Me encantará participar, gracias!!
We are sponsors of Crossref in Brazil.
Most sponsors make deposits via OJS and it works very well.
Those who make the deposit through “webDeposit” are already used to the platform and do not report any problems. What I’ve noticed are duplicate ORCIDs in the contributors list.
It would be nice if the new platform did this kind of verification to avoid duplicate ORCIDs.
Another very common mistake is that some people translate the “webDeposit” page to Portuguese using the Chrome plugin, which prevents a successful deposit.
I am a software developer, I would like to test the platform as soon as possible.
I am publisher, but my website does not support OJS, please mention other ways.
Web Deposit Form is the only fully supported manual metadata deposit tool as of now. But, we are working on developing a new manual deposit tool, as Sara mentioned in this post.
So, please do try using Web Deposit Form, and if you have feedback on what would make it easier, please leave it here.
Thank you for your information. Could you provide me with a direct link to Web Deposit Form?
I have never tried it before and had no idea how to reach it.
Hi @icsr . Thanks for following up and welcome to the community.
The web deposit form is available here: https://apps.crossref.org/webDeposit/
And, instructions for its user are available here: Web deposit form - Crossref
We use the OJS deposit (for our journal articles), it´s ok. And we´re beginning to use the Web Deposit form for other item types, it´s been easy.
But, at the Web Deposit form, to update or correct metadata of a previously registered DOI, we have to input all data again. We can make mistakes, and it gives us the impression we´re generating another DOI (and paying again), even if we´re not… So, forgive me if it´s too dull a suggestion to make, since I´m new to the WDf. But, would it be possible to have some “Edit” icon + filling the already registered DOI code, so to get to its registry and only modify the field metadata that require update or correction? Or there´s already a way of doing it?
Hi, I’m from Brazil and we encourage small editors to use MM.
Mainly to avoid editing XML that many do not do and mainly to implement metadata enrichment, which, even with OJS deposits are not complete, which prevented the use of other services, such as: Similarity check, Cited-by
Following the forum discussion, I thought of 3 important approaches for the new metadata editing platform.
- That addresses the fields and possibilities that the MM contemplated for the improvement/enrichment of metadata, which we started to plan in our work routines, such as:
editing and inserting additional metadata
Relations between metadata
among many others…
- Support New Infrastructures:
Support for languages in the form
For the new metadata plattform to have answers, give technical support and focus on best practices for working with metadata, we have to address it in the system itself, avoiding errors or need for changes, and especially that members learn with the platform.
When I used Web deposit form, it shows issue DOI but we have only article DOI for each article.
Even when I added article DOI, it was was showing as wrong doi.
Issue-level DOIs are optional. If you don’t have them, just leave the Issue DOI and Issue URL fields empty.
Broadly speaking, assuming you have recently published a new issue of your journal and you want to register DOIs for all articles in the issue, the steps to take to use the web deposit form are:
- Select the Journal data type
- Enter the Journal and Issue level metadata on the first page of the form. At minimum this includes: Journal title, abbreviated journal title, ISSN(s), and at least one publication year (print or online). If applicable, also enter issue number, volume number, and full publication dates.
[Journal DOI and Issue DOI are optional. If you don’t wish to deposit Journal-level and Issue-level DOIs, simply leave these fields as well as Journal URL and Issue URL empty. Keep in mind that, if you do deposit a Journal DOI, it refers to the journal as a whole, and therefore cannot change in future deposits]
- Select ‘Add Articles’
- On the second page of the form, enter the metadata for your first article (article title, authors, page numbers if available), the article DOI, and article URL
- Click ‘Add Another Article’
- Continue to enter article metadata, DOIs, and URLs until you’ve entered all articles for the given issue.
- Click ‘Finish’
- Enter your Crossref username and password, and your email address
- Click ‘Deposit’
Any thoughts of adding the database type to this web form? Would really simplify things. Will the database type xml batch submission work here?
Marc Gillespie • Biocurator
reactome.org • New York
Thanks so much for your feedback. I wanted to let you know that we are starting to look at ways to better support multilingual metadata (as well as translated content). There is a card on our Roadmap for multilingual metadata - we hope to add more details to that card soon.
I stumbled across the sentence “We’ll be focusing on creating a brand new Content Registration user interface that will eventually replace Metadata Manager, the Web Deposit form, and Simple Text Query.” in the blog post “Next steps for Content Registration”.
We are working with the Simple Text Query as a crucial tool in our workflow. If Simple Text Query was replaced we would probably need to make changes to our workflow. Are there already any more concrete plans about how and when the Simple Text Query will be replaced? That is, in which way will a future tool differ from the current copy/paste of a text file to a window?
It will be probably me to come up with the necessary changes to our workflow. Hence, I’d rather know sooner than later.
Thanks for your question, we know that Simple Text Query is an important content registration method for a large number of our members and we will keep the ability to deposit references in this way.
We’re currently working on an updated version of Simple Text Query, which is likely to launch in next few months but the functionality will remain the same. There isn’t a timeline for bringing it into the new content registration system, but if we do it will serve the same purpose: you will be able to deposit references separately to the rest of the metadata. The only change to your workflow should be that you need to visit a different part of our website. We’ll announce the changes here and on our blog, and there will be some overlap between the current and new versions.
Thank you. Actually, we use Simple Text Query only to retrieve DOIs for references for which the authors didn’t provide any. But if this functionality also remains the same, everything will be fine.
For our journal , the plugin of OJS is used for the purpose of deposit the content. Will this tool still work? Nevertheless, I am glad to try the tool you are developing.
does the method of resolve a conflict of DOIs be updated as well? or create another ways .
Mujtaba AT Ankush
Hi @Ankush - yes, the OJS plugin will continue to work to deposit your DOIs.
The method for resolving DOIs conflicts will remain the same for the time being.