In reply to
@zuphilip @CrossrefOrg @opencitations Yes, we strip the DOI from the generated reference string before trying to match again. Otherwise it would be too easy ;-).
In reply to
@zuphilip @CrossrefOrg @opencitations Yes, we strip the DOI from the generated reference string before trying to match again. Otherwise it would be too easy ;-).
In reply to
@csarven @CrossrefOrg @ORCID_Org So ORCID public works approach would be easiest *today*. We are still exploring how to let individuals to make assertions via event data directly. Issue, as usual, is how to deal with spam, abuse, etc.
In reply to
@csarven @CrossrefOrg @ORCID_Org Data included in Event Data is not from our members (we don’t have concept of “partners”). And no fees required for REST API or Event Data API.
In reply to
@csarven @CrossrefOrg @ORCID_Org Not a question of conflict, but of documenting provenance. And system would support making new assertion about elements already deposited by pub, you could submit corrections, etc.
In reply to
@csarven @CrossrefOrg @ORCID_Org … we want to eventually open up ability for others to make assertions about DOIs via Event Data. https://www.crossref.org/services/event-data/ 2/2