I can see that. But, to stick to my example in this thread, if a member had a work whose full text was available in Spanish, French, and English and only wanted one DOI to be cited for those works in the three languages, while we’d recommend three distinct DOIs in this case, they would be able to provide titles in those multiple languages (free of a language attribute).
-Isaac
…XML, however, should be machine-readable, and (correct me if I’m wrong) the XML semantics should not rely on the order of the same sibling elements. If the members deposit several titles, which they are allowed to do, and don’t attach a language attribute, which they are not allowed to do, this results in several title elements that, from the machine’s point of view, are exactly equivalent. The machine sees several titles and has no way of differentiating between them. Which one is in the original language of the article? The first one? The last one? The one in the middle? The machine has no way of knowing that, and so “computer says no”.
To some extent, I understand your intentions, but I can’t see the rationale between several titles with no way of differentiating them by language. Why several titles in any case? Is there a valid use case for this? If there is, I can’t think of any, and to me this story with the titles looks as a ground for introducing ambiguity into the metadata.
<titles>
<title>When your best metadata isn't good enough: working with an imperfect specification</title>
</titles>
<titles language="fr">
<title>Quand vos meilleures métadonnées ne suffisent pas: travailler avec une spécification imparfaite</title>
</titles>
I tried to register a book and its chapters, but it didn’t work.
That’s because it shouldn’t, @Raiane . Neither titles nor title supports language attribute.
If your work is a translation, you can use the original_language_title element (e.g., as in best-practice-examples/journal_article_translation_5.4.0.xml · master · crossref / Schema · GitLab ).
This isn’t a translation, but a multilingual book.