We get a full section on the container/book as well as on the chaper/content_item
The rest api therefore does not seem to return enough data to validate/generate a typical citation to a book chapter (at least for an edited book). Nor does it seem to include the DOI of the ‘container’ to make further queries to fetch this data.
You’re not missing anything. This is a known issue that has been present since we built the REST API - it was essentially a flaw in modeling the work types and their relationships to one another. We unfortunately just haven’t had the resources to do the kind of comprehensive work necessary to get it corrected yet.
That said, if you need to generate a formatted citation based on a DOI’s metadata, you can use Content Negotiation. Even though that primarily relies on the data from the REST API, citations for book chapters and other ‘child’ items do include the container/parent information.
Many thanks for the reply, that is a shame, but thanks for the suggested work around.
If we do go via the content negotiation route we are hitting doi.org directly. Is there still a requirement / desire to identify ourselves (ala polite pool) and if so what is the correct way to do so?
No, that’s not necessary for content negotiation. It’s centrally managed by the DOI Foundation, because it supports getting citations/metadata for DOIs from several different registration agencies (Crossref, DataCite, and mEDRA). The requests that pertain to Crossref DOIs are directed from there to our servers, but the public/polite distinction isn’t maintained.