Network Working Group J. Levine
Internet-Draft Taughannock Networks
Intended status: Informational August 19, 2014
Expires: February 20, 2015
Assigning Digital Object Identifiers to RFCs
draft-iab-doi-02
Abstract
The Digital Object Identifier (DOI) is a widely used system that
assigns unique identifiers to digital documents that can be queried
and managed in a consistent fashion. We propose a method to assign
DOIs to past and future RFCs.
Status of This Memo
This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute
working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-
Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
This Internet-Draft will expire on February 20, 2015.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2014 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved.
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
(http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
publication of this document. Please review these documents
carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must
include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
described in the Simplified BSD License.
Levine Expires February 20, 2015 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft DOIs for RFCs August 2014
Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2. Structure and resolution of DOIs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3. DOIs for RFCs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
4. The process of assigning DOIs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
4.1. Getting a DOI prefix . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
4.2. Retroactively assigning DOIs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
4.3. Assigning DOIs to new RFCs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
4.4. Use of DOIs in RFCs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
5. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Appendix A. Change Log . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
A.1. Changes from -01 to -02 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
A.2. Changes from -00 to -01 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
1. Introduction
The Digital Object Identifier (DOI) is a widely used system that
assigns unique identifiers to digital documents that can be queried
and managed in a consistent fashion. The structure of DOIs is
defined by ISO 26324:2012 [ISO-DOI] and is implemented by a group of
registration agencies coordinated by the International DOI
Foundation.
Each DOI is associated with bibliographic metadata about the object,
including one or more URIs where the object can be found. The DOI
system also provides many features not relevant to RFCs, such as the
ability to update the metadata after the DOI is assigned, and for
organizations to maintain local caches of metadata, e.g., a
university or corporate library that tracks its copies of purchased
documents so subsequent users don't buy them again.
The wide use of DOIs suggests that even though RFCs can be downloaded
directly from the IETF for free, organizations that use DOIs can have
trouble locating non-DOI documents. DOIs with metadata that points
to the existing free online RFCs would make RFCs easier to find and
use. Some scholarly publishers accept DOIs as references in
published documents, and some versions of bibtex can automatically
retrieve the bibliographic data for a DOI and format it. Hence DOIs
would make RFCs easier to cite.
The benefits of DOIs apply equally to documents from all of the RFC
submission streams, so all RFCs would get DOIs.
Levine Expires February 20, 2015 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft DOIs for RFCs August 2014
2. Structure and resolution of DOIs
DOIs are an application of the handle system defined by RFCs
[RFC3650], [RFC3651], and [RFC3652]. A DOI for an RFC might be
10.123456/rfc1149
The first part of a DOI is the number 10, which means a DOI within
the handle system, a dot, and a unique number assigned to a
publisher, in this example 123456. This part is the DOI prefix.
Following that is a slash and a text string assigned by the
publisher, called the DOI suffix. Since the RFC Editor's series
already have numbers, it would be straightforward to use mnemonic
suffixes. DOIs might use the familiar series names and numbers,
e.g., rfc1149. (DOIs are case-insensitive.) DOIs are treated as
opaque identifiers, so the RFC Editor could use some other naming
scheme if it turned out to be advantageous to do so. The reliable
way to find the DOI for an RFC would be to look it up in the RFC
index.
Although the handle system has its own protocol described in
[RFC3652], the usual way to look up a DOI is to use web lookup. A
proposed "doi:" URN was never widely implemented, so the standard way
to look up a DOI is to use the public http proxy at
http://dx.doi.org. The sample DOI above could be looked up at:
http://dx.doi.org/10.123456/rfc1149
Whenever a publisher assigns a DOI, it provides the bibliographic
metadata for the object (henceforth called a document, since that
what they are in this context) to its registration agency which then
makes it available to clients that look up DOIs. The document's
metadata is typically uploaded to the registration agency in XML
using a web API.
Publishers have considerable flexibility as to what resides at the
URI(s) that a DOI refers to. Sometimes it's the document itself,
while for commercial publishers it's typically a page with the
abstract and bibliographic information, and some way to buy the
actual document. Since some RFCs are in multiple formats (e.g.,
Postscript and text), and some STDs and BCPs consist of multiple
documents, an appropriate URI would be that of the RFC Editor's info
page that has the document's abstract and links to the document(s) in
various formats. Hence the URI above would be set to redirect to
http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc1149
Levine Expires February 20, 2015 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft DOIs for RFCs August 2014
More information on the structure and use of DOIs is in the DOI
Handbook [DOI-HB].
3. DOIs for RFCs
Once the RFC series has DOIs assigned, it would be a good idea to
include the DOI in the XML boilerplate of each RFC, which would both
permit it to be displayed if a rendering engine wants to do that, and
aid software that does things with DOIs. Online databases and
indexes that include RFCs would be updated to include the DOI, e.g.
the ACM Digital Library. (A practical advantage of this is that the
DOI would link directly to the RFC Editor, rather than perhaps to a
copy of an RFC behind a paywall.)
Since RFCs are immutable, existing RFCs still wouldn't mention their
own DOIs within the RFC itself, but putting the DOIs into indexes
would still provide value.
4. The process of assigning DOIs
There are three phases to assigning DOIs to RFCs, getting a DOI
prefix, retroactively assigning DOIs to existing documents, and
updating the publication process to assign DOIs as new RFCs are
published.
4.1. Getting a DOI prefix
There are ten registration agencies [DOI-RA] that assign DOI
prefixes. Most of them serve specialized audiences or limited
geographic areas, but there are a few that handle scholarly and
technical materials. All registration agencies charge for DOIs to
defray the cost of maintaining the metadata databases. The prices
are fairly low, on the order of $660/year for membership, 15 cents
per document deposit fees for a bulk upload of the backfile (the
existing RFCs), and $1/per document to deposit them as they are
published.
4.2. Retroactively assigning DOIs
Other than paying the deposit fees, assigning DOIs to all of the
existing RFCs is primarily a software problem. We'd need tools to
extract or create the metadata for all of the RFCs and submit it to
the registration agency using the agency's online API. Where we are
aware of indexes and databases that include RFCs, we would try to get
them to include the DOI.
Levine Expires February 20, 2015 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft DOIs for RFCs August 2014
4.3. Assigning DOIs to new RFCs
As new RFCs are published, the publication process will add steps to
collect and submit the bibliographic metadata to the registration
agency. This should be a largely or entirely automatic process,
since it should be possible to extract the metadata mechanically
either from a document's xml2rfc source, or from the existing
catalogs of RFCs.
4.4. Use of DOIs in RFCs
The DOI agency requests that documents that are assigned DOIs in turn
include DOIs when possible when referring to other organizations'
documents. Hence it would be a good idea to add a DOI field to the
xml2rfc reference entity, and request that authors provide DOIs when
possible. The RFC production center might add missing DOIs when it's
easy to do so, e.g., when the same reference with a DOI has appeared
in a prior RFC, or a quick online search finds the DOI. With a DOI
field in the xml2rfc reference structure, DOIs in references from
citation libraries would appear in the RFCs automatically once the
DOIs are added to the libraries.
Since it is usually possible to retrieve the bibliographic
information for a document from its DOI (see the discussion of bibtex
above), it might also be worth adding this feature to xml2rfc, so a
reference with only a DOI could be automatically fetched and
expanded.
5. Informative References
[DOI-HB] International DOI Foundation, "DOI Handbook", April 2012,
<http://www.doi.org/hb.html>.
[DOI-RA] International DOI Foundation, "DOI Registration Agencies",
July 2013,
<http://www.doi.org/registration_agencies.html>.
[ISO-DOI] International Organization for Standardization (ISO), "ISO
26324:2012 Information and documentation -- Digital object
identifier system", 2012,
<http://www.iso.org/iso/catalogue_detail?csnumber=43506>.
[RFC3650] Sun, S., Lannom, L., and B. Boesch, "Handle System
Overview", RFC 3650, November 2003.
[RFC3651] Sun, S., Reilly, S., and L. Lannom, "Handle System
Namespace and Service Definition", RFC 3651, November
2003.
Levine Expires February 20, 2015 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft DOIs for RFCs August 2014
[RFC3652] Sun, S., Reilly, S., Lannom, L., and J. Petrone, "Handle
System Protocol (ver 2.1) Specification", RFC 3652,
November 2003.
Appendix A. Change Log
A.1. Changes from -01 to -02
Clarify submission process, multi-document DOIs. Note all streams
treated the same. Remove unused reference.
A.2. Changes from -00 to -01
DOI in the xml, not necessarily in the text
Use of DOI in RFCs section.
Author's Address
John Levine
Taughannock Networks
PO Box 727
Trumansburg, NY 14886
Phone: +1 831 480 2300
Email: standards@taugh.com
URI: http://jl.ly
Levine Expires February 20, 2015 [Page 6]
