July 2018
Newsletter

Crossref

Hello,

This month we’ve got a few good things to share with you—starting with the introduction of our new metadata visualization tool—Participation Reports. We also have a new status page, which details the performance of our services and APIs and a new Support Manager, who will introduce both himself and the new status page to you. We also share our recent outreach experiences, explain how to resolve a Conflict Report, and invite you to be part of our Meet the members blog series.

As always—feel free to ask or tell us anything.

Introducing our new participation reports tool

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. That’s where Participation Reports (beta) comes in, giving—for the first time—a clear visualization of the metadata Crossref has. Find out what percentage of your (and others) content includes 10 key elements of information above and beyond the basic bibliographic metadata that all members are obliged to provide.


It's lift-off for Participation Reports

Meet our new status page

Our new status page provides critical, real-time information about our services—it helps us tell our overall story. If you are looking for metrics on the performance of our APIs, websites, the deposit system, or new beta services, you'll want to bookmark this page or subscribe to alerts.


Isaac, our new Support Manager, introduces himself and our new status page

Conflict Reports; why conflicts are important to resolve

If there’s a conflict in your metadata—we’ll send you a Conflict Report to tell you about it. A conflict is where two (or more) DOIs have been submitted with the same metadata, so it looks like there are two separate DOIs for the same content. And as you know, a DOI is a unique identifier—so there should only ever be one DOI for each content item.


It’s important to fix conflicts soon as you can, because it 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.


What to do when you get a Conflict Report

If you’re the Crossref ‘technical contact’ at your organization you’ll automatically receive these. If you’re not the technical contact, but want to see the reports, let us know.


Conflict Reports are sent by support@crossref.org automatically every 30 days. If however, your conflict level has increased by 500+ we’ll let you know right away, as this indicates a bigger problem. If your organization has more than one prefix, you’ll receive a separate email for each prefix. The email will contain a link to our conflict report page, where you can locate your organization and see the conflicts. 


Click your organization’s name to see which titles have the problem. Click each title to show a report that displays the DOIs in conflict. Alternatively, you can see the conflict reports for your whole prefix by clicking on the XML link.


conflict report image


Resolving conflict

The three ways two (or more) DOIs can get submitted with the same metadata are:


One: 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's metadata, the conflict will be resolved.


Two: 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'll only need to maintain the primary. There are two methods to assign primary and alias status, both are described in detail in our support documentation.


Three: 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, using one of the methods described in our support documentation.


If you have any further questions about our Conflict Reports, get in touch.

LIVE locals

The past few months have been busy for the Crossref team; we’ve been to Cape Town and Ulyanovsk—and many places in between—meeting members, and presenting at ‘LIVE locals’.


LIVE locals are one-day Crossref events, held around the world—but local to our members—that provide information about our services, and how to benefit from them. Everyone is welcome to attend, whether you are a long-established member, totally new, or not even a member at all.


Read about our recent outreach work across South Africa, Russia and Germany.


Register for our September LIVE locals in Goiania and Fortaleza, Brazil.

Nice to meet you!

What do Oxfam, Protocols.io and INASP have in common? They have each featured in our new Meet the member blog series, and now we want to meet you too. If you think you might be a 'non-typical' publisher and you'd like to tell us—and the wider scholarly communications community—about your organization.  Share what needs your services are trying to meet, and how you use Crossref.  Please—get in touch.

LIVE18 18 Toronto—November 13 and 14, 2018

Register now for your place at our Annual Meeting

Crossref

50 Salem St., Lynnfield, MA 01940, USA
View in browser | Manage preferences or unsubscribe | Privacy Policy

Twitter Facebook LinkedIn