- 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