Timeline for Why do some papers not have a DOI?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
9 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 29, 2022 at 16:10 | comment | added | Joe | This wasn't meant to be misleading. Crossref used DOI to implement persistent identifiers. Note that the ISO standard is 2012, Crossref was founded some time prior. | |
| Jun 29, 2022 at 3:42 | comment | added | nealmcb | This answer almost makes it sound like CrossRef created the notion of a DOI, which is quite misleading. DOIs are an international standard via ISO. See en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_object_identifier | |
| Aug 3, 2017 at 15:37 | comment | added | jiggunjer | Nvm I think my reference manager tricked me. I scraped a reference using only the DOI, and it found a pubmed URL. Turns out it didn't resolve the actual DOI as I thought it would. But since pubmed often seems to offer multiple options for downloading, wouldn't it be a good idea for a DOI? | |
| Aug 3, 2017 at 9:15 | comment | added | Joe | Do you have an example of a DOI pointing to a Pubmed page? | |
| Aug 3, 2017 at 7:09 | comment | added | jiggunjer | So how come some DOIs point to e.g. a pubmed entry? wouldn't it make more (financial) sense for the publisher to directly link to their site? | |
| Sep 15, 2014 at 17:01 | history | edited | Joe | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 435 characters in body
|
| Sep 15, 2014 at 15:10 | history | edited | Joe | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 429 characters in body
|
| Sep 15, 2014 at 14:48 | review | First posts | |||
| Sep 15, 2014 at 15:07 | |||||
| Sep 15, 2014 at 14:48 | history | answered | Joe | CC BY-SA 3.0 |