity that more extensive checks on the over 200 applicants we receive per month would entail, it\u0026rsquo;s more fitting with our mission to:\nenable equitable participation; and focus on evidence: Equitable participation Inclusivity is very important to us - after all, one of our organisational truths (the guiding principles for everything we do) is “come one, come all”, and this is mirrored in the POSI principles that commit us to broad stakeholder representation. We know that for new organisations, it may take them a while to be able to completely fulfil the membership obligations. We support them with information to help them understand what being a participant in the Crossref community entails. These organisations would have less of a chance of developing better practices if we were to limit membership in Crossref to \u0026lsquo;proven\u0026rsquo; candidates. Besides, it would introduce a race condition; if joining and sharing metadata through Crossref is widely considered best practice, new entrants need to join Crossref in order to show that they are adopting best practices.\nTrust signals and the Research Nexus Secondly, it\u0026rsquo;s not our role to make such a call; we don’t have the expertise to decide if an organisation would be considered “good” at what they are producing; there are other organisations guiding in this area, such as with the Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing. Instead, we focus on the decision-making tools, metadata, and relationships that can help provide trust signals for the community.\nOnce members start registering their content, their activity and metadata speak about their practices – others in the community can process that metadata, combined with its wider context, and identify trust signals to make their own decisions. That metadata can only be shared in an open and machine-readable way if an organisation joins Crossref and starts registering their records and underpinning data with us. To paint a more detailed picture of the scholarly record, our priority is to get more and varied organisations contributing to the research nexus, rather than putting up barriers and blockers until they are performing perfectly. If they aren’t acting in the best interests of the scholarly community, then having the metadata available to assess will quickly make that obvious and hopefully encourage changes - sunlight being the best disinfectant, as the saying goes.\nAs we said in the first ISR blog:\n“Crossref itself doesn’t assess the quality of content or the integrity of the research process but rather enables those who produce scholarly outputs to provide metadata (effectively evidence) about how they ensure the quality of content and how the outputs fit into the scholarly record.”\nIn our next post in the series, we\u0026rsquo;ll talk more about the workflow and decision-making tools we have in place and are planning to develop. We\u0026rsquo;ll pose questions about what kinds of metadata give what kind of levels of trustworthiness.\nHelping new members become “good Crossref citizens” Once an applicant becomes a member, we help them to completely fulfil the membership terms - ensuring that, for example, they register and display DOIs, keep their metadata up to date, and implement reference linking properly. We have a lot of documentation on our website, we run regular events and webinars, and we have a series of automated onboarding emails for new members to help them move through the key stages of the member journey from set up and onboarding to levelling up and using additional services like Crossmark and Similarity Check. Our staff are also on hand alongside Ambassadors and other members in our Community Forum. Speaking of POSI (and transparent operations) we receive around 3,000 emails per month with support requests so we are gradually moving support from closed 1:1 email to the more public and efficient community support forum.\nWe work with members who aren’t fulfilling the obligations to understand challenges and help explain what they need to do. This is currently reactive, but we have plans to automate checks on whether members are meeting the membership terms in future.\nOutside of confirming that our members are behaving as “good Crossref citizens”, there aren’t many other areas where the membership team typically gets involved. Our mission is to help preserve the integrity of the scholarly record by making the metadata provided by our members openly available in a machine-readable format. We don’t investigate our members’ business practices or take a deep dive into their editorial processes (such as peer review), and there are many areas where we aren’t able to get involved. For example, we cannot arbitrate title ownership disputes. It’s all about preserving the integrity of the scholarly record We do sometimes revoke membership, but this is for limited reasons: unpaid invoices; legal sanctions or judgments against the member or its home country; or contravention of the membership terms. Membership revocation due to unpaid invoices We spend a lot of time communicating with members who haven’t paid their invoices and ensuring they have the information they need to solve the problem. Revoking membership due to unpaid fees is an absolute last step for us, but financial sustainability means we can keep the organisation afloat and keep our infrastructure running.\nWhere members have unpaid fees, we eventually suspend their access to register new records and then ultimately revoke their membership if the fees remain unpaid. Once an organisation’s membership has been revoked, they would need to re-apply if they wanted to become a member again in the future. If accepted, the applicant would need to pay all outstanding invoices before re-joining. In March 2022, we revoked membership for around 140 members due to unpaid invoices (out of a total of over 17,000 active members). Membership revocation due to sanctions Occasionally, we are informed of sanctions that we need to comply with, such as the recent case of Russia invading Ukraine where each Russian member needed to be checked for individual sanctions and some were revoked. Such revocations have to be voted on by the Executive Committee and then ratified by the board. Read more information on our sanctions process. Membership revocation for cause Very occasionally there may be evidence that a member is in contravention of the membership terms. This may include:\nMisrepresentation in the original membership application Fraudulent use of identifiers or metadata Contravening the code of conduct Any other basis set forth in our governing documents. We always try to work together with the member to solve problems, and again, revoking membership is an absolute last step. The revocation has to be voted on by the Executive Committee and then ratified by the board. Our first ever revocation for cause was in July 2019 for OMICS, after the board voted that the US Federal Trade Commission\u0026rsquo;s ruling against them amounted to a cause for revocation. There have been a handful of cases since. For example, most recently in September this year we revoked membership for a member who was registering DOIs for journals with the ISSNs of similarly-named publications.\nThere’s more information about our processes to revoke membership on our website.\nMore participation for the win In conclusion, we believe that the more parties able to participate in Crossref and provide metadata and context for the research nexus, the more robust this makes the scholarly record.\nBut do you agree? Are these measures enough? What other information about our membership operations would help us be more transparent? As we said in our first blog, we need your help to establish whether our approach is still the right one, if we are missing anything and what else we might be able to do.\nHere’s how you can help:\nJoin the discussion about the integrity of the scholarly record on our community forum. Keep an eye out for future blog posts and meetings. We are having a small, in-person discussion prior to the Frankfurt Book Fair and will report on this in a future blog post. Sign up to attend Crossref LIVE22 for updates on these topics and all things Crossref. Join and support initiatives and organisations that we partner with or who use our metadata to look at ethical practices, for example, COPE, DOAJ, and OASPA, and review the Principles of Transparency in Scholarly Publishing, which these organisations worked on with WAME. ",
"headings": ["Who can become a Crossref member and do we check new applicants?","The importance of keeping barriers to entry low ","Equitable participation","Trust signals and the Research Nexus","Helping new members become “good Crossref citizens”","It’s all about preserving the integrity of the scholarly record","Membership revocation due to unpaid invoices","Membership revocation due to sanctions","Membership revocation for cause","More participation for the win"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/categories/operations/",
"title": "Operations",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Categories",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/isr-part-one-what-is-our-role-in-preserving-the-integrity-of-the-scholarly-record/",
"title": "ISR part one: What is our role in preserving the integrity of the scholarly record?",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2022-09-22",
"lastmod_ts": 1663804800,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "The integrity of the scholarly record is an essential aspect of research integrity. Every initiative and service that we have launched since our founding has been focused on documenting and clarifying the scholarly record in an open, machine-actionable and scalable form. All of this has been done to make it easier for the community to assess the trustworthiness of scholarly outputs. Now that the scholarly record itself has evolved beyond the published outputs at the end of the research process – to include both the elements of that process and its aftermath – preserving its integrity poses new challenges that we strive to meet\u0026hellip; we are reaching out to the community to help inform these efforts.\n",
"content": "The integrity of the scholarly record is an essential aspect of research integrity. Every initiative and service that we have launched since our founding has been focused on documenting and clarifying the scholarly record in an open, machine-actionable and scalable form. All of this has been done to make it easier for the community to assess the trustworthiness of scholarly outputs. Now that the scholarly record itself has evolved beyond the published outputs at the end of the research process – to include both the elements of that process and its aftermath – preserving its integrity poses new challenges that we strive to meet\u0026hellip; we are reaching out to the community to help inform these efforts.\nScholarly research, and therefore scholarly communications, are rapidly changing with the development of new approaches, technologies, and models. We need open scholarly infrastructure that can adapt to these changes and provide trust signals that enable assessment of the integrity of the research and reflect the ways that research is changing. Crossref has been changing and adapting by building on the concept of the scholarly record with our vision of the Research Nexus:\n\u0026ldquo;a rich and reusable open network of relationships connecting research organisations, people, things, and actions; a scholarly record that the global community can build on forever, for the benefit of society\u0026rdquo;.\nThe foundation of the scholarly record and Research Nexus is metadata and relationships - the richer and more comprehensive the metadata and relationships in Crossref records, the more context there is for our members and for the whole scholarly research ecosystem. This will lead to a range of benefits from better discovery and saving researchers time to the assessment of research impact and research integrity. This is why Crossref is focused on enriching metadata to provide more and better trust signals while keeping barriers to membership and participation as low as possible to enable an inclusive scholarly record.\nWe want to engage with the community to emphasise this role, share our plans for the future, and get feedback to establish if we are heading in the right direction.\nThis blog explains our current position and will be followed by subsequent posts exploring all our services and plans in this area, as well as more details on our membership operations and policies.\nWhat is “Integrity of the Scholarly Record” (ISR), and how does it feed into Research Integrity? The US National Institutes of Health (NIH) defines research integrity as a set of values in scientific research: honesty; accuracy; efficiency; and objectivity. It’s concerned with the soundness of the process of science. As a subset of that, the outputs of the scholarly publishing process create a “scholarly record” which allows those in the community to find evidence and context to help confirm whether these values have been adhered to. The scholarly record is Crossref’s focus. This means that Crossref itself doesn’t assess the quality of content or the integrity of the research process but rather enables those who produce scholarly outputs to provide metadata (effectively evidence) about how they ensure the quality of content and how the outputs fit into the scholarly record (through reference links, ORCID iDs for authors, ROR IDs for affiliations, funding and licensing information, etc.).\nCrossref members include any organisation that produces research objects and materials (publishers, societies, universities, funders, research institutions, scholars) so they can establish a persistent record—tied to a persistent and unique identifier—for these outputs and supply metadata about this content in an open, machine-readable way. Maintaining this record for the long term, and adding in an important layer of context, establishes the integrity of the scholarly record as well as ensuring it is something that can be used by the whole community to improve scholarly research for generations to come.\nThe scholarly record is about more than just published outputs - it’s also a network of inputs, relationships, and contexts In the past, the Scholarly Record was seen as just the published outputs at the end of the research process - for example, journal articles or book chapters. But as the OCLC Research Group notes in their 2014 report on The Evolving Scholarly Record:\n“The boundaries of the scholarly record are in flux, as they stretch to extend over an ever-expanding range of materials.”\nOCLC describes how outputs at the “process” and “aftermath” stages of the research process are becoming increasingly important alongside the outputs at the traditional “outcomes” stage.\nWe like to take this even further. We think the evolving Scholarly Record is about more than just recording different types of works. As the above report notes “The scholarly record is evolving to have greater emphasis on collecting and curating context of scholarly inquiry […] One can imagine an article in quantitative biology published in a Wiley journal, the data for which resides in Dryad; the e-print in arXiv; and the conference poster in F1000. All of these materials may be considered part of the scholarly record, but no single institution will collect them all. Instead, access is achieved through a coordination of stewardship roles in which the scholarly record is decomposed into discrete, interrelated units that organisations specialize in collecting, preserving, and making available.”\nIt’s this interrelatedness that we think is important, and Crossref plays an important role in collecting, matching, and sharing those relationships. We now focus on this ‘nexus’ - so no longer primarily the different types of objects, but increasingly the interplay and relationships between them. The context, rather than the individual metadata elements, is what’s key.\nMartin Eve explores this idea further in his blog What is the Scholarly Record, suggesting “the scholarly record is a decentralized network of evolving truth assertions” and “Whether a truth assertion is part of the scholarly record is determined by another set of distributed assertions and their power configurations (say, through institutional affiliation) of the individuals who make such assertions.”\nBarbara Fister\u0026rsquo;s excellent talk about the importance of lateral reading as a way to understand information systems discusses how professional fact checkers “engaged in “lateral reading,” check other sources for context before spending time reading and analyzing a source.”\nFister highlights the “SIFT” approach from A Curriculum for Civic Online Reasoning, created by a group of educators at Stanford University for students to evaluate online content. And she argues that this approach is also useful for assessing scholarly materials noting\n“The networked, social nature of scholarship is worth making explicit”.\nWhere does Crossref fit in? Where do we have the most impact and opportunity? To address the question of our role in the integrity of the scholarly record, we need to understand several aspects that Crossref has to balance in this capacity, such as\nWe don’t have the means or desire to be the arbiter of research quality. However, we operate neutrally, at the centre of scholarly communications, and we can help develop a shared consensus or framework. Our metadata elements and tools can be positioned to signal or detect trustworthiness. An important distinction is that we can play a role in assessing legitimacy but not in assessing quality. We must be cautious that our best practices for demonstrating legitimacy and handling less-than-legitimate behaviour do not raise already-high barriers for emerging publications or organisations that present in ways that some may not recognise as professional standards. Disruption is different from deception. In discussions with our board this point has come out strongly: that Crossref has an opportunity to think about how to help the community identify deceptive actions and pair that with our efforts to bring more people on board. Addressing this issue may involve changes to our membership eligibility and processes, bylaws, policies, staff resources, and technical and metadata solutions; actually, a combination of all these aspects. Many of these are projects that are already planned and we have ideas for extending these. We regularly review the process we use for evaluating when and why to revoke membership for reasons other than non-payment. The volume of cases that we believe justify membership revocation\u0026mdash;while a tiny fraction of members\u0026mdash;is growing and does take staff and legal resources to address. Crossref and our members aleady help preserve the integrity of the scholarly record in significant ways Almost all of our services in some way touch on enabling people to express and evaluate trustworthiness; our mission statement commits us to “making research objects easy to find, cite, link, assess, and reuse [\u0026hellip;] all to help put research in context.”\nWe have, of course, specific tools and services that augment this activity too. Many members are active in:\nReporting corrections and retractions through Crossmark metadata. Assessing originality using Similarity Check. Conveying their stewardship via the public participation report. Establishing provenance and stakeholders through funding metadata, ORCID, and ROR. Acknowledging funding through the use of the Open Funder Registry and registering grants metadata. Citing data for transparency and reproducibility, including linking to related research data via Event Data. Demonstrating open peer review by registering peer review reports. As recently concluded in this Nature editorial calling for us to think beyond open references,\n“Depositing all relevant metadata in Crossref should become the norm in scholarly publishing.”\nFor those members just starting out on their journey, there are some immediate specific things that all members are able to do. Check your participation report and start registering more metadata to add that contextual layer:\nReferences Abstracts Corrections and retractions via Crossmark License links ORCID IDs for authors ROR IDs for affiliations Grant IDs for funding acknowledgements Cite data (preferably using DataCite DOIs in reference lists) Register all related objects such as versions and translations via relationships Register grants with Crossref (funder members). By enabling our members to register their research objects and create metadata records about them that are freely and openly shared with the scholarly community, we facilitate them in being able to communicate the context and trustworthiness of that object.\nAnd within that metadata, they can create relationships not just between research objects and also between research stakeholders - the individuals, affiliations, funders, and other players involved. That’s why we work so closely with other parts of foundational scholarly infrastructure (ORCID, DataCite, ROR) and why we now have more than 30 funders registering grants with us. We want to help to capture, identify, and link together all these important elements and more to deliver context for the scholarly record.\nWe started this blog by talking about the changes that are taking place in the world of research and how the infrastructure needs to adapt and change. Although we have extensive plans in place to improve our contribution to ISR, we need your help to establish whether our role is still the right one, whether we are missing anything and what else we might be able to do.\nJoin the discussion about the integrity of the scholarly record, and the Research Nexus on our Community Forum. Keep an eye out for future blog posts and meetings. We are having a small, in-person discussion prior to the Frankfurt Book Fair and will report on this in a future blog post. Sign up to attend Crossref LIVE22 for updates on these topics and all things Crossref. Join and support initiatives and organisations that we partner with or who use our metadata to look at ethical practices in publishing, for example, COPE, DOAJ, and OASPA, and review the Principles of Transparency in Scholarly Publishing, which these organisations worked on with WAME. In the coming weeks, we will post more about our product and metadata plans and also about the specifics of membership operations and cases we see and how we’re currently addressing them.\nPlease share your thoughts! ",
"headings": ["What is “Integrity of the Scholarly Record” (ISR), and how does it feed into Research Integrity?","The scholarly record is about more than just published outputs - it’s also a network of inputs, relationships, and contexts","Where does Crossref fit in? Where do we have the most impact and opportunity?","Crossref and our members aleady help preserve the integrity of the scholarly record in significant ways","Please share your thoughts!"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/2022-board-election/",
"title": "2022 Board Election",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2022-09-16",
"lastmod_ts": 1663286400,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "I’m pleased to share the 2022 board election slate. Crossref’s Nominating Committee received 40 submissions from members worldwide to fill five open board seats.\nWe 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. We have four large member seats and one small member seat open for election in 2022.\n",
"content": "I’m pleased to share the 2022 board election slate. Crossref’s Nominating Committee received 40 submissions from members worldwide to fill five open board seats.\nWe 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. We have four large member seats and one small member seat open for election in 2022.\nThe Nominating Committee presents the following slate.\nThe 2022 slate Tier 1 candidates (electing one seat): eLife, Damian Pattinson, Executive Director Pan Africa Science Journal, Oscar Donde, Editor in Chief Tier 2 candidates (electing four seats): Clarivate, Christine Stohn, Director of Product Management Elsevier, Rose L’Huillier, Senior Vice President Researcher Products The MIT Press, Nick Lindsay, Journals and Open Access Director Springer Nature, Anjalie Nawaratne, VP Data Transformation \u0026amp; Chief Business Architect Wiley, Allyn Molina, Group Vice President, Research Publishing Here are the candidates\u0026rsquo; organisational and personal statements You can be part of this important process by voting in the election If your organisation is a voting member in good standing of Crossref as of September 6th, 2022, you are eligible to vote when voting opens on September 20th, 2022.\nHow can you vote? Your organisation’s designated voting contact will receive an email the week of September 19th with the Formal Notice of Meeting and Proxy Form with concise instructions on how to vote. You will also receive a username and password with a link to our voting platform.\nThe election results will be announced at the LIVE22 online meeting on October 26th, 2022. Save the date! Incoming members will take their seats at the March 2023 board meeting.\n",
"headings": ["The 2022 slate","Tier 1 candidates (electing one seat):","Tier 2 candidates (electing four seats):","Here are the candidates\u0026rsquo; organisational and personal statements","You can be part of this important process by voting in the election","How can you vote?"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/operations-and-sustainability/membership-operations/",
"title": "Membership operations",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2022-09-13",
"lastmod_ts": 1663027200,
"section": "Operations & sustainability",
"tags": [],
"description": "Your organisation needs to be a member of Crossref in order to get a DOI prefix so you can create Crossref DOIs and register content. All members agree to our membership terms to help ensure the persistence of our infrastructure.\nOn this page, find out more about our membership operations:\nNew member applications The membership terms Applications to become a sponsor Our billing cycle Canceling your membership When Crossref revokes membership Membership and legal sanctions Organisations that claim to be Crossref members New member applications We ask new applicants to complete an application form, and we then check that:\n",
"content": "Your organisation needs to be a member of Crossref in order to get a DOI prefix so you can create Crossref DOIs and register content. All members agree to our membership terms to help ensure the persistence of our infrastructure.\nOn this page, find out more about our membership operations:\nNew member applications The membership terms Applications to become a sponsor Our billing cycle Canceling your membership When Crossref revokes membership Membership and legal sanctions Organisations that claim to be Crossref members New member applications We ask new applicants to complete an application form, and we then check that:\nYou meet our membership criteria and can commit to fulfil the member terms. We are legally able to accept your organisation as a member. Your organisation hasn’t previously been a member of Crossref whose membership was revoked. Your organisation hasn’t misrepresented themselves in the application. Your organisation is not already a member of Crossref. Membership in Crossref is open to organisations that produce professional and scholarly materials and content, and we treat this broadly - “come one, come all” is one of our organisational truths. We’re a global community of members with content in all disciplines, in many formats, with all kinds of business models - research institutions, publishers, government agencies, research funders, museums and many more. But it’s important that members are able to meet the obligations of membership and work in a way which reflects our code of conduct.\nAs an organisation that’s based in the US (and with significant activities in the UK and Europe) there are also some legal limits on our activity - for example, we cannot accept applications for membership from organisations based in some countries due to sanctions. Find out more about sanctions which impact on Crossref membership and the countries which are affected.\nWe may not be able to accept applications for membership from organisations which have previously had their membership revoked or who have misrepresented themselves in their application.\nAnd finally, if your organisation is already a member of Crossref (for example, a different department of the same university) we may add you to the existing membership. This ensure that the same organisation is not paying multiple membership fees.\nMembership terms New Crossref members agree to these member terms by ticking a box in the application form. These terms then remain in effect permanently - there is no need to renew each year. The terms will only be canceled if one of the following things happen:\nThe member cancels their membership - how to cancel your membership. Crossref revokes your membership - find out more. The terms are updated. Updating the membership terms If we change the Crossref membership terms, we will email the contact that each active member organisation has identified as their Primary contact (previously known as \u0026ldquo;Business contact\u0026rdquo;) to let them know about the change. This will happen no fewer than sixty days prior to effectiveness. Members may cancel their membership if they don’t want to accept the new terms.\nApplications to become a sponsor Some small organisations want to register metadata for their research and participate in Crossref but are not able to join directly due to financial, administrative, or technical barriers. Sponsors are organisations who facilitate membership for these organisations by providing administrative, billing, technical, and—if applicable—language support to these organisations. There is quite a high bar to becoming a Crossref sponsor, so not all organisations who apply will be eligible.\nFind out more about becoming a sponsor\nOur billing cycle We send out annual membership fees (for members and sponsors) and annual subscription fees (for service providers and those subscribing to Metadata Plus or other paid-for metadata services) each January. We invoice for content registration on a quarterly basis. All invoices have a term of 45 days. We recommend that members pay using a credit or debit card through our payment portal, but other payment methods are available.\nFind out more about:\nOur billing process What happens if you don’t pay your invoices Canceling your Membership You need to contact us to cancel your membership. You aren’t able to pause your membership, so if you just stop using the service and don’t tell us that you want to cancel, we will still continue to send you annual membership fee invoices. And if you then want to start using the service again in future years, you will need to pay these outstanding membership invoices. If you actually contact us to cancel, we can stop these annual membership invoices from being created.\nHow to cancel your membership.\nRevoking membership As an organisation that’s obsessed with persistence, we really try to avoid revoking membership. However, there are limited times when we have to. Find out more.\nMembership and legal sanctions Crossref’s mission is to support global research in and between all countries and we will always do that to the extent possible. But we are also bound by laws in the US, the UK, and the EU, and where sanctions apply we have to comply with these. Find out more\nOrganisations that claim to be Crossref members Occasionally authors contact us as a publisher they are working with has claimed to be a Crossref member, or has claimed to register DOIs, but instead just displays unregistered, DOI-like strings on their website.\nWe don\u0026rsquo;t currently have an online list of Crossref members, and it\u0026rsquo;s the parent publishing organisation that joins Crossref (rather than individual journals), so it\u0026rsquo;s sometimes hard to work out if a journal is published by a Crossref member or not.\nIf you are an author planning to submit a manuscript to a publisher who claims to be a Crossref member, the best thing to do is check the DOIs that they currently display on their website.\nDon\u0026rsquo;t just click on the DOI link that\u0026rsquo;s displayed in the website. Instead, copy the DOI as a link, and then paste this into new tab in your browser. If the DOI resolves to an article, then that DOI has been registered with us (or with another Registration Agency), and metadata about that published item has been shared with the scholarly community through our open APIs. But if the DOI resolves to DOI Foundation Error page, then that DOI has NOT been registered, and there is no open metadata record that has been shared with the community.\nFor example of a DOI that has NOT been registered, copy and paste https://doi.org/10.5555/undeposited into a browser. You will arrive at the DOI Foundation Error page, rather than a scholarly work.\nShow image × Always refer to the Think, Check, Submit website to help you decide whether to submit to a particular journal. If you have any problems with a publisher, do speak to your university of the team at the Committee On Publication Ethics (COPE) for support and guidance.\nThis is by no means comprehensive, but we do keep a list of websites where we have been informed that they are displaying fake DOIs (eg unregistered, DOI-like strings), and/or claiming to be Crossref members. (Do contact us if you are one of these organisations and have removed these fake, DOI-like strings and wish to be removed from the list).\nWe also hold a list of ex-members who have had their membership revoked as they contravened the membership terms.\n",
"headings": ["New member applications","Membership terms","Updating the membership terms","Applications to become a sponsor","Our billing cycle","Canceling your Membership","Revoking membership","Membership and legal sanctions","Organisations that claim to be Crossref members"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/accessibility-for-crossref-doi-links-call-for-comments-on-proposed-new-guidelines/",
"title": "Accessibility for Crossref DOI Links: Call for comments on proposed new guidelines",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2022-09-06",
"lastmod_ts": 1662422400,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "Our entire community \u0026ndash; members, metadata users, service providers, community organisations and researchers \u0026ndash; create and/or use DOIs in some way so making them more accessible is a worthy and overdue effort.\nFor the first time in five years and only the second time ever, we are recommending some changes to our DOI display guidelines (the changes aren’t really for display but more on that below). We don’t take such changes lightly, because we know it means updating established workflows. We appreciate the questions that prompted us to make this recommendation and we know it’s critical that we get community input on the proposed updates.\n",
"content": "Our entire community \u0026ndash; members, metadata users, service providers, community organisations and researchers \u0026ndash; create and/or use DOIs in some way so making them more accessible is a worthy and overdue effort.\nFor the first time in five years and only the second time ever, we are recommending some changes to our DOI display guidelines (the changes aren’t really for display but more on that below). We don’t take such changes lightly, because we know it means updating established workflows. We appreciate the questions that prompted us to make this recommendation and we know it’s critical that we get community input on the proposed updates.\nTL;DR Here is a quick overview:\nDOIs and URLs themselves don’t really tell readers much. People with visual impairments rely on screen readers to read out loud the contents of a page. We’re asking for the title of each DOI to be added, in an ARIA (Accessible Rich Internet Applications) attribute, so these users understand what these links are for. Accessible text, as this kind of description is known, should be included for all links, but at this time, we’re specifically recommending it for landing pages of newly registered records. It’s not required, yet. We’re proposing a 2 year recommendation period and we want your feedback on the particulars, including timing and how we can help. Please take a short survey and/or get in touch and share your thoughts. We’ll finalize these recommendations after assessing the feedback. Please check back for updates. What is changing, when and why The proposed updates are meant to improve overall usability, particularly for people with visual impairments, by aligning our guidelines with modern accessibility requirements such as the new W3C recommendations and the European Accessibility Act. This means that assistive technologies such as screen readers can interpret DOI links.\nWhy are changes being recommended?\nDOIs are unique and persistent links to items in the scholarly record so it makes sense that they link to the full URLs for the associated content –for example, a journal article. The issue for people who rely on screen readers is that a DOI link doesn’t provide title or other information to give that link context. Users of screen readers need to know what the destination of a link is.\nThese users often lack the context that other users have; in fact, they may be presented with links in a document as a list. That\u0026rsquo;s why all links, not just DOI links, need what is called \u0026ldquo;accessible text.” Providing additional information for links requires ARIA (Accessible Rich Internet Applications) techniques. This speaks to the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG), the standard guidelines for accessibility across the web, specifically success criterion 2.4.4 - Link Purpose (In Context), which aims to ‘help users understand the purpose of each link so they can decide whether they want to follow the link.’\nFor your feedback: recommended draft changes\nWe recommend the addition of an aria-label attribute for DOI links, containing as its value the descriptive title of the content represented by the DOI, so that screen readers can interpret DOI links. This means that, while the DOI display itself doesn’t actually change, the link is enhanced with additional, contextual information for the user of assistive technology, in one of two ways, either:\nan aria-label attribute, described as ‘a way to place a descriptive text label on an object,’ identifying the destination, or an aria-describedby attribute pointing to where the destination is identified in the surrounding text. The updated HTML for a journal article*, for example, would be:\n\u0026lt;a href=\u0026quot;https://doi.org/10.5555/12345678\u0026quot; aria-label=\u0026quot;DOI for Toward a Unified Theory of High-Energy Metaphysics: Silly String Theory\u0026quot;\u0026gt;https://doi.org/10.5555/12345678\u0026lt;/a\u0026gt;\nHere the aria-label has been set to the value of the ‘title’ property as retrieved from the Crossref REST API at https://api.crossref.org/v1/works/10.5555/12345678.\n*Note that fields may vary slightly for different record types.\nThis proposed solution allows screen readers to read aloud to users the value of the aria-label attribute, instead of the full DOI in the link text.\nAt this time, we are recommending the change for landing pages in particular, but it can and should be applied to wherever DOI links appear, whenever feasible (more on this below).\nOur guidelines will continue to state that the DOI should always be displayed as a full URL link\u0026ndash;that will not change. Neither will content registration\u0026ndash;we are not asking for additional information in your deposits.\nIt’s not perfect, but it’s very worthwhile\nThis recommendation has some limitations worth noting but it must be said that there is no perfect solution.\nDOI links appear in lots of places - PDFs for one notable example. We reviewed and tested the recommendation with Bill Kasdorf, Principal, Kasdorf \u0026amp; Associates, LLC, Richard Orme, CEO, DAISY Consortium, and George Kerscher, Chief Innovations Officer, DAISY Consortium-Senior Officer, Global Literacy, Benetech, who graciously provided their time and expertise. EPUBs and websites proved to be easy to update; other formats, notably PDFs, less so. Widespread adoption of accessible DOIs is so important and we don’t want confusion or frustration to get in the way of making progress. We support and welcome efforts to include an ARIA attribute wherever DOI links appear, but we recommend focusing on landing pages, for now.\nPatrick Vale, Crossref Senior Front End Developer, explains that:\n”DOI links serve a very specific purpose: to provide the persistent link to an item in the scholarly record. And as such, they present an unusual set of requirements when balancing accurately presenting the information they encode - the persistent link - and making that link accessible, and understandable. With these proposed changes, we hope to strike this balance.“\nWe know it will be a challenge (more on that below) but we think it’s absolutely a worthwhile effort. Indeed, we are undertaking a project to update our own website to meet these recommendations and to review overall accessibility.\nAs Bill Kasdorf notes:\n“Most people have no idea how many people with visual impairments there are. Not only is it unfair to those people not to provide accessible text for links, the authors and publishers of the linked resource are missing a lot of readers. This update is a great move by Crossref, and every bit aligned with its mission to make scholarly content discoverable and consumable.”\nWe propose the following timeline, also for your feedback\nOnce finalized, following community feedback, the updated guidelines will be issued as a recommendation for a suggested period of two years starting next year, 2023. Beginning in 2025, the changes will be required for landing pages of newly registered content (and strongly recommended for existing registered content). Feedback on this approach and timeline is also encouraged.\nHelp us help you We are conscious that adding descriptive information to DOI links places a significant responsibility on the members and Service Providers creating and hosting these links. Therefore, we are also considering the creation of a tool to help with implementation. Initial discussions suggest this could be a JavaScript helper tool, which could be included on member websites. We also welcome feedback as to how such a tool might be implemented, and how it would best integrate with existing sites and workflows.\nCall for comments - by 1st November We hope that this proposal is a welcome one and that the timing is good for moving forward together toward greater accessibility of the scholarly record. We welcome questions, feedback and suggestions through 1st November via the survey below or by email to feedback@crossref.org\nLoading... Small changes, big impact We’re excited to make changes that improve accessibility and we look forward to the community’s response to our proposal. We will share aggregated feedback in an updated post later this year.\nA note on language Multiple sources were consulted to find the most appropriate and inclusive term(s) for users of screen readers in this context. “Print disabled,” for example, seemed to be a good candidate but was ultimately deemed likely to be confusing to a very global publishing audience, who often don’t physically print anything. Sources differ slightly, for example between the US and UK and of course, this English text may well be translated into other languages. Feedback on the terms used here is also very welcome.\nAdditional resources The Inclusive Publishing Hub (DAISY Consortium) National Center on Disability and Journalism (Arizona State University, US) Inclusive Language guidance (UK government) The American Psychological Association (APA) Bias-Free Language Disability Guide The Open Access Books Network (OABN) ",
"headings": ["TL;DR","What is changing, when and why","Help us help you","Call for comments - by 1st November","Small changes, big impact","A note on language","Additional resources"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/categories/doi-display-guidelines/",
"title": "DOI Display Guidelines",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Categories",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/martin-paul-eve-is-joining-our-rd-group-as-a-principal-developer/",
"title": "Martin Paul Eve is joining our R&D group as a Principal Developer",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2022-08-26",
"lastmod_ts": 1661472000,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "I\u0026rsquo;m delighted to say that Martin Paul Eve will be joining Crossref as a Principal R\u0026amp;D Developer starting in January 2023.\nAs a Professor of Literature, Technology, and Publishing at Birkbeck, University of London- Martin has always worked on issues relating to metadata and scholarly infrastructure. In joining the Crossref R\u0026amp;D group, Martin can focus full-time on helping us design and build a new generation of services and tools to help the research community navigate and make sense of the scholarly record.\n",
"content": "I\u0026rsquo;m delighted to say that Martin Paul Eve will be joining Crossref as a Principal R\u0026amp;D Developer starting in January 2023.\nAs a Professor of Literature, Technology, and Publishing at Birkbeck, University of London- Martin has always worked on issues relating to metadata and scholarly infrastructure. In joining the Crossref R\u0026amp;D group, Martin can focus full-time on helping us design and build a new generation of services and tools to help the research community navigate and make sense of the scholarly record.\nMartin himself explains the logic of this move on his own blog, so I won\u0026rsquo;t attempt to do the same here other than to say:\npraxis makes perfect.\n(mic drop)\nCreated with DALL·E, an AI system by OpenAI with the the prompt: \u0026lsquo;A bookwheel in the style of the 16th-century illustration by Agostino Ramelli and where the books are replaced by open laptops\u0026rsquo;\n",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/contact-thank-you/",
"title": "Thank you for contacting us",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2022-08-04",
"lastmod_ts": 1659571200,
"section": "",
"tags": [],
"description": "Thank you Thanks for getting in touch. We will reply by email as soon as we can. In the meantime, please check out our forum where other community members may be able to help sooner.\n",
"content": "Thank you Thanks for getting in touch. We will reply by email as soon as we can. In the meantime, please check out our forum where other community members may be able to help sooner.\n",
"headings": ["Thank you"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/authors/arley-soto/",
"title": "Arley Soto",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Authors",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/flies-in-your-metadata-ointment/",
"title": "Flies in your metadata (ointment)",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2022-07-25",
"lastmod_ts": 1658707200,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "Quality metadata is foundational to the research nexus and all Crossref services. When inaccuracies creep in, these create problems that get compounded down the line. No wonder that reports of metadata errors from authors, members, and other metadata users are some of the most common messages we receive into the technical support team (we encourage you to continue to report these metadata errors).\nWe make members’ metadata openly available via our APIs, which means people and machines can incorporate it into their research tools and services - thus, we all want it to be accurate. Manuscript tracking services, search services, bibliographic management software, library systems, author profiling tools, specialist subject databases, scholarly sharing networks - all of these (and more) incorporate scholarly metadata into their software and services. They use our APIs to help them get the most complete, up-to-date set of metadata from all of our publisher members. And of course, members themselves are able to use our free APIs too (and often do; our members account for the vast majority of overall metadata usage).\n",
"content": "Quality metadata is foundational to the research nexus and all Crossref services. When inaccuracies creep in, these create problems that get compounded down the line. No wonder that reports of metadata errors from authors, members, and other metadata users are some of the most common messages we receive into the technical support team (we encourage you to continue to report these metadata errors).\nWe make members’ metadata openly available via our APIs, which means people and machines can incorporate it into their research tools and services - thus, we all want it to be accurate. Manuscript tracking services, search services, bibliographic management software, library systems, author profiling tools, specialist subject databases, scholarly sharing networks - all of these (and more) incorporate scholarly metadata into their software and services. They use our APIs to help them get the most complete, up-to-date set of metadata from all of our publisher members. And of course, members themselves are able to use our free APIs too (and often do; our members account for the vast majority of overall metadata usage).\nWe know many organisations use Crossref metadata. We highlighted several different examples in our API case study blog series and user stories. Now, consider how errors could be (and often are) amplified throughout the whole research ecosystem.\nWhile many inaccuracies in the metadata have clear consequences (e.g., if an author’s name is misspelled or their ORCID iD is registered with a typo, the ability to credit the author with their work can be compromised), there are others, like this example of typos in the publication date, that may seem subtle, but also have repercussions. When we receive reports of metadata quality inaccuracies, we review the claims and work to connect metadata users with our members to investigate and then correct those inaccuracies.\nThus, while Crossref does not update, edit, or correct publisher-provided metadata directly, we do work to enrich and improve the scholarly record, a goal we’re always striving for. Let’s look at a few common examples and how to avoid them.\nPagination faux pas First page marked as 1 In the XML registered \u0026lt;pages\u0026gt; \u0026lt;first_page\u0026gt;1\u0026lt;/first_page\u0026gt; \u0026lt;last_page\u0026gt;1\u0026lt;/last_page\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/pages\u0026gt; Related REST API query https://api.crossref.org/works?filter=type:journal-article\u0026select=DOI,title,issue,page\u0026sample=100\nMore on the problem Very little content begins and ends on page 1. Especially journal articles. But, many members may not know what the page range of the content will be when they register the content with us (perhaps the content in question is an ahead-of-print journal article and the member intends to update this page range later). The issue here is that page range is an important piece of the metadata that we use for citation matching. If the pagination registered with us is incorrect, and it differs from the pagination stated in the citation, our matching process is challenged. Thus, we might fail to establish a citation link between the two works. The page range beginning with page 1 is the most common pagination error that the technical support team sees.\nMore metadata does not mean better metadata.\nOther pagination errors In the XML registered \u0026lt;item_number item_number_type=\u0026#34;article-number\u0026#34;\u0026gt;1\u0026lt;/item_number\u0026gt; More on the problem Like first pages beginning with 1, few internal article numbers are 1. We see a disproportionate number of article number 1s in the metadata. Again, this can prevent citation matching. Mistakes happen in all aspects of life, including metadata entry. That said, if you, as a member, don’t use internal article numbers or other metadata elements that can be registered, a recommendation we’d make is: if you don’t know what the metadata element is, omit it. More metadata does not mean better metadata. If you’d like to know more about what the elements are, bookmark our schema documentation in Oxygen or review our sample XML files.\nIn the XML registered \u0026lt;pages\u0026gt; \u0026lt;first_page\u0026gt;121-123\u0026lt;/first_page\u0026gt; \u0026lt;last_page\u0026gt;129\u0026lt;/last_page\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/pages\u0026gt; More on the problem This content either begins on page 121, 122, or 123. It cannot start on all three pages. Ironically, registering a first page of 121-123 ensures that we will not match the article if it is included in a citation for another DOI with a first page of 121, 122, or 123.\nAuthor naming lapses Examples: Titles (Dr., Prof. etc.) in the given_name field; Suffixes (Jr., III, etc.) in the surname field; superscript number, asterisk, or dagger after author names (usually carried over from website formatting that references affiliations); full name in surname field\nIn the XML registered \u0026lt;contributors\u0026gt; \u0026lt;person_name sequence=\u0026#34;first\u0026#34; contributor_role=\u0026#34;author\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;given_name\u0026gt;DOCTOR KATHRYN\u0026lt;/given_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;surname\u0026gt;RAILLY\u0026lt;/surname\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/person_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;person_name sequence=\u0026#34;additional\u0026#34; contributor_role=\u0026#34;author\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;given_name\u0026gt;DOCTOR JOSIAH S.\u0026lt;/given_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;surname\u0026gt;CARBERRY\u0026lt;/surname\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/person_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/contributors\u0026gt; \u0026lt;contributors\u0026gt; \u0026lt;person_name contributor_role=\u0026#34;author\u0026#34; sequence=\u0026#34;first\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;surname\u0026gt;Mahmoud Rizk\u0026lt;/surname\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/person_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;person_name contributor_role=\u0026#34;author\u0026#34; sequence=\u0026#34;additional\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;surname\u0026gt;Asta L Andersen(\u0026lt;/surname\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/person_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/contributors\u0026gt; Related REST API queries https://api.crossref.org/works?query.author=professor https://api.crossref.org/works?query.author=doctor https://api.crossref.org/works?query.author=ingeniero https://api.crossref.org/works?query.author=junior https://api.crossref.org/works?query.author=III More on the problem Neither Josiah nor Kathryn’s official given name includes ‘doctor,’ thus it should be omitted from the metadata. Including ‘doctor’ in the metadata and/or capping the authors’ names in the metadata does not result in additional accreditation or convey status. Instead, the result is to muddle the metadata record. As with page numbers in the metadata, accurate author names are crucial for citation matching.\norganisations as authors slip-ups Examples: The contributor role for person names is for persons, not organisational contributors, but we see this violated from time to time. Unfortunately, no persons are being credited with contributing to content that have these errors present in the metadata record.\nIn the XML registered \u0026lt;contributors\u0026gt; \u0026lt;person_name sequence=\u0026#34;first\u0026#34; contributor_role=\u0026#34;author\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;surname\u0026gt;Society\u0026lt;/surname\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/person_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/contributors\u0026gt; \u0026lt;person_name contributor_role=\u0026#34;author\u0026#34; sequence=\u0026#34;first\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;given_name\u0026gt;University of Melbourne\u0026lt;/given_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;surname\u0026gt;University of Melbourne\u0026lt;/surname\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/person_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/contributors\u0026gt; Related REST API queries https://api.crossref.org/works?query.author=society https://api.crossref.org/works?query.author=university More on the problem We love seeing inclusion of organisational contributors in the metadata, when that metadata is correct. Unfortunately, we do see mistakes where organisations are entered as people and people are inadvertently omitted from the metadata record (sometimes omission of people in the contributor list is intentional, but other times it is a mistake). In the XML above, the organisation was entered as an organisational contributor - the organisation itself is being credited with the work. This is sometimes confused with an author affiliation or even a ROR ID. Our schema library and XML samples are a great place to start, if you’re interested in learning more about organisational contributors versus author affiliations.\nNull no-nos Examples: Too many times we see \u0026ldquo;N/A\u0026rdquo;, “null”, \u0026ldquo;none\u0026rdquo; in various fields (pages, authors, volume/issue numbers, titles, etc.). If you don’t have or know the metadata, it’s better to omit it for optional metadata elements than to include inaccuracies in the metadata record.\nIn the XML registered \u0026lt;journal_volume\u0026gt; \u0026lt;volume\u0026gt;null\u0026lt;/volume\u0026gt; \u0026lt;pages\u0026gt; \u0026lt;first_page\u0026gt;null\u0026lt;/first_page\u0026gt; \u0026lt;last_page\u0026gt;null\u0026lt;/last_page\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/pages\u0026gt; \u0026lt;person_name sequence=\u0026#34;first\u0026#34; contributor_role=\u0026#34;author\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;given_name\u0026gt;Not Available\u0026lt;/given_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;surname\u0026gt;Not Available\u0026lt;/surname\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/person_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;person_name sequence=\u0026#34;additional\u0026#34; contributor_role=\u0026#34;author\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;given_name\u0026gt;Not Available\u0026lt;/given_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;surname\u0026gt;Not Available\u0026lt;/surname\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/person_name\u0026gt; Related REST API queries https://api.crossref.org/works?query.author=null https://api.crossref.org/works?query.author=none https://api.crossref.org/works?query.author=Not%20Available More on the problem Nulls and Not Availables, like many of the examples in this blog, are not simply agnostic when included in the metadata record. Including nulls in your metadata limits our ability to match references and establish connections between research works. These works do not expand and enrich the research nexus; quite the opposite. The incorrect metadata limits our ability to establish relationships between works.\nWhere to go from here? One thing we’ve said throughout this blog that we’ll reiterate here is: accurate metadata is important. It’s important in itself, and the metadata registered with us is heavily used by many systems and services, so think Crossref and beyond. In addition to that expanding perspective, there are practical steps members and metadata users can take to help us:\nAs a member registering metadata with us:\nmake sure we have a current metadata quality contact for your account and update us if there’s a change if you receive an email request from us to investigate a potential metadata error, help us if you do not know what to enter into a metadata element or helper tool field, please leave it blank; perhaps some of the examples of errors within this blog were placeholders that the responsible members intended to come back to - to correct in time; that’s also a practice to avoid if you find a record in need of an update, update it - updates to existing records are always free (we do this to encourage updates and the resulting accurate, rich metadata, so take advantage of it). As a metadata user:\nif you spot a metadata record that doesn’t seem right, let us know with an email to support@crossref.org and/or report it to the member responsible for maintaining the metadata record (if you have a good contact there) if you’re eager to confirm the last update of a metadata record, our REST API is a great resource; here’s a handy query to use as a starting point: this one returns records on our Crossref prefix 10.5555 that have been updated in 2022: https://api.crossref.org/prefixes/10.5555/works?rows=500\u0026filter=from-update-date:2022-01-01,until-pub-date:2022-12-31\u0026mailto=support@crossref.org Making connections between research objects is critical, and inaccurate metadata complicates that process. We’re continually working to better understand this, too. That’s why we’re currently researching the reach and effects of metadata. Our technical support team is always eager to assist in correcting errors. We’re also keen on avoiding those mistakes altogether, so if you are uncertain about a metadata element or have questions about anything included in this blog post, please do contact us at support@crossref.org. Or, better yet, post your question in the community forum so all members and users can benefit from the exchange. If you have a question, chances are others do as well.\n",
"headings": ["Pagination faux pas","First page marked as 1","In the XML registered","Related REST API query","More on the problem","Other pagination errors","In the XML registered","More on the problem","In the XML registered","More on the problem","Author naming lapses","In the XML registered","Related REST API queries","More on the problem","organisations as authors slip-ups","In the XML registered","Related REST API queries","More on the problem","Null no-nos","In the XML registered","Related REST API queries","More on the problem","Where to go from here?"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/register-maintain-records/",
"title": "Register and maintain your records",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2022-07-22",
"lastmod_ts": 1658448000,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": " Content Registration allows members to register and update metadata via machine or human interfaces. When you join Crossref as a member you are issued a DOI prefix. You combine this with a suffix of your choice to create a DOI, which becomes active once registered with Crossref. Content Registration allows members to register a DOI and deposit or update its associated metadata, via machine or human interfaces.\nBenefits of content registration Academic and professional research travels further if it’s linked to the millions of other published papers. Crossref members register content with us to let the world know it exists, instead of creating thousands of bilateral agreements.\n",
"content": " Content Registration allows members to register and update metadata via machine or human interfaces. When you join Crossref as a member you are issued a DOI prefix. You combine this with a suffix of your choice to create a DOI, which becomes active once registered with Crossref. Content Registration allows members to register a DOI and deposit or update its associated metadata, via machine or human interfaces.\nBenefits of content registration Academic and professional research travels further if it’s linked to the millions of other published papers. Crossref members register content with us to let the world know it exists, instead of creating thousands of bilateral agreements.\nMembers send information called metadata to us. Metadata includes fields like dates, titles, authors, affiliations, funders, and online location. Each metadata record includes a persistent identifier called a digital object identifier (DOI) that stays with the work even if it moves websites. Though the DOI doesn\u0026rsquo;t change, its associated metadata is kept up-to-date by the owner of the record.\nRicher metadata makes content useful and easier to find. Through Crossref, members are distributing their metadata downstream, making it available to numerous systems and organisations that together help credit and cite the work, report impact of funding, track outcomes and activity, and more.\nMembers maintain and update metadata long-term, telling us if content moves to a new website, and they include more information as time goes on. This means that there is a growing chance that content is found, cited, linked to, included in assessment, and used by other researchers.\nParticipation Reports give a clear picture for anyone to see the metadata Crossref has. See for yourself where the gaps are, and what our members could improve upon. Understand best practice through seeing what others are doing, and learn how to level-up.\nThis is Crossref infrastructure. You can’t see infrastructure, yet research—and researchers all over the world—rely on it.\nShow image × Download the content registration factsheet, and explore factsheets for other Crossref services and in different languages.\nHow content registration works To register content with Crossref, you need to be a member. You’ll use one of our content registration methods to give us metadata about your content. Note that you don’t send us the content itself - you create a metadata record that links persistently (via a persistent identifier) to the content on your site or hosting platform. Learn more about metadata, constructing your DOIs, and ways to register your content.\nYou should assign Crossref DOIs to and register content for anything that is likely to be cited in the scholarly literature.\nNo matter whether you register content using one of our helper tools, or creating your own metadata files, all metadata deposited with Crossref is submitted as XML, and formatted using our metadata deposit schema section. Explore our XML sample files to help you create your own XML.\nWhat types of resources and records can be registered with Crossref? We are working to make our input schema more flexible so that almost any type of object can be registered and distributed openly through Crossref. At the moment, members tend to register the following:\nBooks, chapters, and reference works: includes book title and/or chapter-level records. Books can be registered as a monograph, series, or set. Conference proceedings: information about a single conference and records for each conference paper/proceeding. Datasets: includes database records or collections. Dissertations: includes single dissertations and theses, but not collections. Grants: includes both direct funding and other types of support such as the use of equipment and facilities. Journals and articles: at the journal title and article level, and includes supplemental materials as components. Peer reviews: any number of reviews, reports, or comments attached to any other work that has been registered with Crossref. Pending publications: a temporary placeholder record with minimal metadata, often used for embargoed work where a DOI needs to be shared before the full content is made available online. Preprints and posted content: includes preprints, eprints, working papers, reports, and other types of content that has been posted but not formally published. Reports and working papers: this includes content that is published and likely has an ISSN. Standards: includes publications from standards organisations. You can also establish relationships between different research objects (such as preprints, translations, and datasets) in your metadata. Learn more about all the metadata that can be included in these records with our schema library and markup guides.\nObligations and fees for content registration You pay a one-time content registration fee for each content item you register with us. content registration fees are different for different types of content and sometimes include discounts for back-year material. You don’t pay to update an existing metadata record. It’s an obligation of membership that you maintain your metadata for the long term, including updating any URLs that change. In addition, we warmly encourage you to correct and add to your metadata, and there is no charge for redepositing (updating) existing metadata. Learn more about maintaining your metadata, and managing existing DOIs.\nYour content registration fees are billed quarterly in arrears. This means you’ll usually receive a bill at the beginning of each quarter for the content you registered in the previous quarter. The only exception is if you’ve only registered a small number of DOIs.\nTypes of metadata We collect many different types of metadata. You can read more in our documentation.\nGetting Started with Content Registration Read through Getting started as a new Crossref member in our documentation.\n",
"headings": ["Content Registration allows members to register and update metadata via machine or human interfaces.","Benefits of content registration ","How content registration works ","What types of resources and records can be registered with Crossref?","Obligations and fees for content registration ","Types of metadata ","Getting Started with Content Registration"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/how-i-think-about-ror-as-infrastructure/",
"title": "How I think about ROR as infrastructure",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2022-07-08",
"lastmod_ts": 1657238400,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "The other day I was out and about and got into a conversation with someone who asked me about my doctoral work in English literature. I\u0026rsquo;ve had the same conversation many times: I tell someone (only if they ask!) that my dissertation was a history of the villanelle, and then they cheerfully admit that they don\u0026rsquo;t know what a villanelle is, and then I ask them if they\u0026rsquo;re familiar with Dylan Thomas\u0026rsquo;s poem \u0026ldquo;Do not go gentle into that good night.\u0026rdquo; So far, everyone has heard of it \u0026ndash; it\u0026rsquo;s a very well-known poem indeed. I then explain that \u0026ldquo;Do not go gentle into that good night\u0026rdquo; is a villanelle, and that a villanelle is a poetic form something like a sonnet. So far, everyone also knows what a sonnet is, which is why I use that as a comparison, even though a villanelle isn\u0026rsquo;t all that much like a sonnet, in my opinion. They\u0026rsquo;re both poetic forms, however, with a particular standard number of lines and a particular standard rhyme scheme, so in that sense they certainly are alike.\n",
"content": "The other day I was out and about and got into a conversation with someone who asked me about my doctoral work in English literature. I\u0026rsquo;ve had the same conversation many times: I tell someone (only if they ask!) that my dissertation was a history of the villanelle, and then they cheerfully admit that they don\u0026rsquo;t know what a villanelle is, and then I ask them if they\u0026rsquo;re familiar with Dylan Thomas\u0026rsquo;s poem \u0026ldquo;Do not go gentle into that good night.\u0026rdquo; So far, everyone has heard of it \u0026ndash; it\u0026rsquo;s a very well-known poem indeed. I then explain that \u0026ldquo;Do not go gentle into that good night\u0026rdquo; is a villanelle, and that a villanelle is a poetic form something like a sonnet. So far, everyone also knows what a sonnet is, which is why I use that as a comparison, even though a villanelle isn\u0026rsquo;t all that much like a sonnet, in my opinion. They\u0026rsquo;re both poetic forms, however, with a particular standard number of lines and a particular standard rhyme scheme, so in that sense they certainly are alike.\nOddly enough, I think my early background in the study of poetic form is very much of a piece with my new role here at Crossref as Technical Community Manager for ROR, the Research Organisation Registry. Both poetic form and metadata are invisible to most people, but both are valuable infrastructure. Both poetic form and metadata involve generally-accepted practices and standards that differ between different groups of people and change over time. Both writing formal poetry and creating rich metadata can seem burdensome and rigid to some people, but to my mind, both are generative. A solid underlying foundation allows for all kinds of creativity to flourish on the surface.\nThat might be part of why as soon as I heard about ROR I understood its tremendous potential. As someone who\u0026rsquo;s worked in digital humanities and scholarly communication for over fifteen years, I\u0026rsquo;ve long appreciated the value of clean, standard, comprehensive metadata in general. For instance, I explained the origin and value of the Dublin Core metadata standard to many a history scholar in the Omeka workshops I often taught at THATCamp. Later, while overseeing the institutional repository at Virginia Tech University Libraries, I learned even more about both the importance and the difficulty of creating, acquiring, and providing good metadata. When the pandemic began in 2020, I learned more than I ever wanted to know about messy data as Community Lead for The COVID Tracking Project at The Atlantic.\nData and metadata are, let\u0026rsquo;s admit it, very hard to keep clean and consistent as they travel through multiple systems, and that\u0026rsquo;s why it\u0026rsquo;s important to regularize as much as we can through automatic means such as APIs that use agreed-upon standards. Scholarship is a network of networks, and common identifiers like DOIs and ORCIDs enable the interchange of information in those networks about scholarly outputs and scholars, and thus they enable scholarship itself. What could be more important than that?\nBut the organisations that employ, fund, and publish scholarly researchers have had a hard time keeping track of everything \u0026ldquo;their\u0026rdquo; researchers have given to the world. That\u0026rsquo;s the problem that ROR, \u0026ldquo;a community-led registry of open, sustainable, usable, and unique identifiers for every research organisation in the world,\u0026rdquo; can help solve. In an ideal world, universities might use ROR IDs to track the research their faculty have produced, certainly, but they might also discover which universities their faculty\u0026rsquo;s co-authors most often come from. Funders might use ROR IDs to identify the research outputs that have benefited from their funds, certainly, but they might also analyze whether they are funding enough researchers from institutions in rural areas. Publishers might use ROR IDs to offer affiliation searching in their own public interfaces, certainly, but they might also create internal reports on compliance with institution-level transformative Open Access agreements. Once something like ROR is widely adopted, the vision of the Research Nexus becomes closer to reality: \u0026ldquo;A rich and reusable open network of relationships connecting research organisations, people, things, and actions; a scholarly record that the global community can build on forever, for the benefit of society.\u0026rdquo; ROR is all about the \u0026ldquo;organisations\u0026rdquo; part of that alluring vision.\nIf you\u0026rsquo;re curious about ROR and want to learn more (hey, that rhymes!), you might want to watch the highly informative presentation from September 2021 \u0026ldquo;Working with ROR as a Crossref Member\u0026rdquo;, in which you\u0026rsquo;ll learn several interesting things, including the following:\nROR itself is not an organisation, but an initiative supported jointly by Crossref, DataCite, and the California Digital Library; Crossref members cited institutional affiliation identifiers as one of their top priorities in 2019, second only to abstracts; The specifics of how one recent ROR integrator, the open access journal publisher Hindawi, used the ROR API to create a typeahead widget in its manuscript submission system that replaces user-supplied free text with a standard institution name and a ROR ID behind the scenes, helping them to generate useful internal reports about institutional payments; and Crossref supports the submission of ROR IDs in its XML content registration process and makes ROR IDs available in its API. I\u0026rsquo;m also enthusiastically inviting you to get in touch with me if you\u0026rsquo;d like to learn more about ROR or if you\u0026rsquo;d like to tell me about your previous experience with ROR. And if you don\u0026rsquo;t get in touch with me, please be aware that I might well reach out to you – I\u0026rsquo;m eager to hear what you hope for from ROR, but also what you\u0026rsquo;re skeptical about. For, after all, I learn by going where I have to go – don\u0026rsquo;t we all?\n",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/seeing-your-place-in-the-research-nexus/",
"title": "Seeing your place in the Research Nexus",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2022-06-22",
"lastmod_ts": 1655856000,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "Having joined the Crossref team merely a week previously, the mid-year community update on June 14th was a fantastic opportunity to learn about the Research Nexus vision. We explored its building blocks and practical implementation steps within our reach, and within our imagination of the future.\nRead on (or watch the recording) for a whistlestop tour of everything – from what on Earth is Research Nexus, through to how it’s taking shape at Crossref, to how you are involved, and finally – to what concerns the community surrounding the vision and how we’re going to address that.\n",
"content": "Having joined the Crossref team merely a week previously, the mid-year community update on June 14th was a fantastic opportunity to learn about the Research Nexus vision. We explored its building blocks and practical implementation steps within our reach, and within our imagination of the future.\nRead on (or watch the recording) for a whistlestop tour of everything – from what on Earth is Research Nexus, through to how it’s taking shape at Crossref, to how you are involved, and finally – to what concerns the community surrounding the vision and how we’re going to address that.\nSummary of presentations Click on image above to access the presentation.\nThe idea is simple in principle: scholarly records ought to be transparent – available to examine and learn from for all. Much of scientific production and communication these days has a heavy digital footprint so the Nexus is nothing but simply connecting the loose strands, right? Yet, as the scholarly record is a reflection of the continuous progress made by multiple actors within the context of scientific structures and processes, bringing the Nexus to life is a little short of simple.\n“What we think of as metadata is expanding, and the notion of ‘record types’ is changing” – said Ginny Hendricks. A great majority of scholarly ‘objects’, whether they are data sets, research articles, monographs, or others, undergo many processes (including review, publication, licensing, correction, derivation) and influence knowledge and practice over time.\nMaking that progress visible and discoverable will allow for tracing the development of ideas and changes in our thinking over time. Transparency of the complete scholarly records will help to understand the impact of science funding and changing policies. It can support a more robust and comprehensive assessment of research, and contribute to improving integrity within as well as public trust in sciences.\nThe Research Nexus concept was first introduced by Jennifer Lin in 2017 as “Better research through better metadata”. Important adaptations to the model were needed to break it out of the content-specific schema. Ginny also pointed out that the concept is shared among the scholarly infrastructure community, citing a report from 2015 by OCLC Research on conscious coordination for stewardship of the evolving scholarly record.\nPatricia Feeney has given us reasons for optimism in building a robust Nexus. She’s shown areas of greatest growth in metadata reported to Crossref and shared a public roadmap of types of information we’re asked to enable in the future. We’re seeing a true boom of datasets and peer review reports registrations, and the relationship metadata for our records is improving too. At the dawn of defaulting to open references, 44% of records we hold have associated references and that is growing. Provision of the newly enabled affiliation information (ROR IDs) is on the rise, as is the funder information. Some conversations and questions followed highlighting the need for further guidance in these areas.\nTo make a case for enriching metadata records, Martyn Rittman demonstrated examples of traceability of research influence on realities outside academia. He captured recent examples of data citations and other references present not just between scholarly papers, but also in policy documents and popular media. These allow for greater discoverability of literature – but also show the public influence and impact of the research and the work’s context in our wider society.\nWhile Martyn shared our blue-skies aspiration to streamline Crossref’s APIs to offer insight to all these relationships with a single service, Joe Wass grounded those ambitions in the reality of technical work underway. His team’s attention is divided between three main areas. They continue to maintain and de-bug our existing infrastructure. They are developing self-service solutions for members. Finally, they are mapping and planning improved infrastructure, evaluating technology against the Research Nexus vision.\nBringing it back to the source (of metadata), Rachael Lammey offered a very practical guide to key activities enabling Research Nexus that all members can take on now. She highlighted the benefits of collecting and registering data citations, ROR IDs, and grant funding information. She went on to talk about challenges of subject classification (at a journal level) that our research and development efforts are focusing on at the moment.\nSummary of discussions Publishing has changed dramatically and our members recognise increasing opportunities for transparency of the scholarly record. Breaking the distant vision of Research Nexus down into actionable chunks made it more relatable for call participants. Many reflected on seeing their place in it properly for the first time. Yet, challenges remain and many were brought to the fore in the discussions.\nThe reliability and usability of the technology for registering metadata with Crossref needs to improve. We need to do better in supporting multi-language and multi-alphabet information. Not just developing systems anew, but also streamline the way content is registered and annotated, and continue to disambiguate the competing identifiers. Different record types, chiefly books, present specific challenges in this regard. Finally, making all that metadata accessible and usable is key to enabling insights from the rich data we collectively make available.\nTechnology is important, but won’t overcome the barriers that exist in the mindsets. Siloed thinking means that publishers may not be sensitive to benefits that improved relationship metadata could have for colleagues working on assessment, even within the same institutions. Greater guidance or best practices for new identifiers, such as ORCID, ROR, grants, would allow more publishers to get on board with the changes. Researchers often don’t help the cause either – many don’t realise the role and benefits of metadata for their work and are reluctant to provide rich information related to it, perceiving it as a bureaucratic burden.\nIn a nutshell, I learnt that – while the concept of Research Nexus is pretty complex – we’re all already participating in making it a reality. I’m grateful to the call participants for sharing their challenges and ideas so generously. It means we can work to address those. I’ll be sure to follow-up on requests for support and clearer guidelines about citing data, recording ROR IDs and grants information in the metadata, and we’ll engage our community on complex topics of record updates (corrections, retractions and versions). Be sure to keep in touch with the conversations on the Community Forum. I’ll see you there!\n",
"headings": ["Summary of presentations","Summary of discussions"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/announcing-our-new-head-of-strategic-initiatives-dominika-tkaczyk/",
"title": "Announcing our new Head of Strategic Initiatives: Dominika Tkaczyk",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2022-06-10",
"lastmod_ts": 1654819200,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "TL;DR A year ago, we announced that we were putting the \u0026ldquo;R\u0026rdquo; back in R\u0026amp;D. That was when Rachael Lammey joined the R\u0026amp;D team as the Head of Strategic Initiatives.\nAnd now, with Rachael assuming the role of Product Director, I\u0026rsquo;m delighted to announce that Dominika Tkaczyk has agreed to take over Rachael\u0026rsquo;s role as the Head of Strategic Initiatives. Of course, you might already know her.\nWe will also immediately start recruiting for a new Principal R\u0026amp;D Developer to work with Esha and Dominika on the R\u0026amp;D team.\n",
"content": "TL;DR A year ago, we announced that we were putting the \u0026ldquo;R\u0026rdquo; back in R\u0026amp;D. That was when Rachael Lammey joined the R\u0026amp;D team as the Head of Strategic Initiatives.\nAnd now, with Rachael assuming the role of Product Director, I\u0026rsquo;m delighted to announce that Dominika Tkaczyk has agreed to take over Rachael\u0026rsquo;s role as the Head of Strategic Initiatives. Of course, you might already know her.\nWe will also immediately start recruiting for a new Principal R\u0026amp;D Developer to work with Esha and Dominika on the R\u0026amp;D team.\nWhat does this mean for R\u0026amp;D? Before I talk about what Dominika\u0026rsquo;s move means in practice, I just want to take a moment to thank Rachael for the time she spent working with us. Over the past year, she has injected a massive amount of energy into the group and rebuilt the team\u0026rsquo;s momentum. This is exactly what we asked her to do.\nRachael\u0026rsquo;s first task was to repatriate her two R\u0026amp;D colleagues, who we had loaned to work on other urgent projects. Dominika was the technical lead on the port and relaunching of the REST API. Esha was the technical lead for the ROR initiative. In addition, Rachael has been working with Esha, Dominika, Paul Davis, and me on several shorter-term strategic projects that are shaping our overall development strategy.\nExploring and implementing a new approach to building content registration front ends. This approach is schema-driven and bakes in localization and accessibility support from the start. The new approach is currently the basis for the grant registration tool that our Product \u0026amp; Tech teams are now testing with our new funder members. Exploring and ultimately rejecting a \u0026ldquo;pull-based\u0026rdquo; approach to registering metadata, where Crossref would harvest structured metadata from member landing pages instead of asking members to deposit it with us via XML. You are not really doing R\u0026amp;D unless some of your ideas fail. In this case, we quickly discovered that the logistics of crawling our members’ websites, combined with the sparsity of structured metadata in landing pages, made a pull-based approach fragile and impractical. Exploring the use of ML techniques to fill gaps in the journal classification data that is currently in the REST API. Gaining new data science badges in the process. Exploring alternative approaches to building community-extendable reporting tools using standard data science tooling and techniques. Exploring how we can help reduce support toil by using data science tools like notebooks to create new support tools and self-serve UIs for information frequently requested by members that can otherwise prove difficult to get using our existing tools. Looking at extending the matching technology previously developed by labs to try and better match funder grant-information research outputs. And this is just a sample of projects Rachael helped promote and prioritize. It is the nature of many of the larger R\u0026amp;D projects that you don\u0026rsquo;t see the immediate results until long after they\u0026rsquo;ve been conceived and put into motion. This means that Rachael has been working on some things over the past year that are not yet public.\nBut, with any luck, we may see some significant new developments in how Crossref collects and distributes information about significant updates to the scholarly record- including retractions and withdrawals. We are also likely to see more work to promote data citation amongst our members. And finally, we are likely to see an attempt to create a community-managed and open research classification taxonomy. Of course, as is the case with research projects, there is no guarantee that any of these nascent ideas/projects will make it into a production service. Still, if even one of them does, it will become as vital a part of open scholarly infrastructure as DOIs, ORCIDs, or ROR IDs are now.\nAnd we will have Rachael and the hard work of the R\u0026amp;D group, important cameos from others, and community input to thank for giving them the initial push to realization. So that\u0026rsquo;s a pretty good track record for just a year in the R\u0026amp;D group.\nPassing the torch And this is a track record I\u0026rsquo;m confident that Dominika can match as she takes over Rachael\u0026rsquo;s role.\nSoon after Dominika joined the Crossref R\u0026amp;D team, she started to expand her activities to include more production engineering practice, team leadership, and community outreach. She has also worked extensively with support and outreach- providing them with data science consulting and mentoring in software development. Her new role as the Head of Strategic Initiatives will continue this trend. She will spend less time prototyping software and analyzing data and more time liaising with our members and the broader community to understand their needs and design R\u0026amp;D projects to test approaches to meeting those needs. This means a lot more liaising with other Crossref teams, speaking with our members and the wider community, and participating in working groups and conferences.\nIt also probably means a lot less programming and analysis. But programming and building prototypes are critical to the R\u0026amp;D team. And so the first thing we will do is start recruiting for a new Principal R\u0026amp;D Developer to continue working along with Esha on conducting experiments and developing POCs.\nI’m looking forward to the next year. With Rachael taking the role of Product Director and Dominika taking over as the Head of Strategic Initiatives, we are well-positioned to make profound technical and conceptual improvements to Crossref\u0026rsquo;s services while simultaneously working with the community to line up our next strategic priorities.\n",
"headings": ["TL;DR","What does this mean for R\u0026amp;D?","Passing the torch"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/rethinking-staff-travel-meetings-and-events/",
"title": "Rethinking staff travel, meetings, and events",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2022-06-07",
"lastmod_ts": 1654560000,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "As a distributed, global, and community-led organisation, sharing information and listening to our members both online and in person has always been integral to what we do.\nFor many years Crossref has held both in-person and online meetings and events, which involved a fair amount of travel by our staff, board, and community. This changed drastically in March 2020, when we had to stop traveling and stop having in-person meetings and events. Due to the hard work and creativity of our team and the support of our Ambassadors and Sponsors, we were able to move to exclusively online meetings and events and maintain connections with colleagues, members, and much of the scholarly research community.\n",
"content": "As a distributed, global, and community-led organisation, sharing information and listening to our members both online and in person has always been integral to what we do.\nFor many years Crossref has held both in-person and online meetings and events, which involved a fair amount of travel by our staff, board, and community. This changed drastically in March 2020, when we had to stop traveling and stop having in-person meetings and events. Due to the hard work and creativity of our team and the support of our Ambassadors and Sponsors, we were able to move to exclusively online meetings and events and maintain connections with colleagues, members, and much of the scholarly research community.\nOnline meetings have benefits compared to in-person ones; they have a much lower carbon footprint, and they can be more inclusive because people don’t have to find the time and money to travel. But there are limitations to online meetings; individual connections made in person do become harder to maintain, and new connections are more difficult to make and grow online. Sometimes just by sitting with someone, meeting their team and drinking their tea, free-flowing conversation leads to real progress.\nBut with over 17,000 members in 150 countries, our small staff can’t be everywhere, and we need to consider the personal as well as the environmental impacts.\nWhen we started work on the 2022 budget last year, our staff and board took the opportunity to think about our approach, with the goal of not going back to ‘normal’. So we asked ourselves, now that we have a better sense of what works and what doesn\u0026rsquo;t, how can we make our travel and in-person meetings have a greater impact on our goals, while also traveling less and reducing our impact on the environment?\nWe decided that in the context of our mission and values, we had to take into account three key areas:\nThe environment and climate change Inclusion Work/life balance. We developed an updated strategy for in-person and online meetings from 2022 onwards along with a set of recommendations and commitments to reduce our carbon footprint. The commitments were approved by the board at its November 2021 meeting.\nOur plan for online and in-person meetings Online events will generally be aimed at broad groups, in multiple timezones, to inform, update, and test general ideas and assumptions at scale. In contrast, in-person events will be smaller, focusing on deep learning, co-creation, and collaborating through various formats such as workshops, roundtables, or sprints, ideally working toward a specific outcome. These smaller in-person meetings will be scheduled alongside other community events so there will be fewer trips on the whole but each trip more consolidated.\nEach in-person meeting will have stated goals such as recruiting and onboarding a new Sponsor, bringing our Ambassadors together to build relationships and share best practices, or getting experts together in a room to help decide important polices, improve some code, or plan new initiatives. At the moment, we are not planning \u0026lsquo;hybrid\u0026rsquo; events as we don\u0026rsquo;t believe they will help meet our goals.\nWhile online meetings and webinars provide a breadth of interactions, in-person meetings can provide greater depth and opportunities for more meaningful engagement and purposeful discussion, and it is this depth that we have missed over the last two and a half years. Therefore, we are identifying focus countries where we plan on engaging more with local community groups. Each country-level engagement plan includes outreach and communications activities and some in-person meetings.\nFactors and aims for selecting focus countries Inclusion is important for us and we are committed to supporting the needs of our community members worldwide. We aim to combine meaningful conversations with informational activities. We want to provide time in the day for technical problem solving and/or a more strategically focused session, both of which have worked well in the past. We hope to learn more about trends in our selected focus countries, including the challenges our members face, local publishing norms, barriers to participation in Crossref, and understand and help to adapt government policies.\nWe consider a number of factors when selecting countries with which to focus our activities:\nWhere we have a relatively large number of members. Where we are seeing an increase in new members joining. Where we have not undertaken engagement activities in at least 3 years. Where we have good contacts to collaborate with, i.e., a national funder, a sponsor or ambassador, a government body, or another organisation aligned with our mission. Where we have very few members but where research output is high according to other sources, in order to understand and overcome barriers to participating in Crossref. Where we can consolidate multiple engagement activities in one trip, for example run a LIVE (informational) meeting or workshop, develop relationships with a key Sponsor, or discuss national research policy with government representatives. Where we can coordinate our engagement efforts alongside other local community events. Our environmental commitments In line with rethinking how we engage with our members and making sure we do so in the most sustainable, inclusive, and impactful way, we are making the following commitments:\nCrossref staff will think strategically and consider environmental, inclusion, and work/life balance issues when they plan travel. We will make the most of in-person events by focusing on those that involve interaction, such as listening and learning from our members and users, deepening relationships, co-creating, and forming new alliances\nWe will travel less and have fewer face-to-face meetings going forward compared with 2019 as a baseline year. The 2022 travel and events budget was reduced by 40% and set at 60% of the 2019 budget. Travel and in-person events for the first half of 2022 have been limited so we will make this same commitment for 2023 still using 2019 as the baseline.\nCrossref will track the carbon footprint of staff travel to meetings and events. We will regularly review the data and find ways to reduce the environmental impact.\nCombine stakeholder visits with event trips and vice versa whenever possible (if you do 1 plane trip to a location 1000 miles away instead of 2 trips, you reduce your impact by 0.5t)\nAs previously planned before the COVID-19 pandemic, the Crossref LIVE Annual Meetings will remain online only and will be held in different time zones. Having them in different time zones will enable global sharing of updates with a lower environmental impact.\nCrossref board meetings will be reduced from three in-person meetings per year to one face-to-face and two online meetings per year.\nFewer staff will attend fewer in-person conferences and will combine them with other travel.\nFor Crossref staff meetings, it is important for our distributed staff to meet face-to-face as a whole organisation and as teams. We will plan for one all-staff in person meeting per year (at which there can also be team meetings). Additional team meetings will be based on the reduced travel and meetings budget. Where possible, team meetings will be combined with other meetings (e.g. conferences or other community events).\nWhile trips that combine meetings may mean longer time away from home, we will still try to avoid staff having to travel or be away on weekends. We will also:\nAvoid short-haul flights (under 2.5 to 3 hours) where trains are available. Book hotels within walking distance of the event locations (if safe) in order to reduce taxi use. Use public transport and trains (if efficient and safe). Select hotels that have good sustainability plans in place, seeking out ‘green’ hotels where (if available and within budget). Prioritize locations where the fewest number of staff have to travel or travel the shortest distances. Reporting From now on, we will:\nTrack staff travel incl. the number of trips, miles flown, and the carbon impact. Estimate the carbon footprint of our two offices, staff home working, our data center, and our cloud infrastructure. Track all Crossref-hosted events - in-person and online and review annually (what went well, what can be improved, how to further reduce carbon footprint) as part of the budgeting process. Many organisations are now rethinking how to go about travel, conferences, meetings, and work in general. The pandemic may have been the trigger for a big shift in the ways we work and interact, and not all of it was welcome or should continue; however, sometimes it takes a big event to give us the space to sit back, reflect, and change things for the better going forward. As always, we\u0026rsquo;ll evaluate these approaches over time.\nAll of this means we may be declining some in-person meetings (and when we do, please don’t take it personally) but we still look forward to engaging with our community in a purposeful way.\nThis feels like a good time to give a shout-out to all our Ambassadors and Sponsors around the world who are very important for insight and engagement, and we will continue to partner with them for both online and in-person meetings.\n",
"headings": ["Our plan for online and in-person meetings","Factors and aims for selecting focus countries","Our environmental commitments","Reporting"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/authors/vanessa-fairhurst/",
"title": "Vanessa Fairhurst",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Authors",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/annual-call-for-board-nominations/",
"title": "Annual call for board nominations",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2022-05-31",
"lastmod_ts": 1653955200,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "The Crossref Nominating Committee is inviting expressions of interest to join the Board of Directors of Crossref for the term starting in March 2023. 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.\nExpressions of interest will be due Friday, June 24th, 2022.\nAbout the our board elections The board is elected through the “one member, one vote” policy wherein every member organisation of Crossref has a single vote to elect representatives to the Crossref board. Board terms are for three years, and this year there are five seats open for election.\n",
"content": "The Crossref Nominating Committee is inviting expressions of interest to join the Board of Directors of Crossref for the term starting in March 2023. 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.\nExpressions of interest will be due Friday, June 24th, 2022.\nAbout the our board elections The board is elected through the “one member, one vote” policy wherein every member organisation of Crossref has a single vote to elect representatives to the Crossref board. Board terms are for three years, and this year there are five seats open for election.\nThe board maintains a balance of seats, with eight seats for smaller members and eight seats for larger members (based on total revenue to Crossref). This is in an effort to ensure that the diversity of experiences and perspectives of the scholarly community are represented in decisions made at Crossref.\nThis year we will elect four of the larger member seats (membership tiers $3,900 and above) and one of the smaller member seats (membership tiers $1,650 and below). You don’t need to specify which seat you are applying for. We will provide that information to the Nominating Committee.\nThe election takes place online and voting will open in September. Election results will be shared at the annual meeting in October. New members will commence their term in March 2023.\nAbout the Nominating Committee The Nominating Committee reviews the expressions of interest and selects a slate of candidates for election. The slate put forward will exceed the total number of open seats. The committee considers the statements of interest, organisational size, geography, gender, and experience.\n2022 Nominating Committee:\nAbel Packer, SciELO, Brazil, chair* Patrick Alexander, Penn State University Press, US Nisha Doshi, Cambridge University Press, UK Marc Hurlbert, Melanoma Research Alliance\t, US* Kihong Kim, Korean Council of Science Editors, South Korea* (*) indicates Crossref board member\nWhat does the committee look for The committee looks for skills and experience that will complement the rest of the board. Candidates from countries and regions that are not currently reflected on the board are strongly encouraged to apply. Successful candidates often demonstrate a commitment to or understanding of our strategic agenda or the Principles of Open Scholarly Infrastructure; hold positions within their organisations that may be underrepresented on the board currently; and/or have experience with governance or community involvement. The Nominating Committee will also review the member organisation\u0026rsquo;s participation report.\nWho can apply to join the board? Any active member of Crossref can apply to join the board. Crossref membership is open to organisations that produce content, such as academic presses, commercial publishers, standards organisations, and research funders.\nBoard roles and responsibilities Crossref’s services provide central infrastructure to scholarly communications. Crossref’s board helps shape the future of our services, and by extension, impacts the broader scholarly ecosystem. We are looking for board members to contribute their experience and perspective.\nThe role of the board at Crossref is to provide strategic and financial oversight of the organisation, as well as guidance to the Executive Director and the staff leadership team, with the key responsibilities being:\nSetting the strategic direction for the organisation; Providing financial oversight; and Approving new policies and services. The board is representative of our membership base and guides the staff leadership team on trends affecting scholarly communications. The board sets strategic directions for the organisation while also providing oversight into policy changes and implementation. Board members have a fiduciary responsibility to ensure sound operations. Board members do this by attending board meetings, as well as joining more specific board committees.\nWhat is expected of board members? Board members attend three meetings each year that typically take place in March, July, and November. Meetings have taken place in a variety of international locations and travel support is provided when needed. Following travel restrictions as a result of COVID-19, the board adopted a plan to convene at least one of the board meetings virtually each year and all committee meetings take place virtually. Most board members sit on at least one Crossref committee. Care is taken to accommodate the wide range of timezones in which our board members live.\nWhile individuals apply to join the board, the seat that is elected to the board ultimately belongs to the member organisation. The primary board member also names an alternate who may attend meetings in the event that the primary board member is unable to. There is no personal financial obligation to sit on the board. The member organisation must remain in good standing.\nBoard members are expected to be comfortable assuming the responsibilities listed above and to prepare and participate in board meeting discussions.\nHow to apply Please click here to submit your expression of interest. We ask for a brief statement about how your organisation could enhance the Crossref board and a brief personal statement about your interest and experience with Crossref.\nPlease contact me with any questions at lofiesh@crossref.org\n",
"headings": ["About the our board elections","About the Nominating Committee","What does the committee look for","Who can apply to join the board?","Board roles and responsibilities","What is expected of board members?","How to apply"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/2022-public-data-file-of-more-than-134-million-metadata-records-now-available/",
"title": "2022 public data file of more than 134 million metadata records now available",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2022-05-13",
"lastmod_ts": 1652400000,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "In 2020 we released our first public data file, something we’ve turned into an annual affair supporting our commitment to the Principles of Open Scholarly Infrastructure (POSI). We’ve just posted the 2022 file, which can now be downloaded via torrent like in years past.\nWe aim to publish these in the first quarter of each year, though as you may notice, we’re a little behind our intended schedule. The reason for this delay was that we wanted to make critical new metadata fields available, including resource URLs and titles with markup.\n",
"content": "In 2020 we released our first public data file, something we’ve turned into an annual affair supporting our commitment to the Principles of Open Scholarly Infrastructure (POSI). We’ve just posted the 2022 file, which can now be downloaded via torrent like in years past.\nWe aim to publish these in the first quarter of each year, though as you may notice, we’re a little behind our intended schedule. The reason for this delay was that we wanted to make critical new metadata fields available, including resource URLs and titles with markup.\nCrossref metadata is always openly available via our API. We recommend you use this method to incrementally add new and updated records once you’re up and running with an annual public data file. If you’re interested in more frequent and regular “full-file” downloads, consider subscribing to our Metadata Plus program. Plus subscribers have access to monthly snapshots in JSON and XML formats.\nEvery year our metadata corpus grows. The 2020 file was 65GB and held 112 million records; 2021 came in at 102GB and 120 million records. This year the file weighs in at 160 GB and contains metadata for 134 million records, or all Crossref records registered up to and including April 30, 2022.\nTips for using the torrent and retrieving incremental updates Use the torrent if you want all of these records. Everyone is welcome to the metadata, but it will be much faster for you and much easier on our APIs to get so many records in one file. Here are some tips on how to work with the file.\nUse the REST API to incrementally add new and updated records once you’ve got the initial file. Here is how to get started (and avoid getting blocked in your enthusiasm to use all this great metadata!).\n‘Limited’ and ‘closed’ references are not included in the file or our open APIs. And while bibliographic metadata is generally required, lots of metadata is optional, so that records will vary in quality and completeness.\nQuestions, comments, and feedback are welcome at support@crossref.org.\n",
"headings": ["Tips for using the torrent and retrieving incremental updates"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/announcing-our-new-director-of-product-rachael-lammey/",
"title": "Announcing our new Director of Product: Rachael Lammey",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2022-05-12",
"lastmod_ts": 1652313600,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "Unfortunately, Bryan Vickery has moved onto pastures new. I would like to thank him for his many contributions at Crossref and we all wish him well.\nI’m now pleased to announce that Rachael Lammey will be Crossref’s new Director of Product starting on Monday, May 16th.\nRachael’s skills and experience are perfectly suited for this role. She has been at Crossref since 2012 and has deep knowledge and experience of all things Crossref: our mission; our members; our culture; and our services.\n",
"content": "Unfortunately, Bryan Vickery has moved onto pastures new. I would like to thank him for his many contributions at Crossref and we all wish him well.\nI’m now pleased to announce that Rachael Lammey will be Crossref’s new Director of Product starting on Monday, May 16th.\nRachael’s skills and experience are perfectly suited for this role. She has been at Crossref since 2012 and has deep knowledge and experience of all things Crossref: our mission; our members; our culture; and our services.\nIn all her roles at Crossref Rachael has demonstrated how community-focused product development can be done.\nStarting as a Product Manager for Similarity Check and Crossmark, she then led community discussions on text and data mining and taxonomies, introduced our support of preprints, and led the very successful ORCID Auto-update integration. She initiated our important partnership with the Public Knowledge Project including scoping and overseeing the joint plugin development work over the years. She helped to grow the Sponsors program, establish the LIVE informational events, oversaw the founding of our ambassador program, engaged more research funders and institutions, and became a go-to person for data citation expertise in our community.\nIn her brief time in our Research \u0026amp; Development team, she helped to kick off that group’s reinvigoration and has engaged with numerous new community and technical initiatives. Such relationships—together with her knowledge of our systems and API—have enabled her to be a key driver in the development and adoption of ROR and grants - two of the highest strategic priorities of recent years.\nRachael says:\n\u0026ldquo;Alignment in planning and focusing on delivering outcomes will be my initial priorities. I\u0026rsquo;m conscious that we have a lot in play and I want to support the product team in their existing and ambitious goals while working with the leadership team and our very diverse community to focus and prioritise our development roadmap. I\u0026rsquo;m really grateful for this opportunity and I am looking forward to working with our members, users, and other open infrastructure organisations in this new capacity\u0026rdquo;.\nOur staff and the board are very enthusiastic about Rachael\u0026rsquo;s appointment and we know our community will be too. Please join us in congratulating Rachael!\n",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/similarity-check-whats-new-with-ithenticate-v2/",
"title": "Similarity Check: what’s new with iThenticate v2?",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2022-05-10",
"lastmod_ts": 1652140800,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "Since we announced last September the launch of a new version of iThenticate, a number of you have upgraded and become familiar with iThenticate v2 and its new and improved features which include:\nA faster, more user-friendly and responsive interface A preprint exclusion filter, giving users the ability to identify content on preprint servers more easily A new “red flag” feature that signals the detection of hidden text such as text/quotation marks in white font, or suspicious character replacement A private repository available for browser users, allowing them to compare against their previous submissions to identify duplicate submissions within your organisation A content portal, helping users check how much of their own research outputs have been successfully indexed, self-diagnose and fix the content that has failed to be indexed in iThenticate. We’ve received some great feedback from iThenticate v2 users and user testers:\n",
"content": "Since we announced last September the launch of a new version of iThenticate, a number of you have upgraded and become familiar with iThenticate v2 and its new and improved features which include:\nA faster, more user-friendly and responsive interface A preprint exclusion filter, giving users the ability to identify content on preprint servers more easily A new “red flag” feature that signals the detection of hidden text such as text/quotation marks in white font, or suspicious character replacement A private repository available for browser users, allowing them to compare against their previous submissions to identify duplicate submissions within your organisation A content portal, helping users check how much of their own research outputs have been successfully indexed, self-diagnose and fix the content that has failed to be indexed in iThenticate. We’ve received some great feedback from iThenticate v2 users and user testers:\n“There are a lot of new and helpful features implemented in version 2 of iThenticate.”\n\u0026ndash; Beilstein Institut\n“The updates to the user interface make working with the new version a pleasure. It has a very modern feel and is easy to use, as an app on a phone. We particularly like being able to click on a link and easily exclude a source from view with just a few clicks. The response time and speed of download are also greatly improved which will cut down processing time on our end.”\n\u0026ndash; Frontiers\n“I like the ability to be able to exclude content directly from the report.”\n\u0026ndash; American Chemical Society\nMore information for administrators and users is available on the Turnitin website: iThenticate v2 documentation.\nUpgrading to iThenticate v2 In September, we started inviting new and existing Similarity Check subscribers using iThenticate in the browser to upgrade to this new version. And now some of the manuscript submission systems have completed their integrations with the new version of iThenticate too, so users of these systems can start to migrate. Morressier users are already using iThenticate v2, and in the next few days, we will be emailing all eJournalPress users. We know the other major manuscript submission systems are also working on their integrations, and we\u0026rsquo;ll be in touch with members using them as soon as they confirm they are ready.\nManuscript tracking system integrations All Similarity Check subscribers using a manuscript management system will particularly appreciate a closer integration with iThenticate v2 which means that users will be able to view their Similarity Report and investigate sources within their manuscript tracking system.\neJournalPress eJournalPress users will also be able to customise their iThenticate v2 settings via a configuration interface and to decide, for example, to include or exclude bibliographies from their Similarity Reports. The new integration will also show the top five matches returned by iThenticate directly in the eJournalPress interface.\neJournalPress configuration settings in iThenticate v2\nEditorial Manager and ScholarOne Aries (Editorial Manager) and Clarivate (ScholarOne) are planning to release their iThenticate v2 integrations later this year and we will be inviting users to upgrade in the coming months.\nPlease check our community forum for updates on manuscript tracking system integrations.\nMore new and improved features User-friendly PDF report “The report is clean and easy to read.”\n\u0026ndash; The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine\n“The clickable links will save us a considerable amount of time as they make it easy for the author to understand where the overlap is coming from, meaning we do not need to spend time clarifying overlap reports to the authors. The summary page is also very useful as authors and editors are easily able to see which sections have been included and excluded from the report.”\n\u0026ndash; Frontiers\nThe PDF version of the Similarity Report has been completely redesigned and can easily be downloaded, emailed and printed. It contains a summary of the report i.e. word count, character count, number of pages, file size, excluded sections, submission, and report dates as well as the similarity score and a list of the top sources with clickable links.\nFirst page of the Similarity Report in iThenticate v2\nSummary and clickable links in the new Similarity Report in iThenticate v2\nCustom section exclusion filter In iThenticate v2, users can now exclude sections that are standard such as authors, affiliations, ethics statements, acknowledgments, etc. from the Similarity Report which often impacts similarity scores. You can choose from the templates available and/or create your own custom section exclusions from the admin portal.\nCustom section exclusion filter in the iThenticate v2 admin portal\nSummary of excluded custom sections on the iThenticate v2 Similarity Report\n“The user interface is definitely more responsive than v1, especially when I am looking at the full-text viewing mode, scrolling through the text to compare matches, reading through the box of text in the matching source [\u0026hellip;] I also especially like the options around excluding, I was able to see our submitted work was also taken into the database and showed matches against the papers we’d uploaded already. Going forward, this is a really interesting thing for us, especially if we are looking at duplicated content in the same journal.”\n\u0026ndash; Taylor \u0026amp; Francis User reporting Details of user activity including folder names, similarity scores, word count, and file format are now also available in iThenticate v2 and downloadable as Excel and csv. files.\nUp next Product development Further enhancements to existing features and interface such as the view full-text mode, user groups, and custom section exclusions are planned for this year. Paraphrase detection and citation matching are currently in development.\niThenticate v2 training iThenticate v2 documentation is available from the Turnitin website. Training videos and webinars will be available later on in the year.\n✏️ Do get in touch via support@crossref.org if you have any questions about iThenticate v1 or v2 or start a discussion by commenting on this blog post below.\n",
"headings": ["Upgrading to iThenticate v2","Manuscript tracking system integrations","eJournalPress","Editorial Manager and ScholarOne","More new and improved features","User-friendly PDF report","Custom section exclusion filter","User reporting","Up next","Product development","iThenticate v2 training"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/categories/ambassadors/",
"title": "Ambassadors",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Categories",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/do-you-want-to-be-a-crossref-ambassador/",
"title": "Do you want to be a Crossref Ambassador?",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2022-04-14",
"lastmod_ts": 1649894400,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "A re-cap We kicked off our Ambassador Program in 2018 after consultation with our members, who told us they wanted greater support and representation in their local regions, time zones, and languages.\nWe also recognized that our membership has grown and changed dramatically over recent years and that it is likely to continue to do so. We now have over 16,000 members across 140 countries. As we work to understand what’s to come and ensure that we are meeting the needs of such an expansive community, having trusted local contacts we can work closely with is key to ensuring we are more proactive in engaging with new audiences and supporting existing members.\n",
"content": "A re-cap We kicked off our Ambassador Program in 2018 after consultation with our members, who told us they wanted greater support and representation in their local regions, time zones, and languages.\nWe also recognized that our membership has grown and changed dramatically over recent years and that it is likely to continue to do so. We now have over 16,000 members across 140 countries. As we work to understand what’s to come and ensure that we are meeting the needs of such an expansive community, having trusted local contacts we can work closely with is key to ensuring we are more proactive in engaging with new audiences and supporting existing members.\nWe know that Crossref still remains inaccessible to many around the world, and in line with our strategic goal to engage communities, we want to lower the barriers to participation. Our Ambassadors are essential to us achieving this goal as we look to develop additional content in languages other than English, identify organisations to work closer with to support local research ecosystems, provide more in-person and online events in local time zones and languages, and do more in terms of open support via our community forum.\nWhat are our ambassadors up to now? We currently have a team of 30 ambassadors, spanning Indonesia, Turkey, Ukraine, India, Bangladesh, Colombia, Mexico, Tanzania, Cameroon, Nigeria, Russia, Brazil, USA, UAE, Australia, China, Malaysia, Mongolia, Singapore, and Taiwan. The program is reviewed annually, welcoming new faces and sometimes sadly saying goodbye to others. This enables us to continue improving how we work together and ensures the Ambassador team remains a diverse group of committed individuals that have the time and support from Crossref to fully participate in the program.\nOver the last 3 years, we’ve had some great successes alongside a few challenges, not least of which has been working across 15 countries during a pandemic. We have all experienced the additional personal and professional strain that COVID-19 brought along, including shifts in the way we work and anxieties in the way we go about our lives. Of course, it has also meant that all our interactions have been restricted to Zoom, which has many benefits but doesn’t compare to face-to-face interactions when it comes to building strong working relationships, particularly across language and cultural barriers.\nDespite this, our ambassador team helped us run 15 multi-lingual webinars last year, including Content Registration in Arabic, Getting Started with Books in Brazilian Portuguese, and an Introduction to Crossref in Chinese. They also helped us translate various materials and content into other languages, provided feedback on our new developments, took part in beta-testing, provided support to members on our community forum, and participated in calls to contribute to the program\u0026rsquo;s future.\nI love helping people get to know Crossref\u0026rsquo;s products and services.\nI was proud to work as Ambassador and give an online Chinese webinar to introduce Crossref and the services in Oct. 2021.\nI am glad to be of help to Spanish speakers who are not able to grasp all the Crossref information correctly because of a language barrier or because they don\u0026rsquo;t have the time to read and explore all the information available.\nMuy contento de poder formar parte como Embajador y con ello poder promover el uso y aprovechamiento de los productos de Crossref.\nI feel so blessed meeting with many diverse friends in Crossref ranging from Europe to Asia continents.\nFeeling happy by giving back knowledge to my regional community.\nThe future is ours to co-create As countries are slowly dropping restrictions and we are taking our first cautious steps into a potential ‘post-pandemic’ world, our Community Engagement and Communication team has been looking at what this means for our activities in 2022 and beyond.\nA big part of this is identifying local communities and groups to engage with to learn what challenges our members are facing, what barriers to participation in Crossref still exist, and how we can overcome these together. This practice is also fundamental to our vision of the Research Nexus––a rich and reusable open network of relationships connecting research organisations, people, things, and actions––which can only become a reality if everyone can fully contribute to the scholarly record.\nAs such, we would like to expand our Ambassador Program and particularly encourage applications from those based in the following countries:\nArgentina\nChile\nCanada\nCroatia\nEl Salvador\nGermany\nGhana\nIraq\nKenya\nNicaragua\nNigeria\nPeru\nPoland\nVietnam\nBy being one of our ambassadors, you will become a key part of the Crossref community; our first port of call for updates or to test out new products or services, become well connected to our wide network of members, and work closely with us to make scholarly communications better for all.\nIf you are interested in participating, please read more on our Ambassadors page. You can submit an application letting us know why you are interested, how you work with Crossref currently, and a bit more about yourself. We will then follow up with you to discuss your ideas and the program in more detail.\nThe Ambassador Program is quite flexible, so you can choose how and when you contribute based on your comfort levels and other commitments. However, it does come with some minimum requirements of attending two team calls a year, being responsive and letting us know if anything is preventing you from participating, and completing our annual feedback survey so we can continue to improve the program going forward. A good level of English and a firm understanding of our services and systems at Crossref is also a must to participate fully in the program and provide support to others in your local community. If you have just joined Crossref or want to learn more about how to work with us, then the Ambassador program may be too much for you right now, but our documentation has lots of helpful information and step-by-step guides, and you could also look at attending one of our events or joining our community forum.\nIf you have any questions, you can always contact us at feedback@crossref.org. We look forward to hearing from you!\n",
"headings": ["A re-cap","What are our ambassadors up to now?","The future is ours to co-create"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/amendments-to-membership-terms-to-open-reference-distribution-and-include-uk-jurisdiction/",
"title": "Amendments to membership terms to open reference distribution and include UK jurisdiction",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2022-04-04",
"lastmod_ts": 1649030400,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "Tl;dr Forthcoming amendments to Crossref\u0026rsquo;s membership terms will include:\nRemoval of \u0026lsquo;reference distribution preference\u0026rsquo; policy: all references in Crossref will be treated as open metadata from 3rd June 2022.\nAn addition to sanctions jurisdictions: the United Kingdom will be added to sanctions jurisdictions that Crossref needs to comply with.\nSponsors and members have been emailed today with the 60-day notice needed for changes in terms. Reference distribution preferences In 2017, when we consolidated our metadata services under Metadata Plus, we made it possible for members to set a preference for the distribution of references to Open, Limited, or Closed. Prior to the 2017 change, we acted as a broker of 1:1 feeds of parts of metadata for parts of our community - clearly a role that was not scalable.\n",
"content": "Tl;dr Forthcoming amendments to Crossref\u0026rsquo;s membership terms will include:\nRemoval of \u0026lsquo;reference distribution preference\u0026rsquo; policy: all references in Crossref will be treated as open metadata from 3rd June 2022.\nAn addition to sanctions jurisdictions: the United Kingdom will be added to sanctions jurisdictions that Crossref needs to comply with.\nSponsors and members have been emailed today with the 60-day notice needed for changes in terms. Reference distribution preferences In 2017, when we consolidated our metadata services under Metadata Plus, we made it possible for members to set a preference for the distribution of references to Open, Limited, or Closed. Prior to the 2017 change, we acted as a broker of 1:1 feeds of parts of metadata for parts of our community - clearly a role that was not scalable.\nWe are well underway to pay back technical debt on our 20-year-old metadata system and effectively rearchitect it. We therefore recently needed to decide whether to rewrite code for a capability that hardly any member was using. Just one member has chosen Closed, and Limited was the default for a while, but the vast majority of our members now prefer Open distribution. Additionally, bringing references in line with other metadata significantly simplifies this work and will speed up the technical development.\nThe Crossref Board discussed the issue in our meeting on 10th March 2022, and voted to remove the reference distribution policy set in 2017. All board motions go on our website, and the wording of this particular motion is:\nResolve that, based on a technical assessment, we will change the reference distribution policy so that all references registered with Crossref are treated the same as other metadata, following a planned transition.\nThis motion means that 60 days from today\u0026mdash;3rd June 2022\u0026mdash;all references in Crossref will be open and after that available through our API. As with all other metadata, if members cannot make references available, or do not want them openly distributed, they can choose not to deposit them. However, depositing references is necessary in order to retrieve citation links from our members-only Cited-by API.\nCheck the documentation for information on how to deposit references and use Cited-by. Also look up your participation dashboard to see if you are already registering references and your current distribution setting.\nSanctions jurisdictions Following the UK departing from the European Union, we needed to add the United Kingdom as a separate jurisdiction that we must comply with, alongside the United Nations, the United States of America, and the European Union.\nWhere there are either relevant financial or governance-based sanctions against individuals, organisations, geographic regions, or whole countries, Crossref is legally bound to comply with these four different jurisdictions. These laws supersede our own governing bylaws.\nWe have launched a new operations and sustainability section of our website, which includes a sanctions page which we will keep updated with any changes and actions we\u0026rsquo;re taking.\nThe specific terms that will change The complete membership terms are online here. In the text below, any text to be removed is shown in \u0026lsquo;strike-through\u0026rsquo; text and any additions are in bold. These new terms will be in effect from 3rd June 2022.\n5. Distribution of Metadata by Crossref. Without limiting the provisions of Section 4 above, the Member acknowledges and agrees that, subject to the Member\u0026rsquo;s reference distribution preference,all Metadata and Identifiers registered with Crossref are made available for reuse without restriction through (but not limited to) public APIs and search interfaces, which enhances discoverability of Content. Metadata and Identifiers may also be licensed to third party subscribers along with an agreement for Crossref to provide third parties with certain higher levels of support and service. For the avoidance of doubt, the scope of Crossref\u0026rsquo;s distribution (if any) of a Member\u0026rsquo;s references is based on such Member\u0026rsquo;s reference distribution preference, as established by the Member in accordance with the \u0026ldquo;Reference Distribution\u0026rdquo; page on the Website.\n20. Compliance. Each of the Member and Crossref shall perform under this Agreement in compliance with all laws, rules, and regulations of any jurisdiction which is or may be applicable to its business and activities, including anti-corruption, copyright, privacy, and data protection laws, rules, and regulations.\nThe Member warrants that neither it nor any of its affiliates, officers, directors, employees, or members is (i) a person whose name appears on the list of Specially Designated Nationals and Blocked Persons published by the Office of Foreign Assets Control, U.S. Department of Treasury (“OFAC”), (ii) a department, agency or instrumentality of, or is otherwise controlled by or acting on behalf of, directly or indirectly, any such person; (iii) a department, agency, or instrumentality of the government of a country subject to comprehensive U.S. economic sanctions administered by OFAC; or (iv) is subject to sanctions by the United Nations, the United Kingdom, or the European Union.\nAs always, please get in touch with us via member@crossref.org with any questions.\n",
"headings": ["Tl;dr","Reference distribution preferences","Sanctions jurisdictions","The specific terms that will change"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/with-a-little-help-from-your-crossref-friends-better-metadata/",
"title": "With a little help from your Crossref friends: Better metadata",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2022-03-31",
"lastmod_ts": 1648684800,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "We talk so much about more and better metadata that a reasonable question might be: what is Crossref doing to help?\nMembers and their service partners do the heavy lifting to provide Crossref with metadata and we don’t change what is supplied to us. One reason we don’t is because members can and often do change their records (important note: updated records do not incur fees!). However, we do a fair amount of behind the scenes work to check and report on the metadata as well as to add context and relationships. As a result, some of what you see in the metadata (and some of what you don’t) is facilitated, added or updated by Crossref.\n",
"content": "We talk so much about more and better metadata that a reasonable question might be: what is Crossref doing to help?\nMembers and their service partners do the heavy lifting to provide Crossref with metadata and we don’t change what is supplied to us. One reason we don’t is because members can and often do change their records (important note: updated records do not incur fees!). However, we do a fair amount of behind the scenes work to check and report on the metadata as well as to add context and relationships. As a result, some of what you see in the metadata (and some of what you don’t) is facilitated, added or updated by Crossref.\nMuch of the work is automated but some of it still requires manual intervention (sound familiar?). Here’s an overview:\nBefore registration Our open APIs allow for Crossref metadata to be used throughout research and scholarly communications systems and services, before and after records are registered with us. Those who have used a search function in something like a manuscript submission system, rather than having to hand key or copy and paste the information, will appreciate how these integrations reduce time, effort and the likelihood of errors in collecting metadata well before it gets to Crossref.\nFor one example, it’s very common for members to use the metadata to add DOIs to reference lists when preparing deposits. Of course, new members first need a prefix (and a memberID and name, but more on that later) in order to register content. We also provide a suffix generator for help in constructing DOIs. If you’re not sure how best to make use of existing metadata in deposits, we’ve got a few options for you. Questions are welcome.\nWe don’t often put it this way but we should: Crossref members rely on the metadata as much, if not more, than the rest of the community. More and better metadata directly benefits our members.\nUpon registration There are a number of ways we work with the metadata when deposits are received.\nChecking for uniqueness In order to avoid duplicate records, we check to make sure that a title or work hasn\u0026rsquo;t been registered before. Depending on what we find, a conflict report or failed registration may result. Adding DOIs to references When references come to us without DOIs, we’ll try to match and add them. ORCID auto-update We automatically update authors’ ORCID records (with their permission of course) whenever deposits include their ORCID iDs. Preprint to VoR reports We compare title information and provide notifications of matching records to members depositing preprints, to help them fulfill their obligation to link to Versions of Record (VoRs), where they exist. Relationships Like preprint to VoR links, components are another kind of relationship. These might be supplementary material such as figures we can link to the ‘parent’ record. Funding data When members register only a funder name as part of the information on who funded the work, we’ll try to match it to its identifier from the Funder Registry, to support better linking between funders and works. Timestamps We add date-times for first created and last updated to member-supplied timestamps. Count of references That’s right, we count all the references for each record that includes them and add the total to the metadata. After registration Once registered, we check, report on and update metadata in a few ways.\nLink checking We email each member a monthly Resolution Report with details of the number of failed and successful resolutions for their DOIs. If someone in the community reports a DOI that isn’t registered, we email the member a DOI Error Report. Citation counts and matches Citation counts for records of members participating in our Cited-by service are openly available in our REST API. The matching citations themselves are available to members, for their own records only. Title transfers Title, prefix and DOI transfers are common and require assistance from our team. MemberID It’s not uncommon for members to have more than one prefix. The memberID means users of the REST API can query for records associated with all of a member’s prefixes. Digital preservation We handle the infrequent but critical update of URLs that are necessary when titles are triggered for digital preservation. We also preserve the metadata itself, with both CLOCKSS and Portico. Of course, since records are often redeposited with updates (note, deposit fees are only charged once per record), some of these processes on our side are repeated as necessary.\nThis list isn’t exhaustive and other needs and opportunities will emerge. For example, we are looking at matching to add ROR IDs, as we do for funderIDs, and doing some research into how we might determine and assert subject classifications at the work-level. If you\u0026rsquo;re interested in more about this kind of work, you\u0026rsquo;ll want to read this recent post by my Labs colleague Dominika on matching grants to outputs.\nGet in touch if you have questions or for more information.\n",
"headings": ["Before registration","Upon registration","After registration"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/authors/bruna-erlandsson/",
"title": "Bruna Erlandsson",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Authors",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/perspectives-bruna-erlandsson-on-scholarly-communications-in-brazil/",
"title": "Perspectives: Bruna Erlandsson on scholarly communications in Brazil",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2022-03-28",
"lastmod_ts": 1648425600,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "\rJoin us for the first in our Perspectives blog series. In this series of blogs, we will be meeting different members of our diverse, global community at Crossref. We learn more about their lives, how they came to know and work with us, and we hear insights about the scholarly research landscape in their country, challenges they face, and plans for the future.\n",
"content": "\rJoin us for the first in our Perspectives blog series. In this series of blogs, we will be meeting different members of our diverse, global community at Crossref. We learn more about their lives, how they came to know and work with us, and we hear insights about the scholarly research landscape in their country, challenges they face, and plans for the future.\nIn our first blog, we meet Bruna Erlandsson, Crossref Ambassador in Brazil, co-owner of Linceu Editorial, and client services manager at ABEC Brasil. Bruna has dedicated her career to scholarly publishing and has worked with Crossref for many years. We invite you to have a read and a listen below to meet Bruna!\n\u0026lt;a type=\u0026quot;button\u0026quot; style=\u0026quot;cursor:pointer;\u0026quot; class=\u0026quot;video-language-button\u0026quot; data-videoid=\u0026quot;1030565718\u0026quot; data-playerid=\u0026quot;video-player-perspectives-bruna-english\u0026quot;\u0026gt;Portuguese\u0026lt;/a\u0026gt; \u0026lt;a type=\u0026quot;button\u0026quot; style=\u0026quot;cursor:pointer;\u0026quot; class=\u0026quot;video-language-button\u0026quot; data-videoid=\u0026quot;1030565745\u0026quot; data-playerid=\u0026quot;video-player-perspectives-bruna-portuguese\u0026quot;\u0026gt;English\u0026lt;/a\u0026gt; Tell us a bit about your organisation, your objectives, and your role\n​​Conte-nos um pouco sobre sua organização, seus objetivos e sua função\nI am a co-founder of the company Linceu Editorial, dedicated to publishing scientific and technological research in ethical, creative, and innovative ways. We strive to provide quality editorial services that meet standard industry requirements and best practices, increase visibility, attract readers and potential authors, and ensure their work is properly cited. My personal goal is to be recognized by the scientific community for providing excellent service to our clients.\nSou sócia proprietária da empresa Linceu Editorial, que se dedica à editoração de artigos científicos de inúmeras revistas, de forma ética, criativa e inovadora. Buscamos atribuir aos periódicos de nosso portfólio os requisitos de qualidade editorial alinhados às melhores práticas editoriais, de forma que aumentem sua visibilidade e atraiam leitores, potenciais autores e, não menos importante, que recebam citações em seus artigos. Meu objetivo pessoal é obter reconhecimento da comunidade científica por meio de uma prestação de serviço em nível de excelência.\nWhat is one thing that others should know about your country and its research activity?\nO que os outros deveriam saber sobre seu país e sua atividade de pesquisa?\nBrazil is the South American leader in publishing scientific articles in Open Access journals. However, it faces challenges due to the absence of a more comprehensive public policy to support scientific editors. As a result, most journals are produced by teaching and/or research institutions or scientific associations with volunteer editorial teams that, although lacking professional journal production skills, produce high-quality journals. Only a tiny percentage of Brazilian journals are published through commercial publishers.\nO Brasil é o líder sul-americano na publicação de artigos científicos, com destaque para as revistas em acesso aberto. No entanto, enfrenta desafios em função da ausência de uma política pública mais abrangente para apoio aos editores científicos. A maior parte dos periódicos é produzida por instituições de ensino/pesquisa ou Sociedades Científicas, tendo uma equipe editorial voluntária e carecendo de profissionalização em sua produção, embora, em muitos casos, apresentem boa qualidade. Apenas uma pequena porcentagem de periódicos brasileiros é publicada por meio de um publisher comercial.\nAre there trends in scholarly communications that are unique to your part of the world?\nExistem tendências nas comunicações acadêmicas que são únicas em sua parte do mundo?\nI wouldn\u0026rsquo;t say unique. However, adherence to Open Science practices, such as preprints and making research data available, is already part of the editorial culture. On the other hand, open peer review is not yet well accepted by everyone in the scientific community, and only a few journals adopt it. In addition, in some areas of research, such as Education and Social Science, researchers are very active - on forums, in discussions lists and attending the same conferences - so there’s this feeling that ‘everyone knows everyone’ which can then lead to potential conflicts of interest and apprehensiveness around open peer review, particularly when it comes to publishing a negative review.\nEu não diria única, mas penso que, no Brasil, a adesão às práticas da ciência aberta, como publicação em preprint e disponibilização de dados de pesquisa, já fazem parte da cultura editorial. Por outro lado, a revisão aberta ainda não é bem aceita por toda comunidade científica, sendo poucos os periódicos que o adotam. Além disso, em algumas áreas de conhecimento com grande produção local, como por exemplo a Ciências Sociais e Educação, a interação entre membros da comunidade é muito grande, visto que são pesquisadores muito ativos em fóruns, listas de discussões e conferências da área, causando a sensação de que \u0026ldquo;todo mundo conhece todo mundo\u0026rdquo;, resultando em um possível conflito de interesse, visto que existe um grande receio em publicar um parecer aberto, especialmente se o caso for um parecer negativo.\nWhat about any political policies, challenges, or mandates that you have to consider in your work?\nE as políticas, desafios ou mandatos políticos que você deve considerar em seu trabalho?\nIn Latin America we have a large indexing database, Redalyc, and a digital library of Open Access journals, which has recently excluded a number of journals for charging APCs (Article Processing Charges), upon the understanding that this would go against their Diamond Open Access requirement.\nHowever, in Brazil - in general - the understanding of Open Access is not so limited. Charging APCs are in fact encouraged by many as a form of self-sustainability of the journal while still being Open Access.\nAs for challenges, one of the biggest is whether or not to publish in English. Although the number of Brazilian journals that publish exclusively in English or both languages (Portuguese and English) is remarkably high. There is still however a belief that local science is only of interest to the local public, and so some question whether there is a value in publishing in English (or other languages). For example, if an author writes a research paper about a small riverside community in the countryside of Acre state in Brazil, they might ask why someone outside the country would be interested in reading that.\nAqui na América Latina, temos uma grande base indexadora, Redalyc, e biblioteca digital de periódicos de Acesso Aberto que, recentemente, excluíu da base um número considerável de periódicos que cobrassem qualquer tipo de taxa de publicação, por entender que isso iria contra os requisitos de seu modelo de Acesso Aberto Diamante (periódicos em acesso aberto livre de taxa de publicação).\nNo entanto, no Brasil, em geral, o entendimento é outro, a cobrança de taxas de processamento não descaracteriza o acesso aberto, sendo, na verdade, encorajado por muitos como uma forma de auto-sustentabilidade do periódico.\nJá em relação a desafios, acredito que um dos maiores é a questão de publicar ou não em inglês. Embora seja notável o número de periódicos brasileiros que publicam exclusivamente em inglês ou ainda nos dois idiomas (português e inglês), existe ainda a crença de que a ciência local só teria interesse do público local, criando assim o questionamento se há ou não o valor em publicar em outro idioma. Por exemplo, se uma pesquisa estuda algo sobre uma comunidade ribeirinha no interior do estado do Acre, aqui no Brasil, é comum existir a dúvida se algo tão específico seria do interesse de alguém de fora do nosso país.\nHow would you describe the value of being part of the Crossref community; what impact has your participation had on your goals?\nComo você descreveria o valor de fazer parte da comunidade Crossref; que impacto teve sua participação em seus objetivos?\nI get immense value from being part of the Crossref community. Being a Crossref Ambassador brings greater recognition and legitimacy to my role working with editors and adds value to my company’s services as well. The title of Ambassador enhances trust in my opinions, presentations, and when providing support and clarification to those asking questions. However it also comes with a great responsibility to do this well, which motivates me to always keep up to date with developments at Crossref. Through the Ambassador Program I have given several webinars for Crossref and the Associação Brasileira de Editores Científicos (ABEC Brasil), which provide much needed information and support to Portuguese speaking Crossref members as well as enhancing the visibility of my professional activities at Linceu Editorial.\nÉ um valor enorme fazer parte da comunidade Crossref! Ser Embaixadora do Crossref traz um reconhecimento entre os editores e agrega valor aos serviços de minha empresa. Esse título assegura confiabilidade em minhas opiniões, apresentações, e esclarecimentos de dúvidas, o que traz junto uma grande responsabilidade que me motiva a me manter sempre atualizada com tudo em relação ao Crossref. Através do Programa de Embaixadores eu ministrei diversos webinários para a Crossref e também para a Associação Brasileira de Editores Científicos (ABEC Brasil), fornecendo muitas informações necessárias para os membros da Crossref que falam português, e também isso tudo acaba por retornar em visibilidade para as minhas atividades profissionais na Linceu Editorial.\nFor you, what would be the most important thing Crossref could change (do more of/do better in)?\nPara você, qual seria a coisa mais importante que o Crossref poderia mudar (fazer mais/fazer melhor)?\nI think there is still a need for more multilingual training both online and face-to-face, which has been particularly lacking during the pandemic, to provide more information on Crossref services beyond Content Registration. For example Similarity Check is a service that people still have a lot of questions about (such as ‘what is the magic similarity percentage score to identify plagiarism?’ Answer - there isn’t one!). Crossmark is another service where I believe people could benefit from more training on it’s importance in the publication process, not only in cases of retraction but also in guaranteeing that the article is up-to-date and trustworthy. In Brazil many people use Open Journal Systems (OJS) and so the development of Crossref service specific plugins and training on how to use them is really useful!\nAcho que ainda há necessidade de mais treinamentos multilíngues, tanto online quanto presencial – o que tem sido particularmente escasso durante a pandemia – para fornecer mais informações sobre os serviços do Crossref além do Registro de Conteúdo. Por exemplo, o Similarity Check é um serviço sobre o qual as pessoas ainda têm muitas dúvidas (como \u0026lsquo;qual é a porcentagem de similaridade aceitável para identificar plágio?\u0026rsquo; Resposta - não existe!). O Crossmark é outro serviço onde acredito que as pessoas poderiam se beneficiar de mais treinamento sobre sua importância no processo de publicação, não apenas em casos de retratação, mas também para garantir que o artigo esteja sempre atualizado e confiável. No Brasil muitas pessoas usam o Open Journal Systems (OJS) e por isso o desenvolvimento de plugins específicos do serviço Crossref e treinamento sobre como usá-los seriam muito úteis!\nWhich other organisations do you collaborate with or are pivotal to your work in open science?\nCom quais outras organizações você colabora ou é fundamental para o seu trabalho em ciência aberta?\nI contribute to ABEC Brasil in a variety of ways including speaking on short courses about Crossref, designing content for lectures as part of an online program called ABEC Educação (which will be launched soon), and as a volunteer consultant to answer a variety of questions from editors regarding content registration at Crossref.\nContribuo com a ABEC Brasil, participando tanto como ministrante de minicursos sobre ferramentas Crossref quanto como conteudista de um curso no Programa EaD ABEC Educação (que será lançado em breve), além de como consultora voluntária para atender a diversas dúvidas de editores em relação a depósito de conteúdo.\nWhat are the post-pandemic challenges you are facing and how are you adapting to them?\nQuais são os desafios pós-pandemia que você está enfrentando e como você está se adaptando a eles?\nConsidering the current situation in Brazil, I don’t think I would consider us having reached ‘post-pandemic’ just yet. Although vaccination is taking place successfully, there are still many uncertainties and fears. A good example of this is Crossref LIVE Brazil which was canceled at the start of the pandemic and at the moment we still don’t know when we will be able to reschedule this. It still feels too risky to bring a number of speakers from abroad to Brazil and too soon to hold such a large in-person event.\nHowever, if I had to highlight one challenge I\u0026rsquo;ve been facing, it would be something more personal rather than work-related. Beyond a shadow of a doubt, it would be the lack of human contact! It has been really hard to get use to not gathering together with family and friends and not being able to travel, meet new people, and experience new cultures. To deal with it, I spend my free time planning the places I will go to and people I will visit as soon as this whole situation is over!\nPara ser honesta, considerando a realidade atual no Brasil, eu ainda não considero o momento atual \u0026ldquo;pós-pandemia\u0026rdquo;. Embora a vacinação esteja ocorrendo com sucesso, ainda existem muitas incertezas e medos. Um exemplo bem claro é o Crossref Live in Brazil, que foi cancelado assim que a pandemia foi \u0026ldquo;anunciada\u0026rdquo; e, até hoje, não sabemos quando ocorrerá, pois ainda soa muito arriscado trazer palestrantes de fora para o Brasil e também se encontrar com diversas pessoas em um evento presencial.\nNo entanto, se eu tivesse que destacar um desafio que tenho enfrentado, seria algo mais pessoal e não relacionado ao trabalho. E, sem sombras de dúvidas, seria a falta de contato humano! Está sendo realmente complicado se acostumar em não encontrar amigos e familiares, e também não poder viajar e conhecer novos lugares, pessoas e culturas – o jeito que encontrei para lidar com isso é gastar meu tempo livre planejando todos os lugares que irei e todas as pessoas que visitarei assim que essa situação toda passar.\nWhat are your plans for the future?\nQuais são seus planos para o futuro?\nMy plans for the future include continuously learning more and more about scholarly publishing including the various services that Crossref provides. I want to be able to help publishers implement valuable tools into their workflows such as Similarity Check and Crossmark, and contribute to greater scientific dissemination of Brazilian research so that Brazilian journals can get the global recognition, visibility and value they deserve.\nMeus planos para o futuro incluem aprender cada vez mais e mais sobre publicação científica, incluindo os vários serviços que o Crossref oferece. Quero poder ajudar os editores a implementar ferramentas valiosas em seus fluxos de trabalho, como Similarity Check e Crossmark, e contribuir para uma maior divulgação científica das pesquisas brasileiras para que os periódicos brasileiros possam obter o reconhecimento global, visibilidade e valor que merecem.\nThank you, Bruna!\nObrigado, Bruna!\n",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/outage-of-march-24-2022/",
"title": "Outage of March 24, 2022",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2022-03-24",
"lastmod_ts": 1648080000,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "So here I am, apologizing again. Have I mentioned that I hate computers?\nWe had a large data center outage. It lasted 17 hours. It meant that pretty much all Crossref services were unavailable - our main website, our content registration system, our reports, our APIs. 17 hours was a long time for us - but it was also an inconvenient time for numerous members, service providers, integrators, and users. We apologise for this.\n",
"content": "So here I am, apologizing again. Have I mentioned that I hate computers?\nWe had a large data center outage. It lasted 17 hours. It meant that pretty much all Crossref services were unavailable - our main website, our content registration system, our reports, our APIs. 17 hours was a long time for us - but it was also an inconvenient time for numerous members, service providers, integrators, and users. We apologise for this.\nLike the outage last October, the issue was related to the data center that we are trying to leave. However, unlike last time, our single nearby network admin wasn\u0026rsquo;t in surgery at the time. Tim was alerted in the early hours of his morning and was able get up and immediately investigate.\nDespite having both secondary and tertiary backup connections, neither activated appropriately.\nThe problem was with incomplete BGP (Border Gateway Protocol) settings on our primary connection\u0026rsquo;s network provider’s side. We never noticed this because our backup connection had the correct and complete BGP settings. But our backup circuit went down (we don’t know why yet), and when the router with complete settings went down, only the router with the incomplete settings was available and so everything went down.\nWe hadn’t yet fully configured the tertiary connection to cut over automatically. This meant cutting over to the tertiary during the outage would have required manual and potentially error-prone reconfiguration. Not something we wanted to do in a hurry with a sleep-deprived network admin.\nIt’s not an excuse at all. But we are currently down two people in our infrastructure group. One of our infrastructure staff recently left for a startup, and we are already hiring a new third position. In short, our one-long-suffering sysadmin had to field this all by himself. But hey - we are hiring a Head of Infrastructure, and if you are interested you can now see the work you\u0026rsquo;d have cut out for you!\nSo things are back up and we’ve resolved the incident but we are carefully and cautiously monitoring. We will further analyze what went wrong and post an update when we have a clearer picture.\nI apologize for the downstream pain this outage will have inevitably caused. We realize that many people will now be scrambling to clean things up after this lengthy outage.\nMore when I have it… but for now I\u0026rsquo;ll mostly be curled up in a ball.\n",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/categories/post-mortem/",
"title": "Post Mortem",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Categories",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/announcing-the-ror-sustaining-supporters-program/",
"title": "Announcing the ROR Sustaining Supporters program",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2022-03-23",
"lastmod_ts": 1647993600,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "In collaboration with California Digital Library and DataCite, Crossref guides the operations of the Research Organisation Registry (ROR). ROR is community-driven and has an independent sustainability plan involving grants, donations, and in-kind support from our staff.\nROR is a vital component of the Research Nexus, our vision of a fully connected open research ecosystem. It helps people identify, connect, and analyze the affiliations of those contributing to, producing, and publishing all kinds of research objects. Crossref added support for ROR to its schema and REST API in 2021 and we are asking Crossref members to use ROR IDs for author affiliations in the metadata they deposit with Crossref. But this post is about how the Crossref community can support ROR in another way.\n",
"content": "In collaboration with California Digital Library and DataCite, Crossref guides the operations of the Research Organisation Registry (ROR). ROR is community-driven and has an independent sustainability plan involving grants, donations, and in-kind support from our staff.\nROR is a vital component of the Research Nexus, our vision of a fully connected open research ecosystem. It helps people identify, connect, and analyze the affiliations of those contributing to, producing, and publishing all kinds of research objects. Crossref added support for ROR to its schema and REST API in 2021 and we are asking Crossref members to use ROR IDs for author affiliations in the metadata they deposit with Crossref. But this post is about how the Crossref community can support ROR in another way.\nAll three lead organisations\u0026mdash;as well as the ROR initiative\u0026mdash;have publicly committed to the POSI Principles and we know that our diverse and global community is increasingly interested in showing its support for open scholarly infrastructure too. Now there\u0026rsquo;s an opportunity to show that support; the following blog by Maria Gould, cross-posted from the ROR blog, explains how.\nROR begins a new round of community fundraising Since ROR launched in 2019, we have been charting a path to sustainability that leverages our broad community network and diversifies our funding sources. ROR is currently funded through a combination of in-kind support from its three operating organisations, project-based grant funds, and financial contributions from community members.\nWhile ROR aims to minimize overhead and contain costs, it still requires resources to build and maintain the registry\u0026rsquo;s infrastructure, especially as adoption continues to grow. ROR has been working to establish independent revenue streams that complement ROR\u0026rsquo;s in-kind support, avoid dependence on grant funds, and ensure the registry data remains openly available.\nThis year, ROR is initiating a new round of community fundraising. Building on the community fundraising campaign we ran during 2019-2021, we are renewing a call for organisations to commit to supporting ROR financially. We are launching a Sustaining Supporters program that opens up new ways for organisations to participate in the collective funding of ROR.\nROR Sustaining Supporters program With the Sustaining Supporters program, organisations are encouraged to support ROR\u0026rsquo;s operating expenses on a recurring annual basis. Any organisation that signs up to support ROR through the end of 2022 will be recognized as a Founding Supporter and receive a supporter badge that can be displayed on their website.\nWe want to make the process of contributing to ROR as easy as possible. To ensure this is the case, organisations can support ROR at any amount that works for their budget and capacity. Also, to simplify the invoicing process, organisations that are already members of Crossref or DataCite can choose to receive an invoice directly from Crossref and DataCite for their ROR contributions. However, if organisations prefer, they can also be invoiced directly from ROR.\nWhy support ROR ROR aims to be an example of the power and potential of community-funded open infrastructure. ROR is committed to providing open, stakeholder-governed infrastructure for research organisation identifiers and associated metadata. Implementation of ROR IDs in scholarly infrastructure and metadata enables more efficient discovery and tracking of research outputs across institutions and funding bodies.\nThe Sustaining Supporters program is the next step in ROR\u0026rsquo;s sustainability journey. ROR is continuing to explore future potential paid service tiers designed for those organisations and companies that rely heavily on our infrastructure, which would complement the supporters program. However, rest assured that any paid services will not impact the availability of ROR data or our commitment to supporting our community, in line with our commitment to the Principles of Open Scholarly Infrastructure (POSI).\nWe\u0026rsquo;ve all seen key infrastructure components disappear, be enclosed, or get acquired. We are also realistic about how much effort and cost is involved in sustaining key components of open infrastructure that the scholarly community depends on. And we are committed to doing this right. That means not just sustaining core infrastructures, but investing in them so that they can evolve alongside community needs.\nROR is a free resource for the research community. However, this shared infrastructure does require a collective funding approach that can sustain it as a common good.\nJoin us! This is an exciting moment to be part of ROR\u0026rsquo;s growth. Let\u0026rsquo;s fund open infrastructure together!\nIf your organisation is interested in supporting ROR and helping to fund open, community-led infrastructure, sign up here.\n",
"headings": ["ROR begins a new round of community fundraising","ROR Sustaining Supporters program","Why support ROR","Join us!"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/operations-and-sustainability/membership-operations/revocation/",
"title": "Suspending or revoking membership",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2022-03-23",
"lastmod_ts": 1647993600,
"section": "Operations & sustainability",
"tags": [],
"description": "Once a member joins Crossref, we expect them to remain a member for the long term. As an organisation that’s obsessed with persistence, we really try to avoid suspending or revoking membership. However, there are three key reasons why we may be forced to do this:\nA member leaves invoices unpaid for a long time Legal sanctions or judgments against the Member or its home country A member contravenes the membership terms. Process for revoking membership due to unpaid invoices Revoking membership due to unpaid fees is an absolute last step for us, but as a not-for-profit membership organisation we have a duty to remain sustainable and manage our finances in a responsible way. Financial sustainability means we can keep the organisation afloat and keep our dedicated service to scholarly communications running.\n",
"content": "Once a member joins Crossref, we expect them to remain a member for the long term. As an organisation that’s obsessed with persistence, we really try to avoid suspending or revoking membership. However, there are three key reasons why we may be forced to do this:\nA member leaves invoices unpaid for a long time Legal sanctions or judgments against the Member or its home country A member contravenes the membership terms. Process for revoking membership due to unpaid invoices Revoking membership due to unpaid fees is an absolute last step for us, but as a not-for-profit membership organisation we have a duty to remain sustainable and manage our finances in a responsible way. Financial sustainability means we can keep the organisation afloat and keep our dedicated service to scholarly communications running.\nAfter each invoice is sent, we send a series of automated reminders to the member’s billing contact (and secondary billing contact if available) to make sure they’re clear on when their invoice payment is due. If the invoice remains unpaid after the due date, we send an email to the Billing, Secondary Billing, Primary and Technical contacts on the account to let them know that their account is at risk of suspension. This gives the member time to contact us if there are any issues with the invoice or if they didn’t realise that there was an outstanding invoice.\nIf the invoice remains unpaid, we suspend the member\u0026rsquo;s access to register or update content, but they remain a member. Once a year we contact all members who were suspended due to unpaid invoices to let them know that if the invoices remain unpaid for a further two weeks, their membership of Crossref will be revoked.\nOnce an organisation’s membership has been revoked, they would need to re-apply if they wanted to become a member again in the future. We reserve the right to decline the application. If accepted, the applicant would need to pay all outstanding invoices before re-joining.\nProcess for revoking membership due to Legal sanctions or judgments against the Member or its home country Very occasionally there may be a legal requirement or government order requiring us to suspend or revoke membership, most commonly as a result of economic sanctions. In this case, we are unable to work with the member from a set date and will suspend or revoke membership as appropriate. We will provide notification to any impacted members unless notification is prohibited by the legal requirement or order.\nYou can find out more about current sanctions impacting Crossref members here.\nProcess for revoking membership due to contravention of the membership terms There are limited occasions where we are forced to revoke membership of Crossref due to a contravention of the membership terms. This may be due to:\nMisrepresentation in the original membership application Fraudulent use of identifiers or metadata Contravening the code of conduct Any other basis set forth in the governing documents. Step One We contact the member to confirm the issue, investigate further and try to work with the member to rectify the problem if possible.\nStep Two If the issue cannot be resolved in a timely manner, we suspend the member\u0026rsquo;s access to register new DOIs or update their existing DOIs. We continue to work with the member to try to rectify the problem.\nStep Three If the issue still cannot be resolved, we move to revoke membership. The Executive Committee of Crossref’s board reviews and ratifies the decision. The member is able to appeal this decision, and the Executive Committee of Crossref’s board will review and respond to an appeal.\nStep Four We add the member information to the record of revoked membership.\n",
"headings": ["Process for revoking membership due to unpaid invoices","Process for revoking membership due to Legal sanctions or judgments against the Member or its home country","Process for revoking membership due to contravention of the membership terms"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/follow-the-money-or-how-to-link-grants-to-research-outputs/",
"title": "Follow the money, or how to link grants to research outputs",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2022-03-22",
"lastmod_ts": 1647907200,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "The ecosystem of scholarly metadata is filled with relationships between items of various types: a person authored a paper, a paper cites a book, a funder funded research. Those relationships are absolutely essential: an item without them is missing the most basic context about its structure, origin, and impact. No wonder that finding and exposing such relationships is considered very important by virtually all parties involved. Probably the most famous instance of this problem is finding citation links between research outputs. Lately, another instance has been drawing more and more attention: linking research outputs with grants used as their funding source. How can this be done and how many such links can we observe?\n",
"content": "The ecosystem of scholarly metadata is filled with relationships between items of various types: a person authored a paper, a paper cites a book, a funder funded research. Those relationships are absolutely essential: an item without them is missing the most basic context about its structure, origin, and impact. No wonder that finding and exposing such relationships is considered very important by virtually all parties involved. Probably the most famous instance of this problem is finding citation links between research outputs. Lately, another instance has been drawing more and more attention: linking research outputs with grants used as their funding source. How can this be done and how many such links can we observe?\nTL;DR We looked for links between research outputs and grants registered with Crossref. Grant DOIs alone are not enough for linking research outputs with grants, because the funding information in research outputs typically does not contain grant DOIs (yet). Award numbers alone are also not enough because they are not globally unique. We used either grant DOIs (if available) or the combination of award number and funder information to match grants to research outputs. In total, we found 20,834 links between research outputs and registered grants, involving 17,082 research outputs and 3,858 grants (10% of all registered grants)1. Erroneous and incomplete metadata, especially involving award numbers, is the main factor that prevents linking research outputs to grants. Introduction The ecosystem of scholarly metadata is filled with relationships between items of various types: a person authored a paper, an author works at a university, a paper cites a book, a book contains a chapter, a funder funded research. Those relationships are absolutely essential: an item without them is missing the most basic context about its structure, origin, and impact.\nNo wonder that finding and exposing relationships between items in the scientific ecosystem is considered very important by virtually all parties involved. Probably the most famous instance of this problem is finding citation links between research outputs. Another, relatively new example, is linking research outputs with grants used as their funding source.\nAt Crossref, for some time now we have been seeing a steady growth of funder membership and grant registration. We are aware that the possibility of finding relationships between grants and research outputs is a big reason why funders are registering grants with us in the first place. Being able to see which research outputs are being supported by which grants helps reduce the reporting burden on researchers, funders, and institutions alike, especially now with the addition of ROR IDs to help complete the picture. Exposing relationships between research outputs and grants also increases the transparency of funding sources of the research, making it easier to assess and trust scientific findings.\nBut how can we find those relationships and how many of them can we already observe? Thankfully our REST API, recently equipped with the grant metadata, can help us answer these questions.\nThe perfect scenario Imagine a world where the metadata of any scientific output states all relationships with other items existing in the scientific ecosystem, and those related items are always referred to by their persistent identifiers, allowing all this information to be accessed in a fully machine-readable way\u0026hellip; Lovely, right?\nIn the case of citations, in such a perfect world every bibliographic reference has a DOI of the cited item. And in the case of funding information, a scientific paper contains grant DOIs, stating the funded-by relationships between the paper and the grants.\nBut, as the last two years have painfully taught us all, life is not all rainbows and unicorns.\nThe reality kicks in We know that around 71% of bibliographic references are deposited with Crossref without a DOI of the cited item. This means that if we want to establish citation links between items, we need to match the bibliographic references using the provided metadata, which is not a trivial task and can potentially introduce errors.\nAnd the situation with the funding information and grant DOIs is even worse.\nProblem #1: our schema does not allow the publishers to attach grant DOIs to research outputs This issue is 100% on us. Because grant DOIs are relatively new, our deposit schema does not yet allow to specify the grant DOI in the funding information of a research output, even if the publisher wanted to. We are working on changing this.\nInterestingly, it looks like persistent identifiers always find a way. Within over 7.4 million research outputs with funding information, we noticed 6 cases where a grant DOI was provided as an award number. For example in 10.1093/nar/gkaa994 we have the following:\nfunder: [ { name: \u0026#34;Wellcome Trust\u0026#34;, award: [\u0026#34;10.35802/108758\u0026#34;], doi-asserted-by: \u0026#34;publisher\u0026#34;, DOI: \u0026#34;10.13039/100010269\u0026#34; }, ... ] This may not be 100% correct from the schema perspective, but it is very useful when one is interested in linking grants to research outputs!\nBut those cases are extremely rare outliers. For the vast majority of the outputs, grant DOIs are not present in the metadata. This means that, just like in the case of bibliographic references, we have to use the metadata to match funding information to grants.\nFunding information is typically given as a pair: award number, funder information. Grants contain similar metadata. One might be tempted to use only the award number for linking, as in some cases it can look like a grant identifier.\nLet\u0026rsquo;s consider an example. We want to find all papers funded by grant 10.37807/gbmf7622. The award number is GBMF7622. A simple approach might be to search for items with this award number in Crossref\u0026rsquo;s REST API, which returns 12 results2. However, one of the resulting items is the grant itself3. So excluding that, it seems like there are 12-1=11 research outputs funded by this grant.\nSimple and easy, right? Well, think again.\nProblem #2: award numbers are not unique Let\u0026rsquo;s look at another example grant: 10.25585/60000600. Its award number is 2817 and the funder is the US Department of Energy.\nWhen we search for this award we get 10 results4. Like before, one of them is our grant. After examining the remaining 9 we will see that:\n3 items have been funded by the Joint Genome Institute, which according to the Funder Registry has been incorporated into Basic Energy Sciences, which is a descendant of the US Department of Energy 2 items have been funded by International Rett Syndrome Foundation from the US 2 items have been funded by Agencia Nacional de Promoción Científica y Tecnológica from Argentina 1 item has been funded by Arak University of Medical Sciences from Iran 1 item has been funded by Shahrekord University also from Iran So among only 9 items mentioning the same award number we have in fact 5 different grants. Our input grant should probably be linked only to the three items mentioning Joint Genome Institute. The main problem illustrated here is that the award numbers are not globally unique, and thus should not be treated like identifiers.\nIndeed, within 38,326 grants registered so far, we have 37,608 distinct award numbers, and among those, there are 716 award numbers, each of which appears in multiple grants. This issue comes in two flavours: conflicts between and within funders.\nBetween-funder award number conflicts A conflict between funders is when more than one funder uses the same award number for one of their grants. This is expected - award numbers are assigned by funders internally and are not designed to be a globally unique identifier.\nOut of 716 award numbers that appear in multiple grants, 12 are numbers that appear in grants of different funders. For example, there are two grants with the award number 105626:\nSystemic MFG-E8 Blockade as Melanoma Therapy funded by Melanoma Research Alliance Institutional Strategic Support Fund Phase2 FY2014/16 funded by Wellcome Trust Because of those conflicts, we cannot simply rely on the award numbers for linking grants to research outputs. Instead, we have to use more information to be sure that the links are correctly established.\nWithin-funder award number conflicts To our big surprise, it turns out that the majority of the award number conflicts happen not between different funders, but within the grants of a single funder. Out of 716 award numbers that appear in multiple grants, 704 appear in multiple grants of a single funder only. Such situations are not expected and could indicate an error or some other systematic issue with the data.\nInterestingly, out of those 704 award numbers, 700 are associated with the US Department of Energy. We\u0026rsquo;ve followed up with them in order to clarify or resolve this. The US Department of Energy pointed out a fundamental issue with the data model: currently a grant deposited with Crossref has to have at least one funder DOI, and no other way of identifying the associated organisation is allowed. At the same time, some of the facilities that should appear in their grants\u0026rsquo; metadata are not funders at all and thus cannot be identified by a funder DOI. In the future, they plan to identify those facilities in their grant metadata by providing ROR IDs.\nBecause of within-funder award number conflicts, in some cases it might be difficult to distinguish between two grants with the same award number and funder. A solution might be to use additional information or simply not accept any links if a research output cannot be reliably linked to one grant only.\nOur linking approach Based on all those observations, we adopted the following approach:\nWe iterated over all registered grants, for each we performed the following steps: We used award.number:\u0026lt;grant DOI\u0026gt; filter in the REST API to find all items listing a given grant\u0026rsquo;s DOI as the award number. Because this is based on the grant\u0026rsquo;s persistent identifier, we recorded those links without any further verification. We used the award.number:\u0026lt;grant award number\u0026gt; filter in the REST API to find all items listing grant\u0026rsquo;s award number in the funding information. Each resulting item was then verified by comparing the funder information in the item to the funder information in the grant. We recorded the link between the grant and the candidate item only if the verification succeeded. In the final step, we examined all recorded links to make sure that each pair (research output, award number) is linked to at most one grant. Links violating this rule were flagged as not reliable. We used different techniques to verify the funder information between the research output (item) and the grant, depending on what information is available. Grants always have the funder DOI. The item, however, can have the funder DOI, the funder name, or both.\nIf the funder DOI was available on both sides, the following rules were used for the funder verification (ordered by decreasing confidence):\nBoth the item and the grant contain the same funder DOI, for example, 10.35802/089928 and 10.1242/jcs.196758 The funder in the item replaced or was replaced by the funder in the grant (according to the Funder Registry), for example, 10.35802/104848 and 10.1136/medethics-2020-106821 The funder in the paper is an ancestor or a descendant of the funder in the grant (according to the Funder Registry), for example, 10.46936/sthm.proj.2010.40084/60004575 and 10.1016/j.heliyon.2018.e00629 If the funder DOI was not available in the item, the following rules were used for the funder verification (ordered by decreasing confidence):\nThe funder name in the paper is the same (ignoring the case) as the funder name in the grant, for example, 10.35802/110166 and 10.12688/wellcomeopenres.14645.4 The funder name in the item is the same (ignoring the case) as the name of the funder that replaced/was replaced by the funder in the grant, for example, 10.35802/206194 and 10.1172/jci.insight.96381 The funder name in the item is the same (ignoring the case) as the name of the ancestor/descendant of the funder in the grant, for example, 10.46936/cpbl.proj.2001.2191/60002922 and 10.1109/tkde.2016.2628180 Note that this is in fact very similar to our reference matching approach. In both cases, first we search for candidate items, and then verify the candidates by comparing the metadata. The actual metadata used for the verification varies, because different information is typically given in the bibliographic reference and the funding information.\nWhat we found This procedure applied to the entire Crossref dataset resulted in 20,846 links between research outputs and grants5. Of those, 12 were flagged as unreliable, because they involved more than one grant linked to the same item and award number. The rest of this section focuses on the remaining 20,834 links.\nWithin the 20,834 links, we have 17,082 research outputs and 3,858 (10.1%) grants.\nHere is the breakdown into the verification approaches used:\nVerification #links %links The item contains grant DOI - no verification 6 \u0026lt;0.1% Funder DOIs are the same 8,364 40.1% Funder DOIs are related with a replaced/was replaced by relationship 3,704 17.8% Funder DOIs are related with an ancestor/descendant relationship 7,718 37.0% Funder names are the same 591 2.8% The name of the funder in the item is the same as the name of the funder that replaced/was replaced by the funder in the grant 364 1.7% The name of the funder in the item is the same as the name of the ancestor or descendant of the funder in the grant 87 0.4% In most cases, just using the funder DOIs for the verification was enough. Verifying by the funder name added 1,042 links, which is 5% of all links.\nAnd here are statistics for individual funders. Only funders with at least 10 deposited grants are listed in the table. The table shows the number of detected links, the number of distinct research outputs linked, the total number of outputs mentioning the given funder DOI, and the number of grants.\nFunder #links #linked research outputs #total outputs with funder DOI #grants Japan Science and Technology Agency 11,922 10,411 25,779 9,383 Wellcome Trust (including both funder DOIs 10.13039/100004440 and 10.13039/100010269) 8,001 6,246 49,492 17,534 James S. McDonnell Foundation 463 457 2,534 557 Melanoma Research Alliance 152 150 894 392 Asia-Pacific Network for Global Change Research 100 100 838 539 ALS Association 84 78 909 434 U.S. Department of Energy 56 52 97,482 8,462 Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation 51 50 5,928 94 American Cancer Society 3 3 7,276 107 Children\u0026rsquo;s Tumor Foundation 1 1 759 630 American Parkinson Disease Association 0 0 181 12 Neurofibromatosis Therapeutic Acceleration Program 0 0 101 68 International Anesthesia Research Society 0 0 94 34 Australian National Data Service 0 0 92 67 Note that the fourth column reports the total number of outputs registered with Crossref and mentioning the given funder DOI, including grants, journal papers and all other record types.\nIt is interesting to compare the number of linked research outputs for a given funder with the total number of research outputs mentioning a given funder DOI. In general, for a funder that registers grants, the more research outputs mentioning this funder, the more links we should be able to find.\nAnd for some funders (Japan Science and Technology Agency, Melanoma Research Alliance, Asia-Pacific Network for Global Change Research, Wellcome Trust, James S. McDonnell Foundation), the number of linked outputs is indeed high, as compared with how many outputs mention the funder in the first place. This suggests our procedure was quite successful in linking outputs funded by these funders, meaning that in general the metadata in their grants and the funding information in the research outputs match.\nOn the other hand, we have a few funders for which we managed to link only a very small fraction of research outputs. There are several potential explanations here. A simple one is that not all relevant grants have been deposited yet. For example, a funder might be registering new grants only, whereas many research outputs mention older, not yet registered grants. It is also possible that there are systematic differences in how the publishers deposit the funding information in articles and other outputs, and how it is given in grants. Such differences might prevent us from establishing links, contributing to the overall low percentage of linked grants.\nThe importance of being precise Here are some examples of existing links that should\u0026rsquo;ve been found, but were not.\nThe award number in grant 10.48105/pc.gr.93156 is CTF-2020-01-004. This article: 10.3390/ijms22094716 mentions award number 2020‐01‐004 and the same funder (Children\u0026rsquo;s Tumor Foundation). It is very probable that this is the same grant, but our procedure expects exactly the same award number, and so the two were not linked.\nPaper 10.1128/genomea.00159-18 contains award number 1931 and U.S. Department of Energy as the funder. There are two grants with the same award number and funder: 10.46936/10.25585/60001053 and 10.46936/genr.proj.2000.1931/60002530. It is difficult to choose between them, and these links were marked as unreliable.\nThese examples could be signs of systematic errors and/or discrepancies that effectively prevent linking of those funders\u0026rsquo; grants.\nWhat\u0026rsquo;s next In problems such as linking grants to research outputs, there are typically two key ingredients of the success, which at the same time are the main areas of improvement: the quality of the metadata, and the strength of the linking approach.\nThe metadata could be improved greatly by addressing existing discrepancies between grants and research outputs and allowing (and encouraging!) the publishers to provide grant DOIs in the funding information. Thankfully, we are not alone in those efforts. Both this recent Upstream blog from Alexis-Michel Mugabushaka, and this Scholarly Kitchen post from Robert Harrington call for the development and adoption of grant DOIs in scholarly metadata.\nIn terms of the linking approach, there are some ideas that could be used to further improve the linking accuracy and completeness:\nThe verification by funder name could be fuzzy and allow for minor variations like typos or additional words. Apart from replaced/replaced by and ancestor/descendant, there are other relationships between funders in the Funder Registry: continuation of, incorporates/incorporated into, merged with, renamed as, split into/split from. We could also consider those relationships during the funder validation. Apart from the funder information, there is other information that could be potentially used for verification, for example, the names of the authors and the investigators, the domain, or keywords. If you have any questions, do get in touch!\nAll numbers are as of March 8, 2022\u0026#160;\u0026#x21a9;\u0026#xfe0e;\nhttps://api.crossref.org/works?filter=award.number:gbmf7622\u0026#160;\u0026#x21a9;\u0026#xfe0e;\nhttps://api.crossref.org/works?filter=award.number:gbmf7622,type:grant\u0026#160;\u0026#x21a9;\u0026#xfe0e;\nhttps://api.crossref.org/works?filter=award.number:2817\u0026#160;\u0026#x21a9;\u0026#xfe0e;\nThe code and data available here: https://gitlab.com/crossref/labs_data_analyses/-/tree/master/analyses/22-01-26-grants-matching\u0026#160;\u0026#x21a9;\u0026#xfe0e;\n",
"headings": ["TL;DR","Introduction","The perfect scenario","The reality kicks in","Problem #1: our schema does not allow the publishers to attach grant DOIs to research outputs","Problem #2: award numbers are not unique","Between-funder award number conflicts","Within-funder award number conflicts","Our linking approach","What we found","The importance of being precise","What\u0026rsquo;s next"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/a-registry-of-editorial-boards-a-new-trust-signal-for-scholarly-communications/",
"title": "A Registry of Editorial Boards - a new trust signal for scholarly communications?",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2022-03-09",
"lastmod_ts": 1646784000,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "Background Perhaps, like us, you\u0026rsquo;ve noticed that it is not always easy to find information on who is on a journal\u0026rsquo;s editorial board and, when you do, it is often unclear when it was last updated. The editorial board details might be displayed in multiple places (such as the publisher\u0026rsquo;s website and the platform where the content is hosted) which may or may not be in sync and retrieving this information for any kind of analysis always requires manually checking and exporting the data from a website (as illustrated by the Open Editors research and its dataset).\n",
"content": "Background Perhaps, like us, you\u0026rsquo;ve noticed that it is not always easy to find information on who is on a journal\u0026rsquo;s editorial board and, when you do, it is often unclear when it was last updated. The editorial board details might be displayed in multiple places (such as the publisher\u0026rsquo;s website and the platform where the content is hosted) which may or may not be in sync and retrieving this information for any kind of analysis always requires manually checking and exporting the data from a website (as illustrated by the Open Editors research and its dataset).\nFor well-established as well as early career researchers, membership of an editorial board demonstrates their contribution to their community, brings prestige, improves (or maintains) their professional profile and often increases their chances of being published.\nWhilst most journal websites only give the names of the editors, others possibly add a country, some include affiliations, very few link to a professional profile, an ORCID ID. Even when it\u0026rsquo;s clear when the editorial board details were updated, it\u0026rsquo;s hardly ever possible to find past editorial boards information and almost none lists declarations of competing interest.\nWe hear of instances where a researcher\u0026rsquo;s name has been listed on the board of a journal without their knowledge or agreement, potentially to deceive other researchers into submitting their manuscripts. Regular reports of impersonation, nepotism, collusion and conflicts of interest have become a cause for concern.\nSimilarly, recent studies on gender representation and gender and geographical disparity on editorial boards have highlighted the need to do better in this area and provide trusted, reliable and coherent information on editorial board members in order to add transparency, prevent unethical behaviour, maintain trust, promote and support research integrity.\nRegistry of Editorial Boards We are proposing the creation of some form of Registry of Editorial Boards to encourage best practice around editorial boards\u0026rsquo; information and governance that can easily be accessed and used by the community.\nWhat we have in mind A Registry of Editorial Boards could be a new trust-signal for Crossref members and details would be included on a member\u0026rsquo;s Participation Report.\nCrossref members would register and maintain this information for their journal titles in a similar way as they currently manage their metadata. Only the owner of the title, or their trusted service provider, would be able to update it. Editors would be linked by ORCID iD and ROR and Crossref would use \u0026lsquo;autoupdate\u0026rsquo; to push editorship information to ORCID profiles, saving researchers time. The information would be made available via Crossref\u0026rsquo;s API.\nThis new service would introduce more transparency and automation to the editorial process and connect content platforms (i.e. peer review management systems, publishers\u0026rsquo; websites, ORCID and other author register systems, ROR, bibliographic databases, etc.) and make available current and historical information on editorial boards including metadata on the editorial boards\u0026rsquo; full affiliations.\nThe benefits for the community The benefits would be wide-ranging for the different stakeholders in the scholarly communications community, from publishers, researchers, institutions, funders, bibliometricians to librarians including:\nproviding those involved in the peer review process and research ethics a single, authoritative and up-to-date resource on editorial boards\nreducing fraudulent claims to be or to have been on an editorial board of a publication in order to be published or publish others\nconnecting and automating editorship role updates with e.g. ORCID, ROR, etc.\ngenerating a detailed analysis of the publication practices of editorial board members and their close contacts assessing any relationships between authors, reviewers and editorial board members for conflict of interest, etc.\nsupporting researchers responding to a request to join an editorial board, making proactive approaches to a journal or wanting to ensure that an editorial board is representative of its community and assess its levels of diversity and inclusivity\nproviding increased visibility to researchers, particularly to early career researchers\nYour feedback Before we progress further, we would like to fully understand what the needs of the community are and whether members would be willing and have the capacity to participate and contribute regularly in registering and maintaining details of their editorial boards.\n✏️ Please let us know what your thoughts and experience are with editorial boards by completing this brief survey by 31 March 2022.\n",
"headings": ["Background","Registry of Editorial Boards","What we have in mind","The benefits for the community","Your feedback"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/categories/enrich-services/",
"title": "Enrich Services",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Categories",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/posi-fan-tutte/",
"title": "POSI fan tutte",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2022-03-08",
"lastmod_ts": 1646697600,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "Just over a year ago, Crossref announced that our board had adopted the Principles of Open Scholarly Infrastructure (POSI).\nIt was a well-timed announcement, as 2021 yet again showed just how dangerous it is for us to assume that the infrastructure systems we depend on for scholarly research will not disappear altogether or adopt a radically different focus. We adopted POSI to ensure that Crossref would not meet the same fate.\nPOSI proposes three areas that an Open Infrastructure organisation can address to garner the trust of the broader scholarly community: accountability (governance), funding (sustainability), and protection of community interests (insurance). POSI also proposes a set of concrete commitments that an organisation can make to build community trust in each area. There are 16 such commitments.\n",
"content": "Just over a year ago, Crossref announced that our board had adopted the Principles of Open Scholarly Infrastructure (POSI).\nIt was a well-timed announcement, as 2021 yet again showed just how dangerous it is for us to assume that the infrastructure systems we depend on for scholarly research will not disappear altogether or adopt a radically different focus. We adopted POSI to ensure that Crossref would not meet the same fate.\nPOSI proposes three areas that an Open Infrastructure organisation can address to garner the trust of the broader scholarly community: accountability (governance), funding (sustainability), and protection of community interests (insurance). POSI also proposes a set of concrete commitments that an organisation can make to build community trust in each area. There are 16 such commitments.\nIn our announcement of Crossref’s adoption of POSI, we made two critical points:\nOne doesn’t have to meet all the commitments of POSI already to adopt it. For one thing, this would make it impossible for new organisations to adopt POSI. So instead, we should view the adoption of the POSI principles as a “statement of intent” against which stakeholders can measure an organisation\u0026rsquo;s progress. That, conversely, meeting all of the POSI principles doesn’t mean an organisation can relax. It is always possible for an organisation to regress on a particular commitment. For example, an emergency expenditure might mean that the organisation no longer maintains a 12-month contingency fund and therefore has to replenish it. With these two points made, we ended our announcement with a candid self-audit against the principles. We concluded that Crossref was already entirely or partially meeting the requirements of 15 of the 16 POSI commitments. And adopting the 16th commitment would just formalize a direction Crossref had already been heading toward for several years. We also said that we would update our self-audit regularly.\nBut before we continue with the Crossref POSI audit update, we should talk about the immediate aftermath of our adopting the principles.\nSince Crossref adopted POSI, nine other organisations have made the same commitment and conducted similar self-audits. We affectionately call them the “POSI Posse”.\nDryad ROR JOSS OurResearch OpenCitations DataCite OA Switchboard Sciety Europe PMC These organisations represent a critical part of the hidden infrastructure that scholarly research depends on every day. By committing to POSI, they are helping ensure their accountability to the research community. They are also emphasizing that stakeholders must participate in the governance and stewardship of organisations running that infrastructure.\nBut perhaps most importantly- these ten organisations that have publicly committed to adopting POSI will not suddenly disappear or change priorities without giving the community time to react and, if need be, intervene.\nThere are also more quotidian advantages to these organisations adopting POSI. Adopting the principles makes it easier for the respective organisations to collaborate to make research infrastructure more effective and efficient. The foundation of effective collaboration is trust. And, so by agreeing that we share basic principles of operation, we virtually eliminate a whole slew of negotiations that typically need to occur before two organisations trust each other enough to collaborate closely on projects.\nOne of Crossref’s strategic priorities is to “collaborate and partner” with other organisations on improving our open scholarly infrastructure. And the easiest way to collaborate with us is to adhere to the same principles. So we look forward to more scholarly infrastructure organisations adopting POSI in 2022 so that, together, we can make research infrastructure work better.\nEstablishing this level of trust has already paid significant dividends with the Research Organisation Registry (ROR) - a relatively new infrastructure project founded jointly by DataCite, CDL, and Crossref.\nHaving nine organisations adopt POSI so soon after our announcement was a wonderful feeling. It is hard for us to convey how happy we are about this without gushing.\nHere is a picture of me gushing.\nBut now we have some outstanding business to update our self-audit.\nThis post is the first of our regular updates on our progress (or regress) on meeting the POSI principles.\nTL;DR We didn’t regress on any commitment. We’ve improved a little bit where we were not meeting the POSI principles, but we have still not met all our POSI commitments.\nArea Commitment 2020 2021 Governance Coverage across the research enterprise Non-discriminatory membership Transparent operations Cannot lobby Living will Formal incentives to fulfill mission \u0026amp; wind-down Stakeholder-governed Sustainability Time-limited funds are used only for time-limited activities Goal to generate surplus Goal to create a contingency fund to support operations for 12 months Mission-consistent revenue generation Revenue based on services, not data Insurance Available data (within constraints of privacy laws) Patent non-assertion Open source Open data (within constraints of privacy laws) Details Stakeholder governance moves from red to yellow Our only red mark in our POSI self-audit was against the principle of stakeholder governance. Our board did not yet reflect our members\u0026rsquo; diversity or the broader stakeholder community. In particular, as funders have become more central to shaping the scholarly communications landscape, it seemed important that Crossref have funder representation in our governance.\nSo this year, the Crossref nominations committee was charged with proposing a board slate that addressed some of our representational gaps. They did this, and as a direct result, two of the members elected to next year\u0026rsquo;s board were a funder (Melanoma Research Alliance) and a significant preprint platform (Center for Open Science).\nThese new additions to our board mark a significant improvement in stakeholder governance, but we can do more. Researchers and research institutions are also substantial Crossref stakeholders. We need to have a better representation of their concerns.\nAlso, there are still members of the scholarly communications community who depend on Crossref but cannot afford to join it because our fees are too high for them. Since membership is a prerequisite to participation in Crossref governance, we are also placing emphasis on figuring out how to further extend Crossref membership to those who still cannot afford it, through programs like Sponsorship, country-level journal gap analyses work, and a forthcoming fee review. So this is a source of stakeholder governance inequity that may be best handled by our membership \u0026amp; fees committee rather than our nominations committee.\nIn short, we’ve made progress on our stakeholder governance commitment. Still, we need to do more- so we are updating our adherence to the POSI stakeholder governance principle from red to yellow.\nAnother place where we have improved things is under the banner of “transparency.” But here, we see one of the shortcomings of the ‘traffic light” representation used in the self-audit. The degree that one meets a commitment falls along a gradient. And this gradient cannot be represented accurately in the ternary classification of red/yellow/green. So while last year we marked ourselves as “green” under the commitment to transparency, over the past year we have become greener. We did this by creating sections on our website that provide further detail on our governance and finances- even including the 990 forms that are required by US tax authorities for non-profits when they submit their taxes. So what do we do here? Make it neon-green? Make it blink?\nSustainability moves from yellow to chartreuse stays yellow In our first self-audit, we had several yellow marks- places where we were doing OK, but where we needed to make improvements.\nThe first yellow mark involved one of the principles of “sustainability,” which stipulates that an organisation should have a goal to create a contingency fund to support operations for 12 months. At the time, we had a contingency fund of 9 months. The board instructed the finance committee to develop a plan for meeting the new 12-month goal. To do this, the board decided to create three funds. The first is fairly flexible and holds operating expenses for three months. Staff leadership can use this fund at their discretion to manage cash flow issues and support budgeted expenses. The second fund is the fund that holds operating expenses for 12 months. This fund is board-restricted and is only meant to be used in emergencies to help with substantial changes in our financial position or to, in extremis, fund an orderly wind-down of Crossref’s operations. Furthermore, the board’s investment committee established guidelines for investing our operating and investment surpluses. Any surpluses are first applied to supporting the 3-month fund. Once that funding goal is met, any surpluses are applied to the 12-month fund. And once both the 3-month and 12-month funding goals are met, any further surpluses will be put into another board-restricted fund that can be used to fund new investments or new Crossref initiatives.\nBut again, the simple yellow mark against this item does not capture this level of detail. We only get to turn it green once we have the 12-month fund in place.\nIt looks like we will meet the goal in 2022, but it is hard to say exactly when. If we did shades of color- we might make it chartreuse. But nobody wants to see chartreuse. So while we have made significant progress here, our commitment to maintaining a 12-month contingency fund remains yellow until we have reached our goal.\nPatent non-assertion stays yellow The second yellow mark was against our publishing a patent-non-assertion statement. This feels like a missed opportunity because it will be straightforward for us to do, but we have not yet done it. We have never applied for patents, and we don’t intend to start. In short, nothing is blocking us from doing this other than our natural reluctance to have to draft anything that involves lawyers. Our lawyers are very nice people, but everything we have to draft with them makes our eyes glaze over. We need to get this done ASAP in 2022.\nOpen source remains yellow The third yellow mark makes me cringe because, as technical director, it is firmly in my bailiwick. We have committed to open-sourcing all of our code. In last year’s self-audit, I predicted that we should be able to open all of our code within 12 to 18 months. I was wrong. That means this commitment remains yellow. And what’s more- it is likely to remain yellow for a year or two. Let me try and explain why.\nFirst, I should note that all new services that we’ve written since 2007 have been released as open-source (under an MIT license). These include our REST API, Crossmark, Metadata Search, and Event Data. You can find all our open-source code on Gitlab.\nThis leaves us with our “content system” with its legacy code, which handles content registration, OAI-PMH, OpenURL, and XML APIs. This code was originally developed for Crossref by a third party (who I won’t name because they are in no way to blame for our predicament). Crossref only took over the development of the code base internally ~ 2010. But the system has accumulated over twenty years of technical debt and includes many once-common engineering practices that are deprecated (to put it delicately). Additionally, the code is a labyrinth of dependencies on very old libraries under very old licenses.\nAnd although we have spent much of the past two years replacing critical parts of the system’s authentication and authorization code, I am certain that there remain swathes of code that, under scrutiny, would prove a security nightmare.\nNow we know that so-called “security through obscurity” is bad practice. Our legacy code base illustrates the point. We had credentials embedded in the code. We had backdoors and application-level root access. We had countless places where we didn’t sanitize input. But the code was private- and so it gave developers a false sense of confidence when they occasionally made these shortcuts in the interest of developing new features more quickly. And in those early days of hyper-growth, we often had to develop things very, very quickly. Technical debt, like any debt, is a tradeoff.\nAs I said- we’ve cleaned a ton of this stuff up. For example, we’ve replaced our primary authentication system. But this experience has made us better appreciate just how difficult it would be to harden a system this old.\nAnd besides, we are already replacing it - albeit incrementally. We have been extracting and rewriting key components of the old system, and we plan to continue to extract and rewrite until there is nothing left of the old code. All this new code is, naturally, open-source. And it follows modern security practices.\nAnd so we face a difficult choice- do we try and fix code that is hard to fix and that we are replacing anyway- or do we just focus just on replacing the code and making sure the new, open-source code follows modern security best -practices? We’ve chosen to take the latter route. But it does mean this entry will have a yellow circle next to it for a few more years as we replace things.\nOpen data moves from yellow to green And this brings us to our final yellow mark- which was next to the principle of open data. The root of the problem is that what we colloquially call “Crossref metadata” is a mix of elements, some of which come from our members, some from third parties, and some from Crossref itself. These elements, in turn, each have different copyright implications.\nOn top of this, Crossref has terms and conditions for its members and terms and conditions for specific services. These terms and conditions grant Crossref the right to do things with some classes of metadata and not do things with other classes of metadata - regardless of copyright.\nThe net result is that users can freely use and redistribute any metadata they retrieve via our APIs or in our periodic public data files. But it also means we cannot just slap a CC0 waiver on all the data. Instead, we have to specify exactly what copyright and terms apply to each class of data. We’d never done this in a clear and accessible way, so some of our users were understandably concerned that maybe we were hedging or perhaps the reuse rights were unclear. But we are not hedging; they are clear. They just weren\u0026rsquo;t documented. And now they are. In human-readable form. And soon-to-be in machine-readable form. So we can move this from yellow to green.\nReflections on the year since our adoption of POSI When the Crossref board adopted POSI last year, frankly, a few of us were surprised. We never doubted Crossref’s direction as an open infrastructure organisation, but we were not sure that others would see the value in making a public commitment to the principles. We’d heard some people say that they thought adopting them would be seen as “Virtue Signaling.” Which, to be fair, it is. This shouldn’t be surprising or contentious. Our entire scholarly communication system is based on virtue signaling. But, of course, the term “virtue signaling” (with scare quotes) is also sometimes used to insinuate that such signaling is disingenuous and designed primarily for marketing purposes. And that would be a real danger. But the principles were drafted with a built-in safeguard against disingenuous use. The commitments POSI lists are practical things that can be verified by anyone. Is our data open? Does the diversity of our board reflect the diversity of our stakeholders?\nSo from the start, we knew that the community would be able to hold us to our commitments. And knowing that made it imperative that we develop a mechanism and process for tracking whether we were meeting them. Thus was born the self-audit.\nAnd the self-audit, in turn, has served as a forcing function to ensure that we didn’t just launch a proclamation and then forget about it. We needed to integrate our POSI commitments into all aspects of our day-to-day work. As such, “Live up to POSI” is now a prominent part of Crossref’s Strategic Agenda. POSI has become a fundamental part of our planning and our public product roadmap. POSI has even become a part of our internal staff annual development plans.\nAdopting POSI has changed the way we work. It has changed the way the board works. It has changed the way staff works.\nAnd we hope that it is having a similar effect on our fellow POSI Posse.\nBut how about changing the way POSI works? Now that Crossref and the nine other members of the POSI Posse have had a year of considering and/or living up to the POSI standards, what would we change? What would we add?\nA few themes have started to emerge as we’ve fielded questions from the current POSI Posse and others who have expressed an interest in adopting POSI.\nHow does POSI apply to non-membership organisations? Can POSI apply to commercial organisations? How could POSI be extended to apply to open infrastructure organisations outside of scholarly communication? How in the hell do you pronounce “POSI?” We’ve tried to answer some of these questions in the POSI FAQ, but can we update POSI so that we don’t need the FAQ? Or at least so that we can start a new FAQ?\nAnd, critically, if we change POSI, how do we ensure we make it stronger and not weaker? Because, to be candid, some of the questions that we’ve fielded have come from parties concerned that POSI is too restrictive. That, for example, the stipulation that revenue should be based on services and not on data makes for inflexible business models. Yes. It does. Deliberately.\nBecause one of the biggest barriers to a community being able to fork digital infrastructure is closed (incl. fee-based) data. And one of the fundamental positions of POSI is one the authors learned from open-source communities. This is that these efforts can fail no matter how much care you take to ensure financial sustainability and how much care you take to ensure community-based governance. The ultimate power the open-source community has is to take the code and fork it. This is the insurance policy that helps keep open source projects honest. And we have tried our best to bake this lesson into the POSI principles. We don’t want to weaken POSI. They are, after all, principles.\nSo in 2022, we look forward to more organisations endorsing POSI. And the current POSI Posse has started a conversation about how we can strengthen the principles and also extend them so that they can more easily be applied to different kinds of organisations and perhaps even in different sectors. A summary of these discussions will be published in the coming weeks.\nBut how will we open these conversations to the broader community? How will we engage those who have yet to adopt the principles but are interested in doing so? What about those interested but perhaps only if they are adapted in some way?\nWe already have a mechanism for soliciting feedback, questions, and suggestions concerning POSI. However, it is a relatively primitive system, based on either sending email to one of the POSI Posse or raising a GitLab ticket. It was the best we could do in the short time we had to put together the POSI site. An MVP, if you will. The feedback mechanism served us well over the past year; we engaged with many interested parties and even managed to help nine of them adopt the principles.\nBut as with all things POSI - there is room for improvement. And so, we hope to have a more user-friendly way to solicit public feedback and hold discussions. This feedback and our own experiences with adopting POSI over the past year will, in turn, inform our efforts at revising POSI to take into account the things we’ve learned since POSI was originally written.\nSo look out for announcements on the POSI site. And we look forward to another year of expanding the list of POSI adopters and continuing our own POSI progress. If you’re POSI-curious, get in touch with any of the ten POSI adopters to start a conversation about your own path towards truly open infrastructure.\n",
"headings": ["TL;DR","Details","Stakeholder governance moves from red to yellow","Sustainability moves from yellow to chartreuse stays yellow","Patent non-assertion stays yellow","Open source remains yellow","Open data moves from yellow to green","Reflections on the year since our adoption of POSI","But how about changing the way POSI works?"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/image-integrity-help-us-figure-out-the-scale-of-the-problem/",
"title": "Image integrity: Help us figure out the scale of the problem",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2022-02-07",
"lastmod_ts": 1644192000,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "Some context The Similarity Check Advisory Group met a number of times last year to discuss current and emerging originality issues with text-based content. During those meetings, the topic of image integrity was highlighted as an area of growing concern in scholarly communications, particularly in the life sciences.\nOver the last few months, we have also read with interest the recommendations for handling image integrity issues by the STM Working Group on Image Alteration and Duplication Detection, followed closely image integrity sleuths such as Elizabeth Bik and have, like many of you, noticed that image manipulation is increasingly given as the reason for retractions.\n",
"content": "Some context The Similarity Check Advisory Group met a number of times last year to discuss current and emerging originality issues with text-based content. During those meetings, the topic of image integrity was highlighted as an area of growing concern in scholarly communications, particularly in the life sciences.\nOver the last few months, we have also read with interest the recommendations for handling image integrity issues by the STM Working Group on Image Alteration and Duplication Detection, followed closely image integrity sleuths such as Elizabeth Bik and have, like many of you, noticed that image manipulation is increasingly given as the reason for retractions.\nImage integrity issues are often associated with paper mill activity but can also originate from an individual’s intentional or unintentional unethical behaviour. Currently, such issues with figures and images are being identified manually or by using an image integrity tool, comparing images within the same article and/or the publisher’s past publications only - and we know that this is a source of frustration for the Crossref members we have spoken to.\nWhat next ? As reported in Nature last December, we believe Crossref is in a unique position to spearhead a cross-publisher solution, similar to what we do for text-based originality checking, as part of our Similarity Check service.\nBefore we start exploring potential software options, we need your help to understand:\nthe scale of the issues and whether these are focused on specific disciplines the type of issues we should prioritise e.g. duplication, beautification, rotation, plagiarism, GAN-generated images/deep-fakes, etc. what software (if any) members are using or trialling whether a cross-publisher service with the collective benefit of shared images would be of sufficient interest to the community ✏️ Let us know what your experience and thoughts are on image integrity by completing this survey.\nWe’re planning to complete our research and share with you the results along with our proposed next steps soon.\n",
"headings": ["Some context","What next ?"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/categories/admin-tool/",
"title": "Admin Tool",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Categories",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/hiccups-with-credentials-in-the-test-admin-tool/",
"title": "Hiccups with credentials in the Test Admin Tool",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2022-01-26",
"lastmod_ts": 1643155200,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "TL;DR We inadvertently deleted data in our authentication sandbox that stored member credentials for our Test Admin Tool - test.crossref.org. We’re restoring credentials using our production data, but this will mean that some members have credentials that are out-of-sync. Please contact support@crossref.org if you have issues accessing test.crossref.org.\n2025 update We\u0026rsquo;re working to scale back our support for the test admin tool. We will continue to support our XML parser for anyone wanting to test their XML. If you’re a service provider and would like to test your integrations, which we will continue to support, you may POST submissions to our test system using https://test.crossref.org/servlet/deposit. You’ll need to email us at support@crossref.org so we can configure an account within the test system before you test your integration.\n",
"content": "TL;DR We inadvertently deleted data in our authentication sandbox that stored member credentials for our Test Admin Tool - test.crossref.org. We’re restoring credentials using our production data, but this will mean that some members have credentials that are out-of-sync. Please contact support@crossref.org if you have issues accessing test.crossref.org.\n2025 update We\u0026rsquo;re working to scale back our support for the test admin tool. We will continue to support our XML parser for anyone wanting to test their XML. If you’re a service provider and would like to test your integrations, which we will continue to support, you may POST submissions to our test system using https://test.crossref.org/servlet/deposit. You’ll need to email us at support@crossref.org so we can configure an account within the test system before you test your integration.\nThe details Earlier today the credentials in our authentication sandbox were inadvertently deleted. This was a mistake on our end that has resulted in those credentials no longer being stored for our members using our Test Admin Tool - test.crossref.org.\nTo be clear, this error has had no impact on the production Admin Tool - doi.crossref.org - or any member’s access to registering content therein. If you’re a member who registers content with us using our helper tools (e.g., the web deposit form) or OJS, you’re likely unfamiliar with the Test Admin Tool, and this issue will not affect you or your registration of content.\nWe don’t configure all member accounts for the Test Admin Tool, so, fortunately, this is an issue for the minority of our members. That said, for those members who do use the Test Admin Tool, this is not a trivial problem. And, we’re going to dedicate additional resources across the organisation to ensure it is fixed.\nNext steps We’ve repopulated the credentials in the Test Admin Tool based on our production accounts. It was our best option. While we don’t know your current credentials, our support and membership teams do know that the majority of our members using the Test Admin Tool have historically shared credentials between the Test Admin Tool and our production Admin Tool - doi.crossref.org. That means that many of you will be able to access the Test Admin Tool using those shared credentials; but some of you - who have used different credentials between the two systems - will not.\nWe also know that for many of you testing submissions is an integral step in your workflow, so we’ve determined this is an all-hands-on-deck situation and our staff, across the organisation, will be assisting members who have issues with access to test.crossref.org. Starting today, we’re actively monitoring submissions to the Test Admin Tool for access errors through Friday, 11 February. We’ll be proactively contacting affected members to reset their passwords. If you encounter problems before we reach out to you, please do contact us at at support@crossref.org and include ‘Accessing Test Admin Tool’ in your subject line.\n",
"headings": ["TL;DR","2025 update","The details","Next steps"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/a-ror-some-update-to-our-api/",
"title": "A ROR-some update to our API",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2022-01-19",
"lastmod_ts": 1642550400,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "Earlier this year, Ginny posted an exciting update on Crossref’s progress with adopting ROR, the Research Organisation Registry for affiliations, announcing that we\u0026rsquo;d started the collection of ROR identifiers in our metadata input schema. 🦁\nThe capacity to accept ROR IDs to help reliably identify institutions is really important but the real value comes from their open availability alongside the other metadata registered with us, such as for publications like journal articles, book chapters, preprints, and for other objects such as grants. So today\u0026rsquo;s news is that ROR IDs are now connected in Crossref metadata and openly available via our APIs. 🎉\n",
"content": "Earlier this year, Ginny posted an exciting update on Crossref’s progress with adopting ROR, the Research Organisation Registry for affiliations, announcing that we\u0026rsquo;d started the collection of ROR identifiers in our metadata input schema. 🦁\nThe capacity to accept ROR IDs to help reliably identify institutions is really important but the real value comes from their open availability alongside the other metadata registered with us, such as for publications like journal articles, book chapters, preprints, and for other objects such as grants. So today\u0026rsquo;s news is that ROR IDs are now connected in Crossref metadata and openly available via our APIs. 🎉\nThis means ROR can be used by and within all the tools services that integrate with Crossref APIs to analyse, search, recommend, or evaluate research. It’s an important element of the Research Nexus, our vision of a fully connected open research ecosystem, and helps identify, share, and link the affiliations of those producing and publishing different types of research or receiving grants.\nNow that this metadata is available, it helps confer the downstream benefits of ROR for different (and interconnected) groups:\nIt makes it easier for institutions to find and measure their research output by the articles their researchers have published, or perhaps make it easier to track the grants they’ve received. Funders need to be able to discover and track the research and researchers they have supported. Academic librarians need to easily find all of the publications associated with their campus. Journals need to know where authors are affiliated so they can determine eligibility for institutionally sponsored publishing agreements. Editors can use more accurate information on author and reviewer institutions during the peer review process, which can help avoid potential conflicts of interest. Those are just a handful of use cases, which is why disseminating ROR affiliation identifiers via our APIs is so important; it lets others choose to do what they need to with the information, without restriction.\nThe story so far A growing number of our members have started to include ROR in the metadata they register with us, so we’re excited to be able to see this via simple API queries.\nAt the time of writing we can see nearly 4,000 RORs being registered by these 21 members (we\u0026rsquo;ve removed test accounts). Note that many of these are being baked into metadata being registered for grant records, also recently released and now findable through the REST API:\n\u0026#34;Wellcome\u0026#34;: 2821, \u0026#34;Natural Resources Canada/CMSS/Information Management\u0026#34;: 277, \u0026#34;University of Szeged\u0026#34;: 139, \u0026#34;RTI Press\u0026#34;: 104, \u0026#34;American Cancer Society\u0026#34;: 103, \u0026#34;University of Missouri Libraries\u0026#34;: 77, \u0026#34;Keldysh Institute of Applied Mathematics\u0026#34;: 52, \u0026#34;Boise State University, Albertsons Library\u0026#34;: 52, \u0026#34;Australian Research Data Commons (ARDC)\u0026#34;: 52, \u0026#34;The Neurofibromatosis Therapeutic Acceleration Program\u0026#34;: 49, \u0026#34;Boise State University\u0026#34;: 12, \u0026#34;The ALS Association\u0026#34;: 11, \u0026#34;Children\u0026#39;s Tumor Foundation\u0026#34;: 9, \u0026#34;Episteme Health Inc\u0026#34;: 3, \u0026#34;The University of the Witwatersrand\u0026#34;: 2, \u0026#34;Office of Scientific and Technical Information\u0026#34;: 2, \u0026#34;AGH University of Science and Technology Press\u0026#34;: 2, \u0026#34;York University Libraries\u0026#34;: 1, \u0026#34;SZTEPress\u0026#34;: 1, \u0026#34;Masaryk University Press\u0026#34;: 1, \u0026#34;Institut für Germanistik der Universität Szeged\u0026#34;: 1, Our grants schema accommodated ROR first, so it\u0026rsquo;s the funder members and grant records that dominate the adoption of ROR\u0026hellip; so far! But there are a few articles and reports there too already. These record types include ROR in their records:\n\u0026#34;Grant\u0026#34;: 3047, \u0026#34;Report\u0026#34;: 382, \u0026#34;Dissertation\u0026#34;: 164, \u0026#34;Journal Article\u0026#34;: 140, \u0026#34;Conference Paper\u0026#34;: 22, \u0026#34;Posted Content\u0026#34;: 12, \u0026#34;Dataset\u0026#34;: 7, \u0026#34;Monograph\u0026#34;: 6, \u0026#34;Book\u0026#34;: 3, \u0026#34;Chapter\u0026#34;: 2, \u0026#34;Proceedings Series\u0026#34;: 1, \u0026#34;Peer Review\u0026#34;: 1, \u0026#34;Journal Issue\u0026#34;: 1, \u0026#34;Book Set\u0026#34;: 1, \u0026#34;Book Series\u0026#34;: 1 We can currently see 205 different ROR IDs in Crossref metadata, with the most frequently provided ROR ID being: https://ror.org/02jx3x895, or University College London as it’s also known as.\nIf you’re a Crossref member keen to assert affiliation identification in your content, our recent webinar, Working with ROR as a Crossref member: what you need to know, covers all the detail.\nInterested in using the information? Dig into our REST API documentation and into the API itself, use the polite pool if you can (i.e. identify yourself). There’s also a wealth of information on the ROR support site or being shared among integrators in the growing ROR community.\nJoin us in doing more with ROR!\n",
"headings": ["The story so far"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/code-of-conduct/",
"title": "Code of conduct",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2022-01-19",
"lastmod_ts": 1642550400,
"section": "Code of conduct",
"tags": [],
"description": "At Crossref, we assume that most people are intelligent and well-intentioned, and we’re not inclined to tell people what to do. However, we want all engagement with Crossref to be safe and productive for everyone involved. To that end, this Code of Conduct frames our expectations for behavior when interacting with Crossref staff and our community—in person and online—including when enquiring about membership, at our events, during meetings and webinars, through social media, email, support tickets, and forum discussions.\n",
"content": "At Crossref, we assume that most people are intelligent and well-intentioned, and we’re not inclined to tell people what to do. However, we want all engagement with Crossref to be safe and productive for everyone involved. To that end, this Code of Conduct frames our expectations for behavior when interacting with Crossref staff and our community—in person and online—including when enquiring about membership, at our events, during meetings and webinars, through social media, email, support tickets, and forum discussions.\nCrossref is dedicated to providing a harassment-free experience for everyone. We welcome your questions, concerns, and feedback relating to any aspect of our work and offer many opportunities to do so.\nExpected behavior While interacting within a Crossref environment in any way, we expect you to respect all staff and community members, regardless of any diversity characteristics which include but are not limited to:\nage citizenship status disability ethnicity family and other caring responsibilities gender geographic location military/veteran status national origin physical appearance political beliefs pregnancy/parental status professional career level race religion/value system sex sexual orientation socio-economic background/social class Our global community consists of publishers, editors, funders, developers, librarians, researchers, and more, across a wide variety of disciplines. We value the participation of every member and want everyone to have a fulfilling and enjoyable experience in their interactions with Crossref and the wider community.\nIn short: We expect all community members to abide by these guidelines in all their interactions in the Crossref community, both online and in-person. We do not accept harassment or offensive behavior anywhere. It’s counter to Crossref’s values and is counter to our values as human beings.\nAs such, we expect the following:\nAll communication should be appropriate for a professional audience of people of many different backgrounds. Sexual language and imagery are never appropriate in such a context, nor is language referring to personal qualities or characteristics or group membership. Empathize and be respectful of others. Be agreeable even when you disagree. Be polite even if there is cause to complain. Do not use insulting language, harass anyone, impersonate people, or expose their private information. Be encouraging. Include others in the conversation where appropriate and value their contributions. Additionally, avoid jargon, slang, and cultural references that can exclude others from engaging. Participate constructively. Aim to improve the discussion and ensure that your contribution is on topic and helpful for others. Never post spam or attempt to mislead others. Pay attention to non-verbal communication. Ensure that your behavior is considerate and any physical contact is consensual. AI tools In the interest of participants\u0026rsquo; privacy in our meetings, we do not permit AI agents and tools to join Crossref meetings.\nReporting If someone makes you or anyone else feel unsafe or uncomfortable or otherwise violates the Code of Conduct, please bring this to the attention of Crossref staff or email the report to conduct@crossref.org. All reports will be seen by Lucy Ofiesh and Ginny Hendricks and will be treated privately.\nSteps Crossref will take Participants will be asked to stop any harassing behavior and are expected to comply immediately. Anyone violating this Code of Conduct will be blocked—without warning—from the space where the incident occurred, such as our social media channels, the Crossref community forum, or expulsion from the meeting/event. They may also be banned from all interaction on all platforms for a period of time at our discretion. Crossref may publish a statement publicly about the incident, but never without the permission of those who have been harmed by the incident, and always within the law. Reinstatement Requests to be reinstated after being blocked or banned may be sent to conduct@crossref.org and will be considered.\nReviewing this policy The Crossref Code of Conduct is adapted from several others, including O’Reilly Media Conferences and FORCE11. We review this Code of Conduct regularly and learn from other organisations. Contributions have been made by: Ginny Hendricks, Geoffrey Bilder, Shayn Smulyan, Laura J. Wilkinson, Vanessa Fairhurst, Rosa Morais Clark, Isaac Farley, Amanda Bartell, Rachael Lammey, Lucy Ofiesh.\nPlease contact conduct@crossref.org with any suggestions.\nWe thank our community for your help in keeping Crossref a welcoming, respectful, and friendly community for all participants.\n",
"headings": ["Expected behavior","AI tools","Reporting","Steps Crossref will take","Reinstatement","Reviewing this policy"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/archives/2021/",
"title": "2021",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Archives",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/event-data-now-with-added-references/",
"title": "Event Data now with added references",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2021-11-10",
"lastmod_ts": 1636502400,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "Event Data is our service to capture online mentions of Crossref records. We monitor data archives, Wikipedia, social media, blogs, news, and other sources. Our main focus has been on gathering data from external sources, however we know that there is a great deal of Crossref metadata that can be made available as events. Earlier this year we started adding relationship metadata, and over the last few months we have been working on bringing in citations between records.\n",
"content": "Event Data is our service to capture online mentions of Crossref records. We monitor data archives, Wikipedia, social media, blogs, news, and other sources. Our main focus has been on gathering data from external sources, however we know that there is a great deal of Crossref metadata that can be made available as events. Earlier this year we started adding relationship metadata, and over the last few months we have been working on bringing in citations between records.\nOur members deposit references alongside other metadata, and we have a lot of them. In fact, we have over 1.2 billion, with hundreds of thousands of new references added each day. While our metadata APIs make it easy to see which works are cited, it is much more difficult to find a list of citations to a specific work. We can make this easier by presenting citations as events in Event Data. Now that the huge majority of our members have responded positively to the Initiative for Open Citations (I4OC) campaign and Crossref’s open-by-default reference policy, the move to make this data available via Event Data is a natural step.\nA bumpy ride, but we got there Adding such a large amount of data means a significant increase in the data coming into Event Data, which has presented some challenges. We’ve known for some time that Event Data is not very stable, but we expected it to cope with the new data coming in. We have mitigated by initially only looking at new data, not trying to immediately back-fill with old references. Unfortunately, even with this limitation it hasn’t been a smooth ride, and our first effort to put references into Event Data uncovered bugs we didn’t know about and we had to walk back the changes. We tried again and found that we were hitting rate limits for our own APIs. This is a sure sign of technical debt: we shouldn’t need to be shifting large amounts of our own data from one place to another, and not at rates that could be putting stress on APIs used by others in the community.\nWe have managed to work around these problems and I’m pleased to say that we are now adding metadata from reference lists to Event Data. They can be accessed via the Event Data API: https://api.eventdata.crossref.org/v1/events?rows=10\u0026source=crossref\u0026relation-type=references\u0026from-collected-date=2021-10-01\nWhere to next? There remains work to be done. We would like to backfill references, and there is also further work to include relationships to objects that have identifiers other than Crossref records (genes, proteins, ArXiv identifiers, and so on). Our work on investigating sources is proceeding and we will be looking to add more next year. While possible, these steps will be costly and time-consuming if we proceed without significant changes to the infrastructure supporting Event Data.\nWhen we started Event Data the volumes of data were much smaller and our infrastructure coped well, but as we’ve said here before, it’s in need of an overhaul. In fact, our recent experience and some other considerations are making us look at some very fundamental changes in how we record events.\nWe are therefore working on a new data model that will allow events to be stored alongside the rest of our metadata. This work is still in the early stages, but if we are successful it will mean that we won’t need to move data between databases. It will also make it easier to provide access to all of our reference metadata along with other relationships that we’re not currently able to provide, and give us the capacity to add new data sources.\nOpen references [EDIT 6th June 2022 - all references are now open by default with the March 2022 board vote to remove any restrictions on reference distribution].\nIt is worth noting that only open references will be available via Event Data. This covers 88% of works with references at present. Members have the option to deposit references with limited visibility, meaning only Metadata Plus users can access them; or closed visibility, meaning that only the member who owns the cited work can retrieve the citation, via Cited-by.\nWe encourage our members to make their references open and deposit them as metadata. It makes them usable downstream by thousands of tools that researchers use. Including open references also improves the quality of metadata, and there are reciprocal benefits for the large number of members who openly share their reference data: they contribute to a large, openly available pool of data with many applications that advance research, and drives usage of the content published by our members.\nIf you are a Crossref member and unsure whether your reference metadata is open or not, check your participation report. This will tell you the percentage of your records with deposited references, and the percentage of those that are open. You can change the reference visibility preference for each DOI prefix that you own by contacting our support team. For guidance on how to deposit references, see our user documentation.\n",
"headings": ["A bumpy ride, but we got there","Where to next?","Open references"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/come-and-get-your-grant-metadata/",
"title": "Come and get your grant metadata!",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2021-11-08",
"lastmod_ts": 1636329600,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "Tl;dr: Metadata for the (currently 26,000) grants that have been registered by our funder members is now available via the REST API. This is quite a milestone in our program to include funding in Crossref infrastructure and a step forward in our mission to connect all.the.things. This post gives you all the queries you might need to satisfy your curiosity and start to see what\u0026rsquo;s possible with deeper analysis. So have the look and see what useful things you can discover.\n",
"content": "Tl;dr: Metadata for the (currently 26,000) grants that have been registered by our funder members is now available via the REST API. This is quite a milestone in our program to include funding in Crossref infrastructure and a step forward in our mission to connect all.the.things. This post gives you all the queries you might need to satisfy your curiosity and start to see what\u0026rsquo;s possible with deeper analysis. So have the look and see what useful things you can discover.\nHow it started Back in 2017 we posted the outcomes of some discussions with a newly-reformed Funder Advisory Group, plotting Crossref\u0026rsquo;s path. In 2018, Wellcome described their rationale for supporting the grants effort with the help of Europe PMC, and in 2019 the sub-groups of the Advisory Board put out a call for feedback on the metadata plan as the fee model they created was also approved by our board.\nSince late 2019, research funders have been registering metadata and identifiers for their grants with us. We currently have a healthy 26k grants registered with us, via 13 funding organisations. I’d specifically highlight Wellcome for volume (registering via Europe PMC), and the Australian Research Data Commons (ARDC) who was the first funder that included ROR IDs in their grant metadata, really getting the value of connecting all related entities and contributors.\nThe reasons for registering grants with Crossref? Let\u0026rsquo;s recap:\nSupport of open data and information about grants Streamlined discovery of funded content Improved analytics and data quality More complete picture of outputs and impact Better value from investments in reporting services Improved timeliness, completeness and accuracy of reporting: save time for researchers More complete information to support analysis and evaluation without relying on manual data entry How it\u0026rsquo;s going For grant information to be used, it’s key that it is is openly available and disseminated as widely as possible. That work starts with funders registering their grants, and continues with us. Now that we’ve completed the REST API\u0026rsquo;s Elasticsearch migration, we’re happy to announce that all our grant information is now available via our REST API.\nHere’s a snippet of the kind of metadata you can see related to the grants registered with us. This is information related to grant record https://doi.org/10.35802/218300, found using this request (https://api.crossref.org/works/10.35802/218300) which you can use to see the full metadata record:\n\u0026#34;publisher\u0026#34;: \u0026#34;Wellcome\u0026#34;, \u0026#34;award\u0026#34;: \u0026#34;107769\u0026#34;, \u0026#34;DOI\u0026#34;: \u0026#34;10.35802/107769\u0026#34;, \u0026#34;type\u0026#34;: \u0026#34;grant\u0026#34;, \u0026#34;created\u0026#34;: { \u0026#34;date-parts\u0026#34;: [ [ 2019, 9, 25 ] ], \u0026#34;date-time\u0026#34;: \u0026#34;2019-09-25T07:17:20Z\u0026#34;, \u0026#34;timestamp\u0026#34;: 1569395840000 }, \u0026#34;source\u0026#34;: \u0026#34;Crossref\u0026#34;, \u0026#34;prefix\u0026#34;: \u0026#34;10.35802\u0026#34;, \u0026#34;member\u0026#34;: \u0026#34;13928\u0026#34;, \u0026#34;project\u0026#34;: [ { \u0026#34;project-title\u0026#34;: [ { \u0026#34;title\u0026#34;: \u0026#34;Initiative to Develop African Research Leaders (IDeAL)\u0026#34; } ], \u0026#34;project-description\u0026#34;: [ { \u0026#34;description\u0026#34;: \u0026#34;Research is key in tackling the heath challenges that Africa faces. In KWTRP we have been committed to building sustainable capacity alongside an active and diverse research programme covering social science, health services research, epidemiology, laboratory science including molecular biology and bioinformatics. Our strategy has been successful in delivering high quality PhD training, leveraging individual funding and programme funding in order to place students in productive groups and provide high quality supervision and mentorship. Here we plan to consolidate and build on these outputs to address long-term sustainability. We will emphasise the full career path needed to generate research leaders. KWTRP aims to address capacity building for research through an initiative that employs a progressive and long term outlook in the development of local research leadership. The overall aim of the \\\u0026#34;Initiative to Develop African Research Leaders\\\u0026#34; (IDeAL) is to build a critical mass of African researchers who are technically proficient as scientists and well-equipped to independently lead science at international level, able to engage with funders, policy makers and governments, and to act as supervisors and mentors for the next generation of researchers.\u0026#34;, \u0026#34;language\u0026#34;: \u0026#34;en\u0026#34; }, If you dig in, you can see information about the project, investigators (including their ORCID iDs), the funder, award type, amount, description of the grant, and a link to the public page showing information about the grant. More information on the required and optional fields is available in our grants markup guide.\nHere are some examples of the kind of things you can now ask:\nShow me who is registering grants: https://api.crossref.org/types/grant/works?rows=0\u0026amp;facet=funder-name:*\nShow me all of the grants registered by Wellcome: https://api.crossref.org/works?query.funder-name=Wellcome\u0026filter=type:grant\nShow me all of the grants associated with the investigator name Caldas: https://api.crossref.org/works?query.contributor=Caldas\u0026filter=type:grant\nAnd bibliographic queries finding entries in\u0026hellip;\nAward number: https://api.crossref.org/works?query.bibliographic=7196\u0026filter=type:grant\nProject title: https://api.crossref.org/works?query.bibliographic=RIZ1\u0026filter=type:grant\nMore to do This is a milestone but it\u0026rsquo;s not the end of the story. We have more to add relationships, encourage the use of this metadata amongst publishers and their platforms, and to add grant records to our tools such as Participation Reports and Metadata Search. But in the meantime, feel free to get in touch if you have queries about registering grants with us or about using the related metadata in your tools and services.\nThis information will grow over time as more funders join Crossref and add their grant metadata and as more analyses is possible. We\u0026rsquo;re looking forward to the next steps!\n",
"headings": ["How it started","How it\u0026rsquo;s going","Show me who is registering grants:","Show me all of the grants registered by Wellcome:","Show me all of the grants associated with the investigator name Caldas:","Award number:","Project title:","More to do"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/membership/simcheck-new-thank-you/",
"title": "Thank you for your application",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2021-11-03",
"lastmod_ts": 1635897600,
"section": "Become a member",
"tags": [],
"description": "Thanks for applying for the Similarity Check service. Once we\u0026rsquo;ve confirmed that you meet the obligations of having full-text URLs supplied in over 90% of your registered content, we\u0026rsquo;ll work with the team at Turnitin to check that they can index your content. If they have any problems, they\u0026rsquo;ll contact the technical contact you have just supplied.\nOnce your content has been indexed, Turnitin will provide you with your login details for the iThenticate system, and we send you more details to help you get underway.\n",
"content": "Thanks for applying for the Similarity Check service. Once we\u0026rsquo;ve confirmed that you meet the obligations of having full-text URLs supplied in over 90% of your registered content, we\u0026rsquo;ll work with the team at Turnitin to check that they can index your content. If they have any problems, they\u0026rsquo;ll contact the technical contact you have just supplied.\nOnce your content has been indexed, Turnitin will provide you with your login details for the iThenticate system, and we send you more details to help you get underway.\n",
"headings": ["Thanks for applying for the Similarity Check service."]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/membership/simcheck-transition-new-thank-you/",
"title": "Thank you for your application",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2021-11-03",
"lastmod_ts": 1635897600,
"section": "Become a member",
"tags": [],
"description": "Thanks for applying for Similarity Check Once we\u0026rsquo;ve confirmed that you meet the obligations, we\u0026rsquo;ll work with the team at Turnitin to check that they can index your content. If they have any problems, they\u0026rsquo;ll contact the technical contact you have just supplied. Once you\u0026rsquo;re all set up, they\u0026rsquo;ll provide you with your login details for the iThenticate system, and we\u0026rsquo;ll help you get yourself set up and underway.\n",
"content": "Thanks for applying for Similarity Check Once we\u0026rsquo;ve confirmed that you meet the obligations, we\u0026rsquo;ll work with the team at Turnitin to check that they can index your content. If they have any problems, they\u0026rsquo;ll contact the technical contact you have just supplied. Once you\u0026rsquo;re all set up, they\u0026rsquo;ll provide you with your login details for the iThenticate system, and we\u0026rsquo;ll help you get yourself set up and underway.\n",
"headings": ["Thanks for applying for Similarity Check"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/update-on-the-outage-of-october-6-2021/",
"title": "Update on the outage of October 6, 2021",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2021-10-27",
"lastmod_ts": 1635292800,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "In my blog post on October 6th, I promised an update on what caused the outage and what we are doing to avoid it happening again. This is that update.\nCrossref hosts its services in a hybrid environment. Our original services are all hosted in a data center in Massachusetts, but we host new services with a cloud provider. We also have a few R\u0026amp;D systems hosted with Hetzner.\nWe know an organisation our size has no business running its own data center, and we have been slowly moving services out of the data center and into the cloud.\n",
"content": "In my blog post on October 6th, I promised an update on what caused the outage and what we are doing to avoid it happening again. This is that update.\nCrossref hosts its services in a hybrid environment. Our original services are all hosted in a data center in Massachusetts, but we host new services with a cloud provider. We also have a few R\u0026amp;D systems hosted with Hetzner.\nWe know an organisation our size has no business running its own data center, and we have been slowly moving services out of the data center and into the cloud.\nFor example, over the past nine months, we have moved our authentication service and our REST APIs to the cloud.\nAnd, we are working on moving the other existing services too. For example, we are in the midst of moving Event Data and, our next target, after Event Data, is the content registration system.\nAll new services are deployed to the cloud by default.\nWhile moving services out of the data center, we have also been trying to shore up the data center to ensure it continues to function during the transition. One of the weaknesses we identified in the data center was that the same provider managed both our primary network connection and our backup connection (albeit- on entirely different physical networks). We understood that we really needed a separate provider to ensure adequate redundancy, and we had already had a third network drop installed from a different provider. But, unfortunately, it had not yet been activated and connected.\nMeanwhile, our original network provider for the first two connections informed us months ago that they would be doing some major work on our backup connection. However, they assured us that it would not affect the primary connection- something we confirmed with them repeatedly since we knew our replacement backup connection was not yet active.\nBut, the change our provider made did affect both the backup (as intended) and the primary (not intended). They were as surprised as we were, which kind of underscores why we want two separate providers as well as two separate network connections.\nSo both our primary and secondary networks went down while we had not yet activated our replacement secondary network.\nAlso, our only local infrastructure team member was in surgery at the time (He is fine. It was routine. Thanks for asking).\nThis meant we had to send a local developer to the data center, but the data center’s authentication process had changed since the last time said developer had visited (pre-pandemic). So, yeah, it took us a long time to even get into the data center.\nBy then, our infrastructure team member was out of surgery and on the phone with our network provider, who realized their mistake and reverted everything. This whole process (getting network connectivity restored, not the surgery) took almost two hours.\nUnfortunately, the outage didn’t just affect services hosted in the data center. It also affected our cloud-hosted systems. This is because all of our requests were still routed to the data center first, after which those destined for the cloud were split out and redirected. This routing made sense when the bulk of our requests were for services hosted in the data center. But, within the past month, that calculus had shifted. Most of our requests now are for cloud-based services. We were scheduled to switch to routing traffic through our cloud provider first, and had this been in place, many of our services would have continued running during the data center outage.\nIt is very tempting to stop this explanation here and leave people with the impression that:\nThe root cause of the outage was the unpredicted interaction between the maintenance on our backup line and the functionality of our primary line; Our slowness to respond was exclusively down to one of the two members of our infrastructure staff being (cough) indisposed at the time. But the whole event uncovered several other issues as well.\nNamely:\nEven if one of our three lines had stayed active, the routers in the data center would not have cut over to the redundant working system because we had misconfigured them and we had not tested them; We did not keep current documentation on the changing security processes for accessing the data center; Our alerting system does not support the kind of escalation logic, and coverage-scheduling that would have allowed us to automatically detect when our primary data center administrator didn’t respond (being in surgery and all) and redirect alerts and warnings to secondary responders; and We need to accelerate our move out of the data center. What are we doing to address these issues?\nCompleting the installation of the backup connection with a second provider; Scheduling a test of our router’s cutover processes where we will actually pull the plug on our primary connection to ensure that failover is working as intended. We will give users ample warning before conducting this test; Revising our emergency contact procedures and updating our documentation for navigating our data center’s security process; Replacing our alerting system with one that gives us better control over escalation rules; and Adding a third FTE to the infrastructure team to help us accelerate our move to the cloud and to implement infrastructure management best practices. October 6th, 2021, was a bad day. But we’ve learned from it. So if we have a bad day in the future, it will at least be different.\n",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/principles-practices/",
"title": "Metadata principles and practices",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2021-10-22",
"lastmod_ts": 1634860800,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "When you register your content with us, you create a metadata record for a digital object. The metadata within that record becomes an enduring, widely distributed connection to the research nexus.\nOur requirements are minimal, beyond basic bibliographic metadata. We’d like to require everything, but don’t because:\nNot all metadata fields are relevant. For example, not all journals have volumes and issues, and not all articles have funding. Our members are not always able to send us everything, and having some metadata is better than having no metadata. For example, it’s better to have an identifier attached to basic bibliographic information than for there to be no identifier at all. Some metadata are hard to come by. For example, digitized back issues may not have good reference lists available. However, we hope all members will follow our metadata best practices rather than just meeting the basic requirements. This will ensure that the records and identifiers you register with us are discoverable and connected.\n",
"content": "When you register your content with us, you create a metadata record for a digital object. The metadata within that record becomes an enduring, widely distributed connection to the research nexus.\nOur requirements are minimal, beyond basic bibliographic metadata. We’d like to require everything, but don’t because:\nNot all metadata fields are relevant. For example, not all journals have volumes and issues, and not all articles have funding. Our members are not always able to send us everything, and having some metadata is better than having no metadata. For example, it’s better to have an identifier attached to basic bibliographic information than for there to be no identifier at all. Some metadata are hard to come by. For example, digitized back issues may not have good reference lists available. However, we hope all members will follow our metadata best practices rather than just meeting the basic requirements. This will ensure that the records and identifiers you register with us are discoverable and connected.\nPrinciples (modeled on Metadata 20/20 principles) Metadata 20/20 has a set of basic principles that can be applied to our metadata to ensure that it is Compatible, Complete, Credible and Curated.\nPrinciples are aspirational - they help us define what we hope to accomplish with our metadata. So while we don’t meet all of the principles completely, they can still guide us as we move forward. Let\u0026rsquo;s take a look at the Metadata 20/20 principles one-by-one.\nCOMPATIBLE: provide a guide to content for machines and people So, metadata must be as open, interoperable, parsable, machine actionable, human readable as possible.\nHow are we compatible? The metadata provided to Crossref is made freely and openly available through our APIs Crossref metadata is provided in both JSON and XML formats. Our JSON and ‘UNIXSD’ XML formats are comprehensive and contain all metadata registered with us. We also provide limited metadata tailored for specific purposes via content negotiation (BibTeX, RIS, RDF). We try to make use of vocabularies and identifiers as much as possible, and allow free text only when there is no other option. What more can we do? Provide a JSON schema to make REST API outputs easier to ingest. Adopt and support existing and new standards that define the metadata we collect. COMPLETE: reflect the content, components and relationships as published So, metadata must be as complete and comprehensive as possible.\nHow are we complete? We aim to collect all metadata that is relevant to describing and using the scholarly content registered with us, and work to make it possible for members to send this metadata to us.\nWhat more can we do? A lot, this is our biggest challenge - we need to:\nMake it easy for members to send metadata to us. Make it easy for members to assess the metadata they have sent to us. Evolve our schema (or evolve beyond an XML schema) to quickly to support new types of content and metadata segments. CREDIBLE: enable content discoverability and longevity So, metadata must be of clear provenance, trustworthy and accurate.\nHow are we credible? Our metadata is provided to us by our members, and we don’t curate or clean up the metadata in any way. We do insert metadata into outputs such as DOI matches for citations, recursive relationships, and clearly flag those pieces as being inserted by Crossref in our metadata outputs.\nThis means, good or bad, metadata accuracy depends on the quality of metadata provided by our members.\nWhat more can we do? We can:\nFacilitate reporting and correction of metadata errors identified by metadata users. Create tools to help members assess their metadata quality. CURATED: reflect updates and new elements So, metadata must be maintained over time.\nHow are we curated? An important obligation for our members is to keep metadata up to date - for some this may mean periodically updating registered URLs, for others this may mean ensuring license and Crossmark data is current. (Find out more about maintainng metadata.)\nWhat more can we do? Assess and report URLs that are broken. Provide tools to allow members to assess their license metadata. Make sure that DOIs that move from member to member are maintained. ",
"headings": ["Principles (modeled on Metadata 20/20 principles)","How are we compatible?","What more can we do?","How are we complete?","What more can we do?","How are we credible?","What more can we do?","How are we curated?","What more can we do?"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/authors/lindsay-russell/",
"title": "Lindsay Russell",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Authors",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/more-new-faces-at-crossref/",
"title": "More new faces at Crossref",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2021-10-21",
"lastmod_ts": 1634774400,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "Looking at the road ahead, we’ve set some ambitious goals for ourselves and continue to see new members join from around the world, now numbering 16,000. To help achieve all that we plan in the years to come, we’ve grown our teams quite a bit over the last couple of years, and we are happy to welcome Carlos, Evans, Fabienne, Mike, Panos, and Patrick.\n",
"content": "Looking at the road ahead, we’ve set some ambitious goals for ourselves and continue to see new members join from around the world, now numbering 16,000. To help achieve all that we plan in the years to come, we’ve grown our teams quite a bit over the last couple of years, and we are happy to welcome Carlos, Evans, Fabienne, Mike, Panos, and Patrick.\nOur Software Development team has seen the most growth with the addition of Carlos, Mike, Panos, and Patrick; collectively, they bring specialist skills that are helping us to pay down technical debt, modernize our underlying infrastructure, and prepare for a consistent front-end experience. As a member of the Product team, Fabienne has a fresh take on our Similarity Check service, steering the upgrade to iThenticate v2. And Evans brings a scientific researcher perspective to our Member Experience team along with experience as a member who’s worked with our tools.\nAnd now some words from each of them.\nCarlos Del Ojo Elias I am a computer scientist with a master’s degree in Bioinformatics. Previously I used to work as a security auditor. I\u0026rsquo;ve got experience in research and software development both in academia and industry. It\u0026rsquo;s very exciting for me to join Crossref as a Senior software developer on the technology team. My current project involves working on the authentication and authorization subsystems, exploring state-of-the-art technologies in order to improve our services. I have always enjoyed contributing to the open-source community, so it is a pleasure for me to work in an organisation that promotes the principles of openness and transparency of software and data. Evans Atoni I am a member of the Technical Support team having joined Crossref just a few weeks ago. I’m passionate about advancing open access and POSI. Helping our members sort through knotty technical queries and building relations with them to service their very diverse needs is what I’m most excited about in my role. In my spare time, I enjoy anything outdoors, family time, and traveling. I work remotely from Nairobi, Kenya. Fabienne Michaud I joined Crossref in April 2021 as a Product Manager for scholarly stewardship which includes the content comparison tool Similarity Check and I am thrilled to be a member of such a lovely, supportive and international team. I have a background in teaching and have worked in academic, research, and not-for-profit libraries in the UK for over 20 years in academic liaison, customer services, and management roles. These experiences have given me a user-centered approach and a drive to find collaborative, reliable, and pertinent technological solutions to support the research and scholarly community. Since starting at Crossref and, through my work with the Similarity Check Advisory Group, I have developed a good understanding of the current ethical issues facing the publishing sector (such as paper mills and other manipulations of the publication process) and a particular interest in how AI and automation tools can play a part in addressing these challenges. Mike Gill I’ve been a software developer for twenty years, having studied software engineering at university. During my career, I have worked mostly in the banking and engineering industries so this is my first time working in scholarly publishing. I confess that before joining Crossref I wasn’t aware that the community existed so I was excited to see how I could ply my trade in this new (to me!) field. The role also appealed as, having primarily been a team leader/line manager in my recent career, this was an opportunity to be hands-on again and work with modern languages such as Kotlin. In the end, though, what really sealed it for me was reading on the Crossref website that ‘we take the work seriously but not necessarily ourselves’ which basically sums me up. So I knew I’d be in good company and that has proven to be the case!\nPanos Pandis I joined Crossref as a Senior Software Developer in 2020, in the middle of the coronavirus pandemic. Moving to Crossref has been a much-needed breath of fresh air. I\u0026rsquo;m a big fan of open-source, and at Crossref, it just feels like home. Even more so after our recent commitment to the Principles of Open Scholarly Infrastructure (POSI). My main focus at the moment is Crossref\u0026rsquo;s Event Data service. I\u0026rsquo;m fascinated by the potential of Event Data and the broad audience I get to support and communicate with through the project. So if you spot me in a room, feel free to ask me anything about Clojure/Kotlin, Event Data, obscure technology, or kombucha recipes.\nPatrick Vale I\u0026rsquo;m delighted to have joined Crossref as the first Frontend Developer. My role covers the inauguration of a scalable framework in which we can build future User Interfaces, and generally making people\u0026rsquo;s lives easier as they interact with our products and services - if a human uses it, I\u0026rsquo;m interested! It\u0026rsquo;s my intention to provide a platform on which we can quickly iterate to build and adapt our interfaces to suit the rapidly changing needs of our community. It\u0026rsquo;s been a pleasure to learn about the impact Crossref has across the scholarly spectrum; and to work with a team of open, practical, and downright friendly colleagues is a privilege. Outside of work, I enjoy cycling, growing things, and most recently, avoiding two small cats while moving from anywhere to anywhere around the house. Your contributions have been impactful and it will be fun to see all that you will surely contribute to our road ahead!\n",
"headings": ["Carlos Del Ojo Elias","Evans Atoni","Fabienne Michaud","Mike Gill","Panos Pandis","Patrick Vale"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/reports/",
"title": "Reports",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2021-10-17",
"lastmod_ts": 1634428800,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": "Our reports are tools to help you evaluate and improve your metadata. The dashboard gives an overview of our ever-growing corpus of metadata. How good is your metadata? Find out using Participation Reports and other reports to evaluate your metadata records, check for any issues, and learn how to resolve them. Some reports are sent to you by email, and some are available on our website.\nReports by email We send reports by email from reports@crossref.org to specific contacts on your account. Do add this address to your email contacts list or safe senders list to ensure that you receive them. These reports are intended to help you keep your metadata records up-to-date, and include:\n",
"content": "Our reports are tools to help you evaluate and improve your metadata. The dashboard gives an overview of our ever-growing corpus of metadata. How good is your metadata? Find out using Participation Reports and other reports to evaluate your metadata records, check for any issues, and learn how to resolve them. Some reports are sent to you by email, and some are available on our website.\nReports by email We send reports by email from reports@crossref.org to specific contacts on your account. Do add this address to your email contacts list or safe senders list to ensure that you receive them. These reports are intended to help you keep your metadata records up-to-date, and include:\nConflict report - this report shows where two (or more) DOIs have been submitted with the same metadata, indicating that you may have duplicate DOIs. You’ll start receiving conflict reports if you have at least one conflict. These reports are sent out on a monthly basis, or more frequently if your number of conflicts peaks by over 500, and it is sent to the main Technical contact on your account. DOI error report - a DOI error report is sent immediately when a user informs us that they’ve seen a DOI somewhere which doesn\u0026rsquo;t resolve to a website, and it is sent to the main Technical contact on your account. Resolution report - this monthly report shows the number of successful and failed DOI resolutions for the previous month, and it is sent to the Primary contact on your account (please note - this contact used to be known as the Business contact). Schematron report - the main Technical contact on your account may also receive periodic Schematron reports if there’s a metadata quality issue with your records. If you aren’t receiving reports, please check the emails aren’t being caught by your spam filter. It might also be because we our contact information for your organisation is not current, or you aren’t the designated reports person in our database. Please contact us and we’ll sort it out for you.\nIf you are not the appropriate person to receive reports, we can send reports to a different email address. If you don’t find our reports useful, please contact us and we’ll see what we can do.\nIf you need information about something that’s not covered by your reports, please explore all the information you can access through our REST API, or contact us for help.\nReports available on our website These reports are available on our website:\nBrowsable title list Conflict report Depositor report DOI crawler report Field or missing metadata report Missed conflict report Participation Reports Schematron report ",
"headings": ["Reports by email ","Reports available on our website "]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/outage-of-october-6-2021/",
"title": "Outage of October 6, 2021",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2021-10-06",
"lastmod_ts": 1633478400,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "On October 6 at ~14:00 UTC, our data centre outside of Boston, MA went down. This affected most of our network services- even ones not hosted in the data centre. The problem was that both of our primary and backup network connections went down at the same time. We\u0026rsquo;re not sure why yet. We are consulting with our network provider. It took us 2 hours to get our systems back online.\n",
"content": "On October 6 at ~14:00 UTC, our data centre outside of Boston, MA went down. This affected most of our network services- even ones not hosted in the data centre. The problem was that both of our primary and backup network connections went down at the same time. We\u0026rsquo;re not sure why yet. We are consulting with our network provider. It took us 2 hours to get our systems back online.\nWe are going to reprocess content that was in the process of being registered at the time of the outage in order to make sure everything gets registered correctly. This may take a few days to complete.\nWhy did we have such a complete outage and why did it take us so long to fix it? We still run a significant amount of our infrastructure in a data centre outside of Boston that we manage ourselves. Even though we\u0026rsquo;ve been moving many of our services to the cloud, all our traffic was still routed through the data centre - so when it went down, most of our cloud services were unavailable as well.\nIt took us a long time to fix this because our infrastructure team only has two people in it. Only one of them is located near the data centre and was at the doctor’s when the outage occurred. Although we were alerted to the problem immediately, we had to send one of our development team members to the data centre to diagnose and fix the problem.\nWe have been aware of these weaknesses in our system since I took the role of director of technology in 2019, and we have been putting most of our efforts over the past two years into fixing them.\nWe know that an organisation of our size has no business trying to run and maintain a physical data centre ourselves. One of the strengths of cloud-based systems is that they can be administered from anywhere and don\u0026rsquo;t require anyone to physically go to a data centre to replace failed hardware or check that network connections are, in fact, live. We\u0026rsquo;ve been trying to move to the cloud as fast as we can. All new services that we build are cloud-based. At the same time we\u0026rsquo;ve been moving systems out of the data centre - starting with those that put the biggest load on our systems. To further aid this process we have budgeted to add an FTE to the infrastructure team in 2022.\nWhat is really painful about this event is that we had just completed the last bit of work we needed to do before changing our traffic routing so that it would hit the cloud first instead of the data centre first. This would not have avoided the outage we just experienced, but it would have made it a bit less severe.\nWhat is even more painful is that we had recently installed a third network connection with an entirely different provider because we were worried about just this kind of situation. But this third connection wasn’t yet active.\nWe already have a long list of tickets that we’ve created to address problems we faced in recovering from this outage. The list will undoubtedly grow as we complete a postmortem over the next few days. I will report back when we have more detail of what happened and have a solid plan for how to avoid anything similar in the future.\nWe know that an outage of this severity and duration has caused a lot of people who depend on our services extra work and anxiety. For this, we apologise profusely.\nBut at least we didn’t need to use an angle grinder.\n",
"headings": ["Why did we have such a complete outage and why did it take us so long to fix it?"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/2021-board-election/",
"title": "2021 Board Election",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2021-09-28",
"lastmod_ts": 1632787200,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "We are pleased to share the 2021 board election slate. Crossref’s Nominating Committee received over 60 submissions from members worldwide to fill five open board seats. It was a fantastic group of applicants and showed the strength of our membership community.\nThere are five seats open for election (three small, two large), and the Nominating Committee presents the following slate.\nThe 2021 slate Candidate organisations, in alphabetical order, for the Small category (three seats available):\n",
"content": "We are pleased to share the 2021 board election slate. Crossref’s Nominating Committee received over 60 submissions from members worldwide to fill five open board seats. It was a fantastic group of applicants and showed the strength of our membership community.\nThere are five seats open for election (three small, two large), and the Nominating Committee presents the following slate.\nThe 2021 slate Candidate organisations, in alphabetical order, for the Small category (three seats available):\nCalifornia Digital Library, University of California, Lisa Schiff Center for Open Science, Nici Pfeiffer Melanoma Research Alliance, Kristen Mueller Morressier, Sebastian Rose NISC, Mike Schramm Candidate organisations, in alphabetical order, for the Large category (two seats available):\nAIP Publishing (AIP), Penelope Lewis American Psychological Association (APA), Jasper Simons Association for Computing Machinery (ACM), Scott Delman Here are the candidates\u0026rsquo; organisational and personal statements You can be part of this important process by voting in the election If your organisation is a voting member in good standing of Crossref as of September 20, 2021, you are eligible to vote when voting opens on September 29, 2021.\nHow can you vote? On September 29, 2021, your organisation\u0026rsquo;s designated voting contact will receive an email with the Formal Notice of Meeting and Proxy Form with concise instructions on how to vote. You will also receive a user name and password with a link to our voting platform.\nThe election results will be announced at the LIVE21 online meeting on November 9, 2021. Save the date!\n",
"headings": ["The 2021 slate","Here are the candidates\u0026rsquo; organisational and personal statements","You can be part of this important process by voting in the election","How can you vote?"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/similarity-check-news-ithenticate-v2.0-ready-for-launch/",
"title": "Similarity Check news: iThenticate v2.0 ready for launch",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2021-09-20",
"lastmod_ts": 1632096000,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref Similarity Check news: iThenticate v2.0 ready for launch\nLast year, we announced the upcoming launch of a new version of iThenticate, the product from Turnitin that powers Crossref Similarity Check. We know some of you have been waiting a long time for this upgrade and we are very happy to share with you that we are now ready to release it.\nWe will be rolling out this new version in stages, so not everyone will be able to upgrade to the new version immediately. We\u0026rsquo;ll start with new Crossref Similarity Check subscribers who use iThenticate in the browser, and one member who uses iThenticate via the eJournalPress API integration.\n",
"content": "Crossref Similarity Check news: iThenticate v2.0 ready for launch\nLast year, we announced the upcoming launch of a new version of iThenticate, the product from Turnitin that powers Crossref Similarity Check. We know some of you have been waiting a long time for this upgrade and we are very happy to share with you that we are now ready to release it.\nWe will be rolling out this new version in stages, so not everyone will be able to upgrade to the new version immediately. We\u0026rsquo;ll start with new Crossref Similarity Check subscribers who use iThenticate in the browser, and one member who uses iThenticate via the eJournalPress API integration.\nNext month, we will reach out to existing Crossref Similarity Check subscribers who use iThenticate in the browser (rather than through a manuscript tracking system), and further eJournalPress users. From then on, we\u0026rsquo;ll be contacting those of you who use Similarity Check through your manuscript tracking system, as and when your providers are ready to work with the new version.\nCrossref Similarity Check - first things first Crossref Similarity Check is a content comparison tool, powered by iThenticate and produced by Turnitin, to check the originality of scholarly works and detect potential cases of plagiarism. Crossref members are eligible for this service, which offers them a reduced rate for document checking (plus enhanced functionality) in exchange for making their own published content available to be indexed into the iThenticate database.\nThe Crossref Similarity Check service continues to grow in membership (1,531 members in 2020; 1,964 members in 2021, to date) and in the number of documents checked (1,922,621 manuscripts checked between January and July 2020 and 2,419,612 over the same period this year).\nJust as with the current version of iThenticate, Crossref Similarity Check subscribers will be able to compare documents against a vast database of internet sources and over 78 million full-text documents contributed by the Crossref members that use the service:\nCrossref - research articles, books, and conference proceedings provided by publishers of scholarly content all over the world Crossref posted content - preprints, eprints, working papers, reports, dissertations, and many other types of content that has not been formally published but has been registered with Crossref Internet - a database of archived and live publicly-available web pages, including billions of pages of existing content, and with tens of thousands of new pages added each day Publications - third-party periodical, journal, and publication content including many major professional journals, periodicals, and business publications from sources other than Crossref Similarity Check members Your Indexed Documents - other documents you have uploaded for checking (within your Crossref Similarity Check user account only, and not added to iThenticate\u0026rsquo;s main indexes) What\u0026rsquo;s new We are delighted to introduce the following new features and enhancements with iThenticate v2.0:\nIncreased document upload capacity Suspicious and hidden character detection Preprint exclusion filter Refreshed and responsive interface Similarity reports - save and share Annotations Content portal Improved API Increased document upload capacity This new version of iThenticate has an increased document upload capacity of up to 800 pages/200 MB and a Google Drive document upload functionality. Please note that per-document fees allow for a maximum of 25,000 25,000 characters (EDIT 21/11/4: words), as one billable unit (25,001-50,000 25,000 characters (EDIT 21/11/4: words) is two billing units, and so on).\nSuspicious or hidden character detection A new \u0026lsquo;Red flag\u0026rsquo; feature, highlighted at the top right hand side of the Similarity report and with in-line markers, signals the detection of hidden text such as text/quotation marks in white font or suspicious character replacement e.g., the substitution of a Latin e for a Cyrillic е or a Latin o for a Greek ο, which may have been deliberately added to avoid text-matching detection.\nRed flag feature: Hidden characters in the iThenticate v2.0 Similarity report\nPreprint exclusion filter Increasingly, authors are making available a preprint of their article, either before or at the same time as submitting it to a journal. With Turnitin, we have therefore developed a new exclusion filter for \u0026lsquo;Preprint Sources\u0026rsquo;, which can be applied directly from your Similarity report.\nRefreshed and responsive interface The new iThenticate has a cleaner, more intuitive and accessible interface, with responsive design for ease of use on different screen sizes. The Similarity report is no longer a static image but a text that can be searched, copied and pasted. The display of matches has been improved and simplified with two views only: \u0026lsquo;Sources overview\u0026rsquo; and \u0026lsquo;All sources\u0026rsquo;.\nSimilarity report in iThenticate v2.0\nSimilarity reports - save and share You can now save Similarity reports as a PDF file and share them via email through the iThenticate interface with authors. Please note: this is still work in progress and enhancements to this feature will be released in the coming months.\nAnnotations Annotations in Similarity reports is a brand new feature available in private mode only (in shared folders) in this initial release. Annotations will display the date, time and comments and can be edited or deleted as required. These private annotations will not be included in the \u0026lsquo;save and share\u0026rsquo; features mentioned above. Public, shareable, annotations will be included in a future release.\nPrivate annotations in the new Similarity report\nContent portal The new \u0026lsquo;Content portal\u0026rsquo; is a useful tool to check how much of your own published content has been successfully indexed into the iThenticate database and is now searchable. It will also help you self-diagnose and fix the content that has failed to be indexed.\nImproved API for subscribers who integrate Similarity Check with their manuscript tracking system API users will benefit from a new integration with manuscript tracking systems which will allow the display of the largest matching word count and the top 5 source matches alongside the Similarity score.\nWhat\u0026rsquo;s next We\u0026rsquo;re expecting a number of new features and enhancements to iThenticate version 2.0 as well as further manuscript tracking system API integrations in the coming months:\nUser/usage reporting functionality Editorial Manager API integration Further enhancements to the Similarity report user interface Parent/child account management reporting, to assist Crossref Sponsors Public vs. private annotations Document resubmission flow Customisable welcome email We\u0026rsquo;ll keep you posted We will post updates here as soon as new features, enhancements and API integrations are available and/or we are ready to upgrade the next group of members.\nWe\u0026rsquo;ll be contacting subscribers in stages to upgrade you to the new version, so keep your eyes open for an email from us. As you know, you have to supply full-text Similarity Check URLs in your Crossref metadata for over 90% of your own published content in order to be eligible for the service. We\u0026rsquo;ll be checking that anyone who wants to upgrade to v2.0 is still at 90% or above. You can check this yourself in advance on our eligibility checker - if you\u0026rsquo;ve fallen below 90%, the tool will give you instructions for adding your missing full-text Similarity Check URLs.\nIn the meantime, you will find the Similarity Check service documentation for the current version of iThenticate on our website. The documentation for the new version can be found on the Crossref Similarity Check site provided by Turnitin.\n✏️ Do get in touch via support@crossref.org if you have any questions or suggestions or start a discussion on our Community Forum\n",
"headings": ["Crossref Similarity Check - first things first","What\u0026rsquo;s new","Increased document upload capacity","Suspicious or hidden character detection","Preprint exclusion filter","Refreshed and responsive interface","Similarity reports - save and share","Annotations","Content portal","Improved API for subscribers who integrate Similarity Check with their manuscript tracking system","What\u0026rsquo;s next","We\u0026rsquo;ll keep you posted"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/lesson-learned-the-hard-way-lets-not-do-that-again/",
"title": "Lesson learned, the hard way: Let’s not do that again!",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2021-09-08",
"lastmod_ts": 1631059200,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "TL;DR We missed an error that led to resource resolution URLs of some 500,000+ records to be incorrectly updated. We have reverted the incorrect resolution URLs affected by this problem. And, we’re putting in place checks and changes in our processes to ensure this does not happen again.\nHow we got here Our technical support team was contacted in late June by Wiley about updating resolution URLs for their content. It\u0026rsquo;s a common request of our technical support team, one meant to make the URL update process more efficient, but this was a particularly large request. Shortly thereafter, we were provided with nearly 1,200 separate files by Atypon on behalf of Wiley in order to update the resolution URLs of ~9 million records. We manually spot checked over 50 of these files, because, prior to this issue, our technical support team did not have a mechanism to automatically check for errors. That labor intensive review did not turn up any problems. That is, those 50 samples had no errors with the headers, like were found later.\n",
"content": "TL;DR We missed an error that led to resource resolution URLs of some 500,000+ records to be incorrectly updated. We have reverted the incorrect resolution URLs affected by this problem. And, we’re putting in place checks and changes in our processes to ensure this does not happen again.\nHow we got here Our technical support team was contacted in late June by Wiley about updating resolution URLs for their content. It\u0026rsquo;s a common request of our technical support team, one meant to make the URL update process more efficient, but this was a particularly large request. Shortly thereafter, we were provided with nearly 1,200 separate files by Atypon on behalf of Wiley in order to update the resolution URLs of ~9 million records. We manually spot checked over 50 of these files, because, prior to this issue, our technical support team did not have a mechanism to automatically check for errors. That labor intensive review did not turn up any problems. That is, those 50 samples had no errors with the headers, like were found later.\nAmong the files we didn’t check, there were headers included in the files with different owning fromPrefix and acquiring toPrefix members’ DOI prefixes. In a URL update request, the prefixes should always be the same.\nAnd still other files included requests to update records with DOIs that had never even been registered. Here are some examples:\nH:email=support@crossref.org;fromPrefix=10.5555;toPrefix=10.5555\n10.5555/doi1 http://www.newurl.com/whatever\n10.5555/doi2 http://www.newurl.com/whatever2\nIn the example above, these fictional DOIs are both under prefix 10.5555. Thus, the result of this request will ONLY be that the resolution URLs of DOI 10.5555/doi1 and 10.5555/doi2 are updated in the metadata.\nH:email=support@crossref.org;fromPrefix=10.5555;toPrefix=10.9876 10.5555/doi1 http://www.newurl.com/whatever\n10.5555/doi2 http://www.newurl.com/whatever2\nIn this second example, these fictional DOIs are both under prefix 10.5555, but because the toPrefix in the header differs from the fromPrefix, the result of this request will be that the resolution URLs of 10.5555/doi1 and 10.5555/doi2 are updated in the metadata AND the owning prefix of both records will be transferred from prefix 10.5555 to prefix 10.9876.\nWe kicked off the URL update request on 30 June and all legitimate DOIs whose files were free of errors were updated by 7 July (yes, it takes about a week to update the resolution URLs for ~9 million records).\nOn 9 July, Peter Strickland of the International Union of Crystallography, one of 22 members affected by this mistake, contacted us to enquire how/why much of their content was resolving to incorrect URLs and why ownership of their content appeared within our search interface to be Wiley. Peter was rightly concerned. We were, too. Our technical support team quickly elevated this issue, because, frankly, this is not the first time our finicky URL update process has caused unwanted metadata updates, albeit not quite at this volume.\nHow we investigated the problem We rallied our internal team. We investigated and discovered that we believed that some ~600,000 DOIs were erroneously included and updated in the requested 1,200 files. We later extended that estimate to include other conditions, in order to be as cautious as we could, to over 1 million DOIs. In the end, we determined that the incorrect files attempted updates of 1,228,041 DOIs. Due to the errors in the files (i.e., erroneous headers and non-registered DOIs), we only actually updated and then reverted 520,512 DOIs. The other 700,000+ DOIs were never updated (because of errors in the original files provided to us) or simply had never been registered with us.\nPrior to this mistake, Crossref had never reverted a member’s metadata update before. To be clear, and as I said above, we have had other URL update mistakes over the years, like this one; they were just smaller in scale. We knew there were holes in our process that needed to be plugged. And we knew we needed a better solution for members to manage these updates themselves without our manual intervention. So, while there were mistakes made in the files supplied to us, this was our error and we’re fixing it; more on that below.\nFor this situation, we quickly realized that reversion of the metadata update was the best option for us, albeit we did not have an existing process in place to execute that reversion. That’s because we only keep the current version of each metadata record. We couldn’t back out of the change; we couldn’t simply restore these records to the metadata registered with us as of late June, because we no longer had an easily accessible, central record of those previous resolution URLs. What we did have was a record of all the previous submissions made against each DOI, so our technical team, focused their efforts there.\nHow we fixed all those records We had two errors to correct: the ownership transfers (those records that had inadvertent and mismatched from/to prefixes) and the incorrect resolution URLs. We reverted all of the ownership transfers on 9 July and then double and triple checked that ownership during the week of 12 July to ensure we didn’t miss anything.\nThe resolution reversion was more complicated. We invested in creating a patch to identify the records that had been updated by our team, and then extract the last legitimate resolution URL registered with us by the owning member in order to revert the metadata for each record. In order to provide confidence that this mistake was contained, we also built a check into the patch to ensure that those DOIs that did have their ownership temporarily transferred were not updated during the few days that ownership was incorrect. That check helped us determine that none of the 520,512 DOIs were incorrectly updated beyond this mistaken URL update request.\nThe technical team built and tested this patch. The tests turned up gaps in the patch, so we refined it during the week of 2021 July 12. We kicked off the reversion of these records on Monday, 19 July at 20:05 UTC and the patch completed all reversions at 20:14 UTC, Thursday, 22 July.\nIn the end, we successfully reverted all of the resolution URLs for those 520,512 DOIs we identified; provided daily updates and apologies to the 22 affected members; together we worked some longer hours; and persevered.\nEd updates everyone internally on the situation and thanks all the people who worked together to resolve the issue\nNext up We don\u0026rsquo;t want this to ever happen again. Like, never. We clearly need to make changes to our internal processes to prevent this in the future.\nHere’s what’s ahead:\nWe are building a checker that we can run URL update files through to automate and our checks. This means we will be able to check every single file in a large batch, rather than relying on manual and labor intensive spot-checking;\nAs said above, one compounding issue in this mistake was the mismatched from/to prefixes in the file headers. Our technical support team uses the same file headers to transfer ownership/stewardship of a record or set of records between members AND to update resolution URLs. These two tasks are almost never legitimately completed in the same file. That is, there is usually a lag between ownership transfers and resolution URL updates (most members will request an ownership transfer and then a month or two later update their URLs). Because of this, simply decoupling these two tasks (feel free to follow our work at this link) would help eliminate a glaring risk, so we’re working on that too;\nLastly, we’re researching ways we can streamline resource resolution URL updates. You can also monitor our progress on this one. No promises or specifics yet, but we’re eager to reduce toil on our technical support team, avoid problems like this one, and provide members safe and straightforward ways to better update your metadata.\nThanks for the support of the whole Crossref team and our community - and for reading this far! Never a dull moment\u0026hellip;\n",
"headings": ["TL;DR","How we got here","How we investigated the problem","How we fixed all those records","Next up"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/categories/url-updates/",
"title": "URL Updates",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Categories",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/authors/anna-tolwinska/",
"title": "Anna Tolwinska",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Authors",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/crossref-conversations-audio-blog-about-helping-open-science/",
"title": "Crossref Conversations: audio blog about helping open science",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2021-08-20",
"lastmod_ts": 1629417600,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref Conversations is an audio blog we\u0026rsquo;re trying out that will cover various topics important to our community. This conversation is between colleagues Anna Tolwinska and Rosa Morais Clark, discussing how we can make research happen faster, with fewer hurdles, and how Crossref can help. Our members have been asking us how Crossref can support open science, and we have a few insights to share. So we invite you to have a listen.\n",
"content": "Crossref Conversations is an audio blog we\u0026rsquo;re trying out that will cover various topics important to our community. This conversation is between colleagues Anna Tolwinska and Rosa Morais Clark, discussing how we can make research happen faster, with fewer hurdles, and how Crossref can help. Our members have been asking us how Crossref can support open science, and we have a few insights to share. So we invite you to have a listen.\n[UPDATE: Since this recording ROR IDs are now part of the Crossref schema.]\nHelpful links Here are links to all the sources mentioned in the recording.\nRecording transcript Lots of great information on our blog Send questions to: feedback@crossref.org Let\u0026rsquo;s continue the conversation on our Community Forum Metadata 20/20 - great information about how richer more open metadata can make research happen faster Crossref’s Board votes to adopt the Principles of Open Scholarly Infrastructure (POSI) Helping researchers identify content they can text mine Thanks for listening!\n",
"headings": ["Helpful links"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/categories/affiliations/",
"title": "Affiliations",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Categories",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/some-rip-roring-news-for-affiliation-metadata/",
"title": "Some rip-RORing news for affiliation metadata",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2021-07-26",
"lastmod_ts": 1627257600,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "We’ve just added to our input schema the ability to include affiliation information using ROR identifiers. Members who register content using XML can now include ROR IDs, and we’ll add the capability to our manual content registration form, participation reports, and metadata retrieval APIs in the near future. And we are inviting members to a Crossref/ROR webinar on 29th September at 3pm UTC.\nThe background We’ve been working on the Research Organisation Registry (ROR) as a community initiative for the last few years. Along with the California Digital Library and DataCite, our staff has been involved in setting the strategy, planning governance and sustainability, developing technical infrastructure, hiring/loaning staff, and engaging with people in person and online. In our view, it’s the best current model of a collaborative initiative between like-minded open scholarly infrastructure (OSI) organisations.\n",
"content": "We’ve just added to our input schema the ability to include affiliation information using ROR identifiers. Members who register content using XML can now include ROR IDs, and we’ll add the capability to our manual content registration form, participation reports, and metadata retrieval APIs in the near future. And we are inviting members to a Crossref/ROR webinar on 29th September at 3pm UTC.\nThe background We’ve been working on the Research Organisation Registry (ROR) as a community initiative for the last few years. Along with the California Digital Library and DataCite, our staff has been involved in setting the strategy, planning governance and sustainability, developing technical infrastructure, hiring/loaning staff, and engaging with people in person and online. In our view, it’s the best current model of a collaborative initiative between like-minded open scholarly infrastructure (OSI) organisations.\nLast year, Project Manager Maria Gould described the case for publishers adopting ROR and ROR was ranked the number one priority at our last in-person annual meeting. Now it’s time that Crossref’s services themselves took up the baton to meet the growing demand.\nThe inclusion of ROR in the Crossref metadata will help everyone in the scholarly ecosystem make critical connections more easily. For example, research institutions need to monitor and measure their output by the articles and other resources their researchers have produced. Journals need to know with which institutions authors are affiliated to determine eligibility for institutionally sponsored publishing agreements. Funders need to be able to discover and track the research and researchers they have supported. Academic librarians need to easily find all of the publications associated with their campus.\nEarlier this month, GRID and ROR announced that after working together to seed the community-run Research Organisation Registry, GRID would be retiring from public service and handing the proverbial torch over to ROR as the scholarly community’s reliable universal open identifier for affiliations. That means that our members who have been using GRID now need to consider their move to ROR and think about how they can add ROR IDs into the metadata that they manage and share through Crossref.\nThe plan We’ve been able to include ROR IDs for our grant metadata schema as affiliation information for two years, since July 2019. And the Australia Research Data Commons (ARDC) was the first member to add ROR IDs to the Crossref system in 2020. In early July, we completed the work to accept ROR IDs for affiliation assertions for all other types of records with an affiliation or institution element, such as journal articles, book chapters, preprints, datasets, dissertations, and many more.\nNext, we will commence the plans to support ROR in our other tools and services, such as Participation Reports. We’ll work on alignment with the Open Funder Registry and share our plans to collect the information via the new user interface we’re developing for registering and managing metadata. Open Journal Systems (OJS) already has a ROR Plugin, developed by the German National Library of Science and Technology (TIB). This supports the collection of ROR IDs and future releases of this plugin and the OJS DOI plugin will allow including ROR IDs in the metadata sent to Crossref, to support thousands of our members to share ROR IDs via their Crossref metadata. We also aim to add ROR to our metadata retrieval options, including the REST API, which recently saw the start of an unblocking with our move to a more robust technical foundation.\nThe call for participation Many Crossref publishers, funders, and service providers are already planning to integrate ROR with their systems, map their affiliation data to ROR, and include ROR in Crossref metadata. In addition to publishers and funders, libraries, repositories, and other stakeholders are developing support for ROR. For example, the Plan S Journal Checker tool uses ROR IDs to let people check whether a particular journal is compliant with an author\u0026rsquo;s funder and institutional open access policies. In addition, the ROR website shows a growing list of active and in-progress ROR integrations.\nCrossref members registering research grants via Altum’s ProposalCentral system can already add ROR IDs. Now those registering articles, books, preprints, datasets, dissertations, and other research objects, can start including much clearer and all-important affiliation metadata as part of their content registration going forward. As with all newly-introduced metadata elements, we recommend adding ROR IDs from now and ongoing, but planning a distinct project to backfill older records. We know that more than 80% of records have been updated and enriched at least once with additional and cleaner metadata, so as members do this routinely, they can include ROR IDs alongside updating URLs, license or funding information, and other metadata.\nFor information on how ROR will be supported in the Crossref metadata, take a look at our latest schema release (version 5.3.0) or in this journal article example XML.\nJoin the discussion in our forum below and register for the Crossref/ROR webinar on September 29th at 3pm UTC to learn all you need to know about incorporating ROR into your Crossref metadata.\n",
"headings": ["The background","The plan","The call for participation"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/rfp-help-evaluate-the-reach-and-effects-of-metadata/",
"title": "RFP: Help evaluate the reach and effects of metadata",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2021-07-21",
"lastmod_ts": 1626825600,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "UPDATE, 14 October 2021:\nWe received several excellent proposals in response to this RFP and we’d like to thank everyone involved for their time and enthusiasm.\nWe are excited to announce the two projects that have been selected, to run through early 2023. Stay tuned!\nWith or Without: Measuring Impacts of Books Metadata\nThis project will test the premise that academic books metadata improves discoverability and usage by assessing the impact of book chapter records with DOIs (unique from metadata associated with the entire book) with associated chapter and book attributes. The study aims to prove or disprove its hypothesis and rank metadata attributes by their association with successful content discovery and access. The findings will be considered alongside similar metadata research in order to develop a metadata efficacy framework, which can be used to determine the return on metadata investments by publishers and service providers.\n",
"content": "UPDATE, 14 October 2021:\nWe received several excellent proposals in response to this RFP and we’d like to thank everyone involved for their time and enthusiasm.\nWe are excited to announce the two projects that have been selected, to run through early 2023. Stay tuned!\nWith or Without: Measuring Impacts of Books Metadata\nThis project will test the premise that academic books metadata improves discoverability and usage by assessing the impact of book chapter records with DOIs (unique from metadata associated with the entire book) with associated chapter and book attributes. The study aims to prove or disprove its hypothesis and rank metadata attributes by their association with successful content discovery and access. The findings will be considered alongside similar metadata research in order to develop a metadata efficacy framework, which can be used to determine the return on metadata investments by publishers and service providers.\nLettie Y. Conrad and Michelle Urberg, Independent consultants\nMetadata For Everyone\nThis project will explore the metadata quality, consistency and completeness from various individual journals and communities. The project will pay special attention to elements that are most likely to vary across cultures, such as names and those that are potentially multi-lingual, with the understanding that metadata issues do not affect nor impact all communities in the same way.\nJuan Pablo Alperin, Associate Director of Research, Public Knowledge Project \u0026amp; Co-Director, Scholarly Communications Lab\nMike Nason, Scholarly Communications \u0026amp; Publishing Librarian, University of New Bruinswick Libraries\nMarco Tullney, Head of Publishing Services \u0026amp; Coordination Open Access at TIB – Leibniz Information Centre for Science and Technology\nWe’re excited (and a little nervous) to launch a new research project designed to assess the effects of metadata on research communications. We’re expecting this effort to be a significant contribution to the existing research on the topic and we’re really looking forward to getting started. We’re also a little nervous because of course we don’t know what the conclusions will be (after all, if we did, we wouldn’t be starting this project).\nAssume nothing It seems logical and very widely accepted that more and better metadata leads to good things. Does it? If so, how and how do we know that? What does the ‘before and after’ look like when metadata is corrected or enhanced? There are so many questions, so many stakeholders and enough variation around record types (books come to mind) and disciplines (hello citation styles) that the topic warrants all the attention it gets and more. This project is designed to be very broad in scope, sampling from various criteria, and is expected to last about a year.\nInterested in getting involved? If you’re a researcher involved in scientometrics or bibliometrics or if you’re a consultant with experience in original research, please have a read of the RFP and get in touch with a statement of interest by 1st September or with questions in the meantime. We’re looking for an individual, research group or organisation that will work with us over the course of the project to define terms, finalize the approach, analyze the data and communicate the results, whatever they may be.\nRFP responses are requested by 1st September so don’t hesitate to get in touch with questions.\nIf you’re interested in the project but not in responding to the RFP, you may still be able to help. We would appreciate wide circulation of this announcement to help us find qualified respondents to the RFP so please do share this with your network. And, of course, we hope you stay tuned for the outcome of the work. Check back with us on that in about a year\u0026hellip;\n",
"headings": ["Assume nothing","Interested in getting involved?"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/behind-the-scenes-improvements-to-the-rest-api/",
"title": "Behind the scenes improvements to the REST API",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2021-07-06",
"lastmod_ts": 1625529600,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "UPDATE, 24 August 2021: All pools have been migrated to the new Elasticsearch-backed API, which already appears to be more stable and performant than the outgoing Solr API. Please report any issues via our Crossref issue repository in Gitlab.\nUPDATE, 9 August 2021: The cutovers for the polite and Plus pools are delayed again. We\u0026rsquo;re still working to ensure acceptable performance and stability before serving responses from the new application and infrastructure. Each cutover is currently delayed by one more week\u0026ndash;the polite pool is scheduled for 2021 August 17 and the Plus pool is scheduled for 2021 August 24.\n",
"content": "UPDATE, 24 August 2021: All pools have been migrated to the new Elasticsearch-backed API, which already appears to be more stable and performant than the outgoing Solr API. Please report any issues via our Crossref issue repository in Gitlab.\nUPDATE, 9 August 2021: The cutovers for the polite and Plus pools are delayed again. We\u0026rsquo;re still working to ensure acceptable performance and stability before serving responses from the new application and infrastructure. Each cutover is currently delayed by one more week\u0026ndash;the polite pool is scheduled for 2021 August 17 and the Plus pool is scheduled for 2021 August 24.\nUPDATE, 2 August 2021: The cutovers for the polite and Plus pools are delayed. We\u0026rsquo;ve been mirroring traffic to the new polite pool and want to ensure acceptable performance and stability before serving responses from the new application and infrastructure. Each cutover is currently delayed by one week\u0026ndash;the polite pool is scheduled for 2021 August 10 and the Plus pool is scheduled for 2021 August 17.\nUPDATE, 13 July 2021: The first stage of the cutover is complete, so requests to the public pool are now being served by the new REST API. We took a slightly different approach to performing the cutover, so the \u0026ldquo;Documentation\u0026rdquo; and \u0026ldquo;Temporary domain\u0026rdquo; sections below have been updated.\nOur REST API is the primary interface for anybody to fetch the metadata of content registered with us, and we\u0026rsquo;ve been working hard on a more robust REST API service that\u0026rsquo;s about to go live.\nThe REST API is free to use and it gets around 300 million requests each month (we encourage users to adhere to our etiquette guidelines to keep things running smoothly). It is used for bibliometric studies, by platforms like Dimensions, by organisations like the National Library of Sweden, and to support countless other efforts.\nWe also offer enhanced access to our APIs and other services with Metadata Plus, and we recommend it for production services and others that benefit from guaranteed up-time, a higher rate limit, and priority support from our helpful staff.\nFor a while now, we\u0026rsquo;ve been working to migrate the REST API from Solr to Elasticsearch and from our datacenter to a cloud platform in order to address issues of scalability and extensibility.\nWe\u0026rsquo;re pleased to announce that we\u0026rsquo;ll be cutting over to the Elasticsearch-backed version of the REST API over the next few weeks, beginning July 13. This cutover will occur one pool at a time\u0026ndash;the public pool will be migrated first, followed by the polite pool on August 3, and the Plus pool on August 10 (see \u0026rsquo;etiquette\u0026rsquo; link above if you\u0026rsquo;re unfamiliar with our different pools). Please note updates at the top of this post for changes to the original schedule.\nWe\u0026rsquo;ve thoroughly tested the functionality and performance of the new REST API, and we\u0026rsquo;d like to invite you to test it out before we move production traffic to the new service. Try out your favorite API queries at https://api.production.crossref.org/. Feature parity, but note a few differences One of our primary objectives was to maintain feature parity between the old and new services, avoiding any breaking changes that might cause problems for existing services integrating with the REST API. We implemented a regression test suite which has given us the confidence to make such a foundational change. During the course of this project, we found it necessary and a good opportunity to make a few modifications. In each case, we analyzed usage and aimed to avoid making any breaking changes. We hope these represent improvements to the behavior and consistency of the REST API.\nThe group-title filter uses exact matching. This filter previously worked but was undocumented and unsupported.\nThe directory filter is deprecated. This was meant to be an experimental, unsupported filter, and the data has not met the standard we require.\nThe affiliation facet returns counts of affiliation strings rather than counts of terms within affiliation fields (thus resolving this Github issue).\nCursors may be used to page through results from the /members, /funders, and /journals routes, in addition to /works.\nWhile we suggest that everyone use cursors for pagination, we still support the offset functionality. We have introduced a limit of 80000 for offset values for the /members /funders and /journals routes\noffset behavior is slightly changed, now applying to the sum of rows and offsets rather than just offsets.\nThe published field is now present in API responses.\nThe /licenses route returns paged results.\nSorting by submitted is no longer supported. This was never officially supported or documented.\nThe /quality route has been removed. This was an undocumented, experimental feature.\nFunder name in /works metadata is the name provided by the publisher.\nEmpty relation fields correctly return an empty object.\nOnly ISBN and isbn-type for a record will be returned. ISBNs for associated volumes will be omitted.\nThe institution field is a list.\nquery uses different stop word defaults, though we expect querying to remain roughly the same.\nAPI responses may feature slightly different scores, as they come from different backends.\nSome technical notes on the cutover Documentation The above changes are documented in our new REST API documentation, which is now automatically generated via Swagger, resulting in more comprehensive coverage and more efficient feature development. During the cutover, the right documentation for you will depend on which pool you are using. The documentation for the new API can be found by visiting the API in a browser, or by navigating to https://api.crossref.org/help; and the docs for the old API remain here: https://github.com/CrossRef/rest-api-doc. The Github-hosted documentation will be deprecated once the cutover is complete.\nThis may not come as news, but bears repeating as we mentioned GitHub. We have moved our source code repositories from GitHub to GitLab, including all of our issue tracking.\nTemporary domain UPDATE: We ended up performing the public pool cutover via reverse proxies instead of redirects\u0026ndash;please disregard the note about temporary domains below. The api.crossref.org domain will remain the domain regardless of which pool you\u0026rsquo;re using or where we are in the cutover process.\nPlease note that the api.production.crossref.org domain is a temporary domain we are using during this cutover period. Traffic will be redirected to the new service one pool at a time via a 307 http redirect. Once the cutover is complete, we will go back to using the api.crossref.org domain. Do not update any software, scripts, libraries, tools, etc. to use the temporary domain.\nDifferences in query results Due to inherent differences in how Solr and Elasticsearch perform queries and rank results, you may see slightly different results when comparing the old and new services. If for whatever reason your workflow involves using multiple API pools (which we don\u0026rsquo;t recommend), you may see inconsistent results. Cursor behavior Cursors may break if your script is paging through results at the exact moment the cutover is performed, and you should retry your request once the release is complete. We will post the precise maintenance window to https://status.crossref.org/.\nFiling issues Feature requests and bug reports should be filed into the Crossref issue repository in Gitlab during this testing phase and once the new Elasticsearch-backed API is live in production.\nComing next While we hope the benefits of improved stability and extensibility are as exciting to you as they are to us, \u0026ldquo;feature parity\u0026rdquo; may not be the most thrilling message for our API users. In truth, one of the more exciting aspects of completing this migration is the end of the code freeze we instituted at the start of this effort. Now, we can work on new feature development and a continuous stream of bug fixes. We also improved the automatic test coverage as part of the work, meaning we can deliver features with greater confidence.\nThe first new feature we\u0026rsquo;ll be delivering via the REST API will be support for the \u0026ldquo;grants\u0026rdquo; record type, allowing for the retrieval of metadata for grants that have been registered with us, now numbering over 20,000 from 8 different funder members. This work is well underway and will be released once we are confident that the new REST API is stable in production. From there, we\u0026rsquo;ll continue to select the highest priority issues from our REST API backlog.\nAs always, should you have any questions about our REST API, check out the metadata retrieval section of our website, start a discussion on our community forum, file a Gitlab issue as mentioned above, or you can contact us via support@crossref.org.\n",
"headings": ["Feature parity, but note a few differences","Some technical notes on the cutover","Documentation","Temporary domain ","Differences in query results","Cursor behavior","Filing issues","Coming next"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/doaj-and-crossref-sign-agreement-to-remove-barriers-to-scholarly-publishing-for-all/",
"title": "DOAJ and Crossref sign agreement to remove barriers to scholarly publishing for all",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2021-06-21",
"lastmod_ts": 1624233600,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "22 June 2021, London, UK and Boston, MA, USA — The future of global open access publishing received a boost today with the signing of a Memorandum of Understanding between the Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ) and Crossref. The MOU formalizes an already strong partnership between the two organisations and furthers their shared pursuit of an open scholarly communications ecosystem that is inclusive of emerging publishing communities.\nBoth organisations aim to encourage the dissemination and use of scholarly research using open infrastructure, online technologies, regional and international networks, and community partners - all supporting local institutional capacity and sustainability around the world.\n",
"content": "22 June 2021, London, UK and Boston, MA, USA — The future of global open access publishing received a boost today with the signing of a Memorandum of Understanding between the Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ) and Crossref. The MOU formalizes an already strong partnership between the two organisations and furthers their shared pursuit of an open scholarly communications ecosystem that is inclusive of emerging publishing communities.\nBoth organisations aim to encourage the dissemination and use of scholarly research using open infrastructure, online technologies, regional and international networks, and community partners - all supporting local institutional capacity and sustainability around the world.\n“DOAJ is delighted to be formalizing today’s agreement with Crossref, an organisation we are already closely aligned with. Together we stand a greater chance of encouraging an open, fair, and fully inclusive future for scholarly publishing,” said Lars Bjørnshauge, DOAJ Founder and Managing Director.\nThe agreement will enable content from journals indexed on DOAJ to be more easily identified through the use of Crossref metadata. The MOU also covers the exchange of a variety of services and information and greater coordination of technical and strategic requirements between DOAJ and Crossref. Included too is the development of outreach and training materials, coordination of service and feature development, as well as research studies to explore the overlaps and gaps in the journals and metadata covered by each organisation.\n“As academic-led journals continue to grow in number and geographic reach, it’s important we support this community more effectively. Our partnership with DOAJ means we can share strategies, data, and resources in order to lower barriers for emerging publishers around the world,” said Ginny Hendricks, Crossref’s Director of Member \u0026amp; Community Outreach.\nAbout DOAJ DOAJ is a community curated online directory that indexes and provides access to high quality, open access, peer reviewed journals. DOAJ deploys more than one hundred carefully selected volunteers from among the community of library and other academic disciplines to assist in the curation of open access journals. This independent database contains over 15,000 peer-reviewed open access journals covering all areas of science, technology, medicine, social sciences, arts and humanities. DOAJ is financially supported worldwide by libraries, publishers and other like-minded organisations. DOAJ services (including the evaluation of journals) are free for all, and all data provided by DOAJ are harvestable via OAI/PMH and the API. See doaj.org for more information.\nAbout Crossref Crossref makes research objects easy to find, cite, link, assess, and reuse. We’re a not-for-profit membership organisation that exists to make scholarly communications better. We rally the community; tag and share metadata; run an open infrastructure; play with technology; and make tools and services—all to help put research in context. Visit crossref.org for further information.\nPlease contact louise@doaj.org or feedback@crossref.org with any questions.\n",
"headings": ["About DOAJ","About Crossref"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/event-data-help-us-fill-in-the-gaps/",
"title": "Event Data: Help us fill in the gaps",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2021-06-11",
"lastmod_ts": 1623369600,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "UPDATE August 2, 2021: This work was awarded to Laura Paglione of the Spherical Cow Group.\nTo date, we have collected around 740 million events from 12 different source since we launched our Event Data service service in 2017. Each event is an online mention of the research associated with a DOI, either via the DOI directly or using the associated URL. However, we know that there is much more out there. Because of this, we would like to explore where we could expand.\n",
"content": "UPDATE August 2, 2021: This work was awarded to Laura Paglione of the Spherical Cow Group.\nTo date, we have collected around 740 million events from 12 different source since we launched our Event Data service service in 2017. Each event is an online mention of the research associated with a DOI, either via the DOI directly or using the associated URL. However, we know that there is much more out there. Because of this, we would like to explore where we could expand.\nWe invite proposals to conduct a gap analysis for Event Data sources, looking at what we currently collect and seeing what more could be added. For the most relevant new sources, we are seeking an estimate of the effort to include them, and establish whether it is possible: we know that there are sources that are paywalled or with restrictive licensing not compatible with Event Data.\nThe aim of the project is to identify a list of potential new sources. With community input, we will look to add a number of these to Event Data in the future based on needs and priorities.\nFor full details of the requirements and how to make a proposal, see here. The deadline for proposals is 11 July 2021 and we anticipate that the work will be completed by the end of October 2021.\n",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/categories/request-for-proposal/",
"title": "Request for Proposal",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Categories",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/an-advisory-group-for-preprints/",
"title": "An Advisory Group for Preprints",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2021-06-09",
"lastmod_ts": 1623196800,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "We are delighted to announce the formation of a new Advisory Group to support us in improving preprint metadata. Preprints have grown in popularity over the last few years, with increasing focus brought by the need to rapidly disseminate knowledge in the midst of a global pandemic. We have supported metadata deposits for preprints under the record type ‘posted content’ since 2016, and members currently register a total of around 17,000 new preprints metadata records each month.\n",
"content": "We are delighted to announce the formation of a new Advisory Group to support us in improving preprint metadata. Preprints have grown in popularity over the last few years, with increasing focus brought by the need to rapidly disseminate knowledge in the midst of a global pandemic. We have supported metadata deposits for preprints under the record type ‘posted content’ since 2016, and members currently register a total of around 17,000 new preprints metadata records each month.\nAs preprints develop and different practices arise, we are keen to re-examine the metadata schema: to do this properly we need community input. We want to ensure that the schema is fit for purpose and supports the diversity of ways in which preprints are posted, linked with other objects, and used. Metadata schema need regular review, and this is just one example of a number of areas we are looking to update. Several topics we see as a high priority for preprints are better notification for when a preprint has been withdrawn or removed, accurate recording of versioning, and better indication of preprint server names.\nWe have invited a number of organisations we know to be active in this area, and are looking forward to some very positive discussions. Participants span five continents and include members who post preprints, indexing services, and others with significant experience in the area of preprints. The first meeting took place earlier this week and brought up a diverse range of themes that will be tackled in future meetings.\n",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/categories/relationships/",
"title": "Relationships",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Categories",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/time-to-put-the-r-back-in-rd/",
"title": "Time to put the “R” back in “R&D”",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2021-06-07",
"lastmod_ts": 1623024000,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "It is time to put the \u0026lsquo;R\u0026rsquo; back into R\u0026amp;D.\nThe Crossref R\u0026amp;D team was originally created to focus on the kinds of research projects that have allowed Crossref to make transformational technology changes, launch innovative new services, and engage with entirely new constituencies. Some Illustrious projects that had their origins in the R\u0026amp;D group include:\nDOI Content Negotiation Similarity Check (originally CrossCheck) ORCID (originally Author DOIs) Crossmark The Open Funder Registry The Crossref REST API Linked Clinical Trials Event Data Grant registration ROR And for each project that has graduated, there have been several that have not. Some projects were simply designed to gather data. Others just didn’t generate enough interest. You are not truly experimenting if you don’t fail occasionally too.\n",
"content": "It is time to put the \u0026lsquo;R\u0026rsquo; back into R\u0026amp;D.\nThe Crossref R\u0026amp;D team was originally created to focus on the kinds of research projects that have allowed Crossref to make transformational technology changes, launch innovative new services, and engage with entirely new constituencies. Some Illustrious projects that had their origins in the R\u0026amp;D group include:\nDOI Content Negotiation Similarity Check (originally CrossCheck) ORCID (originally Author DOIs) Crossmark The Open Funder Registry The Crossref REST API Linked Clinical Trials Event Data Grant registration ROR And for each project that has graduated, there have been several that have not. Some projects were simply designed to gather data. Others just didn’t generate enough interest. You are not truly experimenting if you don’t fail occasionally too.\nRecently we’ve been doing very little experimenting of any kind. Instead, the R\u0026amp;D team has mostly been seconded to the software development team to help them through a period of organisational and process change. We would not have made it through the past two years without their help.\nBut now we’re ready to focus on more ‘R’ and less ‘D’. And to that end, we are increasing the size of the team as well. Rachael Lammey will be joining the team as Head of Strategic Initiatives. She will work alongside our Principal R\u0026amp;D Developers, Esha Datta and Dominika Tkaczyk. Together they will be able to engage with new communities and immediately start experimenting with ways in which Crossref might be able to address their needs and use-cases.\nWe hope to soon add to our list of distinguished R\u0026amp;D project alumni.\nRationale \u0026amp; details The Crossref R\u0026amp;D group (AKA \u0026ldquo;Labs\u0026rdquo;) has been the incubator of many services that are now in production and which form a fundamental part of Crossref\u0026rsquo;s identity and value. Similarity Check, ORCID, Crossmark, Open Funder Registry, The REST API, Linked Clinical Trials, and Event Data all started as R\u0026amp;D projects. More recently the enhancement of our reference matching infrastructure and the development and launch of ROR were also R\u0026amp;D projects.\nAnd prior to the formation of the outreach group in 2015, the R\u0026amp;D group also led a critical function engaging with communities that, at the time, Crossref only had tangential connections with: PKP; DOAJ; funders; and the data and altmetrics communities.\nBut since the R\u0026amp;D group merged with the technology team back in 2019, we have done very little \u0026ldquo;R.\u0026rdquo; and very little community engagement of our own. Instead, the R\u0026amp;D team has supported the development team through a period of major cross-cutting projects and organisational change. Dominika has led the REST API rewrite and Esha\u0026mdash;when she is not acting as technical lead on ROR\u0026mdash;has also worked on the API rewrite and has kept Crossref metadata search on its feet. We would not have been able to make it through the past few years without their help.\nThroughout this period, Rachael Lammey has continued the vital work of identifying, engaging with, and advocating for members of our community who we previously didn\u0026rsquo;t even know were members of our community.\nThe strength of the R\u0026amp;D group was that it combined outreach, product, and development functions. It was not only able to engage with new constituencies, but to quickly experiment with ways in which Crossref might be able to serve them. Previously, members of the R\u0026amp;D team would return from a conference or workshop that no Crossref member had ever attended before with a set of new contacts and ideas for new services and tools. They\u0026rsquo;d form interest groups and develop prototypes. Sometimes the interest groups would lead nowhere and sometimes the prototypes would be discarded. But critically, some of them would turn into the major services and organisations that now form a foundational part of open scholarly infrastructure.\nAnd this is why it makes so much sense for Rachael to join the R\u0026amp;D team. The group is most effective when it is able to engage with new communities and immediately start experimenting with ways in which Crossref might be able to address their needs and use-cases. Rachael\u0026rsquo;s extensive experience in both product management and outreach\u0026mdash;combined with Esha and Dominika\u0026rsquo;s experience leading development projects\u0026mdash;is exactly what we need to reinvigorate the group and put the R back into R\u0026amp;D.\nTo kick off, we are going to be working on some small-ish, discrete projects. These include:\nBetter matching and linking of preprints to published articles; Extending our journal title classification to cover all journal and conference proceedings titles; and Tools to allow us to community-source structured metadata correction information and feed it back to our members. We will consult with and update the community on the kinds of projects we are working on through regular tech updates and a revitalised Labs area of our website.\nOh- and we will certainly be designing some new Labs creatures. \u0026ndash;G\n",
"headings": ["Rationale \u0026amp; details"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/the-road-ahead-our-strategy-through-2025/",
"title": "The road ahead: our strategy through 2025",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2021-06-03",
"lastmod_ts": 1622678400,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "This announcement has been in the works for some time, but everything seems to take longer when there is a pandemic going on, including finding time and headspace to plan out our strategy for the next few years.\nOver the last year or so we have had our heads down addressing how to scale our 20-yr-old system and operation \u0026ndash; and adapting to new ways of working. But we\u0026rsquo;ve also spent time talking to people, forging alliances, looking ahead, and making plans. So we\u0026rsquo;re happy to now let everyone know exactly what we\u0026rsquo;ve been up to lately, what we are heading towards in 2025, and what projects and programs are prioritised on our near-term agenda.\n",
"content": "This announcement has been in the works for some time, but everything seems to take longer when there is a pandemic going on, including finding time and headspace to plan out our strategy for the next few years.\nOver the last year or so we have had our heads down addressing how to scale our 20-yr-old system and operation \u0026ndash; and adapting to new ways of working. But we\u0026rsquo;ve also spent time talking to people, forging alliances, looking ahead, and making plans. So we\u0026rsquo;re happy to now let everyone know exactly what we\u0026rsquo;ve been up to lately, what we are heading towards in 2025, and what projects and programs are prioritised on our near-term agenda.\nTl;dr Introducing the new Crossref strategy through 2025, extending the one we published in 2018 There are now two additional strategic goals, to make six: bolstering our team; living up to POSI Good progress has been made in reducing operational and technical debt - a lot of learning too We\u0026rsquo;re unblocking stuff to get more done, including expanding R\u0026amp;D (more on that next week) We have a new public roadmap 🎉 Come to next week\u0026rsquo;s mid-year update webinar to hear what\u0026rsquo;s happening and up next. The emergence of a strategic agenda 2018 seems like a decade ago, doesn\u0026rsquo;t it? Back then we set out a 2018-2021 strategic direction\u0026mdash;now archived\u0026mdash;that described four goals: adapt to expanding constituencies; simplify and enrich services; selectively collaborate and partner with others; and improve our metadata quality and comprehensiveness. These themes were formed from the output of a planning exercise with our board in mid-2017 which tackled scenarios that remain true today, including: the increasing diversity in scholarly publishing (library-publishing, academic-led journals, shifting geographic dominance, etc.); the growth in preprints and other content formats; the sustainability of scholarly publishing (who is funding it and whether that is an expanding or shrinking pool); and the increase in policy and regulation in this space.\nThat meeting was the catalyst for embracing openness and a broader set of constituents. It was also decisive about Crossref’s role in this evolving community to focus on our core competencies, defined as:\nA reputation as a trusted, neutral one-stop source of metadata and services Managing scholarly infrastructure with technical knowledge and innovation Convening and facilitating scholarly community collaboration. So you can see how we got to focusing on metadata, services, infrastructure, and broad community collaboration.\nAhh, 2019, such an innocent time When we wrote our post at the end of 2019 A turning point is a time for reflection we highlighted\u0026mdash;with data\u0026mdash;how different the Crossref community is nowadays. The post also linked to the results of our \u0026lsquo;value\u0026rsquo; research project and a fact file which had even more hard data and posed the question Which Crossref initiatives should be top or bottom priorities?. To answer that, the LIVE19 annual meeting group voted (using betting chips) on priority initiatives, with the following results:\nSupport and implement ROR Metadata best practices and principles Support for multiple languages Address technical and operational debt Schema updates such as JATS and CRediT Engagement with funders We all know what happened next: the collective health and social trauma of the COVID-19 pandemic. All of us struggled. You all did too. Homeschooling, homeworking, homestaying. Caring for\u0026mdash;and even saying goodbye to\u0026mdash;sick friends and family. Also beloved colleagues. Alongside these unfamiliar new stresses, members were joining in growing numbers, funders kept joining to register grants, conferences went online and we loved them (before then hating them), the number of records we hosted kept going up, and publishing (especially preprints) skyrocketed.\nThe plan hasn\u0026rsquo;t actually changed much. Those charts in the 2019 fact file still make for remarkable reading as those same trends continue. We simply haven\u0026rsquo;t had time to update people on where we are with plans. So it\u0026rsquo;s high time we give an update on these priorities as well as contextualise them in longer-term goals.\nBut first, some framing The chart below shows the approach we took to organise our thinking. A lot of it isn\u0026rsquo;t new; we have had the current mission statement, key messages (rally, tag, run, play, make), and truths since the rebranding work in 2015/2016. More recently, we have added POSI to our values, describing the principles and rules by which we operate as a committed open scholarly infrastructure organisation.\nWe already have a lot of 'words'. So why do we also need a vision statement and where do the goals fit in? In order to prioritize the things we will work on first, we need to be able to track everything to a higher vision, ensuring that everything we do is working toward an agreed destination. When we have organisation-wide goals, it means that everyone is clear on the direction, is able to prioritize individual and team work, and can see how their contribution fits in. This, in turn, instills confidence, and motivation - amongst staff as well as members and users. Our working vision statement (feedback needed!) is:\nWe envision a rich and reusable open network of relationships connecting research organisations, people, things, and actions; a scholarly record that the global community can build on forever, for the benefit of society.\nA vision is, of course, shared. It isn\u0026rsquo;t Crossref-specific but describes the world in which we all want to work together in future.\nNow for those contextual six goals Full details are on the new strategy page but here\u0026rsquo;s a summary below.\nThis goal is all about people, support, culture, and resilience. Not just because we\u0026rsquo;re coming through a panedmic, but also because we\u0026rsquo;re growing and we need to be able to scale and manage growth more purposefully, with appropriate policies, fees, and resources.\nWe published a POSI self-assessment earlier this year and like-minded initiatives are following suit. This is a stated goal because we want to be held publicly accountable to the Principles of Scholarly Infrastructure standards of governance, insurance, and sustainability.\nThis goal centres on growth, strengthening relationships, community facilitation, and content. Working with a growing number of Sponsors helps us lower barriers to participation around the world, including in languages other than English. Expanding the support we offer for research funders and institutions are priorities.\nThis goal involves researching and communicating the value of richer, connected, and reusable, open metadata, and incentivising people to meet best practices, while also making it possible (and easier) to do so.\nWe\u0026rsquo;ve always collaborated but we want to work even more closely with like-minded organisations to solve problems together. Perhaps in future we could also partner with others to find operating efficiencies for our overlapping stakeholders.\nThis goal is all about focus. And about delivering easy-to-use tools that are critically important for our community. A lot of invisible work has been happening behind the scenes; we\u0026rsquo;ve been strengthening (and will continue to strengthen) our code-base (while opening up all code) in order to unblock some of the initiatives we know people have been waiting for.\nRead more about what projects are included in the above goals in our full 2025 strategic agenda.\nYou\u0026rsquo;re invited to a mid-year update webinar Rather than saving everything for our annual\u0026mdash;usually November\u0026mdash;meeting, we\u0026rsquo;ll also do a mid-year update and plan to do so in May or June every year from now on, in addition to the November updates which include the board election and governance and budget information.\nThis year, we\u0026rsquo;re covering some of the main product development work we have completed, underway, and planned for the next quarter. We\u0026rsquo;ll run it live twice - once for those nearby The Americas timezones (June 8th 3pm UTC) and once for those nearby Asia Pacific timezones (June 9th 6am UTC). We have a lot to cover in 90 minutes\u0026mdash;including unveiling [our public roadmap[(http://bit.ly/crossref-roadmap)]\u0026mdash;but we\u0026rsquo;re going to try really hard to have a few minutes to discuss questions too.\nIn the meantime, or indeed anytime, join the discussion over on our community forum - see the discussion below and join in on our forum.\nWe want to be held accountable to these goals so we’re reliant on you, as a community, to let us know what you think of our 2025 strategic agenda. As always; we’re grateful for your support and advice.\n",
"headings": ["Tl;dr","The emergence of a strategic agenda","Ahh, 2019, such an innocent time","But first, some framing","Now for those contextual six goals","You\u0026rsquo;re invited to a mid-year update webinar"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/categories/election/",
"title": "Election",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Categories",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/our-annual-open-call-for-board-nominations/",
"title": "Our annual open call for board nominations",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2021-05-27",
"lastmod_ts": 1622073600,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref\u0026rsquo;s Nominating Committee is inviting expressions of interest to join the Board of Directors of Crossref for the term starting in 2022. 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 25th, 2021.\nBoard roles and responsibilities The role of the board at Crossref is to provide strategic and financial oversight of the organisation, as well as guidance to the Executive Director and the staff leadership team, with the key responsibilities being:\n",
"content": "Crossref\u0026rsquo;s Nominating Committee is inviting expressions of interest to join the Board of Directors of Crossref for the term starting in 2022. 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 25th, 2021.\nBoard roles and responsibilities The role of the board at Crossref is to provide strategic and financial oversight of the organisation, as well as guidance to the Executive Director and the staff leadership team, with the key responsibilities being:\nSetting the strategic direction for the organisation; Providing financial oversight; and Approving new policies and services. The board is representative of our membership base and guides the staff leadership team on trends affecting scholarly communications. The board sets strategic directions for the organisation while also providing oversight into policy changes and implementation. Board members have a fiduciary responsibility to ensure sound operations. Board members do this by attending board meetings, as well as joining more specific board committees.\nCrossref’s services provide central infrastructure to scholarly communications. Crossref’s board helps shape the future of our services, and by extension, impacts the broader scholarly ecosystem. We are looking for board members to contribute their experience and perspective.\nWho can apply to join the board? Any active member of Crossref can apply to join the board. Crossref membership is open to organisations that produce content, such as academic presses, commercial publishers, standards organisations, and research funders. In fact, this year the board has specifically included in the committee’s remit to “propose at least one name from a funder member for the current round of elections.”\nThere is a link at the bottom of this post to submit your expression of interest.\nWhat is expected of board members? Board members attend three meetings each year that typically take place in March, July, and November. Meetings have taken place in a variety of international locations and travel support is provided when needed. Following travel restrictions as a result of COVID-19, the board adopted a plan to convene at least one of the board meetings virtually each year and all committee meetings take place virtually. Most board members sit on at least one Crossref committee. Care is taken to accommodate the wide range of timezones in which our board members live.\nWhile the expressions of interest are specific to an individual, the seat that is elected to the board belongs to the member organisation. The primary board member also names an alternate who may attend meetings in the event that the primary board member is unable to. There is no personal financial obligation to sit on the board. The member organisation must remain in good standing.\nBoard members are expected to be comfortable assuming the responsibilities listed above and to prepare and participate in board meeting discussions.\nAbout the election The board is elected through the “one member, one vote” policy wherein every member organisation of Crossref has a single vote to elect representatives to the Crossref board. Board terms are for three years, and this year there are five seats open for election.\nThe board maintains a balance of seats, with eight seats for smaller members and eight seats for larger members (based on total revenue to Crossref). This is in an effort to ensure that the diversity of experiences and perspectives of the scholarly community are represented in decisions made at Crossref.\nThis year we will elect two of the large member seats (membership tiers $3,900 and above) and three of the small member seats (membership tiers $1,650 and below). You don’t need to specify which seat you are applying for. We will provide that information to the nominating committee.\nThe election takes place online and voting will open in September. Election results will be shared at the November board meeting and new members will commence their term in 2022.\nAbout the nominating committee The nominating committee will review the expressions of interest and select a slate of candidates for election. The slate put forward will exceed the total number of open seats. The committee considers the statements of interest, organisational size, geography, gender, and experience.\n2021 Nominating Committee:\nLiz Allen, F1000/Taylor \u0026amp; Francis, London, UK, committee chair Melissa Harrison, eLife, Cambridge, UK Andrew Joseph, Wits University Press, Johannesburg, South Africa Abel Packer, SciELO, São Paulo, Brazil Lisa Scott, New England Journal of Medicine, Boston, USA How do you apply to join the board? Please click here to submit your expression of interest or contact me.\n",
"headings": ["Board roles and responsibilities","Who can apply to join the board?","What is expected of board members?","About the election","About the nominating committee","How do you apply to join the board?"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/service-provider-perspectives-a-few-minutes-with-our-publisher-hosting-platforms/",
"title": "Service Provider perspectives: A few minutes with our publisher hosting platforms",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2021-05-24",
"lastmod_ts": 1621814400,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "Service Providers work on behalf of our members by creating, registering, querying and/or displaying metadata. We rely on this group to support our schema as it evolves, to roll out new and updated services to members and to work closely with us on a variety of matters of mutual interest. Many of our Service Providers have been with us since the early days of Crossref. Others have joined as scholarly communications has grown and services have evolved. Though fewer than 20 in number, their impact far outweighs the size of the group.\n",
"content": "Service Providers work on behalf of our members by creating, registering, querying and/or displaying metadata. We rely on this group to support our schema as it evolves, to roll out new and updated services to members and to work closely with us on a variety of matters of mutual interest. Many of our Service Providers have been with us since the early days of Crossref. Others have joined as scholarly communications has grown and services have evolved. Though fewer than 20 in number, their impact far outweighs the size of the group.\nThey, like us, work with a great variety of members and have a broad view into publishing trends. In this post, we focus on views from some of the publishing hosting platform Service Providers, who\u0026rsquo;ve taken the time to share their thoughts on a few questions:\nWhat is the biggest change you\u0026rsquo;ve experienced working with publisher metadata over the last few years and how have you adapted to it? It has become more and more important that not only the DOIs are registered with the minimum of necessary metadata to get the DOIs registered, but that a most complete set of metadata is being sent along \u0026ndash; including author identifiers, funding information, abstracts, licenses, to support other Crossref services and improve discoverability.\n\u0026ndash; de Gruyter\nOur clients are increasingly aware of the key role metadata plays in the effective dissemination of research. With an increasing number of published articles and a clear domination of \u0026ldquo;search engines\u0026rdquo; and aggregation of content, metadata is the primary means of making sure that publications reach the right audience. Publishers\u0026rsquo; value-add includes not just copy editing, formatting, and packaging, but also now creating journal articles for the digital age that are discoverable and well linked to the research corpus. Furthermore, we sense a clear move toward standardization, which goes beyond the structure to introduce standardized semantics: adopting common taxonomies for classifying content in different dimensions. Our response is to introduce effective, automated and consistent services that capture, and surface metadata throughout the value chain from authoring to publication and search.\n\u0026ndash; Atypon\nHighwire\u0026rsquo;s publishers are always looking to use the latest DTD (Document Type Definition) for the content to stay up to current standards. Currently this would be JATS 1.2. They are choosing to remain current so that they can stay on top of all or new metadata that can enrich their deposits. We have handled this well and offer support for the latest version of DTD when they are released, but some publishers are not always familiar with what can/should be deposited with their content and this can be a learning process for them.\n\u0026ndash; MPS Limited\nHow do you explain to clients (and others!) why correct, quality metadata is important? In the digital age, metadata is the key to enabling effective content consumption. Publications that cannot be effectively discovered are of little value. We can only increase the impact of research with \u0026ldquo;discoverable\u0026rdquo; and \u0026ldquo;machine readable\u0026rdquo; publications. So ensuring correct and quality metadata is the key to optimizing not only the processing (finding the right journal, editor, reviewers) but also to positioning each publication properly. As the volume of published scientific research increases, article metadata is the way forward \u0026mdash; it brings \u0026ldquo;order\u0026rdquo; and enables our community to manage this volume.\n\u0026ndash; Atypon\nHighwire always positions itself as \u0026ldquo;good content in\u0026rdquo; means \u0026ldquo;good content out\u0026rdquo;. This is true for our own content stores. Strong and valid metadata will result in valid and strong deposits. We explain this to all new clients on-boarded with Highwire and the use of current standards and for current client projects where content should/can be enriched through re-load.\n\u0026ndash; MPS Limited\nGetting our journals to care about metadata is a two step process: First, make sure they understand how metadata will help their journal succeed (i.e. why it matters to them). Second, make it easy for them to produce metadata while minimizing the cost, time, or complexity of their workflow. The first step – making a case for why metadata matters – is often easier than you\u0026rsquo;d think. At the very least, most journal editors understand that metadata, e.g., JATS or DOI registration, is an important signifier of professionalism / prestige. In other words, they see that top journals publish metadata and want the same for their journal. From a more technical standpoint, metadata is important because that\u0026rsquo;s the format computers understand and, like it or not, the publishing ecosystem relies on computers to deliver all sorts of critical services – such as indexing, archiving, and discoverability. So, if you\u0026rsquo;re not publishing metadata, you\u0026rsquo;re likely missing the benefit of these services. The second step – making it easy to produce metadata – is more difficult. Journal editors generally understand metadata matters but often lack the technical skills or resources necessary to create metadata. This is where a platform, such as Scholastica, can be very helpful. Because platforms work with many journals, they can invest in tools to automate the creation of metadata, reducing costs for all their clients. For example, most platforms offer integrations to support automatic DOI registration. At Scholastica, we\u0026rsquo;re pushing this idea even further with automatic integration to more complicated services such as PubMed Central. By reducing cost and complexity, we can help new or small-budget journals have the same quality metadata normally reserved for large, established journals.\n\u0026ndash; Scholastica\nWe are sending other publishers\u0026rsquo; metadata to academic libraries and distribution channels. Erroneous metadata will have a direct impact on how discoverable a title may be. The more uniform and correct the metadata, the better it will be indexed in other places.\n\u0026ndash; de Gruyter\nWhat is the one industry development or trend you’re most excited about for the near future and why? Open Science and the ability to deliver research with the tools for reproducing it is the most exciting and game changing trend. Technology has enabled the output of science to transition from two-dimensional printed text delivery into globally accessible and responsive web-based delivery. We are now taking the next steps to further leverage web technology to enhance research output with rich assets ranging from audio and video, datasets, executable code, high-resolution imagery, interactive applications and more. As more assets accompany research publications, viewing these assets as modular, individually citable, and reusable becomes a requirement. We are reviewing the whole research output flow from authoring to publishing, and most importantly to its dissemination through the myriad of discovery tools now available.\n\u0026ndash; Atypon\nThe move of everything to the cloud \u0026ndash; this is changing and improving our infrastructure, our possibility to scale and to stay on top of technological development.\n\u0026ndash; de Gruyter\nThanks very much to the interviewees for their time and thoughts. We look forward to working with our entire Service Provider group on questions like these and many more. If you\u0026rsquo;d like more details, you can read about our Service Provider program or contact me for more information.\n",
"headings": ["What is the biggest change you\u0026rsquo;ve experienced working with publisher metadata over the last few years and how have you adapted to it?","How do you explain to clients (and others!) why correct, quality metadata is important?","What is the one industry development or trend you’re most excited about for the near future and why?"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/categories/service-providers/",
"title": "Service Providers",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Categories",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/next-steps-for-content-registration/",
"title": "Next steps for Content Registration",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2021-05-17",
"lastmod_ts": 1621209600,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": " UPDATE, December 2025: The legacy Metadata Manager interace will be switched off on 1 January 2026. We have been in touch with affected members throughout the year with guidance and resources on making the switch to our newest helper tool or alternative content registration methods. --- Hi, I’m Sara, one of the Product Managers here at Crossref. I joined the team in April 2020, primarily tasked with looking after Content Registration mechanisms. Prior to Crossref, I worked on open source software to support scientific research. I’ve learned a lot in the last year about how our community works with us, and I’m looking forward to working more closely with you in the coming year to improve Content Registration tools.\n",
"content": " UPDATE, December 2025: The legacy Metadata Manager interace will be switched off on 1 January 2026. We have been in touch with affected members throughout the year with guidance and resources on making the switch to our newest helper tool or alternative content registration methods. --- Hi, I’m Sara, one of the Product Managers here at Crossref. I joined the team in April 2020, primarily tasked with looking after Content Registration mechanisms. Prior to Crossref, I worked on open source software to support scientific research. I’ve learned a lot in the last year about how our community works with us, and I’m looking forward to working more closely with you in the coming year to improve Content Registration tools.\nJust over a year ago, we updated you on the status of Metadata Manager. TL;DR: We learned that our approach with the tool wasn’t flexible enough to easily and quickly add other record types or update the input schema, and paused new development. We’re back with another update on Metadata Manager and our strategy for Content Registration user interfaces (UIs) going forward.\nOur helper tools for Content Registration The bulk of content registered with us is done so programmatically; that is, our members’ (or their service providers’) machines talking to our machines using our APIs. But, there are plenty of our members that don’t have the technical expertise to work with us this way. For those members, we provide various helper tools to assist with manual content registration.\nWe offer a variety of interfaces for registering many different types of content, including Web Deposit form for most record types, Metadata Manager for journal content, and Simple Text Query to register references. Each of these has its own use cases and limitations, leading to a confusing and inconsistent experience for members who are manually depositing metadata. From our perspective, maintaining this many interfaces in different codebases is inefficient, in part because an update to the schema likely leads to separate updates in each of them. A unified user interface to register content would both improve and simplify the user experience for you, our community, and make updates quicker and more efficient. The original goal of Metadata Manager was to be this unified interface. But we’ve learned that the approach we took was flawed: there have been problems reported by users, and the tool itself isn’t flexible enough to easily and quickly add new record types or support new fields when our input schema changes.\nA new approach to helper tools So we’ve decided to build something new and retire the old. We’ll be focusing on creating a brand new Content Registration user interface that will eventually replace Metadata Manager, the Web Deposit form, and Simple Text Query. And what we’ve learned from our experiences with Metadata Manager and Web Deposit has greatly influenced our strategy going forward. The new tool will:\nHave a Community focus Design for small - Our membership demographic is evolving. A large (and growing) number of our members are very small, often with a single publication and no technical resources. Creating XML can be a barrier to participating in Crossref, and our helper tools are designed to lower that barrier. Accessibility and localization support - All of our UIs should support major international accessibility guidelines and translation into local languages, to meet the needs of our global membership. Open source code - Build in the open, so that others can contribute. This could mean an entire UI that we haven’t prioritized, or adding a new translation file, or tweaking some CSS. Follow user-centered design processes Unified user interface - Improve user experience and simplify tools and services by providing members with one place to go to register content via a UI. Rapid iteration - Focus on a technical solution that allows for rapid development of UIs to support new record types and updates to our schema. Building the right features for the right users - The needs of our large members and smaller members are different. Experience has shown us that the core audience for a helper tool is smaller members; we’ll tailor the features to solve the challenges of our smaller members. Allow us to build content for the future Tactical approach to record types - Quickly build UIs in a strategic order. We can’t build support for every record type at once, so we want to identify and build in the areas of highest impact/lowest effort first. Deliberate approach to supported fields - Not all members will supply metadata for all fields in our schema. Building a UI to support all fields for a specific record type before moving on to another slows progress on that next record type. We’ll identify the most-used and most-useful fields to support first, and add more in a future iteration if needed. Deprecating Metadata Manager In order to free up the resources to develop the new Content Registration UIs, we need to stop doing other things - that means not adding to, supporting, or bug-fixing other Content Registration tools. We’re setting an aggressive goal of sunsetting Metadata Manager by the end of 2021, with a commitment to a smooth transition to our new tool. This means that new members should not start using Metadata Manager. New members who need a helper tool have a few choices:\nthose who use the OJS platform from PKP to host their journals (OJS V3 and above) should use the third party Crossref OJS plugin to register their content. other new members should use the Web Deposit form current members who are using Metadata Manager may continue to do so, but are advised that we won’t be doing bug fixes or further development on the tool, and that support will be scaled back. If possible, you should transition over to using the Web Deposit form. This wasn’t a decision made lightly, but one made after considering multiple options and all the data available to us about member usage and internal resources.\nTo highlight some of the data that led to this decision: the Support team tracks the types of support tickets they handle. In 2020, the 3rd most common ticket type was Metadata Manager-related. But less than 4% of metadata records registered with us are registered using Metadata Manager. Supporting Metadata Manager requires resources disproportionate to the amount of use the tool gets. For comparison, twice as many records are registered using the Web Deposit Form, but it generates far fewer Support tickets. To fix the bugs and issues reported about Metadata Manager requires an equally disproportionate amount of developer resources. So far, we have been unable to free up resources we would need to fix them all. Continuing to maintain this tool is effectively preventing us from building something new that will better meet the needs of our smaller members.\nWe know this will surprise and concern some of you, especially heavy users of Metadata Manager. We’re committed to making this a smooth transition, and over the coming months, we’ll provide more guidance to help current members migrate to our other tools.\nInvolving the community Building a tool that allows us to create and adapt content registration forms based on example input files is an exciting new approach - one that will allow us to better serve the needs of our smaller members across multiple record types and support those who want to adapt our tools to their own needs. We’ve already begun work on a proof-of-concept tool aligned with this new strategy and I’m excited to drive it to production. As this project develops, we’ll keep in close contact with members, conducting user interviews, feedback sessions, and using usage data to help guide our decision-making on features and design. As we’ll be building in the open, we’ll have prototypes to share along the way as we iterate to produce a tool that will stand the test of time as well as scale to support even more content and members in future. We welcome your feedback over on our Community Forum, where we’ve set up a dedicated category to discuss this topic.\n",
"headings": ["Our helper tools for Content Registration","A new approach to helper tools","Have a Community focus","Follow user-centered design processes","Allow us to build content for the future","Deprecating Metadata Manager","Involving the community"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/doing-more-with-relationships-via-event-data/",
"title": "Doing more with relationships - via Event Data",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2021-05-14",
"lastmod_ts": 1620950400,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref aims to link research together, making related items more findable, increasing transparency, and showing how ideas spread and develop. There are a number of moving parts in this effort: some related to capturing and storing linking information, others to making it available.\nBy including relationship metadata in Event Data, we are taking a big step to improve the visibility of a large number of links between metadata. We know this is long-promised and we’re pleased that making this valuable metadata available supports a number of important initiatives. We will also be backfilling, so all previously deposited relationships will eventually become available as events. The first step will be to add relationships between items that have DOIs, such as between a research article and a related review report or dataset.\n",
"content": "Crossref aims to link research together, making related items more findable, increasing transparency, and showing how ideas spread and develop. There are a number of moving parts in this effort: some related to capturing and storing linking information, others to making it available.\nBy including relationship metadata in Event Data, we are taking a big step to improve the visibility of a large number of links between metadata. We know this is long-promised and we’re pleased that making this valuable metadata available supports a number of important initiatives. We will also be backfilling, so all previously deposited relationships will eventually become available as events. The first step will be to add relationships between items that have DOIs, such as between a research article and a related review report or dataset.\nWhat are relationships? When members register metadata with us, they have the possibility to identify other works, items, and websites that they know are related. This might be supplementary material or previous versions of a work (especially for preprints and working papers). Equally, identifiers for a protein, gene, or organism used in the research can be included. These are recorded as ‘relationships’ and can be accessed in the same way as the rest of the metadata we hold about registered content.\nSome examples Relationships in the metadata show links to the published article from this bioRxiv preprint. In the Crossref Rest API: \u0026#34;relation\u0026#34;: { \u0026#34;is-preprint-of\u0026#34;: [ { \u0026#34;id-type\u0026#34;: \u0026#34;doi\u0026#34;, \u0026#34;id\u0026#34;: \u0026#34;10.1038/s41467-020-17892-0\u0026#34;, \u0026#34;asserted-by\u0026#34;: \u0026#34;subject\u0026#34; } ], \u0026#34;cites\u0026#34;: [] }, And now in Event Data: \u0026#34;subj\u0026#34;: { \u0026#34;pid\u0026#34;: \u0026#34;https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.05.21.109546\u0026#34;, \u0026#34;url\u0026#34;: \u0026#34;https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.05.21.109546\u0026#34;, \u0026#34;work_type_id\u0026#34;: \u0026#34;posted-content\u0026#34; }, \u0026#34;obj\u0026#34;: { \u0026#34;pid\u0026#34;: \u0026#34;https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-020-17892-0\u0026#34;, \u0026#34;url\u0026#34;: \u0026#34;https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-020-17892-0\u0026#34;, \u0026#34;method\u0026#34;: \u0026#34;doi-literal\u0026#34;, \u0026#34;verification\u0026#34;: \u0026#34;literal\u0026#34;, \u0026#34;work-type-id\u0026#34;: \u0026#34;journal-article\u0026#34; }, Linking to a dataset in the Dryad Digital Repository by a recent eLife article. In the Crossref metadata: \u0026#34;relation\u0026#34;: { \u0026#34;is-supplemented-by\u0026#34;: [ { \u0026#34;id-type\u0026#34;: \u0026#34;doi\u0026#34;, \u0026#34;id\u0026#34;: \u0026#34;10.5061/dryad.s58qh\u0026#34;, \u0026#34;asserted-by\u0026#34;: \u0026#34;subject\u0026#34; } ], \u0026#34;references\u0026#34;: [ { \u0026#34;id-type\u0026#34;: \u0026#34;doi\u0026#34;, \u0026#34;id\u0026#34;: \u0026#34;10.5061/dryad.s58qh\u0026#34;, \u0026#34;asserted-by\u0026#34;: \u0026#34;subject\u0026#34; } ], \u0026#34;cites\u0026#34;: [] }, And now in Event Data: \u0026#34;subj\u0026#34;: { \u0026#34;pid\u0026#34;: \u0026#34;https://doi.org/10.7554/elife.19920\u0026#34;, \u0026#34;url\u0026#34;: \u0026#34;https://doi.org/10.7554/elife.19920\u0026#34;, \u0026#34;work_type_id\u0026#34;: \u0026#34;journal-article\u0026#34; }, \u0026#34;obj\u0026#34;: { \u0026#34;pid\u0026#34;: \u0026#34;https://doi.org/10.5061/dryad.s58qh\u0026#34;, \u0026#34;url\u0026#34;: \u0026#34;https://doi.org/10.5061/dryad.s58qh\u0026#34;, \u0026#34;method\u0026#34;: \u0026#34;doi-literal\u0026#34;, \u0026#34;verification\u0026#34;: \u0026#34;literal\u0026#34;, \u0026#34;work-type-id\u0026#34;: \u0026#34;Dataset\u0026#34; }, If you are interested in relationships for a single DOI, we still recommend checking the metadata of that record, however Event Data is a great option for looking across multiple records. For example, to check for relationships across a prefix, in a given time period, or for a specific type of relationship.\nData citation Data citations can be included in data deposits in relationship metadata, usually using the ‘is-supplemented-by’ relationship. By creating an event from each relationship, the links between journal articles and books, and the data they rely on are more visible. This makes the data much easier to locate.\nMany datasets have DOIs which are usually recorded with DataCite, meaning you are unlikely to find them via searches of Crossref metadata. Making data citation relationship metadata available in Event Data means it will be available in the same format as citations from datasets to articles (which DataCite sends to Event Data) and citations from articles to datasets from Crossref reference metadata (more to come on this later this year). It also means we will convert this information into Scholix format so that it can be harvested and combined with other sets of Scholix-compliant article/data links. Data citations will therefore be available for the community to identify, share, link and recognise research data. We’re working with initiatives like Make Data Count and STM’s research data program to support the growing uptake of good data citation practices. This is a big step forward in making data citation happen for the community; we have more to do, but Crossref is committed to completing this work as a strategic priority.\nWhat’s next? In this first stage we are adding relationships that link two objects with a DOI, and later this year we will bring in relationships using other identifiers such as accession numbers and URIs. That will make it more straightforward to ask questions of Event Data such as which organisms have relationships to which works with a DOI.\nMore info and staying in touch Find out more about Event Data in our support documentation or check out tickets in the GitLab repo. Keep informed and ask us anything via our community forum for Event Data discussion ",
"headings": ["What are relationships?","Some examples","Relationships in the metadata show links to the published article from this bioRxiv preprint. In the Crossref Rest API:","And now in Event Data:","Linking to a dataset in the Dryad Digital Repository by a recent eLife article. In the Crossref metadata:","And now in Event Data:","Data citation","What’s next?","More info and staying in touch"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/authors/joel-schuweiler/",
"title": "Joel Schuweiler",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Authors",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/open-source-code-giving-back/",
"title": "Open-source code: giving back",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2021-04-30",
"lastmod_ts": 1619740800,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "TL:DR; Hi, I\u0026rsquo;m Joel GitLab UI unsatisfactory Wrote a UI to use the API Wrote a missing API Open company contributes changes back to another open company Now have a method for getting work done much easier Hurrah! I\u0026rsquo;m Joel, a Senior Site Reliability Engineer here at Crossref. I have a long background in open source, software development, and solving unique problems. One of my earliest computer influences was my father. He wrote software to support scientists in search of things like the top quark, the most massive of all observed elementary particles.\n",
"content": "TL:DR; Hi, I\u0026rsquo;m Joel GitLab UI unsatisfactory Wrote a UI to use the API Wrote a missing API Open company contributes changes back to another open company Now have a method for getting work done much easier Hurrah! I\u0026rsquo;m Joel, a Senior Site Reliability Engineer here at Crossref. I have a long background in open source, software development, and solving unique problems. One of my earliest computer influences was my father. He wrote software to support scientists in search of things like the top quark, the most massive of all observed elementary particles.\nOne day my father came home with over 40 floppy disks, excited to have this cool, free operating system called Linux. Together we installed Linux and ended up with a fully functional computer. Learning and using Linux opened up an entirely new world to me of amazing open-source software that I could use freely. As I enjoyed all this new software now available to me, I tried to fix any bugs or problems I\u0026rsquo;d encounter and report solutions for them to the software developers. It felt great to be able to contribute back so others could benefit.\nSoftware teams tend to manage their workflow by writing issues, reviewing them to make sure they make sense and have an achievable goal, estimate how much time it will take to complete, and finally––the crucial step––putting the issues in the order in which they should be completed. To manage my work, I’ve always used Jira––a product designed to help teams of all types prioritize work––and for the first time in over a decade, I find myself not using it in my work.\nProduct development tracking with GitLab The Crossref team took the decision a few years ago to move all our development and product tracking work via GitLab––a commercial open-source product anyone can use to help keep track of software throughout the development life cycle––with an open-by-default policy. Work is tracked using the issues feature of Gitlab. GitLab will host it, so you don\u0026rsquo;t have worry about maintenance and backups. One major drawback I discovered with GitLab, is a lack of maturity when it comes to doing light project management work.\nThis is where the trouble begins with GitLab.\nIn the board view of your issues, you can transition your issues from waiting, to in progress, from in progress to done. The problem with this view is its width-restricted, and things like tags on issues, which are used to help categorize, take up valuable vertical space. With enough tags and a long enough subject line, you can only see five issues at a time on a MacBook Pro monitor, for example.\nIn the list view of your issues, you get a clean compact view; the perfect view to order issues. However there\u0026rsquo;s one major flaw, it\u0026rsquo;s paginated. (You know when you\u0026rsquo;re shopping and they make you click to see another page of goods? Yes, like that.) The problem with GitLab\u0026rsquo;s implementation is you can drag and drop issues on a given page, but there is no way to move the issues to another page in the list of results. Additionally, all newly-created issues are added to the end of the list.\nThe solution I went about finding a solution by visiting GitLab\u0026rsquo;s own public issue page and found that requests requiring user interface (UI) changes would languish; in some cases, they would go years without getting approval. Instead of putting in all the work to open an issue with them, only to have it be discarded or ignored, I decided to look for another way.\nGitLab has an API, what more could I need? I discovered I could log in and get a list of all the issues, by project, and by group. \u0026ldquo;This is perfect!\u0026rdquo;, I thought. I can write my own UI around it. It took three evenings writing a UI that was satisfactory to me. When I started writing javascript to interact with the UI, I learned that the \u0026rsquo;re-ordering of issues\u0026rsquo; didn\u0026rsquo;t actually have an API. Further investigation lead me to the issue tracker where I found an issue by a GitLab employee asking for the same functionality––the ability to re-order issues.\nWhile in a chatroom for GitLab development, I was genuinely surprised by my experience. There was quick attentive help on locating the file I would need to implement the change, they set up a development environment, and even helped submit tests for my code while I worked on updating documentation and writing a changelog entry. It felt like GitLab must’ve designated an employee to work with the community on submitting improvements. In no time, the API for re-ordering was implemented. After the scheduled monthly release of GitLab rolled out with my new API, I was able to easily re-order issues.\nGitLab\u0026rsquo;s response when help was needed along the way was impressive. Now there is a much easier method for getting work done that everyone can use. It’s rewarding when you can contribute back to the community for all to benefit.\nIs GitLab as polished as Jira? No. Did they embrace me making changes by being open from the start and providing help along the way? Yes. Do I see Jira shifting its culture to match? Unlikely.\nBy emulating GitLab, an open organisation like Crossref has a shot at encouraging community development.\n",
"headings": ["TL:DR;","Product development tracking with GitLab","The solution"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/services/",
"title": "Find a service",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 4,
"lastmod": "2021-04-09",
"lastmod_ts": 1617926400,
"section": "Find a service",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref services for registering, linking, and distributing scholarly metadata — DOI registration, Similarity Check, Cited-by, Crossmark, and more.",
"content": "Metadata enables connections We offer a wide array of services to ensure that scholarly research metadata is registered, linked, and distributed. When members register their content with us, we collect both bibliographic and non-bibliographic metadata. We process it so that connections can be made between publications, people, organisations, and other associated outputs. We preserve the metadata we receive for the scholarly record. We also make it available across a range of interfaces and formats so that the community can use it and build tools with it.\nSome of our services are only available to members - most of these services are included your membership but some involve an extra fee (marked *). We also offer a range of services free of charge to the scholarly community, with the option of premium service versions at an extra charge (marked ~).\nMetadata retrieval (including Metadata Plus~)* Content Registration Reference linking Cited-by Funder Registry Similarity Check* Crossmark Overview of our services Crossref service Do you need to be a member? About the service and how it benefits you Metadata retrieval No The collective power of our members’ metadata is available to use through a variety of tools and APIs—allowing anyone to search and reuse the metadata in sophisticated ways.\nRead the factsheet in your language: English, español, العربية, bahasa Indonesia, português do Brasil, македонски Metadata Plus No Metadata Plus gives you enhanced access to all our supported APIs, guarantees service levels and support, and additional features such as snapshots and priority service/rate limits. Content Registration Yes Content Registration allows members to register and update metadata via machine or human interfaces. Read the factsheet in your language: English, español, العربية, bahasa Indonesia, português do Brasil, македонски Reference linking No Reference linking enables researchers to follow a link from the reference list to other full-text documents, helping them to make connections and discover new things. Read the factsheet in your language: English, español, العربية, bahasa Indonesia, português do Brasil, македонски Cited-by Yes Cited-by shows how work has been received by the wider community; displaying the number of times it has been cited, and linking to the citing content. Read the factsheet in your language: English, español, العربية, bahasa Indonesia, português do Brasil, македонски Funder Registry No The Funder Registry and associated funding metadata allows everyone to have transparency into research funding and its outcomes. It’s an open and unique registry of persistent identifiers for grant-giving organisations around the world.\nRead the factsheet in your language: English, español, العربية, bahasa Indonesia, português do Brasil, македонски Similarity Check Yes A service provided by Crossref and powered by iThenticate—Similarity Check provides editors with a user-friendly tool to help detect plagiarism.\nRead the factsheet in your language: English, español, العربية, bahasa Indonesia, português do Brasil, македонски Crossmark Yes The Crossmark button gives readers quick and easy access to the current status of an item of content, including any corrections, retractions, or updates to that record.\nRead the factsheet in your language: English, español, العربية, bahasa Indonesia, português do Brasil, македонски Register Rich metadata leads to greater discoverability\nThe more complete the metadata registered, the more accurate the view of the scholarly record and the more discoverable the content is to the scholarly community.\nThrough our content registration service, members register and maintain metadata for their content. We are interested in the full range of metadata for each publication, including information on:\ncontributors (such as authors, editors, reviewers) funding (such as funding body, grant number) publication history (such as versions, updates, revisions, corrections, retractions, dates) peer review (such as status, type, reviews) access indicators (such as publication license, text \u0026amp; data mining URLs, machine mining URLs) related resources \u0026amp; associated research artifacts (such as preprints, figures \u0026amp; tables, datasets, software, protocols, research resource IDs). Unique identifiers for authors, organisations, and associated scholarly outputs enhance precision and quality, members can deposit accurate funder acknowledgment metadata when they apply the unique funder identifier in Crossref’s Funder Registry service, a regularly updated, industry-standard taxonomy of grant-giving organisations.\nLink Linking improves the scholarly enterprise\nThe complete set of scholarly links spans time, geography, and disciplinary boundaries.\nWe connect all the metadata elements we can accurately identify, from all phases of publication, across content records in our vast corpus. We link literature to people, literature to resources and associated research artifacts, and soon, literature to the activity surrounding the publication. Amongst the vast web of links, we connect research output content to external tools such as Turnitin’s iThenticate in the Similarity Check service, assisting members in plagiarism detection. With the references deposited by members, Crossref offers a Cited-by service so that participating members can discover all the publications that have cited their content.\nRetrieve Metadata is meant to be used\nCrossref delivers metadata to systems throughout scholarly communications making content easy to find, cite, link, assess, and reuse.\nOur metadata retrieval service supports a diverse range of systems by offering a wide range of formats and interfaces. We do this because the range of organisations who use it \u0026ndash; from publishers to libraries, to funders to startups\u0026ndash;and how they use it, are diverse. Using metadata facilitates content discoverability\u0026ndash;if it’s rich metadata, all the better. Crossmark is a powerful example: Metadata is displayed on publication landing pages through the a widget that gives readers quick and easy access to the current status of an item of content. With one click, readers can see if content has been updated, corrected or retracted and access additional metadata provided by the member.\n",
"headings": ["Metadata enables connections","Overview of our services ","Register","Link","Retrieve"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/community/ambassadors/",
"title": "Ambassadors",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2021-03-10",
"lastmod_ts": 1615334400,
"section": "Get involved",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref Ambassadors are our trusted contacts who work within our communities (as librarians, researchers, publishers, societies, technologists, innovators) around the world and who share a great enthusiasm and belief in our work. Alongside their varied professional roles, they volunteer to support the scholarly community in their locales with ongoing communication, interactive workshops and training from Crossref. They are Crossref’s eyes and ears in the community, and a special part of our team. Meet our Ambassadors and find out more about them.\n",
"content": "Crossref Ambassadors are our trusted contacts who work within our communities (as librarians, researchers, publishers, societies, technologists, innovators) around the world and who share a great enthusiasm and belief in our work. Alongside their varied professional roles, they volunteer to support the scholarly community in their locales with ongoing communication, interactive workshops and training from Crossref. They are Crossref’s eyes and ears in the community, and a special part of our team. Meet our Ambassadors and find out more about them.\nWhat is it like to be an Ambassador? By being one of our ambassadors you will become a key part of the Crossref community; our first port of call for updates or to test out new products or services, well connected to our wide network of members and you will work closely with us to make scholarly communications better for all.\nThe benefits to ambassadors are:\nThe opportunity to expand your network and forge new relationships with the scholarly research community. Training opportunities in a range of skills and Crossref services. The inside scoop on all things Crossref and happenings in research communications. A sneak preview of new Crossref services and initiatives. Official endorsement and recognition of your role. How we support them We want to make sure our ambassadors have the help they need to succeed in their roles. We’ll contact you with all the information to bring you on-board and we’ll schedule regular catch-ups to give any updates, answer any questions and generally check-in with you. We’ll also give you access to resource packs to assist your outreach activities (including slide decks and handouts), special edition ambassador digital badges and other goodies. We will also help support your attendance at relevant Crossref meetings so that you can see what we’re working on and what’s coming next!\nHow they support our communities We’re setting up the ambassador program as we’ve heard from members and users they would like\u0026hellip;\nA local expert on-hand to provide support as and when required. Increased training events both online and in person, in your local region, timezone and language. Representatives from Crossref at events in your region. A conduit for other members and stakeholders in the region. A liaison to the Crossref teams in the US and Europe. Apply to become an Ambassador If you are interested in working with us please fill out the form below to give us a little information about yourself. We’ll then get back to you to follow-up and discuss your plans and ideas. The program is very flexible so you can pick and choose what you’d like to be involved in based on your other commitments - we know that people are busy!\nIf you\u0026rsquo;re a brand new member and still getting to grips with everything Crossref, then this role may be a little too advanced for you. However, our services page is full of helpful information and you could look into attending one of our webinars or LIVE local events to find out more.\nLoading... If you are unable to access the form above, please download this pdf and send it back to us.\nPlease contact our community team with any questions.\n",
"headings": ["What is it like to be an Ambassador?","How we support them","How they support our communities","Apply to become an Ambassador"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/authors/mike-yalter/",
"title": "Mike Yalter",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Authors",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/stepping-up-our-deposit-processing-game/",
"title": "Stepping up our deposit processing game",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2021-03-08",
"lastmod_ts": 1615161600,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "Some of you who have submitted content to us during the first two months of 2021 may have experienced content registration delays. We noticed; you did, too.\nThe time between us receiving XML from members, to the content being registered with us and the DOI resolving to the correct resolution URL, is usually a matter of minutes. Some submissions take longer - for example, book registrations with large reference lists, or very large files from larger publishers can take up to 24 to 48 hours to process.\n",
"content": "Some of you who have submitted content to us during the first two months of 2021 may have experienced content registration delays. We noticed; you did, too.\nThe time between us receiving XML from members, to the content being registered with us and the DOI resolving to the correct resolution URL, is usually a matter of minutes. Some submissions take longer - for example, book registrations with large reference lists, or very large files from larger publishers can take up to 24 to 48 hours to process.\nHowever, in January and February 2021 we saw content registration delays of several days for all record types and all file sizes.\nTell me more Januaries and Februaries are usually busy at Crossref. Journal ownership changes hands. Members migrate from one platform to another (and can need to update tens of thousands of their resolution URLs). And, many of you are registering your first issues, books, or conferences of the year. Others of you have heard the calls of The Initiative for Open Citations (I4OC) and The Initiative for Open Abstracts (I4OA) and are enriching your metadata accordingly (thank you!). Tickets into our support and membership colleagues peak for the year. But did we see significantly more submissions this year?\nAs you can see, we did see larger-than-normal numbers of submissions in the first two months of the year. For the entire month of January 2021, we received nearly 1 million more submissions into our admin tool deposit queue than we did in January 2020 (2,757,781 in 2021 versus 1,848,261 in 2020). Under normal circumstances, this would lead to an increase in our processing times, so there’s that to consider. But there was also something else at play this year. We desperately needed to upgrade our load balancer, and so we did. Unfortunately, unforeseen at the time, these upgrades caused hiccups in our deposit processing and slowed down submissions even further, building up the number of unprocessed submissions in the queue.\nWhen we saw the impact this was having we suspended the load balancer work until things were stable again. We also increased the resources serving our queue to bring it back down to normal. To make sure we don\u0026rsquo;t face the same problem again, we have put in better tools to detect trends in queue usage- tools which, in turn, will allow us to anticipate problems in the queue instead of reacting to them after they\u0026rsquo;ve already occurred. And as a longer-term project, we are addressing two decades of technical debt and rearchitecting our system so that our entire system is much more efficient.\nGory technical details As part of our effort to resolve our technical debt, we\u0026rsquo;re looking to transition more of our services to the cloud. To accomplish this, we first needed to upgrade our internal traffic handling capabilities to route things to their new locations better. This upgrade caused some unforeseen and hard to notice problems, like the queue being stalled. Since the queue still showed things in process, it wasn\u0026rsquo;t immediately apparent that things were not processing (normally the processing on the queue will clear a thread if a significant problem occurs).\nWe initially noticed a problem on 5 February and thought we had a fix in place on the 10th. But, we again realized on 16 February that the underlying problem had recurred, and we needed a closer investigation.\nFor many reasons it took us too much time to realize the connection, until people started complaining.\nWhile our technical team worked on those load balancer upgrades, some of your submissions lingered for days in the deposit queue. In a few examples, larger submissions took over a week to complete processing. Total pending submissions began to push nearly 100,000, an unusually large backlog. We called an emergency meeting, paused all related work, and dedicated additional time and resources to processing all pending submissions. On 22 February, we completed working through the backlog of pending submissions and new submissions were being processed at normal levels. As we finish up this blog on 2 March, there are less than 3,000 pending submissions in the queue, the oldest of which has been there for less than three hours.\nThis brings us back to the entire rationale for what we are doing with the load balancer - which, ironically, was to move some services out of the data centre so that we could free-up resources and scale things more dynamically to match the ebbs and flows of your content registration.\nBut before we proceed, we\u0026rsquo;ll be looking at what happened. The bumps associated with upgrading ancient software were expected, so we were looking for side effects. We just didn\u0026rsquo;t look in the right place. And we should have detected that the queues had stalled well before people started to report it to us. A lot of our queue management is still manual. This means we are not adjusting it 24x7. So if something does come in when we are not around, it can exacerbate problems quickly.\nWhat are we going to do about it? In a word: much. We know that timely deposit processing is critical. We can and will do better.\nFirst off, we have increased the number of concurrently processing threads dedicated to metadata uploads in our deposit queue from 20 to 25. That’s a permanent increase. A million more submissions in a month necessitates additional resources, but that’s only a short-term patch. And we were only able to make this change recently due to some index optimizations we implemented late last year.\nOne of the other things that we\u0026rsquo;ve immediately put into place is a better system for measuring trends in our queue usage so that we can, in turn, anticipate rather than react to surges in the queue. And, of course, the next step will be to automate this queue management.\nAll this is part of an overall, multi-year effort to address a boat-load of technical debt that we\u0026rsquo;ve accumulated over two decades. Our system was designed to handle a few million DOIs. It has been incrementally poked and prodded to deal with well over a hundred million. But it is suffering.\nAnybody who is even semi-technically-aware might be wondering what all the fuss is about? Why can\u0026rsquo;t we fix this relatively easily? After all, 130 million records\u0026mdash;though a significant milestone for Crossref\u0026mdash;does not in any way qualify as \u0026ldquo;big data.\u0026rdquo; All our DOI records fit onto an average sized micro-SD card. There are open source toolchains that can manage data many, many times this size. We\u0026rsquo;ve occasionally used these tools to load and analyse all our DOI records on a desktop computer. And it has taken in just a few minutes (admittedly using a beefier-than-usual desktop computer). So how can a queue with just 100,000 items in it take so long to process?\nOur scale problem isn\u0026rsquo;t so much about the number of records we process. It is about the 20 years of accumulated processing rules and services that we have in place. Much of it undocumented and the rationale for which has been lost over the decades. It is this complexity that slows us down.\nAnd one of the challenges we face as we move to a new architecture is deciding which of these rules and services are \u0026ldquo;essential complexity\u0026rdquo; and which are not. For example, we have very complex rules for verifying that submissions contain a correct journal title. These rules involve a lot of text matching and, until they are successfully completed, they block the rest of the registration process.\nBut the workflow these rules are designed for is one that was developed before ISSNs were widely deposited and before we had our own, internal title identifiers for items that do not have an ISSN. And so a lot of this process is probably anachronistic. It is not clear which (if any) parts of it are still essential.\nWe have layers upon layers of these kinds of processing rules, many of which are mutually dependent and which are therefore not easily amenable to the kind of horizontal scaling that is the basis for modern, scalable data processing toolchains. All this means that, as part of moving to a new architecture, we also have to understand which rules and services we need to move over and which ones have outlived their usefulness. And we need to understand which remaining rules can be decoupled so that they can be run in parallel instead of in sequence.\nPro tip: Due to the current checks performed in our admin tool, for those of you submitting XML, the most efficient way to do so is by packaging the equivalent of a journal issue\u0026rsquo;s worth of content in each submission (i.e., ten to twelve content items - a 1 MB submission is our suggested file size when striving for efficient processing)\nWhich brings us conveniently back to queues. We did not react soon enough to the queue backing up. We can do much better at monitoring and managing our existing registration pipeline infrastructure. But we are not fooling ourselves into thinking this will deal with the systemic issue.\nWe recognize that, with current technology and tools, it is absurd that a queue of 100,000 items should take so long to process. It is also important that people know that we are addressing the root of the issues as well. And that we\u0026rsquo;re not succumbing to the now-legendary anti-pattern of trying to rewrite our system from scratch. Instead we are building a framework that will allow us to incrementally extract the essential complexity of our existing system and discard some of the anachronistic jetsam that has accumulated over the years.\nContent Registration should typically take seconds. We wanted to let you know, that we know, and we are working on it.\n",
"headings": ["Tell me more","Gory technical details","What are we going to do about it?"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/working-groups/crossmark/",
"title": "Crossmark advisory group",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 2,
"lastmod": "2021-02-26",
"lastmod_ts": 1614297600,
"section": "Working groups",
"tags": [],
"description": "The Crossmark Advisory Group’s role is to provide Crossref with policy and technical advice on changes and developments to Crossmark. The group is comprised of Crossref members who have implemented or are planning to implement Crossmark on their publications, and is lead by a Chair and Crossref staff facilitator. It is currently not active.\nGroup members Chair: TBC Facilitator: Martyn Rittman, Crossref\nChristopher McMahon, AIP Emily-Sue Sloane, AIP Theo Bloom, BMJ Keith Waters, CUP Egbert van Wezenbeek, Elsevier Omer Gazit, F1000 Research Michael Evans, F1000 Research Peter Strickland, IUCr Joseph Brown, PLOS Rob O’Donnell, Rockefeller University Press Michael Waters, Springer David Burgoyne, T\u0026amp;F Nicholas Everitt, T\u0026amp;F Edward Wates, Wiley How the group works (and the guidelines) Members commit to attend all meetings by conference call, and may choose to send a named proxy if they are not available. Meeting notes will be circulated to all by the facilitator. The schedule of meetings is at the discretion of the chair and facilitator and may vary depending on whether there are relevant topics for discussion, but will not be more than one per quarter.\n",
"content": "The Crossmark Advisory Group’s role is to provide Crossref with policy and technical advice on changes and developments to Crossmark. The group is comprised of Crossref members who have implemented or are planning to implement Crossmark on their publications, and is lead by a Chair and Crossref staff facilitator. It is currently not active.\nGroup members Chair: TBC Facilitator: Martyn Rittman, Crossref\nChristopher McMahon, AIP Emily-Sue Sloane, AIP Theo Bloom, BMJ Keith Waters, CUP Egbert van Wezenbeek, Elsevier Omer Gazit, F1000 Research Michael Evans, F1000 Research Peter Strickland, IUCr Joseph Brown, PLOS Rob O’Donnell, Rockefeller University Press Michael Waters, Springer David Burgoyne, T\u0026amp;F Nicholas Everitt, T\u0026amp;F Edward Wates, Wiley How the group works (and the guidelines) Members commit to attend all meetings by conference call, and may choose to send a named proxy if they are not available. Meeting notes will be circulated to all by the facilitator. The schedule of meetings is at the discretion of the chair and facilitator and may vary depending on whether there are relevant topics for discussion, but will not be more than one per quarter.\nWith the exception of Crossref staff, the group will be limited to one representative from each participating organisation, unless particular agenda items or topics call for domain expertise from specific colleagues or departments. Members are, however, free to discuss the information shared during meetings with colleagues or any external party.\nPlease contact Martyn Rittman with any questions or to apply to join the advisory group.\n",
"headings": ["Group members","How the group works (and the guidelines)"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/working-groups/event-data/",
"title": "Event Data advisory group",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2021-02-26",
"lastmod_ts": 1614297600,
"section": "Working groups",
"tags": [],
"description": "Event Data has been sunset as a project and this group has therefore been retired.\nThe purpose of the Event Data Advisory Group is to provide Crossref with policy and technical advice regarding developments, changes and improvements to the Crossref Event Data service. The group is comprised of both our members as well as non-members (third party platforms and organisations) who are interested in consuming our Event Data records for their own use case.\n",
"content": "Event Data has been sunset as a project and this group has therefore been retired.\nThe purpose of the Event Data Advisory Group is to provide Crossref with policy and technical advice regarding developments, changes and improvements to the Crossref Event Data service. The group is comprised of both our members as well as non-members (third party platforms and organisations) who are interested in consuming our Event Data records for their own use case.\nGroup Members Chair: John Chodacki, California Digital Library Facilitator: Martyn Rittman, Crossref\nEuan Adie, Altmetric Tim Stevenson, BioMed Central Theo Bloom, BMJ Martin Fenner, DataCite Mike Taylor, Digital Science Mark Patterson, eLife Craig Jurney, Highwire Sebastian Pöhlmann, Mendeley Maciej Rymarz, Mendeley Juan Pablo Alperin, Public Knowledge Project Katie Hickling, PLOS Lorraine Estelle, COUNTER Damian Pattinson, Research Square Martijn Roelandse, Springer Nature Christian Hauschke, TIB Leibniz Universität Hannover Mike Thelwell, University of Wolverhampton Liz Ferguson, Wiley Christina Lohr, Elsevier Kaveh Bazargan, River Valley Technologies How the group works (and the guidelines) The Event Data Advisory Group is led by a Chair and a Crossref Facilitator, who together help to develop meeting agendas, lead discussions, outline group actions and rally the community outside of the Advisory Group for support with the service where appropriate.\nThe Working Group has been retired and Crossref Event Data is no longer running.\nPlease contact Martyn Rittman with any questions.\n",
"headings": ["Group Members","How the group works (and the guidelines)"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/truths/",
"title": "Our truths",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2021-02-26",
"lastmod_ts": 1614297600,
"section": "Our truths",
"tags": [],
"description": "These are the Crossref truths. These are the principles that guide us in everything we do. They were tested with members and adopted by our board in 2016. We tweaked and added \u0026ldquo;What you see, what you get\u0026rdquo; in 2017.\nCome one, come all We define publishing broadly. If you communicate research and care about preserving the scholarly record, join us. We are a global community of members with content in all disciplines, in many formats, and with all kinds of business models.\n",
"content": "These are the Crossref truths. These are the principles that guide us in everything we do. They were tested with members and adopted by our board in 2016. We tweaked and added \u0026ldquo;What you see, what you get\u0026rdquo; in 2017.\nCome one, come all We define publishing broadly. If you communicate research and care about preserving the scholarly record, join us. We are a global community of members with content in all disciplines, in many formats, and with all kinds of business models.\nOne member, one vote Help us set the agenda. It doesn’t matter how big or small you are, every member gets a single vote to create a board that represents all types of members.\nSmart alone, brilliant together Collaboration is at the core of everything we do. We involve the community through active working groups and committees. Our focus is on things that are best achieved by working together.\nLove metadata, love technology We do R\u0026amp;D to support and expand the shared infrastructure we run for the scholarly community. We create open tools and APIs to help enrich and exchange metadata with thousands of third parties, to drive discoverability of our members’ content.\nWhat you see, what you get Ask us anything. We’ll tell you what we know. Openness and transparency are principles that guide everything we do.\nHere today, here tomorrow We’re here for the long haul. Our obsession with persistence applies to all things\u0026mdash;metadata, links, technology, and the organisation. But “persistent” doesn’t mean “static”; as research communications continues to evolve, so do we.\nPlease let us know what you think by contacting our outreach team.\n",
"headings": ["Come one, come all","One member, one vote","Smart alone, brilliant together","Love metadata, love technology","What you see, what you get","Here today, here tomorrow"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/discuss-all-things-metadata-in-our-new-community-forum/",
"title": "Discuss all things metadata in our new community forum",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2021-02-11",
"lastmod_ts": 1613001600,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "TL;DR: We have a Community Forum (yay!), you can come and join it here: community.crossref.org.\nCommunity is fundamental to us at Crossref, we wouldn’t be where we are or achieve the great things we do without the involvement of you, our diverse and engaged members and users. Crossref was founded as a collaboration of publishers with the shared goal of making links between research outputs easier, building a foundational infrastructure making research easier to find, cite, link, assess, and re-use. It is at the very core of what we do and who we are. Our global community now includes publishers, libraries, government agencies, funders, researchers, universities, ambassadors, and more from over 140 countries. We are also actively part of the larger scholarly research community, which includes other open scholarly infrastructure organisations, metadata users and aggregators, open science initiatives, and others with shared aims and values.\n",
"content": "TL;DR: We have a Community Forum (yay!), you can come and join it here: community.crossref.org.\nCommunity is fundamental to us at Crossref, we wouldn’t be where we are or achieve the great things we do without the involvement of you, our diverse and engaged members and users. Crossref was founded as a collaboration of publishers with the shared goal of making links between research outputs easier, building a foundational infrastructure making research easier to find, cite, link, assess, and re-use. It is at the very core of what we do and who we are. Our global community now includes publishers, libraries, government agencies, funders, researchers, universities, ambassadors, and more from over 140 countries. We are also actively part of the larger scholarly research community, which includes other open scholarly infrastructure organisations, metadata users and aggregators, open science initiatives, and others with shared aims and values.\nWhat do we mean by \u0026lsquo;community\u0026rsquo;? ‘Community’ is often one of those words which gets bandied around without much thought given to its meaning. At Crossref, we are aware that expertise lies within our broad, global community and we engage with them (you!) in a variety of ways to ensure that decisions we make are community-led and that what we do, as well as what we don’t do, are in line with the views of our members and developed with your insights and input. We do this via our working groups, committees, ambassador program, beta-testing groups, in-person and online events, webinars, and on-going dialogues and feedback via our support channels and even social media. We are also involved in a number of collaborative projects with other organisations such as ROR, Metadata 2020, Make Data Count, PIDapooloza, and the FREYA project to name but a few.\nCommunity is more than just signing up to be a Crossref member. It’s more than just attending an event or a webinar, or levelling up to include the use of a service like Crossmark or Similarity Check –– it’s really engaging with us and creating something together of shared value for the scholarly community. As an organisation, we’ve been so thrilled that there is a new group dedicated to highlighting community managers and our work. We are working with –– and learning a lot from –– the Centre for Scientific Collaboration \u0026amp; Community Engagement to improve the way we interact and involve people in Crossref. The model below shows a trajectory towards true collaboration that we aim to follow in the coming months and years.\nCite as: Center for Scientific Collaboration and Community Engagement. (2020) The CSCCE Community Participation Model – A framework for member engagement and information flow in STEM communities. Woodley and Pratt doi: 10.5281/zenodo.3997802\nIn the current climate, there are additional challenges and limitations on how we interact with all the various communities that we as individuals are a part of, both professionally and personally. I wrote in my last blog about how we have moved our events online and thought about new ways to better connect and engage with our community virtually. One of those ways is our Community Forum.\nThe purpose of our community forum Hosted on the open-source discussion platform Discourse, you can find our forum at community.crossref.org. The goal of the community forum is to create an inclusive, open space where Crossref members, ambassadors, sponsors, service providers, and others who share a passion for scholarly infrastructure, can connect. This enables collaborative problem-solving, the sharing of expertise and experiences across time zones and languages, and allows members to post questions to be answered by other community members or even our staff. Members of the community engage via creating posts, commenting on existing content in the forum, volunteering for working groups or beta-testing projects, helping to co-create materials that include translations and shared FAQs, giving feedback on new developments, and joining online events and webinars. Throughout these interactions, we expect that those who use the community forum will form relationships –– a collective working together to advance their work with Crossref and shape the future of scholarly infrastructure.\nWhen I joined Crossref as Community Manager over three years ago, the idea of a forum had already begun to take shape, but it wasn’t quite there just yet. There was additional research and consultation with the community to be done to check this was the approach we wanted to take.\nThis involved speaking to others working in scholarly communications about forums they were involved in running or were an active participant of –– check out the PKP forum for instance if you haven’t already –– and having numerous valuable conversations about successes, potential downfalls, and realistic expectations. The most important –– and commonly cited –– takeaway is that building an online community takes time. We are still at the start of this journey. It will only work if it is a place of value for all and a place where people feel a sense of belonging and co-ownership.\nPreparing to rollout the forum We tested the platform with a small group of beta-testers and also sent out a survey to over 1,700 of our members, taking a sample with a geographical and organisational spread. The responses thankfully held no major surprises and reinforced our belief that this is something of use to people.\nKey research findings 77% of respondents had previously contacted our Support team for help resolving an issue. 90% stated either ‘yes’ or ‘maybe’ to whether they would use a community forum to post their questions, though over half have never used a forum before. Most common reasons of importance for joining are \u0026lsquo;Community support in solving issues or answering questions\u0026rsquo;, \u0026lsquo;To locate FAQs and quickly find answers to common issues\u0026rsquo;, and \u0026lsquo;To connect with others working in a similar role and/or with similar interests\u0026rsquo; Most commonly-stated things that would discourage or limit member’s participation would be how time-consuming and complex the forum is to use, and any potential language barriers. Things you can do on the forum We hope this will provide a much more open level of support for the community, enabling us to bring out all those great questions and thoughtful conversations we receive via our Support channels into the public sphere, where we can all benefit from these rich exchanges. Ultimately our goal for the future is that this space is owned by you, the Crossref community. This is a platform for you to connect and build relationships with others working in scholarly communications: metadata fanatics, identifier aficionados, developer gurus, and open research enthusiasts - we welcome you all!\nShare what activities or projects you are working on and get input from others. Share issues that you need some help resolving, post a question to the forum in your native language and get help from another community member. Give us feedback on our plans and help us shape future developments at Crossref. Test out new tools and services. Find out about upcoming events and webinars, and share any you think are of interest to the community. Help us identify better ways of working together through Crossref and co-create new materials and projects. How to get started So, how do I sign up you ask? Simply head over to community.crossref.org and set up an account. There\u0026rsquo;s a useful How-To guide available on our welcome post, as well as some Community Guidelines all our members should follow.\nDo you have a question about registering or updating your metadata? Then head over to the Content Registration category and post your query to the group. Want to find out about getting started with Similarity Check service? Then take a look at our Similarity Check topic in our services category. Or maybe you want to know more about upcoming multilingual webinars at Crossref, or perhaps you have one of your own you’d like to share? Then check out the Community Calendar.\nWe’re also looking for talented linguists out there to help us translate our welcome email template into multiple languages so that anyone joining the community can get a welcome in their native language. To join in, visit my post in our ‘Questions from Crossref’ category.\nWe look forward to seeing you in the community soon!\n",
"headings": ["What do we mean by \u0026lsquo;community\u0026rsquo;?","The purpose of our community forum","Preparing to rollout the forum","Key research findings","Things you can do on the forum","How to get started"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/cited-by/",
"title": "Cited-by",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2021-02-09",
"lastmod_ts": 1612828800,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": " Cited-by supports members who display citations, enabling the community to discover connections between research outputs. Scholars use citations to critique and build on existing research, acknowledging the contributions of others. Members can include references in their metadata deposits which Crossref uses to create links between works that cite each other. The number of citations each work receives is visible to anyone through our public APIs. Through our Cited-by service, members who deposit reference metadata can retrieve everything they need to display citations on their website.\n",
"content": " Cited-by supports members who display citations, enabling the community to discover connections between research outputs. Scholars use citations to critique and build on existing research, acknowledging the contributions of others. Members can include references in their metadata deposits which Crossref uses to create links between works that cite each other. The number of citations each work receives is visible to anyone through our public APIs. Through our Cited-by service, members who deposit reference metadata can retrieve everything they need to display citations on their website.\nMembers who use this service are helping readers to:\neasily navigate to related research, see how the work has been received by the wider community, explore how ideas evolve over time by highlighting connections between works. Watch the introductory Cited-by animation in your language:\nEnglish 한국어 Japanese Chinese Español Français Bahasa Indonesia العربية 한국어 Português do Brasil How Cited-by works Cited-by begins with references deposited as part of the metadata records for your content. Learn more about depositing references.\nShow image\r×\rA member registers content for a work, the citing paper. This metadata deposit includes the reference list. Crossref automatically checks these references for matches to other registered content. If this is successful, a relationship between the two works is created. Crossref logs these relationships and updates the citation counts for each work. You can retrieve citation counts through our public APIs.\nMembers can use the Cited-by service to retrieve the full list of citing works, along with all the bibliographic details needed to display them on their website.\nNote that citations from Crossref may differ from those provided by other services because we only look for links between Crossref-registered works and don\u0026rsquo;t share the same method to find matches.\nObligations and fees for Cited-by Participation in Cited-by is optional, but encouraged. There is no charge for Cited-by. Depositing references is not a requirement, but strongly encouraged if you are using Cited-by. Best practice for Cited-by Because citations can happen at any time, Cited-by links must be kept up-to-date. Members should either check regularly for new citations or (if performing XML queries) set the alert attribute to true. This means the search will be saved in the system and you’ll get an alert when there is a new match.\nDepositing your own references is strongly encouraged if you use Cited-by. If you don\u0026rsquo;t, the citations you retrieve will not include those from your own works. This is likely to lead to under-reporting of citations counts by at least 20% and you are missing the opportunity to point readers to other similar works on your platform.\nShow image × Download the Cited-by factsheet, and explore factsheets for other Crossref services and in different languages.\nHow to access citation matches Members who deposit references allow them to be retrieved by anyone using our public APIs. For example:\nhttp://api.crossref.org/works?filter=has-references:true Also in the metadata is the number of citations a work has received, under the tag \u0026quot;is-referenced-by-count\u0026quot;.\nTo retrieve the full list of citations you need be a member using Cited-by. While anyone can use an API query to see the number of citations a work has received, members can retrieve a full list of citing DOIs and callback notifications informing them when one of their works has been cited. Details of the citing works can be displayed on your website alongside the article.\n",
"headings": ["Cited-by supports members who display citations, enabling the community to discover connections between research outputs.","How Cited-by works ","Obligations and fees for Cited-by ","Best practice for Cited-by ","How to access citation matches "]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/services/cited-by/",
"title": "Cited-by",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 5,
"lastmod": "2021-02-09",
"lastmod_ts": 1612828800,
"section": "Find a service",
"tags": [],
"description": " Cited-by supports members who display citations, enabling the community to discover connections between research outputs. Scholars use citations to critique and build on existing research, acknowledging the contributions of others. Members can include references in their metadata deposits which Crossref uses to create links between works that cite each other. The number of citations each work receives is visible to anyone through our public APIs. Through our Cited-by service, members who deposit reference metadata can retrieve everything they need to display citations on their website.\n",
"content": " Cited-by supports members who display citations, enabling the community to discover connections between research outputs. Scholars use citations to critique and build on existing research, acknowledging the contributions of others. Members can include references in their metadata deposits which Crossref uses to create links between works that cite each other. The number of citations each work receives is visible to anyone through our public APIs. Through our Cited-by service, members who deposit reference metadata can retrieve everything they need to display citations on their website.\nMembers who use this service are helping readers to:\neasily navigate to related research, see how the work has been received by the wider community, explore how ideas evolve over time by highlighting connections between works. Watch the introductory Cited-by animation in your language:\nEnglish 한국어 Japanese Chinese Español Français Bahasa Indonesia العربية 한국어 Português do Brasil How Cited-by works Cited-by begins with references deposited as part of the metadata records for your content. Learn more about depositing references.\nShow image\r×\rA member registers content for a work, the citing paper. This metadata deposit includes the reference list. Crossref automatically checks these references for matches to other registered content. If this is successful, a relationship between the two works is created. Crossref logs these relationships and updates the citation counts for each work. You can retrieve citation counts through our public APIs.\nMembers can use the Cited-by service to retrieve the full list of citing works, along with all the bibliographic details needed to display them on their website.\nNote that citations from Crossref may differ from those provided by other services because we only look for links between Crossref-registered works and don\u0026rsquo;t share the same method to find matches.\nObligations and fees for Cited-by Participation in Cited-by is optional, but encouraged. There is no charge for Cited-by. Depositing references is not a requirement, but strongly encouraged if you are using Cited-by. Best practice for Cited-by Because citations can happen at any time, Cited-by links must be kept up-to-date. Members should either check regularly for new citations or (if performing XML queries) set the alert attribute to true. This means the search will be saved in the system and you’ll get an alert when there is a new match.\nDepositing your own references is strongly encouraged if you use Cited-by. If you don\u0026rsquo;t, the citations you retrieve will not include those from your own works. This is likely to lead to under-reporting of citations counts by at least 20% and you are missing the opportunity to point readers to other similar works on your platform.\nShow image × Download the Cited-by factsheet, and explore factsheets for other Crossref services and in different languages.\nHow to access citation matches Members who deposit references allow them to be retrieved by anyone using our public APIs. For example:\nhttp://api.crossref.org/works?filter=has-references:true Also in the metadata is the number of citations a work has received, under the tag \u0026quot;is-referenced-by-count\u0026quot;.\nTo retrieve the full list of citations you need be a member using Cited-by. While anyone can use an API query to see the number of citations a work has received, members can retrieve a full list of citing DOIs and callback notifications informing them when one of their works has been cited. Details of the citing works can be displayed on your website alongside the article.\nGetting started with Cited-by Learn more about Cited-by in our documentation.\n",
"headings": ["Cited-by supports members who display citations, enabling the community to discover connections between research outputs.","How Cited-by works ","Obligations and fees for Cited-by ","Best practice for Cited-by ","How to access citation matches ","Getting started with Cited-by "]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/working-groups/funders/",
"title": "Funder advisory group",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 3,
"lastmod": "2021-02-07",
"lastmod_ts": 1612656000,
"section": "Working groups",
"tags": [],
"description": "The Funder Advisory Group was originally formed to help with the development of our funding data and Funder Registry capabilities. As those services matured, the group re-convened in 2017 to discuss ways in which funders can take advantage of Crossref\u0026rsquo;s infrastructure to register grant metadata and engage more officially by becoming members. As the result of work completed in 2018, research funders are now able to join, register their grants with metadata and DOIs and reap the full benefits of membership. Funders, publishers and the entire community can contribute to and benefit from linking grants to outputs.\n",
"content": "The Funder Advisory Group was originally formed to help with the development of our funding data and Funder Registry capabilities. As those services matured, the group re-convened in 2017 to discuss ways in which funders can take advantage of Crossref\u0026rsquo;s infrastructure to register grant metadata and engage more officially by becoming members. As the result of work completed in 2018, research funders are now able to join, register their grants with metadata and DOIs and reap the full benefits of membership. Funders, publishers and the entire community can contribute to and benefit from linking grants to outputs.\nThe current Advisory Group is a mix of members, prospective members and representatives of related initiatives, and meets as needed to discuss Crossref developments as well as changes to the broader landscape, such as the recent calls for research funding transparency by the International Science Council.\nSome use cases for registering grants Multi-country funding e.g. the Australian Research Council wants to know which other countries their awardees get additional funding from. Government vs. private funding relationships e.g. which private funders work with which governments to support what kind of research? Co-funding e.g. which other funders do my grantees tend to receive support from as well as us? Portfolio analysis e.g. a funder invests in centers and individual scientists; which effort generates more products? More on use cases and example queries is provided in this blog post overview. Case studies for some of our funder members can be found in this blog series.\nWhat the group is working on In 2025, the group:\nReviewed the new Participation Reports, which now supports grants as content Discussed developments of the Barcelona Declaration Completed a survey about Crossref fees and formed a fees consultation working group Discussed updates to Crossref grants metadata schema *Chair and facilitator: Kornelia Korzec, Crossref\nDiego-Valerio Chialva, European Research Council Patricia Feeney, Crossref Rocio Gaudioso Pedraza, Crossref Hannah Hope, Wellcome, UK Melissa Harrison, EMBL-EBI, UK Ginny Hendricks, Crossref Adam Jones, The Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation, USA Natasha Simons, ARC, Australia Justin Withers, ARC, Australia Ashley Farley, The Gates Foundation, USA Kiley Goldstein, The ALS Association, USA Cátia Laranjeira, Foundation for Science and Technology, Portual Cindy Danielson, National Institutes of Health, USA Carly Strasser, CZI, USA David Vestergaard Eriksen, Ministry of Higher Education and Science, Denmark Mogens Sandfaer, Ministry of Higher Education and Science, Denmark M. Brent Dolezalek, James S. McDonnell Foundation, USA Josh Greenberg, Sloan Foundation, USA Katharina Rieck, Austrian Science Fund, Austria Kristen Ratan, Strategies for Open Science (Stratos), USA Linda Kee, American Cancer Society, USA Maryrose Franko, Health Research Alliance, USA Rita Barata, CAPES, Brazil Sheila Rabun, LYRASIS, USA Alexis-Michel Mugabushaka, European Research Council, France Lisa Murphy,\tScience Foundation Ireland, Ireland Alicia Smyth, Science Foundation Ireland, Ireland Masashi Hara, JST, Japan Yoshiro Hirao, JST, Japan Lucy Ofiesh, Crossref Dominika Tkaczyk, Crossref Erin McKiernan, Open Research Funders Group Michael Parkin, EMBL-EBI, UK Steve Pinchotti, Altum Katharina Rieck, FWF, Austria Michaela Strinzel, Swiss National Science Foundation Elizabeth Agee, DOE, USA Natasha Simons, ARDC, Australia Nidhi Wahi,\tNASA, USA Joanne Calhoun, NASA, USA Ginger Strader Minkiewicz, Smithsonian Institution, USA Ann Fust, Swedish Research Council, Sweden Cynthia Parr, USDA, USA Scott Hanscom, USDA, USA Vicky Crone, USDA, USA Benjamin Missbach, Vienna Science and Technology Fund, Austria Clifford Tatum, SURF, Netherlands Guntram Bauer, Human Frontier Science Program, USA Hans de Jonge, NWO (Dutch Research Council), Netherlands Angela Holzer, DFG (German Research Foundation), Germany Tobias Grimm, DFG (German Research Foundation), Germany Martin Halbert, National Science Foundation (NSF), USA Shawna Sadler, ORCID Original working group participants A big thanks to the group of volunteers who at various stages jumped in to help make the registration of grants a reality.\nLinks \u0026amp; more information Crossref for funders Crossref Grant Linking System Registering research grants Metadata schema for grants Please contact Ginny Hendricks with any questions.\n",
"headings": ["Some use cases for registering grants","What the group is working on","Original working group participants","Links \u0026amp; more information"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/event-data-a-plan-of-action/",
"title": "Event Data: A Plan of Action",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2021-02-01",
"lastmod_ts": 1612137600,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "Event Data uncovers links between Crossref-registered DOIs and diverse places where they are mentioned across the internet. Whereas a citation links one research article to another, events are a way to create links to locations such as news articles, data sets, Wikipedia entries, and social media mentions. We\u0026rsquo;ve collected events for several years and make them openly available via an API for anyone to access, as well as creating open logs of how we found each event. Some organisations are already using Event Data and we are keen for more to come on board.\n",
"content": "Event Data uncovers links between Crossref-registered DOIs and diverse places where they are mentioned across the internet. Whereas a citation links one research article to another, events are a way to create links to locations such as news articles, data sets, Wikipedia entries, and social media mentions. We\u0026rsquo;ve collected events for several years and make them openly available via an API for anyone to access, as well as creating open logs of how we found each event. Some organisations are already using Event Data and we are keen for more to come on board.\nLast year we gave an update on Event Data with apologies for being so quiet and a promise of more information at a later date. It\u0026rsquo;s been some time, so here goes\u0026hellip;\nI joined Crossref in the middle of last year as a Product Manager and was tasked with looking into Event Data. The first thing I found was a large amount of enthusiasm for Event Data, both within Crossref and further afield. The idea of gathering information beyond the metadata deposited by our members is popular, and creates valuable connections between DOIs and a range of other sources. Interest spans the spectrum of academic research, publishing, bibliometrics, and beyond.\nAt the same time, I found a project with a very solid, well-built code base but unstable performance. After being put into production in 2018, we didn\u0026rsquo;t provide sufficient support. Coupled with staff changes and other competing priorities, Event Data hasn\u0026rsquo;t had the opportunity to live up to early expectations.\nTo address these issues, we have embarked on a plan to make the server infrastructure more robust, improve monitoring, and make sure that the future of Event Data makes the best use of the resources we have without over-stretching. It means working with the community to determine the most essential aspects of Event Data, and providing support where it\u0026rsquo;s needed.\nThe steps below are not necessarily sequential and some depend on the completion of work in other parts of Crossref, but they outline the priorities we have for Event Data in 2021.\nThe Plan Stability Since we put in place our original Event Data infrastructure, the amount of incoming data has grown, and at an ever-increasing rate. In 2017 we were creating 2 million new events per month, that number is now over 20 million. We have known for some time that we need to refresh the infrastructure, but didn\u0026rsquo;t have the resources to move forward: now we do.\nIn the first part of the plan we will renew the server infrastructure that underpins Event Data. Maybe not a headline-grabbing move, but the aim is to reduce downtime and pull in missing data. Through improving our monitoring and shortening the response time when things go wrong, we will be able to ensure that events are added on a regular basis and the API can reliably handle requests.\nWe\u0026rsquo;ve made the first steps in this direction by upgrading our API infrastructure and making some other tweaks to improve performance. There is still work to do, but we\u0026rsquo;ve already seen a significant improvement in performance with nearly \u0026gt;99.99% uptime in December.\nConsolidation The second component of the plan is to review performance and data quality. We will evaluate the event sources, update artefacts (such as the lists of publisher landing pages and news websites, and review performance reporting. This will help us to have a better understanding of Event Data in its current form: if the stability component is about improving what comes in and goes and out, this part will give us increased confidence in what Event Data already contains.\nFuture roadmap While the two steps above are being carried out, we will revisit the applications of Event Data and talk to organisations that currently use it or have expressed an interest. These conversations will feed into future development in which we will evaluate new sources and other ways to optimize the service.\nCentral to the roadmap will be continued support of the data citation endpoint in Scholix format, which we run in close collaboration with DataCite. Additionally, we will add new data from relationships between Crossref works, for example a preprint is matched to a journal article, or where there are corrections, retractions, or translations of works.\nWe expect to continue supporting the current sources of events and where there are organisations with either a strong interest in a particular source or a database of events that they can send directly, we are keen to build collaborations. Event Data, like everything that Crossref does, is a community-based effort.\nStaying in touch To join the conversation about Event Data and keep informed, head over to our Community pages. You can also check out our Gitlab pages. At the end of last year we updated the Education pages where you can learn more about Event Data.\n",
"headings": ["The Plan","Stability","Consolidation","Future roadmap","Staying in touch"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/new-public-data-file-120-million-metadata-records/",
"title": "New public data file: 120+ million metadata records",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2021-01-19",
"lastmod_ts": 1611014400,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "2020 wasn\u0026rsquo;t all bad. In April of last year, we released our first public data file. Though Crossref metadata is always openly available––and our board recently cemented this by voting to adopt the Principles of Open Scholarly Infrastructure (POSI)\u0026lt;/agic––we\u0026rsquo;ve decided to release an updated file. This will provide a more efficient way to get such a large volume of records. The file (JSON records, 102.6GB) is now available, with thanks once again to Academic Torrents.\n",
"content": "2020 wasn\u0026rsquo;t all bad. In April of last year, we released our first public data file. Though Crossref metadata is always openly available––and our board recently cemented this by voting to adopt the Principles of Open Scholarly Infrastructure (POSI)\u0026lt;/agic––we\u0026rsquo;ve decided to release an updated file. This will provide a more efficient way to get such a large volume of records. The file (JSON records, 102.6GB) is now available, with thanks once again to Academic Torrents.\nUse of our open APIs continues to grow, as does the metadata. Last year\u0026rsquo;s file was 112 million records and 65GB. Just nine months later (though it feels longer than that!), the new file is over 120 million records and over 102GB. That\u0026rsquo;s all of the Crossref records ever registered up to and including January, 7, 2021. We continue to see around 10% growth in records each year––and while journal articles account for most of the volume, preprints and book chapters are two of our fast-growing record types. In addition to the growth in the number of records, many of the records are getting bigger and better as members look at their participation report and understand the value of enriching metadata records for distribution throughout the scholarly ecosystem. Elsevier recently opened its references, enriching over 12 million records. A number of members, including Royal Society, Sage, Emerald, OUP, World Scientific and more have started adding \u0026lt;a href=\u0026quot;/blog/open-abstracts-where-are-we/\u0026quot; target=\u0026quot;_blank\u0026quot;gicabstracts which now number over 9 million.\nHelp us help you––using the torrent and other important notes We decided to release these public data files largely to help support COVID-19 research efforts but of course use cases for Crossref metadata vary widely and a few pointers should help all users:\nUse the torrent if you want all of these records. Everyone is welcome to the metadata but it will be much faster for you and much easier on our APIs to get so many records in one file. Use the REST API to incrementally add new and updated records once you\u0026rsquo;ve got the initial file. Here is how to get started (and avoid getting blocked in your enthusiasm to use all this great metadata!). \u0026lsquo;Limited\u0026rsquo; and \u0026lsquo;closed\u0026rsquo; \u0026lt;a href=\u0026quot;/education/content-registration/descriptive-metadata/references/#00564/\u0026quot; target=\u0026quot;_blank\u0026quot;gicreferences are not included in the file or our open APIs. And, while bibliographic metadata is generally required, lots of metadata is optional, so records will vary in quality and completeness. Questions, comments and feedback are welcome at support@crossref.org.\nHere\u0026rsquo;s hoping 2021 is a better year for us all! Stay well.\n",
"headings": ["Help us help you––using the torrent and other important notes"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/community/data-citation/",
"title": "Data citation",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2021-01-07",
"lastmod_ts": 1609977600,
"section": "Get involved",
"tags": [],
"description": "Why data citation is important Data sharing and citation are important for scientific progress. The three key reasons for this are:\nTransparency and reproducibility: Most scientific results that are shared today are just a summary of what researchers did and found. The underlying data are not available, making it difficult to verify and replicate results. If data would always be made available with publications, transparency of research would be greatly improved. Reuse: The availability of raw data allows other researchers to reuse the data. Not just for replication purposes, but to answer new research questions. Credit: When researchers cite the data they used, this forms the basis for a data credit system. Right now researchers are not really incentivized to share their data, because nobody is looking at data metrics and measuring their impact. Data citation is a first step towards changing that. How to cite data in your Crossref metadata Crossref members deposit data \u0026amp; software links by adding them directly into the standard metadata deposit. This is part of the existing Content Registration process. You can add these links to your metadata in one of two ways, via the reference metadata you register with Crossref or via the relationships section of the schema.\n",
"content": "Why data citation is important Data sharing and citation are important for scientific progress. The three key reasons for this are:\nTransparency and reproducibility: Most scientific results that are shared today are just a summary of what researchers did and found. The underlying data are not available, making it difficult to verify and replicate results. If data would always be made available with publications, transparency of research would be greatly improved. Reuse: The availability of raw data allows other researchers to reuse the data. Not just for replication purposes, but to answer new research questions. Credit: When researchers cite the data they used, this forms the basis for a data credit system. Right now researchers are not really incentivized to share their data, because nobody is looking at data metrics and measuring their impact. Data citation is a first step towards changing that. How to cite data in your Crossref metadata Crossref members deposit data \u0026amp; software links by adding them directly into the standard metadata deposit. This is part of the existing Content Registration process. You can add these links to your metadata in one of two ways, via the reference metadata you register with Crossref or via the relationships section of the schema.\nReferences The main mechanism for depositing data and software citations is to insert them into an article\u0026rsquo;s reference metadata. To do so, publishers follow the general process for depositing references.\nPublishers can deposit the full data or software citation as a unstructured reference, or they can employ any number of reference tags currently accepted by Crossref. It’s always best to include the DOI (either DataCite or Crossref) for the dataset if possible.\nYou’ll see additional support for data citations in reference lists in the next version of our schema.\nRelationships We maintain a set of relationship types to support the various content items that a research object, like a journal article, might link to. For data and software, we ask members to provide the following information:\nidentifier of the dataset/software identifier type: “DOI”, “Accession”, “PURL”, “ARK”, “URI”, “Other”. Additional identifier types beyond those used for data or software are also accepted, including ARXIV, ECLI, Handle, ISSN, ISBN, PMID, PMCID, and UUID. relationship type: “isSupplementedBy” or “references” (use the former if it was generated as part of the research results). description of dataset or software. Both Crossref and DataCite employ this method of linking. Data repositories who register their content with DataCite follow the same process and apply the same metadata tags. This means that we achieve direct data interoperability with links in the reverse direction (data and software repositories to journal articles).\nYou can see illustrations and examples of this schema in our Data \u0026amp; Software Citation guide.\nHow to access data and software citations Crossref and DataCite make the data and software citations deposited by Crossref members and DataCite data repositories openly available for use for anyone within the research ecosystem (funders, research organisations, technology and service providers, research data frameworks such as Scholix, etc.).\nData citations deposited by Crossref members can be accessed via a dedicated API endpoint.\nScholix Participation The goal of the Scholix (SCHOlarly LInk eXchange) initiative is to establish a high-level interoperability framework for exchanging information about the links between scholarly literature and data. Crossref members can participate by sharing article-data links by including them in their deposited metadata as references and/or relation type as described above. You don\u0026rsquo;t need to sign up or let us know you\u0026rsquo;re going to start providing this information, just start to send it to us in your reference lists or in the relationship metadata.\nIf the reference metadata you are registering with Crossref uses Crossref or DataCite DOIs, the linkage between the publications/data is handled by Crossref - nothing more is needed.\nIf the data (or other research objects) uses DOIs from another source, or a different type of persistent identifier, then you need to create a relationship type record instead. This method also allows for the linkage of other research objects.\nMake Data Count Crossref participates in the Make Data Count initiative. Make Data Count\u0026rsquo;s focus is on the widespread adoption of standardized data usage and data citation practices, the building blocks for open research data metrics.\nMake Data Count\u0026rsquo;s goals are three-fold:\nIncreased adoption of standardized data usage across repositories through enhanced processing and reporting services Increased implementations of proper data citation practices at publishers by working in conjunction with publisher advocacy groups and societies Promotion of bibliometrics qualitative and quantitative studies around data usage and citation behaviors We\u0026rsquo;re participating to help support and inform data citation work at publishers in conjunction with existing data citation initiatives, so that we can embed data citation into standard publication workflows and give researchers credit for sharing their data.\nIf you have questions about registering data citations with us, you can consult other users on our forum community.crossref.org or open a ticket with our technical support specialists.\n",
"headings": ["Why data citation is important","How to cite data in your Crossref metadata","References","Relationships","How to access data and software citations","Scholix Participation","Make Data Count"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/archives/2020/",
"title": "2020",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Archives",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/a-tribute-to-our-kirsty/",
"title": "A tribute to our Kirsty",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2020-12-16",
"lastmod_ts": 1608076800,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "Our colleague and friend, Kirsty Meddings, passed away peacefully on 10th December at home with her family, after a sudden and aggressive cancer. She was a huge part of Crossref, our culture, and our lives for the last twelve years.\nKirsty Meddings is a name that almost everyone in scholarly publishing knows; she was part of a generation of Oxford women in publishing technology who have progressed through the industry, adapted to its changes, spotted new opportunities, and supported each other throughout. We hope this post will do justice to her memory in our profession.\n",
"content": "Our colleague and friend, Kirsty Meddings, passed away peacefully on 10th December at home with her family, after a sudden and aggressive cancer. She was a huge part of Crossref, our culture, and our lives for the last twelve years.\nKirsty Meddings is a name that almost everyone in scholarly publishing knows; she was part of a generation of Oxford women in publishing technology who have progressed through the industry, adapted to its changes, spotted new opportunities, and supported each other throughout. We hope this post will do justice to her memory in our profession.\nKirsty\u0026rsquo;s early career After completing her degree in English and Spanish American Literature at Warwick University, Kirsty started her career in scholarly communications and publishing at Blackwell’s Information Services. She was there for a year before joining CatchWord, an online journal start-up, in 1998, as Electronic Publisher and Account Manager and in 1999 was promoted to the new role of Library Relations Manager.\nCatchWord was acquired by Ingenta and Kirsty moved into product management working on integrating the CatchWord and Ingenta platforms and launching IngentaConnect in 2004. Ingenta became Publishing Technology in 2005 and Kirsty was Product Development Manager working with engineering, business development, and users on developing online products and services. She was also involved in a range of community initiatives including COUNTER, KBART, and ICEDIS.\nJoining Crossref Kirsty\u0026rsquo;s professional headshot\nShe was an early pioneer in electronic and online publishing - an innovator who understood scholarly publishing, technology, libraries, and people - a powerful combination. And Crossref was quick to offer her a role.\nIn Kirsty’s introduction to Crossref she was described by the recruiter as:\nAn experienced and highly capable individual with a solid background in product development, marketing and customer service issues related to the supply of scholarly electronic content from publishers to library and end user audiences. A good communicator and team worker with sound technical understanding and an excellent grasp of publishing industry issues.\nThis adequately captures Kirsty’s impressive professional achievements, but not her personality. Kirsty was a Product Manager at Crossref for 12 years and was a valued and loved friend and colleague. Committed to Crossref\u0026mdash;its values and people\u0026mdash;she was funny, human, and always asked tough questions.\nShe joined us on October 27th, 2008 as our first Product Manager and the third UK employee. In her time at Crossref, Kirsty made a major impact, working on a range of important projects and services - particularly new, innovative services. Not long after she started at Crossref, she wrote a “day in the life” profile for the journal Serials that perfectly captures what it was like in 2009 at Crossref Oxford (there were three of us in Oxford and only ten total staff at Crossref): Meddings, K., 2009. Mini-profile: a day in the life of a product manager. Serials, 22(1), pp.5–6. DOI: http://doi.org/10.1629/225\nHer own biography, on her staff page, states:\nKirsty Meddings has been involved in a diverse set of initiatives that have kept her busy since 2008. She has spent most of her career in scholarly communications, in a variety of marketing and product development roles for intermediaries and technology suppliers. She speaks conversational geek and competent publishing, and is working towards fluency in both.\nSee? Funny!\nProfessional achievements Kirsty started out working on CrossCheck, now Similarity Check, the plagiarism screening service that launched in 2008. The service was in need of some attention and better organisation - Kirsty got stuck in, whipped it into shape and it has gone on to be one of Crossref’s most widely-adopted services. This article that Kirsty wrote for ISMTE’s publication, EON, remains useful nearly 10 years after it was written! Kirsty successfully managed the partnership with Turnitin (starting as iParadigms), the technical provider for Similarity Check, for many years. Colleagues there are mourning her loss too.\nKirsty was instrumental in launching Crossmark, which became a production service in 2012. After a few changes of hands, she resumed work on the service in recent years, and announced the removal of Crossmark fees to better support uptake in 2020.\nThe addition of clinical trial information to the Crossref metadata was a community-driven initiative, developed from the concept of threaded publications. There were/are lots of moving parts in this initiative, and in many ways it was one of the precursors to the idea of the Research Nexus: linking via metadata and relationships to provide a clearer picture of the ecosystem that exists around a research object.\nWhat was once FundRef (ahh, those logos!) has matured into the Open Funder Registry under Kirsty’s stewardship. In collaboration with Elsevier, the registry has grown from an initial 4,000 funders, to over 25,000 and we can see over 5 million works registered with Crossref that are linked to at least one funder. More recently, Kirsty was the Product Manager for the registration of research grants with Crossref, working with our Funder Advisory Group, and she was starting to work with CDL and DataCite to absorb the Funder Registry into ROR.\nIn 2018, Kirsty launched our first ever dashboard for member best practice. She led the development and design of Participation Reports and the decision of which checks would be most important for the scholarly community to assess. This has quickly become one of Crossref’s most valuable and used tools.\nPublic speaking Kirsty always spoke with authority across a range of topics, appearing totally calm even if she was nervous. Among many talks, she spoke at the STM seminar on Publication Ethics and Research Integrity, ISMTE, UKSG, ALPSP seminars, the COPE Forum, ran numerous CrossCheck, CrossMark, FundRef and TDM webinars, and a recent online LIVE event.\nShe was a frequent presenter at many of Crossref annual meetings, and enjoyed the opportunity to meet and catch up with our members, the board, and the community (many of whom always ask after her). Checking in after conferences on who said what, who’s moving where, what feedback we had, and picking up on opportunities for further collaboration were all things that we looked forward to sharing.\nTo use UKSG’s own words, Kirsty was always a staunch supporter of the organisation - attending, exhibiting, and speaking at many UKSG conferences and events over her whole career. She was also a legend at the dinners, on the dance floor, and in the bar. At the 2019 conference she tallied the votes at the quiz night - Kirsty loved a quiz! We had an all-staff end-of-year quiz via zoom last week and it was just not the same without her.\nHere are Kirsty\u0026rsquo;s slides on SlideShare, some videos of Kirsty\u0026rsquo;s talks on YouTube, and her ORCID record which lists her published works.\nStrong friendships One of the most rewarding experiences of working at Crossref is meeting up with the whole team and with our members. Jetlag, hunting out coeliac-friendly food, staying up far too late chatting, trying to fit in exploring bits of cities around board and other meetings, presenting, organizing, thinking, laughing (I’m sure to the annoyance of other plane passengers)\u0026mdash;these experiences were all part and parcel of working with Kirsty, and where many of us cemented connections with her.\nWe started a message board and within days it was populated with numerous stories, poems, and photos from so many friends and colleagues on whom Kirsty made such a lasting and loving impression.\nKirsty\u0026rsquo;s message board\nIt’s impossible to capture someone’s character in a blog, but some of the words that carry across the messages that people have shared are empathy, compassion, honesty, intelligence, brilliance, sincerity, laughter, human, passion, openness, and fun. We’ll miss her immensely.\nKirsty was somewhat of an expert in grief. She lost her first husband, James Culling, to leukemia in December 2012, leaving her a widow with two sons, Dan, 7 at the time, and Luke, just 6-months old. A few years later, through the charity Widowed And Young (WAY), she met Martin Eggleston. Martin and his daughter Amy joined Kirsty, Dan, and Luke, and they created a very happy blended family. Some of us went to their wedding and it was an incredible event full of love and laughter - and of course music. Always music.\nKirsty represented us, along with Rachael, at the funeral of another colleague last year, Christine Hone, in Amsterdam. Kirsty helped all of us get through the grief then. And because she made it okay to grieve and to talk about grief, it is heartbreaking and also comforting that she is indirectly helping us all now to be better able to handle her own death.\nHow we can honour Kirsty’s memory We heard that Kirsty’s last words were “I’m listening”. Which is just so fitting. She was always ready with an ear, a shoulder to support us all, and indeed she demanded that we express ourselves honestly.\nIf you want to share memories of Kirsty, you can join others who have done so on the message board or just take a few minutes to read through.\nAnd there is a justgiving page in memory of Kirsty for Maggie\u0026rsquo;s Oxford, a branch of a cancer support charity who helped her and her family through James\u0026rsquo;s death and is now helping her family again.\nProfessionally, Kirsty made major contributions at Crossref and in scholarly communications in general. More importantly, she had a profound impact on a personal level with many people. Our thoughts are with Martin, Dan, Amy, and Luke, and also with Kirsty’s mum Val, her brother Colin, her in-laws, her close friends, and all the people who\u0026mdash;like the rest of us\u0026mdash;are better for knowing her, and will never forget her.\n",
"headings": ["Kirsty\u0026rsquo;s early career","Joining Crossref","Professional achievements","Public speaking","Strong friendships","How we can honour Kirsty’s memory"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/fast-citable-feedback-peer-reviews-for-preprints-and-other-record-types/",
"title": "Fast, citable feedback: Peer reviews for preprints and other record types",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2020-12-09",
"lastmod_ts": 1607472000,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref has supported depositing metadata for preprints since 2016 and peer reviews since 2018. Now we are putting the two together, in fact we will permit peer reviews to be registered for any record type.\n",
"content": "Crossref has supported depositing metadata for preprints since 2016 and peer reviews since 2018. Now we are putting the two together, in fact we will permit peer reviews to be registered for any record type.\nCurrently, peer reviews can be registered for journal articles, but that means that they can only be related to some of the content our members deposit. Preprints, books, chapters, working papers, dissertations, and a host of other works can also be registered with Crossref. A number of these frequently undergo some form of review and many of our members and voices in the community have called for us to widen the net on peer reviews, including journal publishers, book publishers, review platforms, and preprint servers. We\u0026rsquo;ve listened and taken action, and from now on Crossref members can add relationship metadata that links peer reviews to any record type. The metadata will also contain the type of review, stating whether it is a referee report, author response, or community comment, etc. This allows accurate reporting on whether the peer review is happening within a traditional editorial process or elsewhere.\nReviews for preprints In the last decade there has been an increase in the number of disciplines using preprints. Since enabling registration of preprint metadata, it has become our fastest-growing record type. Preprints, working papers, and other forms of early publication help to accelerate dissemination of the latest research and discovery. They can also promote discussion on important topics, and help authors to improve papers before an editorial decision for journal publication. During the COVID-19 pandemic, preprints have become invaluable for speeding the publication of vital research and case studies.\nOn the other hand, preprints do not undergo formal review and editorial approval, leading to concerns about the dissemination of false information. While the issue of misinformation in preprints has been discussed for some time, the COVID-19 pandemic has brought it more sharply into focus. organisations that post preprints need to balance the benefits of rapid dissemination with promoting their responsible use.\nTo support the feedback process, preprint servers along with a growing number of other platforms and services offer scholars the opportunity to post public comments on preprints. By doing this, they give extra context for readers, provide suggestions for authors, and raise awareness of work that could be flawed or too preliminary.\nAnother growing trend is journal publishers adopting editorial processes that involve preprint-first options and open peer review. As Dr. Stephanie Dawson from ScienceOpen says:\n\u0026ldquo;We have long believed in rewarding reviewers by assigning Crossref DOIs to their open reviews to make them citable objects and we were one of the first users of Crossref\u0026rsquo;s peer review schema. However, a large percentage of the articles reviewed on ScienceOpen are publicly available preprints. The UCL Open: Environment journal hosted on the platform, for example, is based on a workflow of open peer review of preprints. Our customers, editors, reviewers and authors are therefore extremely happy that these reviews can now also be assigned a Crossref peer review DOI for more accountability and transparency in scholarly publishing.\u0026rdquo;\nAt Crossref, we\u0026rsquo;re continually looking to support more record types and relations between them to build trust, support reproducibility and increase discoverability of content. This is another small step in building the research nexus and we look forward to working with members depositing peer reviews of preprints.\n",
"headings": ["Reviews for preprints"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/404-support-team-down-for-essential-maintenance/",
"title": "404: Support team down for essential maintenance",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2020-12-04",
"lastmod_ts": 1607040000,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "2020 has been a very challenging year, and we can all agree that everyone needs a break. Crossref will be providing very limited technical and membership support from 21st December to 3rd January to allow our staff to rest and recharge. We’ll be back on January 4th raring to answer your questions. Amanda explains more about why we made this decision.\n",
"content": "2020 has been a very challenging year, and we can all agree that everyone needs a break. Crossref will be providing very limited technical and membership support from 21st December to 3rd January to allow our staff to rest and recharge. We’ll be back on January 4th raring to answer your questions. Amanda explains more about why we made this decision.\nAs we all know, 2020 has been an unprecedented year, with the COVID-19 pandemic affecting lives across the globe.\nIt’s been amazing to watch our members pivot their working practices and continue to publish content and register it with Crossref to keep the wheels of research and scholarly communications moving.\nSince January, we’ve seen 9,079,082 items registered with Crossref, up 13% on 2019. 2628 new members have also joined during that time and we now have almost 13.5k members from 139 countries. We’ve seen over 337 million requests to our REST API on average per month in 2020, a 9% increase over 2019 (and over 600 million total metadata queries on average per month across all our APIs and services).\nOf course, all this activity brings an increasing number of requests for help and support. Since the start of 2020, we have answered almost 24,000 support tickets from the community. Sometimes these just need a quick answer or a link to our documentation. Sometimes it\u0026rsquo;s a straightforward new member application or a routine query. But sometimes a prospective member needs a lots of advice, sometimes a long-standing member or user needs in-depth investigations and consultancy. Sometimes the request highlights a problem in one of our systems that needs input from our product and development colleagues. But either way, it’s keeping our small team of five full-time employees very busy.\nVanessa wrote earlier in the year about how our Community Outreach team has changed its working practices this year. As Head of Member Experience I’ve been incredibly impressed by the way our membership, support and billing staff have done the same - remaining really focused on the needs of the Crossref community while (at the same time) balancing this with the demands of working from home, childcare, home-schooling, and supporting those affected by the pandemic in their own community. Isaac’s thoughtful post on our forum about his first week working at home because of the pandemic really highlighted some of these challenges.\nWe take work/life balance seriously at Crossref. We want to make sure that we’re are able to continue to help the Crossref community effectively in 2021, but are also able to continue to look after ourselves, our families, and our own communities in this difficult time. We all hope that 2021 will be a very different year, but there’s still likely to be disruption ahead for all of us, and one thing is sure: there will continue to be plenty more requests coming in for our small team to stay on top of in the meantime.\nWith this in mind, we want to make sure that our support staff are able to properly rest and recharge during what is a holiday period for many of us coming up. We’ll be operating with just one person each on the technical support and membership support side between 23rd December and 3rd January. This means that while we’ll be able to answer urgent queries, non-urgent questions will be left unanswered until 4th January. And we’ll not take on any new members between 21st December and 3rd January too.\nWe know many of you will be continuing to work during this period. If you have a non-urgent question, do take a look at our support documentation in the meantime, or see if other members (or our amazing Ambassadors) are able to help on our forum. If you can’t find what you’re looking for and it\u0026rsquo;s urgent, we hope that the limited staff who are on call will still be able to help you out.\nColleagues in the US have recently celebrated their Thanksgiving, and I remain enormously thankful for our team here at Crossref, and for you all in the scholarly community for your enthusiasm for working together collectively to help the world find, cite, link, assess, and reuse scholarly content. We all really appreciate your patience while we reset ready for 2021. Happy Holidays!\n",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/categories/support/",
"title": "Support",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Categories",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/crossrefs-board-votes-to-adopt-the-principles-of-open-scholarly-infrastructure/",
"title": "Crossref’s Board votes to adopt the Principles of Open Scholarly Infrastructure",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2020-12-02",
"lastmod_ts": 1606867200,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "TL;DR On November 11th 2020, the Crossref Board voted to adopt the “Principles of Open Scholarly Infrastructure” (POSI). POSI is a list of sixteen commitments that will now guide the board, staff, and Crossref’s development as an organisation into the future. It is an important public statement to make in Crossref’s twentieth anniversary year. Crossref has followed principles since its founding, and meets most of the POSI, but publicly committing to a codified and measurable set of principles is a big step. If 2019 was a reflective turning point, and mid-2020 was about Crossref committing to open scholarly infrastructure and collaboration, this is now announcing a very deliberate path. And we’re just a little bit giddy about it.\n",
"content": "TL;DR On November 11th 2020, the Crossref Board voted to adopt the “Principles of Open Scholarly Infrastructure” (POSI). POSI is a list of sixteen commitments that will now guide the board, staff, and Crossref’s development as an organisation into the future. It is an important public statement to make in Crossref’s twentieth anniversary year. Crossref has followed principles since its founding, and meets most of the POSI, but publicly committing to a codified and measurable set of principles is a big step. If 2019 was a reflective turning point, and mid-2020 was about Crossref committing to open scholarly infrastructure and collaboration, this is now announcing a very deliberate path. And we’re just a little bit giddy about it.\nHere is a picture of me being “giddy.”\nIf you just want to see the principles that the board has endorsed, you can see them here:\nhttps://doi.org/10.24343/C34W2H\nBut if you also want some background and want to understand some of the implications of Crossref adopting the principles, read on…\nWarning - this is a long post.\nBackground and Origins Some of you may be surprised that we’ve done this - simply because you always assumed we operated under these principles anyway. And we have. Mostly.\nThe “Principles of Open Scholarly Infrastructure” were largely inspired by a set of uncodified rules and norms that Crossref had been operating under for years. So how did we get to this circular situation where we are making a big announcement about adopting something we have largely been doing anyway?\nSix years ago I met with Cameron Neylon and Jennifer Lin when they were still at PLOS and we decided that we wanted to write a blog post about\u0026hellip;\nWell, it doesn’t really matter.\nWe never finished writing that blog post because we got distracted by an issue that we kept seeing which was that services that the scholarly community depended on were increasingly taking directions that seemed antithetical to the community’s interests.\nWe were concerned because the scholarly community was becoming increasingly distrustful of infrastructure services. We wondered if there were any practices that we could point to that might mitigate the risk of infrastructure being co-opted and that would help build trust. Fortunately, we had two great models to look at:\nCrossref, which had a set of informal rules and norms that it had followed since its founding (e.g., transparency of operations, being business-model neutral, one member one vote). ORCID, an organisation that was spun-out of Crossref and which had adopted a written set of principles, based largely on codifying practices that they had seen at Crossref. And so we wrote these practices up and added a few that we thought were missing. And we posted a different blog post to the one we had originally planned. It was titled “The Principles of Open Scholarly Infrastructures.” And the blog post became popular. And we did a bunch of talks about the Principles. And, much to our surprise, POSI has influenced the directions and policies of a number of organisations and initiatives since, including SPARC, Invest in Open Infrastructure, Open Data Institute, OA Switchboard, and others.\nElsewhere, community organisations and likeminded community members helped further develop the implementation of POSI through discussions at FORCE11 and through additional blog posts and books. Some, like Dryad and ROR, started to work to align their organisational structure to embrace POSI.\nAnd this left Crossref in a strange position. Although we were largely the inspiration for these Principles - we ourselves had never codified and adopted them.\nMotivations. Why Now? Because it is the right thing to do for those that currently depend on Crossref It is a healthy thing for the organisation to do. Adopting these principles strengthens Crossref’s governance. After twenty years, Crossref infrastructure has become critical to a broad segment of the community. As our membership profile changes, and as our broader stakeholder community expands, we need to explicitly evolve our governance to reflect stakeholders. And it would be irresponsible to continue to have our governance guided by a set of informal conventions. Particularly in the context of a global political period where we’ve seen the informal operating conventions and policy understandings of at least two major democracies ignored or discarded.\nBecause it could help make the creation of new, sustainable, open scholarly infrastructure easier and less expensive There is a lot of new interest in open scholarly infrastructure. New infrastructure services and systems are being proposed almost every month. Many of them seek extensive advice and consulting from Crossref. A subset of these are incubated through Crossref. And a subset of these become Crossref services. Others are spun out as separate organisations (e.g., ORCID) or were specifically initiated as collaborations (e.g., ROR).\nOur experience has been that the vast majority of work involved in these infrastructure projects was in establishing trust amongst the stakeholder community. We think that Crossref adopting the principles will help to address fundamental questions about accountability and sustainability that are inevitably raised when a new constituency approaches Crossref with an idea for collaborating on a new or existing infrastructure service. In short, adopting the principles will make future collaboration easier.\nAdopting the Principles: Plus ça change The Principles of Open Scholarly Infrastructure (POSI) proposes three areas that an Open Infrastructure organisation can address in order to garner the trust of the broader scholarly community: accountability (governance), funding (sustainability), and protection of community interests (insurance).\nPOSI proposes a set of concrete commitments that an organisation can make to build trust in each of these areas. There are 16 such commitments. Of these 16 commitments, Crossref is already completely or partially meeting the requirements of 15. And adopting the 16th commitment just formalises a direction Crossref has been heading toward for several years.\nCritically, “adopting” POSI does not mean that we have to instantly meet all of the criteria. After all, when ORCID adopted its principles, it didn’t meet any of them. They were adopted to make a statement of intent. And they were publicly adopted so that the community could measure the organisation\u0026rsquo;s progress as well as to allow the community to detect if ORCID started to stray from its stated intentions.\nAdopting the principles is akin to adopting a mission statement or a vision statement. It is an aspirational guide, not a description of the status quo.\nHaving said that, the principles are more concrete than a mission or vision statement, and this makes them easier to measure.\nIt is also important to note that the criteria are designed to balance each other. So, for example, one would not want to change the governance or business model to better support the mission if doing so would also threaten the sustainability of the organisation.\nAnd finally, meeting a commitment is an ongoing process - it is not a one-off event. The organisation needs to keep measuring their performance against the principles in order to make sure that they have not inadvertently regressed.\nImplications Before adopting the principles, we did a candid self-audit to see which ones we thought we currently met and which ones we still needed to work on.\nThe three areas and sixteen commitments that are proposed in POSI are all designed to ensure that an infrastructure can not be co-opted by a particular party or interest group.\nAnd the last area, “Insurance,” is the backstop that makes sure that, if some in the community feel that the infrastructure organisation has gone in a radically wrong direction, they can recreate the infrastructure as it was when they were comfortable with it, and they will not be hindered by practices or policies that lock them into the existing organisation.\nThis “insurance” is very much inspired by Crossref. Crossref itself was built, in part, to make sure that publishers were not locked into platforms and that journals and societies were not locked into publishers. Using the indirect Crossref DOI linking mechanism ensures that content can move between platforms and publishers without breaking vital citation links. Moving between platforms or publishers is never easy. And it isn’t cheap. But using Crossref DOIs for citation links at least makes it possible.\nCrossref has an extra insurance level as well. It is built on the DOI and Handle infrastructure. If Crossref were to take a direction that some of its members found unacceptable, those members could join another DOI Registry agency more amenable to them. It wouldn’t be easy. It wouldn’t be cheap. But it would be possible.\nAnd this knowledge helps keep Crossref grounded and attuned to the needs and concerns of its members. We know that our members are not “trapped” with us. We don’t take lightly the trust placed in us. And we know that there is trust still to build with various corners of our community. And it is this knowledge that helps keep us from developing the disdainful, take-it-or-leave-it, attitude that can be the cliché characteristic of infrastructure organisations.\nSo the fundamental, overarching goal of POSI is to set out principles that ensure that the stakeholders of an infrastructure organisation have a clear say in setting its agenda and priorities and that, in extremis, the stakeholders can leave and create an alternative infrastructure if the original organisation becomes unresponsive, hostile, or disappears.\nAs we look at how Crossref currently maps to the principles, please keep in mind three things:\nIf we have marked something as green, that doesn’t mean we think we do this perfectly. It simply means that we already have internal processes that focus on this commitment and we have evidence that these processes have thus far been working. The fact that something is green and has “thus-far been working” does not mean that we should rest easy. We could regress. Our processes need to be able to detect and address regressions. The commitments are supposed to be balanced. So we don’t want to do something to turn something green if it has an irreversible impact on another commitment. So, for example, we should not address a shortfall in the contingency fund by generating revenue in a way that ultimately hurts Crossref’s mission. The implication of #3 above is that it may take us some time to meet all of the commitments. But again, the community can measure our progress against meeting the commitments. So how does Crossref currently meet POSI? Governance 🟢 Coverage across the research enterprise. 🟢 Non-discriminatory membership 🟢 Transparent operations 🟢 Cannot lobby 🟢 Living will 🟢 Formal incentives to fulfil mission \u0026amp; wind-down 🔴 Stakeholder Governed Sustainability 🟢 Time-limited funds are used only for time-limited activities. 🟢 Goal to generate surplus 🟡 Goal to create contingency fund to support operations for 12 months 🟢 Mission-consistent revenue generation 🟢 Revenue based on services, not data Insurance 🟢 Available data (within constraints of privacy laws) 🟡 Patent non-assertion 🟡 Open source 🟡 Open data (within constraints of privacy laws) Governance If an infrastructure is successful and becomes critical to the community, we need to ensure it is not co-opted by particular interest groups. Similarly, we need to ensure that any organisation does not confuse serving itself with serving its stakeholders. How do we ensure that the system is run “humbly”, that it recognises it doesn’t have a right to exist beyond the support it provides for the community and that it plans accordingly? How do we ensure that the system remains responsive to the changing needs of the community?\n\u0026ndash; POSI\nIn the area of governance, Crossref clearly meets six of the seven criteria listed. We will discuss these first.\n🟢 Coverage across the research enterprise it is increasingly clear that research transcends disciplines, geography, institutions and stakeholders. The infrastructure that supports it needs to do the same.\n\u0026ndash; POSI\nCrossref includes members who publish in the STM, HSS and Professional spheres. There are still some gaps in our coverage (e.g., monographs, law), but this is not through policy or lack of trying.\nCrossref has members in 139 countries and has agreements with people in 150 countries. However note that geographic diversity is not the same as language diversity. Although we have members in many countries, the vast majority of our registered content is still in English. This does not reflect the trends in research outputs. We still need to do a lot of work to support non-English publications and non-English speaking members. But we have already identified this as a priority and are working on a number of initiatives to better support research communication in languages other than English.\n🟢 Non-discriminatory membership we see the best option as an “opt-in” approach with a principle of non-discrimination where any stakeholder group may express an interest and should be welcome. The process of representation in day to day governance must also be inclusive with governance that reflects the demographics of the membership\n\u0026ndash; POSI\nIt is first worth noting that “non-discriminatory” does not mean that we cannot have standards, obligations, and rules that all members of Crossref have to adhere to. It simply means that said rules are clear and that we apply them uniformly.\nCrossref has always had catholic membership criteria. Although we have until now historically defined ourselves as a primarily “publisher” organisation, we define “publisher” loosely as anybody who produces content that commonly references or is referenced by scholarly literature. Historically, this has included NGOs, IGO’s, standards bodies, institutional archives, and professional publishers. More recently it has expanded to include preprint archives and funders.\nThe requirements for joining Crossref are few. We admit any applicant who:\nAgrees to the obligations of membership. Can pay the fees. In practice we have historically had a policy of rejecting individuals as members. But even this is probably a pointless distinction as many of our members are “organisations” consisting of one person.\nAnd fundamental to Crossref’s governance is that a member’s influence in the governance of Crossref is not tied to the level of financial investment they make in the organisation. All members have the same single vote. All board members have one vote.\nRecently, we have also made changes to our governance and election process. The first to introduce contested elections for the board. The second to ensure that board membership was proportionally balanced amongst the membership tiers. Even as recently as 2017, when the Board established a Governance Committee, the idea of weighting votes to membership tiers was roundly rejected - on principle.\nThis is not to say that we can relax on this point. For example, as more funders and institutions join Crossref, we will need to make sure that our governance reflects that. We talk about this more in the section on governance.\nSome will also point out that our fees are themselves a form of discrimination as they can still be an insurmountable barrier to some in the community. We understand this and, without trying to make light of or dismiss the situation, we are also confident that we are constantly looking at ways to lower the barrier-to-entry for joining Crossref. Our fees have gone steadily down since we were founded and we are constantly reviewing them to try and make them more equitable. We have created a category of sponsoring organisations to defray the costs of membership. We collaborate closely with organisations like PKP to try and build tools and services that make participation in Crossref easier and less expensive.\n🟢 Transparent operations achieving trust in the selection of representatives to governance groups will be best achieved through transparent processes and operations in general (within the constraints of privacy laws).\n\u0026ndash; POSI\nCrossref has transparent finances and a transparent governance process. Much of this is simply a byproduct of the regulations governing non-profits with tax exempt status in the US and our specific registration as a non-profit membership association in New York State.\nUntil fairly recently, the obvious exception to this was Crossref’s use of pre-picked slates in board elections, but we have since improved this with an open election process.\n🟢 Cannot lobby the community, not infrastructure organisations, should collectively drive regulatory change. An infrastructure organisation’s role is to provide a base for others to work on and should depend on its community to support the creation of a legislative environment that affects it\n\u0026ndash; POSI\nCrossref has never lobbied. Partly this is a byproduct of our commitment to be business-model neutral as most lobbying efforts in the industry seem to center around promoting the views held by members who share a business model.\nBut also, Crossref has never lobbied on its own behalf. We have always relied on our members and the community to point out and promote Crossref if there is any area of legislative policy that the Crossref infrastructure could help with.\n🟢 Living will a powerful way to create trust is to publicly describe a plan addressing the condition under which an organisation would be wound down, how this would happen, and how any ongoing assets could be archived and preserved when passed to a successor organisation. Any such organisation would need to honour this same set of principles\n\u0026ndash; POSI\nCrossref has two relationships that require us to set out plans for an orderly wind-down.\nThe first is a condition of our incorporation as a non-profit in the state of New York. This explicitly includes a provision that requires us to hand over our operations and responsibilities to a successor non profit organisation that has a similar constituency and mission. The NY State Attorney General reviews and approves any major changes to ensure this requirement is met.\nThe second is a condition of our being members of the DOI Foundation, which includes provisions for us to hand over management of DOIs to another registration agency should Crossref ever wind-down. It is worth noting that we have already seen this clause invoked for other registration agencies that have wound down and who have, as part of the DOI Foundation provisions, handed responsibility for their DOIs to Crossref.\nThis is not to say that we are perfect on this score. We do not, for example, have any single place that outlines the steps that would need to be taken in order to execute the requirements laid out by our obligations to the state of New York and the IDF.\n🟢 Formal incentives to fulfil mission \u0026amp; wind-down infrastructures exist for a specific purpose and that purpose can be radically simplified or even rendered unnecessary by technological or social change. If it is possible the organisation (and staff) should have direct incentives to deliver on the mission and wind down.”\n\u0026ndash; POSI\nCrossref has a track record of periodically reviewing our services and decommissioning those that are no longer needed - either because they have fulfilled their specific mission or because there is simply waning interest in them (arguably, the same thing).\nAgain, this is not to say we are perfect on this score. We also have, by our last count, about 30 specialised, overlapping APIs- many of which are used by just a handful of users. These have escaped our normal scrutiny because they never had the status of a formal service and had not been through our product management process.\nBut still, Crossref has long made it a habit to question its own existence. At virtually every board annual strategy meeting we ask the question “will technology X make Crossref unnecessary?” We need to continue with the attitude that the best thing we could do for our members is to make ourselves unnecessary.\n🔴 Stakeholder Governed a board-governed organisation drawn from the stakeholder community builds more confidence that the organisation will take decisions driven by community consensus and consideration of different interests.\n\u0026ndash; POSI\nOverall, Crossref meets most of the Governance requirements with the notable exception of broader stakeholder involvement.\nOf course, the key to this is how you define “stakeholder.”\nSome may dispute this and argue that Crossref “stakeholders” are “publishers” because they are the parties that invested in creating Crossref.\nBut this narrow definition of “stakeholder” - focusing solely on those who have “invested”- is not widely held. In fact, common phrases like \u0026ldquo;stakeholder economy\u0026rdquo; and \u0026ldquo;stakeholder capitalism\u0026rdquo; describe the exact opposite- systems that don\u0026rsquo;t just focus on the “investor”, but which instead balance benefits to the investor with benefits to employees, the broader community, society, and the environment.\nIt is this latter, broader definition of “stakeholder” that is used in POSI.\nAnd just in case anybody still thinks that people other than publishers don’t consider themselves “stakeholders’ in the Crossref infrastructure, we simply point to this, recently tweeted by Brea Manuel, a researcher, in celebration of their publication in Nature Reviews Chemistry (read it, and learn how to recruit and retain a diverse workforce):\nSustainability Financial sustainability is a key element of creating trust. “Trust” often elides multiple elements: intentions, resources, and checks and balances. An organisation that is both well meaning and has the right expertise will still not be trusted if it does not have sustainable resources to execute its mission. How do we ensure that an organisation has the resources to meet its obligations?\n\u0026ndash; POSI\nIn the area of sustainability, Crossref clearly meets four of the five of the criteria listed and is most of the way to meeting the fifth.\n🟢 Time-limited funds are used only for time-limited activities day to day operations should be supported by day to day sustainable revenue sources. Grant dependency for funding operations makes them fragile and more easily distracted from building core infrastructure.\n\u0026ndash; POSI\nCrossref has never supported production activities based on grants. Indeed Crossref’s delivery on this point is what inspired the approach taken in this principle. This distinguishes Crossref from many grant-funded infrastructure initiatives which either barely stay afloat or disappear altogether. Even those that survive often do so by pursuing solutions that align with their funder’s interest over their user’s needs.\n🟢 Goal to generate surplus organisations which define sustainability based merely on recovering costs are brittle and stagnant. It is not enough to merely survive, it has to be able to adapt and change. To weather economic, social and technological volatility, they need financial resources beyond immediate operating costs.\n\u0026ndash; POSI\nCrossref has always attempted to generate a surplus. Crossref has generated surpluses since 2002 - so for 18 years of its 20 year existence.\n🟡 Goal to create contingency fund to support operations for 12 months a high priority should be generating a contingency fund that can support a complete, orderly wind down (12 months in most cases). This fund should be separate from those allocated to covering operating risk and investment in development.\n\u0026ndash; POSI\nCrossref currently has a contingency fund that would support operations for 9 months. Although this may be standard for industry, it seems prudent to extend this in the case of infrastructure organisations, particularly when they are membership organisations. First, the very fact that something is infrastructure implies that the systemic effects of its failing ungracefully could have industry-wide repercussions. Second, the decision-making process of a membership organisation whose governance is voluntary is inherently slower. It has taken Crossref Board 9 months, for example, just to discuss the ramifications of adopting POSI.\nGiven our recent financial performance, we expect Crossref could comfortably increase the contingency fund to support 12 months of operations within the next 2-3 years.\n🟢 Mission-consistent revenue generation potential revenue sources should be considered for consistency with the organisational mission and not run counter to the aims of the organisation.\n\u0026ndash; POSI\nCrossref has a good track record of periodically reviewing our services and fees and adjusting them to better support Crossref’s mission. The role of the Membership \u0026amp; Fees Committee in advising the Board has been critical. The very first example of this was in the early days of Crossref when we dropped matching fees because they were disincentivising members from linking their references. Crossref was also quick to recognise that, in order to support global research and reach smaller publishers in lower income countries, we had to develop a sponsoring mechanism to help defray the costs and ameliorate the technical complexity of participating in Crossref. Most recently we have taken the decision to drop fees for Crossmark as it was clear they had become a barrier to our members distributing retraction and correction notifications in a machine actionable format.\n🟢 Revenue based on services, not data data related to the running of the research enterprise should be a community property. Appropriate revenue sources might include value-added services, consulting, API Service Level Agreements or membership fees\n\u0026ndash; POSI\nCrossref does not charge for or resell its members’ data. Doing so would restrict dissemination and reduce the discoverability of our members’ content. Instead our revenue comes from a combination of membership fees and service fees. The DOI registration is a member service that generates the bulk of our revenue. But our SLA-backed APIs are becoming increasingly popular as members and others seek to integrate Crossref metadata into their production workflows and services.\nInsurance Even with the best possible governance structures, critical infrastructure can still be co opted by a subset of stakeholders or simply drift away from the needs of the community. Long term trust requires the community to believe it retains control. Here we can learn from Open Source practices. To ensure that the community can take control if necessary, the infrastructure must be “forkable.” The community could replicate the entire system if the organisation loses the support of stakeholders, despite all established checks and balances. Each crucial part then must be legally and technically capable of replication, including software systems and data. Forking carries a high cost, and in practice this would always remain challenging. But the ability of the community to recreate the infrastructure will create confidence in the system. The possibility of forking prompts all players to work well together, spurring a virtuous cycle. Acts that reduce the feasibility of forking then are strong signals that concerns should be raised. The following principles should ensure that, as a whole, the organisation in extremis is forkable.\n\u0026ndash; POSI\nCrossref clearly meets two of the four Insurance requirements. And the remaining two can be met easily with some clarification and time.\nThe “governance” section of POSI is designed to ensure that an infrastructure organisation is beholden to the broader stakeholder community and that it can not be co-opted by a particular party or special interest. And the “sustainability” section of POSI is designed to ensure that the infrastructure organisation takes the financial steps to ensure it can weather sudden changes in the financial or technical environment. But the last section, “insurance” is designed to protect stakeholder interests in case either “governance” or “sustainability” fail.\nThe term “forkable” comes from the Open Source software community where it is used to indicate when a software community’s interests diverge and they decide to split a project into several projects, with each new project focusing on a particular sub-community\u0026rsquo;s interests.\nOne of the immediate worries that people have when they first hear of the concept of “forkability” is that it will encourage the creation many variations of a project based on frivolous criteria. But this simply does not happen. Forking a project is never easy and takes a lot of effort. It is only done successfully when a critical mass of the community becomes unhappy with the direction a project is taking and is willing to take on the substantial burden of running an entirely separate project. Without such a critical mass, the fork just withers and has virtually no effect on the original project.\nAnd the reason for this is simple, the mere knowledge that a project is “forkable” forces project maintainers to balance the interests of the community so that no sizable subgroup grows dissatisfied enough to fork the project.\nForkability encourages reponsivness to the community by making sure that the community is not “locked-in.”\nCrossref itself was founded, in part, to prevent lock-in. Use of the DOI in linking citations makes it easier for publishers to move platforms, and for journals and societies to move between publishers.\nAnd Crossref itself is architected in part to ensure that lock-in is not possible. Crossref is just one of several DOI registration agencies. Members unhappy with Crossref, can move to another DOI registration agency and their citation links will continue to work. But there are things we could do to make this even easier.\n🟢 Available data (within constraints of privacy laws) It is not enough that the data be made “open” if there is not a practical way to actually obtain it. Underlying data should be made easily available via periodic data dumps.\n\u0026ndash; POSI\nCrossref provides public APIs that allow users to access Crossref metadata. We are planning to eventually release yearly public data files. We already did this once when we released a public data file in support of COVID-19 research. This in no way prevents the provision of data through paid Service Level Agreement tiers that provide guarantees of regularity, availability or reliability for those that need it. Existing Metadata Plus customers primarily use data that is available through the open API or existing dumps, but value additional services that support their use-cases.\n🟡 Patent non-assertion “The organisation should commit to a patent non-assertion covenant. The organisation may obtain patents to protect its own operations, but not use them to prevent the community from replicating the infrastructure.\n\u0026ndash; POSI\nCrossref has never registered a patent. But the DOI Foundation, with significant support from Crossref, had to respond to (and then monitored) a set of patent applications that, if successful, the DOI System would infringe on. The applications were filed more than 15 years ago and haven’t been successful so these applications aren’t a current concern. As a result of this, the DOI Foundation adopted a patent policy in 2005 that covers all Registration Agencies and protects the DOI System. We may want to register protective patents in the future in order to enable us to defend ourselves against patent trolls.\nThe problem with patents is that they could be used by an organisation to prevent the infrastructure forking. One technique that has been used by major companies to assure communities that they will not be affected by patents, is to make a patent non-assertion covenant. For example, IBM, Microsoft and Google have made non-assertion statements in order to assure the open source and standards communities that they participate in that they will not co-opt an open source project or open standard by asserting patents on code or processes they contribute.\nThough Crossref has never registered a patent, issuing a patent non-assertion covenant would help assure stakeholders that we would not use patents in the future to prevent the community from forking the system.\n🟡 Open source All software required to run the infrastructure should be available under an open source license. This does not include other software that may be involved with running the organisation.\n\u0026ndash; POSI\nAll code for new initiatives since 2007 has been released under an open source MIT license. The legacy Content System code could be open sourced within 12-18 months with no extra effort.\nIf some Crossref stakeholders wanted to “fork” Crossref or leave for another DOI registration agency, their biggest hurdle would be trying to recreate the twenty years worth of rules and algorithms we use for processing and matching metadata. Without access to the source code of the system, it would be almost impossible for these to be reverse engineered.\nSimilarly, without access to the source code of our system - it is difficult to ensure that Crossref is, indeed, non-discriminatory in the way it works with member content. It would be possible, for example, for Crossref to modify its matching algorithms to deliberately favour or deprecate some members’ content.\nIf we want to assure the community that we are managing our member metadata fairly and if we want to provide even better insurance to our members and the broader stakeholders, we should make all of our code open source.\nThe legacy so-called “CS” (content system) is in the process of being refactored. The only reason we cannot open source this immediately is that we still need to make some security changes to it. These security changes are being done as part of a current refactoring project and should be completed without any extra effort within 12-18 months. After that, we can open source the code.\n🟡 Open data (within constraints of privacy laws)\nFor an infrastructure to be forked it will be necessary to replicate all relevant data. The CC0 waiver is best practice in making data legally available. Privacy and data protection laws will limit the extent to which this is possible.\n\u0026ndash; POSI\nAchieving this simply requires us clarifying copyright and license information and that this will not have any effect on the metadata registered in Crossref by our members.\nFirst we should outline the current copyright status of a Crossref metadata record.\nThe fundamental issue is that what we colloquially call “Crossref metadata” is actually a mix of elements, some of which come from our members, and some of which come from third parties and some of which comes from Crossref itself. These elements, in turn, each have different copyright implications.\nOn top of this, Crossref has terms and conditions for its members and terms and conditions for specific services. These grant Crossref the right to do things with some classes of metadata and not do things with other classes of metadata - regardless of copyright.\nLet’s start with the easiest case. Crossref already has two services with CC0 metadata:\nThe Open Funder Registry Event Data Obviously, the POSI open data provision would not change anything for either service.\nThe next easiest case is private data. Crossref collects PII (usernames, passwords IP addresses, etc.). This would remain private. And we will continue to manage it in conformance with GDPR. It would not be affected by the open data provision of POSI.\nNext let’s look at what most people probably think of as “Crossref metadata”- that is, the basic bibliographic metadata that Crossref has collected from its members since its founding (titles, authors, volumes, issues, etc). For the record- this does not include abstracts.\nSince 2000 Crossref has stated that it considers this basic bibliographic metadata to be “facts.” And under US law (Crossref is registered in the US) these facts are not subject to copyright at all. If this data is not subject to copyright at all, there is no way Crossref can “waive the copyright” under CC0. This metadata would not be affected at all under the open data provision of POSI.\nMore recently, some of our members have been submitting abstracts to Crossref. These are copyrighted. In the case of subscription publishers, the copyright usually belongs to the publisher. In the case of open access publishers, the copyright most often belongs to the authors. In both cases, Crossref cannot waive copyright under CC0 because the copyright is not ours to waive. However, we are allowed to redistribute the abstracts with our metadata because that is part of the terms and conditions we have with our members. We already have language that notes the distinct copyright status of the abstracts in our metadata, but, ideally, we should extend our schema to make that information available in a machine actionable form as well. In short, the copyright status of abstracts would not be affected at all by the open data provision of POSI.\nCrossref also has its Reference Distribution Policy that the board adopted in 2017 - limited and closed references are not distributed by Crossref and this won’t change. [EDIT 6th June 2022 - all references are now open by default with the March 2022 board vote to remove any restrictions on reference distribution].\nAnd this leaves us with the one thing that would be affected by the open data provision of POSI- data that is created by Crossref itself as a byproduct of our services. By law, this data is under Crossref’s copyright unless we explicitly waive it. This data includes things like, participation reports, conflict reports, member IDs and Cited-by counts (just the counts, not the references) and any aggregations of our otherwise uncopyrighted data that might, by aggregating it, be subject to sui generis database rights. At the moment, although we distribute this data freely and without restriction, we have no explicit copyright attached to it. All we would be seeking to do is explicitly say that data generated by Crossref will be distributed CC0. Again, at first it would be enough to just specify this in human readable form, along with our other copyright information. But, eventually, we would want to include this information in machine actionable form in the metadata itself.\nTo summarise:\nMetadata type Example Current Copyright Change under POSI Already CC0 Open Funder Registry, Event Data CC0 None Private Log files, user IDs Private None Bibliographic Title, authors, volume, issue Facts None Closed references Facts - but no distribution under the reference distribution board policy from 2017 None Limited references Facts - but no public distribution under the reference distribution board policy from 2017 None Open references Facts None Crossref-generated data Participation data, reports, extracts Copyright Crossref CC0 [EDIT 6th June 2022 - all references are now open by default with the March 2022 board vote to remove any restrictions on reference distribution].\nNo member metadata will be affected by our adopting the open data provision of POSI. The only data that would be affected is data generated by Crossref itself.\nHowever, the adoption of this principle would likely have an effect on our decisions about future services. For example, under this principle we would not launch any new services where the data was not freely reusable or the copyright of the data was not CC0.\nConclusion and Next steps So again we face the paradox- We are announcing something that is simultaneously insignificant and important. It is insignificant in that we are simply saying that we will continue to do what we have largely been doing since Crossref was founded. But it is important because, in codifying what we have been doing, we are also confirming that these principles actually worked. That they were essential to building the trust that allowed us to function over the past twenty years, and they will continue to be essential in the future- as we look to work with existing organisations to strengthen current infrastructures, and work with new stakeholders to develop new infrastructures.\nSo much of the work in building scholarly infrastructure is about building trust. We would love to see other organisations and services adopt POSI as well. Doing so would help us to collaborate more efficiently by allowing us to confirm from the outset that our fundamental values align. And having a set of verifiable commitments that we can point to will also help build the community\u0026rsquo;s trust in our respective organisations and services.\nAnd this brings us to an important point. Although POSI might have been inspired by Crossref, POSI is not a “Crossref thang” and it never has been. The movement to create open scholarly infrastructures and to define and clarify the ground rules within which they operate has become a much broader community concern.\nTo this end, we’ve worked with some sibling infrastructure organisations—such as Dryad and ROR—as well as the original authors of POSI to create a website where we could host the list of principles independent of the original blog post and independent of any single organisation:\nopenscholarlyinfrastructure.org Minimally, this provides a place for anybody who wants to link to or cite POSI - either because they are endorsing them, or because they are simply discussing them. If we see enough activity of this type, then the site could evolve to become a register of those organisations and services who have formally adopted POSI and a place where they can link to their self-assessments against the principles.\nThe community promoting, discussing and applying POSI has long since grown beyond the original authors of the POSI blog post. And it is also much larger than any single organisation. Our hope is that this website encourages that growth.\nAnd, of course, in addition to the external outreach and coordination, Crossref still has internal work to do in addressing the outstanding issues that were raised in our own self-assessment above. We need to increase our contingency funds. We need to publish a patent non-assertion covenant. We need to open source our core software. And we need to clarify our metadata license information and make it explicit that Crossref waives copyright (using CC-0) for any metadata generated by Crossref. And, finally, as Crossref expands and starts working with different stakeholders, we will need to adjust our governance and the composition of our board accordingly. We will, of course, post updates here as we make progress on addressing these areas.\n2020 marked Crossref’s 20th birthday. What a grim year to have an anniversary. But we are, at least, ending it on a little bit of a high. We are delighted that the issue of open scholarly infrastructure has become so prominent in the community. And we are eager to help strengthen and extend this infrastructure. The decision by Crossref’s board to adopt POSI is the equivalent of Crossref finally adopting a written constitution. And it is a fitting launch to our next twenty years.\n",
"headings": ["TL;DR","Background and Origins","Motivations. Why Now?","Because it is the right thing to do for those that currently depend on Crossref","Because it could help make the creation of new, sustainable, open scholarly infrastructure easier and less expensive","Adopting the Principles: Plus ça change","Implications","So how does Crossref currently meet POSI?","Governance","Sustainability","Insurance","Governance","🟢 Coverage across the research enterprise","🟢 Non-discriminatory membership","🟢 Transparent operations","🟢 Cannot lobby","🟢 Living will","🟢 Formal incentives to fulfil mission \u0026amp; wind-down","🔴 Stakeholder Governed","Sustainability","🟢 Time-limited funds are used only for time-limited activities","🟢 Goal to generate surplus","🟡 Goal to create contingency fund to support operations for 12 months","🟢 Mission-consistent revenue generation","🟢 Revenue based on services, not data","Insurance","🟢 Available data (within constraints of privacy laws)","🟡 Patent non-assertion","🟡 Open source","Conclusion and Next steps"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/community/working-for-you/",
"title": "Working for you",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2020-11-08",
"lastmod_ts": 1604793600,
"section": "Get involved",
"tags": [],
"description": "Innovation never slows, and the ways research is communicated is no different. Crossref has evolved to work with and for many new and emerging organisations and innovations. Find out how our services can work for you, take a look at our current members metadata coverage and get in touch if you\u0026rsquo;d like to see us develop something new.\nFor Publishers Increase discoverability; put your content on the map so that it’s easy to find, cite, link, assess, and reuse. We help you create persistent links between research outputs such as articles, books, references, data, components, versions, and more. Read more about our services for Publishers.\n",
"content": "Innovation never slows, and the ways research is communicated is no different. Crossref has evolved to work with and for many new and emerging organisations and innovations. Find out how our services can work for you, take a look at our current members metadata coverage and get in touch if you\u0026rsquo;d like to see us develop something new.\nFor Publishers Increase discoverability; put your content on the map so that it’s easy to find, cite, link, assess, and reuse. We help you create persistent links between research outputs such as articles, books, references, data, components, versions, and more. Read more about our services for Publishers.\nFor Editors Your decisions influence what research is communicated and how. Demonstrate your editorial integrity with tools that help you assess a paper’s originality, and properly label and connect updates, corrections, and retractions. Read more about what we offer Editors.\nFor Researchers Find other researchers’ work and let them find yours. Through registering DOIs, we collect and share comprehensive information about research such as citations, mentions, and other relationships. Thousands of tools and services then harness this information\u0026mdash;for search, discovery, and measurement\u0026mdash;through our open APIs. Read more about how Researchers benefit.\nFor Developers If you develop tools and software to find, cite, link, and/or assess research outputs, you can integrate our metadata about scholarly content into your project, through our open APIs. Read more about our tools for Developers.\nFor Research Funders Connect your grants and grantees with their published outputs. We collect and share metadata about published research\u0026mdash;such as Funder IDs, ORCID iDs, licenses and clinical trials\u0026mdash;all of which helps funders measure reach and return. Read more about our services for Funders. Crucially, funders are joining Crossref to register their grants so that they can more easily and accurately track the outputs connected to the research they support.\nFor Librarians Enhance your metadata and connect your discovery and linking services with our metadata records\u0026mdash;they’re all available in XML and JSON through open APIs and search. Read on for our services for Libraries.\nFor Preprint Servers Add your preprints, working papers, and more to the corpus of works that are easy to find, cite, link, assess, and reuse. With a persistent identifier and related metadata, you can create links between different versions of the same document, including those published in journals and elsewhere. Authors can easily cite their preprints in articles, grant applications, and for research assessment. Read more about our support for preprints and related metadata.\nFor Research Institutions Your institution can use Crossref to help with the management, analyses, and reporting of their research activities. Through our open metadata, you can support researchers to bring their ideas to life, identify groups to work with, demonstrate compliance, and share and report on outcomes. Read more about we help Research Institutions.\n",
"headings": ["For Publishers","For Editors","For Researchers","For Developers","For Research Funders","For Librarians","For Preprint Servers","For Research Institutions"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/calling-all-24-hour-pid-party-people/",
"title": "Calling all 24-hour (PID) party people!",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2020-10-13",
"lastmod_ts": 1602547200,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "While we wish we could be together in person to celebrate the fifth PIDapalooza, there\u0026rsquo;s an upside to moving it online: now everyone can participate in the universe\u0026rsquo;s best PID party! With 24 hours of non-stop PID programming, you\u0026rsquo;ll be able to come to the party no matter where you happen to be.\nSend us your ideas for #PIDapalooza21 Now is your chance to share your work in the #PIDapalooza21 spotlight! We\u0026rsquo;re seeking proposals for short, interactive sessions about what you are doing––or want to do––with persistent identifiers and the communities that love and use them. ",
"content": "While we wish we could be together in person to celebrate the fifth PIDapalooza, there\u0026rsquo;s an upside to moving it online: now everyone can participate in the universe\u0026rsquo;s best PID party! With 24 hours of non-stop PID programming, you\u0026rsquo;ll be able to come to the party no matter where you happen to be.\nSend us your ideas for #PIDapalooza21 Now is your chance to share your work in the #PIDapalooza21 spotlight! We\u0026rsquo;re seeking proposals for short, interactive sessions about what you are doing––or want to do––with persistent identifiers and the communities that love and use them. #PIDapalooza21 will feature sessions around the broad theme of PIDs and Open Research Infrastructure, focusing on the following areas:\nTheme 1. PIDs 101 For PID beginners! You\u0026rsquo;ve got just 30 minutes to get attendees up to speed on a PID or PIDs. Make it fast! Make it fact-filled! Make it fun!\nTheme 2. PID Communities International Have you always wanted to host a Spanish-language PID session, or bring together PID people in the humanities? Tell us how you\u0026rsquo;d connect with PID peers around the world!\nTheme 3. PID Success Stories There\u0026rsquo;s nothing better than hearing about what\u0026rsquo;s working in the PID world––and why! Share your success stories so we can all benefit from them.\nTheme 4. PID Party! It wouldn\u0026rsquo;t be PIDapalooza without the party sessions, so be creative! Help us make this the best PID party ever!\nPropose a session now! The call for proposals will be open until October 30. Submit your PIDea now!\n*Note: The PIDapalooza submission form uses Google. If you are unable to access Google Forms, email your session idea.\nGet the full low-down on #PIDapalooza21 at the PIDapalooza website.\n",
"headings": ["Send us your ideas for #PIDapalooza21","Theme 1. PIDs 101","Theme 2. PID Communities International","Theme 3. PID Success Stories","Theme 4. PID Party!","Propose a session now!"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/categories/pidapalooza/",
"title": "PIDapalooza",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Categories",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/ease-council-post-rachael-lammey-on-the-research-nexus/",
"title": "EASE Council Post: Rachael Lammey on the Research Nexus",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2020-10-12",
"lastmod_ts": 1602460800,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "This blog was initially posted on the European Association of Science Editors (EASE) blog: \u0026ldquo;EASE Council Post: Rachael Lammey on the Research Nexus\u0026rdquo;. EASE President Duncan Nicholas accurately introduces it as a whole lot of information and insights about metadata and communication standards into one post\u0026hellip;\nI was given a wide brief to decide on the topic of my EASE blog, so I thought I\u0026rsquo;d write one that tries to encompass everything - I\u0026rsquo;ll explain what I mean by that.\n",
"content": "This blog was initially posted on the European Association of Science Editors (EASE) blog: \u0026ldquo;EASE Council Post: Rachael Lammey on the Research Nexus\u0026rdquo;. EASE President Duncan Nicholas accurately introduces it as a whole lot of information and insights about metadata and communication standards into one post\u0026hellip;\nI was given a wide brief to decide on the topic of my EASE blog, so I thought I\u0026rsquo;d write one that tries to encompass everything - I\u0026rsquo;ll explain what I mean by that.\nIn the past, Crossref has had the opportunity to talk to EASE members about the importance of registering content whose metadata contains important information related to the article. Richer metadata helps to connect the content to other key information such as who wrote it, who it was funded by, the relevant license, the research it cites, any updates to the work such as corrections and retractions, and the data that underpin the research. The use of open persistent identifiers like DOIs, funder IDs, ORCID iDs and ROR IDs are always recommended.\nSuch rich and connected metadata also helps discoverability of the published research in a different way than just direct access; if you can find something based on looking at the publications related to a particular funder, author, or institution, then there are more ways to come across what you\u0026rsquo;re looking for. Making links between objects underpinning the research also helps put the research in context and can help further research by making connections to other valuable information that may have been more difficult to make otherwise.\nI\u0026rsquo;ve mentioned the Research Nexus in the title of this post. It\u0026rsquo;s achieved by declaring relationships between publications and other associated research objects, and from those objects to related publications. The metadata that reveals relationships between research objects can be as informative as the objects themselves. These relationships can assert certain facts that may not be otherwise obvious: this is our goal with the Research Nexus. These relationships and assertions need to exist not just on the web pages of the outputs, but also reflected in a standard way in the metadata so that the information is computer-readable and can be used at scale. As Jennifer Lin, who coined the term, explains:\n\u0026ldquo;Researchers are adopting new tools that create consistency and shareability in their experimental methods. Increasingly, these are viewed as key components in driving reproducibility and replicability. They provide transparency in reporting key methodological and analytical information. They are also used for sharing the artefacts which make up a processing trail for the results: data, material, analytical code, and related software on which the conclusions of the paper rely. Where expert feedback was also shared, such reviews further enrich this record.\u0026rdquo;\nIn her Crossref blog, Jennifer goes on to give some examples, including:\nLinking to an entire collection of methods and video protocols via Protocols.io Linking to software and peer reviews in JOSS Linking to preprint, data, code, source code, peer reviews in Gigascience I\u0026rsquo;d include an additional example of linking research to the grant using the grant identifier and associated metadata from the funding section of this PLOS paper (read more about the example from EuroPMC who register grants with Crossref for Wellcome).\nThese links can be established by adding them into the Crossref relationship metadata schema. The information is then made available to anyone via our open APIs, so that they can easily see and use the information.\nIn all of these, publishers and other parties are linking to associated research outputs to support the reproducibility and discoverability of content.\nThe reproducibility point is worth reiterating; EASE has always supported projects to maintain high standards around the review of research, publication standards and ethics, and the reduction of research waste. And connecting articles to data, preprints, protocols, and peer reviews, and making the relationships open for analysis will help achieve this.\nWe also know that there are work and cost involved in establishing these links, and we\u0026rsquo;re working on ways to lower the barriers in doing so by:\nRevisiting what we charge to encourage best practice. Starting in 2020, we have removed fees for registering vital information on corrections, retractions and other Crossmark metadata. This is timely in light of the updates to the EASE Standardised Retraction form. We\u0026rsquo;re also working to remove fees for translations and versions that are linked together by the appropriate relationship metadata so that publishers posting translations or different versions of an article don\u0026rsquo;t have to pay multiple times for these. Our Membership \u0026amp; Fees Committee is currently reviewing other ways we can support publishers keen to make these connections. Finding ways to make it easier for publishers to collect this information from authors e.g. submission systems integrations with data repositories to collect robust information on article/data links. Allowing the registration of peer review metadata for content other than journal articles e.g. books, preprints (coming soon). Making it easier for publishers to register this information with us at Crossref via the provision of simple to use tools, interfaces and reporting. The outputs of the research process, such as journal articles, don\u0026rsquo;t exist in isolation - you only have to look at the interest in the corpus of COVID-19 publications, preprints and associated data to see this. This thinking is also supported by campaigns like Metadata 2020 advocating for \u0026ldquo;richer, connected, and reusable, open metadata will advance scholarly pursuits for the benefit of society.\u0026rdquo; The relationships revealed by the Research Nexus may one day help progress research to realise benefits that help us all, providing we all make efforts to effectively support them. More to come\u0026hellip;\n",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/2020-board-election/",
"title": "2020 Board Election",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2020-09-28",
"lastmod_ts": 1601251200,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "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.\nThere are six seats open for election (two large, four small), and the Nominating Committee is pleased to present the following slate.\n",
"content": "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.\nThere are six seats open for election (two large, four small), and the Nominating Committee is pleased to present the following slate.\nThe 2020 slate Candidate organisations, in alphabetical order, for the Small category (four seats available):\nBeilstein-Institut, Wendy Patterson Korean Council of Science Editors, Kihong Kim OpenEdition, Marin Dacos Scientific Electronic Library Online (SciELO), Abel Packer, The University of Hong Kong, Jesse Xiao Candidate organisations, in alphabetical order, for the Large category (two seats available):\nAIP Publishing, Jason Wilde, Oxford University Press, James Phillpotts, Taylor \u0026amp; Francis, Liz Allen Here are the candidates\u0026rsquo; organisational and personal statements You can be part of this important process, by voting in the election If your organisation is a voting member in good standing of Crossref as of September 14, 2020, you are eligible to vote when voting opens on September 30, 2020.\nHow can you vote? On September 30, 2020, your organisation\u0026rsquo;s designated voting contact will receive an email with the Formal Notice of Meeting and Proxy Form with concise instructions on how to vote. You will also receive a user name and password with a link to our voting platform.\nThe election results will be announced at LIVE20 virtual meeting on November 10, 2020.\n",
"headings": ["The 2020 slate","Here are the candidates\u0026rsquo; organisational and personal statements","You can be part of this important process, by voting in the election","How can you vote?"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/open-abstracts-where-are-we/",
"title": "Open Abstracts: Where are we?",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2020-09-25",
"lastmod_ts": 1600992000,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "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.\n",
"content": "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.\nWhere are we at the moment in terms of openness of abstracts? For an individual publisher working with Crossref, the percentage of the publisher’s content for which an abstract is available in Crossref can be found in Crossref’s Participation Reports. The chart presented below gives the overall picture (as of September 1, 2020) for medium-sized and large publishers working with Crossref. The vertical axis shows the number of journal articles of a publisher in the period 2018-2020. Because of the large differences between publishers in the number of articles they publish, this axis has a logarithmic scale. The horizontal axis shows the percentage of the articles of a publisher for which an abstract is available in Crossref. The orange dots represent publishers that have agreed to join I4OA. The publishers colored in blue have not yet agreed to join the initiative.\nA similar chart was published a few months ago in this blog post on the importance of open abstracts. Comparing the above chart with the one published a few months ago, the first effects of I4OA are already visible. While for most publishers the percentage of abstracts available in Crossref has hardly changed, it has increased from 11% to 95% for the Royal Society, one of the founding publishers of I4OA. This reflects the efforts the Royal Society has made over the past months to improve the availability of abstracts in Crossref for its content, not only for new content but also for existing content. For SAGE, another founding publisher of I4OA, the percentage of abstracts available in Crossref has increased from 38% to 50%. A further increase can be expected to take place in the coming months. The third founding publisher of I4OA, Hindawi, has remained at a stable level, with abstracts being available for 97% of its content.\nThe above chart shows that many publishers supporting I4OA are already making abstracts available in Crossref. Other publishers do not yet make abstracts available in Crossref but have nevertheless decided to join I4OA. This is the case for Frontiers, PLOS, and Karger, and also for several smaller publishers not visible in the above chart, such as EMBO and Ubiquity Press. These publishers are currently adjusting their workflows and will start submitting abstracts to Crossref soon.\nOf the publishers that have not yet joined I4OA, some may not yet be aware of I4OA, while others may need more time to decide whether they will join the initiative. As can be seen in the above chart, most publishers that have not yet joined I4OA do not make abstracts available in Crossref at the moment. However, some publishers have not yet joined I4OA even though they do make abstracts available in Crossref. We hope these publishers will join I4OA soon. By joining the initiative, these publishers would formalize their commitment to openness of abstracts.\nNone of the publishers in the above chart makes abstracts available in Crossref for 100% of its journal content. Some publishers, such as Copernicus and Hindawi, are close to 100%, but even these publishers have some content for which no abstract is available. Importantly, this does not necessarily mean that publishers have failed to submit abstracts to Crossref for some of their content. Instead, it may simply mean that some of their journal content does not have an abstract. Research articles usually have an abstract, but many other types of content published in journals, such as book reviews, letters, editorials, and corrections, often do not have an abstract. For most publishers, it is therefore impossible to make abstracts available for 100% of their content. Moreover, since Crossref does not distinguish between different types of content published in journals, we cannot provide separate statistics on the availability of abstracts for different types of journal content.\nAs an example, let’s consider Brill, a publisher that has joined I4OA and that mainly focuses on the humanities and social sciences. Abstracts are available in Crossref for 57% of Brill’s content in the period 2018-2020. This may suggest that Brill has failed to submit abstracts to Crossref for a significant share of its content. However, when we look up journal publications of Brill in 2018 and 2019 in the Web of Science database, abstracts turn out to be available for only 68% of these publications. Assuming that Web of Science has more or less complete coverage of abstracts, this seems to indicate that Brill has already submitted most of its abstracts to Crossref. In fact, Web of Science shows that about a quarter of the publications of Brill are book reviews and that hardly any of these book reviews has an abstract. This illustrates why some publishers, for instance those that publish many book reviews, cannot be expected to get close to 100% availability of abstracts.\nDespite the above caveats, it is clear that there is still a long way to go in improving the availability of abstracts in Crossref. As of September 1, 2020, abstracts were available for 21% of all journal articles in Crossref in the period 2018-2020. In Web of Science (Science Citation Index Expanded, Social Sciences Citation Index, and Arts \u0026amp; Humanities Citation Index), 86% of all journal publications in 2018 and 2019 that have a DOI also have an abstract.\nPublishers who wish to distribute their abstracts openly through Crossref can include them in the normal content registration process. They can send XML to Crossref (using Crossref’s metadata deposit schema), either directly via HTTPS POST or via the Crossref admin system. For back-content, a resubmission of the full XML is required. In addition, various tools can be used to deposit abstracts. Open Journal Systems (OJS) has a plugin that supports the depositing of abstracts. Metadata Manager also facilitates this, but only for journal articles. Crossref’s web deposit form does not yet support abstracts, but Crossref is working on this.\nTo keep track of the progress publishers are making in depositing abstracts in Crossref, we plan to publish regular updates of the chart presented above on the I4OA website. We look forward to witnessing the impact of I4OA in the coming months!\nThank you to guest authors Bianca Kramer and Ludo Waltman, as well as the other founding members of I4OA.\n",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/get-involved-with-peer-review-week-2020-and-register-your-peer-reviews-with-crossref/",
"title": "Get involved with Peer Review Week 2020 and register your peer reviews with Crossref",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2020-09-21",
"lastmod_ts": 1600646400,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "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. ",
"content": "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. As the Peer Review Week team states:\n“Maintaining trust in the peer review decision-making process is paramount if we are to solve the world’s most pressing problems. This includes ensuring that the peer review process is transparent (easily discoverable, accessible, and understandable by anyone writing, reviewing, or reading peer-reviewed content) and that everyone involved in the process receives the training and education needed to play their part in making it reliable and trustworthy.”\nA key way that publishers can make peer reviews easily discoverable and accessible is by registering them with Crossref - creating a persistent identifier for each review, linking them to the relevant article, and providing rich metadata to show what part this item played in the evolution of the content. It also gives a way to acknowledge the incredible work done by academics in this area. For Peer Review week last year, Rosa and Rachael from Crossref created this short video to explain more.\nFast forward to 2020 and over 75k peer reviews have now been registered with us by a range of members including Wiley, Peer J, eLife, Stichting SciPost, Emerald, IOP Publishing, Publons, The Royal Society and Copernicus. We encourage all members to register peer reviews with us - and you can keep up to date with everyone who is using this API query. (We recommend installing a JSON viewer for your browser to view these results if you haven’t done so already).\nRegister peer reviews and contribute to the Research Nexus At Crossref, we talk a lot about the research nexus, and it’s a theme that you’re going to hear a lot more about from us in the coming months and years. The published article no longer has the supremacy it once did, and other outputs - and inputs - have increasing importance. Linked data and protocols are key for reproducibility, peer reviews increase trust and show the evolution of knowledge, and other research objects help increase the discoverability of content. Registering these objects and stating the relationships between them support the research nexus.\nPeer reviews in particular are key to demonstrating that the scholarly record is not fixed - it’s a living entity that moves and changes over time. Registering peer reviews formally integrates these objects into the scholarly record and makes sure the links between the reviews and the article both exist and persist over time. It allows analysis or research on peer reviews and highlights richer discussions than those provided by the article alone, showing how discussion and conversation help to evolve knowledge. In particular, post-publication reviews highlight how the article is no longer the endpoint - after publication, research is further validated (or not!) and new ideas emerge and build on each other. You can see a real-life example of this from F1000 in a blog post written by Jennifer Lin a few years ago.\nAs we’ve said before:\nArticle metadata + peer review metadata = a fuller picture of the evolution of knowledge Registering peer reviews also provides publishing transparency and reviewer accountability, and enables contributors to get credit for their work. If peer review metadata includes ORCID IDs, our ORCID auto-update service means that we can automatically update the author’s ORCID record (with their permission), while our forthcoming schema update will take this even further, making CRediT roles available in our schema.\nHow to register peer reviews with Crossref You need to be a member of Crossref in order to register your peer reviews with us and you can currently register peer reviews by sending us your XML files. Unfortunately, you can’t currently register peer reviews using our helper tools like the OJS plugin, Metadata Manager, or the web deposit form. You can find out more about registering peer reviews on our website - we even have a range of markup examples. We know that there’s a range of outputs from the peer review process, and our schema allows you to identify many of them, including referee reports, decision letters, and author responses. You can include outputs from the initial submission only, or cover all subsequent rounds of revisions, giving a really clear picture of the evolution of the article. Members can even register content for discussions after the article was published, such as post-publication reviews.\nGet involved with Peer Review Week 2020 We’re looking forward to seeing the debate sparked by Peer Review Week and hearing from our members about this important area. You can get involved by checking out the Peer Review Week 2020 website or following @PeerRevWeek and the hashtags #PeerRevWk20 #trustinpeerreview on Twitter.\nWe’re excited to see what examples of the evolution of knowledge will be discoverable in registered and linked peer reviews this time next year!\n",
"headings": ["Register peer reviews and contribute to the Research Nexus","How to register peer reviews with Crossref","Get involved with Peer Review Week 2020"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/categories/peer-review/",
"title": "Peer Review",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Categories",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/categories/record-types/",
"title": "Record Types",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Categories",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/crossref-at-the-frankfurt-digital-book-fair/",
"title": "Crossref at the Frankfurt Digital Book Fair",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2020-09-17",
"lastmod_ts": 1600300800,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "Frankfurt Book Fair (#FBM20) will be online this year since people are really not traveling right now. 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! ",
"content": "Frankfurt Book Fair (#FBM20) will be online this year since people are really not traveling right now. 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! Similar to the in-person event of years past, members of our technical support, membership, and outreach teams will be on hand at our online Crossref Cafe. Here are our Crossref Cafe hours: Support Membership Community outreach Product Wed 14 Oct 8:00 - 9:00 UTC Paul Sally Vanessa Bryan Wed 14 Oct 14:00 - 15:00 UTC Shayn Anna Susan Sara Thu 15 Oct 8:00 - 9:00 UTC Paul Laura Vanessa Martyn Thu 15 Oct 14:00 - 15:00 UTC Isaac, Shayn Anna, Kathleen Susan Kirsty Fri 16 Oct 8:00 - 9:00 UTC Paul Amanda Vanessa, Rachael Rakesh Fri 16 Oct 14:00 - 15:00 UTC Isaac, Shayn Anna, Kathleen Susan Who will be online:\nSusan, Vanessa, and Rachael can talk to you about our upcoming events. Kirsty can talk to you about Crossmark. Kathleen can explain Similarity Check. Laura can show you how to use Metadata Manager for Content Registration. Isaac, Shayn, and Paul can help troubleshoot any metadata, DOI, or reporting needs. Sara can talk to you about content registration. Anna will give you a \u0026lsquo;metadata health check\u0026rsquo; including a tour of your Participation Report. Rakesh can talk to you about product design. Sally and Amanda can answer your questions about membership. Martyn can talk to you about Cited-by. Bryan can talk to you about recent updates to our products and services. We are happy to schedule one-on-one virtual meetings as well. Please do drop-in to say \u0026ldquo;Guten Tag\u0026rdquo;. We\u0026rsquo;re looking forward to seeing you online! ",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/categories/organisation-identifier/",
"title": "Organisation Identifier",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Categories",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/publishers-are-you-ready-to-ror/",
"title": "Publishers, are you ready to ROR?",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2020-08-25",
"lastmod_ts": 1598313600,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "If you manage a publishing system or workflow, you know how crucial—and how challenging!—it is to have clean, consistent, and comprehensive affiliation metadata. Author affiliations, and the ability to link them to publications and other scholarly outputs, are vital for numerous stakeholders across the research landscape. Institutions need to monitor and measure their research output by the articles their researchers have published. Funders need to be able to discover and track the research and researchers they have supported. Academic librarians need to easily find all of the publications associated with their campus. Journals need to know where authors are affiliated so they can determine eligibility for institutionally sponsored publishing agreements.\n",
"content": "If you manage a publishing system or workflow, you know how crucial—and how challenging!—it is to have clean, consistent, and comprehensive affiliation metadata. Author affiliations, and the ability to link them to publications and other scholarly outputs, are vital for numerous stakeholders across the research landscape. Institutions need to monitor and measure their research output by the articles their researchers have published. Funders need to be able to discover and track the research and researchers they have supported. Academic librarians need to easily find all of the publications associated with their campus. Journals need to know where authors are affiliated so they can determine eligibility for institutionally sponsored publishing agreements.\nUntil recently, an open, unambiguous, and persistent identifier for research organisation affiliations has been a missing layer of the scholarly ecosystem. DOIs could identify articles and datasets and other research outputs, and ORCID IDs could identify researchers, but no equivalent solution was available to identify institutions. With the launch of the Research Organisation Registry (ROR) in 2019 (which Crossref has helped to develop), the landscape is changing. ROR IDs are an opportunity to make affiliation details easier for publishers to use and easier for those who rely on this data.\nAffiliations are a key piece of Crossref metadata that has been missing, but will soon be supported in the Crossref metadata schema. This means that content registered with Crossref can be associated with a ROR IDs to enable better tracking and discovery of research and other publication outputs by institution.\nWhat is ROR? ROR is the Research Organisation Registry––open, noncommercial, community-led infrastructure for research organisation identifiers. The registry currently includes globally unique persistent identifiers and associated metadata for more than 98,000 research organisations (as of August 2020).\nROR IDs are specifically designed to be implemented in any system that captures institutional affiliations and to enable connections (via persistent identifiers and networked research infrastructure) between research organisations, research outputs, and researchers.\nROR IDs are interoperable with those in other identifier registries, including GRID (which provided the seed data that ROR launched with), Crossref Funder Registry, ISNI, and Wikidata. ROR data is available under a CC0 waiver and can be accessed via a public API and data dump.\nROR is not the first organisation identifier to exist. But ROR is distinct because it is completely open, specifically focused on identifying affiliations, and collaboratively developed by, with, and for key stakeholders in scholarly communications. ROR is operated as a joint initiative by Crossref, DataCite, and California Digital Library, and was launched with seed data from GRID in collaboration with Digital Science. These organisations have invested resources into building an open registry of research organisation identifiers that can be embedded in scholarly infrastructure to effectively link research to organisations.\nWhy care about ROR IDs in Crossref metadata? Ed Pentz, Crossref’s Executive Director, explains the key role ROR can play in enriching Crossref metadata:\n“Over the years Crossref has expanded the metadata it collects (for example, ORCID IDs and license URLs) based on the changing needs of our members and the scholarly research community. A key type of metadata that is missing from Crossref is affiliations. We’ve had a lot of feedback from members that adding affiliations should be a priority. At Crossref LIVE19 in Amsterdam, ROR was ranked joint first place for Crossref by the 100 plus attendees at the meeting. For the last few years we’ve been diligently working on the initiative and are very happy that ROR is now coming to fruition.”\nCrossref metadata does include some affiliations already. But this data is not comprehensive or consistent, and appears as free-text strings only (even if originally sourced from a list of institutions). A search for UC Berkeley, for instance, returns multiple variants of the university’s name:\nUniversity of California, Berkeley University of California-Berkeley University of California Berkeley UC Berkeley And likely more\u0026hellip; While it isn\u0026rsquo;t too difficult for a human to guess that \u0026ldquo;UC Berkeley,\u0026rdquo; \u0026ldquo;University of California, Berkeley,\u0026rdquo; and \u0026ldquo;University of California at Berkeley\u0026rdquo; are all referring to the same university, a machine interpreting this information wouldn\u0026rsquo;t necessarily make the same connections. If you are trying to easily find all of the publications associated with UC Berkeley, you would need to run and reconcile multiple searches at best, or miss data completely at worst. This is where an affiliation identifier comes in: a single, unambiguous, standardized identifier that will always stay the same (for UC Berkeley, that would be https://ror.org/01an7q238).\nROR IDs for affiliations can transform the usability of Crossref metadata. While it\u0026rsquo;s crucial to have IDs for affiliations, it\u0026rsquo;s equally important that the affiliation data can be easily used. The ROR dataset is CC0, so ROR IDs and associated affiliation data can be freely and openly used and reused without any restrictions.\nWhat does this mean for publishers? As the Crossref schema update is being cleared for takeoff, this is a good time for publishers and publishing service providers to be thinking about adopting ROR.\nROR IDs can be useful in publishing workflows in a variety of ways. They can easily be implemented into manuscript tracking systems to identify the affiliations of submitting authors and co-authors. This can be done via a simple institution lookup that connects to the ROR API. Authors choose their affiliation from a dropdown list populated from ROR; they do not have to provide a ROR ID or even know that a ROR ID is being collected.\nUpon publication, ROR affiliation data can be included when content is registered with Crossref. ROR IDs are also supported in the JATS XML format that many publishers use. Crossref metadata can be searched and crawled, and the Crossref API will make ROR IDs available so affiliation data can be captured by tools and services and fed into downstream reporting and tracking systems.\nGet ready to ROR! ROR is already working with a number of publishers and service providers that are planning to integrate ROR in their systems, map their affiliation data to ROR IDs, and/or include ROR IDs in publication metadata.\nFor example: Rockefeller University Press has already added the collection of ROR IDs to their publication workflow. Upon submission, the author selects an institutional affiliation from a dropdown list of options that comes from ROR. Rockefeller University Press also relies on this affiliation data for billing and licensing purposes to coordinate Gold Open Access publishing agreements.\nIn addition to publishers, libraries and repositories and other stakeholders are building in support for ROR. You can also see the list of active and in-progress ROR integrations here.\nWe know decisions about identifier adoption aren\u0026rsquo;t easy or immediate, so get in touch with ROR if you have questions or want to be more involved in the project. ROR holds regular community meetings and webinars and supports several community working groups for those interested in implementing ROR IDs and working with ROR data. This is a community-driven effort so we want to hear from you!\n",
"headings": ["What is ROR?","Why care about ROR IDs in Crossref metadata?","What does this mean for publishers?","Get ready to ROR!"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/authors/bryan-vickery/",
"title": "Bryan Vickery",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Authors",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/evolving-our-support-for-text-and-data-mining/",
"title": "Evolving our support for text-and-data mining",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2020-08-21",
"lastmod_ts": 1597968000,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "Many researchers want to carry out analysis and extraction of information from large sets of data, such as journal articles and other scholarly content. Methods such as screen-scraping are error-prone, place too much strain on content sites and may be unrepeatable or break if site layouts change. Providing researchers with automated access to the full-text content via DOIs and Crossref metadata reduces these problems, allowing for easy deduplication and reproducibility. Supporting text and data mining echoes our mission to make research outputs easy to find, cite, link, assess, and reuse.\n",
"content": "Many researchers want to carry out analysis and extraction of information from large sets of data, such as journal articles and other scholarly content. Methods such as screen-scraping are error-prone, place too much strain on content sites and may be unrepeatable or break if site layouts change. Providing researchers with automated access to the full-text content via DOIs and Crossref metadata reduces these problems, allowing for easy deduplication and reproducibility. Supporting text and data mining echoes our mission to make research outputs easy to find, cite, link, assess, and reuse.\nIn 2013 Crossref embarked on a project to better support Crossref members and researchers with Text and Data Mining requests and access. There were two main parts to the project:\nTo collect and make available full-text links and publisher TDM license links in the metadata.\nTo provide a service (TDM click-through service) for Crossref members to post their additional TDM terms and conditions and for researchers to access, review and accept these terms.\nThe TDM click-through was launched in May 2014.\nTo date, 37.5 million works registered with Crossref have both full-text links and TDM license information. We continue to encourage all members to include full-text links and license information in the metadata they register to assist researchers with TDM. You can see how each member is doing via its Participation Report (e.g. Wiley\u0026rsquo;s).\nMembers are also making subscription content available for text mining (temporarily or otherwise) for specific purposes, such as to help the research community with its response to COVID-19. Back in April we highlighted how this can be achieved by including:\nA \u0026ldquo;free to read\u0026rdquo; element in the access indicators section of publisher metadata indicating that the content is being made available free-of-charge (gratis)\nAn assertion element indicating that the content being made available is available free-of-charge.\nTo access Crossref\u0026rsquo;s click-through tool for text and data mining, users could log in via their ORCID iD. They could then review TDM license agreements posted by Crossref members and accept, reject or postpone their decisions until later. Having agreed to a publisher\u0026rsquo;s terms and conditions this action was logged against the user\u0026rsquo;s API token which they could use when requesting full-text from the publisher.\nSince the pilot in 2014, only 2 publishers have continued with the tool and fewer than 300 API tokens have been issued.\nPublishers have since developed their own mechanisms for managing TDM requests. The introduction of UK (2014) / EU (2019) copyright exceptions for TDM has significantly reduced the number of requests and at the same time, more and more content is published under an open access license.\nGiven the low take-up of the click-through by both publishers and researchers, its goals are no longer being met. Therefore we will retire the TDM click-through in December 2020. Until that date, it will still operate for the two publishers and various researchers who use it while they finish implementing their alternative plans.\nCrossref will continue to collect member-supplied TDM licensing information in metadata for individual works, and researchers can continue to find this via the Crossref APIs.\n",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/categories/text-and-data-mining/",
"title": "Text and Data Mining",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Categories",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/authors/kirsty-meddings/",
"title": "Kirsty Meddings",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Authors",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/similarity-check-news-introducing-the-next-generation-ithenticate./",
"title": "Similarity Check news: introducing the next generation iThenticate.",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2020-07-28",
"lastmod_ts": 1595894400,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref’s Similarity Check service is used by our members to detect text overlap with previously published work that may indicate plagiarism of scholarly or professional works. Manuscripts can be checked against millions of publications from other participating Crossref members and general web content using the iThenticate text comparison software from Turnitin.\n",
"content": "Crossref’s Similarity Check service is used by our members to detect text overlap with previously published work that may indicate plagiarism of scholarly or professional works. Manuscripts can be checked against millions of publications from other participating Crossref members and general web content using the iThenticate text comparison software from Turnitin.\nThe 2000 members who already make use of Similarity Check upload almost 2,000,000 documents each month to look for matching text in other publications.\nWe have some great news for those 2000 members –– a completely new version of iThenticate is on its way, and will start to roll out to users in the coming months.\nNew functionality has been developed based on your feedback over the past few years and includes:\nAn improved Document Viewer that makes PDFs searchable and accessible, with responsive design for ease of use on different screen sizes. All of the functionality of the Viewer and the Text-only reports in the previous version have been streamlined into just two views: Sources Overview and All Sources. Improved exclusion options to make refining matches even easier. Smarter citation detection now identifies probable citations both inline and in reference sections. A new “Content Portal” where you can see what percentage of your own content has been successfully indexed for the iThenticate comparison database, and download reports of indexing errors that need to be fixed. A new API for integration with manuscript submission systems allows display of the largest matching word count and the top 5 source matches alongside the Similarity Score. The maximum number of pages and file size per document has been doubled to 800 pages/200 MB. The new document viewer in iThenticate v2.0 Improved reference exclusion Crossref members can use Similarity Check directly by logging in, or via an integration with a submission/peer review system. We are working with many system providers to bring v2.0 to you as soon as possible. In the meantime, we are looking for members to help us test the new system directly in the iThenticate user interface. If you are interested and can spare a few hours some time in the next month please let me know.\nAnd if your organisation is not yet using Similarity Check to assess the originality of the manuscripts you receive do take a look at the many benefits the service has to offer.\n",
"headings": ["The new document viewer in iThenticate v2.0","Improved reference exclusion"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/meet-the-new-crossref-executive-director/",
"title": "Meet the new Crossref Executive Director",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2020-07-23",
"lastmod_ts": 1595462400,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "It’s me! Back in January I wrote, The one constant in Crossref’s 20 years has been change. This continues to be true, and the latest change is that I’m happy to say that I will be staying on as Executive Director of Crossref. At the recent Crossref board meeting, I rescinded my resignation and the board happily accepted this.\n",
"content": "It’s me! Back in January I wrote, The one constant in Crossref’s 20 years has been change. This continues to be true, and the latest change is that I’m happy to say that I will be staying on as Executive Director of Crossref. At the recent Crossref board meeting, I rescinded my resignation and the board happily accepted this.\nWhat happened? Well, a lot has changed since I announced that I was leaving back in February. The pandemic has upended “business as usual” and everyone is rethinking pretty much everything. It’s clear that as a result of the crisis, there will be greater economic pressure on our community. These are difficult times and they are going to continue for the foreseeable future.\nThe people at Crossref are amazing and I’ve been impressed and inspired by everyone’s resilience and creativity in responding to these unusual challenges. Crossref has a very special organisational culture and I want to remain a part of it and continue to develop it.\nI’ve also been inspired by the board. In particular, at its July meeting they passed a progressive motion based on a proposal from the leadership team:\nRESOLVED: Crossref should proactively lead an effort to explore, with other infrastructure organisations and initiatives, how we can improve the scholarly research ecosystem. Crossref is committed to the collaborative development of open scholarly infrastructure for the benefit of our members and the wider research community.\nThis is the result of a process that started back in 2019. In the A turning point is a time for reflection blog post, we took a step back as we approached Crossref’s 20th anniversary. We conducted research into the perceived value of Crossref, reflected on what we had achieved, and what the future holds for Crossref. At our annual meeting, \u0026ldquo;the strategy one\u0026rdquo; and in our annual report fact file, we reminded people of the organisation’s original founding purpose:\nTo promote the development and cooperative use of new and innovative technologies to speed and facilitate scientific and other scholarly research.\nFollowing on from 2019, as the pandemic hit, we held virtual strategic sessions with the board in March, May and June. These culminated in the motion above, which allows Crossref to fully embrace this simple, but ambitious, vision. This was a game changer for me, and I realized there was nothing else I wanted to do or that better suited my skills and experience than to continue to lead Crossref and work with the community through the next phase of transformation.\nThis is not the time for “business as usual”. We live in an interconnected, interdependent world and open infrastructure organisations have to collaborate more deeply and look at doing things differently in order to improve the scholarly research ecosystem. So - more to come!\n",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/new-faces-at-crossref/",
"title": "New faces at Crossref",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2020-06-30",
"lastmod_ts": 1593475200,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "Please help us welcome new faces at Crossref! Martyn, Sara, Laura, and Mark joined us very recently and we are happy they\u0026rsquo;re with us. Both Martyn and Sara have joined the Product team and this has given us the chance to reorganize the team into the following groups: content registration, scholarly stewardship, scholarly impact, metadata retrieval, and UX/UI leadership. Laura joined the Finance and Operations team to help make the billing process simple for our members. Mark joins the Technology team and one of his projects will be improving the Event Data service.\nIt is exciting to already see the impact of your contributions and look forward to what’s to come!\n",
"content": "Please help us welcome new faces at Crossref! Martyn, Sara, Laura, and Mark joined us very recently and we are happy they\u0026rsquo;re with us. Both Martyn and Sara have joined the Product team and this has given us the chance to reorganize the team into the following groups: content registration, scholarly stewardship, scholarly impact, metadata retrieval, and UX/UI leadership. Laura joined the Finance and Operations team to help make the billing process simple for our members. Mark joins the Technology team and one of his projects will be improving the Event Data service.\nIt is exciting to already see the impact of your contributions and look forward to what’s to come!\nAnd now a few words from each of them. Martyn Rittman I am a former university researcher who worked on interdisciplinary projects around life sciences and analytical chemistry, with positions in the UK and Germany. I spent seven years at open access publisher MDPI doing everything from running journals to handling production, developing services for authors and publishers, and supporting preprints. I’m very excited to be joining Crossref as a Product Manager and developing some great products and services that focus on how Crossref-indexed research creates impact. This includes supporting the use of preprint metadata. I’m also looking forward to getting my teeth into event data, which looks at how those in the research community and beyond reference, use, and reuse research. If you are interested in making use of event data or have examples of event data applications, I would like to hear from you. Sara Bowman I’m thrilled to have joined Crossref at this exciting time in the organisation. As a member of the Product team, my primary area of focus is content registration, building, and improving tools for our members to deposit rich metadata. I’m particularly interested in how we can create a unified user experience for content registration while supporting the needs of our diverse membership. A scientist by training, I’ve spent the last 6 years working on open source technologies to support scholarly communication, most recently in the role of Product Manager at the Center for Open Science. I’m passionate about open tools and using data to drive product development, building innovative solutions to improve research and scholarly communication.\nLaura Cuniff I joined Crossref two months ago as a part-time Billing Support Specialist on the Finance and Operations team. With the help of my supportive and knowledgeable colleagues, I took on learning the various systems. My goal is to make the billing process as simple as possible for our members by researching, retrieving, and relaying billing information. This allows our members to focus on the reason for their engagement with Crossref. With several part-time jobs cobbled together at different times of the day, I have the flexibility to volunteer with a few organisations in my hometown of Ipswich, MA. If you find yourself at the Ipswich Visitor Center, I may greet you, recommend the most beautiful spots in town, give you a tour of the Ipswich Museum, or send you off with a wonderful Ipswich Humane Group cat or dog! I’m very excited to be here!\nMark Woodhall I am an open-source enthusiast who has worked in a range of technology roles at a variety of companies as a polyglot programmer with experience in Clojure(Script), Java, C#, and JavaScript. It’s really exciting to be working at Crossref as a Senior Software Developer on the Technology team and I’m proud to be part of a team with open source at its heart. I’m really looking forward to getting more involved with event data and building a scalable solution to support its future uses.\nWelcome to the Crossref community Martyn, Laura, Sara, and Mark.\n",
"headings": ["And now a few words from each of them.","Martyn Rittman","Sara Bowman","Laura Cuniff","Mark Woodhall"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/community-outreach-in-2020/",
"title": "Community Outreach in 2020",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2020-06-29",
"lastmod_ts": 1593388800,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "2020 hasn’t been quite what any of us had imagined. The pandemic has meant big adjustments in terms of working; challenges for parents balancing childcare and professional lives; anxieties and tensions we never had before; the strain of potentially being away from co-workers, friends, and family for a prolonged period of time. Many have suffered job losses and around the world, many have sadly lost their lives to the virus.\n",
"content": "2020 hasn’t been quite what any of us had imagined. The pandemic has meant big adjustments in terms of working; challenges for parents balancing childcare and professional lives; anxieties and tensions we never had before; the strain of potentially being away from co-workers, friends, and family for a prolonged period of time. Many have suffered job losses and around the world, many have sadly lost their lives to the virus.\nI’ve been very fortunate that my family and friends remain in good health and very grateful to work for a supportive and caring organisation such as Crossref. I don’t usually work from home every day, so adjusting to the ‘new normal’ these last few months has been difficult at times. I certainly miss seeing my colleagues in the Oxford office day-to-day, and now have a new appreciation for the challenges our remote working members of staff face, particularly when it comes to feeling quite isolated at times. I’ve also learnt about the importance of good communication and building in greater flexibility to projects, especially when you are not able to see people face-to-face.\nMy role as Outreach Manager is all about people; it often involves organising and attending industry events as well as running our own educational days, which we call our Crossref LIVE events. The global health crisis brought the majority of international travel to an abrupt halt, something the environment may thank us for, but that also requires a dramatic reimagining of how we can effectively and empathetically engage with our members and the wider community.\nAs our planned in-person events have been postponed, for now, we converted our LIVE events into an online format, which we have so far run in Arabic, Spanish, Korean and Brazilian Portuguese with help from our Ambassadors and technical support team. We have had better attendance and engagement than we ever dreamed, with lots of thoughtful questions and positive feedback. While an online format has its limitations it also brings new opportunities, particularly by enabling us to reach many members who would not be able to attend a physical event. We have more in the works for the rest of the year, so keep a lookout on our webinar and events pages.\nWe have all had to adapt to new ways of living and working this year, but vital research continues to be done and new content continues to be published. We embrace new ways of engaging with our international membership so we can continue to support them in their roles and in working with our systems, despite the uncertain circumstances we find ourselves in.\nLessons learned: Online events need to be much shorter than physical ones. Zoom fatigue is real, no one can stay focused for long periods of time at the screen.\nFlexibility is key, running events in multiple languages and time-zones make them more accessible for a geographically diverse audience, but also ensuring recordings and other materials are readily available means people can engage with the content in their own time. And they do. Our Spanish LIVE on May 19 saw 335 people attend, and a further 304 (so far) watch the recording in their own time.\nDon’t forget to build in time for breaks.\nAlthough it’s impossible to replicate the natural human interaction that occurs at a physical event, an online format can still bring hearts as well as minds together. Break-out rooms, polls, and clever use of chat functionality all help to build engagement and turn a passive audience into active participants.\nPeople love an online quiz.\nPartner with others –– an interesting guest speaker can bring a whole new dynamic to your planned content.\nTake the opportunity to be a little more experimental. We can’t do business as usual right now, so embrace new ideas and see what works!\nHoping you all stay safe and healthy, and that we can meet again in person in 2021.\n",
"headings": ["Lessons learned:"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/calling-all-prospective-board-members/",
"title": "Calling all prospective board members",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2020-05-21",
"lastmod_ts": 1590019200,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "English version –– Información en español –– Version Française\nThe 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.\nThe role of the board at Crossref is to provide strategic and financial oversight of the organisation, as well as guidance to the Executive Director and the staff leadership team, with the key responsibilities being:\n",
"content": "English version –– Información en español –– Version Française\nThe 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.\nThe role of the board at Crossref is to provide strategic and financial oversight of the organisation, as well as guidance to the Executive Director and the staff leadership team, with the key responsibilities being:\nSetting the strategic direction for the organisation;\nProviding financial oversight; and\nApproving new policies and services.\nThe board is representative of our membership base and guides the staff leadership team on trends affecting scholarly communications. The board sets strategic directions for the organisation while also providing oversight into policy changes and implementation. Board members have a fiduciary responsibility to ensure sound operations. Board members do this by attending board meetings, as well as joining more specific board committees.\nAs an example, in 2019 the board decided to remove fees for the Crossmark service. This involved a strategic review of the service and its alignment with the mission by the Membership \u0026amp; Fees committee; followed by a review of the financial implications of removing the fee; and ultimately, a vote by the full board to remove the fee starting in 2020.\nCrossref\u0026rsquo;s services provide central infrastructure to scholarly communications. Crossref\u0026rsquo;s board helps shape the future of our services, and by extension, impacts the broader scholarly ecosystem. We are looking for board members to contribute their experience and perspective. I\u0026rsquo;m interested but busy! What is expected of board members? Board members attend three meetings each year that typically take place in March, July, and November. Meetings have taken place in a variety of international locations and travel support is provided when needed.\nStarting in 2020, following travel restrictions as a result of COVID-19, the board introduced a plan to convene at least one of the board meetings virtually each year and all committee meetings take place virtually. Most board members sit on at least one Crossref committee. Care is taken to accommodate the wide range of timezones in which our board members live.\nWhile the expressions of interest are specific to an individual, the seat that is elected to the board belongs to the member organisation. The primary board member also names an alternate who may attend meetings in the event that the primary board member is unable.\nBoard members are expected to be comfortable assuming the responsibilities listed above and to prepare and participate in board meeting discussions.\nAbout the election The board is elected through the \u0026ldquo;one member, one vote\u0026rdquo; policy wherein every member of Crossref has a single vote to elect representatives to the Crossref board. Board terms are for three years, and this year there are six seats open for election.\nThe board maintains a balance of seats, with eight seats for smaller publishers and eight seats for larger publishers, in an effort to ensure that the diversity of experiences and perspectives of the publishing community is represented in decisions made at Crossref. This year we will elect two of the larger publisher seats and four of the smaller publisher seats.\nThe election takes place online and voting will open in September. Election results will be shared at the November board meeting and new members will commence their term in 2021.\nAbout the nominating committee The nominating committee will review the expressions of interest and select a slate of candidates for election. The slate put forward will exceed the total number of open seats. The committee considers the statements of interest, organisational size, geography, gender, and experience.\n2020 Nominating Committee:\nMelissa Harrison, eLife, Cambridge, UK, committee chair\nScott Delman, ACM, New York, NY\nSusan Murray, AJOL, Grahamstown, South Africa\nTanja Niemann, Erudit, Montreal, Canada\nArley Soto, Biteca, Bogotá, Colombia\nHow to submit an expression of interest Please click here to submit your expression of interest or contact me with any questions at lofiesh [at] crossref.org.\nVersión en español\nEl Comité de Nominación de Crossref está invitando a expresiones de interés a unirse a la Junta Directiva de Crossref para el período que comienza en 2021. El comité recopilará las respuestas de los interesados ​​y creará la lista de candidatos que nuestra membresía votará en una elección en septiembre. Las expresiones de interés vencen el viernes 19 de junio de 2020.\nLa función de la junta directiva de Crossref es proporcionar supervisión estratégica y financiera de la organización, así como orientación para el Director Ejecutivo y el equipo de liderazgo del personal, con responsabilidades importantes como:\nEstablecer la dirección estratégica para la organización;\nProporcionar supervisión financiera; y\nAprobar nuevas políticas y servicios.\nLa junta es representativa de nuestra base de miembros y guía al equipo de liderazgo del personal sobre las tendencias que afectan las comunicaciones académicas. La junta establece direcciones estratégicas para la organización mientras supervisa los cambios e implementación de políticas. Los miembros de la junta tienen la responsabilidad fiduciaria de garantizar operaciones sólidas. Los miembros de la junta hacen esto asistiendo a las reuniones de la junta, además de unirse a comités de la junta más específicos.\nComo ejemplo, en 2019 la junta decidió eliminar las tarifas de servicio de Crossmark. Esto implicó una revisión estratégica del servicio y su alineación con la misión del comité de Membresía y Tarifas; seguido de una revisión de las implicaciones financieras de eliminar la tarifa; y, en última instancia, un voto de la junta completa para retirar la tarifa a partir de 2020.\nLos servicios Crossref proporcionan infraestructura central para las comunicaciones académicas. La junta directiva de Crossref ayuda a dar forma al futuro de nuestros servicios y, por extensión, impacta el ecosistema académico más amplio. Estamos buscando miembros de la junta para contribuir con su experiencia y perspectiva.\n¡Estoy interesado pero ocupado! ¿Qué se espera de los miembros de la junta? Los miembros de la junta asisten a tres reuniones cada año que generalmente tienen lugar en marzo, julio y noviembre. Las reuniones se han llevado en una variedad de ubicaciones internacionales y se brinda apoyo para viajes cuando es necesario.\nA partir de 2020, después de las restricciones de viaje como resultado de COVID-19, la junta introdujo un plan para convocar al menos una de las reuniones de la junta virtualmente todos los años, y todas las reuniones del comité tienen lugar virtualmente. La mayoría de los miembros de la junta formen parte del menos un comité Crossref. Se tiene cuidado de acomodar la amplia gama de zonas horarias en las que viven los miembros de nuestra junta.\nAunque las expresiones de interés son específicas de un individuo, el asiento elegido para la junta pertenece a la organización miembro. El miembro primario de la junta también nombra a un suplente que puede asistir a las reuniones en caso de que el miembro de la junta principal no pueda.\nSe espera que los miembros de la junta se sientan cómodos asumiendo las responsabilidades anteriores y que se preparen y participen en las discusiones de la reunión de la junta.\nLas reuniones de la junta se llevarán a cabo en inglés, por lo que los posibles miembros de la junta deben sentirse cómodos leyendo material en inglés y en inglés conversacional.\nSobre las elecciones La junta se elige mediante la política de \u0026ldquo;un miembro, un voto\u0026rdquo; en la que cada miembro de Crossref tiene un voto para elegir representantes en la junta de Crossref. Los términos de la junta son de tres años, y este año hay seis asientos abiertos para la elección\nLa junta mantiene un equilibrio de asientos, con ocho asientos para editoriales más pequeñas y ocho asientos para editoriales más grandes, en un esfuerzo por garantizar que la diversidad de experiencias y perspectivas de la comunidad editorial esté representada en las decisiones tomadas en Crossref. Este año elegiremos dos de los asientos de editor más grandes y cuatro de los asientos de editor más pequeños.\nLa elección se realiza en línea y la votación se abrirá en septiembre. Los resultados de las elecciones se compartirán en la reunión de la junta de noviembre y los nuevos miembros comenzarán su mandato en 2021.\nSobre el comité de nominaciones El comité de nominaciones revisará las expresiones de interés y seleccionará una lista de candidatos para la elección. Esta lista presentada excederá el número total de asientos disponibles. El comité considera declaraciones de interés, tamaño organizacional, geografía, género y experiencia.\nComité de nominaciones 2020:\nMelissa Harrison, eLife, Cambridge, UK, committee chair\nScott Delman, ACM, New York, NY\nSusan Murray, AJOL, Grahamstown, South Africa\nTanja Niemann, Erudit, Montreal, Canada\nArley Soto, Biteca, Bogotá, Colombia\nCómo presentar una expresión de interés Por favor haga clic aquí para enviar su expresión de interés o contáctame si tiene alguna pregunta lofiesh [at] crossref.org.\nVersion Française\nAppel à tous les membres potentiels du conseil d\u0026rsquo;administration Le comité de nomination de Crossref invite les personnes qui seraient intéressées à se porter candidates pour l\u0026rsquo;élection au conseil d\u0026rsquo;administration de Crossref, pour le mandat commençant en 2021. Le comité de nomination rassemblera les réponses des personnes candidates et élaborera une liste des candidats, pour lesquels nos membres pourront voter lors des élections au conseil d\u0026rsquo;administration, en septembre. Les candidatures doivent être déposées au plus tard le vendredi 19 juin 2020.\nLe rôle du conseil d\u0026rsquo;administration de Crossref est d\u0026rsquo;opérer une supervision stratégique et financière de l\u0026rsquo;organisation, et de conseiller le directeur exécutif ainsi que l\u0026rsquo;équipe de direction du personnel. Les principales responsabilités du conseil d’administration sont les suivantes :\nFixer l\u0026rsquo;orientation stratégique de l\u0026rsquo;organisation Assurer la surveillance financière Approuver de nouvelles politiques et de nouveaux services Le conseil d\u0026rsquo;administration est représentatif de nos adhérents et guide l\u0026rsquo;équipe de direction du personnel en ce qui concerne les tendances affectant les communications savantes. Le conseil d\u0026rsquo;administration établit des orientations stratégiques pour l\u0026rsquo;organisation, tout en assurant le contrôle des changements et de la mise en œuvre des politiques. Les membres du conseil ont la responsabilité fiduciaire d\u0026rsquo;assurer son bon fonctionnement. Les membres du conseil d\u0026rsquo;administration s’acquittent de cette responsabilité en assistant aux réunions du conseil d\u0026rsquo;administration et en participant à des comités, plus spécifiques, du conseil d\u0026rsquo;administration.\nA titre d’exemple, en 2019, le conseil d\u0026rsquo;administration a décidé de supprimer les frais liés au service Crossmark. Ceci a impliqué un examen stratégique du service et de son alignement avec la mission de Crossref, par le comité des adhésions et frais, puis un examen des implications financières de la suppression des frais, et, finalement, un vote par l\u0026rsquo;ensemble du conseil d\u0026rsquo;administration pour supprimer les frais à partir de 2020.\nLes services de Crossref fournissent une infrastructure centralisée pour les communications savantes. Le conseil d\u0026rsquo;administration de Crossref aide à façonner l\u0026rsquo;avenir de nos services et, par extension, a un impact sur l\u0026rsquo;écosystème universitaire plus large. Les futurs membres du conseil d\u0026rsquo;administration sont recherchés particulièrement pour leur expérience et leur point de vue.\nJe suis intéressé mais très occupé! Qu\u0026rsquo;attend-on des administrateurs? Les membres du conseil d\u0026rsquo;administration assistent à trois réunions par an qui ont généralement lieu en mars, juillet et novembre. Les réunions se déroulent dans des lieux divers, à l\u0026rsquo;échelle internationale, et une assistance financière est octroyée, en cas de besoin, pour le voyage.\nÀ partir de 2020, à la suite des restrictions de voyage causées par la COVID-19, le conseil a présenté un plan pour convoquer au moins une des réunions du conseil en téléconférence chaque année, et toutes les réunions des comités auront lieu en téléconférence. La plupart des membres du conseil d\u0026rsquo;administration siègent à au moins un comité de Crossref. Nous souhaitons préciser que nous prenons soin de prendre en compte le large éventail de fuseaux horaires dans lesquels vivent les membres de notre conseil d\u0026rsquo;administration.\nBien que les manifestations d\u0026rsquo;intérêt émanent d’une personne, le siège pourvu au conseil appartient à l\u0026rsquo;organisation membre dans son ensemble. Le membre titulaire du conseil d\u0026rsquo;administration nomme également un suppléant, qui pourra assister aux réunions en cas d\u0026rsquo;empêchement du membre titulaire du siège au conseil d\u0026rsquo;administration.\nIl est attendu que les membres du conseil d’administration puissent dédier aux responsabilités présentées ci-dessus le temps qui leur est raisonnablement dû, ainsi qu\u0026rsquo;à la préparation et à la participation aux discussions des réunions du conseil.\nÀ propos de l\u0026rsquo;élection Le conseil d\u0026rsquo;administration est élu selon une politique de «un membre, une voix» dans laquelle chaque membre de Crossref dispose d\u0026rsquo;une seule voix pour élire les représentants au conseil d\u0026rsquo;administration de Crossref. Le mandat du conseil d\u0026rsquo;administration est de trois ans et, cette année, six sièges sont à pourvoir lors de des élections de septembre prochain.\nLe conseil d\u0026rsquo;administration maintient un équilibre des sièges, avec huit sièges pour les petits éditeurs et huit sièges pour les grands éditeurs, afin de garantir que la diversité des expériences et des perspectives de la communauté de l\u0026rsquo;édition soit représentées dans les décisions prises à Crossref. Cette année, sont à pourvoir deux sièges de grands éditeurs et quatre sièges de petits éditeurs.\nLe vote aura lieu en ligne et s\u0026rsquo;ouvrira en septembre. Les résultats de ce scrutin seront communiqués lors de la réunion du conseil d\u0026rsquo;administration de novembre et les nouveaux membres commenceront leur mandat en 2021.\nÀ propos du comité de nomination Le comité des candidatures examinera les candidatures et sélectionnera une liste de candidats aux élections. Le nombre de candidats proposés dépassera le nombre total de sièges à pourvoir. Le comité prend en compte les déclarations d\u0026rsquo;intérêt, la taille de l\u0026rsquo;organisation, la géographie, le sexe et l\u0026rsquo;expérience des personnes pour sa sélection.\nComment exprimer une manifestation d\u0026rsquo;intérêt Veuillez cliquer ici pour envoyer votre candidature ou contactez-moi pour toute question à lofiesh [at] crossref.org.\n",
"headings": ["I\u0026rsquo;m interested but busy! What is expected of board members?","About the election","About the nominating committee","How to submit an expression of interest","¡Estoy interesado pero ocupado! ¿Qué se espera de los miembros de la junta?","Sobre las elecciones","Sobre el comité de nominaciones","Cómo presentar una expresión de interés","Appel à tous les membres potentiels du conseil d\u0026rsquo;administration","Je suis intéressé mais très occupé! Qu\u0026rsquo;attend-on des administrateurs?","À propos de l\u0026rsquo;élection","À propos du comité de nomination","Comment exprimer une manifestation d\u0026rsquo;intérêt"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/come-for-a-swim-in-our-new-pool-of-education-materials/",
"title": "Come for a swim in our new pool of Education materials",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2020-04-29",
"lastmod_ts": 1588118400,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "After 20 years in operation, and as our system matures from experimental to foundational infrastructure, it’s time to review our documentation.\nHaving a solid core of education materials about the why and the how of Crossref is essential in making participation possible, easy, and equitable.\nAs 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.\n",
"content": "After 20 years in operation, and as our system matures from experimental to foundational infrastructure, it’s time to review our documentation.\nHaving a solid core of education materials about the why and the how of Crossref is essential in making participation possible, easy, and equitable.\nAs 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.\nOur new documentation gives the full picture, with each chapter explaining an aspect of Crossref and why it matters, followed by instructions on how to participate. As far as possible, these instructions are given for each of our deposit and retrieval methods.\nThe revised documentation has been edited for use of simple English, and consistent terminology. Specialist vocabulary is explained as it is introduced. Understanding what’s involved across the full range of Crossref services can often seem complicated. This makes the documentation easier for readers, and provides a good basis for human and machine translations.\nThe chapters and sections are modular, so you can approach and combine them in different ways according to your existing knowledge and what you wish to learn. This Choose Your Own Adventure style means that sections don\u0026rsquo;t overlap, avoiding problems of repetition and versioning, and helping us to keep the information current.\nThe revised documentation includes several new topics, including: The importance of metadata, explaining why you might register metadata for different purposes (discoverability, research integrity, reproducibility, and reporting and assessment)\nPersistent identifiers (PIDs), explaining the structure of a DOI, and how you might use DOIs at different levels\nChoosing which way to register your content, including suggested DOI registration workflow and suffix generator to make life easier\nIntroduction to types of metadata, including descriptive (bibliographic), administrative, and structural Version control, corrections, and retractions, including publication stages and DOIs\nMetadata stewardship, including maintaining your metadata, reports, understanding your member obligations, and maintaining your Crossref membership.\nThis new documentation is part of our efforts to make Crossref participation possible, easy, and rewarding for our members large and small, all over the world. It provides a concrete basis on which to build further education and outreach projects in the future. New members will start to see our paced member onboarding program, introducing them to parts of the documentation as and when it\u0026rsquo;s useful to them. And like the rest of the Crossref website, it\u0026rsquo;s all licensed for reuse under CC-BY.\nI would like to say a big thank you to the members of the Education Task Force, who helped guide the development of the new documentation, representing a diverse range of Crossref members large and small from around the world:\nAnjum Sherasiya - India, Editor-in-Chief of Veterinary World, Crossref Ambassador Budi Setiawan - Indonesia, Poltekkes Kemenkes Yogyakarta Caroline Breul - USA, BioOne Isabel Recavarren - Peru, Consejo Nacional de Ciencia, Tecnología e Innovación Tecnológica (CONCYTEC), Crossref Ambassador Mike Nason - Canada, Public Knowledge Project (PKP) and University of New Brunswick Nadine van der Merwe - South Africa, Academy of Science of South Africa (ASSAf) Roberto Camargo - Brazil, Associação Brasileira de Editores Científicos (ABEC) Sioux Cumming - UK, INASP Taeil Kim - South Korea, Korean Association of Medical Journal Editors (KAMJE) and from Crossref: Amanda, Esha, Geoffrey, Ginny, Isaac, Kirsty, Patricia, and Susan. Please explore the new documentation, give us your feedback using the yellow \u0026ldquo;Docs feedback\u0026rdquo; button at the bottom of each page, and share this update to spread the word!\n",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/crossing-the-rubicon-the-case-for-making-chapters-visible/",
"title": "Crossing the Rubicon - The case for making chapters visible",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2020-04-29",
"lastmod_ts": 1588118400,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "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.\nBook 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.\n",
"content": "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.\nBook 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.\nLibrarianship, and the management of book catalogs at scale took off in the nineteenth century. The Dewey Decimal Classification, the various initiatives of the Library of Congress and the British Library followed. Innovations from the 1960s gave us MARC records and ISBNs. The late 90s produced ONIX, which gave the book industry a tremendous start in migrating online. However, progress in the decades after appears to have been less dramatic. Some might even argue that this tremendous legacy and wealth of metadata experience has acted as a weight, and has slowed progress. Nowhere is this lack of progress clearer than in the discovery and analysis of book chapters: approximately one-quarter of books published per year has chapter-level metadata, and about two-thirds of books don\u0026rsquo;t have a persistent and open identifier, ratios that have not significantly changed over the last ten years.\nOnly one-quarter of scholarly books make chapter level metadata available\nThe proportion of edited books and monographs with chapter-level data is approximately one-quarter of all books published in the last ten years. Calculating this figure is necessarily approximate, using numbers published in Grimme et al (2019), and based on data and observed trends in both Dimensions and Crossref.\nSo why the lack of progress? For many publishers and their vendor partners, with systems geared up to the efficient delivery of title-level information, the case for moving towards chapter-level metadata can seem daunting (and potentially expensive!).\nMetadata is necessarily detailed and it\u0026rsquo;s not the kind of thing most people will dabble in. Practitioners, as in other technical fields, have expertise that others may find difficult to leverage if they don\u0026rsquo;t know what questions to ask. organisations often find themselves entrenched in outdated approaches to metadata. Crossref and Metadata 2020 are collaborating to produce arguments why publishers should move from book-level metadata to chapters. They\u0026rsquo;ve been working with representatives from the scholarly community, including both small and large presses, not-for-profits and university presses. Here we present 7 reasons why publishers should collect chapter-level metadata: 1. Increased discoverability\nIncreasingly, we\u0026rsquo;re seeing students and researchers move away from traditional book catalogs and onto more general purpose tools, that are often optimized for journal content, and which may - inadvertently - exclude books and chapters from search results. Making chapter level data and DOIs available places book content into these new channels at no additional cost, and starts to reduce the dependency on specialist vendors. Discovery is simplified, requiring less familiarity or expertise to find relevant book content. 2. Increased usage\nExposing the contents of books at a more granular level drives more users towards the book content, and increasing usage numbers and (depending on platform and business model) revenue.\n3. Matching author expectations\nNew generations of authors expect their content to be easily discoverable in the platforms they use. Without chapter level data, this content won\u0026rsquo;t easily be found in Google Scholar, Mendeley or ResearchGate. For younger researchers, for those in certain disciplines or using resources well-suited to it, if the chapter metadata - which in many cases requires either an introductory paragraph or an abstract - is missing, the book may as well not exist.\n4. Author exposure\nAbout half of scholarly book publishing is thought to be in the form of collected works: books where two or three editors get credit at the top level, but dozens of authors contribute to the chapters. Without chapter level metadata, these authors \u0026ndash; the book authors of tomorrow \u0026ndash; get no credit for their efforts.\n5. Usage and citations reporting\nHaving chapters readily available in the modern platforms means that they start to accumulate evidence of sharing and citations from the moment of being published. Where chapter content is available on its own, the lack of associated metadata inhibits this evidence. After all, the DOI is a citation identifier. Evidence of impact is now critical for research evaluation, funding, tenure and promotion, and without this data, an author\u0026rsquo;s chapter may as well remain unread.\n6. Supporting your authors with funding compliance and reporting\nAuthors are increasingly being mandated by their funders to report back on the status of their books and chapters. And, in the case of Open Books and Open Chapters, the funders and authors are frequently the ultimate clients, who are looking to record and report evidence of both academic or social impact. Making chapter level information and identifiers available will facilitate this evidence gathering, especially for open chapters within otherwise non-open books, and increasingly common phenomena.\n7. Understanding the hot topics in your books\nWhether you use Altmetric, or one of the other data sources that capture book activity, being able to access the social and media metrics of the chapters in your book gives you an immediate insight into the topics that capture interest at a broader level. Vital information when it comes to planning more books in the space, especially if you\u0026rsquo;re on the look out for books with trade crossover potential.\nWith chapter-level data, publishers can summarize their programs and compare how many authors they work with, how many book titles they have and where there might be gaps in subject and authors omitted from the metadata. Does the scholarly record fully reflect each book? If not, there may be a good deal of information that is simply unavailable to the machines that read the metadata and use it in systems throughout scholarly communications. Fortunately, it\u0026rsquo;s becoming easier to manage this data. Although traditional book metadata systems don\u0026rsquo;t always support chapter-level data, they do often permit publishers to register title-level DOIs, and with Crossref encouraging ISBN information alongside the generation of chapter level DOIs, some of the significant challenges have been reduced.\nBoth Crossref and Metadata 2020 offer best practices that make clear the need for richer metadata. It\u0026rsquo;s also important to acknowledge the very real barriers to providing robust metadata, whether for book chapters or anything else, which is why having the conversations and being aware of available resources is important. Because, though it may be difficult, the hurdles are often up-front making the decision to invest in better metadata, factoring in associated costs, setting up workflows, etc.\nBut as we have seen from the previous decades, book publishers and their suppliers are experts in managing substantial amounts of metadata. Just as no-one would argue to roll-back all those advantages, we believe that - once deployed - industry-wide creation and distribution of chapter data would be an advance from which there is no retreat.\nREFERENCES https://riojournal.com/article/38698/\nThe State of Open Monographs Report\nhttps://longleafservices.org/blog/the-sustainable-history-monograph-pilot/\nhttps://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2017/12/07/enriching-metadata-is-marketing/\nhttps://www.ingenta.com/blog-article/five-reasons-chapter-level-metadata-increases-value-academic-books/\n",
"headings": ["So why the lack of progress? ","Here we present 7 reasons why publishers should collect chapter-level metadata:","REFERENCES"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/authors/laura-j-wilkinson/",
"title": "Laura J Wilkinson",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Authors",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/authors/mike-taylor/",
"title": "Mike Taylor",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Authors",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/memoirs-of-a-doi-detective...its-error-mentary-dear-members/",
"title": "Memoirs of a DOI detective…it’s error-mentary dear members",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2020-04-27",
"lastmod_ts": 1587945600,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "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.\nIf 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\u0026rsquo;m here to help you to become your own DOI detective.\n",
"content": "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.\nIf 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\u0026rsquo;m here to help you to become your own DOI detective.\nMotive: ridding the world of bad metadata When depositing xml files to us, there can be a plethora of error messages returned to you in the submission logs. Wait, what are submission logs? If that is the first thing that came to mind, then you’re in the right place; do keep reading.\nMeans: XML deposits After each content registration or update is received into our deposit admin system, it is initially placed in the submission queue and later, once its time comes, is processed. Whether that deposit comes from the web deposit form, Metadata Manager, or a good old fashioned XML deposit, a submission log is created in our system. This log contains important information about the deposit and its success or failures.\nI will go through how you will find and receive this log later on. At the bottom of the submission log you will see a status message that looks like this:\n\u0026lt;batch_data\u0026gt; \u0026lt;record_count\u0026gt;***\u0026lt;/record_count\u0026gt; \u0026lt;success_count\u0026gt;***\u0026lt;/success_count\u0026gt; \u0026lt;warning_count\u0026gt;***\u0026lt;/warning_count\u0026gt; \u0026lt;failure_count\u0026gt;***\u0026lt;/failure_count\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/batch_data\u0026gt; To some, this might look a bit like a crime scene. If the status report displays the same number in the \u0026lt;record_count\u0026gt; and the \u0026lt;success_count\u0026gt;, then no crime (against deposits) has been committed. Everything you have tried to register or update has been successful and we are all free as DOI detectives to knock off early.\nAt some point you will probably come across an error or failure in the submission logs, where the failure count is 1.\n\u0026lt;batch_data\u0026gt; \u0026lt;record_count\u0026gt;1\u0026lt;/record_count\u0026gt; \u0026lt;success_count\u0026gt;0\u0026lt;/success_count\u0026gt; \u0026lt;warning_count\u0026gt;0\u0026lt;/warning_count\u0026gt; \u0026lt;failure_count\u0026gt;1\u0026lt;/failure_count\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/batch_data\u0026gt; For the purposes of this blog, this type of message means a “crime” has been committed. The worst kind of crime - a metadata crime. In the real world, outside of this blog, it just means that your deposit has failed and you need to take some action to fix it. You will also receive accompanying error messages (an evidence log) with details about what went wrong with your submission. We’ll deliver these submission details to you as well in the following ways:\nFor those submitting via the web deposit form, to the email address used to register your submission\nOn screen and within the admin tool using the submission ID for those submitting via Metadata Manager\nFor those submitting XML, to the email included in the \u0026lt;email_address\u0026gt; element of your deposit XML\nYou can also find the submission log in the admin system at any point\nMore information on viewing past deposits in the admin system can be found on our support site.\nThe usual suspects Those serial offenders, when it comes to failed deposits, are:\nTimestamps Misdemeanor - Every deposit has a \u0026lt;timestamp\u0026gt; value, and that value needs to be incremented each time the DOI is updated. This is done automatically for you in Metadata Manager, the Web Deposit Form and the OJS plugin. But if you’re updating an existing DOI by sending us the whole XML file again, you need to make sure that you update the timestamp as well as the field you’re trying to update. Error: \u0026lt;msg\u0026gt;Record not processed because submitted version: 201907242206 is less or equal to previously submitted version 201907242206\u0026lt;/msg\u0026gt; Rehabilitation - simply resubmit your XML file, but make sure that you increment the timestamp value to be larger than the current timestamp value. Titles Misdemeanor - These need to match exactly between what we have on the system against the ISSN/ISBN and what is in the deposit file. Error: \u0026lt;msg\u0026gt;Deposit contains title error: the deposited publication title is different than the already assigned title\u0026lt;/msg\u0026gt; or\nError: \u0026lt;msg\u0026gt;ISSN \u0026#34;123454678\u0026#34; has already been assigned, issn (123454678) is assigned to another title (Journal of Metadata)\u0026lt;/msg\u0026gt; Rehabilitation - you can check the title we have on the system against the ISSN/ISBN on the title list and make the necessary changes, or contact support for us to check the title in our system and make changes to match the title in the deposit to the one in the system, if known. Title level DOIs Misdemeanor - These also need to match up exactly in both system and deposit Error: \u0026lt;msg\u0026gt;Deposit contains title error: The journal has a different DOI assigned; If you want to change the journal\u0026#39;s DOI please contact Crossref support: title=Journal of Metadata; current-doi=10.14393/JoM; deposited-doi=10.14393/JoM.1.1\u0026lt;/msg\u0026gt; Rehabilitation - contact us to change the journal level DOI in the system or change the DOI in the deposit yourself to match the one already registered for the title. Errors in the xml Misdemeanor - Poor formatting, self closing tags, invalid values. Error: \u0026lt;msg\u0026gt;Deposited XML is not well-formed or does not validate: Error on line 538\u0026lt;/msg\u0026gt; Rehabilitation - update the xml file that was deposited as it was not well formed against our schema or as an xml file in general. Check you have saved the file correctly (as an .xml file), edited it in an xml editor and not a word processor and if that fails, then contact support and we will try to assist. We also have a collection of new xml examples you may use as a template. Forensics There are a few tools we offer to help with the deciphering of the error messages –– we think of these as our magnifying glass(es).\nThe Title list: A list of all of the titles in our database, you can check against the ISSN/ISBN to see what the title on our system is and whether it matches the title you have in your deposit.\nThe Depositor Report: Shows all journals, books, and conference proceedings against each member. The report includes all DOIs for each journal, book, conference; the most recently used timestamps; and citation counts for each DOI.\nThe Reports tab in the admin system: You can find out the history behind a DOI by searching against this in the admin console.\nOur common error messages are documented within our support documentation. You can always find out more about most of the error messages are system displays at the link above.\nYou can find the current xml metadata against a DOI by adding the DOI to the end of this link http://doi.crossref.org/search/doi?pid=support@crossref.org\u0026format=unixsd\u0026doi= (you might need an xml viewer browser extension to view the xml in a more readable format).\nCalling for backup We’ll also soon be adding more leads to our submission logs and error messages for the best of our detectives. These improvements will point our DOI detectives to better documentation about interpreting error messages and taking the appropriate action to resolve those errors.\nBut there are a lot more error messages out there. If you have trouble deciphering any error message you encounter, then please do send the case number (submission ID) over to CSI (Crossref Support Investigations) at support@crossref.org.\nYou can also find lots of great information in the pages of our new documentation.\n",
"headings": ["Motive: ridding the world of bad metadata","Means: XML deposits","The usual suspects","Timestamps","Titles","Title level DOIs","Errors in the xml","Forensics","Calling for backup"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/helping-researchers-identify-content-they-can-text-mine/",
"title": "Helping researchers identify content they can text mine",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2020-04-16",
"lastmod_ts": 1586995200,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "TL;DR Many organisations are doing what they can to aid in the response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Crossref members can make it easier for researchers to identify, locate, and access content for text mining. In order to do this, members must include elements in their metadata that:\nPoint to the full text of the content. Indicate that the content is available under an open access license or that it is being made available for free (gratis). How to do it. If your content is open access Make sure the Crossref metadata for all of your open access content includes:\n",
"content": "TL;DR Many organisations are doing what they can to aid in the response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Crossref members can make it easier for researchers to identify, locate, and access content for text mining. In order to do this, members must include elements in their metadata that:\nPoint to the full text of the content. Indicate that the content is available under an open access license or that it is being made available for free (gratis). How to do it. If your content is open access Make sure the Crossref metadata for all of your open access content includes:\nThe URL of the open access license the content is under. A URL that points to the full text of the content on your site (PDF, XML or HTML). Instructions for including license and full text URLs in your metadata.\nIf you are making subscription content available for text mining (temporarily or otherwise). Make sure the Crossref metadata for the content you are making freely available for text mining includes:\nThe URL of the publisher license the content is under. A URL that points to the full text of the content where it is being made freely available (PDF, XML or HTML). This might not be on your site. Instructions for including license and full text URLs in your metadata.\nIn addition, you need to flag the content that you are making freely available.\nA “free to read” element in the access indicators section of your metadata indicating that the content is being made available free-of-charge (gratis). An assertion element indicating that the content being made available is available free-of-charge. Instructions for flagging your content as “free”\nNote that step #4 is required in order for users to be able to find content marked as “gratis” in Crossref’s REST API.\nAnd if you decide to revoke the free access in the future, you will need to update the data to reflect that restrictions have been reimposed.\nSounds great. Has anybody else actually done this? Yes.\nOver 43 million metadata records already have a license and a full text link. https://api.crossref.org/works?filter=has-license:true,has-full-text:true\u0026rows=0\nMillions of the above items have one of the Creative Commons licenses or a dedicated text and data mining license provided by the publisher.\nAnd in the past three weeks (as of the writing of this blog post) over 23,000 articles have been flagged as “free” so they are available for text mining.\nhttps://api.crossref.org/v1/works?filter=assertion:free,has-full-text:true\n",
"headings": ["TL;DR","How to do it.","If your content is open access","If you are making subscription content available for text mining (temporarily or otherwise).","Sounds great. Has anybody else actually done this?"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/changes-to-resolution-reports/",
"title": "Changes to resolution reports",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2020-04-10",
"lastmod_ts": 1586476800,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "This blog is long overdue. My apologies for the delay. I promised you an update in February as a follow up to the resolution reports blog originally published in December by my colleague Jon Stark and me. Clearly we (I) missed that February projection, but I’m here today to provide said update. We received many great suggestions from our members as a result of the call for comments. For those of you who took time to write: thank you! We took extra time to review and evaluate all of your comments and recommendations. We have reached a decision about the major proposed change - removal of all filters from monthly resolution reports - as well as a couple of suggested improvements from that feedback.\n",
"content": "This blog is long overdue. My apologies for the delay. I promised you an update in February as a follow up to the resolution reports blog originally published in December by my colleague Jon Stark and me. Clearly we (I) missed that February projection, but I’m here today to provide said update. We received many great suggestions from our members as a result of the call for comments. For those of you who took time to write: thank you! We took extra time to review and evaluate all of your comments and recommendations. We have reached a decision about the major proposed change - removal of all filters from monthly resolution reports - as well as a couple of suggested improvements from that feedback.\nQuick recap of our original blog Jon wrote the original version of the resolution report in late 2009 in an effort to provide you, our members, with information about the usage of registered Crossref DOIs. At that time, Jon and others at Crossref thought it important to segment human-driven traffic from resolutions by machines (bots). Thus, we decided to filter out well-known machine activity in an attempt to only present you with resolutions by individual humans.\nIn the last ten-plus years things changed. We live in a time where most of our work requires both human and machine interaction. Therefore, we have hypothesized that some, or most, of those resolutions from machines today represent legitimate activity and should be reported to you each month. Since we don’t have a reliable method to segment those resolutions, and don’t think we should be making judgments about which resolutions should and should not be included in the reports, we proposed removing all filters and presenting you with all the numbers.\nWhat we heard from you In addition to soliciting comments in the blog, I also reached out to all of our members who had written into our support desk in the last year about anything related to resolution reports. We received dozens of responses from the blog and my outreach via email. The most common response was from members expressing their appreciation for and highlighting the utility of the reports. Most everyone told us how they were using the reports - from monitoring failure rates to mitigate issues to identifying trends over time. And a great number of respondents expressed concern that removing the filters might alter how or what we present to you in the reports (more on that soon). And, finally, several of you shared suggestions for improvement.\nWhere we go from here Our existing filters have been removing between 100 and 150 million resolutions from the monthly numbers we report to all members, collectively. Based on those figures, when we remove the filters all resolutions numbers will increase by about 25%. Those increased resolutions will vary from member to member because the numbers are based on actual bots crawling specific content, so some members may see more of an increase than others. We are mindful of how our members might adjust to that new baseline, since these changes will mean a noticeable (and, significant) increase in resolution totals for the majority of our members.\nOutside of the suggested tweaks from members below and that 25% increase I mentioned (due to the retirement of the filters), the reports will remain unchanged. You’ll continue to receive successful resolutions, the report of top 10 DOIs, and the csv file containing failed resolutions. Our most important consideration throughout this process is that these reports continue to serve you.\nThe changes We liked some of your suggestions, so we’re set to adopt a few of the more straightforward improvements. Those that are more complicated we’re considering for the Member Center (working title, subject to change) project, where we will start to bring together all business and technical information for our members, service providers and metadata users.\nAs I said, we’re removing the filters. Starting in June, we’ll present all of the resolutions to you. No filters. On average, monthly resolution numbers will therefore increase by about 25%. We currently link to the failed DOI.csv near the bottom of the resolution report. For many members with large volumes of content, the resolution report can take some time to load and sift through, so we’re moving the link to the failed DOI.csv file up the page (Note: we know they are other changes we can make to the report itself that will make it easier to work with for members with large volumes of data; we’re exploring those improvements). We learned during this process that some members were not receiving resolution reports when they only had failed resolutions. One of the aims of the reports is to help members identify content registration problems, so this was a bug we are keen to repair. We are fixing it. Once it is fixed, all members who have at least one resolution - successful or failed - during the previous month will receive the report. What we can\u0026rsquo;t change Many members who responded to the call and who also enquire throughout the year (outside of this call) express interest in receiving more information from the resolution reports. You want resolution numbers for all your DOIs. You want referral information about where the resolutions are coming from (e.g., IP addresses) and breakdowns by machine/human. You want more information about how and why the failure rate is growing over time. We understand.\nIn the past, we did try to process more information for IP addresses and user agents but it turns out that generating that volume of extra data and processing monthly is simply impractical. The other issue is one of privacy. IP addresses are considered personally identifiable information (PII), or data that could potentially be used to identify particular people. We are committed to maintaining the privacy of our members and users and therefore cannot provide this level of granularity in our reports.\nNext up Look for these changes starting in June. If you read this far, you may not need it, but we’ll also include a reminder atop the report itself about the increase in resolution totals as a result of our changes.\n",
"headings": ["Quick recap of our original blog","What we heard from you","Where we go from here","The changes","What we can\u0026rsquo;t change","Next up"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/categories/doi-resolution/",
"title": "DOI Resolution",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Categories",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/committees/executive/",
"title": "Executive committee",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 3,
"lastmod": "2020-04-10",
"lastmod_ts": 1586476800,
"section": "Committees",
"tags": [],
"description": "The Executive Committee is made up of the Chair, Treasurer and three other board members, one who has to be a representative of a non-profit member. The Executive committee has three major functions, to:\nSteer: create and review agendas for discussion and decision by the Board. Oversee: evaluate key performance indicators and suggest corrective actions between Board meetings. Expedite: take any decisions delegated to it by the board. This usually happens after full board discussion reaches a consensus on a major initiative and wants open details resolved before the next board meeting. Executive Committee members Marin Dacos (Chair) James Phillpotts, Oxford University Press (Treasurer) Rose L\u0026rsquo;Huillier, Elsevier Rebecca Wambua, Distance, Open and e-Learning Practitioners’ Association of Kenya Aaron Wood, APA ",
"content": "The Executive Committee is made up of the Chair, Treasurer and three other board members, one who has to be a representative of a non-profit member. The Executive committee has three major functions, to:\nSteer: create and review agendas for discussion and decision by the Board. Oversee: evaluate key performance indicators and suggest corrective actions between Board meetings. Expedite: take any decisions delegated to it by the board. This usually happens after full board discussion reaches a consensus on a major initiative and wants open details resolved before the next board meeting. Executive Committee members Marin Dacos (Chair) James Phillpotts, Oxford University Press (Treasurer) Rose L\u0026rsquo;Huillier, Elsevier Rebecca Wambua, Distance, Open and e-Learning Practitioners’ Association of Kenya Aaron Wood, APA ",
"headings": ["Executive Committee members"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/free-public-data-file-of-112-million-crossref-records/",
"title": "Free public data file of 112+ million Crossref records",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2020-04-09",
"lastmod_ts": 1586390400,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "A lot of people have been using our public, open APIs to collect data that might be related to COVID-19. This is great and we encourage it. We also want to make it easier. To that end we have made a free data file of the public elements from Crossref’s 112.5 million metadata records.\nThe file (65GB, in JSON format) is available via Academic Torrents here: https://doi.org/10.13003/83B2GP\nIt is important to note that Crossref metadata is always openly available. The difference here is that we’ve done the time-saving work of putting all of the records registered through March 2020 into one file for download.\n",
"content": "A lot of people have been using our public, open APIs to collect data that might be related to COVID-19. This is great and we encourage it. We also want to make it easier. To that end we have made a free data file of the public elements from Crossref’s 112.5 million metadata records.\nThe file (65GB, in JSON format) is available via Academic Torrents here: https://doi.org/10.13003/83B2GP\nIt is important to note that Crossref metadata is always openly available. The difference here is that we’ve done the time-saving work of putting all of the records registered through March 2020 into one file for download.\nThe sheer number of records means that, though anyone can use these records anytime, downloading them all via our APIs can be quite time-consuming. We hope this saves the research community valuable time during this crisis.\nA few important notes All records are included. In other words, the data file has every DOI ever registered with Crossref through March 31st, 2020. This means it’s a large file, 65GB.\nMetadata is supplied by our members and, as such, not all records have the same completeness (or quality) of metadata. Bibliographic metadata is generally required. All other metadata, e.g. license and funding information, ORCIDs, etc. is optional (though very much encouraged). References (i.e. authors’ cited sources) are also optional metadata. Nearly 50 million records include references and, of those, nearly 30 million have open references that are included in the data file. “Limited” and “Closed” references are not included in the data file. [EDIT 6th June 2022 - all references are now open by default with the March 2022 board vote to remove any restrictions on reference distribution]. If an error in the metadata is found, please report it directly to the publisher to correct. The records are in JSON.\nNew and updated records can be added incrementally using our REST API, which includes a number of date filter options, e.g. index-date.\nNo registration is required to use our REST API but we do strongly encourage being a ‘polite’ (i.e. identified) user. It makes troubleshooting much easier and reduces the chance of negatively impacting other users.\nQuestions, comments and feedback are welcome at support@crossref.org.\nWe thank AcademicTorrents.com for helping us make this data available. And we are grateful for the incredible efforts of everyone working to support research everywhere\u0026ndash;stay safe and well.\n",
"headings": ["A few important notes"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/services/content-registration/",
"title": "Content Registration",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 5,
"lastmod": "2020-04-08",
"lastmod_ts": 1586304000,
"section": "Find a service",
"tags": [],
"description": " Content Registration allows members to register and update metadata via machine or human interfaces. When you join Crossref as a member you are issued a DOI prefix. You combine this with a suffix of your choice to create a DOI, which becomes active once registered with Crossref. Content Registration allows members to register a DOI and deposit or update its associated metadata, via machine or human interfaces.\nBenefits of content registration Academic and professional research travels further if it’s linked to the millions of other published papers. Crossref members register content with us to let the world know it exists, instead of creating thousands of bilateral agreements.\n",
"content": " Content Registration allows members to register and update metadata via machine or human interfaces. When you join Crossref as a member you are issued a DOI prefix. You combine this with a suffix of your choice to create a DOI, which becomes active once registered with Crossref. Content Registration allows members to register a DOI and deposit or update its associated metadata, via machine or human interfaces.\nBenefits of content registration Academic and professional research travels further if it’s linked to the millions of other published papers. Crossref members register content with us to let the world know it exists, instead of creating thousands of bilateral agreements.\nMembers send information called metadata to us. Metadata includes fields like dates, titles, authors, affiliations, funders, and online location. Each metadata record includes a persistent identifier called a digital object identifier (DOI) that stays with the work even if it moves websites. Though the DOI doesn\u0026rsquo;t change, its associated metadata is kept up-to-date by the owner of the record.\nRicher metadata makes content useful and easier to find. Through Crossref, members are distributing their metadata downstream, making it available to numerous systems and organisations that together help credit and cite the work, report impact of funding, track outcomes and activity, and more.\nMembers maintain and update metadata long-term, telling us if content moves to a new website, and they include more information as time goes on. This means that there is a growing chance that content is found, cited, linked to, included in assessment, and used by other researchers.\nParticipation Reports give a clear picture for anyone to see the metadata Crossref has. See for yourself where the gaps are, and what our members could improve upon. Understand best practice through seeing what others are doing, and learn how to level-up.\nThis is Crossref infrastructure. You can’t see infrastructure, yet research—and researchers all over the world—rely on it.\nShow image × Download the content registration factsheet, and explore factsheets for other Crossref services and in different languages.\nHow content registration works To register content with Crossref, you need to be a member. You’ll use one of our content registration methods to give us metadata about your content. Note that you don’t send us the content itself - you create a metadata record that links persistently (via a persistent identifier) to the content on your site or hosting platform. Learn more about metadata, constructing your DOIs, and ways to register your content.\nYou should assign Crossref DOIs to and register content for anything that is likely to be cited in the scholarly literature.\nNo matter whether you register content using one of our helper tools, or creating your own metadata files, all metadata deposited with Crossref is submitted as XML, and formatted using our metadata deposit schema section. Explore our XML sample files to help you create your own XML.\nWhat types of resources and records can be registered with Crossref? We are working to make our input schema more flexible so that almost any type of object can be registered and distributed openly through Crossref. At the moment, members tend to register the following:\nBooks, chapters, and reference works: includes book title and/or chapter-level records. Books can be registered as a monograph, series, or set. Conference proceedings: information about a single conference and records for each conference paper/proceeding. Datasets: includes database records or collections. Dissertations: includes single dissertations and theses, but not collections. Grants: includes both direct funding and other types of support such as the use of equipment and facilities. Journals and articles: at the journal title and article level, and includes supplemental materials as components. Peer reviews: any number of reviews, reports, or comments attached to any other work that has been registered with Crossref. Pending publications: a temporary placeholder record with minimal metadata, often used for embargoed work where a DOI needs to be shared before the full content is made available online. Preprints and posted content: includes preprints, eprints, working papers, reports, and other types of content that has been posted but not formally published. Reports and working papers: this includes content that is published and likely has an ISSN. Standards: includes publications from standards organisations. You can also establish relationships between different research objects (such as preprints, translations, and datasets) in your metadata. Learn more about all the metadata that can be included in these records with our schema library and markup guides.\nObligations and fees for content registration You pay a one-time content registration fee for each content item you register with us. content registration fees are different for different types of content and sometimes include discounts for back-year material. You don’t pay to update an existing metadata record. It’s an obligation of membership that you maintain your metadata for the long term, including updating any URLs that change. In addition, we warmly encourage you to correct and add to your metadata, and there is no charge for redepositing (updating) existing metadata. Learn more about maintaining your metadata, and managing existing DOIs.\nYour content registration fees are billed quarterly in arrears. This means you’ll usually receive a bill at the beginning of each quarter for the content you registered in the previous quarter. The only exception is if you’ve only registered a small number of DOIs.\nGetting started with content registration Learn more about content registration in our documentation.\n",
"headings": ["Content Registration allows members to register and update metadata via machine or human interfaces.","Benefits of content registration ","How content registration works ","What types of resources and records can be registered with Crossref?","Obligations and fees for content registration ","Getting started with content registration "]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/crossmark/",
"title": "Crossmark",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2020-04-08",
"lastmod_ts": 1586304000,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": " The Crossmark button gives readers quick and easy access to the current status of an item of content, including any corrections, retractions, or updates to that record. Crossmark provides a cross-platform way for readers to quickly discover the status of a research output along with additional metadata related to the editorial process. Crucially, the Crossmark button can also be embedded in PDFs, which means that members have a way of alerting readers to changes months or even years after it’s been downloaded.\n",
"content": " The Crossmark button gives readers quick and easy access to the current status of an item of content, including any corrections, retractions, or updates to that record. Crossmark provides a cross-platform way for readers to quickly discover the status of a research output along with additional metadata related to the editorial process. Crucially, the Crossmark button can also be embedded in PDFs, which means that members have a way of alerting readers to changes months or even years after it’s been downloaded.\nResearch doesn’t stand still: even after publication, articles can be updated with supplementary data or corrections. It’s important to know if the content being cited has been updated, corrected, or retracted. Crossmark makes this information more visible to readers. With one click, you can see if content has changed, and access valuable additional metadata provided by the member, such as key publication dates (submission, revision, acceptance), plagiarism screening status, and information about licenses, handling editors, and peer review.\nCrossmark lets readers know when a substantial change affecting the citation or interpretation has occurred, and that the member has updated the metadata record to reflect the new status.\nWatch the introductory Crossmark animation in your language:\nEnglish 한국어 Japanese Chinese Español Français Bahasa Indonesia العربية Português do Brasil Benefits of Crossmark Members can report updates to readers and showcase additional metadata. Researchers and librarians can easily see the changes to the content they are reading, which licenses apply to the content, see linked clinical trials, and more. Anyone can access metadata associated with Crossmark through our REST API, providing a myriad of opportunities for integration with other systems and analysis of changes to the scholarly record. How Crossmark works Members place the Crossmark button close to the title of an item on their web pages and in PDFs. They commit to informing us if there is an update such as a correction or retraction, as well as optionally providing additional metadata about editorial procedures and practices.\nShow image × While members who implement Crossmark provide links to update policies and commit themselves to accurately reporting updates, the presence of Crossmark itself is not a guarantee. However, it allows the community to more easily verify how members are updating their content.\nIf you use Crossmark, the Crossmark button must be applied to all of your new content, not just content that is updated. Selective implementation means that a reader, such as a researcher or librarian, who downloaded a PDF version before the update would have no way to know that it has been updated. We also encourage you to implement Crossmark for back-year records, although doing so is optional. At least, we encourage you to do so for back-year records that have been updated.\nObligations for Crossmark Any member can provide update metadata and register an update policy. If you are a member who implements the Crossmark button, you must:\nMaintain your content and promptly register any updates. Include the Crossmark button on all digital formats (HTML, PDF, ePub). Implement Crossmark using the script provided by us. Not alter the Crossmark button in any way other than adjusting its size. Implementing the Crossmark button involves technical changes to your website and production processes. Check that you have the necessarily expertise to implement these before you start. If not, you can start to deliver update metadata and implement the Crossmark button at a later point.\nAny organisation can also implement the Crossmark button on pages where they display content. If you do so, you must follow the guidelines above, except for the first point if you are not reponsible for the content.\nThere are no additional fees to participate in Crossmark.\nHow to participate in Crossmark There are several steps for members to fully implement Crossmark:\nDevise an update policy, assign it a DOI, and register it with us. Add the update policy and, optionally, other relevant metadata to your metadata records. Publish corrections, retractions, and other updates for works where necessary, and register their metadata. See our guidance on registering updates. Implement the Crossmark button online and in PDFs. Learn more about participating in Crossmark.\nTo see which Crossref members are registering Crossmark information, visit Participation Reports. These reports give a clear picture for anyone to see the metadata Crossref has including Crossmark data.\nLearn more about version control, corrections, and retractions.\nShow image × Download the Crossmark factsheet, and explore factsheets for other Crossref services and in different languages.\n",
"headings": ["The Crossmark button gives readers quick and easy access to the current status of an item of content, including any corrections, retractions, or updates to that record.","Benefits of Crossmark ","How Crossmark works ","Obligations for Crossmark ","How to participate in Crossmark "]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/services/crossmark/",
"title": "Crossmark",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 5,
"lastmod": "2020-04-08",
"lastmod_ts": 1586304000,
"section": "Find a service",
"tags": [],
"description": " The Crossmark button gives readers quick and easy access to the current status of an item of content, including any corrections, retractions, or updates to that record. Crossmark provides a cross-platform way for readers to quickly discover the status of a research output along with additional metadata related to the editorial process. Crucially, the Crossmark button can also be embedded in PDFs, which means that members have a way of alerting readers to changes months or even years after it’s been downloaded.\n",
"content": " The Crossmark button gives readers quick and easy access to the current status of an item of content, including any corrections, retractions, or updates to that record. Crossmark provides a cross-platform way for readers to quickly discover the status of a research output along with additional metadata related to the editorial process. Crucially, the Crossmark button can also be embedded in PDFs, which means that members have a way of alerting readers to changes months or even years after it’s been downloaded.\nResearch doesn’t stand still: even after publication, articles can be updated with supplementary data or corrections. It’s important to know if the content being cited has been updated, corrected, or retracted. Crossmark makes this information more visible to readers. With one click, you can see if content has changed, and access valuable additional metadata provided by the member, such as key publication dates (submission, revision, acceptance), plagiarism screening status, and information about licenses, handling editors, and peer review.\nCrossmark lets readers know when a substantial change affecting the citation or interpretation has occurred, and that the member has updated the metadata record to reflect the new status.\nWatch the introductory Crossmark animation in your language:\nEnglish 한국어 Japanese Chinese Español Français Bahasa Indonesia العربية Português do Brasil Benefits of Crossmark Members can report updates to readers and showcase additional metadata. Researchers and librarians can easily see the changes to the content they are reading, which licenses apply to the content, see linked clinical trials, and more. Anyone can access metadata associated with Crossmark through our REST API, providing a myriad of opportunities for integration with other systems and analysis of changes to the scholarly record. How Crossmark works Members place the Crossmark button close to the title of an item on their web pages and in PDFs. They commit to informing us if there is an update such as a correction or retraction, as well as optionally providing additional metadata about editorial procedures and practices.\nShow image × While members who implement Crossmark provide links to update policies and commit themselves to accurately reporting updates, the presence of Crossmark itself is not a guarantee. However, it allows the community to more easily verify how members are updating their content.\nIf you use Crossmark, the Crossmark button must be applied to all of your new content, not just content that is updated. Selective implementation means that a reader, such as a researcher or librarian, who downloaded a PDF version before the update would have no way to know that it has been updated. We also encourage you to implement Crossmark for back-year records, although doing so is optional. At least, we encourage you to do so for back-year records that have been updated.\nObligations for Crossmark Any member can provide update metadata and register an update policy. If you are a member who implements the Crossmark button, you must:\nMaintain your content and promptly register any updates. Include the Crossmark button on all digital formats (HTML, PDF, ePub). Implement Crossmark using the script provided by us. Not alter the Crossmark button in any way other than adjusting its size. Implementing the Crossmark button involves technical changes to your website and production processes. Check that you have the necessarily expertise to implement these before you start. If not, you can start to deliver update metadata and implement the Crossmark button at a later point.\nAny organisation can also implement the Crossmark button on pages where they display content. If you do so, you must follow the guidelines above, except for the first point if you are not reponsible for the content.\nThere are no additional fees to participate in Crossmark.\nHow to participate in Crossmark There are several steps for members to fully implement Crossmark:\nDevise an update policy, assign it a DOI, and register it with us. Add the update policy and, optionally, other relevant metadata to your metadata records. Publish corrections, retractions, and other updates for works where necessary, and register their metadata. See our guidance on registering updates. Implement the Crossmark button online and in PDFs. Learn more about participating in Crossmark.\nTo see which Crossref members are registering Crossmark information, visit Participation Reports. These reports give a clear picture for anyone to see the metadata Crossref has including Crossmark data.\nLearn more about version control, corrections, and retractions.\nShow image × Download the Crossmark factsheet, and explore factsheets for other Crossref services and in different languages.\nGetting started with Crossmark Learn more about Crossmark in our documentation.\n",
"headings": ["The Crossmark button gives readers quick and easy access to the current status of an item of content, including any corrections, retractions, or updates to that record.","Benefits of Crossmark ","How Crossmark works ","Obligations for Crossmark ","How to participate in Crossmark ","Getting started with Crossmark"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/metadata-plus/",
"title": "Metadata Plus",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2020-04-08",
"lastmod_ts": 1586304000,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": " Metadata Plus gives you enhanced access to all our supported APIs, guarantees service levels and support, and additional features such as snapshots and priority service/rate limits. To use Metadata Plus, an optional paid-for service, you do not need to be a member. In addition to enhanced access to all our supported APIs (OAI-PMH and REST APIs) and metadata in XML and JSON, Metadata Plus provides you with:\na service level agreement guaranteeing you extra service and support, giving you a consistent and predictable experience additional features such as snapshots and priority service/rate limits. Metadata Plus users may use either or both of the included API interfaces:\n",
"content": " Metadata Plus gives you enhanced access to all our supported APIs, guarantees service levels and support, and additional features such as snapshots and priority service/rate limits. To use Metadata Plus, an optional paid-for service, you do not need to be a member. In addition to enhanced access to all our supported APIs (OAI-PMH and REST APIs) and metadata in XML and JSON, Metadata Plus provides you with:\na service level agreement guaranteeing you extra service and support, giving you a consistent and predictable experience additional features such as snapshots and priority service/rate limits. Metadata Plus users may use either or both of the included API interfaces:\nOAI-PMH: this API retrieves metadata in XML using the Open Archives Initiative Protocol for Metadata Harvesting (OAI-PMH) version 2 repository framework REST API: this API searches and filters metadata, is generally RESTFUL, and returns results in JSON. Learn more in our REST API documentation. Description of Service Feature Defined as Notes Snapshots User-requested full-file downloads.\nData may be requested in JSON and XML via an interface separate from each API.\nPre-generated reports available via machine request and human user interface. Filters based on commonly used data are in *under consideration*:\n+ ISSN\n+ Month and year\n+ Publisher\n+ Journal title Priority Service/Rate Limits Plus users will be prioritized via isolated resources.\nMinimum number of queries per second per IP address. Rate limiting of the API is primarily on a per IP basis. If a method allows, for example, for 150 requests per rate limit window, then it allows 150 requests per IP. This number can depend on the system state and may need to change. If it does, Crossref will publish it in the response headers. In the exceptional event that a release is not backwards-compatible, Crossref will provide extensive lead time to communicate the changes, as part of our proactive support for Plus users.\nHow Metadata Plus works Start by contacting us about Metadata Plus access. Plus subscribers can create their own API keys to use either or both the OAI-PMH and the REST API. Learn more in our extensive documentation for both the REST API and OAI-PMH interfaces.\nService level agreement (SLA) Crossref will maintain an aggregated, average uptime for all of the interfaces that together comprise the Crossref Metadata Service of 99.5%, reported on a monthly basis. Crossref will provide technical support to Subscriber through Crossref’s existing support channels as requested by Subscriber, and will provide a response within one (1) business day to support requests received during normal working hours in the United States and the United Kingdom. \u0026ldquo;Business days\u0026rdquo; do not include weekends or legal holidays in the United States and the United Kingdom. \u0026ldquo;Response\u0026rdquo; means that support requests will be acknowledged. The time required for resolution will depend upon the nature of the request.\nAgreement and fees for Metadata Plus Learn more about the Metadata Plus service terms, and fees and pricing tiers for Metadata Plus.\n",
"headings": ["Metadata Plus gives you enhanced access to all our supported APIs, guarantees service levels and support, and additional features such as snapshots and priority service/rate limits.","Description of Service ","How Metadata Plus works ","Service level agreement (SLA) ","Agreement and fees for Metadata Plus "]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/services/metadata-retrieval/metadata-plus/",
"title": "Metadata Plus",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 5,
"lastmod": "2020-04-08",
"lastmod_ts": 1586304000,
"section": "Find a service",
"tags": [],
"description": " Metadata Plus gives you enhanced access to all our supported APIs, guarantees service levels and support, and additional features such as snapshots and priority service/rate limits. To use Metadata Plus, an optional paid-for service, you do not need to be a member. In addition to enhanced access to all our supported APIs (OAI-PMH and REST APIs) and metadata in XML and JSON, Metadata Plus provides you with:\na service level agreement guaranteeing you extra service and support, giving you a consistent and predictable experience additional features such as snapshots and priority service/rate limits. Metadata Plus users may use either or both of the included API interfaces:\n",
"content": " Metadata Plus gives you enhanced access to all our supported APIs, guarantees service levels and support, and additional features such as snapshots and priority service/rate limits. To use Metadata Plus, an optional paid-for service, you do not need to be a member. In addition to enhanced access to all our supported APIs (OAI-PMH and REST APIs) and metadata in XML and JSON, Metadata Plus provides you with:\na service level agreement guaranteeing you extra service and support, giving you a consistent and predictable experience additional features such as snapshots and priority service/rate limits. Metadata Plus users may use either or both of the included API interfaces:\nOAI-PMH: this API retrieves metadata in XML using the Open Archives Initiative Protocol for Metadata Harvesting (OAI-PMH) version 2 repository framework REST API: this API searches and filters metadata, is generally RESTFUL, and returns results in JSON. Learn more in our REST API documentation. Description of Service Feature Defined as Notes Snapshots User-requested full-file downloads.\nData may be requested in JSON and XML via an interface separate from each API.\nPre-generated reports available via machine request and human user interface. Filters based on commonly used data are in *under consideration*:\n+ ISSN\n+ Month and year\n+ Publisher\n+ Journal title Priority Service/Rate Limits Plus users will be prioritized via isolated resources.\nMinimum number of queries per second per IP address. Rate limiting of the API is primarily on a per IP basis. If a method allows, for example, for 150 requests per rate limit window, then it allows 150 requests per IP. This number can depend on the system state and may need to change. If it does, Crossref will publish it in the response headers. In the exceptional event that a release is not backwards-compatible, Crossref will provide extensive lead time to communicate the changes, as part of our proactive support for Plus users.\nHow Metadata Plus works Start by contacting us about Metadata Plus access. Plus subscribers can create their own API keys to use either or both the OAI-PMH and the REST API. Learn more in our extensive documentation for both the REST API and OAI-PMH interfaces.\nService level agreement (SLA) Crossref will maintain an aggregated, average uptime for all of the interfaces that together comprise the Crossref Metadata Service of 99.5%, reported on a monthly basis. Crossref will provide technical support to Subscriber through Crossref’s existing support channels as requested by Subscriber, and will provide a response within one (1) business day to support requests received during normal working hours in the United States and the United Kingdom. \u0026ldquo;Business days\u0026rdquo; do not include weekends or legal holidays in the United States and the United Kingdom. \u0026ldquo;Response\u0026rdquo; means that support requests will be acknowledged. The time required for resolution will depend upon the nature of the request.\nAgreement and fees for Metadata Plus Learn more about the Metadata Plus service terms, and fees and pricing tiers for Metadata Plus.\nGetting started with Metadata Plus Learn more about Metadata Plus in our documentation.\n",
"headings": ["Metadata Plus gives you enhanced access to all our supported APIs, guarantees service levels and support, and additional features such as snapshots and priority service/rate limits.","Description of Service ","How Metadata Plus works ","Service level agreement (SLA) ","Agreement and fees for Metadata Plus ","Getting started with Metadata Plus "]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/services/funder-registry/",
"title": "Open Funder Registry (OFR)",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 5,
"lastmod": "2020-04-08",
"lastmod_ts": 1586304000,
"section": "Find a service",
"tags": [],
"description": " The Open Funder Registry (OFR, formerly FundRef) and associated funding metadata allows everyone to have transparency into research funding and its outcomes. It’s an open and unique registry of persistent identifiers for grant-giving organisations around the world. It is good practice for authors to acknowledge support for and contributions to their research in their published articles. This support may be financial, such as a grant or salary award; or practical, such as the use or loan of specialist facilities and equipment. They do this by listing the funding agency and the grant number somewhere in their article - usually the first or last page, or in the acknowledgments or footnotes section. Members contribute by depositing the funding acknowledgements from their publications as part of their standard metadata, together with the unique funder IDs listed in the OFR. The deposit should include funder names, funder IDs, and associated grant numbers.\n",
"content": " The Open Funder Registry (OFR, formerly FundRef) and associated funding metadata allows everyone to have transparency into research funding and its outcomes. It’s an open and unique registry of persistent identifiers for grant-giving organisations around the world. It is good practice for authors to acknowledge support for and contributions to their research in their published articles. This support may be financial, such as a grant or salary award; or practical, such as the use or loan of specialist facilities and equipment. They do this by listing the funding agency and the grant number somewhere in their article - usually the first or last page, or in the acknowledgments or footnotes section. Members contribute by depositing the funding acknowledgements from their publications as part of their standard metadata, together with the unique funder IDs listed in the OFR. The deposit should include funder names, funder IDs, and associated grant numbers.\nThis means that anyone can make connections, for example, to identify which funders invest in certain fields of research. Funding data is also used by funders to track the publications that result from their grants.\nShow image × The Crossref OFR is an open registry of grant-giving organisation names and identifiers, which you use to find funder IDs and include them as part of your metadata deposits. It is a freely-downloadable RDF file. It is CC0-licensed and available to integrate with your own systems. Funder names from acknowledgements should be matched with the corresponding unique funder ID from the registry.\nYou can search funding metadata manually using our funding data search, or programmatically via our REST API. This data not only clarifies the scholarly record, but makes life easier for researchers who may need to comply with requirements to make their published results publicly available.\nWatch the introductory Open Funder Registry animation in your language: English 한국어 Japanese Chinese Español Français Bahasa Indonesia العربية Português do Brasil Benefits of the Open Funder Registry There are many benefits of clear, transparent, and measurable information on who funded research, and where it has been published. The OFR facilitates accurate funding metadata, which in turn enables multiple parties to better understand the research funding landscape:\nReaders and researchers can read and assess literature in the context of knowing who funded it; Research institutions can monitor the published outputs of their researchers; Publishers can track who is funding their authors, and check if they’re meeting funding mandates; Service providers can offer integrated time-saving features to their users; and Funders can easily track the reach and return of the work they have supported. How the Open Funder Registry works Authors acknowledge the funding sources for their research in their publications. Using the registry, members can find the unique IDs for these funders, standardize this metadata and send it to us.\nThe registry is donated by Elsevier, and is updated around every 4-6 weeks with new and updated funder records. Existing entries are also reviewed to make sure that they are accurate and up-to-date. We can then make it openly available through our funding data search and our API. If you spot anything that doesn’t look right, please let us know. You can also download a .csv file of the latest registry. Using the OFR, members can find the unique IDs for these funders, standardize this metadata to send it to us.\nObligations and fees for the Open Funder Registry The OFR is open to everyone. There are no fees for members depositing funding data. Open Funder Registry search and our API are also freely available.\nMembers must include the OFR ID for each funder if it is present in the Registry. If a funder is not in the Registry and does not have an ID, include the name of the funder.\nHow to participate in the Open Funder Registry To access the OFR, you do not need to be a member, but you need to be a member to include OFR IDs in your Crossref metadata. Anyone who’s interested can simply enter an organisation’s name into the Open Funder Registry search to view content connected to funding sources. The metadata in the registry is also openly available via our API, and as a downloadable RDF file. Learn more about accessing the OFR.\nDepositing metadata (members): collect funder names and grant numbers from your authors through your manuscript tracking system (or extract them from acknowledgements sections) and match them with the corresponding Funder IDs from the registry. Once this is done, it’s easy to add these three additional pieces of metadata - funder name, funder id, and grant number - as additional metadata in the regular Crossref content registration service. Learn more about how to collect and register funding data.\nWhenever you register content with us, make sure you include funder names and grant numbers in the submission:\nIf you are using a content registration helper tool - the Crossref XML plugin for OJS, the web deposit form, or the new Metadata Manager tool - simply enter funder names and grant numbers in the relevant fields. For OJS, you must be running at least OJS 3.1.2 and have the Crossref funding plugin enabled. If you’re depositing XML with Crossref, include your funding data in your XML. Retrieving metadata: you can view the content that has cited a particular funding source by entering the organisation’s name into the Open Funder Registry search. If you prefer a machine-readable query, use our REST API. If you have questions about how your organisation appears in the registry then please get in touch. Learn more about the OFR and our other services on our funder community page.\nShow image × Download the Open Funder Registry factsheet, and explore factsheets for other Crossref services and in different languages.\nGetting started with Open Funder Registry (OFR) Learn more about the Open Funder Registry (OFR) in our documentation.\n",
"headings": ["The Open Funder Registry (OFR, formerly FundRef) and associated funding metadata allows everyone to have transparency into research funding and its outcomes. It’s an open and unique registry of persistent identifiers for grant-giving organisations around the world.","Benefits of the Open Funder Registry ","How the Open Funder Registry works ","Obligations and fees for the Open Funder Registry ","How to participate in the Open Funder Registry ","Getting started with Open Funder Registry (OFR) "]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/reference-linking/",
"title": "Reference Linking",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2020-04-08",
"lastmod_ts": 1586304000,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": " Reference linking enables researchers to follow a link from the reference list to other full-text documents, helping them to make connections and discover new things. Reference Linking means including Crossref DOIs (displayed as URLs) in the reference lists that you provide in your own published work. This enables researchers to follow a link from a reference list to the current landing page for that referenced work. And because it’s a DOI rather than just a link, it will remain persistent.\n",
"content": " Reference linking enables researchers to follow a link from the reference list to other full-text documents, helping them to make connections and discover new things. Reference Linking means including Crossref DOIs (displayed as URLs) in the reference lists that you provide in your own published work. This enables researchers to follow a link from a reference list to the current landing page for that referenced work. And because it’s a DOI rather than just a link, it will remain persistent.\nSo, instead of just including the reference in your reference list\u0026hellip;\nSoleimani N, Mohabati Mobarez A, Farhangi B. Cloning, expression and purification flagellar sheath adhesion of Helicobacter pylori in Escherichia coli host as a vaccination target. Clin Exp Vaccine Res. 2016 Jan;5(1):19-25.\n\u0026hellip;you should also display the DOI link:\nSoleimani N, Mohabati Mobarez A, Farhangi B. Cloning, expression and purification flagellar sheath adhesion of Helicobacter pylori in Escherichia coli host as a vaccination target. Clin Exp Vaccine Res. 2016 Jan;5(1):19-25. https://doi.org/10.7774/cevr.2016.5.1.19\nBecause Crossref is all about rallying the scholarly community to work together, reference linking is an obligation for all Crossref members. But you don\u0026rsquo;t have to be a Crossref member to link your references - we provide free tools that anyone can use to match their reference lists to existing DOIs so they can link their references.\nWatch the introductory reference linking animation in your language:\nFrançais Español Português do Brasil Chinese 简体中文 Japanese 日本語 Korean 한국어 Arabic العربية Bahasa Indonesia English How Reference Linking works Show image × Download the reference linking factsheet, and explore factsheets for other Crossref services and in different languages.\nBenefits of reference linking Persistent links enhance scholarly communications. Reference linking offers important benefits:\nReciprocity: members’ records are linked together and more discoverable because all members link their references. As a member organisation, we can obligate all our members to link their references, so that individual members can avoid the inconvenience of signing bilateral agreements to link to persistent resources on other platforms. The result is a scholarly communications infrastructure that enables the exchange of ideas and knowledge. Discoverability: research travels further when everyone links their references. Because DOIs don’t break if implemented correctly, they will always lead readers to the resource they’re looking for, including yours. When the DOIs are displayed, anyone can copy and share them. This will also enable better tracking of where and when people are talking about and sharing scholarly objects, including in social media. Obligations and fees for reference linking Reference Linking is an obligation of membership for all Crossref members. But anyone can use our support tools for Reference Linking - you don\u0026rsquo;t have to be a member. And there\u0026rsquo;s no charge to use our support tools for Reference Linking.\nGetting started with reference linking There are various different ways to look up other member\u0026rsquo;s DOIs to add to your reference lists. Read more here.\nImportant note: Reference Linking is not the same as including your reference lists in your metadata record. Here\u0026rsquo;s more information about how to add your reference lists to your metadata records.\nBest practice for reference linking Start reference linking within 18 months of joining Crossref Link references for back-year as well as current resources Link references in all relevant resource types such as preprints, books, data, conference proceedings, etc. Make sure the links in your references and other platforms conform to our DOI display guidelines ",
"headings": ["Reference linking enables researchers to follow a link from the reference list to other full-text documents, helping them to make connections and discover new things.","How Reference Linking works","Benefits of reference linking ","Obligations and fees for reference linking ","Getting started with reference linking ","Best practice for reference linking "]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/documentation/similarity-check/",
"title": "Similarity Check",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2020-04-08",
"lastmod_ts": 1586304000,
"section": "Documentation",
"tags": [],
"description": " A service provided by Crossref and powered by iThenticate—Similarity Check provides editors with a user-friendly tool to help detect plagiarism. Our Similarity Check service helps Crossref members prevent scholarly and professional plagiarism by providing immediate feedback regarding a manuscript’s similarity to other published academic and general web content, through reduced-rate access to the iThenticate text comparison software from Turnitin.\nOnly Similarity Check members benefit from this tailored iThenticate experience that includes read-only access to the full text of articles in the Similarity Check database for comparison purposes, discounted checking fees, and unlimited user accounts per organisation.\n",
"content": " A service provided by Crossref and powered by iThenticate—Similarity Check provides editors with a user-friendly tool to help detect plagiarism. Our Similarity Check service helps Crossref members prevent scholarly and professional plagiarism by providing immediate feedback regarding a manuscript’s similarity to other published academic and general web content, through reduced-rate access to the iThenticate text comparison software from Turnitin.\nOnly Similarity Check members benefit from this tailored iThenticate experience that includes read-only access to the full text of articles in the Similarity Check database for comparison purposes, discounted checking fees, and unlimited user accounts per organisation.\nWatch the introductory Similarity Check animation in your language:\nEnglish 한국어 Japanese Chinese Español Français Bahasa Indonesia العربية Português do Brasil With editors under increased pressure to assess higher volumes of manuscript submissions each year, it’s important to find a fast, cost-effective solution that can be embedded into your publishing workflows. Similarity Check allows editors to upload a paper, and instantly produces a report highlighting potential matches and indicating if and how the paper overlaps with other work. This report enables editors to assess the originality of the work before they publish it, providing confidence for publishers and authors, and evidence of trust for readers. And as the iThenticate database contains over 78 million full-text scholarly content items, editors can be confident that Similarity Check will provide a comprehensive and reliable addition to their workflow.\nMaking sure only original research is published provides:\npeace of mind for publishers and authors that their content is identified and protected, a way for editors to educate their authors and ensure the reputation of their publication, and clarity for readers around who produced the work. Benefits of Similarity Check Similarity Check participants enjoy use of iThenticate at reduced cost because they contribute their own published content into Turnitin’s database of full-text literature. This means that as the number of participants grows, so too does the size of the database powering the service. More content in the database means greater peace of mind for editors looking to determine a manuscript’s originality.\nIf you participate in Similarity Check, not only do you get reduced rate access to iThenticate, but you also have the peace of mind of knowing that any similarity between your published content and manuscripts checked by other publishers will be flagged as a potential issue too.\nAs a Similarity Check user, you also see extra features in iThenticate, such as enhanced text-matches within the Document Viewer.\nHow the Similarity Check service works To participate in Similarity Check, you need to be a member. Similarity Check subscribers allow Turnitin to index their full catalogue of current and archival published content into the iThenticate database. This means that the service is only available to members who are actively publishing DOI-assigned content and including in their metadata full-text URLs specifically for Similarity Check.\nTurnitin indexes members’ content directly via its Content Intake System (CIS). Its CIS accesses our metadata daily to collect the full-text content links provided by our members within their metadata. Turnitin follows these URLs and indexes the content found at each location.\nWhen you apply for the Similarity Check service, Turnitin will check that they can access your existing content via the full-text URLs in your Crossref metadata. Once confirmed, you’ll be provided with access to the iThenticate tool where you will be able to submit manuscripts to compare against the corpus of published academic and general web content in Turnitin’s database. You can do this in the iThenticate tool, or through your manuscript submission system using an API. iThenticate provides a Similarity Report containing a Similarity Score and a highlighted set of matches to similar text. Editors can then further review matches in order to make their own decision regarding a manuscript’s originality.\nShow image × Download the Similarity Check factsheet, and explore factsheets for other Crossref services and in different languages.\nFees for Similarity Check Similarity Check fees are in two parts: an annual service fee, and a per-document checking fee.\nThe annual service fee is 20% of your Crossref annual membership fee and is included in the renewal invoices you receive each January. When you first join Similarity Check, you’ll receive a prorated invoice for the remainder of that calendar year.\nPer-document checking fees are also paid annually in January. Volume discounts apply, and your first 100 documents are free of charge.\nSimilarity Service status page Check the Turnitin service status page for real-time updates on system performance and any ongoing issues that may impact your Similarity Check service.\nUpdate 2024: We are no longer able to offer the Similarity Check service to members based in Russia. Find out more.\n",
"headings": ["A service provided by Crossref and powered by iThenticate—Similarity Check provides editors with a user-friendly tool to help detect plagiarism.","Benefits of Similarity Check ","How the Similarity Check service works ","Fees for Similarity Check ","Similarity Service status page"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/services/similarity-check/",
"title": "Similarity Check",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 9,
"lastmod": "2020-04-08",
"lastmod_ts": 1586304000,
"section": "Find a service",
"tags": [],
"description": " A service provided by Crossref and powered by iThenticate—Similarity Check provides editors with a user-friendly tool to help detect plagiarism. Our Similarity Check service helps Crossref members prevent scholarly and professional plagiarism by providing immediate feedback regarding a manuscript’s similarity to other published academic and general web content, through reduced-rate access to the iThenticate text comparison software from Turnitin.\nOnly Similarity Check members benefit from this tailored iThenticate experience that includes read-only access to the full text of articles in the Similarity Check database for comparison purposes, discounted checking fees, and unlimited user accounts per organisation.\n",
"content": " A service provided by Crossref and powered by iThenticate—Similarity Check provides editors with a user-friendly tool to help detect plagiarism. Our Similarity Check service helps Crossref members prevent scholarly and professional plagiarism by providing immediate feedback regarding a manuscript’s similarity to other published academic and general web content, through reduced-rate access to the iThenticate text comparison software from Turnitin.\nOnly Similarity Check members benefit from this tailored iThenticate experience that includes read-only access to the full text of articles in the Similarity Check database for comparison purposes, discounted checking fees, and unlimited user accounts per organisation.\nWatch the introductory Similarity Check animation in your language:\nEnglish 한국어 Japanese Chinese Español Français Bahasa Indonesia العربية Português do Brasil With editors under increased pressure to assess higher volumes of manuscript submissions each year, it’s important to find a fast, cost-effective solution that can be embedded into your publishing workflows. Similarity Check allows editors to upload a paper, and instantly produces a report highlighting potential matches and indicating if and how the paper overlaps with other work. This report enables editors to assess the originality of the work before they publish it, providing confidence for publishers and authors, and evidence of trust for readers. And as the iThenticate database contains over 78 million full-text scholarly content items, editors can be confident that Similarity Check will provide a comprehensive and reliable addition to their workflow.\nMaking sure only original research is published provides:\npeace of mind for publishers and authors that their content is identified and protected, a way for editors to educate their authors and ensure the reputation of their publication, and clarity for readers around who produced the work. Benefits of Similarity Check Similarity Check participants enjoy use of iThenticate at reduced cost because they contribute their own published content into Turnitin’s database of full-text literature. This means that as the number of participants grows, so too does the size of the database powering the service. More content in the database means greater peace of mind for editors looking to determine a manuscript’s originality.\nIf you participate in Similarity Check, not only do you get reduced rate access to iThenticate, but you also have the peace of mind of knowing that any similarity between your published content and manuscripts checked by other publishers will be flagged as a potential issue too.\nAs a Similarity Check user, you also see extra features in iThenticate, such as enhanced text-matches within the Document Viewer.\nHow the Similarity Check service works To participate in Similarity Check, you need to be a member. Similarity Check subscribers allow Turnitin to index their full catalogue of current and archival published content into the iThenticate database. This means that the service is only available to members who are actively publishing DOI-assigned content and including in their metadata full-text URLs specifically for Similarity Check.\nTurnitin indexes members’ content directly via its Content Intake System (CIS). Its CIS accesses our metadata daily to collect the full-text content links provided by our members within their metadata. Turnitin follows these URLs and indexes the content found at each location.\nWhen you apply for the Similarity Check service, Turnitin will check that they can access your existing content via the full-text URLs in your Crossref metadata. Once confirmed, you’ll be provided with access to the iThenticate tool where you will be able to submit manuscripts to compare against the corpus of published academic and general web content in Turnitin’s database. You can do this in the iThenticate tool, or through your manuscript submission system using an API. iThenticate provides a Similarity Report containing a Similarity Score and a highlighted set of matches to similar text. Editors can then further review matches in order to make their own decision regarding a manuscript’s originality.\nShow image × Download the Similarity Check factsheet, and explore factsheets for other Crossref services and in different languages.\nFees for Similarity Check Similarity Check fees are in two parts: an annual service fee, and a per-document checking fee.\nThe annual service fee is 20% of your Crossref annual membership fee and is included in the renewal invoices you receive each January. When you first join Similarity Check, you’ll receive a prorated invoice for the remainder of that calendar year.\nPer-document checking fees are also paid annually in January. Volume discounts apply, and your first 100 documents are free of charge.\nSimilarity Service status page Check the Turnitin service status page for real-time updates on system performance and any ongoing issues that may impact your Similarity Check service.\nGetting started with Similarity Check Learn more about Similarity Check in our documentation.\nUpdate 2024: We are no longer able to offer the Similarity Check service to members based in Russia. Find out more.\n",
"headings": ["A service provided by Crossref and powered by iThenticate—Similarity Check provides editors with a user-friendly tool to help detect plagiarism.","Benefits of Similarity Check ","How the Similarity Check service works ","Fees for Similarity Check ","Similarity Service status page","Getting started with Similarity Check "]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/youve-had-your-say-now-what-next-steps-for-schema-changes/",
"title": "You’ve had your say, now what? Next steps for schema changes",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2020-04-02",
"lastmod_ts": 1585785600,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "It seems like ages ago, particularly given recent events, but we had our first public request for feedback on proposed schema updates in December and January. The feedback we received indicated two big things: we’re on the right track, and you want us to go further. This update has some significant but important changes to contributors, but is otherwise a fairly moderate update. The feedback was mostly supportive, with a fair number of helpful suggestions about details.\n",
"content": "It seems like ages ago, particularly given recent events, but we had our first public request for feedback on proposed schema updates in December and January. The feedback we received indicated two big things: we’re on the right track, and you want us to go further. This update has some significant but important changes to contributors, but is otherwise a fairly moderate update. The feedback was mostly supportive, with a fair number of helpful suggestions about details.\nFeedback and changes Many of you are excited about CRediT, and a number of members have indicated that they are ready and waiting to send us CRediT roles. To support this, as in my initial proposal, we’re adding a new role element and role_type attribute that supports existing Crossref-defined roles and CRediT roles, as well as a required vocab attribute to specify which vocabulary is being supplied.\n\u0026lt;role role_type=\u0026quot;author\u0026quot; vocab=\u0026quot;crossref\u0026quot;\u0026gt;author\u0026lt;/role\u0026gt; \u0026lt;role role_type=\u0026quot;writing-original_draft\u0026quot; vocab=\u0026quot;credit\u0026quot;/\u0026gt;\nCRediT as it exists now is an informal standard coordinated by CASRAI, but a formal standard is in the works via NISO. CRediT is currently a list of well considered and defined roles that are not particularly machine-readable. I’ve created a list for implementation that eliminates spaces and ampersands. CRediT also lacks reliable PIDs or persistent URLs for the role definitions, so that has been omitted from our implementation. We’ll adopt any changes resulting from the NISO standard, but have decided to go forward with it as-is, as many of our members are eager to implement.\nBeyond CRediT, we’ll also be expanding and refining our contributor support in a number of ways:\nWe’ll be expanding our affiliation metadata beyond a simple string to include organisation identifiers like ROR, and allow markup of organisation names and locations. We’re expanding the contributor identifiers as well - in addition to ORCID iDs, members can send us Wikidata, ISNI, and other identifiers. We’re adding support for multiple names to support contributors whose names can be expressed in multiple alphabets, or who have aliases or nicknames. We’re changing surname to family_name and will be relaxing the requirement that all person names have a “surname” - a given name may be supplied on its own to support contributors who do not have family names. The current element for corporate/group authors, organisation, will be replaced by collab as the term “organisation” was widely confusing (we have a lot of affiliation info registered as group authors!), and the collab section will also allow organisation identifiers. Many of these updates align with how JATS supports contributors - I hope these changes will allow our members to supply robust contributor metadata without the burden of complicated conversions.\nI’m also including the proposed changes to support data citation and typing of citations. Additionally, we’ll be adding support for members who want to:\nsupply Grant IDs in their metadata records register identifiers for conferences. A draft 5.0 xsd file is available in a branch of our GitLab schema repository with the details of the planned updates, and more robust documentation and examples are forthcoming.\nImplementation plans My house was built in 1890 and there are always surprises whenever we need to fix or renovate anything. Our system is just as old in technology years - it’s been chugging along since the aughts. This means while we don’t think it’s powered by knob-and-tube wiring, we can’t be sure until we open up the walls. We want to implement our plans (in fact we want to do more!) but if we run into any big blockers or crucial issues, we may roll out the changes over several iterations. These updates are fairly conservative and I remain optimistic we’ll be able to implement them as-is. Our update will help us build a foundation for future updates, allowing us to continuously evolve our schema as we move forward.\nSome of you are understandably worried about our implementation schedule and backwards incompatibility. We’re aware that changes are expensive and inconvenient, and making them on our schedule doesn’t always work for your schedule. That’s why we’ve sustained 12+ versions of our schema over the past 12 years. We won’t be mandating a change any time soon, and definitely won’t do so without sufficient warning and community involvement. In the future we’ll need to make a sustained effort to retire older schema, but now isn’t the time for that.\nWe intend to commence work in Q2 but won’t have a firm timeline for a few more weeks. I will be providing regular updates as we progress, and will be asking for volunteers to test the updates when we’re ready. I’ll also be sharing more documentation and information about how the changes will be represented in our metadata outputs.\nHave more to say? Our feedback period has finished and we do plan to implement the changes as described, but if you have opinions, please share them.\n",
"headings": ["Feedback and changes","Implementation plans","Have more to say?"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/encouraging-even-greater-reporting-of-corrections-and-retractions/",
"title": "Encouraging even greater reporting of corrections and retractions",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2020-03-30",
"lastmod_ts": 1585526400,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "TL;DR: We no longer charge fees for members to participate in Crossmark, and we encourage all our members to register metadata about corrections and retractions - even if you can’t yet add the Crossmark button and pop-up box to your landing pages or PDFs.\n\u0026ndash;\n",
"content": "TL;DR: We no longer charge fees for members to participate in Crossmark, and we encourage all our members to register metadata about corrections and retractions - even if you can’t yet add the Crossmark button and pop-up box to your landing pages or PDFs.\n\u0026ndash;\nResearch doesn’t stand still; even after publication, articles can be updated with supplementary data or corrections. When research outputs are is changed in this way the publisher should report and link it, so that those accessing and citing the content know if it’s been updated, corrected or even retracted. This also emphasizes the member\u0026rsquo;s commitment to the ongoing stewardship of research outputs.\nMany people find and store articles to read later, either as PDFs on their laptop or on one of any number of reference management systems - when they come back to read and cite these articles, possibly many months later, they want to know if the version they have is current or not.\nRemoving Crossmark fees To encourage even wider adoption of Crossmark, and to promote best practice around better reporting of corrections and retractions, we will no longer be charging additional fees for our Crossmark service. This change applies to all Crossmark metadata registered from 1 January 2020. All members are now encouraged to add Crossmark metadata and add the Crossmark button and pop-up box to their publications - and you can do so as part of your regular content registration.\nRicher metadata gives important context We know that there are many more corrections and retractions that are not yet being registered, and to address this, we are now asking all of our members to start registering metadata for significant updates to your publications, even if you don\u0026rsquo;t implement the Crossmark button and pop-up box on your content. Remember, anyone can access the Crossmark metadata through our public REST API, and start using it straight away - even if you\u0026rsquo;re not ready to implement the Crossmark button.\nCheck out how to get started; if you only want to deposit metadata, follow steps one through four. If you also want to add the Crossmark button and pop-up box to your web pages/PDFs so that readers can easily see when content has changed, then also follow the rest of the steps.\nCrossmark We launched Crossmark in 2012 to raise awareness of these critical changes, by asking Crossref members to:\nrecord such updates in your metadata, either as part of your regular Crossref metadata deposit, or deposited as stand-alone data for back-year records help readers find out about the changes by placing a Crossmark button and pop-up box (which is consistent across all members making it recognizable to readers) on your landing pages and in PDFs Members can also use Crossmark to register additional metadata about content, giving further context and background for the reader. These metadata appear in the “More Information” section of the Crossmark box. 7 million DOIs have some additional metadata, the most common being copyright statements, publication history, and peer review methods.\nAnyone can access the Crossmark metadata through our public REST API, providing a myriad of opportunities for integration with other systems, and analysis of changes to the scholarly record.\nWho has implemented Crossmark? 440 Crossref members have implemented Crossmark to date. 11.4 million DOIs have some Crossmark metadata.\nTotal DOIs DOIs with Crossmark metadata % Journal articles 80,862,460 10,155,340 12.56% Book chapters 14,040,646 792,953 5.65% Conference Papers 6,175,733 457,237 7.40% Datasets 1,862,852 19,206 1.03% Books 753,298 239 0.03% Monographs 469,333 23 0.00% Of those, about 130,000 contain an update:\nYou can see which members or journals have implemented Crossmark by viewing the relevant Crossref Participation Report.\n",
"headings": ["Removing Crossmark fees","Richer metadata gives important context","Crossmark","Who has implemented Crossmark?"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/events-got-the-better-of-us/",
"title": "Events got the better of us",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2020-03-27",
"lastmod_ts": 1585267200,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "Publisher metadata is one side of the story surrounding research outputs, but conversations, connections and activities that build further around scholarly research, takes place all over the web. We built Event Data to capture, record and make available these \u0026lsquo;Events\u0026rsquo; –– providing open, transparent, and traceable information about the provenance and context of every Event. Events are comments, links, shares, bookmarks, references, etc.\n",
"content": "Publisher metadata is one side of the story surrounding research outputs, but conversations, connections and activities that build further around scholarly research, takes place all over the web. We built Event Data to capture, record and make available these \u0026lsquo;Events\u0026rsquo; –– providing open, transparent, and traceable information about the provenance and context of every Event. Events are comments, links, shares, bookmarks, references, etc.\nIn September 2018 we said Event Data was \u0026lsquo;production ready.\u0026rsquo; What we meant was development of the service had reached a point where we expected no further major changes to the code, and we encouraged you to use it. What normally would have followed was a detailed handover to our operations team, for monitoring and performance management, and for Product Management to expand Event Data by adding new Crossref member domains and evaluating additional event sources.\nWhy so quiet? But many things changed on the staff front, meaning 2019 was a year of reinvention for the Technical and Product teams and of critical knowledge sharing and learning –– Event Data had to take a back seat as we focused resources on other key projects (more on that later). From a technical perspective, we\u0026rsquo;ve found the Elasticsearch index is not performing well and the approach taken to specifically support data citations through Scholix has not really scaled.\nWhen things go wrong, whether in ways you can or can\u0026rsquo;t anticipate, the most important thing is communication –– in dealing with the challenges we forgot to do that. We understand how frustrating that can be and we\u0026rsquo;re extremely sorry to have gone so quiet.\nSo, where are we today? Event Data is important to us and clearly important to you too as you\u0026rsquo;ve contacted us about your use-cases and the reliability of the service. Event Data remains available and you\u0026rsquo;re welcome to use it, but you should expect instability to continue and be aware that it does not find events for DOIs/domains of our newer members (who joined Crossref since 2019) –– so we\u0026rsquo;re conscious it might be hard to say whether it\u0026rsquo;s a good fit for your project at this point.\nWhat are we doing? We have brought in additional expert Elasticsearch resources to assist with a separate project to migrate our REST API from SOLR to Elasticsearch. We\u0026rsquo;re making fantastic progress on this. As soon as we\u0026rsquo;re confident we can make this switch, we will move those same Elasticsearch resources to shoring up Event Data. The REST API takes priority over Event Data because we need to add support for important new record types (like research grants) that aren\u0026rsquo;t yet available via the API.\nWe\u0026rsquo;re also concluding the process of hiring two new Product Managers which means we\u0026rsquo;ll be in a position to assign someone to head up the product management of Event Data. When we do return to Event Data in the coming months, our initial priority will be increased support for data citation and Scholix. If that means radical changes to the rest of the service, we\u0026rsquo;ll let you know. Opening up the discussion We will have more news on Event Data in mid-2020. We\u0026rsquo;d love you to join the Crossref Community Forum; we\u0026rsquo;ve created a new Category for Event Data where you can post details of how you are using, or plan to use Event Data; post questions to the group; suggestions for future development and provide general feedback on the Event Data service.\n",
"headings": ["Why so quiet?","So, where are we today?","What are we doing?","Opening up the discussion"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/metadata-manager-update/",
"title": "Metadata Manager Update",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2020-03-24",
"lastmod_ts": 1585008000,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "At Crossref, we\u0026rsquo;re committed to providing a simple, usable, efficient and scalable web-based tool for registering content by manually making deposits of, and updates to, metadata records. Last year we launched Metadata Manager in beta for journal deposits to help us explore this further. Since then, many members have used the tool and helped us better understand their needs.\n",
"content": "At Crossref, we\u0026rsquo;re committed to providing a simple, usable, efficient and scalable web-based tool for registering content by manually making deposits of, and updates to, metadata records. Last year we launched Metadata Manager in beta for journal deposits to help us explore this further. Since then, many members have used the tool and helped us better understand their needs.\nWhat we\u0026rsquo;ve learned has made us realize how useful such a tool can be to both large and small publishers, but also that the approach we took with Metadata Manager needs to be changed - it\u0026rsquo;s not flexible enough to easily add other record types, like books/book chapters, or to include any changes we may make to our input schema.\nWith that in mind, we\u0026rsquo;re pausing development on Metadata Manager to allow us to properly evaluate what we\u0026rsquo;ve learned. If you\u0026rsquo;re currently using Metadata Manager for journal deposits without any problems, please do continue - you\u0026rsquo;re helping us learn a lot! But if you haven\u0026rsquo;t used Metadata Manager before, or are having problems, please:\nuse our existing Web Deposit Form instead, or upload XML directly through the deposit system admin interface We won\u0026rsquo;t be fixing bugs in Metadata Manager, except for providing any essential security updates. Of course, if you still need help please read our Content Registration help pages, or contact the Support team.\nMetadata Manager\u0026rsquo;s features will be reimagined as part of our planned Member Center (working title, subject to change) project, where we will start to bring together all business and technical information for our members, service providers and metadata users. The Member Center will be the heart of our strategy to make it easier for you to work with Crossref to:\nregister and update metadata view, update and transfer titles visualize your activity/participation and act on problems with metadata understand your bills and invoices manage your users and service providers and their access and entitlements and more We\u0026rsquo;re in the early stages of planning for the Member Center and will be seeking feedback from members, service providers and metadata users in the coming months.\n",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/flagging-free-to-read/",
"title": "Flagging content that is “free” for text mining",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2020-03-13",
"lastmod_ts": 1584057600,
"section": "",
"tags": [],
"description": "Flagging content that is \u0026ldquo;free\u0026rdquo; for text mining. The Crossref API can be used for locating the full text of published articles and preprints for the purpose of text mining.\nCrossref members who have have subscription-access content and who want to make some of their content available for text mining need to take the following steps.\nThe Crossref schema supports the NISO Access and License Indicators ALI section, and, normally, the free_to_read functionality of ALI would be the recommended mechanism for indicating that content is available for free (e.g. \u0026ldquo;gratis\u0026rdquo;, not \u0026ldquo;open\u0026rdquo;). However, the ALI free_to_read element is not currently exposed through our REST API filters.\n",
"content": "Flagging content that is \u0026ldquo;free\u0026rdquo; for text mining. The Crossref API can be used for locating the full text of published articles and preprints for the purpose of text mining.\nCrossref members who have have subscription-access content and who want to make some of their content available for text mining need to take the following steps.\nThe Crossref schema supports the NISO Access and License Indicators ALI section, and, normally, the free_to_read functionality of ALI would be the recommended mechanism for indicating that content is available for free (e.g. \u0026ldquo;gratis\u0026rdquo;, not \u0026ldquo;open\u0026rdquo;). However, the ALI free_to_read element is not currently exposed through our REST API filters.\nBut we have defined a workaround that allows members to both register the ALI free_to_read element and an equivalent assertion that will work with the REST API and which will allow researchers to locate content that has been flagged as \u0026ldquo;free.\u0026rdquo;\nSteps TL;DR 1. Ensure that you have recorded links to full text in your Crossref metadata. Crossref's participation reports can be used to tell if you are already doing this. See the section marked \u0026ldquo;Text mining URLs\u0026rdquo; and/or \u0026ldquo;Similarity Check URLs\u0026rdquo; to see what percentage of your registered content has some sort of full text link.\n2. Remove your platform\u0026rsquo;s access control restrictions from the URLs for the DOIs you would like to make available for free. This will vary from publisher to publisher and platform to platform. But please note that Crossref does not have any control over access to our members\u0026rsquo; content.\n3. Flag the DOIs that you are making available \u0026ldquo;free.\u0026rdquo; You can do this by submitting the relevant ALI free_to_read element as well as a Crossmark assertion for each relevant DOI. See details below.\n4. Test the DOIs via the Crossref API to ensure that everything is working. Details Flagging your DOIs as \u0026ldquo;free\u0026rdquo;. To flag your DOIs as \u0026ldquo;free\u0026rdquo;, you can submit a single CrossMark assertion and deposit the XML using our \u0026lsquo;resource-only deposit\u0026rsquo; mechanism (Note that as of January 2020 there is no longer a charge for participating in Crossmark and so this can be done without any additional fees)\nThe following XML shows an example \u0026ldquo;resource-only deposit\u0026rdquo; that shows how you can add the ALI free_to_read and a Crossmark free assertion to an existing Crossref metadata record.\n\u0026lt;?xml version=\u0026#34;1.0\u0026#34; encoding=\u0026#34;UTF-8\u0026#34;?\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi_batch version=\u0026#34;4.4.2\u0026#34; xmlns=\u0026#34;http://www.crossref.org/doi_resources_schema/4.4.2\u0026#34; xmlns:xsi=\u0026#34;http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance\u0026#34; xsi:schemaLocation=\u0026#34;http://www.crossref.org/schemas/4.4.2 http://www.crossref.org/schemas/doi_resources4.4.2.xsd\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;head\u0026gt; \u0026lt;!-- Replace below with a unique ID --\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi_batch_id\u0026gt;arg_123_954\u0026lt;/doi_batch_id\u0026gt; \u0026lt;depositor\u0026gt; \u0026lt;!-- Replace below with member name --\u0026gt; \u0026lt;depositor_name\u0026gt;Member Name\u0026lt;/depositor_name\u0026gt; \u0026lt;!-- Replace below with the email address where errors should be reported --\u0026gt; \u0026lt;email_address\u0026gt;name@example.com\u0026lt;/email_address\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/depositor\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/head\u0026gt; \u0026lt;body\u0026gt; \u0026lt;crossmark_data\u0026gt; \u0026lt;!--the DOI being updated with CrossMark metadata --\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi\u0026gt;DOI\u0026lt;/doi\u0026gt; \u0026lt;!--CrossMark metadata --\u0026gt; \u0026lt;crossmark\u0026gt; \u0026lt;crossmark_version\u0026gt;1\u0026lt;/crossmark_version\u0026gt; \u0026lt;!-- If you already have a Crossmark policy DOI, replace it below. If you do not have a Crossmark policy, then repeat the DOI being updated --\u0026gt; \u0026lt;crossmark_policy\u0026gt;DOI\u0026lt;/crossmark_policy\u0026gt; \u0026lt;custom_metadata\u0026gt; \u0026lt;assertion name=\u0026#34;free\u0026#34; label=\u0026#34;Free to read\u0026#34;\u0026gt;This content has been made available to all.\u0026lt;/assertion\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/custom_metadata\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/crossmark\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/crossmark_data\u0026gt; \u0026lt;lic_ref_data\u0026gt; \u0026lt;!--the DOI being updated with CrossMark metadata--\u0026gt; \u0026lt;doi\u0026gt;DOI\u0026lt;/doi\u0026gt; \u0026lt;program xmlns=\u0026#34;http://www.crossref.org/AccessIndicators.xsd\u0026#34;\u0026gt; \u0026lt;free_to_read/\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/program\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/lic_ref_data\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/body\u0026gt; \u0026lt;/doi_batch\u0026gt; Assuming this record was named free_to_read.xml, then you can deposit the record via our XML API using curl as follows:\ncurl -F \u0026#39;operation=doDOICitUpload\u0026#39; -F \u0026#39;login_id=USERNAME\u0026#39; -F \u0026#39;login_passwd=PASSWORD\u0026#39; -F \u0026#39;fname=@FILENAME.XML\u0026#39; \u0026#39;https://doi.crossref.org/servlet/deposit\u0026#39; Note that it can take up to an hour before an update is reflected in the REST API. Querying articles flagged as free in the Crossref REST API You may want to acquaint yourself with the documentation for the Crossref REST API.\nBut here are some example queries using a filter to identify content that has been asserted to be \u0026lsquo;free\u0026rsquo; using the above technique.\nQuerying all works that have a free assertion associated with them: https://api.crossref.org/v1/works?filter=assertion:free Querying all works that have a free assertion associated with them and which include links to full text: https://api.crossref.org/v1/works?filter=assertion:free,has-full-text:t Querying all works that have a free assertion, include links to full text, and include the term \u0026ldquo;Covid 19\u0026rdquo; in the bibliographic metadata: https://api.crossref.org/v1/works?filter=assertion:free,has-full-text:t\u0026amp;query.bibliographic=\u0026#34;Covid 19\u0026#34; (note that as of 2020-03-12 this returns zero results)\n",
"headings": ["Flagging content that is \u0026ldquo;free\u0026rdquo; for text mining.","Steps TL;DR","1. Ensure that you have recorded links to full text in your Crossref metadata.","2. Remove your platform\u0026rsquo;s access control restrictions from the URLs for the DOIs you would like to make available for free.","3. Flag the DOIs that you are making available \u0026ldquo;free.\u0026rdquo;","4. Test the DOIs via the Crossref API to ensure that everything is working.","Details","Flagging your DOIs as \u0026ldquo;free\u0026rdquo;.","Querying articles flagged as free in the Crossref REST API","Querying all works that have a free assertion associated with them:","Querying all works that have a free assertion associated with them and which include links to full text:","Querying all works that have a free assertion, include links to full text, and include the term \u0026ldquo;Covid 19\u0026rdquo; in the bibliographic metadata:"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/double-trouble-with-dois/",
"title": "Double trouble with DOIs",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2020-03-10",
"lastmod_ts": 1583798400,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "Detective Matcher stopped abruptly behind the corner of a short building, praying that his loud heartbeat doesn\u0026rsquo;t give up his presence. This missing DOI case was unlike any other before, keeping him awake for many seconds already. It took a great effort and a good amount of help from his clever assistant Fuzzy Comparison to make sense of the sparse clues provided by Miss Unstructured Reference, an elegant young lady with a shy smile, who begged him to take up this case at any cost.\n",
"content": "Detective Matcher stopped abruptly behind the corner of a short building, praying that his loud heartbeat doesn\u0026rsquo;t give up his presence. This missing DOI case was unlike any other before, keeping him awake for many seconds already. It took a great effort and a good amount of help from his clever assistant Fuzzy Comparison to make sense of the sparse clues provided by Miss Unstructured Reference, an elegant young lady with a shy smile, who begged him to take up this case at any cost.\nThe final confrontation was about to happen, the detective could feel it, and his intuition rarely misled him in the past. He was observing DOI 10.2307/257306, which matched Miss Reference\u0026rsquo;s description very well. So far, there was no indication that DOI had any idea he was being observed. He was leaning on a wall across the street in a seemingly nonchalant way, just about to put out his cigarette. Empty dark streets and slowly falling snow together created an excellent opportunity to capture the fugitive.\nSuddenly, Matcher heard a faint rustling sound. Out of nowhere, another shady figure, looking very much like 10.5465/amr.1982.4285592, appeared in front of the detective, crossed the street and started running away. Matcher couldn\u0026rsquo;t believe his eyes. These two DOIs had identical authors, year and title. They were even wearing identical volume and issue! He quickly noticed minor differences: slight alteration in the journal title and lack of the second page number in one of the DOIs, but this was likely just a random mutation. How could have he missed the other DOI? And more importantly, which of them was the one worried Miss Reference simply couldn\u0026rsquo;t live without?\nTL;DR Crossref metadata contains duplicates, i.e. items with different DOIs and identical (or almost identical) bibliographic metadata. This often happens when there is more than one DOI pointing to the same object. In some cases, but not all of them, one of the DOIs is explicitly marked as an alias of the other DOI. In this blog post, I analyze those duplicates, that are not marked with an alias relation. The analysis shows that the problem exists, but is not big. Among 524,496 DOIs tested in the analysis, 4,240 (0.8%) were flagged as having non-aliased duplicates. I divided those duplicates into two categories: Self-duplicate is a duplicate deposited by the same member as the other DOI, there were 3,603 (85%) of them. Other-duplicate is a duplicate deposited by a different member than the other DOI\u0026rsquo;s depositor, there were only 637 (15%) of them. I used three member-level metrics to estimate the volume of duplicates deposited by a given member: Self-duplicate index is the fraction of self-duplicates in member\u0026rsquo;s DOIs: on average 0.67%. Other-duplicate index is the fraction of other-duplicates in a member\u0026rsquo;s DOIs: on average 0.13%. Global other-duplicate index is the fraction of globally detected other-duplicates involving a given member: on average 0.34%. Introduction In an ideal world, the relationship between research outputs and DOIs is one-to-one: every research output has exactly one DOI assigned and each DOI points to exactly one research output.\nAs we all know too well, we do not live in a perfect world, and this one-to-one relationship is also sometimes violated. One way to violate it is to assign more than one DOI to the same object. This can cause problems.\nFirst of all, if there are two DOIs referring to the same object, eventually they both might end up in different systems and datasets. As a result, merging data between data sources becomes an issue, because we no longer can rely on comparing the DOI strings only.\nReference matching algorithms will also be confused when they encounter more than one DOI matching the input reference. They might end up assigning one DOI from the matching ones at random, or not assigning any DOI at all.\nAnd finally, more than one DOI assigned to one object is hugely problematic for document-level metrics such as citation counts, and eventually affects h-indexes and impact factors. In practice, metrics are typically calculated per DOI, so when there are two DOIs pointing to one document, the citation count might be split between them, effectively lowering the count, and making every academic author\u0026rsquo;s biggest nightmare come true.\nIt seems we shouldn\u0026rsquo;t simply cover our eyes and pretend this problem does not exist. So what are we doing at Crossref to make the situation better?\nIt is possible for our members to explicitly mark a DOI as an alias of another DOI, if it was deposited by mistake. This does not remove the problem, but at least allows metadata consumers to access and use this information. Whenever a DOI is registered or updated in Crossref, we automatically compare its metadata to the metadata of existing DOIs. If the metadata is too similar to the metadata of another DOI, this information is sent to the member and they have a chance to modify the metadata as they see fit. Despite these efforts, we still see duplicates that are not explained by anything in the metadata. In this blog post, I will try to understand this problem better and assess how big it is. I also define three member-level metrics that can show how much a given member contributes to duplicates in the system and can flag members with unusually high fractions of duplicates.\nGathering the data The data for this analysis was collected in the following way: Only journal articles were considered in the analysis. Only members with at least 5,000 journal article DOIs were considered in the analysis. For each member, a random sample of 1,000 journal article DOIs was selected. DOIs with no title, title shorter than 20 characters or shorter than 3 words were removed from each sample. This was done because items with short titles typically result in incorrectly flagged duplicates (false positives). For each remaining DOI in the sample, a simple string representation was generated. This representation is a concatenation of the following fields: authors, title, container-title, volume, issue, page, published date. This string representation was used as query.bibliographic in Crossref\u0026rsquo;s REST API and the resulting item list was examined. If the original DOI came back as the first or the second hit, the relevance score difference between the first two hits is less than 1, they are both journal articles, and there is no relation (alias or otherwise) between them, the other one of the two is considered a duplicate of the original DOI. The score difference threshold was chosen through a manual examination of a number of cases. Most detected duplicates came back scored identically. Overall results In total, I tested 590 members and 524,496 DOIs. Among them, 4,240 DOIs (0.8%) were flagged as duplicates of other DOIs. This shows the problem exists, but is not huge.\nI also analyzed separately two categories of duplicates:\nself-duplicates are two DOIs with (almost) identical metadata, deposited by the same member, other-duplicates are two DOIs with (almost) identical metadata, deposited by two different members. Self-duplicates are more common: 3,603 (85%) of all detected duplicates are self-duplicates, and only 637 (15%) are other-duplicates. This is also good news: self-duplicates involve one member only, so they are easier to handle.\nSelf-duplicates To explore the levels of self-duplicates among members, I used a custom member-level metric called self-duplicate index. Self-duplicate index is the fraction of self-duplicates among the member\u0026rsquo;s DOIs, in this case calculated over a sample.\nOn average, members have a very small self-duplicate index of 0.67%. In addition, in the samples of 44% of analyzed members no self-duplicates were found. The histogram shows the skewness of the distribution:\nAs we can see in the distribution, there are only a few members with high self-duplicate index. The table shows all members with the self-duplicate higher than 10%:\nName Total DOIs Sample size Self-duplicate index University of California Press 129,741 798 36% Inderscience Publishers 127,729 998 29% American Society of Hematology 137,124 990 24% Pro Reitoria de Pesquisa, Pos Graduacao e Inovacao - UFF 7,756 919 19% American Diabetes Association 49,536 946 18% Other-duplicates Other-duplicate index is the fraction of other duplicates among the member\u0026rsquo;s DOIs, in this case calculated from a sample.\nOn average, members have a very low other-duplicate index of only 0.13%. What is more, 89% members have no other-duplicates in the sample, and the distribution is even more skewed than in the case of self-duplicates:\nHere is the list of all members with more than 2% of other-duplicates in the sample:\nName Total DOIs Sample size Other-duplicate index American Bryological and Lichenological Society 5,593 844 41% Maney Publishing 15,342 832 6% JSTOR 1,612,174 864 4% American Mathematical Society (AMS) 83,015 844 4% American Bryological and Lichenological Society is a clear outlier with 41% of their sample flagged as duplicates. Interestingly, all those duplicates come from one other member only (JSTOR) and JSTOR was the first to deposit them.\nSimilarly, all other-duplicates detected in the American Mathematical Society\u0026rsquo;s sample are shared with JSTOR, and JSTOR was the first to deposit them.\nManey Publishing\u0026rsquo;s 51 other-duplicates are all shared with a member not listed in this table: Informa UK Limited.\nJSTOR is the only member in this table, whose 36 other-duplicates are shared with multiple (8) members.\nAnother interesting observation is that the members in this table (apart from JSTOR) are rather small or medium, in terms of total DOIs registered by them. It is also worrying that Informa UK Limited, a member that shares 51 other-duplicates flagged in Maney Publishing\u0026rsquo;s sample, was not flagged by this index. The reason might be differences in the overall number of registered DOIs: two members that deposited the same number of other-duplicates, but have different overall numbers of registered DOIs, will have different other-duplicate indexes.\nTo address this issue, I looked at a third index called global other-duplicate index. Global other-duplicate index is the fraction of globally detected other-duplicates involving a given member.\nGlobal other-duplicate index has a useful interpretation: it tells us how much the overall number of other-duplicates would drop, if the given member resolved all its other-duplicates (for example by setting appropriate relations or correcting the metadata so that it is no longer so similar).\nHere is the list of members with global-duplicate index higher than 2%:\nName Total DOIs Global other-duplicate index JSTOR 1,612,174 69% American Bryological and Lichenological Society 5,593 54% Informa UK Limited 4,275,507 15% Maney Publishing 15,342 8% American Mathematical Society (AMS) 83,015 6% Project Muse 326,300 5% Wiley 8,003,815 3% Elsevier BV 16,268,943 3% Liverpool University Press 31,870 3% Cambridge University Press (CUP) 1,621,713 2% Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health) 2,152,723 2% University of Toronto Press Inc. (UTPress) 46,778 2% Note that the values add up to more than 100%. This is because in every other-duplicate there are two members involved, so the involvement adds up to 200%.\nAs we can see, all the members from the previous table are in this one as well. Apart from them, however, this index flagged several large members. Among them, Informa UK Limited, that was missing from the previous table.\nAll the indexes defined here are useful in identifying members that contribute a lot of duplicates to the Crossref metadata. They can be used to help to clean up the metadata, and also to monitor the situation in the future.\nLimitations It is important to remember that index values presented here were calculated on a single sample of DOIs drawn for a given member. The values would be different if a different sample was used, and so they shouldn\u0026rsquo;t be treated as exact numbers.\nThe tables include members with the index exceeding a certain threshold, chosen arbitrarily, for illustrative purposes. Different runs with different samples could result in different members being included in the tables, especially in their lower parts.\nTo obtain more stable values of indexes, multiple samples could be used. Alternatively, in the case of smaller members, exact values could be calculated from all their DOIs.\n",
"headings": ["TL;DR","Introduction","Gathering the data","Overall results","Self-duplicates","Other-duplicates","Limitations"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/can-you-help-us-to-launch-distributed-usage-logging/",
"title": "Can you help us to launch Distributed Usage Logging?",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2020-03-02",
"lastmod_ts": 1583107200,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "Update: Deadline extended to 23:59 (UTC) 13th March 2020.\nDistributed Usage Logging (DUL) allows publishers to capture traditional usage activity related to their content that happens on sites other than their own so they can provide reports of “total usage”, for example to subscribing institutions, regardless of where that usage happens.\n",
"content": "Update: Deadline extended to 23:59 (UTC) 13th March 2020.\nDistributed Usage Logging (DUL) allows publishers to capture traditional usage activity related to their content that happens on sites other than their own so they can provide reports of “total usage”, for example to subscribing institutions, regardless of where that usage happens.\nWe are looking for a consultant to take the lead with DUL outreach, promoting the service and its benefits in order to solicit participation from publishers (receivers) and content-hosting platforms/scholarly collaboration networks (senders).\nCrossref provides the infrastructure for DUL. The call for participation is being led by COUNTER and the selected consultant will be representing COUNTER, with additional support from Crossref\nIf you are interested in this opportunity, please download the request for information (RFI).\nThe RFI response deadline is 23:59 (UTC) 13 March 2020.\n",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/categories/members/",
"title": "Members",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Categories",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/categories/bibliometrics/",
"title": "Bibliometrics",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Categories",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/categories/citation-data/",
"title": "Citation Data",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod" : "",
"lastmod_ts" : 0,
"section": "Categories",
"tags": [],
"description": "Crossref runs open infrastructure to link research objects, entities, and actions, creating a lasting and reusable scholarly record that underpins open science. Together with our 25,000 members in 167 countries, we drive metadata exchange and support over 2 billion monthly API queries, facilitating global research communication, for the benefit of society.",
"content": "",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/crossref-metadata-for-bibliometrics/",
"title": "Crossref metadata for bibliometrics",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2020-02-21",
"lastmod_ts": 1582243200,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "Our paper, Crossref: the sustainable source of community-owned scholarly metadata, was recently published in Quantitative Science Studies (MIT Press). The paper describes the scholarly metadata collected and made available by Crossref, as well as its importance in the scholarly research ecosystem.\n",
"content": "Our paper, Crossref: the sustainable source of community-owned scholarly metadata, was recently published in Quantitative Science Studies (MIT Press). The paper describes the scholarly metadata collected and made available by Crossref, as well as its importance in the scholarly research ecosystem.\nContaining over 106 million records and expanding at an average rate of 11% a year, Crossref\u0026rsquo;s metadata has become one of the major sources of scholarly data for publishers, authors, librarians, funders, and researchers. The metadata set consists of 13 record types, including not only traditional types, such as journals and conference papers, but also data sets, reports, preprints, peer reviews, and grants. The metadata is not limited to basic publication metadata, but can also include abstracts and links to full text, funding and license information, citation links, and the information about corrections, updates, retractions, etc. This scale and breadth make Crossref a valuable source for research in scientometrics, including measuring the growth and impact of science and understanding new trends in scholarly communications. The metadata is available through a number of APIs, including REST API and OAI-PMH.\nIn the paper, we describe the kind of metadata that Crossref provides and how it is collected and curated. We also look at Crossref\u0026rsquo;s role in the research ecosystem and trends in metadata curation over the years, including the evolution of its citation data provision. We summarize the research that used Crossref\u0026rsquo;s metadata and describe plans that will improve metadata quality and retrieval in the future.\n",
"headings": []
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/leaving-crossref/",
"title": "Leaving Crossref",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2020-02-14",
"lastmod_ts": 1581638400,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "Where does the time go\u0026hellip; In my blog post on January 14th about Crossref’s 20th anniversary I said, “The one constant in Crossref’s 20 years has been change”. It’s true that there has been constant change, but there has been another constant at Crossref –– me (and DOIs, to be fair). I started as Crossref’s first employee and Executive Director on February 1st, 2000, so I just marked my 20th anniversary with the organisation.\n",
"content": "Where does the time go\u0026hellip; In my blog post on January 14th about Crossref’s 20th anniversary I said, “The one constant in Crossref’s 20 years has been change”. It’s true that there has been constant change, but there has been another constant at Crossref –– me (and DOIs, to be fair). I started as Crossref’s first employee and Executive Director on February 1st, 2000, so I just marked my 20th anniversary with the organisation.\nThis milestone prompted me to reflect on where I am and where I’m heading. After 20 years leading the organisation, I’ve decided to leave Crossref. It’s time for a new challenge. I’m still very committed to the mission and very proud of my time at Crossref, the culture we’ve created and what the organisation has achieved. It’s been an honor serving as Executive Director and a pleasure working with so many great people over the years. And to be clear –– I’m not ill, being pushed or having a midlife crisis (yet).\nIt’s a difficult and emotional decision but I think the transition can be positive for me, the staff, the board, and the organisation. I’ll be working with the Crossref board, Chair, Treasurer and staff on the transition –– the plan is for me to be around through September or October to enable the recruitment and handover to a new Executive Director. There will be more information about the transition and recruitment process after the Crossref board meeting March 11-12 in London.\nCrossref has a bright future and many opportunities to do new things. Crossref provides essential, open scholarly infrastructure and services that benefit its members and the wider scholarly research ecosystem –– and we’ve got a lot of interesting things in development and ambitious plans. To anyone who might be interested in being Crossref’s next Executive Director, I can honestly say it is fantastic, challenging, fun, and very fulfilling –– that’s why I’ve done it for 20 years.\nWhat’s next for me? I don’t know but it’s something I’ll be thinking about over the coming months. I do know that working for a mission driven organisation and staying involved with scholarly communications and research –– a fascinating and worthy field –– will be top of my list.\nAnyway - it’s back to work and full steam ahead for Crossref!\n",
"headings": ["Where does the time go\u0026hellip;"]
},
{
"url": "https://www.crossref.org/blog/using-the-crossref-rest-api-with-open-ukrainian-citation-index/",
"title": "Using the Crossref REST API (with Open Ukrainian Citation Index)",
"subtitle":"",
"rank": 1,
"lastmod": "2020-02-05",
"lastmod_ts": 1580860800,
"section": "Blog",
"tags": [],
"description": "Over the past few years, I\u0026rsquo;ve been really interested in seeing the breadth of uses that the research community is finding for the Crossref REST API. When we ran Crossref LIVE Kyiv in March 2019, Serhii Nazarovets joined us to present his plans for the Open Ukrainian Citation Index, an initiative he explains below.\nBut first an introduction to Serhii and his colleague Tetiana Borysova.\nSerhii Nazarovets is a Deputy Director for Research at the State Scientific and Technical Library of Ukraine. Serhii has a Ph.D. in Social Communication Science. His research interests lie in the area of scientometrics and library science. Serhii is the Associate Editor for DOAJ (www.doaj.org) and the Regional Editor for E-LIS (Eprints in Library and Information Science). Serhii has worked in different scientific libraries of Ukraine for more than 10 years. Tetiana Borysova is a Senior Researcher at the State Scientific and Technical Library of Ukraine. Her research interests are focused on topics such as research data management, journal management and scientometrics.\n",
"content": "Over the past few years, I\u0026rsquo;ve been really interested in seeing the breadth of uses that the research community is finding for the Crossref REST API. When we ran Crossref LIVE Kyiv in March 2019, Serhii Nazarovets joined us to pres