Search (1 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × author_ss:"Brand, A."
  • × theme_ss:"Elektronisches Publizieren"
  1. Brand, A.: CrossRef turns one (2001) 0.01
    0.0066890595 = product of:
      0.013378119 = sum of:
        0.013378119 = product of:
          0.026756238 = sum of:
            0.026756238 = weight(_text_:x in 1222) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.026756238 = score(doc=1222,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.19116588 = queryWeight, product of:
                  4.2226825 = idf(docFreq=1761, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.045271195 = queryNorm
                0.13996346 = fieldWeight in 1222, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  4.2226825 = idf(docFreq=1761, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=1222)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    CrossRef, the only full-blown application of the Digital Object Identifier (DOI®) System to date, is now a little over a year old. What started as a cooperative effort among publishers and technologists to prototype DOI-based linking of citations in e-journals evolved into an independent, non-profit enterprise in early 2000. We have made considerable headway during our first year, but there is still much to be done. When CrossRef went live with its collaborative linking service last June, it had enabled reference links in roughly 1,100 journals from a member base of 33 publishers, using a functional prototype system. The DOI-X prototype was described in an article published in D-Lib Magazine in February of 2000. On the occasion of CrossRef's first birthday as a live service, this article provides a non-technical overview of our progress to date and the major hurdles ahead. The electronic medium enriches the research literature arena for all players -- researchers, librarians, and publishers -- in numerous ways. Information has been made easier to discover, to share, and to sell. To take a simple example, the aggregation of book metadata by electronic booksellers was a huge boon to scholars seeking out obscure backlist titles, or discovering books they would never otherwise have known to exist. It was equally a boon for the publishers of those books, who saw an unprecedented surge in sales of backlist titles with the advent of centralized electronic bookselling. In the serials sphere, even in spite of price increases and the turmoil surrounding site licenses for some prime electronic content, libraries overall are now able to offer more content to more of their patrons. Yet undoubtedly, the key enrichment for academics and others navigating a scholarly corpus is linking, and in particular the linking that takes the reader out of one document and into another in the matter of a click or two. Since references are how authors make explicit the links between their work and precedent scholarship, what could be more fundamental to the reader than making those links immediately actionable? That said, automated linking is only really useful from a research perspective if it works across publications and across publishers. Not only do academics think about their own writings and those of their colleagues in terms of "author, title, rough date" -- the name of the journal itself is usually not high on the list of crucial identifying features -- but they are oblivious as to the identity of the publishers of all but their very favorite books and journals.