Submitted by: Kim Kantarakis Aug 15 12:42
Thank you for your help with last month’s questions. I have attached the report for August. What is your opinion of the doi’s that end in three dots … and those that end in .FULL.PDF? Neither show on a verbatim google search.
That’s the first time I’ve seen them show up before.
Isaac Farley, Crossref support, responded Aug 17 10:04
Thanks for your question.
Before joining Crossref in April, I worked for one of our members. I received and checked these reports, so I understand your concern and confusion about what is included and which information is most relevant to you.
Admittedly, there is noise within these reports. People and machines make mistakes when trying to resolve DOIs. That’s reflected on the report. Back when I worked for one of our member publishers, I always scanned these reports to see if there were DOIs on the list that were valid DOIs that were familiar to me. That is, DOIs with characters or formats inconsistent with the conventions we used (like three dots), I ignored - those most likely got on the report due to human or machine error. What I found was that most of the valid resolutions on the report, those things that were not noise, were for DOIs where a staff member, editor, or author had tried to view it online prior to it being registered with Crossref. But, I had to check to confirm that.
Sometimes there was an error in our process that resulted in a DOI that we thought had been published not being registered. From there, we’d correct the metadata and redeposit the article(s). That’s really the intent of these reports - to give you ledes for potential metadata problems and DOIs that have gone unregistered (that you thought were registered).
I hope this information is helpful.
Please let me know if you have any additional questions.
Crossref Support Manager
Keep up to date with service performance, incidents, and planned maintenance at status.crossref.org