A basic comparative framework for evaluation of digital identifier systems

Journal of Digital Information Management

Volumn 13, Issue 3, 2015, Pages 190-197

  Khedmatgozar, Hamid Reza ^a   Alipour Hafezi, Mehdi ^a  

^a Iranian Research Institute for Scientific Information and Documentation   (Iran)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

INFORMATION SYSTEMS;

BEST CHOICE; DIGITAL ENVIRONMENT; DIGITAL IDENTIFICATION; DIGITAL OBJECTS; DIGITAL SPACE; PUBLIC AREAS;

INFORMATION MANAGEMENT;

EID: 84938569694     PISSN: 09727272     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (33)

1. Arms, W. Y (2001). Digital libraries. MIT press.
2. Attanasio, P. (2003). The use of DOI in eContent value chain: The case of Casalini Digital Division and mEDRA. White Paper, Multilingual European DOI Registration Agency. [Online]. Available: http://dx.doi.org/10.1392/ BC1.0 (Accessed 1 July 2015).
3. Campbell, D. (2007). Identifying the identifiers. In: Proc. of the 7th international conference on Dublin Core and Metadata Application (DCMI 07), Doblin core, United States, P 63-73. [Online] http://dcpapers.dublincore.org/ pubs/article/download/868/864 (Accessed 1 July 2015).
4. Carreiro, E. (2010). Electronic books: how digital devices and supplementary new technologies are changing the face of the publishing industry. Publishing research quarterly 26 (4) 219-235.
5. Chandrakar, R. (2006). Digital object identifier system: an overview. The Electronic Library 24 (4) 445-452.
6. Clarke, R. (1994). Human identification in information systems: Management challenges and public policy issues. Information Technology & People 7 (4) 6-37.
7. Coyle, K. (2006). Identifiers: Unique, persistent, global. The Journal of academic librarianship 32 (4) 428-431.
8. Duerr, R., Downs, R., Tilmes, C., Barkstrom, B., Lenhardt, W. C., Glassy, J., Bermudez, L. E., Slaughter, P. (2011). On the utility of identification schemes for digital earth science data: an assessment and recommendations. Earth Science Informatics 4 (3) 139-160.
9. IFLA (2009). Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records (FRBR). Final Report (amended and corrected). IFLA Study Group on the Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records. [Online]. Available: http:// www.ifla.org/files/assets/cataloguing/frbr/frbr-2008.pdf (Accessed 1 July 2015).
10. IFLA. (2013). Functional Requirements for Authority Data: a Conceptual Model (FRAD). Final Report (amended and corrected). IFLA Working Group on the Functional Requirements and Numbering of Authority Records (FRANAR). [Online]. Available: http://www.ifla.org/files/ assets/cataloguing/frad/frad-2013.pdf (Accessed 1 July 2015).
11. Galyani Moghaddam, G., Urs, R.S. (2006). Electronic Scholarly Journals: A Review of Technical Issues in DigitalEnvironment. Journal of Educational Media & Library Sciences 44 (2) 235-245.
12. Green, B., Bide, M. (1997). Unique Identifiers: a brief introduction. Book Industry Communication/EDItEUR. [Online]. Available: http://www.bic.org.uk/files/pdfs/ uniquid.pd (Accessed 1 July 2015).
13. Hakala, J. (2010). Persistent identifiers- an overview. KIM Technology Watch Report. [Online]. Available: http:/ /www.persid.org/downloads/PI-intro-2010-09-22.pdf (Accessed 1 July 2015).
14. IDF. 2015. DOI Handbook. [Online]. Available: http:// www.doi.org/hb.html (Accessed 1 July 2015)
15. Juty, N., Le Novère, N., Laibe, C. (2012). Identifiers.org and MIRIAM Registry: community resources to provide persistent identification. Nucleic acids research 40 (D1) D580-D586.
16. Kahn, R., Wilensky, R. (2006). A framework for distributed digital object services. International Journal on Digital Libraries 6 (2) 115-123.
17. Kunze, J. (2003). Towards electronic persistence using ARK identifiers. In: Proceedings of the 3rd ECDL Workshop on Web Archives. August 21st, 2003, Trondheim, Norway. [Online]. Available: http:// bibnum.bnf.fr/ecdl/2003/proceedings.php?f=kunze (Accessed 1 July 2015).
18. Lee, D. J., Stvilia, B (2014). Developing a data identifier taxonomy. Cataloging & Classification Quarterly 52 (3) 303-336.
19. Mooney, S. (2001). Digital object identifiers for eBooks: What are we identifying?. Publishing research quarterly 17 (1) 29-36.
20. Park, S., Zo, H., Ciganek, A. P., Lim, G. G. (2011). Examining success factors in the adoption of digital object identifier systems. Electronic commerce research and applications 10 (6) 626-636.
21. Paskin, N. (1999). Toward unique identifiers. In: Proceedings of the IEEE 87 (7) 1208-1227.
22. Paskin, N. (2000). Digital Object Identifier: implementing a standard digital identifier as the key to effective digital rights management. The International DOI Foundation, Kidlington, Oxfordshire, United Kingdom.
23. Paskin, N. (2002). Digital object identifiers. Information Services and Use 22 (2) 97-112.
24. Paskin, N. (2010). Digital Object Identifier (DOI®) System. In: Bates, M. J., Maack, M. N. Encyclopedia of Library and Information Sciences, 3rd ed. Taylor & Francis, London, 1586-1592.
25. Pisanski, J., •umer, M., Aalberg, T. (2010). Identifiers: bridging language barriers. In World Library and Information Congress: 76th IFLA General Conference and Assembly. Meeting, 93.
26. Rust, G., Bide, M. (2000). The < indecs> Metadata Framework: Principles, model and data dictionary. Indecs Framework Ltd. WP1a-006-2.0, June. [Online]. Available: h t t p : / / w w w . d o i . o r g / t o p i c s / i n d e c s / indecs-framework-2000.pdf (Accessed 1 July 2015).
27. Scopus. 2013. Scopus: Facts and Figures. [Online]. Available: http://www.elsevier.com/-data/assets/pdf-file/ 0007/148714/scopus-facts-and-figures.pdf (Accessed 1 July 2015).
28. Sidman, D., Davidson. T. (2001). A practical guide to automating the digital supply chain with the digital object identifier (DOI). Publishing research quarterly 17 (2) 9-23.
29. Simons, N (2012). Implementing DOIs for Research Data. D-Lib Magazine 18 (5/6). [Online]. Available: http:/ dx.doi.org/10.1045/may2012-simons (Accessed 1 July 2015).
30. Vartiainen, P (2002). On the principles of comparative evaluation. Evaluation 8 (3) 359-371.
31. Wang, J (2007). Digital object identifiers and their use in libraries. Serials review 33 (3) 161-164.
32. Warren, S. A (2005). DOIs and Deeplinked E-Reserves: Innovative Links for the Future. Technical Services Quarterly 22 (4) 1-17.
33. Wynholds, L (2011). Linking to scientific data: Identity problems of unruly and poorly bounded digital objects. International Journal of Digital Curation 6 (1) 214-225.