Rod wrote:
...
> The DOI example above is particularly
annoying for me, because it
> relates to IPNI's LSIDs. One of my
favourite plant taxa is Poissonia
> heterantha
(lsidres:urn:lsid:ipni.org:names:20012728-1). The IPNI
> metadata
for this name include the following:
>
> <tn:publishedIn>Syst.
Bot. 28(2): 401 (2003). </tn:publishedIn>
>
> Wouldn't it be
nice to have something like:
>
> <tn:publishedIn
>
rdf:resource="doi:10.1600/0363-6445(2003)028[0387:PORLFR]2.0.CO;2"
/>
>
> Given a DOI, users can locate the article quickly and, via
CrossRef,
> extract metadata. The more taxonomic literature is
associated with
> GUIDs such as DOIs, Handles, and LSIDs, the
better.
This somewhat relates to a cross conversation (sorry, fell off
the
mailing list) we've been having with Neil Thomson about his
BHL
proposal & it points up another social problem, this time with
legacy
data
Even if the DOIs were working as advertised, what would it
take to
get to the point where we could supplement 'Syst. Bot. 28(2):
401
(2003).' with "doi:10.1600/0363-6445(2003)028[0387:PORLFR]2.0.CO;2"
?
This example is actually quite close to being
doable
programmatically. 'Syst. Bot.' is a standardised
publication
abbreviation in IPNI, and the collation is in a standard form
too, so
if we had a source of DOIs tied to articles in Syst. Bot. we
could
imagine writing a routine to programmatically import the relevant
DOI
into the IPNI record.
We're chugging away with standardisation in
IPNI and we're doing
updates at the moment that are cleaning up aspects of
10,000, 15,000,
up to 50,000 records at a time. But there are 1.5 million
records to
do and we can still find (just from within Poissonia) citations
like
'Adansonia, ix. (1870) 295. ' or 'Bol. Mus. Hist. Nat. Tucuman no.
6:
8. 1925 Hauman, in Kew Bull. 1925: 279. 1925 ' which look much
less
tractable
60% of publications are not standardised in IPNI, and
of the
standardised ones many of them predate DOIs (are there any
moves
among journals to retrofit DOIs to older series?) Plus I've
noticed
in the IPNI and other editors at Kew a strange reluctance to type
in
strings that look
like
'10.1600/0363-6445(2003)028[0387:PORLFR]2.0.CO;2'
- I don't know
whether barcode reading technology could help here...
I think that any
solution to standardising citations of literature
must inevitably include (if
not be confined to) some use of the
infrastructure that DOIs represent. But
we will also have to come up
with a plan that will help us deal with the vast
weight of legacy
data that databases like IPNI carry
Sally*** Sally
Hinchcliffe
*** Computer section, Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew
*** tel: +44
(0)20 8332 5708
***
S.Hinchcliffe@rbgkew.org.uk
_______________________________________________
TDWG-GUID
mailing list
TDWG-GUID@mailman.nhm.ku.edu
http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/mailman/listinfo/tdwg-guid