FDSN - Digital Object Identifiers
Tim Ahern
Several people from the EIDA (European Integrated Data Archive) data centers, along with IRIS have been developing a proposed standard for identifying seismic networks using Digital Object Identifiers (DOIs). We are in the final stages of developing a document that captures the proposed methods for the generation, maintenance, and promotion of seismic network DOIs both within and external to the FDSN, all networks using FDSN assigned Network Codes..
The motivation for providing DOI’s is to insure that permanent seismic networks, or individual experiments undertaken by small groups or individuals, are reliably identified in citations by researchers or monitoring networks that make use of their data. The document should be finished and ready for distribution in a few short weeks. At that time I will send the document out to the FDSN WGIII for consideration.
Our goal is not to make this a document just for the European data centers and IRIS that have developed the plan, but to discuss, amend and endorse it by FDSN WGIII so FDSN can promote it as a standard for seismic networks. It will propose two new FDSN services to manage and mint DOIs;
1) a DOI generation service (FDSN-minted DOIs)
2) a DOI management and mapping service for both FDSN-minted DOIs as well as self minted DOIs according to the proposed methods for the generation
The plan will be for the FDSN to develop a service that can associate an FDSN network code with a DOI and anyone making use of that network’s data can give proper credit to the network by citing the DOI…. many more details will be in the document but I wanted to give you advance warning that the document will reach your inbox in the next few weeks. I would like for the FDSN WG III to be ready to approve the proposed method or provide input to the document with a short turnaround time. We hope we can do this within two weeks after the document is circulated but will accommodate longer time if issues arise.
Cheers and we look forward to your input and rapid response to our proposal
Dr. Tim Ahern
t...@iris.washington.edu
Chair of FDSN WG III on
Products, Tools and Services
IRIS DMC
1408 NE 45th Street #201
Seattle, WA 98105
Doug Neuhauser
The BSL (and NCEDC) have been pursuing DOIs with the UC library
system through the UC Office of the President (UCOP),
which provides services for creating and managing DOIs to UC affiliates.
However, the guidance we have received appears to be inconsistent with
what you are proposing.
In our discussion with the UCOP library staff, they emphasized that
when a DOI is used to refer to a data set (such as seismic data),
the DOI should refer to a SPECIFIC COLLECTION of data. Specifically,
when we discussed the issue of "data from a named network (eg BK)",
they stated that a DOI should not refer to the network itself or
"all of the data from the BK network", but that each collection
of BK data should have a separate DOI. In a perfect world,
they said that the object that a DOI refers to should be static,
but that a dataset that is being added to would be acceptable.
We explicitly discussed the example of the NCEDC maintaining a
(full) collection of BK data, and the IRIS DMC having a subset of BK data.
They stated that if we use DOIs, these 2 collections should have
separate DOIs since they are not an identical collection of data.
This is different than a book, where a book (of the same edition)
stored in 2 separate libraries is considered identical and the
book (or edition of the book) may have a single DOI.
Using this guidance, the BSL is tentatively planning to establish
DOIs for various components of our data collection.
I think this issue deserves more discussion to ensure that we
move forward in a consistent and compliant fashion with DOIs.
- Doug N
> _______________________________________________
> fdsn-wg3-products mailing list
> fdsn-wg3...@iris.washington.edu
> http://www.iris.washington.edu/mailman/listinfo/fdsn-wg3-products
>
--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Doug Neuhauser University of California, Berkeley
do...@seismo.berkeley.edu Berkeley Seismological Laboratory
Office: 510-642-0931 215 McCone Hall # 4760
Fax: 510-643-5811 Berkeley, CA 94720-4760
Remote: 530-752-5615 (Wed,Fri)
Tim Ahern
It would be best to wait to comment until then…. but it is my impression that extending principles from library perspectives may not always be the most useful thing for seismologists…
one aspect of what will be proposed is that networks like BK may mint their own DOIs that meet you institutional needs but they may not be identical all networks within the FDSN. I think we have left the needed flexibility in what we are going to propose.
Cheers
Tim Ahern
Director of Data Services
IRIS
IRIS DMC
1408 NE 45th Street #201
Seattle, WA 98105
Tim Ahern
Tim Ahern
Director of Data Services
IRIS
IRIS DMC
1408 NE 45th Street #201
Seattle, WA 98105
On Feb 28, 2014, at 9:43 AM, Fee, Jeremy <jm...@usgs.gov> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Have you considered using quakeml resource identifiers (smi:...) instead of DOIs? They both have similar issues of ensuring consistent use, and quakeml is a more related standard...
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Jeremy Fee
> USGS, Geologic Hazards Science Center
Seiji Tsuboi
I have a few questions on your proposal for seismic network DOIs, although I
may have to wait to receive your document.
I understand that DOI should be issued by Registration Agency, which is a
member of International DOI Foundation. Will IRIS become a Registration
Agency to issue and maintain seismic network DOIs? Also I understand that it
is necessary to pay some costs to issue DOIs. How do you manage this cost?
Do you plan to issue DOI only for network codes and not for waveform data
themselves? We are considering to issue DOIs for our marine science data
obtained by JAMSTEC's research vessels and are interested in these problems.
Regards,
Seiji Tsuboi
> can give proper credit to the network by citing the DOI.. many more
details
> will be in the document but I wanted to give you advance warning that the
> document will reach your inbox in the next few weeks. I would like for
> the FDSN WG III to be ready to approve the proposed method or provide
input
> to the document with a short turnaround time. We hope we can do this
within
> two weeks after the document is circulated but will accommodate longer
time
> if issues arise.
>
> Cheers and we look forward to your input and rapid response to our
proposal
>
> Dr. Tim Ahern
> t...@iris.washington.edu
>
> Chair of FDSN WG III on
> Products, Tools and Services
>
>
> IRIS DMC
> 1408 NE 45th Street #201
> Seattle, WA 98105
>
> (206)547-0393 x118
> (206) 547-1093 FAX
>
>
>
>
>
Jeremy Fee
Have you considered using quakeml resource identifiers (smi:...) instead of
DOIs? They both have similar issues of ensuring consistent use, and
quakeml is a more related standard...
Thanks,
Jeremy Fee
USGS, Geologic Hazards Science Center
On Fri, Feb 28, 2014 at 9:23 AM, Tim Ahern <t...@iris.washington.edu> wrote: