Skip to main content
Academia

Return to Answer

add note on STM report
Source Link
Andrew is gone
Andrew is gone
  • 7.9k
  • 1
  • 28
  • 42

There does not seem to be an absolute rule, though "new DOI for a new version" seems most common. Speak to whoever's hosting your data in case they have a different preference.

The California Digital Library summarises various approaches here. Some require registering a new DOI for each new tranche of the data; some will reuse the DOI but use a new version number or date to help you identify the relevant bit; some distinguish between major and minor additions.

It's worth noting that the "generate a new DOI for a new version" approach assumes that you're adding, say, a new month's data to the set with each version. If it's being updated on a daily or hourly basis, this approach breaks down; you don't want to generate dozens of DOIs for only marginally different versions! Here, the "snapshot" approach recommended by the Digital Curation Centre is much more efficient - produce a static copy of the dataset as it currently stands, on an as-needed basis or at standard intervals, and cite that.

Update: the new STM Report on scholarly publishing, out today, notes that the "The RDA Data Citation Working Group is investigating possible technical solutions [for dynamic data]" without giving much more detail (p. 140); the most recent material to come out of that group seems to be this workshop report from last year.

There does not seem to be an absolute rule, though "new DOI for a new version" seems most common. Speak to whoever's hosting your data in case they have a different preference.

The California Digital Library summarises various approaches here. Some require registering a new DOI for each new tranche of the data; some will reuse the DOI but use a new version number or date to help you identify the relevant bit; some distinguish between major and minor additions.

It's worth noting that the "generate a new DOI for a new version" approach assumes that you're adding, say, a new month's data to the set with each version. If it's being updated on a daily or hourly basis, this approach breaks down; you don't want to generate dozens of DOIs for only marginally different versions! Here, the "snapshot" approach recommended by the Digital Curation Centre is much more efficient - produce a static copy of the dataset as it currently stands, on an as-needed basis or at standard intervals, and cite that.

There does not seem to be an absolute rule, though "new DOI for a new version" seems most common. Speak to whoever's hosting your data in case they have a different preference.

The California Digital Library summarises various approaches here. Some require registering a new DOI for each new tranche of the data; some will reuse the DOI but use a new version number or date to help you identify the relevant bit; some distinguish between major and minor additions.

It's worth noting that the "generate a new DOI for a new version" approach assumes that you're adding, say, a new month's data to the set with each version. If it's being updated on a daily or hourly basis, this approach breaks down; you don't want to generate dozens of DOIs for only marginally different versions! Here, the "snapshot" approach recommended by the Digital Curation Centre is much more efficient - produce a static copy of the dataset as it currently stands, on an as-needed basis or at standard intervals, and cite that.

Update: the new STM Report on scholarly publishing, out today, notes that the "The RDA Data Citation Working Group is investigating possible technical solutions [for dynamic data]" without giving much more detail (p. 140); the most recent material to come out of that group seems to be this workshop report from last year.

Source Link
Andrew is gone
Andrew is gone
  • 7.9k
  • 1
  • 28
  • 42

There does not seem to be an absolute rule, though "new DOI for a new version" seems most common. Speak to whoever's hosting your data in case they have a different preference.

The California Digital Library summarises various approaches here. Some require registering a new DOI for each new tranche of the data; some will reuse the DOI but use a new version number or date to help you identify the relevant bit; some distinguish between major and minor additions.

It's worth noting that the "generate a new DOI for a new version" approach assumes that you're adding, say, a new month's data to the set with each version. If it's being updated on a daily or hourly basis, this approach breaks down; you don't want to generate dozens of DOIs for only marginally different versions! Here, the "snapshot" approach recommended by the Digital Curation Centre is much more efficient - produce a static copy of the dataset as it currently stands, on an as-needed basis or at standard intervals, and cite that.