- From: Richard Wallis <richard.wallis@dataliberate.com>
- Date: Thu, 11 Jun 2020 16:08:37 +0100
- To: Hugh Paterson III <sil.linguist@gmail.com>
- Cc: public-schemaorg@w3c.org
- Message-ID: <CAD47Kz7KujLzL2ZYaTFbd09WR43a9spNnbJ64ex1hu2VXxH4pQ@mail.gmail.com>
As with all Schema.org types ScholarlyArticle
<https://schema.org/ScholarlyArticle> can have an associated identifier
<https://schema.org/identifier> property defined.
For example:
{
"@context": "http://schema.org",
"@type": "Article",
"name": "DOI Handbook",
"identifier": {
"@type": "PropertyValue",
"propertyID": "doi",
"value": "10.1000/182"
}
}
Richard Wallis
Founder, Data Liberate
http://dataliberate.com
Linkedin: http://www.linkedin.com/in/richardwallis
Twitter: @rjw
On Thu, 11 Jun 2020 at 15:36, Hugh Paterson III <sil.linguist@gmail.com>
wrote:
> Greetings,
>
> I'm wondering why there is no DOI "attribute" listed under
> scholarlyArticle. DOI resolvers are fairly important and mainstream, with
> the Datacite API one can generally get the publication metadata of most
> currently published articles.
>
> It seems that editEIDR solves the same kind of identification function,
> so it seems that someone has suggested that this kind of functionality is
> useful (which I agree it is). I'm wondering if there is any discussion for
> adding DOI or abstracting to an "attribute" which would allow for the use
> of Handles, URN's ARK's, DOI's, LSIDs etc.
>
> Otherwise, how are people choosing to encode DOI's?
>
> all the best,
> - Hugh
>
>
> for specifics on terms:
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_object_identifier
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archival_Resource_Key
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LSID
>
>
>
Received on Thursday, 11 June 2020 15:09:02 UTC