1 / 32

Our experience with linking and CrossRef

Our experience with linking and CrossRef. Jerry Cowhig, Managing Director Terry Hulbert, Business Development Manager Institute of Physics Publishing CrossRef annual meeting, Boston 25 September 2002 jerry.cowhig@iop.org www.iop.org. Terry Hulbert. Introduction.

hedy-sanford
Download Presentation

Our experience with linking and CrossRef

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Our experience with linking and CrossRef Jerry Cowhig, Managing Director Terry Hulbert, Business Development Manager Institute of Physics PublishingCrossRef annual meeting, Boston 25 September 2002 jerry.cowhig@iop.org www.iop.org

  2. Terry Hulbert

  3. Introduction • Development of linking at IOP • Other electronic developments at IOP • CrossRef experiences • Future linking developments

  4. Linking at IOP • 1996 - all 35 IOP journals on www • 1997 - Hypercite • Refs link to INSPEC abs on IOP server • Forward citations to IOP papers only • 1998 - “Distributed publishing” • Bilateral links AIP, APS, Springer etc • 1999 - STACKS linking protocol • 1999 - Axiom (secondary dbase) • INSPEC, later Compendex • Links to full text

  5. Linking at IOP (cont) • 1999 - final bilaterals, AP… getting close to total available coverage in physics

  6. AND THEN ALONG CAME... • CrossRef

  7. CrossRef • 1999 Frankfurt STM: “Linking good”! • Sudden announcement, NY Times • IOP not in original 12 disciples • Online 1999: joined asap • Still pursued bilaterals: Elsevier NO!

  8. October 1998

  9. CrossRef • June 2000 CrossRef launched • Elsevier No to all bilaterals • From the start IOP has been a member • Elsevier was a major factor for IOP

  10. History post 2000 • Bilaterals, CrossRef & other links co-exist • SFX and Open URL • ZBLSA • DOI • Forward citations (3rd party)

  11. DOI • We use and support because of CrossRef • IOP articles all have DOI since 2000 • Now also published in print and online • Anyone incoming can use our DOIs • Linking from IOP: • If no bilateral, check for DOI in INSPEC • If DOI, we create URL to link directly • If no luck, go to CrossRef • We are not a member of the IDF

  12. Forward citations • To see “who has cited this paper” • IOP had this since 1997, Hypercite • Now making bilaterals • IPAP agreed • Verbal agreements with APS, ADS • Role for CrossRef

  13. Other IOP electronic initiatives • Free first 30 days and other free accesses • Archive back to 1874 • Local loading • Now can include XML reference data • Usage stats - COUNTER and more • Vivisimo

  14. Current state: Inbound linking (to get IOP text) • Reference intra-linking in EJs - backwards & forwards (Hypercite) • Primary publishers - bilateral agreements, CrossRef • Or STACKS - no contract needed! • Secondary publishers, aggregators, gateways, etc. • Local holdings, OPACs, etc. • Help yourself!! • Docdel PPV: Ingenta, Infotrieve (contract)

  15. Current: Outbound (from IOP to get other text) • Links to primary data, publishers • Links to secondary services eg ChemPort, MathSciNet • Links to gateways: SwetsnetNavigator, Information Quest, EBSCO Online • Links to aggregators - Ingenta/CatchWord • Links to document delivery vendors eg Infotrieve • SFX (OpenURL) enabled • CrossRef

  16. Our experience with CrossRef • IOP is primary and secondary • Primary = 36 electronic journals • Secondary = Axiom dbase (INSPEC and Compendex) • Enables links to many publishers where no other arrangement exists • Sweeps up 7% refs in electronic journals • >25% links from INSPEC (Axiom)

  17. How much do we use CrossRef? • IOP electronic journals 1968-present • 2.8m references • 1.8m have at least one link (64%) • 1.2m INSPEC or Compendex (66%) • 816k to 2’ry eg Chemport, SWETS (45%) • 608k bilateral to publisher (34%) • 225k to IOP article (13%) • 37k to preprint, eg arXiv, SPIRES (2%) • 37k to CrossRef (2%) - half Elsevier • Total no of links 3m • 1m references have no link (36%)

  18. How much do we use CrossRef (2)? • IOP electronic journals whole year 2001 • 179k references • 126k have at least one link (70%) • 77k INSPEC or Compendex (62%) • 80k to 2’ry eg Chemport, SWETS (63%) • 49k bilateral to publisher (39%) • 14k to IOP article (11%) • 6k to preprint, eg arXiv, SPIRES (5%) • 8k to CrossRef (7%) - half Elsevier • Total no of links 248k • 53k references have no link (30%)

  19. How much do we use CrossRef (3)? • Axiom INSPEC year 2001 • 195k new journal records • 55k CrossRef links (28%) • 52k bilateral links (27%) • 88k have no links (45%)

  20. How much do we use CrossRef (4)? • Axiom click-throughs pointing to full text (last 12 months) • 104k total • 55k AIP/APS (53%) • 37k CrossRef (36%) • 12k remainder (12%)

  21. How much - summary • In current IOP electronic journals, refs • 70% have a link (or links) inc CrossRef • 7% rely on CrossRef link • 30% of refs have no link to full text • In current Axiom (INSPEC) • 55% have a link (or links) inc CrossRef • 28% we rely on CrossRef link • 45% of refs have no link to full text (back sweeps may reduce this)

  22. What’s our experience of using CrossRef? • We support the principle • We love all the nice people • Technically…it’s not been easy • EJs - not much problem • Axiom - more tricky

  23. Axiom technical problems • 5000 new abstracts per week • About 30% need CrossRef links • Much staff time dealing with it • Manual reference check • Data deviating from the spec • Often“Timed Out” with no notice • Now backlog of >300,000 look-ups • Recently stopped using CrossRef at all! • New CrossRef system seems better :-) • Working for EJs; Axiom will try soon

  24. Other issues with CrossRef • Transfer of ownership • Not seamless if new owner fails to update metadata (new URL for the DOI) • Affiliates need not link to primary source! • Primary publishers must do so • Secondary need not. WHY NOT? • 60%members deposit but don’t link! • So we send them readers... • but they don’t send readers to us! • These are not the fault of CrossRef staff • MEMBERS - COME ON, PLAY THE GAME !

  25. How much does CrossRef cost us? • For electronic journals p.a. • Membership $1000 • Deposit articles $6500 • Retrieve articles $500 • For Axiom p.a. • Membership $5000 • Retrieve articles $8500 • For archive (one off) • Deposit $8250 • Retrieve $8500

  26. How much does CrossRef cost us? • Year 2001 invoices = $28,000

  27. How should CrossRef develop? • EVERYTHING TO IMPROVE LINKING • More links to books and grey literature • Affordable subsets of MDDB we can buy • Good for CrossRef as well as for us • Linking tools - e.g. graphical “history” of a “reference trail” • Forward citation: deposit refs attached to papers. Let’s not repeat history! • Cross Search abstracts - NO NO! • Move away from core role - linking (PILA) • It’s competing with secondaries

  28. Summary • IOP always keen on reference linking • Many linking relationships • CrossRef (in physics) is valuable sweep up • CrossRef (for Axiom) is largest single link • We support CrossRef, value relationship • Technical problems may be resolved? • Future: more linking items, not searching • grey literature • MDDB slices • reference trails • forward citing!!!!

  29. Thank you • jerry.cowhig@iop.org • www.iop.org

More Related